OK Ovis, let me violate good interchange of ideas by asking you a question. Would the words "fair chase" have been invented by hunters to ostracize each other or does it serve the ideals of animal rights people better to pit hunter against hunter. I know Milo Hansen had to endure dozens of acusations of poaching and even he was part of a concentrated effort to discredit Mitch Rompola. The Lovenstuen buck of Missouri is another glamorous tale of greed and how far hunters will go. I mean the kid wasn't even allowed to carry his gun afield and the father and the uncle wanted to insure it was killed before other hunters could get into the woods.

Madgoat actually came very close to my feelings when he stated his love of being there and not having to kill something. But information I have from the National Hunter Education Association tells me that 80% of Americans don't want to hear that reasoning. Protecting them from their environment, herd control, and accident prevention fit above additional food resources. The ambiance most of us enjoy. And I'll ask one last question that has two parts. What is "fair" about fair chase? And just who decides what is and isn't fair chase?

George,

Hard for me to believe that the guy that wrote your book is writing this drivel here by asking questions akin to, "George, answer yes or no, do the people here know that you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, have no common sense?????

Fair chase is not a buzzword of the animal rights people, and in the future, your NHEA will be one of the orgs telling us why we lost our priveleges and it won't be due to too much fair chase.

If you call epithets relating gays to hunters on this site necessary and by your answering my simple question on a statement that YOU made causing you to violate a good interchange of ideas, well, that speaks volumnes.....

You can have the last word, George......this thread should be embarassing to any hunter that is proud of his or her heritage, is ethical, and believes in fair chase.

Joe

This seems like an emotional arguement to me. Very little fact is actually taken into concideration, details are preconcieved and minds are made up before any concidration is given to anothers point of view. You would all do good to take a breath and just enjoy what you call hunting. Canned hunts to pose their threat to OUR sport but will never ruin it. By canned I am talking about the low acreage high density hunts as well as the pre scouted open range hunt. THERE ARE A LOT OF SCENERIOS IN BETWEEN THAT ARE COMPLETELY OVER LOOKED DO TO EMOTION.

Skyjacker
In certain terrain with low density 1600 acres is a large area for a buck to hide especially if the range is in good condition. I KNOW NOTHING OF THIS RANCH, therefore with out more info I am not going to condemn this guy as a farm hunter.

Perry

Fellow hunters why not unite against the groups that are are against hunting in any shape or form?
They are the enemy. A person who goes to a preserve
or high fence ranch to hunt is doing just that. He is hunting. What do you people who are railing about hunting on a property with fences say about the person who is poaching on land without fences and has/had animals in BC book?
It would be really easy to name some names who did just that and they are not lambasted like this guy who did nothing wrong. He paid his money and killed a monster deer. What is the problem? You see people who buy "Governor's tags" They get the best guide who has everybody
in the state watching for a monster elk or muley. When they find it they call the guy, he flies in and they hold his hand up the mountain
leading him to it. He pulls the trigger. Fair chase? Yeah right. Doesn't seem much different to me. Both people had a lot of money and got a big trophy. The guy who hunted at the high fence could have had a much harder hunt. It might have taken him more than a day.

Joe, I suppose that makes us even. I would have figured someone with the command of good language would have had the fortitude to step up to the plate when asked a simple question as I asked you: Exactly what is fair chase and who determines it? Doesn't seem that complicated for someone wanting to berate me for asking it. How tall can the fence be, how many acres can the "preserve" be, does it apply to wild birds and wild hogs or just whitetail deer?

As far as the gay bashing, that too is part of your political correctness agenda. I'm still down home, home spun manly man who doesn't bear any burden of my beliefs. All of us have private prejudices. Some of us hide them even from ourselves at times. At my age, I don't find any need to. I don't suffer from homophobia as I fear no man. Conniving some other definition of the word is just more politically correct engineering of our language. Usually I'm gay and seldom sad, but never homosexual.

Mr. Roof, you have finally proved your complete lack of knowledge on many subjects.

