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.

(Slate)   Meet William Hornaday, who after spending the first part of his life traveling the globe and killing just about every exotic animal he could find, helped found the American conservation and environmentalist movements   (slate.com) divider line 138
    More: Ironic, William Hornaday, Americans, exotic animals, conservations, Bronx Zoo, pinnipeds, environmentalists, Bass Ale  
•       •       •

3968 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 May 2013 at 1:29 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-05-08 12:58:23 PM
It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

The first two have resulted in the extinction and near extinction of countless animals.

The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals.   The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.
 
2013-05-08 01:27:32 PM
Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.
 
2013-05-08 01:32:17 PM
He's not just a member of the Super Adventure Club he's the president!
 
2013-05-08 01:33:51 PM

dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

The first two have resulted in the extinction and near extinction of countless animals.

The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals.   The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.


^^^^This right here^^^^.  And also see Alfred Nobel.
 
2013-05-08 01:35:38 PM
Sounds like Teddy Roosevelt to me.
 
2013-05-08 01:36:55 PM

dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.


FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".
 
2013-05-08 01:37:51 PM

Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.


Well they shouldnt have attached their heads to such tasty tasty meat.
 
2013-05-08 01:38:15 PM
So if you hunt for the challenge and the chase why kill it?  I mean if your not going to eat it why not hit it with a paint ball or something?  Wouldn't that satisfy the drive to hunt or do you have to kill it for it to count?
 
2013-05-08 01:40:46 PM

luxup: So if you hunt for the challenge and the chase why kill it?  I mean if your not going to eat it why not hit it with a paint ball or something?  Wouldn't that satisfy the drive to hunt or do you have to kill it for it to count?


Hell, I'd definitely support that kind of hunting. Or even hunting with tranquilizer darts or something, so you can keep the animal still long enough to get a picture.

Many sport fishermen are OK with catch and release, especially now that pretty much everyone (especially those who can afford to go sportfishing)  has a smartphone with a camera. Why do land-based hunters need trophies?
 
2013-05-08 01:42:15 PM

Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.


Hell, local governments kill just to keep the population down.  At least they donate the meat, but the main purpose is to cull the population since they become "a nuisance".
 
2013-05-08 01:42:31 PM

dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals.   The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.


Go on. Keep believing that to justify your sport. Exotic animals with long life spans and limited breeding opportunities cannot outpace sport hunters in the wild.
 
2013-05-08 01:43:03 PM

LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


Ironic that you chose those two animals. The skill in killing an elephant is that a bullet powerful enough to do it cleanly, doesnt lend itself to high capacity. Therefore you are dealing with single or double shot rifles to kill an animal whose 'kill box' is terribly small. An animal smart enough to know what your up to, quiet enough to surprise you, and fast enough to rush you making that kill shot all the smaller. Mess up the first shot, and you have an angry animal charging you at 30 mph. hooch the second, harder shot, and youre worm food.

Leopards are hard to hunt because they are elusive as hell. Tracking one down is ridiculously difficult and the window to engage it is literally seconds. They are also unpredictable. Sometimes they stalk you, sometimes they flee. Not being on your game is a fantastic way to end up on the bad end of a leopard, most of which are sharp.
 
2013-05-08 01:43:44 PM
www.dtomtac.com
/oblig
 
2013-05-08 01:44:00 PM

Subtle_Canary: Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.

Well they shouldnt have attached their heads to such tasty tasty meat.


I have no problem whatsoever with tasty meat hunting and hope to try it myself someday if I can find someone to teach me how to do it.

Trophy hunters, on the other hand, should be forced to wear Scotch Brite underwear soaked in lye.
 
2013-05-08 01:44:13 PM
Let's not forget that environmentalism used to mean "save some trees for your grandkids to chop down" and conservation used to mean "save some animals for your grandkids to kill."
 
2013-05-08 01:44:52 PM
dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

What sport hunting might look like...

mikehanback.typepad.com

Ahh, the thrill of the chase.

Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
mssparky.com
 
2013-05-08 01:45:56 PM
Approves:

www.bradleymanning.org
 
2013-05-08 01:46:13 PM

Calmamity: Subtle_Canary: Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.

Well they shouldnt have attached their heads to such tasty tasty meat.

I have no problem whatsoever with tasty meat hunting and hope to try it myself someday if I can find someone to teach me how to do it.

Trophy hunters, on the other hand, should be forced to wear Scotch Brite underwear soaked in lye.


Im not going to BS you. I've NEVER hunted an animal because i needed the meat. I hunt them because its fun to do. The meat is simply a bonus. I tend to not even bother with my Doe tags every year unless a neighbor wants the venison.
 
2013-05-08 01:50:43 PM

luxup: So if you hunt for the challenge and the chase why kill it?  I mean if your not going to eat it why not hit it with a paint ball or something?  Wouldn't that satisfy the drive to hunt or do you have to kill it for it to count?


In most safari hunts, the meat of the animal is distributed to local natives, who also make a fair bit of income from being guides, suppliers and other support for the hunting groups.

This has the effect of making it economically advantageous for the natives not to poach the animals, and to stop others from poaching the animals.  It also gives them an economic reason not to slash-and-burn the habitat into farmland.

The hunter gets a taxidermy trophy.  Meanwhile, due to economic incentives, the habitat is protected and the hunted species increases.  Everyone wins except the whiners.
 
2013-05-08 01:52:21 PM

Calmamity: Subtle_Canary: Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.

Well they shouldnt have attached their heads to such tasty tasty meat.

I have no problem whatsoever with tasty meat hunting and hope to try it myself someday if I can find someone to teach me how to do it.

Trophy hunters, on the other hand, should be forced to wear Scotch Brite underwear soaked in lye.


Subsistence hunting is bad, much worse than trophy hunting.

A trophy hunter is going to be pretty selective about what he shoots.  Someone who kills merely to eat is going to shoot the first thing that crosses his path.
 
2013-05-08 01:52:49 PM

LordJiro


Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


Or just take a goddamn picture.
 
2013-05-08 01:53:14 PM
Watch it you fark monkeys that have no idea what you are talking about. Guiding hunts feeds my family. Hunters and fishermen have always been the biggest and most effective supporters of environmental and wildlife conservation. fark you all that say trophy hunting is bad. It puts food on the table and money in my pocket. My clients go home with memories and respect for the wilderness of Canada. And their permit fees are one of the leading contributors to wildlife management and research . Bc guide Outfitters are on the leading edge of DNA sequencing research for north American land mammals. How much out of pocket have you spent on conservation research? Do you.volunteer for this research? I do, along with hundreds of other guides. So fark off city folk. And keep your nose out of shiat you are clueless about.
 
2013-05-08 01:54:12 PM
This isn't unusual. Not everyone is required to enjoy the environment only one way. Perhaps that is green peace dogma but reality is most hunters and fishermen are tied into preservation funds so they can continue to hunt and fish.
 
2013-05-08 01:59:21 PM

Maud Dib: dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

What sport hunting might look like...

[mikehanback.typepad.com image 400x268]

Ahh, the thrill of the chase.

Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
[mssparky.com image 500x375]


Actually, this is what I use:

img236.imageshack.us

i45.tinypic.com

i48.tinypic.com

/Well *TECHNICALLY* that head I knapped is too small to hunt big game with in my state, but it's OK for small game and varmints like coyote.
//Am going to knap some bigger heads for the coming bow season
 
2013-05-08 02:01:24 PM

SumoJeb: Watch it you fark monkeys that have no idea what you are talking about. Guiding hunts feeds my family. Hunters and fishermen have always been the biggest and most effective supporters of environmental and wildlife conservation. fark you all that say trophy hunting is bad. It puts food on the table and money in my pocket. My clients go home with memories and respect for the wilderness of Canada. And their permit fees are one of the leading contributors to wildlife management and research . Bc guide Outfitters are on the leading edge of DNA sequencing research for north American land mammals. How much out of pocket have you spent on conservation research? Do you.volunteer for this research? I do, along with hundreds of other guides. So fark off city folk. And keep your nose out of shiat you are clueless about.


Everyone needs a cause to make them feel good about their life. Knowledge of subject and effectiveness of action dont boost egos.
 
2013-05-08 02:03:06 PM

SumoJeb: Watch it you fark monkeys that have no idea what you are talking about. Guiding hunts feeds my family. Hunters and fishermen have always been the biggest and most effective supporters of environmental and wildlife conservation. fark you all that say trophy hunting is bad. It puts food on the table and money in my pocket. My clients go home with memories and respect for the wilderness of Canada. And their permit fees are one of the leading contributors to wildlife management and research . Bc guide Outfitters are on the leading edge of DNA sequencing research for north American land mammals. How much out of pocket have you spent on conservation research? Do you.volunteer for this research? I do, along with hundreds of other guides. So fark off city folk. And keep your nose out of shiat you are clueless about.


Do you know how we know you didn't read the thread before posting?
 
2013-05-08 02:03:12 PM

Englebert Slaptyback: LordJiro

Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


Or just take a goddamn picture.


Ain't the same.

A a philosopher once said, "one does not hunt in order to kill, one kills in order to have hunted".
 
2013-05-08 02:06:27 PM
www.adweek.com
 
2013-05-08 02:08:22 PM

dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.


upload.wikimedia.org
Would like a word with you...
 
2013-05-08 02:10:17 PM

dittybopper: Maud Dib: dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

What sport hunting might look like...

[mikehanback.typepad.com image 400x268]

Ahh, the thrill of the chase.

Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
[mssparky.com image 500x375]

Actually, this is what I use:

[img236.imageshack.us image 582x181]

[i45.tinypic.com image 640x480]

[i48.tinypic.com image 640x480]

/Well *TECHNICALLY* that head I knapped is too small to hunt big game with in my state, but it's OK for small game and varmints like coyote.
//Am going to knap some bigger heads for the coming bow season


Damn, Squanto!
You hunt old, old, OLD school style.

/Srsly though, that's pretty cool and it really does bring back the sport and skill involved with hunting.
//Especially the part about flint knapping...
///Keep the art alive, my man.
 
2013-05-08 02:16:39 PM

guygadbois: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x308]
Would like a word with you...


Sure thing:

It was not until the nation became more prosperous that sport hunters would become the 
impetus for early conservation efforts.
Landowners and businessmen, who no longer had 
to hunt for subsistence, formed clubs of like-minded friends to promote comradeship, a 
kinship with the pioneer spirit, and ethical hunting practices. The first sportsman's club 
was the Carroll's Island Club, formed in 1832 near Baltimore, Maryland, largely for 
waterfowl hunting. In 1844 the New York Sportsmen's Club was formed, which drafted 
model game laws recommending closed hunting seasons on woodcock, quail, and deer as 
well as on trout fishing. These laws were passed by the Orange and Rockland Counties 
of New York in 1848.
Many of the club members were attorneys, and they personally 
sued violators to encourage compliance with the law. Eventually, hundreds of local 
sportsmen's clubs were formed across the country, and similar game laws were passed. In 
addition to game limits and seasons, some states outlawed use of dogs for hunting and 
hunting at night with lights, and others banned the use of traps, snares and pitfalls, which 
were common at the time. Maine was the first state to employ a game warden, in 1852.


John Muir was born in 1838, 6 years *AFTER* the first sport hunters in the US started their conservation efforts.  The first laws on it in New York were passed when he was 10 years old.

Sport hunters did it first.
 
2013-05-08 02:18:14 PM
I've always felt that, like Native Americans; if you kill an animal, you should use all of the parts possible. You shouldn't waste anything or as little as humanly possible.

If you don't want the meat, donate it. If you don't want the hide; donate it or find someone that does want it, there's plenty of market for deer hides. You can always give the bones to either a natural history museum, research facility or some other place. The only thing that it is alright to leave behind is the guts, and coyotes will be all over those.
 
2013-05-08 02:19:31 PM
Did he found the actual environmental movement or the one that was taken over by radical left wing types later?
 
2013-05-08 02:23:37 PM

dittybopper: The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals. The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.


Except that you don't hunt the raggedy-assed tick-infested lame herd-trailers when you hunt. You kill the biggest, strongest, most handsome animal you can find. Of course, by removing that premier specimen of the herd you've just diminished the herd's gene pool. Don't get me wrong, I get that you enjoy the hunt, challenge, etc. And yes, I agree completely that hunters and the license fees they pay support the protected lands which are habitat to the wildlife, but you're not really helping the species or populations by removing their very best from the breeding stock.
 
2013-05-08 02:24:22 PM

DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!
You hunt old, old, OLD school style.

/Srsly though, that's pretty cool and it really does bring back the sport and skill involved with hunting.
//Especially the part about flint knapping...
///Keep the art alive, my man.


I used to hunt with scoped .30'06 bolt action rifle, and a compound bow.

It got too easy for me.

So, instead of going the "bigger and better trophy" way, I went the "make it harder to do the same thing" way.  Another hunter I know went the other way, and he won't shoot anything with less than 8 points on it, but he uses all modern stuff.   Me?  I don't care.  I'll take a doe if the chance presents itself (generally, during the bow and muzzleloader seasons in my state, you can take a deer of either sex).

Our two strategies accomplish the same thing, though:  Making it more of a challenge.  Both are equally valid methods.
 
2013-05-08 02:28:33 PM

DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!


OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

img.fark.net
 
2013-05-08 02:29:35 PM

Kuta: Go on. Keep believing that to justify your sport. Exotic animals with long life spans and limited breeding opportunities cannot outpace sport hunters in the wild.


I always think of duck hunters vs ducks, compared to developers vs wetlands.
 
2013-05-08 02:30:44 PM

dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]


Well now that IS badass. And I commend your approach to keeping it interesting vs. usual dick-measuring method.
 
2013-05-08 02:30:45 PM

dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]


I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.
 
2013-05-08 02:31:36 PM

dittybopper



Ain't the same.


Not the same? OF COURSE it's not the same. That's the point.

Going on a safari to Africa with the express purpose of killing exotic animals appears to be the antithesis of conservatism and tips toward selfishness: every exotic animal that is taken and taxidermied is one that someone else won't get to see in the wild. Not much conservation going on there.

I understand the need to keep deer population down to ensure there is enough food to support them, and obviously there are pest and nuisance animals, but the rare animal aspect is what bothers me. That's where I would prefer to see people just take a picture.
 
2013-05-08 02:35:54 PM

LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.
 
2013-05-08 02:36:04 PM

AngryJailhouseFistfark: dittybopper: The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals. The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.

Except that you don't hunt the raggedy-assed tick-infested lame herd-trailers when you hunt. You kill the biggest, strongest, most handsome animal you can find.


Actually, no, I don't.

Because I use primitive methods with limited range, and the fact that I don't use attractants or tree stands, generally, I end up taking the least wary animals.  Mostly, young does and yearling bucks.
 
2013-05-08 02:36:54 PM
Clearly plagiarized.  Saint Hubertus was the first founder of the modern day ecology movement, and an avid hunter.

You can see his logo on the Jaegermeister bottle.

BTW, tree huggers: You know where the money comes from to conserve wildlife and pay the Game Warden's salary?  From licenses and fees paid by hunters, that's where!
 
2013-05-08 02:41:11 PM

DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.


You don't know who Magua is?
 
2013-05-08 02:42:49 PM

stir22: lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.


*TWEET*

Violation of Markley's Law.  Ten yard penalty and loss of argument.
 
2013-05-08 02:43:46 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

John James Audubon, killed thousands of birds to use as subjects when creating his Birds of America book. He once was quoted as claiming it wasn't a good day unless he killed 100 birds.

He later seemed to develop an opinion similar to Shifting Baselines Syndrome described in the article, when he stated, "A true conservationist is a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers, but borrowed from his children."

It was a different day and age.  Had opinions didn't change more rapidly, we might still have Passenger Pigeons and other species ( Carolina Parakeet, Labrador Duck, Great Auk, Esquimaux Curlew, and Pinnated Grouse, just to name a few) which went extinct about the same time the buffalo was barely clinging to existence.
 
2013-05-08 02:45:16 PM

dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.

You don't know who Magua is?


No idea. I was just CYA in case you were an angry Native American or something. You hunt with home-made flint knapped arrow tips and a black power muzzle loading rifle. I am not that moronic to piss you off lest I wish my own death...:D
 
2013-05-08 02:47:37 PM

DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.

You don't know who Magua is?

No idea. I was just CYA in case you were an angry Native American or something. You hunt with home-made flint knapped arrow tips and a black power muzzle loading rifle. I am not that moronic to piss you off lest I wish my own death...:D


This is Magua, as portrayed by Wes Studi in the film "Last of the Mohicans":

24.media.tumblr.com

He is one of the all-time bad-ass bad guys.
 
2013-05-08 02:50:39 PM
Oh! Him! I have seen Last of the Mohicans, but it was years ago.
Yes, I know who you mean now.
 
2013-05-08 02:59:26 PM

DeathCipris: Oh! Him! I have seen Last of the Mohicans, but it was years ago.
Yes, I know who you mean now.


To make the joke fully aware to you, I was riffing off they lyrics of an old Janet Jackson song:

No my first name ain't baby
It's Janet
Miss Jackson if you're nasty
 
2013-05-08 03:04:13 PM

Englebert Slaptyback: dittybopper


Ain't the same.


Not the same? OF COURSE it's not the same. That's the point.

Going on a safari to Africa with the express purpose of killing exotic animals appears to be the antithesis of conservatism and tips toward selfishness: every exotic animal that is taken and taxidermied is one that someone else won't get to see in the wild. Not much conservation going on there.

I understand the need to keep deer population down to ensure there is enough food to support them, and obviously there are pest and nuisance animals, but the rare animal aspect is what bothers me. That's where I would prefer to see people just take a picture.


I think you may be confusing exotic animals with endangered animals.  Kudu and Spring bok are exotic animals to us, but in Africa, they are as common as, and at times more plentiful than, Whitetail deer here.  Most exotic animal hunts are for those deer type animals, and not big cats and elephants (though those hunts do happen too, just not as frequently).

Also, there are endangered species hunts (like certain breeds of Rhino) that you can go on, but those hunts entail using a tranquilizer rifles, and include an environmental scientist who uses the time when the hunter is getting his pic taken next to the unconscious animal to take measurements and tagging the animals for further research.

I understand the polarizing aspects of hunting, but I truly think egos and emotions get in the way on this conversation on both sides.  Outdoor sportsmen tend to do way more for conservation of the environment, even if it's just by purchasing a license, than most members of environmental groups do (PETA, and Greenpeace for example).
 
2013-05-08 03:04:13 PM
 
2013-05-08 03:06:05 PM
I think you're obligated to be a trophy hunter if you're born with the name "Horn-a-day".
 
2013-05-08 03:12:02 PM

dittybopper: stir22: lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.

