Round and round we go-

So as a hunting community , why- why , must we again and again go through the method/ethics discussion?

Because the so called "civilized" world views hunting as barbarism, and we wittingly or unwittingly fall into "justification" mode in some weak effort to dissuade them from their position.

Once more-
We cannot "justify nor appease people that will not listen/hear.
Our literary machinations as to methods/ethics make but a tiny thorn in the foot of Under-Armor, Delta , etc.

Hunting, hopefully, though not always results in acquisition of the pursued quarry -
Whether by blade, bullet, club or rock -the resulting shredding tissue, cutting blood supplies,deflating lungs, breaking bones, disrupting joints,tearing nerves, etc, -ie trauma---ultimately results in killing the prey in order to achieve such acquisition.

That one method is more or less "ethical" or more or less "acceptable" in view of the above factual representation of trauma that occurs is truly hypocrisy as far as "civilized" opposition is concerned.

While we may each have our personal "ethics" as it relates to hunting .

We MUST stop attempting to impose or convince other hunters that any particular LEGAL method is WRONG , for all these such arguments take energy and focus off the opposition and divert us from the goal of preserving hunting.

quote:

Hunters were the first to set ethical and then legal rules of fair chase and conservation.

Hunters were the ones that brought ethics into the picture, the states and the Federal government are the ones that made the laws.

I am not meaning or trying to insult anyone, from what I have observed however, folks that have or do hunt Africa, view hunting a lot differently on various levels, than those that haven't or do not plan to.

The issue is, which is more important, trying to keep hunting alive for those that enjoy it, or losing it because some individuals believe that their personal ethics are more important?

Mr. Horse:

I respectfully disagree. The first game warden in KY was Daniel Boone. At least that was what I taught in hunters safety course long ago now.

Teddy Roosevelt, Leopold(sp), Karr, Downey, Finch Hatton just off the top of my head were hunters who lead the charge in the legal/political arena to codify ethics into law. We created game laws.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Hunters were the first to set ethical and then legal rules of fair chase and conservation.

Hunters were the ones that brought ethics into the picture, the states and the Federal government are the ones that made the laws.

I am not meaning or trying to insult anyone, from what I have observed however, folks that have or do hunt Africa, view hunting a lot differently on various levels, than those that haven't or do not plan to.

The issue is, which is more important, trying to keep hunting alive for those that enjoy it, or losing it because some individuals believe that their personal ethics are more important?

Ethics and a sense of fairness or right/wrong or fair play are crucial to the survival of sport hunting. If we as the hunting public do not hunt ethically, let alone legally, we will lose the privilege. The issue is not if my ethics or yours are right, but we collectively decide on what IS right. Boone and Crockett has made a stand as have several other organizations of Outdoorsmen and women. Look at the British or the Germans when it comes to a hunting society that has settled on their ethics.

We ARE the government, so, we must set the standards and the ethics whereby laws are made.....

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Mr. Horse:

I respectfully disagree. The first game warden in KY was Daniel Boone. At least that was what I taught in hunters safety course long ago now.

Teddy Roosevelt, Leopold(sp), Karr, Downey, Finch Hatton just off the top of my head were hunters who lead the charge in the legal/political arena to codify ethics into law. We created game laws.

Thanks, you helped make my point. WE are the government. WE must set the ethics whereby the laws are agreed on and structured.

quote:

Hunters were the ones that brought ethics into the picture, the states and the Federal government are the ones that made the laws.

Not sure what there is about that statement that is SO hard to comprehend.

Hunters, brought Ethics into the picture, due to their concerns about diminishing numbers of game animals and birds. They presented their to the elected officials in the various states and within the Federal government.

Hunters, no matter how Ethical they are/were or believed themselves to be, cannot write or pass laws, put them into effect or enforce them.

"We" did not create the Laws, "We" convinced our elected officials of the NEED for some forms of control if future generations were going to have game to hunt or even look at.

As such, if "We" created the Laws, there would not be near as many hunters as there are, because some of "We" like any other ideological zealot, take things too far.

As much as I admire TR on many things, he really did not believe that common people had enough respect of wildlife to be allowed to hunt.

Regardless of any argument anyone can come up with, the Point remains the Anti hunting forces ARE organised and support each other and their common goal is to end all hunting, PERIOD.

The other half of the equation is that hunters, cannot/will not, EVER put their differences over how they Personally feel about hunting aside and present a United Front to try and save hunting for future generations.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:
Round and round we go-

So as a hunting community , why- why , must we again and again go through the method/ethics discussion?

Because the so called "civilized" world views hunting as barbarism, and we wittingly or unwittingly fall into "justification" mode in some weak effort to dissuade them from their position.

Once more-
We cannot "justify nor appease people that will not listen/hear.
Our literary machinations as to methods/ethics make but a tiny thorn in the foot of Under-Armor, Delta , etc.

Hunting, hopefully, though not always results in acquisition of the pursued quarry -
Whether by blade, bullet, club or rock -the resulting shredding tissue, cutting blood supplies,deflating lungs, breaking bones, disrupting joints,tearing nerves, etc, -ie trauma---ultimately results in killing the prey in order to achieve such acquisition.

That one method is more or less "ethical" or more or less "acceptable" in view of the above factual representation of trauma that occurs is truly hypocrisy as far as "civilized" opposition is concerned.

While we may each have our personal "ethics" as it relates to hunting .

We MUST stop attempting to impose or convince other hunters that any particular LEGAL method is WRONG , for all these such arguments take energy and focus off the opposition and divert us from the goal of preserving hunting.

As a veterinary surgeon...I can testify (as an expert if necessary ) that truer words than the above were NEVER spoken.

And as a person who HAS testified as an expert...when people start running from the truth...they generally lose!

Embrace the truth and endorse it..do NOT run from it. If we do...we have lost already.

quote:

We MUST stop attempting to impose or convince other hunters that any particular LEGAL method is WRONG , for all these such arguments take energy and focus off the opposition and divert us from the goal of preserving hunting.

That is as accurate as it gets.

No one that hunts is FORCED to hunt in a manner they do not agree with, and that is reality.

But another reality is that some hunters would like to see hunting laws changed, to fall more in line with THEIR personal "Ethical" beliefs, even if it meant a reduction in overall hunter numbers.

