R3

[Hoosier06]

Is the r3 initiative a bad thing? I do 90+% of my hunting and fishing on public land. I do pretty well on most trips with planning and research. I'll admit that some of my honey holes from 15 years ago are dead now, but I have found others. Tags are harder to draw but I don't apply for bougie hunts anymore. I generally hate tubers with a passion for spot burning and monetizing wildlife.

But, what will the future of public lands be if there is no interest in utilizing and protecting the resource? I know in the short term I don't want any competition, but on a generational time scale can pushing R3 be a net positive? I'd rather have competition than lose productive public land to a new mall or parking lot.

 

[Raylander]

R3 is garbage. Its a promotion by the same folks that benefit from selling hunting products..

The real damage was done when the .gov let the MTN bikers, hikers, etc have purchasing power in how public land is being managed

 

[Hoosier06]

R3 is garbage. Its a promotion by the same folks that benefit from selling hunting products..

The real damage was done when the .gov let the MTN bikers, hikers, etc have purchasing power in how public land is being managed

We're the granola crunchers in charge of stripping every tree off of some of the few good sections of middle/lower gerogia WMAs?

What's wrong with some multi use input on public land? At least it's still there and not getting sold off.

I had similar thoughts to r3, but I wonder if allowing commercial/monetary gain from hunting wildlife on public land is the bigger issue. I'd love to see a ban on hunting film permits for commercial purposes on public land.

 

[Raylander]

My view is selfish and I stand by it. I want to be the only one paying so my opinion is the only one that matters..

I haven’t been below I-20 in years, and I don’t plan to except to catch a flight. I will say that the CNF could use a little more timber management and less MTN biking trails..