how is this "hunting"
#91
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
RE: how is this "hunting"
Argue your point with Tules elk
You don't have to post links to "little golden books of zoology" to make a good point about endangeredspecies being resurrected through generational cycles on some preserve. I don't care if animals live behind a high fence. I don't think they should be hunted behind a high fence.
Yeah, hunting is a religion...tolerance!
( I still think you're an ok guy, we just see things differently).
You should get out more
good luck and good hunting
#92
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,435
RE: how is this "hunting"
The truth is that we humans exploit animals for our own self interests. We always have and likely always will. From the animals raised for the slaughter houses to the high fence canned hunts, trappers, fishermen and yes to the guy on public land stalking a deer with a long bow, we all kill as a result of our own personal desire to do so and/or to satisfy our self interests. Though the methods and the motivations may be different, some apparently have need to feel that their's is quite honorable while others are ethically and maybe even morally wrong. Maybe some deep seated guilt needs to be aswaged there. I don't know but it seems pretty hypocritical to me for a guy, who pays others to kill for him, chowing down a McDonalds burger or some Kentucky fried to be getting up on his moral high horse and condeming someone who killed an animal on a canned hunt. IMO, killing an animal is only unethical if it is done with disregard for the potential suffering one might inflict on the animal but that's another thread.
[/align]
[/align]So is high fence hunting really hunting? Why even ask the question? It's winds up just being an argument parsing the definition of "hunt" and like I've pointed out before, one can even make the argument that waiting in a treestand is arguably not hunting so why go there? Is long range rifle hunting more or less ethical than an atlatl? If the definition of hunting hinges on the amount of advantage the hunter has than I guess the only true hunters wear only a loin cloth and kill with a rock. If you don't do the high fence thing and don't plan to do it and it's a legal endeavor then why not just live and let live? It seems to me that the only reason for this discussion is to have a convenient whipping boy for those that want to look down their nose. Well I for one won't play that game.
[/align]
[/align]You guys that hunt high fence, I hope you enjoy every minute of it! I hope you derive as much satisfication and joy that I do on my little piece of land in upstate NY. Good hunting!
[/align]
[/align]
[/align]So is high fence hunting really hunting? Why even ask the question? It's winds up just being an argument parsing the definition of "hunt" and like I've pointed out before, one can even make the argument that waiting in a treestand is arguably not hunting so why go there? Is long range rifle hunting more or less ethical than an atlatl? If the definition of hunting hinges on the amount of advantage the hunter has than I guess the only true hunters wear only a loin cloth and kill with a rock. If you don't do the high fence thing and don't plan to do it and it's a legal endeavor then why not just live and let live? It seems to me that the only reason for this discussion is to have a convenient whipping boy for those that want to look down their nose. Well I for one won't play that game.
[/align]
[/align]You guys that hunt high fence, I hope you enjoy every minute of it! I hope you derive as much satisfication and joy that I do on my little piece of land in upstate NY. Good hunting!
[/align]
#93
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
RE: how is this "hunting"
I certainly know a few folks in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming that would argue with you when the conversation turns towards wolves (an indigenousbig game animal). Yep, they want fence -not to keep the wolves in. They want it to keep the wolves out! Which side of the fence is "behind"?
#94
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 242
RE: how is this "hunting"
Hillbilly - You're almost there dude! Here's the rub - if no one hunts behind high fences, then the whole operation has a HUGE capital flow problem. Without hunting, there's no funding, therefore no high fence, therefore the animals go away. Do you think do-gooders like PETA and the Humane Society are going to save species? No way - it's always hunting dollars that work. Hunters have the power to say which species stay and which species go because when it really comes down to it hunters are the ones that really care by putting their dollars where their mouths and "feelings" are.
I can't tell you how many species in Africa have been saved due to hunting.
Capitalism WORKS!
That's how our state DNR's function - indigenous animals are hunted, people pay for the privilege and the species is continued and managed. Ever hear of Pittman-Robertson?
When a species is in trouble of becoming extinct, how do we save it? Put the remaining species survivors in zoos? Wrong - never worked and never will. Decide to hunt and eat them and pay for the privilege - BINGO! That works.
It's worked in Africa. It's worked in New Zealand. It's worked (and is working) right here in the good old U.S.A. We get to hunt exotics and the exotics get to remain on the planet. It's what they call in "the biz" a "win-win".
Now, to the not-endangered species. I don't hunt indigenous species behind fence either because there's no need for me to pay extra money for bigger trophies - I don't care about that sort of thing. However, if I owned enough land and could afford to put a fence around it to keep poachers and trespassers off and protect my food plots, you better believe I'd do it. Would I hunt it? If there was enough to make it challenging you better believe I would.
I can't tell you how many species in Africa have been saved due to hunting.
Capitalism WORKS!
That's how our state DNR's function - indigenous animals are hunted, people pay for the privilege and the species is continued and managed. Ever hear of Pittman-Robertson?
When a species is in trouble of becoming extinct, how do we save it? Put the remaining species survivors in zoos? Wrong - never worked and never will. Decide to hunt and eat them and pay for the privilege - BINGO! That works.
It's worked in Africa. It's worked in New Zealand. It's worked (and is working) right here in the good old U.S.A. We get to hunt exotics and the exotics get to remain on the planet. It's what they call in "the biz" a "win-win".
