If I hear one more time about how the Missouri Department of Conservation is only interested in license revenue, or that every change in regulations is going to undo that last knot holding back the hidden poacher inside every other guy in the woods, I will just snap.

When I read “No Such Thing as a Does-Only Season” by Larry Dablemont, and “Opinion Only Counts if Deer Hunters Have Voices Heard” by John Winkelman in the Boat Show issue, I knew a response was required.

For years I sat on the board of the Conservation Federation of Missouri and chaired various committees, working (and sometimes fighting ) with the MDC on a wide variety of issues such as Share the Harvest, muzzleloader regulations, antler point restriction, archery regulations, Check stations, bowfishing and otter trapping. I got to know how the department works on the inside. How the Missouri Conservation Commission works. How things get done, and why.

I met many people in the department, and though I certainly had occasion to use “garage words” when dealing with some of them, but I never heard of anyone at any level in the MDC who seemed influenced by this mysterious consideration of tag revenue as a key factor in deer management.

Nor did I ever meet any who seemed to have anything but the best management of the resource at heart, even if we disagreed on the topic at hand.

I challenge anyone who hauls up this insult to the professionalism of the people entrusted to manage our wildlife, and the motivation of the unpaid volunteer Missouri Conservation Commission, to provide proof or even any evidence to back up their accusations that wildlife regulations are driven by revenue issues.

I will not hold my breath.

I gave Lonnie Hansen, senior whitetail biologist for the MDC a call, to get his take on some of what appeared in these pages.

I asked him about Winkelman's fear “...that decisions are already cast in stone, just looking for data to support a foregone conclusion”. He explained to me that the deer regulation changes which will be recommended to the commission are still being worked on, and that public input to the process has been a huge factor in how those recommendations are formed.

“The Department invested a huge amount of time and effort in the public meetings and other methods of gaining public input. Probably more so than any effort we have ever made in our history.” Hansen said. “In addition to the public meetings and website input, we conducted extensive random surveys. We've got an incredible database of public opinion, and it's had a huge impact on our process.”

I asked him about deer tag revenue, and he said that the topic was never considered, and that he didn't think any of the proposals currently under consideration would have any significant impact on tag sales either way, and that certainly no other proposals had been shelved for revenue reasons.

Dablemont asserts that antlerless only seasons are a sham, on the apparent theory that the average hunter couldn't possibly resist shooting a buck even though it is out of season, and that the woods are littered with headless bucks following the “doe” season.

Hansen says that though there are always stories like that floating around, and certainly some people do cheat, public reports and the input of the conservation agents in the field do not back up the notion that such poaching is rampant.

“No question there is some buck poaching both inside and outside the antlerless seasons,” Hansen said. “But most deer hunters follow the rules, and those that don't aren't greatly affected by rule changes. There's just not strong evidence for an unusual increase in buck poaching during the antlerless season. I encourage anyone aware of any poaching incident to report it to the department or call Operation Game Thief at 800-392-1111.”

And Telecheck? How could the department implement such an obvious boon to poachers? “We didn't go into Telecheck blind,” Hansen said. “We did extensive studies, including one involving 5,000 hunters, and determined that there was no reduction in checking compliance. In fact, we have some reason to believe it has slightly risen.”

Field agents, the ones who see the poaching close up, seem very comfortable with Telecheck, Hansen said.

“Time they spent managing check stations is now spent directly on enforcement. I had been a strong proponent of check stations ever since I've been here, but Telecheck has proven to be a good system.”

He went on to explain that the Department also conducts a large compliance survey, involving 40,000 hunters, after each deer season. If Telecheck had led to a drop in compliance, that would have shown up as a change in the ratio between the in-season numbers and the post season survey. That change did not show up.”

And lastly, the evil antler point restrictions. Opponents claim either they are an elitist rule forced on the majority, catering to some grotesque minority labeled “trophy hunters,” or that people will shoot any buck and count the antlers after they are on the ground, only tagging the ones that measure up.

But it turns out that, just like the other regulations, the vast majority of affected hunters have been compliant, and cheaters have not suddenly taken over the woods.

Not only that, in the “test” counties, recent polling shows that over 70 percent of deer hunters like what they have seen, and support continuation of these regulations. Even in the counties near those with restrictions, support runs around 60 percent. Clearly in much of the state a strong majority of deer hunters favor antler point restrictions.

Opponents like to paint antler point restrictions as catering to “trophy hunters,” while what they really do is end the previous process of over-harvesting the youngest bucks. That had inevitably led to an unnatural balance of age and gender in the herd. Antler point restrictions restore a measure of natural balance. Regardless of what winds up on your wall, it's just good stewardship of the resource. It might also be frustrating to a landowner or a young hunter to pass up a hen pheasant, or release a fish below the length limit, but that doesn't mean those regulations are bad resource management.

Hansen does say that there is a reduction in deer numbers in parts of the state, below target goals, particularly west central and southwestern portions of the state.

“Figuring out what is happening in these areas is complicated by the fact that we have had significant outbreaks of ‘epizootic hemorrhagic disease' in the last couple of years. We will probably recommend some adjustments in those areas, a combination of closing the antlerless season in a handful of them, and reducing the antlerless permits allowed in some others. In the northern two-thirds of the state the populations are in really good shape.”

Epizootic hemorrhagic disease is a naturally occurring disease transmitted to whitetail by a small gnat called the “biting midge.” EHD is always present but tends to flare up in unusually dry summers which favor midge breeding in low, moist areas, and tend to concentrate deer into those areas as well.

