quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
smokers.
Many of you took the opportunity to hammer on me, citing the weak theory that it was unhealthy

Rich

Please tell me you are joking.

Now you've done it.

"Release the Kraken"

Until 10 years ago, my wife had never hunted. She is from Colombia and did not even speak English or know anything about guns and hunting when we met over 20 years ago. Now, she has now hunted Namibia, Scotland, Argentina and the US. We watch a lot of hunting shows and some of them (thank you Dave Fulson and others)convinced us to go to Africa. We are very selective of the shows we watch and do not care for any of the "frat boy redneck over the top antics". We love the shows with a conservation message that respect the animals and the hunt.

Where am I going with this? My wife has a lot of contact with the Latin community. Many of them think guns are bad and "pobrecitos los animales" (poor little animals). She is always shocked at the ones that will ask her if she feels bad for the animals as they are shoving a fork load of meat in their mouths and wearing designer leather clothes and accessories.

Despite all of this, she is one of hunting's best ambassadors. Her friends come to our house and when they see the photos and taxidermy they have a lot of questions. The conservation messages she has heard on hunting shows, combined wtih her personal experiences give her the information she needs to explain the other side of hunting to the unknowing.

I thank those of you that produce a show where you realize it is not all about you. The game, the hunt, the message, the land...they are the stars of the show. My wife may not be winning the global war against anti-hunters but she has won many unknown battles and made the unknowing hear another side of the story.

Safe travels..........LL

Great point LL . . . it is hard to convert those that are agnostic towards hunting if you cannot even convert fellow hunters. We have deer and duck hunters that do not understand the role elephant and lion hunting plays in conservation, nor do they appreciate that the attacks on elephant and lion hunting are ultimately targeted at eliminating all hunting including the types they enjoy. If the shows like those produced by Dave, Aaron, Tim, Ivan and others can help educate and empower . . . and entertain . . . other hunters, I think the benefits outweigh any negatives.

Guys - I think its important to always stand up and fight for what you believe in, and I don't think anyone here will be surprised by my position. Especially as it pertains to the subject at hand - why would we not? Fact is, both the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel are viewed 99% of the time by only sportsmen/women anyway. Why in the world would we be letting outside interests dictate network content? Actually seems like a bad biz decision on the part of the network IMO, as eventually what we all consider mainstream hunting tv is going to get the same scrutiny! Are we going to bow-down to that too?

We certainly can use the content as a teaching moment as well as entertainment, but no benefit is gained from any of it - if we simply leave it on the cutting room floor. Even amongst ourselves - we will always have different opinions on these matters, but I believe supporting it, rather than eliminating it, is the way to go.

Precisely the reason the NRA fights any and all gun and ammo related bills.

It's the ol' if you give them an inch they will take a mile scenario

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Guys - I think its important to always stand up and fight for what you believe in, and I don't think anyone here will be surprised by my position. Especially as it pertains to the subject at hand - why would we not? Fact is, both the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel are viewed 99% of the time by only sportsmen/women anyway. Why in the world would we be letting outside interests dictate network content? Actually seems like a bad biz decision on the part of the network IMO, as eventually what we all consider mainstream hunting tv is going to get the same scrutiny! Are we going to bow-down to that too?

We certainly can use the content as a teaching moment as well as entertainment, but no benefit is gained from any of it - if we simply leave it on the cutting room floor. Even amongst ourselves - we will always have different opinions on these matters, but I believe supporting it, rather than eliminating it, is the way to go.

Hi Aaron,

I can't disagree with anyone's motives in this thread. We are in alignment as to the desired outcome.

I just think the continuation of International Sport hunting would be easier for all of us if the anti hunting organizations didn't have information as to the killing of iconic species, provided to them by us.

I think some posters think I am surrendering. We simply have some disagreements as to how to continue. Hell, I'm more into hunting than watching hunting. That said, I watch most all the International stuff.

