This has devolved for sure....
I thought IdahoSharpshooter was gone too...

I have not threatenerd anyone, and won't.

Merely pointing out your ignorance concerning the difference between a 5 wire barb wire fence and an 8 to 10 foot high fence designed to keep deer and other wildlife confined inside it.

You know anything about cattle? If so, do you honestly believe the fencing normally used to keep cattle confined to a property poses any kind of a barrier for deer?

If you do, you really are stupid.

Heym, I will even sweeten the pot and pay for your license to hunt pigs and/or coyotes.

Whyb don't you showc everyone how open or close minded you are.

I am offering you a $500.00 hunt for free, all I ask in return is for you to post a report on the hunt here on AR.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I have not threatenerd anyone, and won't.

Merely pointing out your ignorance concerning the difference between a 5 wire barb wire fence and an 8 to 10 foot high fence designed to keep deer and other wildlife confined inside it.

You know anything about cattle? If so, do you honestly believe the fencing normally used to keep cattle confined to a property poses any kind of a barrier for deer?

If you do, you really are stupid.

CCH,
I have owned cattle. I fully understand fences and fencing. You miss the point. The fence is not the issue entirely, a preset, timed feeder usually used in an enclosure but used in 5 strand fenced areas as well, is the issue.
The issue is manipulating feed cycles and availability to attract your quarry at a designated time of day that I find abhorant and wrong and unethical.
I have owned a farm and livestock and am well versed in fencing.....

Again, the perceived attack is not at you but at the practice of baiting deer in this manner.....

Maybe you have heard the phrase “love the sinner but hate the sin”. - that is the analogy here. I have no hate or dislike for you ( I do not know you), but I hate the practice of baiting in this manner.

Well, like I say and you simply refuse to understand, no one in these discussions has said anything about wanting to see elephant or lion hunting shut down.

I was born a hunter and I will die a hunter, but one big damn difference between me and you is that while there are hunting methods/practices that I have no desire to ever participate in, unlike YOU, I do not set myself as some sort of demagogue and claim such methods/ptractices should be outlawed and that people using those methods/practices are beneath contempt from "RTEAL" hunters.

For me, if it is LEGALLY accepted by the governing wildlife agency charged with enforcing the wildlife laws in that jurisdiction that is all that is necessary.

I do not have to like the activity, I do not have to participate in the activity and I damn sure will not be guilty of calling for such methods/practices outlawed or saying those that do use/participate/enjoy those methods/practices are not hunters and should not be considered hunters.

This discussion and the one about lion hunting in the Africa Hunting section simply point out the divisions among hunters, how wide those lines of division are and how naive some hunters are, believing they can sway the groups wanting hunting stopped by trying to pass themselves off as "Kinder/Gentler Hunters That Operate Under A Higher Standard Of Ethics And Do Not Think Of The Animals As Merely Trophies"!

Again, legal does not equal "right" .

It was legal to hunt in an amazing list of methods - birds at night, using live decoys, baiting birds, shooting unlimited buffalo, the list goes on and on.

In an enlightened society, where we are not hunting for sustenance, but for sport - the ethics drive the practices, not the laws. We can rarely ever have enough laws to regulate our behavour. Behavour comes from within - the heart and soul. Ethics come from that based on experience, religious beliefs, family beliefs, societal norms and beliefs.

Without ethics and a standard - we devolved into chaos and lose sight of what we should be doing/thinking/saying. For example, when we disagreed over this issue, I am now stupid...
Really? Name calling over this issue? This is changed into a "Trump/Hillary" discussion by dismissing the issue and calling out "Crooked Hillary".

This is an exchange of ideas, a chance to grow and widen our views and hence, develop/expand/change our ethics.

You are correct in that I do not see the ethical dilemma in hunting lions and elephants via the current practices. For me, there is no dilemma. My son has hunted most of the big game species. He refuses to hunt elephants on ethical grounds. Fine. Well thought out and acted out. He also refused to hunt deer in the manner I am against. We did it when he was young (10 years old) and since that day, has refused to do it as, in his words, "this is not fair". Basically an ethical statement from a child. I agree with him and lend my voice to those in the hunting community that would like to see this practice shut down.

If a person hunts in this manner, I do not see me or anyone "higher" than them. I see a practice that is opposed to ethical hunting practices, but I do not judge the person. I do not like or approve of the action, but I do not judge the person.

My lack of words in getting this point across is frustrating. However, I have no fight with you or other hunters. I merely hope to influence thinking when it comes to this practice. Would I support making this practice illegal or regulate it? Yes, of course. But I have no harsh feelings for you or others who do this.