Another reality among hunters, is that some for whatever their motives, have grasped the "In Your Face" attitude when interacting with non-hunters, to the point of alienating people they may not or do not have any problem with hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:
Round and round we go-

So as a hunting community , why- why , must we again and again go through the method/ethics discussion?

Because the so called "civilized" world views hunting as barbarism, and we wittingly or unwittingly fall into "justification" mode in some weak effort to dissuade them from their position.

Once more-
We cannot "justify nor appease people that will not listen/hear.
Our literary machinations as to methods/ethics make but a tiny thorn in the foot of Under-Armor, Delta , etc.

Hunting, hopefully, though not always results in acquisition of the pursued quarry -
Whether by blade, bullet, club or rock -the resulting shredding tissue, cutting blood supplies,deflating lungs, breaking bones, disrupting joints,tearing nerves, etc, -ie trauma---ultimately results in killing the prey in order to achieve such acquisition.

That one method is more or less "ethical" or more or less "acceptable" in view of the above factual representation of trauma that occurs is truly hypocrisy as far as "civilized" opposition is concerned.

While we may each have our personal "ethics" as it relates to hunting .

We MUST stop attempting to impose or convince other hunters that any particular LEGAL method is WRONG , for all these such arguments take energy and focus off the opposition and divert us from the goal of preserving hunting.

100%!!

So, let me see if I have this right.

Us hunters cannot disagree or debate among ourselves about hunting anymore.

We can only disagree or debate with our unalterable enemies, who can never be dissuaded from opposing hunting.

I hope that is not what people are saying, because hat is about the silliest and most twisted logic I have ever heard.

quote:

Us hunters cannot disagree or debate among ourselves about hunting anymor

By disagree and debate, do you really mean force others to hunt by the means/methods that are acceptable to you?

If not..what would be the purpose of debating any of this?...freedom, typically means not only accepting the stuff you like but more importantly the shit you cant stand. I'll hunt any way I damn well choose and as long as I'm within my legal means the rest of you can pound sand.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
So, let me see if I have this right.

Us hunters cannot disagree or debate among ourselves about hunting anymore.

We can only disagree or debate with our unalterable enemies, who can never be dissuaded from opposing hunting.

I hope that is not what people are saying, because hat is about the silliest and most twisted logic I have ever heard.

I can't speak for others but that is not at all what I am saying.

I am saying fight the fight with the antis. Lets have our debate separately.

The problem is that we NEVER get to the fight because the debate always starts.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
So, let me see if I have this right.

Us hunters cannot disagree or debate among ourselves about hunting anymore.

We can only disagree or debate with our unalterable enemies, who can never be dissuaded from opposing hunting.

I hope that is not what people are saying, because hat is about the silliest and most twisted logic I have ever heard.

Simply saying " I would not hunt this way"

Is not Saying-

Bow hunting (fishing) is a gimick

Spear Hunting (fishing) should be banned

Using dogs (or horses)(or falcons) is unethical

Shooting past 300 (or X ) yards is wrong

Hunting at night should always be illegal

Baiting is abhorrent

Need I continue?

IF the law permits the activity,
it does NOT mean one MUST hunt by ONLY that method
One may choose not to, or chose to participate.

Free people debate-- generally , debate is good-
When a community is small, getting smaller and attacked on all sides

Such a community , if it wishes to survive , had best coalesce and point its collective defenses outward rather than inward

Dugga,
I agree fully with. Somehow this thread took a left turn. Usually a collective community discusses, weighs pro's and cons, then agrees to disagree or agrees and moves forward.

The entire point I have tried to make is that ethics drive the process. Without ethics, and a reason why and how we do what we do -we are lost. We must be able to defend logically and rationally our stance.
I AM not advocating that all must adhere to my ethics. Ethics in some cases are purely personal, in other cases, they are communal and for everyone. I am advocating that ethics carry beyond what is legal, they must or we live a purely legalistically society that leaves no room for debate.

AN EXAMPLE- voting rights for women. For several hundred years, women had no vote in anything. At some point about 100 years ago, the ethics of this was questioned and the law was changed. Now, no one questions this as the ethics drove the process and it is now law.

I advocate the same thing in our recreational hunting practices and thinking! We, as a hunting community MUST have this discussion or we become antiquated and lose the war. Boone and Crockett has done this over and over. Other groups have as well.

Debating is not irrational arguing. It is presenting a well thought out position to discuss, getting input and rebuttal from others. Believe it or nor, sometimes we change our minds!

Here are my thoughts from a different thread-

*************************************************
posted 24 October 2015 06:04 Hide Post

quote:
Originally posted by MJines:
Ross,

To be clear, I do not think that ethics will win the debate with anti-hunters. As pointed out earlier, in my view the debate will be won, if at all, with that segment of the population that neither supports nor opposes hunting. I think doing focus group discussions with this segment of the population would be a good first step to understand what will and will not resonate with them. Beyond that I also think hunters have to do a better job of telling the story on the conservation benefits of hunting, the challenges facing wildlife, the role hunting plays in conservation, the plight of poaching, the impact hunting has on local communities, etc.

So where does ethics come in? When we have a Cecil-like incident or other incident where a hunter acts in an ethically questionable way, it (i) pushes someone that is otherwise ambivalent on hunting closer to the anti-hunting groups, (ii) makes efforts to tell the good story we have on many hunting-related issues all the more difficult, and (iii) gives the anti-groups something to try and paint the entire sport with. We basically deliver to them on a silver platter the emotional/soulful argument that they need to beat the stuffing out of us. Stated another way, ethics alone will not win the debate, but acting unethically will certainly help ensure defeat.

In terms of the emotional appeal, I do not have a ready solution for that . . . maybe a community impacted by an overpopulation of animals due to a lack of regulated control, a community benefited from hunter dollars, a die off resulting from lack of adequate game management in the face of a drought or other disaster, other. A good start, however, would be to simply tell the story of the conservation benefits of hunting, the challenges facing wildlife, the role hunting plays in conservation, the plight of poaching, the impact hunting has on local communities, etc.

