"stewardship, opportunity and sustainability"
Fair chase isn't stewardship. Cattle have been handed down through the ages from ancestor to beneficiary and then slaughtered and none of it was "fair chase". Stewardship is something different.
Sustainability is a benefit of management, not just harvest so "fair chase" really doesn't have anything to do with sustainability.
Opportunity hasn't been effected by party hunting. In fact it could be effectively argued that the public has found a way to turn one tag into opportunity for many. Even fiscal opportunity is increased through these types of hunt.
"Because it affects all of us.....and the herd."
It doesn't effect all of us and it does effect the herd but we don't base wildlife management on just whether the herd is effected. You effect the herd every time you kill something so that is negative??????
"All game laws are a result of fair chase and ethics."
Absolutely incorrect.
"Thus, there must be adjustments made to keep from over harvest of the game."
Adjustments like quit issuing tags for deer you can't spare to kill. Because that is the only real functional option.
If you manage the herd correctly and manage your harvest correctly it doesn't matter in the least bit how the animal is killed.
I'll play...
First, fair chase has affected all of us as hunters.
How? Before the laws imposed on hunting in the name of fair chase, game populations were going in the tank, no? So the introduction of fair chase positively affected North American hunting and hunters.
As for my statement of ALL hunting laws being based on fair chase, you are correct not all are. But by far MOST are. Aside from limits on amount of game taken.
If not list 5 hunting laws that are not based on fair chase. If you find that too easy list 10. Out of the hundreds of laws governing how we take game.
The only place I listed adjustments for taking game was my proposal for no laws on method of take just sell an unlimited number of tags and strictly enforce a quota.
I would add to it though. Sell the tags in July and folks just start hunting. However they want. Keep selling tags. A guy can kill as many as he wants, till the unit quota fills.
This will make the opportunity folks happy, yes? We all get a tag.
The trophy hunter should be happy. He has a tag and some time to get it done. How much time? Eh, who knows?
Every faction of the how to get it done crowds should be ok with it. They can do it "their way", shouldn't matter to anyone how else someone else gets it done.
Fish and wildlife should be THRILLED with the plan. Only the number of animals that they want harvested will be harvested, yet they will sell WAY more tags (unlimited remember?). It should require less enforcement, thus less money spent on that, so more spent on wildlife habitat etc.
The herd will benefit greatly I'm sure. I mean it will take the focus off of a specific age class. Who is gonna take too much time to look for the big buck when it will take about a week or less to fill the quota. Most will shoot the first buck they find. Maybe in some units we could even go either sex, gawd knows we need to take out some does in some of these mule deer units to balance out that buck/doe ratio. Speaking of time, there will be less pressure on the herd without all of those seasons. That too should help.
I'm sure there more that I'm not thinking of....maybe some help here Tri....I think you're onto something. It DOESN’T matter how we do it...
This sounds like a winner, does it not?