I liken this to the folks that like to hunt at the high fence places like The Sanctuary or Oak Creek Ranch or other places. It is legal, so by all means participate if your ethics allow. Mine do not and I hope to influence others to think the way I do.

That practice is called civilized debate.

Legal is not the issue, it never will be.

quote:

In an enlightened society, where we are not hunting for sustenance, but for sport - the ethics drive the practices, not the laws. We can rarely ever have enough laws to regulate our behavour. Behavour comes from within - the heart and soul. Ethics come from that based on experience, religious beliefs, family beliefs, societal norms and beliefs.

From your statement quoted above: sport, as long as hunters keep referring to hunting as a "Sport" non-hunters will have a more negative attitiude toward hunters. In a sport one of the participants does not have to die and in a sport all participants are doing so voluntarily and willingly.

If we want to clean up our act, let's get hunters to stop calling hunting a sport, call it what it is, Hunting.

Humans evolved as predators had we not we would not have became the dominant species on the planet.

Calling hunting a "Sport" does not come across well with folks that don't hunt but have no real problem with those that do but in our changed/changing times the concept of a person killing something just for a trophy and now possibly a trophy/trophies that the hunter cannot bring home is being viewed as someone just going to kill something for the fun of it and when it is species like lion and elephant that stir up strong emotions in all humans, they will find plenty of reasons to view that negatively.

quote:

Ethics come from that based on experience, religious beliefs, family beliefs, societal norms and beliefs.

As for the above quoted portion of the original statement, do you honestly believe that each and every person that hunts shares EXACTLY the same experiences/religious beliefs/family beliefs-values and societal beliefs-values-norms?

That each of us are different as those listed parameters ablove are concerned, is quite evident in these discussions.

For me as long as it is a Legal method, that is all that matters.

For you, because of your Personal Ethical Standards, Legal is not good enough, people should vadopt yoiu ethical beliefs and hunt according to your rules.

What you miss is that no one is asking you/telling you that your ethics are wrong nor is anyone stating that they want to see the type hunting you enjoy banned, but you openly admit that you would support a ban on hunting deer at a timed feeder!

Isn't that pretty hypopcritical?

Let us see, lions and elephants, two spotlight species with dwindling populations, two species actually facing being embargoed with no trophies of either species being importable into the U.S., species that could be/can be covered by the Lacey Act so that an American could be charged for hunting them.

White tail deer, a species that is virtually a pest over much of America continually expanding into new areas, hunted annually by hundreds of thousands if not over a million hunters in the U.S. and provide lots of really tasty meat for lots of people and generates a lot of income forv a lot of Americans.

Dogcat, you want other hunters to support your ability/desire to hunt lion or elephant in the manner you desire, yet you admit that you are willing to support taking away a method of hunting white tail deer that is both legal and practiced by a vast number of Americans, because you find that method beneath your personal ethical standards, and I do think that is a stupid attitiude.

Crazyhorse: I am not ignoring you. I just have a very heavy calander for the foreseeable future.

After May we will talk.

You are a professional, and I will not steal from you.

Any time you are ready and we don't have any hunters booked. By May we rarely have hog hunters booked and Spring Turkey season is over so that won't be a consideration.

I just believe if you are a rational person, you need to experience something before passing judgement. It is an Open Invitation, because I really do not believe you and some others on here really comprehend that these are NOT guaranteed hunts. They are nothiong at all like hunts on places such as the Sanctuary.

We have clients that have been coming down and hunting with us annually for several years now. They live in Detroit Michigan and do go to the Sanctuary anmd kill big bucks because they want to, but they also come down and hunt with us because they are aware that they may not see anything LEGAL to shoot and may not see anything at all!

We do not guarantee these hunts as these are completely Free Range deer and pigs, and just because a feeder goes off and throws some corn, that does NOT GUARANTEE anything or anything shootable will come in!

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
And as for this comment:

quote:

Why don't you look it up yourself

No need to, because you just proved there isn't any. Have you ever hunted Mule Deer?[/QUOTE]

You're getting a little testy there CHC when you have no idea what you're talking about! The entire state of Wyoming for one place Mr. expert, where I hunt mule deer every year has very few units that are open in November, especially the latter half of the month during the main part of the mule deer rut. Most unit seasons are in September and October.

I said some states do not allow Rifle hunting for Mulies during the rut, But Do Allow Archery hunting for both Elk and Mule Deer during the rut.