***************************************************************
(reply)
In a population fascinated with the Kardashians- It is unlikely that a "thoughtful" process on hunting can occur-

When foundations will send millions to Mexico to spay and neuter stray cats and dogs -
or attempt and re-attempt to get federal and state funding for a "Bison Highway" that abrogates private land rights and moves interstate highways--

Do you really think a logical approach will prevail--

"These people" do not think -they emote--
and no-- you can't win on emotions-

" These people" are literally the very same that think the selling of fetal parts is OK and the killing of over populated , un-adopted shelter animals is murder-

The "segment" that neither supports or opposes is irrelevant politically-- They are the very same segment that will not vote, will not get involved in local community projects and will not piss on you if you are on fire--

the reality is activists on either end of the spectrum effect change
and not the "who gives a shit , it doesn't effect me 's" in the middle--

These battles are not won in the middle--just look at Congress--

The battles are won on the edges--

We are basically screwed- the generations behind us (we 50 -80 year olds) as a whole , even in rural areas did not grow up hunting--

The current cost of hunting even domestically has become "a rich man's pastime"--

The social "stench" of hunting has been being pushed in the public schools and colleges since the 60's-


No-- palliation and "logical" appeasement doesn't work--
Activism works--
Hopefully in Texas we will (at least for the rest of my life) "secure" hunting as a "right" on the upcoming ballot (nothing is forever in the realm of mortals)

This proposition on the ballot had ZERO to do with the "segment that neither supports or opposes hunting"--
The "battle" for the proposition was fought between the two opposing "activist" camps-

Activism is the needed response--
for:
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that
you end up being governed by your inferiors." .....Plato

Debate amongst ourselves in friendly forums is great, needed, and welcomed.

That said...staunch unity is all that will keep us alive.

We cannot afford to forsake any portion of our hunting community. The anti-hunters don't care if it is a .375 H&H or a spear.

Thus...we must speak out when vendors (ie: Under Armour) forsake "ANY" member of our community...whether we want to, choose to, like, or abhor a particular hunting method (ie: spear in this instance).

We must all hang together or we will all hang separately albeit maybe in different time frames. But make no mistake about it...without unity...the gallows will be built for all forms of hunting.

quote:

Baited hunts for birds is illegal, why not for deer and other game animals? Hello, any ethics out there??????

quote:

Ethics in some cases are purely personal, in other cases, they are communal and for everyone. I am advocating that ethics carry beyond what is legal, they must or we live a purely legalistically society that leaves no room for debate.

The above shows one of the reasons why these type discussions turn into the wrecks they are.

Ethics are a necessary part of daily life for most people in anything/everything they. Legalities are also a major part of Everyone's daily life.

With ethics, the problems occur when an individual or group of individuals reach a belief that their ethical beliefs are better or superior to the the ethics of others.

Why do some folks believe that they are on a higher plane, because they believe shooting game at a waterhole is unethical? Predators of all kinds have been killing game/prey at waterholes, long before humans came on the scene.

What some are missing, is the concept that those strongly on the "Ethical" side of the so-called debate/discussion, openly state that they believe some legally accepted methods should be stopped.

They are uncomfortable with or feel/believe that a method is unacceptable in their view of things and openly state that it should be stopped, i.e. Baiting Deer/Hunting at night and the list goes on. Does not matter to them that those practices are legal and accepted/practice by a large number of people, they want everyone to adept their line of reasoning/belief.

Not all that much different than people with strong religious ideologies, anyone that does not believe the exact same way they do is a sinner.

That is a simplistic way of looking at it, but it amounts to the same thing, it is basically a case of, "I Am A REAL Hunter Because I Hunt This Way, And You Are Not A Real Hunter Because Of The Way You Hunt"!

How can there be a debate or even anything close to a reasonable discussion when one side believes they are on the moral/ethically high ground while the other side has no ethics?

The results are, the antis are winning and HUNTER'S, As A GROUP, and that is the important of the equation. It is not going to be a case of the unethical slobs losing and the "Amen Corner Ethical Holy Rollers" winning, NO All of us that enjoy hunting are going to lose.

None of us are forced, except by legal parameters, to hunt in a manner we do not agree with, we all have choices.

Each of us as individuals set our own standards for how we live our lives and how we choose to participate in such activities as hunting. For some that is nothing more than making sure we are following the laws that are in effect. Some choose to not only follow the laws in effect, but place additional, Personal limitations on themselves concerning various aspects of the hunt or limitations on what they will or won't do.

Somehow, some way we all have to grasp the concept that we must set aside the minutiae and unite to work at saving our ability to hunt, or we will ALL lose that ability.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Debate amongst ourselves in friendly forums is great, needed, and welcomed.

That said...staunch unity is all that will keep us alive.

We cannot afford to forsake any portion of our hunting community. The anti-hunters don't care if it is a .375 H&H of a spear.

Thus...we must speak out when vendors (ie: Under Armour) forsake "ANY" member of our community...whether we want to, choose to, like, or abhor a particular hunting method (ie: spear in this instance).

We must all hang together or we will all hang separately albeit maybe in different time frames. But make no mistake about it...without unity...the gallows will be built for all forms of hunting.

Hell yes Lane!!

Speaking out is fine, as a GROUP, we need to speak out against those that threaten our ability to hunt, but We Do Not need to erect a Bully Pulpit and attack fellow hunters over supposedly "Ethical" differences.

https://gearjunkie.com/bowmars-poaching-case



Bowhunting Couple Charged in Nebraska’s Largest Poaching Case Ever

November 2, 2020 | By Nicole Qualtieri

The famous bowhunting couple will appear in federal court, where they face a laundry list of charges.

Josh and Sarah Bowmar are no strangers to the spotlight. The Ohio couple is well-known for their collective bowhunting success, online videos, and physical fitness training programs.

But they’re now set to go to federal court. Together, they face charges that allege hunting turkeys without a valid permit, illegally transporting game across state lines, and illegal baiting of wildlife, among others.

Bowmar Poaching Charges

Among violations of numerous Nebraska state laws, the Bowmars are also charged with violating the federal Lacey Act through interstate commerce of wildlife.

Filed by United States Attorney Joseph P. Kelly in July, a 20-page indictment lists all charges. The document requests the forfeiture of three whitetail bucks killed in 2016 and 2017 by the couple, a compound bow, and monetary reparations equal to the value of the property involved. However, no amount is yet disclosed.

In a public statement, the Bowmars’ lawyer stated that the couple has pled not guilty and remains innocent until proven otherwise. They intend to fight the charges and go to a jury trial. The Bowmars’ case moves to a pretrial motion deadline on Nov. 2, 2020.


