Catch and Release Hunting?
08-24-2005, 06:33 PM
#21
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 64
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
ORIGINAL: cuchullainn
Could you thread the end of your barrel and attach a 3 pronged barrel on the end where u would have 3 missile things with nets attached. Take the projectile off the bullet and fire the nets catching the deer? I was thinking this might be good for catching them alive if I ever wanted to breed deer.
Could you thread the end of your barrel and attach a 3 pronged barrel on the end where u would have 3 missile things with nets attached. Take the projectile off the bullet and fire the nets catching the deer? I was thinking this might be good for catching them alive if I ever wanted to breed deer.
08-24-2005, 08:35 PM
#23
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a van down by the river
Posts: 8,939
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
I don't guess I see much point in it. The fatality rate for tranquilized animals is about 50%. Not to mention keeping the animal alive and breathing, then getting it back on its feet basically takes a D.V.M. The stuff in tranquilizersis dangerous stuff. There is a very, very fine line between enough to be effective and enough to be lethal.
08-24-2005, 09:46 PM
#24
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N.W. Wisconsin
Posts: 308
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
It is my understanding, that a deer that has been tranquilzed cannot be safely eaten by humans for quite some time after that.
So what happens if Joe Blow tranks a deer today, lets it go, and Bob Smith shoots the same deer later in the day. Bob will never know that it was tranked, and then he fries up some of the deer that night. Not good.
PLUS - wouldn't the tracking after the shot be WAY harder, since there is no blood? So how many of these deer would you actually find?
I think the only thing that would be even remotely plausible, is to hunt deer with a paintball gun that shoots animal safe paint pellets. You could say you "shot" the deer, but really it is just walking around with a big bolb of red or blue paint on its side.
But the paint would have to be non-harmful to the deer, who would most likely try to groom it off themselves. PLUS , I would be afraif that too many gung ho kids would be out in the woods blazing away at the deer with these paintballs, hitting them in the eyes, head, etc.
All in all, I guess it is KILL them or take a photo with a good zoom. No other options.
So what happens if Joe Blow tranks a deer today, lets it go, and Bob Smith shoots the same deer later in the day. Bob will never know that it was tranked, and then he fries up some of the deer that night. Not good.
PLUS - wouldn't the tracking after the shot be WAY harder, since there is no blood? So how many of these deer would you actually find?
I think the only thing that would be even remotely plausible, is to hunt deer with a paintball gun that shoots animal safe paint pellets. You could say you "shot" the deer, but really it is just walking around with a big bolb of red or blue paint on its side.
But the paint would have to be non-harmful to the deer, who would most likely try to groom it off themselves. PLUS , I would be afraif that too many gung ho kids would be out in the woods blazing away at the deer with these paintballs, hitting them in the eyes, head, etc.
All in all, I guess it is KILL them or take a photo with a good zoom. No other options.
08-25-2005, 07:34 AM
#27
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,716
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
The Pennsylvania Game Commission, in conjunction with Penn State University just completed an initial phase ofa very extensive study of wild deer. Without going into the specifics, they used bait and rocket or spring - propelled nets and tranquilizers to check the age, weight, and antler massof wild deer.
I didn't hear any specific instances of mortality as a result of this study, but I did learn that the initial phases were very successful.
I guess I was basing my wild ideas on the bases of that study and it's collection techniques, trying to beat the bushes and see if there's any real-world interest from my peers inthe hunting public.
All I know is that if somebody in the know told me that I could go out hunting, shoot deer all day, and that they would all recover quickly and without harm, I'd be all over it. The devil may be in the details, but it seemed like a good idea on paper.
I didn't hear any specific instances of mortality as a result of this study, but I did learn that the initial phases were very successful.
I guess I was basing my wild ideas on the bases of that study and it's collection techniques, trying to beat the bushes and see if there's any real-world interest from my peers inthe hunting public.
All I know is that if somebody in the know told me that I could go out hunting, shoot deer all day, and that they would all recover quickly and without harm, I'd be all over it. The devil may be in the details, but it seemed like a good idea on paper.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
08-25-2005, 02:18 PM
#29
Spike
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 59
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
One of the main reasons of hunting is to control the population of animals and to better the rest of the heard. Just think this is a crazy idea. The anti's would be all over this. I saw a hunt on ebay for shooting exotics with paintball guns. This is the stuff that gives real hunters bad names for sure. Who want to harrass animal by shooting them with paintballs?
08-25-2005, 02:23 PM
#30
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 480
RE: Catch and Release Hunting?
Well, there are several reasons why I would be opposed to this. First, deer need to be killed every year. Could you imagine if all of the deer harvested by hunters lived just one more year. There would be so many deer wandering around that it would be an epidemic. Second, would you want to kill and eat a deer that had been tranq'd earlier that morning with all of that garbage floating around in its system? Would you want other animals like bears or lions ingesting all of that chemical as well? I don't think so. Also, you would have another epidemic with druggies buying the tranq rounds to get high and probably dying in the process. You would also have tranq shootings on people. I just think that there are way too many negatives for this to ever be a good idea. I don't agree that shooting an animal with a tranq twice will kill it, as suggested is the case with polar bear in this thread. If you give the drug enough time to leave the system before readmininstering it to the animal there will be no ill effects.