If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegram)   21 years after PETA lost a lawsuit to prevent deer hunting, Massachusetts hunters have prevented an environmental disaster   (telegram.com) divider line 88
    More: Interesting, deer hunting, Massachusetts  
•       •       •

7760 clicks; posted to Geek » on 17 Dec 2012 at 10:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-17 10:11:32 AM
First, First! Oh my god my life is complete. I'm first on a thread. Ahhhhhhhahhahahahahaha!!!!!

I feel..... Stupid.
 
2012-12-17 10:12:59 AM
This just proves PETA doesn't know what they're talking about. What a bunch of loonies.
 
2012-12-17 10:16:37 AM
Because screw you PETA.
 
2012-12-17 10:23:26 AM

Richard C Stanford: First, First! Oh my god my life is complete. I'm first on a thread. Ahhhhhhhahhahahahahaha!!!!!

I feel..... Stupid.


Who ARE you?
 
2012-12-17 10:24:39 AM
I know exactly zero people who think PETA is a rational well-meaning organization. I live in Berkeley/ San Francisco area, ground zero for localvores, organic and slow food. Not even any of my vegan friends have a positive view on PETA. They're sick of people thinking they're some sort of proxy and having people try and argue against PETA's idiocy through them. PETA is so bad at what they do, so simpleminded, so zealous, so uncompromising impractical and sanctimonious I honestly believe that if this was a giant false flag conspiracy you couldn't do better.
 
2012-12-17 10:27:50 AM
You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.
 
2012-12-17 10:28:39 AM

uttertosh: Richard C Stanford: First, First! Oh my god my life is complete. I'm first on a thread. Ahhhhhhhahhahahahahaha!!!!!

I feel..... Stupid.

Who ARE you?


Some dude who's had his account for a week.

Hopefully, he'll get over it.
 
2012-12-17 10:36:09 AM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


We are the apex predator. It's about time we acted like it.

/Deerburgers for everyone!
 
2012-12-17 10:36:25 AM
The majority of hunters care deeply about conservation.

Fishermen? Not so much, unfortunately. If someone tells people about a good bite, the lake will be fished clean.
 
2012-12-17 10:39:59 AM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


Those predators kill more than deer, tho.
I suspect after a few five year olds got eaten they'd have been wiped out anyway.
 
2012-12-17 10:41:10 AM

Esc7: I know exactly zero people who think PETA is a rational well-meaning organization. I live in Berkeley/ San Francisco area, ground zero for localvores, organic and slow food. Not even any of my vegan friends have a positive view on PETA. They're sick of people thinking they're some sort of proxy and having people try and argue against PETA's idiocy through them. PETA is so bad at what they do, so simpleminded, so zealous, so uncompromising impractical and sanctimonious I honestly believe that if this was a giant false flag conspiracy you couldn't do better.


PETA's role is largely to be unreasonable and garner press in order to raise awareness and cause discussion. It has been necessary since so many events are primarily flat-out rejected by potentially reasonable conservationists. they're the chock troops you call in when there's no potential for discussion at all and the odds are if the public were aware of the situation they might think differently.
 
2012-12-17 10:43:01 AM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.
 
2012-12-17 10:43:47 AM

utahraptor2: We are the apex predator. It's about time we acted like it.


I have to say this!

utahraptor2: /Deerburgers for everyone!


Can I have mine medium rare please?
 
2012-12-17 10:45:34 AM

DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.


I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.
 
2012-12-17 10:46:16 AM

Cybernetic: uttertosh: Richard C Stanford: First, First! Oh my god my life is complete. I'm first on a thread. Ahhhhhhhahhahahahahaha!!!!!

I feel..... Stupid.

Who ARE you?

Some dude who's had his account for a week.

Hopefully, he'll get over it.

And

A greenlit, and sneaks past the Boobies filter?

/Hopefully I'll get over it ;-)
 
2012-12-17 10:49:51 AM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


What's the point of that observation? Are you trying to assign blame? The individuals who killed off all he wolves in the East have been dead for decades, if not more than a century.

Our society has become more ecologically aware since then. We balance the deer populations with controlled hunting. Most hunters are aware and care about the health of the deer population and the effects of overhunting as well as underhunting. Hunting is a traditional, healthy activity with ecological benefits. It gets people to go outdoors, get in touch with their roots, and puts healthy food on their plates.