Crazy Horse, was arrested by the U.S. Calvary in his village. He was led away from there to Fort Robinson in the North West corner of the Nebraska Panhandle. Upon arrival at the fort, he was led to the Guard House. As he neared the Guard House under an armed escort, he made fight at his escort to keep from being locked up. He manage to get a kinife away from one of the guards and stabbed or cut one person. AN INDIAN SCOUT, by the name of Little Big Man, proceeded to bayonet Crazy Horse, I believe more than once, he died that day from his wounds. His parents were able to steal his body and carry it away from Fort Robinson and it was never found.

That Sir is as fairly as close of an account as was written about the whole incident, and I have actually been to the guard house where iot happened. HAVE YOU????

Indians wasted just as much game as whites did. If you and your tag team partner had any actual knowledge of plains indians, you would know that the reason why they never set up the societies like the Eastern Woodland tribes and the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas, in Mexico, Central, and South America, is because they were so dependent on the Buffalo and other plains animals that they would have to pack up and move to follow the herds as they killed them off in one area.

Crazy Horse was not shot by a white soldier, and it was Apaches that helped Nelson Miles run Geronimo into the ground.

Why don't you and your arrogant tag team buddy get your facts straight before you start posting BS.

The only reason why the Plains Indians were unable to defeat the U.S. military, and stop the advance west of whites, was because they could noty get their crap together and unite under one leader.

Sitting Bull was killed when he was in his late 70's, because the U.S. Army, was scared to death of him and was afraid he would bring what was left of his people together for one last battle.

How about you two Brainiacs read a little of that history you want to spout off about so you don't look silly when you start talking about stuff and throwing out wrong information.

Thought of another item. Since you seem to be such a knowledgable student of history???

You ever been to the Little Big Horn Battlefield????

Well I have, know what my thoughts are about it?????

Couldn't have happened to a greater human being. Custer was an arrogant idiot. Had any of his men had enough brains to think about it, he would have been shot in the back and his troops would have turned around and got the hell out of there.

Did the Sioux and Cheyenne do anything wrong???

Yes they did, they should have gathered their ponies and gear and went south to where Gen. Crook was nursing his forces wounds, from the butt kicking they had been given a few days earlier by these indians, and finished the job.

It might be a good thing to try and not make quite so many assumptions about people, especially when you can't get historical facts straight.

Crazyhorseconsulting,
Thank god for Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Because that is where you got all your Information. Posted almost word for word.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Horse

My debate here was when GeoffM24 posted the following statement. "Was it hunting when the indians killed buffalo by the thousands?"

A totally different reason why Native Americans hunted and why we hunt today. The Native Americans did it for pure survival not for the sport of it. BIG DIFFERANCE.
Just for your Information, I am Native American, I know my history and not everything you read in a book or on the Internet is the whole truth. There is another side to every story.

Also, don't put me and Mr Roof in one group, I stand on my own two feet. If you want to address me, address me as an individual.

Yes I have Crazy Horse and you and I are on the same page about Custer. The Crow, who finally have gained ownership of the spot now don't call it that, as you already know. The stories of Custer's "exploits" along the Powder River have never been told in "white man's language" much like the stories of Crazy Horse, Geronimo, and Cochise. My "tag team" partner is half Chiricahua and I'm woodpile Cherokee, so the stories we have likely haven't been written in books you've read. Did you know that Lt. Col George Armstrong Custer (Not "general") is buried in the cemetary at West Point? Been there too and was sickened the huge memorial built for this "hero". Don't guess he was a fan of "fair chase" either, so in my opinion, his demise was one of the finest examples of "American justice" ever perpetrated.

Redhawk, you dumbass. I have been stugying the west and Indians all my life, since I got old enought to read books on my own. Your ignorance and arrogance is so blatant to be embarrassing.

You maybe Native American, but your an Apache and Apaches did not live the same way as the Sioux, Cheyenne or any of the other Northern Plains Indians. Don't start trying to tell me what I do or don't know about Indians.

I have watched Native Americans do their subsistance hunting, killing every goose in a family flock with a 22, when they had caribou meat and fish drying on racks.

Indians didn't start practicing conservation till they had to, because they would take all the game out of an area and move to a new area.

And I will lump you with Mr. Roof because from what I have seen so far is that when one of you show up on a topic, the other one is only a post or two behind.