Hidden Hills Outfitters Sting

The case is part of a much larger sting involving Hidden Hills Outfitters (HHO) of Broken Bow, Nebraska. Co-owner and lead guide, Joshua Hueftle, received 30 months in federal prison and a $214,375 fine — restitution set to be paid to the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission. He also faces a 15-year ban from obtaining hunting licenses.

More than 30 defendants pled guilty in the case, resulting in more than $500,000 in fines and 53 years of revoked hunting and fishing privileges. In all, 97 animals were found to be taken illegally. HHO also regularly killed non-game migratory birds, meaning birds like red-tailed hawks and American kestrels. The latter is a violation of the federal Migratory Bird Act.

Bowmars Under Scrutiny Once More

This is not the first time the Bowmars have found themselves facing public scrutiny. In 2016, Josh Bowmar killed a black bear in Canada using a spear with a GoPro attached, causing an international backlash.

Although Bowmar wasn’t charged with wrongdoing at the time, Alberta subsequently changed its hunting laws to ban spears as a legal method of take in 2018 as a result of the outcry. The penalty for hunting with a prohibited weapon in Alberta now comes with a maximum $50,000 fine and up to a year in jail.

https://www.deeranddeerhunting...acey-act-allegations


BOWMARS RESPOND TO LACEY ACT ALLEGATIONS
- Tuesday October 27, 2020 - DDH Staff

A husband-and-wife bowhunting couple, popular for their online videos and social media pages, are vowing to fight Lacey Act charges against them in connection with alleged hunting violations in six Nebraska counties from 2015 to 2017. This is part of a larger case that netted their former outfitter a 2-1/2-year federal prison sentence.

Josh and Sarah Bowmar have retained the Kline Preston Law Group out of Nashville, Tennessee. In a public statement sent to D&DH yesterday, G. Kline Preston, IV, Esq., wrote: “The Lacey Act is a federal statute that criminalizes even minor violations of state law if one transports any part of an animal, which is the subject of the state hunting violations, across state lines. The Bowmars have pled not guilty and demanded a jury trial. They are innocent until proven otherwise.”

A pretrial motion in this case had been slated for Nov. 2, 2020.

(Update: On Thursday, Oct. 29, the Bowmars were granted an extension to delay the deadline to Thursday, Nov. 12. This is the third extension granted since Sept. 15.)



Preston said he is representing the Bowmars in the pending criminal case in the United States District Court of Nebraska.

“This is a fight between ethical hunters, the Bowmars, and the federal government which is using the Lacey Act against them,” Preston wrote. “The Lacey Act is an abusive piece of federal legislation that is used to excessively punish hunters for alleged minor infractions which are the equivalent of a speeding ticket under state law. The Lacey Act makes a traffic-like offense into a serious federal case. It is often abused by forcing honest, ethical hunters to plead guilty in order to avoid the risk of excessive fines and substantial jail time.

“The Bowmars have elected to stand on their rights and fight these charges before a jury rather than accept a deal. The Bowmars are fighting for their rights and those of other ethical hunters as well.”



Grand Jury Indictment

The Grand Jury charges against the Bowmars are lengthy and detailed. The allegations stem from a two-year period from 2015 to 2017, and include multiple charges of illegal baiting, hunting without permits and for transporting harvested game across state lines (from the outfitter’s place in Nebraska to their home in Ohio). The charges stem from incidents taking place in Custer, Blaine, Valley, Gosper and Keith counties.

The Grand Jury also claims the Bowmars exploited for the mutual financial gain of both their business and Hidden Hills Outfitters LLC (HHO), a joint business venture they had with HHO co-owner Jacob Hueftle, for the development, marketing, and sale of a deer feed or supplement that Josh Bowmar was the chief executive officer and co-owner of an associated LLC that was filed with the Nebraska Secretary of State on July 10, 2017.

When asked if the Bowmars refute claims that they had a vested interested in a commercial deer feed product in conjunction with the HHO co-owner Jacob Hueftle, Preston wrote, “…there was never a viable business for a deer feed product. There was never a product on the market.”

The indictment spans 20 pages. For brevity’s sake, it should be noted that hunting deer and/or turkeys over bait is illegal in Nebraska. Also, the indictment alleges numerous “overt acts” against the Bowmars. In criminal law, an overt act is one that prosecutors believe can be clearly proven by evidence and from which criminal intent can be inferred, as opposed to a mere intention in the mind to commit a crime.

According to the complaint, the Bowmars hunted white-tailed deer almost exclusively within the outfitter’s baited areas, that most of the hunting locations were in plain or direct sight of bait piles, and were monitored by trail cameras that were set up within 35 yards of nearby tree stands or ground blinds. Preston stated the Bowmars have entered a plea of not guilty when asked if they refute the charges that they placed and/or knowingly hunted over bait.

Here is a recap of 11 of the more serious charges against the couple:

Allegations Against Josh Bowmar

Grand Jury Allegation 1: Hunting deer over bait on or about Sept. 16, 2015. During this hunt, Bowmar allegedly complained to HHO owner JH regarding an opening in a fence that allowed nearby livestock to consume feed at a nearby bait site.

Grand Jury Allegation 2: Hunting deer over bait on or about December 2015, for a trophy buck with double corkscrew drop tines within a heavily baited area in Custer County; and also a buck nicknamed “Snowflake” within a baited area in Blaine County; and for two other bucks nicknamed “Head Turner” and “Superman.”

Grand Jury Allegation 3: On or about Oct. 27, 2016, Josh Bowmar knowingly and unlawfully established, utilized or maintained baited areas for the purpose of taking white-tailed deer or mule deer, bowhunted for a specific whitetail nicknamed “Goalpost” within a baited area.



Grand Jury Allegation 4: That on or about Nov. 7, 2016, Josh Bowmar knowingly and unlawfully bowhunted deer within multiple baited areas, including extensively for a whitetail nicknamed “Sandman” in Blaine County. At about 6:23 p.m. that day a deer arrived within the baited area that was within direct sight and within bow range of Bowmar. The complaint said Bowmar was unable to shoot at the deer due to limited visibility and because the deer failed to provide an unobstructed shot opportunity.

Grand Jury Allegation 5: That on or about Dec. 29, 2016, Josh Bowmar killed a targeted buck, a 10-pointer, while within plain sight of and within a baited area. The complaint also states that Bowmar illegally transported the deer or parts thereof out of the state on or about Jan. 1, 2017.