I believe this is what you actually said......

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

As far as hunting elk and mule deer during the rut, I think if you will notice it is restricted to archery only, so no one wins any points on that because hunting can be and is done, just not rifle hunting.

What is your point and Wyoming is not the only state where mule deer and elk are hunted.

Or are Archers not considered hunters on this site?

This was your statement just like JGRaider state CHC: "As far as hunting elk and mule deer during the rut, I think if you will notice it is restricted to archery only, so no one wins any points on that because hunting can be and is done, just not rifle hunting."

That is totally false as far as your retort to me when I mentioned Wyoming. There are some early rifle hunts for elk during the rut. There are very few hunts for mule deer during the rut regardless of whether you're talking rifle or archery. The mule deer rut gets going the first part of November, but doesn't really peak until late November into early December and there are very few units where any deer hunt is allowed at that time other than in the northeastern part and it's most for whitetails, but a mule deer is legal to take on that license.

Your missing the whole point, that being there are hunting opportunities for hunting mule deer during the rut in some areas, and Wyoming is not the only state that has Mule Deer in it, and the Original Discussion is about hunters being divided and incapable of providing a united front to defend hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Your missing the whole point, that being there are hunting opportunities for hunting mule deer during the rut in some areas, and Wyoming is not the only state that has Mule Deer in it, and the Original Discussion is about hunters being divided and incapable of providing a united front to defend hunting.

So you can't comprehend or understand what you, yourself wrote?

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

As far as hunting elk and mule deer during the rut, I think if you will notice it is restricted to archery only, so no one wins any points on that because hunting can be and is done, just not rifle hunting.

Are there or are there NOT places where Mule Deer can be and are hunted during the rut in a Legally accepted manner?

If you want to nit pik go right ahead it is your prerogative.

If I made a blanket statement that was my fault, providing that No State allows hunting of Mule Deer during the Rut by any means if you can prove that to be the case, then my comme nt was wrong.

But once again the Original Topic concerns the divisions among hunters over issues such as legal methods versus ethical standards and the FACT that some hunters openly admit that they would support the closure of Legal Hunting methods that a large number of hunters participate in simply because someone believes it to be unethical.

I believe that issue is a lot more important than my making either a partial mistake or total mistakle concerning the hunting of Mule Deer during the rut.

If I was/am wrong I admit too it, but if only one state or area in a state allows hunting of Mule Deer during the rut by any legal means than you and topgun are doing nothing more than nit picking and find that more important than addressing the actual issue of the OP.

Thanks to both of you for your input on the original issue.

Bless me Father for I have sinned by getting into this match, but...

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
3. On the elk and mule deer rut issue, I have tried to hunt the rut on both at times and found seasons closed to rifle hunters.

This also is not factual as a broad-brush statement. I've been covering the seven RM states for Rocky Mt. Game & Fish magazine for more than 25 years.

I believe every one of the Rocky Mt. states still has both elk and mule deer RIFLE seasons during the rut. Granted, in some states the areas and/or permits/tags are limited in number or might be meted out through draws, but they are available even to non-residents.

Just one example:

Each year, AZ designates six or seven hunt units to open during the elk rut for RIFLE hunting. They often rotate them with other units. In total somewhere between 200 and 300 permits are doled out. And I know about this one quite well since I now have 18 bonus points because I apply for one of these hunts and no other one every year.

For mule deer: the entire northern part of the state, which includes the Strip and the North Kaibab, have a LATE season which usually takes place over Thanksgiving week. There are generally a couple hundred permits available. In addition, several other units in the state are open to rifle hunting during the mule deer rut, with a couple going even into mid-Dec.

As an aside, it would seem those so concerned about ethics would forgo hunting during the rut when game is less wary and more vulnerable. After all, that's why success figures generally are quite high. This is especially true for elk where calling (unethical?) provides a distinct advantage, which isn't the case in later seasons. The same can be stated in regards to spring turkey seasons during the "rut."

Are artificial calls more "ethical" than artificial food?

It is going to be the division over Ethics Versus Legalities that does more damage than people realize in my opinion.

As much as our world and society have changed especially attitudes toward hunting and hunters, I feel that if hunters continue finding minutiae to create lines of division among ourselves, we will only have ourselves to blame when we lose the ability to hunt.

I feel that I am pretty safe in saying that here in America at least, the last form of hunting that will be lost will be the High Fenced/Canned Trophy Hunting operations because those animals are OWNED by the operators of such places and as such are LIVESTOCK.