*TWEET*

Violation of Markley's Law.  Ten yard penalty and loss of argument.


really?  THAT is what you're going with?  again, lulz...tell you what.  go after a predator with a spear...go get your grizzly bear with, hell, you can even use a bow and arrow...do that and then i'll listen about how big a man you are.

a
 
2013-05-08 03:18:04 PM

ghettodwarf


I think you may be confusing exotic animals with endangered animals. Kudu and Spring bok are exotic animals to us, but in Africa, they are as common as, and at times more plentiful than, Whitetail deer here. Most exotic animal hunts are for those deer type animals, and not big cats and elephants (though those hunts do happen too, just not as frequently).


Appreciated, but the post to which I was responding upthread mentioned elephants and leopards so that's where my head was.


Also, there are endangered species hunts (like certain breeds of Rhino) that you can go on, but those hunts entail using a tranquilizer rifles, and include an environmental scientist who uses the time when the hunter is getting his pic taken next to the unconscious animal to take measurements and tagging the animals for further research.


Interesting - I learned something!


I understand the polarizing aspects of hunting, but I truly think egos and emotions get in the way on this conversation on both sides. Outdoor sportsmen tend to do way more for conservation of the environment, even if it's just by purchasing a license, than most members of environmental groups do (PETA, and Greenpeace for example).


I have no problem with hunting animals that are common, as long as the hunters are competent enough to make humane kills. Hunting something that is not common (and becoming less so) doesn't seem like conservation to me, but I see your point about licenses and such.

The whole PETA-Greenpeace thing is a discussion for another day. :-)
 
2013-05-08 03:22:44 PM

stir22: dittybopper: stir22: lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.

*TWEET*

Violation of Markley's Law.  Ten yard penalty and loss of argument.

really?  THAT is what you're going with?  again, lulz...tell you what.  go after a predator with a spear...go get your grizzly bear with, hell, you can even use a bow and arrow...do that and then i'll listen about how big a man you are.

a


You haven't been reading my posts, have you?
 
2013-05-08 03:28:17 PM

Englebert Slaptyback: I have no problem with hunting animals that are common, as long as the hunters are competent enough to make humane kills. Hunting something that is not common (and becoming less so) doesn't seem like conservation to me, but I see your point about licenses and such.


At the turn of the last century, whitetails deer, black bears, and wild turkeys were all uncommon in most states, largely because of unregulated market and subsistence hunting.  It was sport hunters who pressed for the limited seasons and bag limits.

Because of that, it's now thought that there are more deer in North American *NOW* than in pre-Columbian times.
 
2013-05-08 03:29:27 PM

dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.

You don't know who Magua is?

No idea. I was just CYA in case you were an angry Native American or something. You hunt with home-made flint knapped arrow tips and a black power muzzle loading rifle. I am not that moronic to piss you off lest I wish my own death...:D

This is Magua, as portrayed by Wes Studi in the film "Last of the Mohicans":

[24.media.tumblr.com image 400x510]

He is one of the all-time bad-ass bad guys.


I still want to know how they canoed from Lake George into the Hudson....
 
2013-05-08 03:30:41 PM

stir22: dittybopper: stir22: lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.

*TWEET*

Violation of Markley's Law.  Ten yard penalty and loss of argument.

really?  THAT is what you're going with?  again, lulz...tell you what.  go after a predator with a spear...go get your grizzly bear with, hell, you can even use a bow and arrow...do that and then i'll listen about how big a man you are.

a


New around here eh ?
 
2013-05-08 03:31:55 PM
We were dirt poor in East Texas so we supplemented food by hunting and fishing. So I am of a dim view on sport hunting that does not utilize most of the animal. We just ran across to many carcasses left to rot after they removed the head or horns,

That being said I can see how sport hunter would invest in conserving animals so they can keep doing what they like.

//kudos dittybopper! I know some guys that hunt traditional long bow and that is some serious skill.
 
2013-05-08 03:37:36 PM

LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


Actually go hunting in Africa and then if you say it isn't a challenge then I will bow to your opinion. I have not been hunting in Africa, but shooting a deer in Alabama is plenty challenging enough for me, A rogue elephant or tiger would have to be worse.
 
2013-05-08 03:40:41 PM

Mazzic518: I still want to know how they canoed from Lake George into the Hudson....


Heh.

I live in that area, and it's not possible.

I just kind of think to myself "After the Bloody Pond ambush, they head west and the canoes are on the Hudson."
 
2013-05-08 03:42:43 PM

Mazzic518: stir22: dittybopper: stir22: lulz...you are so right.  anybody who would look through a telescopic sight at an animal hundreds of yards away and kill it just to have it stuffed must have born with an incredibly small penis.

*TWEET*

Violation of Markley's Law.  Ten yard penalty and loss of argument.

really?  THAT is what you're going with?  again, lulz...tell you what.  go after a predator with a spear...go get your grizzly bear with, hell, you can even use a bow and arrow...do that and then i'll listen about how big a man you are.

a

New around here eh ?


I wonder if he'll let me use my atlatl.
 
2013-05-08 03:50:19 PM

IronOcelot: We were dirt poor in East Texas so we supplemented food by hunting and fishing. So I am of a dim view on sport hunting that does not utilize most of the animal. We just ran across to many carcasses left to rot after they removed the head or horns,

That being said I can see how sport hunter would invest in conserving animals so they can keep doing what they like.

//kudos dittybopper! I know some guys that hunt traditional long bow and that is some serious skill.



That *SOUNDS* bad, and it is for that individual animal, but if that sort of thing results in habitat preservation and overall increases in game animals, then it's a net positive from the standpoint of conservation.  I know it doesn't *FEEL* that way, but really, it is.

And don't forget, the habitat preserved also benefits non-game species also.
 
2013-05-08 03:53:48 PM

dittybopper: Mazzic518: I still want to know how they canoed from Lake George into the Hudson....

Heh.

I live in that area, and it's not possible.

I just kind of think to myself "After the Bloody Pond ambush, they head west and the canoes are on the Hudson."


I know I live 13 miles from Fort William Henry and two miles from Fort Edward pretty much on their route lol

/sorry for the threadjack
//I also hunt for the sport of it but I also eat anything I kill
 
2013-05-08 03:55:55 PM

DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.

You don't know who Magua is?

No idea. I was just CYA in case you were an angry Native American or something. You hunt with home-made flint knapped arrow tips and a black power muzzle loading rifle. I am not that moronic to piss you off lest I wish my own death...:D


This amused me. It honestly did. Srsly. Smile on my face and everything, only topped by my reaction of seeing an animated cat knead the hair of Ron Swanson.
 
2013-05-08 03:56:13 PM

dittybopper: Englebert Slaptyback: I have no problem with hunting animals that are common, as long as the hunters are competent enough to make humane kills. Hunting something that is not common (and becoming less so) doesn't seem like conservation to me, but I see your point about licenses and such.

At the turn of the last century, whitetails deer, black bears, and wild turkeys were all uncommon in most states, largely because of unregulated market and subsistence hunting.  It was sport hunters who pressed for the limited seasons and bag limits.

Because of that, it's now thought that there are more deer in North American *NOW* than in pre-Columbian times.


I don't know about bears and turkeys, but the explosion in the white tail population has far more to do with the massive switch of environment from woods and wild to agriculture and open space vastly increasing their habitat and food supply.  And it's not just speculated, there are counts and there is no doubt that the deer population is on the order of tens times what it was at the turn of the 19th century.  (yes yes citation needed I know, I don't have time, look it up yourself).
 
2013-05-08 03:58:23 PM

BlueDuckFarker: Sounds like Teddy Roosevelt to me.


According to the information at the National Park that's named for him, actually he became a serious conservationist after his wife died and he retreated to that region to grieve. IIRC something about he realized how quickly such unique landscapes (it's very like the badlands) would disappear if not preserved by law for future generations to enjoy. I recall an article on here a while back about how developers are trying to build McMansions very close to places like Arches NP and running into protests and such. TR is my hero for establishing so many parks and doing as much as he did...
 
2013-05-08 04:01:52 PM

uncleacid: [www.adweek.com image 484x272]


Still can't believe that sonofabiatch wears a damn Nazi Totenkopf SS badge.
Those people were the vilest, most evil bastards on the planet.
 
2013-05-08 04:07:03 PM

LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".


You sound fat
 
2013-05-08 04:15:28 PM

Mazzic518: I know I live 13 miles from Fort William Henry and two miles from Fort Edward pretty much on their route lol


That doesn't really work, because I'm 8.8 miles from FWH and just 4  miles from FE, and I'm within walking distance of Cooper's Cave (closer to the actual cave than the ale company).
 
2013-05-08 04:22:27 PM

dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

The first two have resulted in the extinction and near extinction of countless animals.

The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals.   The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.



This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.
 
2013-05-08 04:27:38 PM

rkettens: I don't know about bears and turkeys, but the explosion in the white tail population has far more to do with the massive switch of environment from woods and wild to agriculture and open space vastly increasing their habitat and food supply.  And it's not just speculated, there are counts and there is no doubt that the deer population is on the order of tens times what it was at the turn of the 19th century.  (yes yes citation needed I know, I don't have time, look it up yourself).


No, the explosion in their numbers coincides with the banning of commercial hunting of whitetails.
 
2013-05-08 04:29:47 PM

dittybopper: Mazzic518: I know I live 13 miles from Fort William Henry and two miles from Fort Edward pretty much on their route lol

That doesn't really work, because I'm 8.8 miles from FWH and just 4  miles from FE, and I'm within walking distance of Cooper's Cave (closer to the actual cave than the ale company).