This whole thread has turned to a sorrier piece of crap than it was, but don't start telling me where I got my information about indians, because I have been studying the history of the west and southwest for 45 years or so.

Crazyhorseconsulting, I will give you one thing, you are absolutely right about a couple of things.

"The only reason why the Plains Indians were unable to defeat the U.S. military, and stop the advance west of whites, was because they could not get their crap together and unite under one leader."

"Couldn't have happened to a greater human being. Custer was an arrogant idiot. Had any of his men had enough brains to think about it, he would have been shot in the back and his troops would have turned around and got the hell out of there."


"They should have gathered their ponies and gear and went south to where Gen. Crook was nursing his forces wounds, from the butt kicking they had been given a few days earlier by these indians, and finished the job."

Are yall saying Custer was behind a high fence...oh this must be a high jacked thread.

Perry

Crazyhorseconsulting,
Wow confronted with the truth hurts.

I think you need to do some more research, it is obvious from your 45 years or so of reading, you don't know everything. Why else would you get so up set?

Some of us read about it, some of us have lived it.

So why don't we get back on topic and see if that will give you more time to read Wikipedia.

And just for the record, I have lived in North Dakota & South Dakota, and yes I have been to many reservations while I was there. I have visited the sites you have and read the signs that were there, it is amazing how the White man's story is not exactly the way it happened.

You have a lot more reading to do before you can educate someone who's people lived it.

I will not post here any further to this topic, it is not beneficial or fair for everyone here to hear this or prudent to the conversation at hand.

Crazyhorseconsulting,
Make another post some where else and continue this debate. It is amusing to have someone give there version of history, or better yet there cut and paste version.

One final thing here, you call me a dumbass, check your spelling before you call someone dumb.

Did I hit the wrong key, is this HuntingNet.com? Judging by where this thread has gone, I must be on the wrong board.

Back to the original subject, a few random thoughts gleaned from my rather limited experiences of almost 53 years:

If you think an 8' fence will keep a deer inside, you are wrong. 25 years ago I had the privilege of hunting a piece of property in Brooks County, TX that had an oil company paid for high fence on the east side. (The other three sides were barbed wire, to keep the cattle in...) We used to go to a right-of-way that cut both properties in the evenings and watch the "big bucks" come out and feed across the fence. There was a second, barbed wire fence 50 yards inside the game fence, and most evenings we watched the landowner fly the perimeter with a chopper, trying to keep the deer inside. And every year we hunted the areas where the deer had found holes the hogs had made under the fences, and would come across. We didn't kill any B&C bucks, but a 17" 17-point NT isn't a bad whitetail in anybody's book...

I once watched a doe walk up to an 8' fence, stand up on her rear legs, stretch her neck to measure the top of the fence, then drop back down and leap over the fence like a cat jumping up on the hood of a truck. She wanted across, she went across... That simple.

1600 acres is just a bit short of three miles long and a mile wide, if my math is correct. If you think it is "easy" to find a mature whitetail buck in that sized area, you are nuts. They don't get big by being stupid. And he knows you are there 15 minutes after you get out of the truck, off the four wheeler, land the plane, ski in, or whatever means you use to get there. Deer are prey animals, and their survival depends on being able to sense danger. You are just a two-legged predator, and probably a rather unskilled one in most instances, comparatively speaking.

I have a friend that bought a "hunt" years ago, a mature axis buck turned loose on 300 acres of Hill Country property. His idea of a hunt, not mine. But the point is this: it took him 2-1/2 days to find that axis buck. Did he hunt it? You darned betcha he did... Was it "luck of the draw"? Nope, he knew what was there, and he still had holy heck finding it. Was it a "canned" hunt? You decide.

We all have our opinions; most of them wrong, some of them right, but all of them our own. To foist those opinions on someone else is irresponsible, childish and pointless. I have enough trouble trying to keep my own front porch clean. I don't have the time to go check my next door neighbor's. (I think most of you will understand what I mean...)

And Madgoat, your avatar bothers me... Is it wrong for you to put it there? Nope, it is your avatar. Not liking it is just part of who I am.

Doubless,
This thread is about murdering defensless pets in 1600 acres and indians being animal murderers. Dont be hateing on Napoleaon Dynamite (MG's avatar).