Now, to the not-endangered species. I don't hunt indigenous species behind fence either because there's no need for me to pay extra money for bigger trophies - I don't care about that sort of thing. However, if I owned enough land and could afford to put a fence around it to keep poachers and trespassers off and protect my food plots, you better believe I'd do it. Would I hunt it? If there was enough to make it challenging you better believe I would.
#95
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 242
RE: how is this "hunting"
Who's idea was it to reintroduce (wrong word, as you pointed out the canadian wolf never roamed the parts of the rockies they now roam), or let's say introduce, wolves in Yellowstone and now a significant of the northwest? Hunters? Ranchers? Residents of the states into which they were introduced? NO. That bright idea came from lefties and urbanites in Washington, DC.
I agree with everyone that lives there (I know more than a few) - manage the wolves by hunting and trapping them. The best solution was to leave them out, but now that they're there they must be managed. Problem. The states and DC can't get together on how to do that. Big surprise. So what do westerners do in the meantime? SSS or suffer - mostly both. Fences are an expensive solution, but it's something (if you could afford it) a land owner can do now. SSS is illegal. Gridlock continues. The wolf situation in the west is tragic - I really feel for my western brothers and have done what I can do. I've written representatives and made sure my lawmakers know I'm not a happy constituent on that issue - FIX IT!
Sylvan - I like your style man. If I'm ever up state we'll have a beverage. BTW I've tried to operate an atlatl - WAY too hard.
I agree with everyone that lives there (I know more than a few) - manage the wolves by hunting and trapping them. The best solution was to leave them out, but now that they're there they must be managed. Problem. The states and DC can't get together on how to do that. Big surprise. So what do westerners do in the meantime? SSS or suffer - mostly both. Fences are an expensive solution, but it's something (if you could afford it) a land owner can do now. SSS is illegal. Gridlock continues. The wolf situation in the west is tragic - I really feel for my western brothers and have done what I can do. I've written representatives and made sure my lawmakers know I'm not a happy constituent on that issue - FIX IT!
Sylvan - I like your style man. If I'm ever up state we'll have a beverage. BTW I've tried to operate an atlatl - WAY too hard.
#97
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
RE: how is this "hunting"
ORIGINAL: Sylvan
If you don't do the high fence thing and don't plan to do it and it's a legal endeavor then why not just live and let live?
[/align]
If you don't do the high fence thing and don't plan to do it and it's a legal endeavor then why not just live and let live?
[/align]
#98
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
RE: how is this "hunting"
ORIGINAL: JeremiahJohnson
Hillbilly - You're almost there dude! Here's the rub - if no one hunts behind high fences, then the whole operation has a HUGE capital flow problem. Without hunting, there's no funding, therefore no high fence, therefore the animals go away. Do you think do-gooders like PETA and the Humane Society are going to save species? No way - it's always hunting dollars that work. Hunters have the power to say which species stay and which species go because when it really comes down to it hunters are the ones that really care by putting their dollars where their mouths and "feelings" are.
Hillbilly - You're almost there dude! Here's the rub - if no one hunts behind high fences, then the whole operation has a HUGE capital flow problem. Without hunting, there's no funding, therefore no high fence, therefore the animals go away. Do you think do-gooders like PETA and the Humane Society are going to save species? No way - it's always hunting dollars that work. Hunters have the power to say which species stay and which species go because when it really comes down to it hunters are the ones that really care by putting their dollars where their mouths and "feelings" are.
I can't tell you how many species in Africa have been saved due to hunting.
Now, to the not-endangered species. I don't hunt indigenous species behind fence either because there's no need for me to pay extra money for bigger trophies - I don't care about that sort of thing. However, if I owned enough land and could afford to put a fence around it to keep poachers and trespassers off and protect my food plots, you better believe I'd do it.
Would I hunt it? If there was enough to make it challenging you better believe I would.
#99
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,484
RE: how is this "hunting"
ORIGINAL: iamyourhuckleberry
One last thing Hillbilly,
"Innocense" only exists in a world free of evil and corruption. I'm pretty sure Outdoorlover speakswith "inexperience"
One last thing Hillbilly,
"Innocense" only exists in a world free of evil and corruption. I'm pretty sure Outdoorlover speakswith "inexperience"
innocense exists in every person at their beginning and is only incrementally taken awy by a corrupt world and I think it's obvious that outdoorslover still has some of his--thankfully.
BTW, Well done to you Outdoorslover for your rightful perceptions.
#100
RE: how is this "hunting"
“Wrong,
innocense exists in every person at their beginning and is only incrementally taken awy by a corrupt world and I think it's obvious that outdoorslover still has some of his—thankfully”
Wrong again,
At fifteen, he surly knows evil and corruption exists. I won’t deny he’s trying to resurrect his innocence, but by doing so, he turns a blind eye to reality. That’s inexperience! I wish we could live in an ideal world void of all things wrong.
innocense exists in every person at their beginning and is only incrementally taken awy by a corrupt world and I think it's obvious that outdoorslover still has some of his—thankfully”
Wrong again,
At fifteen, he surly knows evil and corruption exists. I won’t deny he’s trying to resurrect his innocence, but by doing so, he turns a blind eye to reality. That’s inexperience! I wish we could live in an ideal world void of all things wrong.