I was kinda referring to the route between the two forts... and I can see Cooper's Cave Ale from my work lol I also always found it amusing how small the actual cave is compared to the movie.
 
2013-05-08 04:32:55 PM

manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.


Who do you think pressed for things like limited seasons, bag limits, permits, and the banning of commercial hunting (ie., market hunting)?

Sport hunters, that's who.

That's because as a group, they wanted to continue hunting, and they knew if they didn't act to protect the game they hunted, there would be none left.

Also, I disagree with you:  Subsistence hunters would, as would market hunters, but if all hunting regulations were repealed, it wouldn't be the trophy hunters out killing all the animals, it would be the people feeding their family for a couple weeks for a $1 bullet and it would be the guys selling venison to frou-frou NYC restaurants and buckskin to clothing manufacturers.
 
2013-05-08 04:34:04 PM

Mazzic518: dittybopper: Mazzic518: I know I live 13 miles from Fort William Henry and two miles from Fort Edward pretty much on their route lol

That doesn't really work, because I'm 8.8 miles from FWH and just 4  miles from FE, and I'm within walking distance of Cooper's Cave (closer to the actual cave than the ale company).

I was kinda referring to the route between the two forts... and I can see Cooper's Cave Ale from my work lol I also always found it amusing how small the actual cave is compared to the movie.


I'm going to pass by your work:  littlebopper has a game at East Field tonight, and I'm one of the coaches.
 
2013-05-08 04:35:12 PM

Mazzic518: I can see Cooper's Cave Ale from my work


I like the vaginal entrance.
 
2013-05-08 04:37:11 PM

manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.


Yes.  It was PETA that did it all.
 
2013-05-08 04:38:03 PM

dittybopper: Mazzic518: I can see Cooper's Cave Ale from my work

I like the vaginal entrance.


LMAO I am glad I am not the only one that thinks that.... I swear that place ever goes out of business it will be converted into a strip club lol...

/ending threadjack
 
2013-05-08 04:41:57 PM

Mazzic518: dittybopper: Mazzic518: I can see Cooper's Cave Ale from my work

I like the vaginal entrance.

LMAO I am glad I am not the only one that thinks that.... I swear that place ever goes out of business it will be converted into a strip club lol...

/ending threadjack


My family is friends with the guy who owns it.  He's a big muzzleloader (or at least was).  I don't know him that well, but every couple of years I get a couple bombers of Radeau Red, and perhaps a Sagamore Stout.
 
2013-05-08 04:42:17 PM

dittybopper: manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.

Who do you think pressed for things like limited seasons, bag limits, permits, and the banning of commercial hunting (ie., market hunting)?

Sport hunters, that's who.

That's because as a group, they wanted to continue hunting, and they knew if they didn't act to protect the game they hunted, there would be none left.

Also, I disagree with you:  Subsistence hunters would, as would market hunters, but if all hunting regulations were repealed, it wouldn't be the trophy hunters out killing all the animals, it would be the people feeding their family for a couple weeks for a $1 bullet and it would be the guys selling venison to frou-frou NYC restaurants and buckskin to clothing manufacturers.


The people most critical of abusive hunters or poor game management are other hunters. Want to start a fist fight? find a group of hunters at a club and laugh about how you keep losing wounded animals.
 
2013-05-08 04:44:13 PM

dittybopper: manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.

Who do you think pressed for things like limited seasons, bag limits, permits, and the banning of commercial hunting (ie., market hunting)?

Sport hunters, that's who.

That's because as a group, they wanted to continue hunting, and they knew if they didn't act to protect the game they hunted, there would be none left.

Also, I disagree with you:  Subsistence hunters would, as would market hunters, but if all hunting regulations were repealed, it wouldn't be the trophy hunters out killing all the animals, it would be the people feeding their family for a couple weeks for a $1 bullet and it would be the guys selling venison to frou-frou NYC restaurants and buckskin to clothing manufacturers.


No, sorry, a small number of rich hunters with the political will to actually implement regulation may have seen the benifit of setting aside land for future hunting,  (because they saw how selfish and shortsighted their brethren were); the vast majority of hunters do not give a shiat about the future and would not have done shiat for conservation on their own without it being forced on them.  There is no "as a group" hunters made a moral decision to conserve thing happening here, hence the reason there are permits and enforcement agencies.  Your argument that sport hunters are more moral than subsistance or market hunters is false.

Second, your implication that only the sport hunter can  look toward the future is flawed.  any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.
 
2013-05-08 04:44:48 PM

Molavian: manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.

Yes.  It was PETA that did it all.


fark Peta.
 
2013-05-08 04:50:25 PM

Subtle_Canary: dittybopper: manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.

Who do you think pressed for things like limited seasons, bag limits, permits, and the banning of commercial hunting (ie., market hunting)?

Sport hunters, that's who.

That's because as a group, they wanted to continue hunting, and they knew if they didn't act to protect the game they hunted, there would be none left.

Also, I disagree with you:  Subsistence hunters would, as would market hunters, but if all hunting regulations were repealed, it wouldn't be the trophy hunters out killing all the animals, it would be the people feeding their family for a couple weeks for a $1 bullet and it would be the guys selling venison to frou-frou NYC restaurants and buckskin to clothing manufacturers.

The people most critical of abusive hunters or poor game management are other hunters. Want to start a fist fight? find a group of hunters at a club and laugh about how you keep losing wounded animals.


I've been around plenty of hunters that don't care about wounding animals, don't care about what's in season, if they can take a buck or a doe, or if it has the right number of points, or.anything  Going hunting with my parents as a kid and seeing the callous disregard their redneck friends had towards the animals they hunted is the sole reason why I call bullshiat on the concept that hunters increase wildlife numbers and that without the hunters moral choice there would be no conservation of hunting lands today.

I've also been on many a boat where, sport fisherman, keep a second cooler below deck for those Redfish, that are just an inch too big.  Trust me, these so called sportsmen, are not increasing the number of anything.  To claim that those who call themselves sportsmen are somehow more moral than those that hunt or fish for food is laughable to me.
 
2013-05-08 04:50:45 PM

SumoJeb: Watch it you fark monkeys that have no idea what you are talking about. Guiding hunts feeds my family. Hunters and fishermen have always been the biggest and most effective supporters of environmental and wildlife conservation. fark you all that say trophy hunting is bad. It puts food on the table and money in my pocket. My clients go home with memories and respect for the wilderness of Canada. And their permit fees are one of the leading contributors to wildlife management and research . Bc guide Outfitters are on the leading edge of DNA sequencing research for north American land mammals. How much out of pocket have you spent on conservation research? Do you.volunteer for this research? I do, along with hundreds of other guides. So fark off city folk. And keep your nose out of shiat you are clueless about.


In the state of Maine hunting licenses pay for the bulk of game management costs. Otherwise you get a situation like Pennsylvania with deer roadkill all over the place.
 
2013-05-08 04:50:59 PM

Subtle_Canary: Calmamity: Killing animals for their heads is bullsh*t.

Well they shouldnt have attached their heads to such tasty tasty meat.


lol
 
2013-05-08 04:51:09 PM

manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.


There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong.
 
2013-05-08 04:51:35 PM

manimal2878: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

The first two have resulted in the extinction and near extinction of countless animals.

The last one, sport hunting, has a track record of *INCREASING* the numbers of game animals.   The reason for this apparent paradox is that sport hunters want to keep on doing what they like, and they will invest time and money into things like habitat protection to ensure that they continue to have animals to hunt.


This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.




Your sir or madam are dead wrong. Sportsmen or women for that matter tend to be better caretakers of the wild then the granola type hippies. In Missouri it was estimated that there was less then 100 wild turkeys in 1930. All which was confined to the Peck Ranch wilderness. Now Missouri has the largest flock of wild turkeys in USA. Concerned sportsmen worked hard to improve habitat and help trap transfer birds. Improving turkey habitat helped all of nature. Now in spring turkeys gobble across Missouri because of hunters. Are flock is so large are birds are trapped and used to restiblish populations across the USA
 
2013-05-08 04:52:11 PM

Subtle_Canary: dittybopper: manimal2878: This is the biggest bullshiat I have ever seen.  It's not the sport hunters that increase the numbers, it's the regulation of sports hunters that preserves the numbers of game animals.  If there were no hunting permits required, most "sport hunters" wouldn't pay shiat toward conservation and the woods would be picked clean in a season.

Who do you think pressed for things like limited seasons, bag limits, permits, and the banning of commercial hunting (ie., market hunting)?

Sport hunters, that's who.

That's because as a group, they wanted to continue hunting, and they knew if they didn't act to protect the game they hunted, there would be none left.

Also, I disagree with you:  Subsistence hunters would, as would market hunters, but if all hunting regulations were repealed, it wouldn't be the trophy hunters out killing all the animals, it would be the people feeding their family for a couple weeks for a $1 bullet and it would be the guys selling venison to frou-frou NYC restaurants and buckskin to clothing manufacturers.

The people most critical of abusive hunters or poor game management are other hunters. Want to start a fist fight? find a group of hunters at a club and laugh about how you keep losing wounded animals.


I guess in the instanced I've been, it's been more like I'm the one walking in and criticizing a club of people that see no issue with wounding animals.
 
2013-05-08 04:54:29 PM

dittybopper: manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.

There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong


Really?  There is thousands of years of evidence proving that sustainable practices don't work if implemented by anyone other than sports hunters?  Maybe you misread what I wrote, because that statement is full on retarded.
 