Perry

The spelling of the word is us, not use!

And just to clrify one thing, I didn't realize that you were born before 1850 or so, because reservation life never was anything like the way indians lived, or hunted when they were free.

Just like blacks that harp on the way slaves were treated, they only know what they have seen or heard, no black alive today was a slave.

No Indian alive today knows what it means to be free and independent of the U.S. goverment. That includes you.

As for the business this thread was originally started about, if the guy that shot the animal wants to call it a hunt, paid for it, and was done legally, what does it really matter, NO one is telling any of us that we have to do things the same way.

As I said earlier, I don't agree with SCI or any other organization that keeps records of and awards trophies for animals shot inside a high fence.

OK, I am going to get off the original topic here. But for ANYONE to put stock in what they find or cut and paste from wikipedia is ludicrous.

True historians either laugh at it or are appalled -- or both. And no college professor that I am aware of will accept anything taken off of that site. It's a joke, pure and simple.

Not sure iof you are refering to me or not, but I never go to wikepedia for anything, and I don't cut and paste nothing, Don't Know How!

No contrary to one persons opinion everything I have said came from the reading I have done in the past on the subject or from actually visiting the area where the events happened.

Nice where this thread went started as a post of a high fenced deer, then goes to some guy calling people gay, fat (which by the way he looks like he has a loaf of bread under his chin) giving history and grammar lessons to everyone. Wow I am really impressed, I love how some people like to think everyone else is a complete idiot just because they like to throw around big words to make themselves look smart. What a complete joke and what a clown.

Time to close this thread.

Y'all need to let this go.

quote:

Originally posted by ovis: hunters better clean up their own house or someones going to do it for us.

Joe

1000% correct. This is the bottom line. PERIOD. You are dead on.

quote:

Originally posted by Madgoat: So call this modern "game farming" just what it is. FARMING. Most of the critters have ear tags, they are grown for slaughter, confined behind a fence, in many instances fed supplements and special feed to grow to exceptionally large size. Does it matter that it goes to a slaughter house to be euthanized, or shot by someone with a rifle, cross bow, what ever? There is no difference between a whitetail behind a high fence, and a cow behind a four strand barbed wire fence. Their purposes are exactly the same.

This is a great point. The bottom line is some here are upset because manufactured hunting is not a recognized sport. Its kind of like steroid abusers in track and field. Is that acceptable? Those that think a 1000 acre enclosure is accpetable hunting should also agree with steroid supplements for major league sports.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
I asked you: Exactly what is fair chase and who determines it?

Well George, here seems to be a problem in comprehension. And please don't take that as an insult.

Most here seem to agree that hunting behind a high fence of 5000 acres or less is not "fair chase". Others would say that hunting above enclosures of 30,000 would be fair chase. Problem is its hard for an organization to say what is or what is not fair chase when it comes to enclosures and game "farms". So they make a rule encompassing Anything that is high fenced.

What establishes fair chase is you and me, and anyone else. Its a PERSONAL choice. My personal opinion is that any enclosure less than 20,000 acres is restricting animal herds and forcing them to adapt to unusual levels of human intrusion. Why 20,000? Don't know, but I've been on several farms around this number and less and I imagine that a high fence would have a definite effect.

Anyway, its a personal choice. What you believe to be fair chase may not be my definition of fair chase.

Your problem with B&C seems to be that they have placed a very high value on non-enclosures. That seems to be their rule and opinion which mirrors many peoples opinions (like mine), but since it doesn't meet yours, you attack them.

You should support and embrace any organization that defends hunters rights that holds a more stricter guideline to what they deem as fair chase,whether you agree with it or not. Its a no-brainer. But you don't seem to understand that.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof: Maybe you live in Utopia, but 90% of all hunting along the East Coast is done on private LEASED land.

Maybe a lifetime in the military made me more callous,

1. Almost 1 million hunters living in Pennsylvania DON'T hunt on leased land. Do we make up the other 10%?

2. George, some on this forum have called you pompous. For over a month now, I've wondered the same thing. Now I know why. It's your lifer mentality. I met lots of pompous lifers just like you during my 4 year enlistment in the Navy.