Wolves have been reintroduced in parts of the West. They have been successful to the point where some places are allowing hunting of wolves to keep their populations in check. You may gripe about it, but people still want a role at the top of the food chain. We kill deer, and we will kill wolves, but from now on we will do it responsibly to maintain balance.
 
2012-12-17 10:54:18 AM

cgraves67: We kill deer, and we will kill wolves, but from now on we will do it responsibly to maintain balance.


weknowmemes.com
 
2012-12-17 11:01:45 AM

yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.


Actually, trophy hunting is more ecologically defensible than all the other forms of hunting.

The guy who won't shoot less than an 8-pointer because "It's too small" likely has a better idea of how balanced the environment he hunts in is than the guy who shoots the first legal deer to cross his path on opening day so he can fill his freezer.
 
2012-12-17 11:03:30 AM
What a browsing deer may look like:

www.anticostiphotos.com
 
2012-12-17 11:13:35 AM
if PETA wanted to save deer and wildlife they would do more to prevent them from being hit by vehicles. Simple barriers by upcoming blind spots would prevent a lot of animal deaths and damage to cars. Cars kill way more deer than hunters.
 
2012-12-17 11:13:48 AM
Responsible management of resources? Including hunting? Incredible!

Next, I'll learn that proper logging helps keep forests healthy and limits the damage of wildfires.
 
2012-12-17 11:22:39 AM

machoprogrammer: The majority of hunters care deeply about conservation.

Fishermen? Not so much, unfortunately. If someone tells people about a good bite, the lake will be fished clean.


Walleye fishermen are just plain evil -- we have bozos out here introducing them illegally.
 
2012-12-17 11:27:53 AM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


I totally agree that we should bring wolves, bears, and mountain lions back to suburban areas of the east coast.
 
2012-12-17 11:29:54 AM

dittybopper: yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.

Actually, trophy hunting is more ecologically defensible than all the other forms of hunting.

The guy who won't shoot less than an 8-pointer because "It's too small" likely has a better idea of how balanced the environment he hunts in is than the guy who shoots the first legal deer to cross his path on opening day so he can fill his freezer.


I don't hunt because, irony being what it is, I suspect that I'd eventually shoot Dick Cheney in the face, but from my loose understanding of hunting in MN, they only offer a limited number of tags by region depending on the current population of critters in that region.

So it doesn't really matter if you are filling your freezer or pissing your spouse off with a new decoration for the living room, hunting isn't going to result in scorched earth of the critter population either way.

Wouldn't the trophy hunters over time eliminate the best genes in the deer population?
 
2012-12-17 11:33:01 AM

Spade: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

I totally agree that we should bring wolves, bears, and mountain lions back to suburban areas of the east coast.


Once we do, we should introduce some sort of a bear tax. Damn freeloading bears can pay their share just like the rest of us.
 
2012-12-17 11:35:07 AM

SewerSquirrels: dittybopper: yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.

Actually, trophy hunting is more ecologically defensible than all the other forms of hunting.

The guy who won't shoot less than an 8-pointer because "It's too small" likely has a better idea of how balanced the environment he hunts in is than the guy who shoots the first legal deer to cross his path on opening day so he can fill his freezer.

I don't hunt because, irony being what it is, I suspect that I'd eventually shoot Dick Cheney in the face, but from my loose understanding of hunting in MN, they only offer a limited number of tags by region depending on the current population of critters in that region.

So it doesn't really matter if you are filling your freezer or pissing your spouse off with a new decoration for the living room, hunting isn't going to result in scorched earth of the critter population either way.

Wouldn't the trophy hunters over time eliminate the best genes in the deer population?



In elephant populations, poachers are responsible for genetic selection for tuskless or small-tusked individuals. Something similar would probably happen with deer, until no males were born with antlers at all.
 
2012-12-17 11:39:44 AM

machoprogrammer: The majority of hunters care deeply about conservation.

Fishermen? Not so much, unfortunately. If someone tells people about a good bite, the lake will be fished clean.


Uhh -- that is a broad brush you have there... Trout Unlimited, just a single example, would like a word with you...
 
