I love that this article supports the strenuous efforts of our wildlife agents. They absolutely provide us with incredible opportunities to hunt and fish safely in the best state to do such in the entire United States. This article does, though, overgeneralize a few factors taking away from its accuracy. Yes, game wardens have been known to tow in a boat or even help drag a deer out of the woods as I have witnessed both of these situations. But to say that they are working even a slight majority of their hours in these superman-esque roles is an over generalization. The same, for example, as assuming that even a small amount of the contacts a wildlife agent encounters in the field would try to murder them. The cases of a wildlife agent being intentionally murdered are incredibly rare in the aggregate. What could be credible presumptions by wildlife agents may turn into assumptions, which are by definition not based on facts. Assumptions and presumptions are not the same and dont we all know what assumptions lead to? Sure they encounter more scumbags in their line of work but maybe treating someone, who has no other intention but to cooperate and follow the warden's orders, like a murderer is a bad look. Also, any employed person knows that attitude counts for something. Their job may be tough but lots of guys could be killed at work and it doesnt mean that he cant be a pleasant person. I have only had pleasant encounters with wardens but to say that happens to everyone else every time is absolutely false. They do a fantastic job as far as Im concerned but lets not over generalize their limited goodwill or discount the situations in which they make mistakes or dont handle a situation as best as possible, at the detriment of some unsuspecting person.