3. I'm sure it's just a typo on your part, but the US Civil War did not end in 1863 like you stated a few pages ago.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
GeoffM24 ,Tembo , TJ, Crazyhorseconsulting didn't you learn anything with your 8th grade educations?
Although you posted that the fur industry did put a big dent into the slaughter of the Bison, you left out a very important part of history. The United States Government order the slaughter of the Bison to starve the Native Americans and force them to go to the reservations.
All you guys that don't know a thing about history, come here and shoot off your uneducated mouths and have no idea what you are talking about.
If you want to know the truth, do some research before you make yourself's look more foolish than you already have. I refuse to have any further debate with any of you, it is not worth the effort. Better a fool out in the open than one in a closet.

Nice try Redhawk. You can try all the name calling you want in order to keep your delusional sense of the subsitance Indian but that doesn't make it true. Why don't you try doing a little reading on the methods of the Crow Indians.

But then again I'm sure you haven't read Buffalo Tales: The Near-Extermination of the American Bison by Shepard Krech III from Brown University

Geoff, maybe you should read a bit more yourself.

"Accordingly, Sherman wrote to Grant: "We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children." Writing two days later to his brother John, General Sherman said: "I suppose the Sioux must be exterminated . . ." (Fellman, p. 264).

This was Sherman’s attitude toward Southerners during the War for Southern Independence as well. In a July 31, 1862 letter to his wife (from his Collected Works) he wrote that his purpose in the war was: "Extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least part of the trouble, but the [Southern] people." His charming and nurturing wife Ellen wrote back that her fondest wish was for a war "of extermination and that all [Southerners] would be driven like the Swine into the sea."

With this attitude, Sherman issued the following order to his troops at the beginning of the Indian Wars: "During an assault, the soldiers cannot pause to distinguish between male and female, or even discriminate as to age. As long as resistance is made, death must be meted out . . ." (Marszalek, p. 379).

Most of the raids on Indian camps were conducted in the winter, when families would be together and could therefore all be killed at once. Sherman gave Sheridan "authorization to slaughter as many women and children as well as men Sheridan or his subordinates felt was necessary when they attacked Indian villages" (Fellman, p. 271). All livestock was also killed so that any survivors would be more likely to starve to death.

Sherman was once brought before a congressional committee after federal Indian agents, who were supposed to be supervising the Indians who were on reservations, witnessed "the horror of women and children under military attack." Nothing came of the hearings, however. Sherman ordered his subordinates to kill the Indians without restraint to achieve what he called "the final solution of the Indian problem," and promised that if the newspapers found out about it he would "run interference against any complaints about atrocities back East" (Fellman, p. 271).

Eight years into his war of "extermination" Sherman was bursting with pride over his accomplishments. "I am charmed at the handsome conduct of our troops in the field," he wrote Sheridan in 1874. "They go in with the relish that used to make our hearts glad in 1864-5" (Fellman, p. 272).

Another part of Sherman’s "final solution" strategy against this "inferior race" was the massive slaughter of buffalo, a primary source of food for the Indians. If there were no longer any buffalo near where the railroad traveled, he reasoned, then the Indians would not go there either. By 1882 the American buffalo was essentially extinct. " from "How Lincoln's Army 'Liberated' the Indian" by Thomas D. Lorenzo

The Frontier Army and the Destruction of the Buffalo: 1865-1883
David D. Smits

In the short but shameful history of the misery inflicted upon this planet (and on each other) by human beings, there is no chapter more shocking or tragic than the reckless and brutal near-extinction of the American Bison---what we will forever incorrectly call the Buffalo. In the short span of three decades in the last half of the 19th century, white hunters and entrepreneurs, encouraged and promoted by the U.S. Army, slaughtered the once massive herds. It is estimated that in 1840, as many as 60 million buffalo roamed the Great Plains, from Canada to north Texas, an area that covered more than a million square miles; by 1886 one scientific survey could find fewer than a hundred free-roaming buffalo in the United States. "Where the Buffalo Roamed..." by Jim Stiles


The Indians bitterly resented this destruction which meant the end of
their way of life. There were years of terrible massacres and bloody
warfare, especially with the Comanche and the Sioux. Their ultimate
defeat was hastened by the extermination of the buffalo, urged and
aided by Gen. Phil Sheridan and the U.S. Army. Newsletter of Dec. 7, 1968 by Forest Preservation District of Cook County, Ill.