Allegations Against Sarah Bowmar

Grand Jury Allegation 1: On or about Dec. 15, 2015, hunting turkeys in Blaine County while not possessing a valid turkey permit.

Grand Jury Allegation 2: Defendants transported turkeys or parts thereof in interstate commerce on or about Dec. 18, 2015.

Grand Jury Allegation 3: On or about Nov. 1, 2016, Sarah Bowmar bowhunted for deer and turkeys within a baited area without a valid permit at multiple locations in Blaine and Custer counties. At various times that day, including at 4:59 p.m., she was in a tree stand located approximately 15 to 25 yards and in direct sight of bait sites.

Grand Jury Allegation 4: On or about Nov. 8, 2016, Sarah Bowmar killed a wild turkey in Blaine County while from a position upon a roadway and within the county road right-of-way, in violation of Nebraska law. The complaint further states that she illegally transported the turkey or parts thereof, in interstate commerce. Preston stated the Bowmars have entered a plea of not guilty when asked if Sarah Bowmar refutes the charges of illegally hunting turkeys without the proper license/permits.

Grand Jury Allegation 5: On or about Sept. 6, 2017, Sarah Bowmar hunted within a baited area and killed a velvet-clad buck nicknamed “Rookie” in Blaine County, and then transported the deer or parts thereof out of the state on or about Sept. 8.

Grand Jury Allegation 6: The complaint further alleges that both Josh and Sarah Bowmar consented to having their guide carry a suppressed rifle while helping them bloodtrail deer on two separate occasions in 2017. In one of the alleged incidents, the complaint said Josh Bowmar took a long shot at a mule deer with his bow, and wounded the deer. Video of the hunt was later uploaded to YouTube under the title, “Long Shot in Crazy Winds Mule Deer Bowhunting.”




Summary

As reported earlier in October, a total of 30 defendants have already pled guilty in the poaching sting and paid $570,453 in fines and restitution, and received 53 years’ worth of hunting and fishing permit revocations.

The HHO sting has been called the largest poaching case in the history of the state of Nebraska. Hueftle was already tried and convicted. He was ordered to serve 30 months in federal prison and was ordered to pay $214,375 in restitution.

There are more allegations contained within the complaint against the Bowmars. Most of them are centered around illegal baiting charges. In Nebraska, it is illegal to establish a baited area from 10 days before the opening of any big-game or turkey season and throughout those entire seasons for the purposes of taking big game or turkeys. It is also illegal to shoot from the right-of-way from any public road, which includes the traveled surface and the right-of-way. According to state statute 72-221.01, the public road right-of-way so dedicated shall be no less than thirty-three feet from the section line, nor less than sixty-six feet through that part of the section where the established road meanders through the described section.

Preston said his clients have elected to meet the legal challenge head on.

“The Lacey Act is draconian in its application and effect on the hunting community,” Preston wrote. “The Lacey Act makes the violation of hunting laws, which might garner a small fine under state law, into the proverbial “federal case” with excessive fines and imprisonment which are out of touch with the nature of the alleged crimes. … the Bowmars are fighting this fight not only for themselves, but also for the hunting community at large because the Lacey Act is used too often against hunters who should not be destroyed by this law for actions which really amount to the equivalent of a speeding ticket.”

UPDATE: THURSDAY, OCT. 29, 2020:

In an almost 5-minute video posted to their Bowmar Bowhunting Instagram page Oct. 28, Josh and Sarah Bowmar further addressed the charges against them.

“First and foremost, we pled not guilty to this. …” Josh Bowmar said.

“These are just charges,” Sarah Bowmar added. “They are not convictions. We have pled not guilty to every single charge that has been brought to light against us.”

Josh Bowmar talks through most of the video. He does not mention specific charges, and only alludes to whitetail hunts the couple took in Nebraska from 2015 to 2017.

“We did hunt at Hidden Hills Outfitters, and yes there were things going on with some clients there that weren’t right, and there were some poaching violations obviously, but that doesn’t mean we were a part of that,” Josh Bowmar said.

“We hunted there for four years and averaged three to four (trips) per year and only have two whitetails to show for that,” he continued. “In four years? Do you guys really think if we were baiting and poaching deer that we would only have two bucks which, by the way, were some of our smallest deer ever. The answer is ‘no.’ We don’t have the success to back up the fact that we were quote, end quote, cheating. We weren’t cheating; we were doing it right. Jacob was doing it right with us. … We can prove our innocence.

“These are Class 3 misdemeanors,” Josh Bowmar said. “Literally, what they’re charging us with is no different than a speeding ticket. It’s the same level of misdemeanor. The only difference is it’s across state lines, and so that’s where things get squirrely with the Lacey Act, because now the Lacey Act is so abusive — and we’re fighting this — because literally … if you guys, and this is a great analogy, if you guys got a speeding ticket in a different state, well, let’s say you got a speeding ticket in your own state — $75 fine, sure — you go across state lines, now it’s a $250,000 fine and it’s a felony,” Josh Bowmar said.

“And five years in prison,” Sarah Bowmar added.

“It’s crazy!” Josh Bowmar continued. “So, this is insane. And we’re not even guilty. But we have to fight it to this level because that’s how ridiculous the Lacey Act is with all of this. So again, guys, we are innocent of these charges. …”

“Prove us guilty … I’ll help you tar and feather us. You know? Because we deserve it then. But, seriously, give us the chance to prove our innocence. … We have done everything right. We really have. I mean, look at our life. I’m not asking you to listen to what we say. Look how we are. We only bowhunt. We always give the animal the greatest chance of escape. I mean, because we literally don’t even gun-hunt. I mean, so if we’re ruthless killers just poachin’ animals, why do we make it harder on ourselves with only bowhunting? That doesn’t make any sense. Like there’s so many things that don’t make any sense. Just think about it. What is our motive to do this … we would cheat and shoot our smallest deer that we’ve ever shot? I mean, why? What’s the point? We don’t need it. It doesn’t make any sense, so please, just look at our lives. We’ve always done everything right; we try to do everything right, and please, just support us until this is over. …”

The Bowmars make no mention in the video of turkey or mule deer hunt allegations, including the hunt for a massive mule deer buck that Josh Bowmar shot while hunting with Hidden Hills Outfitters in 2015. According to the description of that hunt on the Bowmar’s YouTube page, that buck’s rack “grossed 186 nontypical, making him (among the) top 15 bow-kills of all time in the state of Nebraska.” According to the Grand Jury indictment, Bowmar wounded the mule deer with his first archery shot, which was taken at a distance of 95 yards. The indictment goes on to allege that Bowmar knowingly allowed the outfitter to carry a suppressed rifle while they were looking for the buck.

quote:

Originally posted by Kathi:
https://gearjunkie.com/bowmars-poaching-case



Bowhunting Couple Charged in Nebraska’s Largest Poaching Case Ever

November 2, 2020 | By Nicole Qualtieri

The famous bowhunting couple will appear in federal court, where they face a laundry list of charges.

Josh and Sarah Bowmar are no strangers to the spotlight. The Ohio couple is well-known for their collective bowhunting success, online videos, and physical fitness training programs.

But they’re now set to go to federal court. Together, they face charges that allege hunting turkeys without a valid permit, illegally transporting game across state lines, and illegal baiting of wildlife, among others.

Bowmar Poaching Charges

Among violations of numerous Nebraska state laws, the Bowmars are also charged with violating the federal Lacey Act through interstate commerce of wildlife.

Filed by United States Attorney Joseph P. Kelly in July, a 20-page indictment lists all charges. The document requests the forfeiture of three whitetail bucks killed in 2016 and 2017 by the couple, a compound bow, and monetary reparations equal to the value of the property involved. However, no amount is yet disclosed.

In a public statement, the Bowmars’ lawyer stated that the couple has pled not guilty and remains innocent until proven otherwise. They intend to fight the charges and go to a jury trial. The Bowmars’ case moves to a pretrial motion deadline on Nov. 2, 2020.


Hidden Hills Outfitters Sting

The case is part of a much larger sting involving Hidden Hills Outfitters (HHO) of Broken Bow, Nebraska. Co-owner and lead guide, Joshua Hueftle, received 30 months in federal prison and a $214,375 fine — restitution set to be paid to the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission. He also faces a 15-year ban from obtaining hunting licenses.

More than 30 defendants pled guilty in the case, resulting in more than $500,000 in fines and 53 years of revoked hunting and fishing privileges. In all, 97 animals were found to be taken illegally. HHO also regularly killed non-game migratory birds, meaning birds like red-tailed hawks and American kestrels. The latter is a violation of the federal Migratory Bird Act.

Bowmars Under Scrutiny Once More

This is not the first time the Bowmars have found themselves facing public scrutiny. In 2016, Josh Bowmar killed a black bear in Canada using a spear with a GoPro attached, causing an international backlash.

Although Bowmar wasn’t charged with wrongdoing at the time, Alberta subsequently changed its hunting laws to ban spears as a legal method of take in 2018 as a result of the outcry. The penalty for hunting with a prohibited weapon in Alberta now comes with a maximum $50,000 fine and up to a year in jail.

I read about this. Every time I read about something like this, I wonder if the clients really knew or were they misled by the outfitter?

I have a few hunting friends who use the stuff, but from what they say it is overpriced and it does not perform as well as some. My personal favorite for cold weather is merino wool.

Ill let the courts decide on the Bowmans and I will no longer wear Under Armour, all it ever did for me is make me sweat, and thats not good.

Duluth Trading underwear beats Under Armour by leaps and bounds.

Thanks Ray, for putting this into perspective.

I have hunted since I was about 10 years old and I am now older than even you!
All my training was common sense and the word ethics was never mentioned. In fact, no one with whom I have ever hunted or presently hunt with has ever used the word "ethics" in camp or the field. When my Dad taught me NOT to shoot mocking birds, it was because it was the state bird of Texas and he would give me a serious thump on the head if I did kill them. Besides, they are too small to bother cleaning to cook to eat. Our BB guns took many a meadow lark as they were legal and are worth the effort to clean for the kitchen.

The law is discussed and followed.

I have read more about "hunting ethics" in the last few years than the rest of my entire life and for one, I am damn tired of it. I go out to kill animals and birds in a legal and practical manner and that is it. I will not waste my hunting time, camp time, or campfire time discussing ethics or listening to someone else BS about it. If they do, we likely will not be hunting together again.

There -- rant over and I will studiously avoid any such BS posts in the future.

https://www.animals24-7.org/20...justice-in-nebraska/



Celebrity bowhunters Josh & Sarah Bowmar face justice in Nebraska
NOVEMBER 11, 2020 BY MERRITT CLIFTON


TV hunting show star Rod Owen & two prominent outfitters already convicted

OMAHA, Nebraska––Self-promoted online celebrity bowhunters and physical fitness trainers Josh and Sarah Bowmar are expected to be next to go to trial for their roles in the biggest poaching case ever busted in Nebraska.

Exactly when that will be, though, is uncertain. The Bowmars have since September 15, 2020 won three extensions of a deadline to respond to pretrial motions, with the current deadline set for November 12, 2020.

Unlike most of the defendants, the Bowmars have elected to fight charges enumerated in July 2020 by U.S. attorney Joseph P. Kelly in a 20-page grand jury indictment.



33 suspects already pleaded guilty

The case, five years in development by federal and Nebraska state investigators, has already netted guilty pleas to multiple federal and state charges from each of 33 previous defendants, including television hunting show star Rod Owen and Hidden Hills Outfitters co-owners Jacob and Conrad Hueftle.

Senior U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Bataillon has already assessed penalties for violations of the federal Lacey Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act totaling $580,302 in fines and restitution, 53 years in revoked hunting and fishing privileges, and forfeiture of trophies from as many as 97 animals who were allegedly illegally killed. The victims included 30 white-tailed deer, 34 mule deer, six pronghorn antelope, and 27 wild turkeys.



Defense challenges the Lacey Act

The Lacey Act, the cornerstone of U.S. federal conservation law since 1900, prohibits transporting illegally acquired wildlife across state lines. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, in effect since 1918, prohibits trapping or killing most native migratory bird species, including birds of prey and waterfowl other than nonmigratory Canada geese and mute swans.

Representing the Bowmars, attorney G. Kline Preston, IV, of the Kline Preston Law Group in Nashville, Tennessee, told the magazine Deer & Deerhunting that “The Lacey Act is an abusive piece of federal legislation that is used to excessively punish hunters for alleged minor infractions which are the equivalent of a speeding ticket under state law.

