nc452010 wrote:
I couldn't get past your number 1. I'm an avid hunter, but I'm for landowners having the right to restrict basically any damn thing they want to restrict on land they paid their hard-earned money for.in that case, you'd better then carefully consider option #2. because option #1 is what much of the rest of the world has. or option #0, which is that you have no freedom to roam, and you have no public lands to roam in.
option #2 is what we have chosen in the U.S.
about 3 weeks ago i finished a run from a trailhead to which i drove. while driving home i picked up a lost and stranded hunter who, with rifle of course, emerged from the natl forest in which i was running. i gave him a ride back to his base of operation, to meet up with his other 2 hunting buddies. we used the same forest. the only restrictions he faced were those common to hunters: the weapon used; the season; the nature of the animal (species, size, etc.); and that he shoot the animal, not me.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman