Topgun 3006

That's exactly the feelings that Tom and I had and you expressed it superbly!!!

Sheridan

As they say; "When in Rome"..........

iamyourhuckleberry

Lucky,

Do you know what a bottom line question is? If I were to ask you, "If given a choice between using your right hand or your left, which would you use? Understandably, I know you can use both simultaneously, but I have asked you to pick one over the other. It's not that hard of a concept to understand...unless you are one of the Clampetts.

Correct me if I wrong. Do we not all pay for the privilege to hunt in this country? Unless, of course, you are a Native American . Then, whatever you do on your soveriegn nation's land is a matter decided by tribal elders. Aren't you buying your trophies? Last time I checked, Colorado Parks and Wildlife assess a fee for the opportunity to hunt the people's wildlife. Is it the money that really gets you? "Envy is the art of counting the other fellow's blessing instead of your own"-Harold Coffin

You are right, the Inuits do not care about sportsmanship, but I can assure you, they care about the animals and their natural resources. Unlike us, their very existence depends on animals and resources. Moreover, on their land they get to make the rules and change them whenever their survival warrants a change. They feed the wolves and foxes because they recognize these species as an essential part of a fragile ecosystem-and an important part of their annual business trade. The bottomline...the governing nation used "their" natural recourses in a manner which was, to them, for the highest and best use. Whether you, I or anyone else agrees with this decision, it was theirs to make...

Let me say it again, "What was so wrong on the surface to me was absolutely right for them." It's sort of the same way of saying, "Different people have varied opinions and expectations about everything including hunting deer." Champlain, you might want to toss in Musk ox hunting too.

And here's the irony, my musk oxen is eligible for the Pope and Young's "fair chase" record book. I'm sure Saxton and Art would be proud of my good intentions. I wonder how much money they paid for their hunts here and there?

Muley,

There wasn't an option to grab a vehicle. As a matter of fact, the only road on the island transgresses only a few miles-from the airport to the village. I held zero trump cards...

Chopayne

Huckleberry sure you can compare the issue on hand to your hands, but, thats not the same as turning the odds 100% in your favor. Just because you use the right hand and not your left hand for rock paper scissors doesnt mean you'll win 100% of the time.
Sure we pay to hunt in this country, but the thing is youre paying $1000's more to go to a different location to be guaranteed a kill. Most everyone else rich or poor, conduct fair chase. Also Native American reservations are still subject to Federal Laws.

And im sure the rest of the wildlife needs to eat, but im sure the animals couldve caught it on their own. All theyre doing is training the animals to come to the sound of gunfire for a free meal. It sounded more like a cop out to leave the meat behind.

Im not saying that paying more to get a guaranteed success is bad as there is a chance I would do that if I were rolling in dough like you as time is money. But, alot of people's pride, tradition, sense of fairness, risk, and financials dont allow them to go on hunts like you do. Do you feel like you earned your trophy when you knew going in there was a 100% chance that you would bag a kill? The answer based on your previous posts is obviously yes, as you have gone through many of the aches and pains like many of the other hunters. But to others, despite the fact that you trudged through mud like the others, you had help from the guides to find your prey, and it was guaranteed you would find it.

Say for example there are two kids apply to the same college, they both have 4.0 GPAs with 2100 SAT, one kid comes from a wealthy family with connections while the other one comes from a middle class family with no connections. The wealthy kid gets in because his parents call up the school and donate millions to the school, but, the middle class kid has to go through the whole application process and finally gets accepted. The end result is, both of them got in, but did the wealthy one earn it? Maybe, after all he did have the same credentials, but, that doesnt always guarantee acceptance to a school. So due to the route he took, many people wouldnt see it as an earned.

Charlie P

Little conflicting thoughts you think?

iamyourhuckleberry

Chopayne,

First off, my life is based on that which is real and from first hand experience. I do not let certain attitudes dictate what I can and cannot do. I honestly wish I had a dollar for everytime I was told I couldn't kill something with my bow. I'd be the rich man you claim I am.