‘The Lacey Act makes a traffic-like offense,” more closely resembling hit-and-run than a speeding ticket, in that no one dies from speeding by itself, “into a serious federal case,” Preston contended.



“Honest, ethical hunters”

“It is often abused,” Preston argued, “by forcing honest, ethical hunters to plead guilty in order to avoid the risk of excessive fines and substantial jail time.”

But those “honest, ethical hunters” could not be charged with Lacey Act violations if they were not also convicted of the poaching offenses that make transporting wildlife interstate a crime.

“The Bowmars have elected to stand on their rights and fight these charges before a jury,” Preston said, “rather than accept a deal. The Bowmars are fighting for their rights and those of other ethical hunters as well,” Preston finished.

Observed Deer & Deerhunting, “The grand jury charges against the Bowmars are lengthy and detailed. The allegations stem from a two-year period from 2015 to 2017, and include multiple charges of illegal baiting, hunting without permits, and for transporting harvested game across state lines, from the outfitter’s place in Nebraska to their home in Ohio.



“Hard Rack Candy”

“The grand jury also claims,” Deer & Deerhunting summarized, that “the Bowmars exploited for the mutual financial gain of both their business and Hidden Hills Outfitters LLC, a joint business venture they had with Hidden Hills Outfitters co-owner Jacob Hueftle, for the development, marketing, and sale of a deer feed or supplement” made by “an associated LLC” of which Josh Bowmar was chief executive officer.”

Responded defense attorney Preston, “There was never a viable business for a deer feed product. There was never a product on the market,” but the Lacey Act does not require an alleged violation to be economically successful for the action to be illegal.

Further, Jacob Hueftle, 30, reportedly acknowledged promoting deer feeds or supplements called PrimeTine and Hard Rack Candy as part of a plea bargain.



Outfitter fined $214,375

Sentenced on October 5, 2020, Jacob Hueftle drew the stiffest terms of any defendant so far: 30 months in federal prison, a fine of $214,375 to be paid as restitution to the Nebraska Game & Parks Commission, and a 15-year ban from obtaining hunting licenses.

Jacob Hueftle was also ordered to forfeit or abandon his interest in a variety of weapons, trophy mounts, optics, electronic game cameras, and other hunting equipment used to poach wildlife.

Sentenced on October 28, 2020, brother Conrad Hueftle drew two years on probation, financial penalties totaling $7,500. Conrad Hueftle is barred from hunting, trapping, guiding, or otherwise assisting or being present with anyone engaging in hunting or for the duration of his probation.


.

118 clients from 21 states


“Hidden Hills Outfitters contracted hunting clients residing almost exclusively outside the state of Nebraska,” reported Gavin Higgins of the Sandhill Express in Broken Bow, Nebraska, where Hidden Hills Outfitters is headquartered.

Those clients included “at least 118 clients from 21 states.” Higgins wrote. “Hidden Hills Outfitters provided guiding and hunting services to contracted hunting clients for $2,500 to $7,000 depending upon the target species,” but substantially discounted hunts by clients whose videos helped to bring more business.

“The investigation determined that Hueftle and other Hidden Hills Outfitters associates intentionally established and maintained bait sites at or near client hunting locations for the purpose of taking big game or turkey,” Higgins continued. “Law enforcement determined that approximately 80% of the archery white-tailed deer clients killed their deer within a baited area, and that approximately half of Hidden Hills Outfitters rifle white-tailed deer hunting clients hunted and killed their deer within a baited area.



Allegedly shot falcons, hawks & kestrels with a rifle

“Other illegal hunting activity,” Higgins said, “included hunting mule deer within the Nebraska Mule Deer Conservation Area, altering hunting permits, taking turkey in excess of established bag limits, and taking mule deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, and wild turkey with rifles or other prohibited weapons.

“It was also determined,” Higgins explained of the charges, that “Hueftle and other Hidden Hills Outfitters associates routinely killed non-game migratory birds with a rifle, including various native species of hawks or falcons such as red-tailed hawks and American kestrels, by shooting the birds while perched upon fence lines or electrical power lines.”



“Case started with a tip”

Added Omaha World Herald reporter Nancy Gaarder, “The case started with a tip that investigators won’t divulge and was undertaken jointly by agents with Nebraska Game & Parks and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”

The alleged perpetrators, Gaarder recounted, “shot animals who had been lured to them with bait and whose movements had been carefully scrutinized via trail cameras. Some used rifles during archery season. Others hunted at night and with spotlights. Or lacked a permit. Or shot animals from the road. Or lied about who killed their animal and how it was killed.

“To hide their actions from others, hunters sometimes put noise suppressors on their guns. And they sent their ill-gotten gains home, across state lines.



“Meat left to rot”

“The heads were cut off of some animals, with the meat left to rot,” Gaarder wrote. “Hidden Hills’ plea agreement says ‘J.H.’,” apparently Jacob Hueftle, “personally killed at least 100 nongame birds.”

Jacob Hueftle, Gaarder continued, had already “been convicted of violating federal hunting law and sentenced to probation for five years,” in 2012.

Nonetheless, Gaarder explained, “Later that year, he began operating Hidden Hills. Opening an outfitting business was legal under his probation, according to court documents, but he was banned from using weapons or killing animals himself — probation restrictions that he violated.”

Added Gaarder, “According to court records, Hidden Hills drummed up business online and at out-of-state events, including the Great American Outdoor Show, a nine-day event in Pennsylvania that bills itself as the world’s largest outdoor show.”


Rod Owen with mule deer he killed, posted to Facebook on September 25, 2017, with a caption saying the buck was killed at Hidden Hills Outfitters. Owen admitted in his plea bargain to wounding a mule deer at Hidden Hills Outfitters the day before, who was subsequently killed by a guide with a gun. Owen also admitted that the venison from the deer “was needlessly wasted and abandoned.”

Rod Owen

But Hidden Hills Outfitters appears to have been promoted most successfully in videos produced by celebrity bowhunters, like the Bowmars and Rod Owen, 57, of Blue Springs, Missouri.

“Owen has been featured in Field & Stream and on the Outdoor Channel,” wrote Gaarder, “and was a cast member for the popular Drury Outdoors media company.”

