Similar to WHA.
07-27-2006, 01:17 PM
#31
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Similar to WHA.
The whole point of this thread is to enlighten people.
The big reasons that people said they were against the WHA in previous threads ammounts to only a few.
#1. The biggest reason seemed to be that the WHA was turning hunting into nothing more than a money making competition. That hunting was sacred to us all and that this should not be allowed. Someone here referenced that it was only about 13,000 dollars in prize money so it wasn't the same. Prize money is prize money, I don't care if it's a million dollars or a thousand. The people are there to win a competition, win money, win a free hunt, etc... etc... The promoters of the competition are in it to make money. If they couldn't they wouldn't be doing it. In these aspects they are the same.
Shaft, it really does not matter if the perosn filming can make points or not, the whole competition is about filming a hunt. Big bucks killed earn more points than does killed. Big bucks filmed earn more points than does filmed. Killing a deer earns more points than not killing a deer. Don't make an ettempt to sugure coat it. It IS a competition about killing big bucks.
#2. The second biggest reason was the drugging. I am not going to argue about the drugging causeI think it is also absurd. However, I find it no more 'wrong' than fishing for the sole purpose of the sport of fishing and not keeping the fish to eat. IE... Bass Masters, etc...
#3. High fence hunting. Not my cup of tea but thousands of people do it every year and we all watch it on T.V. and it is 100% legal.
Basically what I get out of all of this is that these kinds of competitionsare ok with everyone if the money is kept to a small ammount (less than $20,000), [&:]you actually kill the animal, and that it is free ranging. Not a whole heck of a lot of differance if you ask me.Personally, I would prefer to have this kind of competition behind a high fence rather than free ranging animals.
The big reasons that people said they were against the WHA in previous threads ammounts to only a few.
#1. The biggest reason seemed to be that the WHA was turning hunting into nothing more than a money making competition. That hunting was sacred to us all and that this should not be allowed. Someone here referenced that it was only about 13,000 dollars in prize money so it wasn't the same. Prize money is prize money, I don't care if it's a million dollars or a thousand. The people are there to win a competition, win money, win a free hunt, etc... etc... The promoters of the competition are in it to make money. If they couldn't they wouldn't be doing it. In these aspects they are the same.
Shaft, it really does not matter if the perosn filming can make points or not, the whole competition is about filming a hunt. Big bucks killed earn more points than does killed. Big bucks filmed earn more points than does filmed. Killing a deer earns more points than not killing a deer. Don't make an ettempt to sugure coat it. It IS a competition about killing big bucks.
#2. The second biggest reason was the drugging. I am not going to argue about the drugging causeI think it is also absurd. However, I find it no more 'wrong' than fishing for the sole purpose of the sport of fishing and not keeping the fish to eat. IE... Bass Masters, etc...
#3. High fence hunting. Not my cup of tea but thousands of people do it every year and we all watch it on T.V. and it is 100% legal.
Basically what I get out of all of this is that these kinds of competitionsare ok with everyone if the money is kept to a small ammount (less than $20,000), [&:]you actually kill the animal, and that it is free ranging. Not a whole heck of a lot of differance if you ask me.Personally, I would prefer to have this kind of competition behind a high fence rather than free ranging animals.
07-27-2006, 02:13 PM
#32
Spike
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 74
RE: Similar to WHA.
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
The whole point of this thread is to enlighten people.
The big reasons that people said they were against the WHA in previous threads ammounts to only a few.
#1. The biggest reason seemed to be that the WHA was turning hunting into nothing more than a money making competition. That hunting was sacred to us all and that this should not be allowed. Someone here referenced that it was only about 13,000 dollars in prize money so it wasn't the same. Prize money is prize money, I don't care if it's a million dollars or a thousand. The people are there to win a competition, win money, win a free hunt, etc... etc... The promoters of the competition are in it to make money. If they couldn't they wouldn't be doing it. In these aspects they are the same.
Shaft, it really does not matter if the perosn filming can make points or not, the whole competition is about filming a hunt. Big bucks killed earn more points than does killed. Big bucks filmed earn more points than does filmed. Killing a deer earns more points than not killing a deer. Don't make an ettempt to sugure coat it. It IS a competition about killing big bucks.
#2. The second biggest reason was the drugging. I am not going to argue about the drugging causeI think it is also absurd. However, I find it no more 'wrong' than fishing for the sole purpose of the sport of fishing and not keeping the fish to eat. IE... Bass Masters, etc...
#3. High fence hunting. Not my cup of tea but thousands of people do it every year and we all watch it on T.V. and it is 100% legal.
Basically what I get out of all of this is that these kinds of competitionsare ok with everyone if the money is kept to a small ammount (less than $20,000), [&:]you actually kill the animal, and that it is free ranging. Not a whole heck of a lot of differance if you ask me.Personally, I would prefer to have this kind of competition behind a high fence rather than free ranging animals.