2012-12-17 11:41:07 AM

SewerSquirrels: Wouldn't the trophy hunters over time eliminate the best genes in the deer population?


No, because by the time a trophy deer gets to trophy size, he's likely passed his genes on already. Also, there is little actual pure trophy hunting going on. Of all the deer hunters I know, I can only think of a single one who is a pure trophy hunter. All the rest are at best casual trophy hunters: If they know there is a big buck in the area, they might hold off a bit before filling their tags, but they don't wait forever.
 
2012-12-17 11:43:47 AM

Skarekrough: Esc7: I know exactly zero people who think PETA is a rational well-meaning organization. I live in Berkeley/ San Francisco area, ground zero for localvores, organic and slow food. Not even any of my vegan friends have a positive view on PETA. They're sick of people thinking they're some sort of proxy and having people try and argue against PETA's idiocy through them. PETA is so bad at what they do, so simpleminded, so zealous, so uncompromising impractical and sanctimonious I honestly believe that if this was a giant false flag conspiracy you couldn't do better.

PETA's role is largely to be unreasonable and garner press in order to raise awareness and cause discussion. It has been necessary since so many events are primarily flat-out rejected by potentially reasonable conservationists. they're the chock troops you call in when there's no potential for discussion at all and the odds are if the public were aware of the situation they might think differently.


Except they rarely accomplish anything. The problem is they've gone too far to even be remotely taken serious. They're like little kids throwing tantrums. Everyone just sort of ignores them.
 
2012-12-17 11:52:13 AM

deadsanta: In elephant populations, poachers are responsible for genetic selection for tuskless or small-tusked individuals. Something similar would probably happen with deer, until no males were born with antlers at all.


Poaching is a bit of a different animal.

Also, we would see by now some effect of that selection in the size of antlers. Deer are prolific breeders, so if there was a significant pressure downward on antler size from hunting, you'd expect it to show up in the record books over the last 50 or 100 years. It hasn't.
 
das
2012-12-17 11:57:02 AM

Cheesehead_Dave: What a browsing deer may look like:

[www.anticostiphotos.com image 688x484]


Nope.
Chuck Testa.
 
2012-12-17 11:58:01 AM

Skarekrough: Esc7: I know exactly zero people who think PETA is a rational well-meaning organization. I live in Berkeley/ San Francisco area, ground zero for localvores, organic and slow food. Not even any of my vegan friends have a positive view on PETA. They're sick of people thinking they're some sort of proxy and having people try and argue against PETA's idiocy through them. PETA is so bad at what they do, so simpleminded, so zealous, so uncompromising impractical and sanctimonious I honestly believe that if this was a giant false flag conspiracy you couldn't do better.

PETA's role is largely to be unreasonable and garner press in order to raise awareness and cause discussion. It has been necessary since so many events are primarily flat-out rejected by potentially reasonable conservationists. they're the chock troops you call in when there's no potential for discussion at all and the odds are if the public were aware of the situation they might think differently.


I don't know. I don't think I'd trust any of them to stop airplanes from rolling around.
 
2012-12-17 11:59:51 AM

dittybopper: yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.

Actually, trophy hunting is more ecologically defensible than all the other forms of hunting.

The guy who won't shoot less than an 8-pointer because "It's too small" likely has a better idea of how balanced the environment he hunts in is than the guy who shoots the first legal deer to cross his path on opening day so he can fill his freezer.


I know that, I meant the idea that they only want it as a trophy and leave the rest of the animal to waste. I have heard a few hunters that do this over at my local hunting store. Hunt a buck for its horns and not use the meat. Damn it, deer is so good!
 
2012-12-17 12:08:58 PM
Isn't PETA classed as a terror organization? I'd like to start a viral campaign alerting people to the fact that if they donate to PETA, they will be on record as donating to a terrorist group. Forever. The Internet never forgets.

Where do they get their funds from?
 
2012-12-17 12:16:56 PM

Skarekrough: they're the chock troops


I'd like to chock a few of them myself.
 
2012-12-17 12:20:47 PM

Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.


I agree, Central Park in New York should have large cats and canines reintroduced.
 