Except for the extermination of the buffalo, which the army leadership encouraged as a way to help solve the "Indian problem," the army did not seek the massive destruction of western game as official policy. "Montana: The Magazine of Western History" Aug. 2005

There are thousands of others debunking your attempt to discredit the truth. Actually I find it a bit amazing that several took exception to my comment about gays but not a single person stood up against the bigoted and racially insensitive remarks about Indians. I guess political correctness has its limits.

Thanks for the history lesson numb nuts now go start your own thread.

this thread was not started so you could come here and talk about indians and buffalo, and try to prove to everyone how book smart you are go back to the beginning. It was a bout a picture of a buck shot behind a fence, someone made the comment about SCI record being a joke,,,,not SCI as a whole or said anything about them not doing anything for sportsman. You decided to attack people saying they were against SCI. well I dont think anyone did as a matter of fact I dont think any of them would argue that SCI does as much or more for hunting than any other organization. You seem to think its your duty to come on here and belittle everyone and let everyone know how stupid we all are and just how smart you are. Get a life man.

insecure

Taxidermist[/quote]

quote:

not a single person stood up against the bigoted and racially insensitive remarks about Indians. I guess political correctness has its limits.

Could you point me to the "bigoted remarks" in this thread? I read the entire thread and didn't see it anywhere. Maybe I missed it.

quote:

Redhawk, you dumbass. I have been stugying the west and Indians all my life, since I got old enought to read books on my own. Your ignorance and arrogance is so blatant to be embarrassing.

You maybe Native American, but your an Apache and Apaches did not live the same way as the Sioux, Cheyenne or any of the other Northern Plains Indians. Don't start trying to tell me what I do or don't know about Indians.

That was by Crazyhorseoutfitter TJ and since you're probably not an Indian, that probably didn't tweak you like it did us. Here's a snowcow talking to two Indians as if what he read on Wikipedia makes him more knowledgeable about how our lives were effected.

quote:

1600 acres is just a bit short of three miles long and a mile wide, if my math is correct. If you think it is "easy" to find a mature whitetail buck in that sized area, you are nuts.

Actually it is a 1X2.5 miles or just a little over 1.5X1.5 per side if you want to square it. 1X3 Miles is more like 1920 acres, granted 1600 acres is not small property (depending on location and cover)and a deer could elude you for a one or two day hunt, but if you had a week to hunt that property you would probably be able to find him before your hunt was over, unless you were just a really terrible hunter. Especially if there are only a couple of water or food sources in the area.

quote:

I hunted Namibia a couple years ago, never seen a high fence. We hunted on 118 square miles, nary a high fence in sight.

Hunting a game preserve in Africa that has more acreage and square miles than most small States is a different story all together. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Are the fences around these large chunks of land to keep the poachers out and protect the animals diminishing territory more than to keep the animals in?

quote:

That was by Crazyhorseoutfitter TJ and since you're probably not an Indian, that probably didn't tweak you like it did us. Here's a snowcow talking to two Indians as if what he read on Wikipedia makes him more knowledgeable about how our lives were effected.

Taxidermist

This guy just doesn't get it i give up.

I just have one question Mr. Roof, where did you and your shadow come up with the idea that I got my information off of Wikipedia??????

Have I at any point stated that I got it off of there???

Would Wikipedia have gave the same information that I did about how Crazy Horse actually died, I don't think so and even you didn't know the real story.

Indians only became conservationiosts and started living in harmony with nature when they were confined to the Res's. Neither you nor Redhawk are old enough to know anything first hand about the way indians actually lived, and also neither one of you are from a tribe that lived under the same conditions as the Sioux and Cheyenne did before the white take over. fact if I remember my history correctly, the Cherokee were one of the five Civilized tribes and even owned blacks as slaves, before the Trail Of Tears and the relocation to Oklahoma.

Also, I don't see members of the Jicarilla or San Carlos tribes of Apaches complaining about much. In fact if I remember correctly from articles I have read they are all doing quite well with the hunting and the livestock business on their lands.