2013-05-08 04:57:07 PM

Mid_mo_mad_man: . Sportsmen or women for that matter tend to be better caretakers of the wild then the granola type hippies


In my estimation they do not tend to be better at all.  And what do hippies have to do with anything?

   There are a small number of them that would choose to conserve whether there were regulations or not.  The vast majority only do so to avoid legal complications because of the regulations in place.
 
2013-05-08 05:08:18 PM

manimal2878: dittybopper: manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.

There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong

Really?  There is thousands of years of evidence proving that sustainable practices don't work if implemented by anyone other than sports hunters?  Maybe you misread what I wrote, because that statement is full on retarded.


No, thousands upon thousands of years of evidence that people who hunt to fill their bellies don't care about 'sustainable' practices.  They just care where their next meal comes from.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-05-08 05:13:48 PM

dittybopper: Maud Dib: dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

What sport hunting might look like...

[mikehanback.typepad.com image 400x268]

Ahh, the thrill of the chase.

Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
[mssparky.com image 500x375]

Actually, this is what I use:







/Well *TECHNICALLY* that head I knapped is too small to hunt big game with in my state, but it's OK for small game and varmints like coyote.
//Am going to knap some bigger heads for the coming bow season


Much respect, I don't believe most people have any idea how much effort and skill goes into learning and honing primitive survival skills.
 
2013-05-08 05:14:03 PM

manimal2878: dittybopper: manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.

There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong

Really?  There is thousands of years of evidence proving that sustainable practices don't work if implemented by anyone other than sports hunters?  Maybe you misread what I wrote, because that statement is full on retarded.


You moved the goalpost with "... that practice sustainability." The fact is that for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years sustainable practices were not...um... practiced.  It took the appearance of the sport hunter to come up with even the idea of sustainable hunting.  So yes, if market or subsistence hunters had developed sustainable practices it would have worked.  Unfortunately for you, the sport hunters you have such a raging hard-on against developed them, put them into practice, and are reaping the rewards of them today.
 
2013-05-08 05:20:45 PM
Can you imagine if he'd only had an AR-15?
 
2013-05-08 05:30:39 PM
dittybopper
 
Man, I wish I could get some lessons or advice from you! Where I'm at right now, I'm stuck in an urban area doing menial work, but my goal in life is to earn a piece of rural property and hunt and farm for sustenance, supplemented with some kind of self-employment. I know that, since I don't have a country upbringing, I couldn't sneak up on a deer and would have to use a rifle at first, but I hope to someday get enough skill to hunt with a longbow and knife.
 
Truth be told, I've fished but I've never even been on a hunt. There could be few greater noobs than me in this thread
 
2013-05-08 05:42:15 PM
Oh look another thread with whiny liberals complaining about hunting while they have never hunted, or probably been in the woods. Want to know what you're going to do about sport hunting? Absolutely nothing, oh you'll remember how someone hunted a hippo or a grizzly bear and think mean thoughts, maybe say they have a small dick. That's all you'll do, because you won't actually do anything productive, you won't volunteer to help reintroduce spruce grouse, you won't hunt problem bears. You'd prefer to sit in your apartments and call the people that actually support wildlife conservation limp dicked pussies.
 
In short,
i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-08 05:47:40 PM

Terrydatroll: LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".

Actually go hunting in Africa and then if you say it isn't a challenge then I will bow to your opinion. I have not been hunting in Africa, but shooting a deer in Alabama is plenty challenging enough for me, A rogue elephant or tiger would have to be worse.


Like anything else...it depends.
 
You can go on a canned hunt in Africa, and shoot a de-clawed lion with your rifle...not much of a challenge.
 
Or, you can go into the bush, and not come out....
 
2013-05-08 05:50:37 PM

ficklefkrfark: dittybopper: Maud Dib: dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.

 
What sport hunting might look like...
 
[mikehanback.typepad.com image 400x268]
 
Ahh, the thrill of the chase.
 
Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
[mssparky.com image 500x375]

 
Actually, this is what I use:

/Well *TECHNICALLY* that head I knapped is too small to hunt big game with in my state, but it's OK for small game and varmints like coyote.
//Am going to knap some bigger heads for the coming bow season

 
Much respect, I don't believe most people have any idea how much effort and skill goes into learning and honing primitive survival skills.
 
Oh, please.  Just the other day I went to the supermarket, and returned with my kills, WITHOUT using my GPS or even my cell phone to call my wife to ask what was on the list.
 
2013-05-08 05:58:40 PM

PunGent: Terrydatroll: LordJiro: dittybopper: It's *NOT* ironic, it's *EXPECTED*.

Sport hunters were the original conservationists.

There are 3 kinds of hunting:

1. Subsistence hunting.  This is hunting for food, ie., in order to survive.  It can also include hunting things that are eating your crops or your children.

2. Market hunting:  This is hunting for money.  It can be legal or illegal (poaching), and it can even be to collect a government provided bounty, but the motivation is cash.

3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase making yourself feel better by killing big, 'scary' animals.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it. are insecure.

FTFY. Put away the high-powered rifles and shiat, take down an elephant or leopard with a farking spear, and THEN I'll believe it's "about the challenge".

Actually go hunting in Africa and then if you say it isn't a challenge then I will bow to your opinion. I have not been hunting in Africa, but shooting a deer in Alabama is plenty challenging enough for me, A rogue elephant or tiger would have to be worse.

Like anything else...it depends.
 
You can go on a canned hunt in Africa, and shoot a de-clawed lion with your rifle...not much of a challenge.
 
Or, you can go into the bush, and not come out....


Yeah, canned hunts are for scumbags. I will agree with that. Takes a real POS to kill something rendered helpless.well...other than ants and rats and stuff.
 
2013-05-08 06:01:53 PM

iheartscotch: I've always felt that, like Native Americans; if you kill an animal, you should use all of the parts possible. You shouldn't waste anything or as little as humanly possible.

 
Err...not always:  (scroll down a bit)
 
http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/nattrans/ntecoindian/essa ys /buffalob.htm
 
2013-05-08 06:16:02 PM

dittybopper: manimal2878: dittybopper: manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.

There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong

Really?  There is thousands of years of evidence proving that sustainable practices don't work if implemented
 by anyone other than sports hunters?  Maybe you misread what I wrote, because that statement is full on retarded.

No, thousands upon ythousands of years of evidence that people who hunt to fill their bellies don't care about 'sustainable' practices.  They just care where their next meal comes from.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 441x452]

The fact s when people wish o be sustainable, they give up huntting, they take their animal by means of domestication.  WHichh is why catte and poultry have not been hunted to extinction.
 
2013-05-08 06:16:59 PM
The level of reading comprehension and logic fail in this thread shouldn't surprise me, but it does.

dittybopper there's a reason you're highlighted in a spiffy green, keep up the good work, and good luck to littlebopper.
 
2013-05-08 06:18:18 PM

plausdeny: The hunter gets a taxidermy trophy.  Meanwhile, due to economic incentives, the habitat is protected and the hunted species increases.  Everyone wins except the whiners.


Whiners never win.  Winners never whine.
 
2013-05-08 06:19:56 PM

JH3675: manimal2878: dittybopper: manimal2878: any subsistance or market hunter that practiced sustainability would see that conservation would prolong their livelihood or food source, you don't have to be a privileged sport hunter to look toward sustainable practices.

There is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years of evidence proving you wrong

Really?  There is thousands of years of evidence proving that sustainable practices don't work if implemented by anyone other than sports hunters?  Maybe you misread what I wrote, because that statement is full on retarded.

You moved the goalpost with "... that practice sustainability." The fact is that for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years sustainable practices were not...um... practiced.  It took the appearance of the sport hunter to come up with even the idea of sustainable hunting.  So yes, if market or subsistence hunters had developed sustainable practices it would have worked.  Unfortunately for you, the sport hunters you have such a raging hard-on agSainst developed them, put them into practice, and are reaping the rewards of them today.


You not having a good grasp on reading comprehension does not constitute me moving the goalposts at all.  The susteinable practice is to limit hunting and move to domestication so that your subsistane leaves willd game alone.  My life experiances tell me a much different story about sports hunters than your idealised version of the sportshunter, which to me is basically a myth.
 
2013-05-08 06:20:22 PM
I fail to see the irony. If a hunter isn't also a conservationist, his sport won't last very long.
 
2013-05-08 06:37:59 PM

manimal2878: The fact s when people wish o be sustainable, they give up huntting, they take their animal by means of domestication. WHichh is why catte and poultry have not been hunted to extinction.


Moving the goalpost again.  We are not talking about a sustainable source of food.  We are talking about a sustainable source of wild animals for hunting.  I have no problem admitting that hunting is a full on head rush.  Stalking a wild animal, with its hyper-tuned senses, and coming out victorious is a feeling like no other.  Like most hunters I eat every animal I kill and actually spend my money and time in a effort to create habitat for the species I hunt.  While I do not use primitive weapons like dittybopper, I also don't sit over a corn pile with a sniper rifle.  Trying to couch your argument in terms of sustainability and eco-friendliness does nothing more than reveal your ignorance about which you speak.
 
2013-05-08 07:25:39 PM
One shot, meat
Two shot, maybe.
Three shot, heap shait.
~Hemmingway.
 
2013-05-08 07:49:21 PM
Don't hunt myself, just because I don't have the stomach to field strip a mammal. For some reason though, I have no problem cleaning a fish for food, or rattlesnakes for tasty food, and prize rattle. Won't clean other snakes though, because most of them stink. You don't need a hunting license to kill a rattle snake. Fishing license required to catch any fish.