Bottom line, the people running the show are competent professionals and honorable people, focused on protecting the resource while supporting broad recreational use of our renewable wildlife resources. Current and proposed regulations reflect that.

The regulations under consideration are about to be pared down to a list of recommendations, which will be provided to the Missouri Conservation Commission. By the end of April the Commission will likely have made some decisions.

Whatever they decide will certainly lead to more debate and discussion. Here's hoping those conversations will be based on our best information rather than our worst fears.

After watching today's hunting TV shows, one realizes how much turkey hunting has changed, and how dependent hunters have become with turkey hunting accessory products.

While I work in the outdoor industry and a portion of my living is promoting great products that enhance a hunter's experience, is it possible that hunters have become way too dependent with the use of turkey decoys?

Watching turkey hunting TV is like watching hundreds of all the same deer shows, a hunter in a shooting house on a green field, same thing, over and over. Are today's turkey hunters just following the Pied Piper? Are we, as turkey hunters losing our heritage of hunting and calling skills?

Commercials, television shows, magazines, and web site blogs are all about the latest and greatest turkey decoys. The recent NWTF national convention hosted row after row of every type and kind of turkey decoy, feathered, mating, strutting, moving heads, and sales people working the crowds like a TV infomercial. During my convention seminar, hunters were confused because my video seminar did not show use of decoys, rather tight setups and calling in turkeys to the gun without a decoy.

Are some of today's turkey hunters abandonment of calling/hunting skills just part of today fast paced society, always in a hurry, wanting everything right now, demanding results, now?

Turkey decoys, they are certainly nothing new. Back in 1977, in a turkey hunting camp in the Ozarks, a group of hunters made a turkey decoy by covering a goose decoy with turkey skin and feathers.

They had great success, killed the crap out of turkeys with it, which is until other turkey hunters shamed them into to stop using it. They were in fact accused of cheating, it was an unfair advantage and as soon as the conservation department found out about its use, decoys would be illegal. In early 1980s in St. Louis, local hunters came up with the first commercial hen decoy I ever saw, and decoy use exploded from there.

Strutting decoys are the rage right now, but back in the early 80s, David Nicks of Villa Ridge, MO, introduced his new concept of a strutting decoy. I agreed to try and help him market his idea.

I presented the strutting decoy to Hunter Specialties, Flambeau decoys, Bass Pro shops, Denny Dennis sporting goods, and Wal-Mart, no one would touch it. They all scoffed at the idea, and had great concern with legal liabilities. The rest is history.

The use of blinds on every turkey TV show in conjunction with decoys is yet another overkill. How many shows can we watch that are exactly the same thing, without any diversity, different methods and ways to hunt and kill turkeys?

Both blinds and decoys are great turkey hunting tools, there is always a place and time for use, but every single TV show, and DVDs with nothing but a guy in a blind?

I cannot stand to watch the TV show with a hunter in a blind, who never calls, with a herd of decoys, and 500 pounds of corn on the ground. How do these shows get on TV?

Again this is nothing new. In the late 1960s, early 1970s in Missouri, while I was climbing mountains hunting public ground, calling hard, many hunters with pictures in local newspapers were hunting in homemade fully enclosed brush and limb blind on field edge with 500 pounds of corn on the ground.

Since I began my turkey hunting career so many years ago, I was told (and continue to be told same thing today) I am doing it all wrong, too aggressive, and I call way too much and way too loud.

Paul Nienhaus recently gave me a CD, it is a genuine treasure. Gene Nunnery, the old-time, southern turkey hunter, was recorded from a very rare 45 rpm record. Additionally on this CD is Penn's Woods early days, Roger Latham, Doctor Ott and Harvey GrayBill. These early turkey guys and others before them, all preached very little calling is best, and anything else would scare away the turkeys.

If you listen to this CD, you will understand why generations of hunters are so afraid to call. I was considered very controversial when my turkey tactics went public in the 1970s with seminars and magazine articles. In Fredericktown , MO, while I on stage in a turkey calling contest, I was accused of making the “Alarm Putt,” (cutting) and the contest was stopped. The head judge came from behind the curtain to tell all, that I had just committed the mortal sin, duplicating the “Alarm Putt.” The judging panel gave me a big fat zero on all my score cards.

When featured in 1983 Outdoor Life magazine “You can call Fall Gobblers” by gobbler yelping in fall gobblers, I was scoffed at. Then in the 1986 NRA American Hunter magazine article, “How to hunt Gobblers with Hens? Call the Hens,” I was told I was crazy, and maybe I am, a little.

Back in the day when the old dudes 45 records were on the market, in the late 60s and 70s, I was calling non-stop, moving in tight to a gobbling turkey, changing positions, even back in 1978, I am quoted in a newspaper that I actually called in fall turkeys, but then again , you cannot call fall turkeys, and I got the heat on that one.

There is nothing wrong with using decoys or hunting from a blind, but they are tools that can and will help you have a successful hunt. But there are many other ways to hunt turkeys. Hunters should utilize other options. What I am saying, is that TV shows are over-kill and not telling the full story of turkey hunting. Hunters should keep an open mind and use what is working for them on a given day, dependent on weather, and mood of turkeys, regardless of what they see on TV.

Most important of all is to have fun, enjoy our privilege of hunting, share the outdoors with family and friends, and if you are a bit controversial, good for you. Have a safe and wonderfully successful spring.