Let me get this straight. If I hunt, for four days, in an enclosed area for six elk (the only time I have hunted indigenous North American wildlife within an enclosure) and failed to kill an elk, then the experience was 100% in my favor? Should I have hunted another day? Perhaps, I should have stayed another week to get the outcome you perceive? That hunt was with a rifle, by the way and that should be pointed out. You know, since wildlife cannot out run bullets-turning the odds 100% in the gun hunter's favor regardless of location! I archery hunted nine different times (over the course of 36 days) for axis deer and had my hat handed to me on the eight times prior. You are kidding yourself if you think an animal's survival instinct disappears when fenced. If anything, it ramps up. Have you ever seen an animal go over, through, or under a fence? There is nothing 100 percent about it. Ask me sometime about the fallow deer and goat I hunted in New Zealand. I hunted them from outside the fence, using what was inside the fence as bait. These two creatures routinely went through the fence like they were hot knives going through butter. I witnessed it with my own eyes and killed neither! I will provide detail, if you care...

What does this have to do with anything? In Colorado, a non-resident pays $1600 for a rocky mountain sheep tag. A resident pays $250. Regardless of a person's staus, many sheep units consistantly boast 100% success rates. I equate that to a guaranteed kill, don't you? Holy cow, I've seen some locations where the hunter simply steps from the truck, walks the required distance from the road, picks a ram and it's game over. It was totally fair for the hunter, but not so fair for the animal. Maybe the truck should have been left from the hunt? Where does it stop? Would Topgun view this trophy as authentic-totally fair chase? I believe he would, and I believe there are others in the same boat-and yet, no fence.

In Alaska, a non-resident pays more for the various tags. He is also required by law to hire a guide for four different species. Does this, in and of itself, make him/her less of a hunter? Poor guy is simply wanting to experience something more than that which is fimiliar. I'm not going to hold that against him.

Time and location more than anything else, in my opinion, determines success. A person can have all the time in the world but hunting zebras in Alaska, even with a guide, is a foolish endeavor. Wouldn't you agree?

They are indeed, but as a rule of thumb, they are soveriegn and they control wildlife issues associated with their lands. I was lucky enough to hunt caribou in Quebec via DIY. I would have never had this opportunity had I been anywhere other than on an indian reservation-the Cree Nation to be percise.

Again, regardless of how I feel, or how you feel, it was their decision to make. They made it, it was unsettling to me, but there wasn't a thing I could do about it-even when I tried. The man with the badge didn't care. He and his traded one natural resource for another...they payed their bill and survived another long cold winter.

Surly this is speculation on your part? Why would you think I am rolling in dough? Iam just your average guy with above average ambitions.

And by golly, that's not fair, is it?

Yep, I sure the heck did. I positioned myself in such a place where I knew there would be plenty of musk oxen. I followed every letter of the law, and I made it more challenging by attempting the feat with a traditional bow. I worked my a$$ off to save every penny I could muster-even picked them up when I came across them in parking lots. Every piece of spare change was deposited into a "going to the artic" coffee can. I have found that working, earning, saving, and executing pays bigger dividends than "dreaming".

I went to Iowa recently for a late season muzzleloader hunt. I knew going in I'd be amost assured a deer. Should I have stayed home?

My friend, is it possible guides can be a bigger hinderance than a help? This is a simple yes or no question. Do the peers you hunt with hold all the answers? Do they sometimes get in your way? I assure you, this was definitely the case on this hunt, and it has been very much the same on others. I, like most hunters who venture away from home, are subject to law. Whereas, we are required to be accompanied by a guide. Those guides in many instances are fat, lazy, unconditioned, ill-informed, ill-prepared, inexperienced, so on and so forth. I have been successful despite the guide. But for the most part, I listen and then assess. Sometimes I steer, other times my guide steers. It's awesome when your guide has the same skill set. It sucks when he doesn't.

As far as Victoria island. a child could find a musk oxen. The terrain is completely devoid of trees. With a good set of binoculars, black dots are easy to spot from a distance. A guide on this hunt was simply a formality, and they certainly did not help me draw my bow.

Life isn't fair. We use whatever we can to gain advantage, not just in hunting but in everything. That's just they way it is (I believe it's called survival of the fittest). As individuals, we are all uniquely different. We see things from different prespectives. But nonetheless, we use every tool in our arsenal to acheive our goals. I am not sure why people begudge, belittle and bemoan others for thier choices. In the example you cited, both men reached the same end. Both men earn their spot by way of the same standard. But one man used his family's influence to assure himself a position. Who among us wouldn't do the same thing for their son (if possible or given the chance)?