If I were to go hunting it would be for wild boar, and pigs. They are a nuisance, and need to be curbed. Pig is also delicious. Rabbit is also good. Tried squirrel once when I was a kid, and have no memory of how it was. I just ate it. Venison, I do not like. Too gamey. Quail is also good, but just not worth my time or effort. Wouldn't mind turkey or pheasant hunting, but it's not that important to me to give it a try.

What I do a lot is fishing, and have been fishing all across the country. Some of the funnest fishing is catch and release. Pike, Pickerel, Striped bass fishing in the Hudson River, Carp, Bat Rays and Sturgeon in San Francisco Bay(heard sturgeon may not be illegal to fish for), and Bowfin. Chain Pickerel is one that really tastes good, but are so bony it makes you wonder if it is worth it. There is a way to fillet them to get rid of most the bones, but is a pain in the ass. They are also slimy as hell(not the meat).

Then there are eating fish. All catfish are good, but the bigger they are the muddier they taste. I like to keep the smaller ones for eating, and let the big ones go. Big Mouth bass are also very good, but the lower part of their flesh tends to taste a combination of very fishy and mud. Same deal, I let keep the barely legal ones, and let the big ones go. Trout are perhaps the cleanest tasting fish with a nice little tang, I keep all of them no matter the size. Yellow Perch, Blue Gills, and Crappie I will keep at any size large enough to pan fry. Striped Bass on the west coast let those in the ocean and San Francisco Bay and tributaries always go, but go ahead and keep those you catch at San Louise Reservoir and aqueducts leading to it. Sand dabs, flounder, halibut, surf perch, and mackerel are all delicious are all delicious off the coast. There are size limits on halibut, and watch their teeth. Deep sea lings, salmon, and rock fish are all delicious as well. You have to likely take a guided boat out, and they will tell you what you can keep and what you can't. They can also tell you what is garbage(brown spot). Never been albacore fishing. Monterey and San Francisco have many great guides.

There is also crabbing. I will keep every Dungeness Crab every time they are of legal size in season. So delicious.

Gulf fishing Red Drums and Speckled Trout are the only two I've fished for. They are very regulated, but delicious. If you are just visiting, release them. Never catch and keep more than you need, unless you have someone to give the extra meat to.
 
2013-05-08 07:53:20 PM

JH3675: manimal2878: The fact s when people wish o be sustainable, they give up huntting, they take their animal by means of domestication. WHichh is why catte and poultry have not been hunted to extinction.

Moving the goalpost again.  We are not talking about a sustainable source of food.  We are talking about a sustainable source of wild animals for hunting.  I have no problem admitting that hunting is a full on head rush.  Stalking a wild animal, with its hyper-tuned senses, and coming out victorious is a feeling like no other.  Like most hunters I eat every animal I kill and actually spend my money and time in a effort to create habitat for the species I hunt.  While I do not use primitive weapons like dittybopper, I also don't sit over a corn pile with a sniper rifle.  Trying to couch your argument in terms of sustainability and eco-friendliness does nothing more than reveal your ignorance about which you speak.


Something many who don't fish or hunt don't realize is that hunters and fisherman care very much about keeping our waters clean, and making sure habitats sustainable for wildlife with a clean environment. I had a teacher like that in high school who was very radical. He was practically trying to brain was us all into thinking people who hunt just wanted to wipe out everything, and were in a race to do so. Sounds like some farkers think the same way.
 
2013-05-08 07:54:57 PM

muck4doo: JH3675: manimal2878: The fact s when people wish o be sustainable, they give up huntting, they take their animal by means of domestication. WHichh is why catte and poultry have not been hunted to extinction.

Moving the goalpost again.  We are not talking about a sustainable source of food.  We are talking about a sustainable source of wild animals for hunting.  I have no problem admitting that hunting is a full on head rush.  Stalking a wild animal, with its hyper-tuned senses, and coming out victorious is a feeling like no other.  Like most hunters I eat every animal I kill and actually spend my money and time in a effort to create habitat for the species I hunt.  While I do not use primitive weapons like dittybopper, I also don't sit over a corn pile with a sniper rifle.  Trying to couch your argument in terms of sustainability and eco-friendliness does nothing more than reveal your ignorance about which you speak.

Something many who don't fish or hunt don't realize is that hunters and fisherman care very much about keeping our waters clean, and making sure habitats sustainable for wildlife with a clean environment. I had a teacher like that in high school who was very radical. He was practically trying to brain wash us all into thinking people who hunt just wanted to wipe out everything, and were in a race to do so. Sounds like some farkers think the same way.


FTFM
 
2013-05-08 08:29:54 PM
Just a little tale for people that don't understand the conservation effect of sports hunting, and the horrible unintended consequences of screwing with it.

Sport hunting is a huge sport here in Texas.  Billion dollar industry type huge.  So big in fact that many Texas game ranches had larger populations of exotic animals than existed in their native habitats.  It is such a huge business that there were tens of thousands of animals living in Texas that are considered to be extinct in their native environments.  Of course, those animals existed pretty much exclusively to allow a hunter to have the chance to hunt them.

Now, the thing about exotic trophy hunting is that for every trophy category animal, you will have dozens, if not hundreds who live out their lives without ever being hunted because they weren't the best of the best, so you end up with large, viable herds of animals that don't exist anywhere else on the planet and only a small portion of  them ever get killed by a hunter.

Well, along came PETA and some other animal rights groups and convinced Congress that if the animals were on the endangered species list back home, they should also be protected here too, and now they are all protected from hunting.  The ranches with these herds were given a certain amount of time after which they would have to register their animals and deaths would need to be recorded an investigated to make sure they weren't being "poached".

Well, wouldn't you know it, tens of thousands of endangered animals all up and died all mysterious like before the deadline.  The ranches simply couldn't afford to keep them if they couldn't derive income from them.  Instead of having protected and sustainable herds of endangered animals, now they are all but extinct again, because someone had to save the animals from the hunters...
 
2013-05-08 09:18:25 PM
Something I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned, is Hornady's Cap can wrap you in a cocoon.

/Warehouse 13.
 
2013-05-08 09:19:21 PM
Do farkers buy free range eggs at the supermarket ?  Well I like free range meat. And no - hunting is not meant to be fair to the animal. The idea of hunting is to kill the animal as quickly and as humanely as possible before harvesting the meat. Yes you have to get your hands bloody - and that is part of the karmic price I pay for killing and consuming the animal. Wheras most meat eaters outsource their killing and butchering to a factory.  There is no comparison of the flavour and the food value between free range meat and factory meat.
 
2013-05-08 09:52:15 PM

JH3675: manimal2878: The fact s when people wish o be sustainable, they give up huntting, they take their animal by means of domestication. WHichh is why catte and poultry have not been hunted to extinction.

Moving the goalpost again.  We are not talking about a sustainable source of food.  We are talking about a sustainable source of wild animals for hunting.  I have no problem admitting that hunting is a full on head rush.  Stalking a wild animal, with its hyper-tuned senses, and coming out victorious is a feeling like no other.  Like most hunters I eat every animal I kill and actually spend my money and time in a effort to create habitat for the species I hunt.  While I do not use primitive weapons like dittybopper, I also don't sit over a corn pile with a sniper rifle.  Trying to couch your argument in terms of sustainability and eco-friendliness does nothing more than reveal your ignorance about which you speak.

Guess what, among hunters you are the exception, most don't give a shiat about conservation or sustaining the sport.
 
2013-05-08 10:46:56 PM

Sgt.Zim: The level of reading comprehension and logic fail in this thread shouldn't surprise me, but it does.

dittybopper there's a reason you're highlighted in a spiffy green, keep up the good work, and good luck to littlebopper.


Thanks.  We won 12 to 1.
 
2013-05-08 10:50:04 PM

PunGent: ficklefkrfark: dittybopper: Maud Dib: dittybopper:
3. Sport hunting.  This is hunting because you enjoy the challenge and the chase.  You may eat the animal afterwards, but the primary purpose is because you enjoy it.
 
What sport hunting might look like...
 
[mikehanback.typepad.com image 400x268]
 
Ahh, the thrill of the chase.
 
Relentlessly stalking baiting the prey....
[mssparky.com image 500x375]
 
Actually, this is what I use:

/Well *TECHNICALLY* that head I knapped is too small to hunt big game with in my state, but it's OK for small game and varmints like coyote.
//Am going to knap some bigger heads for the coming bow season
 
Much respect, I don't believe most people have any idea how much effort and skill goes into learning and honing primitive survival skills.
 
Oh, please.  Just the other day I went to the supermarket, and returned with my kills, WITHOUT using my GPS or even my cell phone to call my wife to ask what was on the list.


Same here.

Truth be told, I didn't get anything this last season.  That's a feature for me, though, makes me want to be *BETTER*, to practice more, and to be a better stalker.

If I were in an actual survival situation, though, where I'd be hunting to survive, I'd be violating fair chase rules like they were a drunken debutante with daddy issues.  First thing I set is some deer snares.
 
2013-05-08 10:53:35 PM

dryknife: Can you imagine if he'd only had an AR-15?


In .223 Remington?  Too weak for most big and/or dangerous game.  In fact, for a long time, it was derided as a "poodle shooter" by people used to full sized rifle cartridges, and even today, it's marginal for deer sized game, to the point where a number of states outlaw it's use.
 