The whole point of this thread is to enlighten people.
The big reasons that people said they were against the WHA in previous threads ammounts to only a few.
#1. The biggest reason seemed to be that the WHA was turning hunting into nothing more than a money making competition. That hunting was sacred to us all and that this should not be allowed. Someone here referenced that it was only about 13,000 dollars in prize money so it wasn't the same. Prize money is prize money, I don't care if it's a million dollars or a thousand. The people are there to win a competition, win money, win a free hunt, etc... etc... The promoters of the competition are in it to make money. If they couldn't they wouldn't be doing it. In these aspects they are the same.
Shaft, it really does not matter if the perosn filming can make points or not, the whole competition is about filming a hunt. Big bucks killed earn more points than does killed. Big bucks filmed earn more points than does filmed. Killing a deer earns more points than not killing a deer. Don't make an ettempt to sugure coat it. It IS a competition about killing big bucks.
#2. The second biggest reason was the drugging. I am not going to argue about the drugging causeI think it is also absurd. However, I find it no more 'wrong' than fishing for the sole purpose of the sport of fishing and not keeping the fish to eat. IE... Bass Masters, etc...
#3. High fence hunting. Not my cup of tea but thousands of people do it every year and we all watch it on T.V. and it is 100% legal.
Basically what I get out of all of this is that these kinds of competitionsare ok with everyone if the money is kept to a small ammount (less than $20,000), [&:]you actually kill the animal, and that it is free ranging. Not a whole heck of a lot of differance if you ask me.Personally, I would prefer to have this kind of competition behind a high fence rather than free ranging animals.
#2You find drugging dear or other game animals no more wrong then "catch-and-release" fishing??? Sorry not even close to a comparitive there. See my earlier post if you don't understand the difference between fishing and hunting.
#3High fence hunting is done, it is legal, and while you may watch shows that hunt in that method - please do not include me because I do not.
and your last point that the WHA is notmuchdifferent then a show that would pay out less, actually kill the hunted animal, and do it in a fair chase environment - well you made 3 comparitives and as far as I can tell they are polar opposites?
Guess if you told your car dealer you were looking for a Black SUV with 4WD and he showed up with a White VW Bug you would say "Close Enough for ME?"
07-27-2006, 02:22 PM
#33
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jackson, Missouri
Posts: 7,051
RE: Similar to WHA.
Bigbulls, this sentence explains my entire feelings on the matter.
"One portrays itself as hunting, when it's not. The other is merely a competition revolving around hunting. Therein lies the difference." - me.
I could care less how much money is involved, or if its held within fences or not. I don't want some idiot like Farbman conning the non-hunting world into thinking that the hunting community is letting him step up to the plate as our spokesman and saviour of our sport.
"One portrays itself as hunting, when it's not. The other is merely a competition revolving around hunting. Therein lies the difference." - me.
I could care less how much money is involved, or if its held within fences or not. I don't want some idiot like Farbman conning the non-hunting world into thinking that the hunting community is letting him step up to the plate as our spokesman and saviour of our sport.
07-27-2006, 04:33 PM
#34
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,704
RE: Similar to WHA.
"One portrays itself as hunting, when it's not. The other is merely a competition revolving around hunting. Therein lies the difference." - me.
I don't care if the WHA had zero prize money, was televised on PBS, and only "make a wish" children were allowed to participate. I would still not support it. It is an absurd organization that is "portraying itself as hunting." (well put Greg)
We have offered solutions in past discussions of WHA and none of them (that I've read) had to do with less money or prizes.
They were: No Tranqualizers, No Drugging of any kind, No Pens, and make it Fair Chase.
We have, from the very beginning, suggested they use cameras if they don't want to kill the animals.
Then it could be classified as revolving around hunting. No difference than Dream Season or C.C. Heck, I'd sign up for that.
But to intentionally promote the harrassment of penned up and drugged animals to a national audience and try to pass that off as hunting will never be acceptable.
07-27-2006, 05:45 PM
#35
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location:
Posts: 13,082
RE: Similar to WHA.
The comparison to Bassmasters has been made here a few times, so I have a question. If the WHA isn't hunting because it's drugging the animals and not killing them, is fishing not considered "fishing" if I turn loose every bass I keep?? Is it only fishing if I kill it and eat it?
Yeah, I know, not exactly comparing apples to apples here. There are no drugs involved in fishing, but basically it's sort of the same, right? I mean, your "catching" the animal, but w/ drugs and not a hook, right? I dunno, just something I started mulling over.
But I also stick w/ a statement in my last post......God put these animals here for us to kill and EAT, not torture.
