You are right, it is always nice to see the bow hunters get a chance.  I don't like to see where communities like this use only sharpshooters to control the herd.  It costs quite a bit of money, when they could actually charge bow hunters for permits or access fees, and make money off the whole deal.  Problem is, too many communities hear "hunting" and freak out, thinking guys are going to be shooting anything that moves, including hikers, bikers, pets, etc .

Good article.  Thanks for posting.

Why don't they just allow bow hunters to bring the herd down to objective levels entirely on their own? Is it just a matter of bow hunters just not being capable of bringing the population down in a quick enough manner? It seems to me if there is a situation that hunters can be used to implement the management strategy of reducing that herd than it should be taken care of. Like Ca_Vermonster said, it would not cost the states department of natural resources any money to have hunters come in and reduce the herd. On the contrary, they would actually be able to create revenue as hunters would pay for the opportunity to do so. Safety is brought up as one of the main reasons that sharp shooters get used over bow hunters in most situations. So if it has been deemed safe enough to use bow hunters in this situation than it just seems like they should be used to the fullest extent possible.