2012-12-17 12:27:29 PM
Amateurs.
Opening weekend in Missouri we bagged over 69,000 deer.

Link
 
2012-12-17 12:30:05 PM

Skarekrough: Esc7: I know exactly zero people who think PETA is a rational well-meaning organization. I live in Berkeley/ San Francisco area, ground zero for localvores, organic and slow food. Not even any of my vegan friends have a positive view on PETA. They're sick of people thinking they're some sort of proxy and having people try and argue against PETA's idiocy through them. PETA is so bad at what they do, so simpleminded, so zealous, so uncompromising impractical and sanctimonious I honestly believe that if this was a giant false flag conspiracy you couldn't do better.

PETA's role is largely to be unreasonable and garner press in order to raise awareness and cause discussion. It has been necessary since so many events are primarily flat-out rejected by potentially reasonable conservationists. they're the chock troops you call in when there's no potential for discussion at all and the odds are if the public were aware of the situation they might think differently.


at this point, the way you know you're on the right side of an argument is that PETA is opposing you.
 
2012-12-17 12:31:49 PM

yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.


I don't bow hunt because I find it takes too long for the animal to die. Just because I'm hungry doesn't mean I want to be cruel.
 
2012-12-17 12:36:32 PM

yves0010: know that, I meant the idea that they only want it as a trophy and leave the rest of the animal to waste. I have heard a few hunters that do this over at my local hunting store. Hunt a buck for its horns and not use the meat. Damn it, deer is so good!


Well, from a "preservation of the species" standpoint, one is no worse than the other.

I don't like the "I eat it, so it's OK" argument, because many species were hunted into extinction by subsistence hunting.

You see, there are 3 main kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting. This is hunting for food, and for other uses like shelter and the like, without an economic motive.

2. Market hunting. This is hunting so that you can sell the meat, or the hide, or the tusks, or whatever, for profit.

3. Sport hunting. This is hunting primarily for enjoyment. You may eat what you kill, but not necessarily.

Of the 3 main kinds of hunting, the only one that hasn't resulted in extinctions is sport hunting. That's because sport hunters want to keep on hunting, and if you wipe out all the game, you can't hunt anymore. It was unregulated market and subsistence hunting in the early US that led to the population of Whitetail deer being so low in 1900. Same with the bison: They weren't wiped out because it was fun to hunt them, they were wiped out because their meat and hides were valuable, and it had a side benefit of screwing over the Plains Indians. Similarly with the tiger: To the extent that hunting was a problem, it wasn't *SPORT* hunters. Chauncy Uppercrust sitting on a howdah with a double rifle wasn't responsible for their decline in India. It was locals hunting them to protect themselves and their livestock (subsistence hunting, albeit one step removed), and to sell their hides and other parts to fashion models and flaccid Chinese men (market hunting).

Fact is, regulated sport hunting almost always results in an *INCREASE* in targeted game, not a decrease. At least, that's been the experience here in North America.
 
2012-12-17 12:42:15 PM

Station: yves0010: DubyaHater: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

But we need the fur for rugs and animal heads to hang on the wall. I need people to see what a man I am for hunting a wolf/panther/etc with a rifle and scope.

I know many hunters who do not hunt with a gun but rather use a bow. And they use the entire animal. Not just the head and fur. But they use the meat to eat. Not all hunters do trophy hunting.

I don't bow hunt because I find it takes too long for the animal to die. Just because I'm hungry doesn't mean I want to be cruel.


Then you're not a very good shot. Heart shot or double lung shot with a gun or rifle should produce the same result. And whether gun or bow, if you hit them in the boiler room, the time it takes the animal to expire should be similar as well

JC
 
2012-12-17 12:44:52 PM

Station: I don't bow hunt because I find it takes too long for the animal to die. Just because I'm hungry doesn't mean I want to be cruel.


1. Use a good quality non-mechanical cut-on-contact broadhead.
2. Keep it razor sharp. If you can't shave the hair on your arm with it, it's not sharp enough yet.
3. Don't take shots beyond your ability to place the arrow accurately.

I've had deer run for a long time after being in the vitals with a .30'06, and I've seen them drop not 5 yards from being hit with a bow (shot by a 12 year old, no less!). Neither is actually better than the other, when used within their range limitations.
 