2013-05-08 11:35:06 PM

dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: dittybopper: DeathCipris: Damn, Squanto!

OH, and the name's not Squanto.  It's Magua.  Le Renard if you're nasty.

[img.fark.net image 850x723]

I totally just said whatever came to my mind and meant no offense. Your equipment certainly looked Native American in origin.

You don't know who Magua is?

No idea. I was just CYA in case you were an angry Native American or something. You hunt with home-made flint knapped arrow tips and a black power muzzle loading rifle. I am not that moronic to piss you off lest I wish my own death...:D

This is Magua, as portrayed by Wes Studi in the film "Last of the Mohicans":

[24.media.tumblr.com image 400x510]

He is one of the all-time bad-ass bad guys.


he's terribly mysterious.
 
2013-05-08 11:37:19 PM

manimal2878: Guess what, among hunters you are the exception, most don't give a shiat about conservation or sustaining the sport.


When I was but a wee lad my grandfather gave me a valuable piece of advice: "Hunt like you live.  Honorably and humanely, or like a shiatbag."  (I may have paraphrased that a little.)  In my experience that is true.  Dirtbags hunt (and poach) like dirtbags.  Casual hunters normally follow the rules, but some view them as guidelines rather than the laws they are. They are also more likely to shoot themselves in the knee with a rifle.  A real, legitimate, hunter views their prey as an equal. Only a quick, legal, honorable death will suffice.  I suggest you spend more time with good 'ole boys and less time around rednecks and dirtbag white trash. There really is a difference.

/I know because my family has all three types.  Plus a few subgroups.
 
2013-05-08 11:41:36 PM

dittybopper: No, thousands upon thousands of years of evidence that people who hunt to fill their bellies don't care about 'sustainable' practices. They just care where their next meal comes from.


I have no idea how accurate that graph is but I have to question it based on the contained spelling of Australia. Austrailia?

GUTSU: Oh look another thread with whiny liberals complaining about hunting while they have never hunted, or probably been in the woods. Want to know what you're going to do about sport hunting? Absolutely nothing, oh you'll remember how someone hunted a hippo or a grizzly bear and think mean thoughts, maybe say they have a small dick. That's all you'll do, because you won't actually do anything productive, you won't volunteer to help reintroduce spruce grouse, you won't hunt problem bears. You'd prefer to sit in your apartments and call the people that actually support wildlife conservation limp dicked pussies.
 
In short,
[i.imgur.com image 315x333]


I'm a whiny liberal and while I've never personally shot an animal, I absolutely could have on dozens of occasions if I wanted to bring the rifle. Deer aren't that smart and there are gobs of them on my in-law's property. I do eat the venison fealty that their friend pays in exchange for hunting access, but I haven't bothered to get a license because I am paranoid about screwing it up and making the critter suffer in a non-clean kill.

The rabbit in the garden was a surprise though, so we weren't prepared to take him out and he got away. I have a vendetta against rabbits but they are wiley around here.
 
2013-05-08 11:42:04 PM

Click Click D'oh: Just a little tale for people that don't understand the conservation effect of sports hunting, and the horrible unintended consequences of screwing with it.

Sport hunting is a huge sport here in Texas.  Billion dollar industry type huge.  So big in fact that many Texas game ranches had larger populations of exotic animals than existed in their native habitats.  It is such a huge business that there were tens of thousands of animals living in Texas that are considered to be extinct in their native environments.  Of course, those animals existed pretty much exclusively to allow a hunter to have the chance to hunt them.


The wife and I are heading down to Texas in a couple of weeks to attempt to  help reduce the feral hog population. Looking forward to some fresh pork chops and spending a few days outdoors.
 
2013-05-08 11:58:17 PM

dittybopper: dryknife: Can you imagine if he'd only had an AR-15?

In .223 Remington?  Too weak for most big and/or dangerous game.  In fact, for a long time, it was derided as a "poodle shooter" by people used to full sized rifle cartridges, and even today, it's marginal for deer sized game, to the point where a number of states outlaw it's use.


I've met a lot of people who think it's ethical or humane to hunt deer and hogs with .223 or even .22. "It's all about shot placement" they all say. Well sure, if you put the round right in the ear canal of a hog, and you can do it each and every time to guarantee a clean kill, but I'm still going to think you're (not you personally) an arsehole. I'm going to Texas on a hog trip in a couple of weeks and nobody is bringing anything smaller than 7mm. I've been teaching the wife, who has never gone hunting before, to shoot for the vital areas and she is taking a 7-08. She can consistently hit the target area at 100 yards, so I'm confident barring some kind of freakout at the moment of truth, that she will be able to drop her hog in a single shot. She's asked about using .223 and I flat out told her that was a no-go as well as attempted head shots. Hell, I shoot sub-MOA with my 300 WSM and I'm sticking to the vitals area.

/yes, she's going to clean her own hog
//bbq pork ribs and chops!
 
2013-05-09 12:53:31 AM

dittybopper: dryknife: Can you imagine if he'd only had an AR-15?

In .223 Remington?  Too weak for most big and/or dangerous game.  In fact, for a long time, it was derided as a "poodle shooter" by people used to full sized rifle cartridges, and even today, it's marginal for deer sized game, to the point where a number of states outlaw it's use.


Good for groundhogs :)
 
2013-05-09 01:05:49 AM

CthulhuCalling: Click Click D'oh: Just a little tale for people that don't understand the conservation effect of sports hunting, and the horrible unintended consequences of screwing with it.

Sport hunting is a huge sport here in Texas.  Billion dollar industry type huge.  So big in fact that many Texas game ranches had larger populations of exotic animals than existed in their native habitats.  It is such a huge business that there were tens of thousands of animals living in Texas that are considered to be extinct in their native environments.  Of course, those animals existed pretty much exclusively to allow a hunter to have the chance to hunt them.

The wife and I are heading down to Texas in a couple of weeks to attempt to  help reduce the feral hog population. Looking forward to some fresh pork chops and spending a few days outdoors.


Happy hunting, and you are doing a good and delicious job in God's work. :)
 
2013-05-09 06:35:59 AM

CthulhuCalling: dittybopper: dryknife: Can you imagine if he'd only had an AR-15?

In .223 Remington?  Too weak for most big and/or dangerous game.  In fact, for a long time, it was derided as a "poodle shooter" by people used to full sized rifle cartridges, and even today, it's marginal for deer sized game, to the point where a number of states outlaw it's use.

I've met a lot of people who think it's ethical or humane to hunt deer and hogs with .223 or even .22. "It's all about shot placement" they all say. Well sure, if you put the round right in the ear canal of a hog, and you can do it each and every time to guarantee a clean kill, but I'm still going to think you're (not you personally) an arsehole. I'm going to Texas on a hog trip in a couple of weeks and nobody is bringing anything smaller than 7mm. I've been teaching the wife, who has never gone hunting before, to shoot for the vital areas and she is taking a 7-08. She can consistently hit the target area at 100 yards, so I'm confident barring some kind of freakout at the moment of truth, that she will be able to drop her hog in a single shot. She's asked about using .223 and I flat out told her that was a no-go as well as attempted head shots. Hell, I shoot sub-MOA with my 300 WSM and I'm sticking to the vitals area.

/yes, she's going to clean her own hog
//bbq pork ribs and chops!


Pig hunting, eh?  Here's the legendary Bushman (I "met" him online in Battleground Europe, the only realtime WWII strategy fps worth a damn) hunting barefoot with a spear: (youtuge age sign-in required)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJGd7G2wYuU
 
2013-05-09 07:22:45 AM

ladyfortuna: dittybopper: No, thousands upon thousands of years of evidence that people who hunt to fill their bellies don't care about 'sustainable' practices. They just care where their next meal comes from.

I have no idea how accurate that graph is but I have to question it based on the contained spelling of Australia. Austrailia?



There is an extended treatment on the subject at the Wikipedia page where I pulled that graph from, including alternate hypotheses.


GUTSU: Oh look another thread with whiny liberals complaining about hunting while they have never hunted, or probably been in the woods. Want to know what you're going to do about sport hunting? Absolutely nothing, oh you'll remember how someone hunted a hippo or a grizzly bear and think mean thoughts, maybe say they have a small dick. That's all you'll do, because you won't actually do anything productive, you won't volunteer to help reintroduce spruce grouse, you won't hunt problem bears. You'd prefer to sit in your apartments and call the people that actually support wildlife conservation limp dicked pussies.
 
In short,
[i.imgur.com image 315x333]

I'm a whiny liberal and while I've never personally shot an animal, I absolutely could have on dozens of occasions if I wanted to bring the rifle. Deer aren't that smart and there are gobs of them on my in-law's property. I do eat the venison fealty that their friend pays in exchange for hunting access, but I haven't bothered to get a license because I am paranoid about screwing it up and making the critter suffer in a non-clean kill.

The rabbit in the garden was a surprise though, so we weren't prepared to take him out and he got away. I have a vendetta against rabbits but they are wiley around here.


At some point, if you hunt, you are going to screw it up, or even random happenstance is going to screw it up for you.

Nobody likes it, but that's the reality.  A deer takes a step forward just as your trigger breaks*, and instead of a double lung shot, it's gut shot.   It happens.

That shouldn't dissuade you from hunting if you want to try it.  What it should do is encourage you to be the best hunter you can be in order to minimize the times that's going to occur.


*In the sense of releasing the sear so that the gun fires, not in the sense of a malfunction.
 
2013-05-09 07:35:45 AM

JH3675: manimal2878: Guess what, among hunters you are the exception, most don't give a shiat about conservation or sustaining the sport.

