Re: Laws on selling taxidermy
Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 1:23 pm
Just like hookers charging you for rubber rental
So you've heard, right?jbs38654 wrote:Just like hookers charging you for rubber rental
No, I don't think that it would have any direct effect on the waterfowl population. If it were legal, and Johnny wants to get in the duck mounting business, do you think that he would actually hunt for them?? No. Johnny would raise them in a pen. Same thing goes for deer and fish. If it were legal to sell a mounted largemouth bass would Johnny be on the water every day with dynomite trying to find a 10 pounder? No. Johnny would have a pool in his backyard with a hundred 10 pounders that he raised himself.duramax wrote:They enforce that law in EVERY state when it comes to migratory birds. You can not sell mounted wild migratory game birds by federal law. Are you really that narrow to not see the harm if that wasn't a law? Let me help you.three11 wrote:Wingman wrote: And which other laws should we stop enforcing until we get drugs under control?"
(c) Mounted game animals, birds and fish may not be sold, purchased or leased.
You could start with this one.
They don't enforce this law in plenty of other states, and not one of them is hurting for wildlife.
Johnny wants to make a buck and figures out that if he quits his job and hunts 60 days of duck season he can legally kill 360 ducks if he is good and lucky enough. He doesn't like to eat the ducks, but if he mounts them and finds someone to buy them, he can make good money. Johnny normally only kills 50 ducks a year when he hunted just for fun. Now he kills 210 ducks more than before. Being conservative, say there are 1,000 Johnny's out there in the US (in reality it could easily be 10,000 people killing an extra 100 birds). All those Johnny's added up now kill an extra 210,000 ducks a year than they used to just because they found a way to make money doing it. Do you not think that would have dramatic effects on the waterfowl population?
I read it on the Internet so it's got to be truenbkillr wrote:So you've heard, right?jbs38654 wrote:Just like hookers charging you for rubber rental
You "thinking" that might get you in trouble. Believing that sound game regulations are somehow that government trying to control our lives doesn't bode well for your argument that you are in fact, a "thinker".three11 wrote: ...
Math never was my strong suit. I'm more of a thinker I guess. Now why don't you try thinking outside the box a little here. Unless you like having the government run your life for you.
duramax wrote:You "thinking" that might get you in trouble. Believing that sound game regulations are somehow that government trying to control our lives doesn't bode well for your argument that you are in fact, a "thinker".three11 wrote: ...
Math never was my strong suit. I'm more of a thinker I guess. Now why don't you try thinking outside the box a little here. Unless you like having the government run your life for you.
Hey, I'm the guy who brought up the topic of selling an old mount I don't want. If it were easy to delineate between someone who has an old mount they don't want anymore and someone who shoots hundreds of ducks extra a year to sell them as mounts, then fine. But you can't. Where do you draw the line? You can sell 1 mount per year? 5? 500? How would you regulate that? You must see it's a slippery slope. You would be getting rid of one law, and creating another (which would be even harder to enforce than the old law). Would allowing people to sell mounted waterfowl make a substantial difference in the amount of ducks killed each year? Maybe, maybe not. But one thing is for sure, it wouldn't result in fewer being taken. I for one do not want to have my bird limits reduced because a bunch of a-holes killing ducks to sell as mounts reduces the overall population.three11 wrote:duramax wrote:You "thinking" that might get you in trouble. Believing that sound game regulations are somehow that government trying to control our lives doesn't bode well for your argument that you are in fact, a "thinker".three11 wrote: ...
Math never was my strong suit. I'm more of a thinker I guess. Now why don't you try thinking outside the box a little here. Unless you like having the government run your life for you.
You still don't get it.
This doesn't have anything to do with sound game regulations. This is about a man's right (or lack thereof) to sell a damn mount that he doesn't want anymore.
Again, thanks for the help.
But only if you know what to ask for when you order, or at least thats what a friends , wifes ,uncles GF saidH20 Fowl wrote:I know of a place in the "free state" where you can get an order of $12.99 fries, and they will "give" you some crappie to go with them!!Trip wrote:Can you sell the base or piece of driftwood attached to the mount and throw the mount in for free??
Heard that from a friend