Let me ask one more question, Chopayne, before I let you go. Do you think mis- perceptions are good or detrimental to mankind? IMO, mis-perceptions are running rampant in this thread...

Muley Hunter

Elk hunting has a 20% success rate in Colorado on public land.

How does that compare to fenced elk hunts in Colorado?

Chopayne

I dont understand how you dont understand why paying $1000s more to get a guaranteed success isnt applicable?

And you only pointed out one animal, I wasnt specific to one animal. Like Muleyhunter pointed out, Fenced Elk hunts are probably alot higher.
And if a guide is a hindrance and youre such a great hunter, why dont you hunt public lands? I dont understand that part. The only reason I can think of is because you have the money, and you want to turn the odds in your favor where animals have been penned in.

And both kids did not earn their spot by the same standard, they simply both got in with one proven to have earned it.

As for your misperception concept, I dont think misperceptions being good or bad really has to do with anything. We're human, we make mistakes.

I also said that youre rolling in money because ~$5k + airfare is not in many peoples budge to do every few months. But I believe this was the misperception you were speaking about, I made the assumption that you were going every few months, and didnt realize you were a penny pincher = )
But thank you on the tip about picking up loose change, I actually think that im going to start doing that.

iamyourhuckleberry

Well Muley, based upon my single experience with hunting elk behind a high fence in Colorado, the public land hunt seems to be about 20% better, on average. Just saying.

Have you ever had a conversation with an elk in a bar over the number of humans he has killed? You are trying to make something "more fair" that wasn't/isn't fair from the onset. When you have that conversation, I'd like to be there to witness it.
　
Chopayne,

When you go hunting, do you go with the intentions of killing something?

I'm not sure why "means" gets in the way of the "end" (other than a whole lot of people are envious and will do anything to level the playing field). If a landowner has the only food and water source within 40 square miles, and only pays $5 for his tag, is there really a difference between that $5 guarantee and the $1000 guarantee? How hard is it for the landowner to sit at a water hole and wait? Have you ever tried antelope hunting in Wyoming?

If a person does not have the means to purchase a rifle and borrows one from a friend, does that mean the animal he shoots with said rifle is less of a trophy? Obviously, he did not do all aspects of the hunt for myself...right?

To answer the first part of your quote, who said I don't? I can safely say I have pretty much hunted everywhere: jungles, deserts, mountain tops, valleys, et al. You name it, I've been there. And yeah, I prefer DIY hunts over guided hunts, but this is not always possible.

Now to address the second part of your quote. I hunt whenever, wherever, and whatever because I can. Sometimes I hunt because it is part of a job, other times I do it for pleasure. I only wish I had the money to do more (I'd graciously hunt on a daily basis), but I do not. I am not stigmatized by the use of tools. In fact, I fully comprehend the idea that I turn the odds in my favor the moment I grab my bow with the intent to kill something without opposable thumbs. If I had my druthers, I'd perfer to hunt those things which are capable of hunting back. To hunt those animals usually takes a lot of money...

If both kids have the exact SAT score and GPA, then they are equal. Both were accepted...they are still equal. If one was accepted when the other wasn't, then and only then would there be absolute proof of outside influences. Put yourself in the shoes of the admissions administrator. You have two equal kids and one has parents willing to donate millions. It's a no brainer to take both. You have done your job and your school comes out fat and happy anyway you slice it.

[quotes]As for your misperception concept, I dont think misperceptions being good or bad really has to do with anything. We're human, we make mistakes.[/quote]

Really? Tell that to the Jews. Hilter misperceived a lot about the jewish race/relegion. He, for example, thought all jews were rich, dirt and at the root of Germany's problems. As a consequence, he infringed on their individual rights, including their right to live. I realize this is an extreme example, but infringements and mistakes like this should not be tolerated, especially if their basis is from misperceptions.

Let's take a look:

I hunt...often away from my backyard...with guides when required to do so by law... in fenced areas on occassion-when necessary and for pleasure...and I spend money. That makes me a lousy hunter without a sense of fairness, lacking of pride and tradition, uncapable of making decisions for myself, lazy, and deserving of nothing more than a participation trophy. Yeah, I think that pretty much sums it up...should I give you the sword for my head?

I think not. Have a great day buddy.

skinnnner

Why dont we just do a poll on this.would be intreasting to see the outcome.