Yeah, I know, not exactly comparing apples to apples here. There are no drugs involved in fishing, but basically it's sort of the same, right? I mean, your "catching" the animal, but w/ drugs and not a hook, right? I dunno, just something I started mulling over.
But I also stick w/ a statement in my last post......God put these animals here for us to kill and EAT, not torture.
07-27-2006, 08:20 PM
#36
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 83
RE: Similar to WHA.
good points yall. MoBowhuntr brings up a good point.
and please dont bombard him with hate mail because he doesnt AGREE with your idea of HUNTING?! jeez, its disgusting how people try to draw the line on what they call hunting and not.
WHy cant you make the comparison to fish? are deer that much more higher beings? That is the most ludicrous arguement I have ever heard! You can throw that out the window.
In my opinion, 'money' is the most irrevlevant reason to bash the WHA. My real tiff right now is that they are hunting on 200 acre plots of land? isnt that right? fill me in guys
and please dont bombard him with hate mail because he doesnt AGREE with your idea of HUNTING?! jeez, its disgusting how people try to draw the line on what they call hunting and not.
WHy cant you make the comparison to fish? are deer that much more higher beings? That is the most ludicrous arguement I have ever heard! You can throw that out the window.
In my opinion, 'money' is the most irrevlevant reason to bash the WHA. My real tiff right now is that they are hunting on 200 acre plots of land? isnt that right? fill me in guys
07-28-2006, 06:58 AM
#37
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,704
RE: Similar to WHA.
WHy cant you make the comparison to fish? are deer that much more higher beings?
Would you compare a worm to your Mother?
How about all the bugs you kill with the windshield of your car??? So is driving a car hunting??
Where has the common sense gone?
It is scary to think that these super geniuses are walking around the woods with weapons. [:'(]
07-28-2006, 07:50 AM
#38
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jackson, Missouri
Posts: 7,051
RE: Similar to WHA.
In my opinion, 'money' is the most irrevlevant reason to bash the WHA.
As I said earlier, it's the fact that this other fiasco is attempting to "represent" hunting and to be our "savior" is where my concerns lie.
Again, I repeat what is quicklybecoming mydefinitive thoughtfor this discussion: "One portrays itself as hunting, when it's not. The other is merely a competition revolving around hunting. Therein lies the difference."
I can't make it any plainer than that.
07-28-2006, 01:00 PM
#39
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Similar to WHA.
Greg, So far you are the only one that is making any kind of sense. However, I still have to disagree with the WHA not hunting. By definition they are doing exactly that. Your personal feelings on what hunting should be is something only that person can decide andI respect that but make no mistake bout it............ they are hunting.
I also happen to agree with you that the WHA is crap but that isn't the pointI am trying to make to everyone here.
All of these are competitions that involve shooting an animal for score and winning prizes or money. This was, by a large margin, the biggest reason people gave in previous threads why they didn't approve of the WHA. Now I see here that isn't so much a problem.
As far as deer being higher beings than fish I would have to say that they aren't and it would depend on the sensory organs that you are talking about. A fish can sense a wounded fish from a very long ways off. A shark can sense a drop of blood in a million gallons of water. The point is that fish are just a sensory developed for their environment as deer are for theirs. So IMHO a dart in the ass of a deer is no worse than a hook through the mouth of a fish when we are talking about specifically going fishing just for the sake of fishing and throwing them back. A shot in the butt is no more, probably less so, painful to the deer than a fish being hooked through the mouth and dragged through the water.
AndI would still rather the WHA and all of these other competitions take place behind high fences rather than making a competition with truely wild and free ranging animals. Be it 200 acre plots or 20,000 acre plots.
I also happen to agree with you that the WHA is crap but that isn't the pointI am trying to make to everyone here.
All of these are competitions that involve shooting an animal for score and winning prizes or money. This was, by a large margin, the biggest reason people gave in previous threads why they didn't approve of the WHA. Now I see here that isn't so much a problem.
As far as deer being higher beings than fish I would have to say that they aren't and it would depend on the sensory organs that you are talking about. A fish can sense a wounded fish from a very long ways off. A shark can sense a drop of blood in a million gallons of water. The point is that fish are just a sensory developed for their environment as deer are for theirs. So IMHO a dart in the ass of a deer is no worse than a hook through the mouth of a fish when we are talking about specifically going fishing just for the sake of fishing and throwing them back. A shot in the butt is no more, probably less so, painful to the deer than a fish being hooked through the mouth and dragged through the water.
AndI would still rather the WHA and all of these other competitions take place behind high fences rather than making a competition with truely wild and free ranging animals. Be it 200 acre plots or 20,000 acre plots.
07-28-2006, 02:26 PM
#40
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,704
RE: Similar to WHA.
I've read every thread on here concerning the WHA and I honestly cannot recall anyone complaining that they were competing for prizes. From what I understood, the prize portion was just an insult added to the injury.