When I was but a wee lad my grandfather gave me a valuable piece of advice: "Hunt like you live.  Honorably and humanely, or like a shiatbag."  (I may have paraphrased that a little.)  In my experience that is true.  Dirtbags hunt (and poach) like dirtbags.  Casual hunters normally follow the rules, but some view them as guidelines rather than the laws they are. They are also more likely to shoot themselves in the knee with a rifle.  A real, legitimate, hunter views their prey as an equal. Only a quick, legal, honorable death will suffice.  I suggest you spend more time with good 'ole boys and less time around rednecks and dirtbag white trash. There really is a difference.

/I know because my family has all three types.  Plus a few subgroups.


I agree with your grandfather.  If my experience with hunters was more in line with people like him, I would probably not call bull shiat on the idea that sport hunting promotes conservation. My experience is that the majority of those that hunt are not like him.
 
2013-05-09 07:45:59 AM

muck4doo: Something many who don't fish or hunt don't realize is that hunters and fisherman care very much about keeping our waters clean, and making sure habitats sustainable for wildlife with a clean environment. I had a teacher like that in high school who was very radical. He was practically trying to brain was us all into thinking people who hunt just wanted to wipe out everything, and were in a race to do so. Sounds like some farkers think the same way.


I have only hunted land game a few times in my life, (the company of most deer hunters completely turning me off the sport), but fish almost every weekend during the summer.  I can tell you for a fact that lots of fisherman do not in fact give a crap about clean water or the environment.  They basically have a "I've got mine, I don't care about anybody else" attitude.

Maybe you missed the part up above, but I have seen plenty of fisherman that have no problem bending the rules and taking species out of permit or season.  I've seen plenty that have no problems tearing through no wake zones disturbing the shoreline with their wake, and have seen plenty of prop lines torn through the grass flats.  They may not intend to just wipe everything out, but at the very least are ignorant of the overall impact of the way they approach the sport.  Which is my whole problem with the Boobiess statement that sport hunting increases animal species, it does not, the regulation of sport hunting does.  Otherwise there are enough greedy selfish hunters and fisherman to ruin it for everyone including those that do care.
 
2013-05-09 07:54:38 AM

manimal2878: muck4doo: Something many who don't fish or hunt don't realize is that hunters and fisherman care very much about keeping our waters clean, and making sure habitats sustainable for wildlife with a clean environment. I had a teacher like that in high school who was very radical. He was practically trying to brain was us all into thinking people who hunt just wanted to wipe out everything, and were in a race to do so. Sounds like some farkers think the same way.

I have only hunted land game a few times in my life, (the company of most deer hunters completely turning me off the sport), but fish almost every weekend during the summer.  I can tell you for a fact that lots of fisherman do not in fact give a crap about clean water or the environment.  They basically have a "I've got mine, I don't care about anybody else" attitude.

Maybe you missed the part up above, but I have seen plenty of fisherman that have no problem bending the rules and taking species out of permit or season.  I've seen plenty that have no problems tearing through no wake zones disturbing the shoreline with their wake, and have seen plenty of prop lines torn through the grass flats.  They may not intend to just wipe everything out, but at the very least are ignorant of the overall impact of the way they approach the sport.  Which is my whole problem with the Boobiess statement that sport hunting increases animal species, it does not, the regulation of sport hunting does.  Otherwise there are enough greedy selfish hunters and fisherman to ruin it for everyone including those that do care.


You are so full of shiat. Was your biology teacher named Mr. Bailey? Why don't you tards start putting your money where your mouth is and start helping conservation, instead of killing dogs and cats every year as your stupid protest?
 
2013-05-09 08:00:36 AM

manimal2878: muck4doo: Something many who don't fish or hunt don't realize is that hunters and fisherman care very much about keeping our waters clean, and making sure habitats sustainable for wildlife with a clean environment. I had a teacher like that in high school who was very radical. He was practically trying to brain was us all into thinking people who hunt just wanted to wipe out everything, and were in a race to do so. Sounds like some farkers think the same way.

I have only hunted land game a few times in my life, (the company of most deer hunters completely turning me off the sport), but fish almost every weekend during the summer.  I can tell you for a fact that lots of fisherman do not in fact give a crap about clean water or the environment.  They basically have a "I've got mine, I don't care about anybody else" attitude.

Maybe you missed the part up above, but I have seen plenty of fisherman that have no problem bending the rules and taking species out of permit or season.  I've seen plenty that have no problems tearing through no wake zones disturbing the shoreline with their wake, and have seen plenty of prop lines torn through the grass flats.  They may not intend to just wipe everything out, but at the very least are ignorant of the overall impact of the way they approach the sport.  Which is my whole problem with the Boobiess statement that sport hunting increases animal species, it does not, the regulation of sport hunting does.  Otherwise there are enough greedy selfish hunters and fisherman to ruin it for everyone including those that do care.


The people who most report poaching and are angered about it are fishermen, and hunters. We do things about it. It's you tards sitting in your basements that piss me off, thinking your 5 dollar donation to PETA or whatever once a year are gonna fix everything thing. You are the among the biggest douches that don't know nature.
 
2013-05-09 08:02:15 AM
Hey look! I'm Manimal2878! I made a 5$ donation to some tard group! I care!
 
2013-05-09 08:21:33 AM

manimal2878: My experience is that the majority of those that hunt are not like him.


Could it be "confirmation bias" at work here?

The key thing to remember is the phrase "My experience".

Don't forget, since we've instituted regulations that have pretty much enforced sporting rules on all hunters, game populations have expanded greatly.  Whitetail deer, black bear, wild turkeys, all making a major comeback.

Will there be hunters that don't follow the rules?  Absolutely.  And there is a mechanism to deal with them*. That doesn't mean that sport hunting over-all is a bad thing.

No one can point to a species that has been sport-hunted to extinction or near extinction.  On the other hand, I can point to a number of cases where that has happened with subsistence hunting and especially market hunting.

*Though we shouldn't necessarily judge all of them too harshly.  When I was a teen, up in the Adirondacks, I knew a family that took more deer than they were allowed based on their permits, and occasionally took one out of season.  The local NYS DEC cops knew what was going on, but the family was poor.  As long as it wasn't too blatant, they looked the other way so the guy could put meat on the table for his kids.  Arresting him would have just put the family on public assistance which would have been a bigger waste of resources than the occasional doe taken out of season which went to feed his family.
 
2013-05-09 01:07:10 PM

muck4doo: The people who most report poaching and are angered about it are fishermen, and hunters. We do things about it. It's you tards sitting in your basements that piss me off, thinking your 5 dollar donation to PETA or whatever once a year are gonna fix everything thing. You are the among the biggest douches that don't know nature.


There are two times when I came close to getting into fist fights in the last 25 years or so:  Once when an asshole was driving to fast in my neighborhood and he took umbrage at me yelling at him to slow his ass down, and once when saw some people "road hunting" near where I had just walked out of the woods.

Road hunters are people who cruise slowly down rural back roads, looking for deer, and generally they just shoot them from the vehicle in violation of game laws.

So yeah, we generally don't like it when it happens (I reported their plate number to the DEC).
 
2013-05-09 03:31:29 PM
muck4doo:
You are so full of shiat. Was your biology teacher named Mr. Bailey? Why don't you tards start putting your money where your mouth is and start helping conservation, instead of killing dogs and cats every year as your stupid protest?

Hurr durr.  I don't belong to PETA tard.
 
2013-05-09 03:33:05 PM

dittybopper: manimal2878: My experience is that the majority of those that hunt are not like him.

Could it be "confirmation bias" at work here?

The key thing to remember is the phrase "My experience".

Don't forget, since we've instituted regulations that have pretty much enforced sporting rules on all hunters, game populations have expanded greatly.  Whitetail deer, black bear, wild turkeys, all making a major comeback.

Will there be hunters that don't follow the rules?  Absolutely.  And there is a mechanism to deal with them*. That doesn't mean that sport hunting over-all is a bad thing.

No one can point to a species that has been sport-hunted to extinction or near extinction.  On the other hand, I can point to a number of cases where that has happened with subsistence hunting and especially market hunting.

*Though we shouldn't necessarily judge all of them too harshly.  When I was a teen, up in the Adirondacks, I knew a family that took more deer than they were allowed based on their permits, and occasionally took one out of season.  The local NYS DEC cops knew what was going on, but the family was poor.  As long as it wasn't too blatant, they looked the other way so the guy could put meat on the table for his kids.  Arresting him would have just put the family on public assistance which would have been a bigger waste of resources than the occasional doe taken out of season which went to feed his family.


Again this is exactly my point, the hunters are not choosing to do this.  The regulations are forcing them to.
 
2013-05-09 03:34:02 PM

muck4doo: Hey look! I'm Manimal2878! I made a 5$ donation to some tard group! I care!


You are a farking idiot.
 
2013-05-09 03:57:18 PM

manimal2878: Again this is exactly my point, the hunters are not choosing to do this.  The regulations are forcing them to.


Actually, what happened is that we outlawed market hunting, and most people living in poverty live in urban areas where they can't hunt for their meat, this guy in Detroit notwithstanding.

That's where the real waste was.

No sport hunters were going out and indiscriminately blasting at everything that moves.  It was the market hunters and subsistence hunters that did it, and all the regulations did was make market hunting illegal, and to force subsistence hunters to abide by the same minimal set of rules that sport hunters used.
 
Displayed 138 of 138 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report