The size of our demographic (audience) is our problem. There are roughly 10,000 US hunters that travel internationally to hunt a year. I think there are over 10 million whitetail hunters? So with those numbers, what type of shows will the networks/satellite channels air?

I'm 10000000% percent in agreement with Ted's position on the "Yahoo Hunters"

Steve

Because of my major I take a lot of wildlife management courses, the freaking weirdos are the only ones in the classes with me.

I need the degree to fulfill professional requirements at work, so I push on, but I have to tell you not only is the anti-hunter animal rights asshole sentiment alive and well in the public, an entire generation of anti-hunting wildlife wierdos are in college right now learning how to screw up wildlife management and make it non-hunter centric.

I have not as of yet seen a pro-hunting wildlife management professor at my university. At least not publicly.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Guys - I think its important to always stand up and fight for what you believe in, and I don't think anyone here will be surprised by my position. Especially as it pertains to the subject at hand - why would we not? Fact is, both the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel are viewed 99% of the time by only sportsmen/women anyway. Why in the world would we be letting outside interests dictate network content? Actually seems like a bad biz decision on the part of the network IMO, as eventually what we all consider mainstream hunting tv is going to get the same scrutiny! Are we going to bow-down to that too?

We certainly can use the content as a teaching moment as well as entertainment, but no benefit is gained from any of it - if we simply leave it on the cutting room floor. Even amongst ourselves - we will always have different opinions on these matters, but I believe supporting it, rather than eliminating it, is the way to go.

Hi Aaron,

I can't disagree with anyone's motives in this thread. We are in alignment as to the desired outcome.

I just think the continuation of International Sport hunting would be easier for all of us if the anti hunting organizations didn't have information as to the killing of iconic species, provided to them by us.

I think some posters think I am surrendering. We simply have some disagreements as to how to continue. Hell, I'm more into hunting than watching hunting. That said, I watch most all the International stuff.

The size of our demographic (audience) is our problem. There are roughly 10,000 US hunters that travel internationally to hunt a year. I think there are over 10 million whitetail hunters? So with those numbers, what type of shows will the networks/satellite channels air?

I'm 10000000% percent in agreement with Ted's position on the "Yahoo Hunters"

Steve

Steve, I totally understand your position as well. I can't say I have all the answers, I sure wish I did.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Wonderful Wyoming:
Because of my major I take a lot of wildlife management courses, the freaking weirdos are the only ones in the classes with me.

I need the degree to fulfill professional requirements at work, so I push on, but I have to tell you not only is the anti-hunter animal rights asshole sentiment alive and well in the public, an entire generation of anti-hunting wildlife wierdos are in college right now learning how to screw up wildlife management and make it non-hunter centric.

I have not as of yet seen a pro-hunting wildlife management professor at my university. At least not publicly.

Really sad, but not at all surprising!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:

quote:

Originally posted by Frostbit:

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
smokers.
Many of you took the opportunity to hammer on me, citing the weak theory that it was unhealthy

Rich

Please tell me you are joking.

Now you've done it.

"Release the Kraken"

It may be a weak theory...not well understood what the exact mechanism of action is.... But the evidence is pretty good that it is bad for you.

Secondhand smoke the theory is even weaker, but there does seem to be evidence of that as well.

On the other hand, freedom to indulge in a activity that you want to is not a medical question. The only real question there is where does your right to indulge interfere with my rights not to have to be exposed to it?

Hunting, even to a rabid anti has no real exposure for them for their rights to be reduced. Your comparison logic is weak, grasshopper.

Outdoor Channel has had a long history of bowing to anti-hunting pressure. We aired on the Outdoor Channel from 2000-2003 and they once pulled a friend's zebra episode because Hartman's zebra were endangered (CITIES)

If they want to "ban" something about hunting how about "banning" of the high five, fist pumping, etc. And while we are at it, "you Smoked him," or "you hammered him," etc. Not exactly a way to appeal to the masses.

Thanks for pointing that out. It's our (hunters) behavior that speaks the loudest and it's the easiest to change. Brian