For Drury, Gaarder recalled, Owen “participated in a celebrity reality hunting show called Dream Season, paired with professional bull rider J.W. ‘Ironman’ Hart,” and “touted his Nebraska hunts on Drury’s 100% Wild podcast.”

But “Owen knew that the animals were lured into range with bait — he even helped place some of the bait,” Gaarder noted.

Further, “two animals that he wounded with an arrow were ultimately killed with a rifle. In both instances, he misrepresented the hunt in video submitted to Drury Outdoors, according to court records.

“Owen made about $810 from Drury for one video and $3,067 on another,” Gaarder detailed. “In exchange for being promoted in the video, Hidden Hills halved the fee it charged Owen,” who “has been ordered to pay $50,000 in fines and restitution.”



Josh & Sarah Bowmar may be the biggest trophies

The Hidden Hills Outfitters client fined the highest sum, so far, appears to be car dealer Duane S. Mulvaine, 40, of Fox Lake, Wisconsin. Mulvaine was assessed $95,000 and ordered to surrender trophy mounts of five mule deer, three white-tailed deer, three pronghorn antelope, a turkey and a badger, along with four scoped rifles, three sound suppressors, a compound bow and a crossbow.

But Josh and Sarah Bowmar may become the biggest trophies of the investigation for wildlife law enforcement, because of their prominence as online “influencers” of other young hunters and customers for hunting and bodybuilding paraphernalia.

Josh Todd Bowmar, 30, was a lifelong resident of Ohio before the couple relatively recently moved to Ankeny, Iowa. Sarah Bowmar, 31, was born Sarah Elizabeth Bakian in South Bend, Indiana.

The Bowmar Archery web page claims Josh Bowmar “participated in three National Collegiate Athletic Association sports and was awarded NCAA 2x Academic All American and Double Athletic All American honors in the same year in javelin and the 4×4. Additionally, Josh broke four university records in track and field.”

NCAA records show that Josh Bowmar, between 2009 and 2011, competed as a freshman sophomore, and junior for Heidelberg University in Tiffin, Ohio.

Heidelberg University is an NCAA Division III school, with annual enrollment of only about 500 male undergraduates eligible to participate in intercollegiate sports.



Middling javelin thrower by high school standards

Josh Bowmar participated in ten different track and field events, achieving four firsts, ten seconds, and ten thirds in 70 starts, but his best performances would be well short of school records even at many high schools.

Josh Bowmar threw the javelin as a sophomore and junior. The Heidelberg University Athletics web page credits Josh Bowmar as “All American” in javelin for the 2010-2011 academic year, but the NCAA record page shows him with one first in a javelin event, two seconds, and four thirds.

Josh Bowmar is credited with a longest javelin throw of 62.31 meters, or about 204 feet. Though javelin-throwing is not often a high school or even university event, top high schoolers who do throw the javelin routinely throw it farther. At least two high schoolers have exceeded 245 feet.

The NCAA collegiate javelin throwing record, standing since 1990, is 89.1 meters, about 292 feet, nearly half again farther than Josh Bowmar’s best, and is still 50 feet short of the world record.

Bowmar hunting kills bear with spear



Baited & speared black bear in Alberta

Also according to the Bowmar Archery web page, Josh and Sarah Bowmar, then purportedly a vegetarian and volunteer at the Toledo Area Humane Society in 2013-2014, met at a February 2014 bodybuilding competition.

By 2015 the Bowmars were a married couple, killing animals together and making videos about it.

On June 5, 2016, disclosed CBC staff reporter Verity Stevenson six weeks later, the Bowmars posted a video of Josh Bowmar “killing a black bear in Alberta with a spear,” which had a GoPro camera attached, to capture the death of the bear at the closest possible distance.

“In the video,” described Stevenson, “a black bear can be seen circling and then approaching the area that had been baited and where Bowmar stands nearby before he hits it with the spear.

“’He’s going down; I drilled him perfect,’ [Josh] Bowmar said, with dramatic background music playing on the video. ‘I just did something I don’t think anybody in the world has ever done — and that was spear a bear on the ground, on film. And I smoked him,’ he added, before fist-pumping Sarah, who was filming.”



Left wounded bear to die overnight

Continued Stevenson, “The video shows him returning the next day to retrieve the bear, who appeared to have been left overnight, ‘60 or 70 yards’ from where he was struck. The camera pans to the bear’s wound.”

The Bowmars had enjoyed sponsorship by the Under Armour underwear manufacturing company, but that came to a quick end three days after Stevenson’s broadcast.

“Under Armour and the Bowmars broke up today,” Sarah Bowmar tweeted on August 18, 2016. “I’ll do a blog post in a few days,” she said, “when I am no longer crying. #AntisWon.”



Spearing now banned in Alberta & 45 states

A gap in Alberta hunting laws precluded successfully prosecuting the Bowmars for using an illegal weapon to kill the bear.

However, the Alberta Ministry of Environment & Parks, the Alberta Fish & Game Association, and the Alberta SPCA pushed for an amendment which since 2018 makes hunting with a prohibited weapon, including a spear, punishable with a fine of up to $50,000 Canadian dollars, plus a year in jail.

Hunting various animals with a spear, especially feral pigs, remains legal in four U.S. states: Alabama, Hawaii, Alaska, and Oklahoma.



Missouri allows the use of a spear thrown with an atlatl, a device similar in concept to the ball-thrower many people use to exercise dogs. Atlatls were used by hunters to kill animals, including bears, for at least 40,000 years, but largely fell out of use after the invention of more accurate weapons including longbows, crossbows, and firearms.

I don't use UA, I went to Voormi several years ago. Much better.

cshelton - Glad to hear you've been hanging out with the good guys. Same here. Legal is all we ever followed. Hope all is well.
CB

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Gentlemen:

Let me clarify something. Personally, I would never hunt like this with a spear . It is indeed a stunt in my book. However,as I understand it, that type of hunting was perfectly legal at the time.

My basic position is to support all forms of legal hunting. If we don't what will be next? Bows? Rifles? .........

I guess I take the basic NRA position. I oppose anything diminishing any form of hunting .

Problem is this wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for those two filming the hunt and plastering it on social media. Their desire for the spotlight and need for attention put us in this position. The Bowmans did us no favors with this stunt

+1. I support all forms of legal hunting. I do not support plastering social media with all forms of hunting.

The Bowmars are attention seeking idiots. I'm fine with UA dropping them.