Environmental conservatism is a conservative principle.
You don’t shoot does or pregnant deer when you go hunting, do you?
Remember, Ronald Reagan wanted to save the whales.
In northern Missouri you can take all the does you want, just buy tag for each one. They even have a program setup to donate the meat to charity without having it processed first.
Shooting does or not is used to achieve the desired population density. Not shooting does was successfully used by hunters and conservationists to bring deer populations back over the last 100 years. Too many deer is the case in many areas now.
It used to be it was almost sacrilegious take a doe and now they may have to institute a policy to take a doe before you can take a buck. This is already policy in some managed hunts.
First off, “bleachboy”, welcome to Freerepublic. Did you just sign up today? Conservation is a concervative principle, however, do not ad a greasy-haired Seattle taint to the actualy definition of conservation. First off, I bowhunt deer, bear,and elk, and when our bowseason is happening, there is no such thing as a pregnant doe or cow. Second off, there are plenty of states that need pregnant does shot all the time. It is called thinning the herd to CONSERVE the herd, so they don’t eat themselves out of good nutrition and starve themselves to death. So, that blows your “feel good” stab at science.
Second off, I would want to save the whales also. There are just a tad more Whitetail deer in America alone than all the whales in all the oceans. FYI, true conservatives’ solutions to problems are not based on feelings. I can go fishing in the Atlantic, the Gulf, and the Pacific and chum up a shark. That might be an indicator that they are not extinct or endangered, so keeping an exceptional trop[hy and eating it makes pretty good sense to me. Thanks for playing
Sec