I do know from having been thru the 4 corners area that the average Navajo isn't that well off, but some of them are in good shape financially, and that the Utes around Cortez, Colorado are doing some better since they put in the casino.

If you two are so proud of your heritage, why the hell are you living in Delaware?

quote:

Here's a snowcow talking to two Indians

What's a snowcow?

As a matter of fact, I am part Indian. I'm not a Native American, I'm an Indian.

I ask again, where is the "Bigoted remarks"?

quote:

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Ok, I will. We did not hunt on a "preserve". We hunted on farms. They raise sheep, goats, cows and wild animals. All the animals, including the wild one, are "harvested" and sold in Windhoek. If you shoot an animal in Namibia, the parts not used on the farm are hauled to town and sold. All the farms I saw only had 4 strand barbed wire fences just like in the USA.

Pauly, as for you, you're probably not smart enough to be insulted. Why don't you go play int eh street.

Crazyhorse, you've earned your name.
You continue your tired practice of ridiculing what we have been told by the elders and chirp about what you've read. Just tell us how many of those fancy books your read or tours you've taken or sites you've visited were conducted by Native American Indians. You insult the Indian practice of conservations and ignore the references I gave you that shoots your "theory" of the demise of the buffalo apart. I guess according to your fairytale it was the Indian who eliminated the passenger pigeon as well. Are you so gullible as to believe everything you've read? You sound a lot like an Indian wannabe and no matter what you read, you won't ever be one. Your comments continue to be insulting and degrading. "Some Indians are doing quite well". If you'd made any of those comments and substituted "blacks" or "African American" in there, you'd have been skewered.

The reason Redhawk and I both live in Delaware is the same reason my ancestors went from South Carolina to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears: the government sent us here. I'm an Air Force retiree and Redhawk came here the same way and stayed when he established a profitable business. I guess we didn't know people like you expected us to stay on the reservations.

As usual this thread is full of AR BS and posturing . Here is what is actually on Wikipedia and I quote.

quote:

memoirs of his service in the Indian wars, "On the Border with Crook"' details an entirely different account of Crazy Horse's death. Bourke's account was from a personal interview with Little Big Man, who was present at Crazy Horse's arrest and wounding. The interview took place over a year after Crazy Horse's death. Little Big Man's account is that, as Crazy Horse was being escorted to the guardhouse he suddenly pulled from under his blanket two knives, one in each hand. One knife was reportedly fashioned from the end of an army bayonet. Little Big Man, standing immediately behind Crazy Horse and not wanting the soldiers to have any excuse to kill him, seized Crazy Horse by both elbows, pulling his arms up and behind him. As Crazy Horse struggled to get free, Little Big Man abruptly lost his grip on one elbow, and Crazy Horse's released arm drove his own knife deep into his own lower back.

When Bourke asked about the popular account of the Guard bayoneting Crazy Horse, Little Big Man explained that the guard had thrust with his bayonet, but that Crazy Horse's struggles resulted in the guard's thrust missing entirely and his bayonet being lodged into the frame of the guardhouse door, where the hole it made could still be seen at the time of the interview.

Little Big Man related that, in the hours immediately following Crazy Horse's wounding, the camp Commander had suggested the story of the guard being responsible as a means of hiding Little Big Man's involvement in Crazy Horse's death, and thereby avoiding any inter-clan reprisals.

Bourke goes on to relate how he double-checked Little Big Man's account by visiting the Fort and inspecting the guardhouse door, where he reported finding a deep hole that could only have been made by a bayonet.

This account is compelling, not only in that it is from the only Native American witness to the event, but in that it is consistent with Crazy Horse's reported last words to the camp Commander wherein he absolved anyone from responsibility for his death, claiming that it was entirely his own doing.

Sounds like neither of these groups is quoting directly from Wikipedia to me!

Personally, the whole game farm affair the resulting bitching stems from plain and simple jealously! Drop it already!! I wonder how many here understand just how many "African" game animals are shipped from farms in the USA to certain African countries so that they can be shot there by guys paying large sums of cash!

Like I said before this ENTIRE THREAD reeks of ignorance and petty jealousy!