2012-12-17 12:46:03 PM

chiett: Amateurs.
Opening weekend in Missouri we bagged over 69,000 deer.

Link


Without deer hunting the food banks of Missouri and other Midwest states would lose their biggest source of protein Sharetheharvedt.org for more info
 
2012-12-17 12:47:21 PM
My girlfriend's dad didnt get a deer this year, which is very sad news because that means I wont be getting any deer jerky for Christmas :(

And as someone who lived in rural Ohio for most of my life, I wish there werent so many deer here. When it's not hunting season you hit them with your car. When it is hunting season the state fills up with assholes from out of state who hunt dangerously on other people's land. F those guys.
 
2012-12-17 12:52:12 PM

yves0010: I know that, I meant the idea that they only want it as a trophy and leave the rest of the animal to waste. I have heard a few hunters that do this over at my local hunting store. Hunt a buck for its horns and not use the meat. Damn it, deer is so good!


so encourage them to donate their deer to a participating food bank. if they dont want to eat it, someone else will.
 
2012-12-17 12:56:37 PM

cgraves67: Glitchwerks: You know, if all the apex predators hadn't been killed off, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place.

What's the point of that observation? Are you trying to assign blame? The individuals who killed off all he wolves in the East have been dead for decades, if not more than a century.

Our society has become more ecologically aware since then. We balance the deer populations with controlled hunting. Most hunters are aware and care about the health of the deer population and the effects of overhunting as well as underhunting. Hunting is a traditional, healthy activity with ecological benefits. It gets people to go outdoors, get in touch with their roots, and puts healthy food on their plates.

Wolves have been reintroduced in parts of the West. They have been successful to the point where some places are allowing hunting of wolves to keep their populations in check. You may gripe about it, but people still want a role at the top of the food chain. We kill deer, and we will kill wolves, but from now on we will do it responsibly to maintain balance.


I agree. Another point is that wolves would not do so well in the Eastern part of the US. Wolves need quite a bit of space and even with that they get in to trouble on a regular basis. It would not be a very good fit for them or the folks that live there. Mountain lions are a little better adapted at this type of environment though.
 
2012-12-17 01:01:37 PM

dittybopper: SewerSquirrels: Wouldn't the trophy hunters over time eliminate the best genes in the deer population?

No, because by the time a trophy deer gets to trophy size, he's likely passed his genes on already. Also, there is little actual pure trophy hunting going on. Of all the deer hunters I know, I can only think of a single one who is a pure trophy hunter. All the rest are at best casual trophy hunters: If they know there is a big buck in the area, they might hold off a bit before filling their tags, but they don't wait forever.


Hell, our season is so short anymore, that most can't afford to wait for the trophy. Plus the general season is out of the rut which makes it that more difficult.

Filled my freezer with mostly forkies and 3-pointers over the last decade.

/and a spike elk.
 
2012-12-17 01:02:37 PM

dittybopper: Same with the bison: They weren't wiped out because it was fun to hunt them, they were wiped out because their meat and hides were valuable, and it had a side benefit of screwing over the Plains Indians.


LOL WUT. You of all people should know about the wholesale slaughter of buffalo from railway cars for nothing more than horns and hides, if even that. It was sport hunting at its most wasteful.
 
2012-12-17 01:14:20 PM

dittybopper: Station: I don't bow hunt because I find it takes too long for the animal to die. Just because I'm hungry doesn't mean I want to be cruel.

1. Use a good quality non-mechanical cut-on-contact broadhead.
2. Keep it razor sharp. If you can't shave the hair on your arm with it, it's not sharp enough yet.
3. Don't take shots beyond your ability to place the arrow accurately.

I've had deer run for a long time after being in the vitals with a .30'06, and I've seen them drop not 5 yards from being hit with a bow (shot by a 12 year old, no less!). Neither is actually better than the other, when used within their range limitations.


Exactly. No matter what you use, spend time at the range to be comfortable with how and where it shoots. Simply substituing power for placement usually produces very bad results.
 
2012-12-17 01:30:38 PM

yves0010: I meant the idea that they only want it as a trophy and leave the rest of the animal to waste.


Wanton waste of big game animals is illegal in most (if not all) states.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report