Hunting free ranging game that is basically the property of the Public of the various states, can and will be shut down, and I hope I do not live to see that happen, but as long as some hunters actually believe that if they can display Superior Ethical Behaviors the anti's will back off!

That is not going to happen.

With full knowledge that this is an exercise in futility and that I will be wasting five minutes of my life to type this . . . let me ask you a question CHC. Over the last three years what activities have done more to harm sport hunting and the public image of hunters than anything else? Was it hunters insisting that their fellow hunters act ethically and responsibly and trying to set a higher standard of accountability for all hunters? Was it the actions of a handful of hunters like Dr. Palmer, the hunters and outfitters that have been engaged in canned lion hunts or hunters seen backslapping, celebrating and disrespecting an animal that has been harvested? There can be no debate. Hunting has been harmed more by the latter than the former. So we either continue on engaging in activities like those that have already put hunting under a microscope and brought the sport under attack or we step back and admit that to some extent hunters have been their own worse enemies in terms of how they have conducted themselves and that we need to aspire to higher ethic for the sport. Frankly, I think the latter route holds more promise.

Mike, I know you did not ask those questions of me, but my answers would be:
1. Mass shootings. The anti-hunting group has been able, more than ever, to lump anyone with a gun together as an unnecessary killer. Unfortunately, the mass public is beginning to buy into the efforts that say all guns and gun activities are bad. So that would be my #1. I could be wrong.
2. Trophy hunting. Again, this relates to your thoughts on the canned lion hunts, but I think from a non-hunter perspective, which I have some good friends that are, they see canned hunts, mounting heads on the wall and all of the associated bragging about it as being the same. They see all of those (trophies, canned and bragging) as the same thing and all as repulsive.
3. Simply more and more people as a whole being born and raised in places where hunting is not the norm, or even accepted. The cities get bigger and the towns get smaller.

I really don't think the internal debate about legal vs ethical really hits them since to them, all hunting is unethical.

Just an aside to the baiting ethical commentary, in Kansas baiting is legal. It was not until about 10 years ago. One of the reasons the laws changed was the state thought that PART of the reason for the Blue Tongue disease epidemic the previous couple of years was due to limited numbers of deer being taken in some areas and they wanted a mechanism that would allow hunters to more efficiently thin the herds in order to stem the tides of the disease. To them, it was more ethical to thin the herd through hunting than any other method, such as mass killing and poison. I don't know if I believe it or not, but that was part of their reasoning.

They thought it would have the same lessening effect on CWD. That was all good until 2015 then the CWD positives jumped from an average of 10-12 per year to 57. They still can't explain that year. It went right back down in 2016.

Just my thoughts. No one has to agree.

quote:

Originally posted by larrys:
2. Trophy hunting. Again, this relates to your thoughts on the canned lion hunts, but I think from a non-hunter perspective, which I have some good friends that are, they see canned hunts, mounting heads on the wall and all of the associated bragging about it as being the same. They see all of those (trophies, canned and bragging) as the same thing and all as repulsive.
3. Simply more and more people as a whole being born and raised in places where hunting is not the norm, or even accepted. The cities get bigger and the towns get smaller.

Taadaa! We have a winner.

And much of the "trophy" revulsion by non-hunters has built up over the last decade because of the internet and the "braggin'" photos of hunters posed with their trophies, whether canned or wild.

This is especially true of lions and elephants because they believe the HUNTER has no use for them other than to take a hero photo (see MJINES profile pic )and mount some part of them as a trophy. Of course, they are correct when it comes to Americans hunting in Africa.

Social media is going to be the death of our sport. People now have a platform to make their voices heard to the masses and unfortunately they’re not all intelligent and do and say stupid shit on a regular basis. The number of douchbags looking for attention is sky rocketing and it’s not a positive for us

quote:

With full knowledge that this is an exercise in futility and that I will be wasting five minutes of my life to type this . . . let me ask you a question CHC. Over the last three years what activities have done more to harm sport hunting and the public image of hunters than anything else? Was it hunters insisting that their fellow hunters act ethically and responsibly and trying to set a higher standard of accountability for all hunters? Was it the actions of a handful of hunters like Dr. Palmer, the hunters and outfitters that have been engaged in canned lion hunts or hunters seen backslapping, celebrating and disrespecting an animal that has been harvested? There can be no debate. Hunting has been harmed more by the latter than the former. So we either continue on engaging in activities like those that have already put hunting under a microscope and brought the sport under attack or we step back and admit that to some extent hunters have been their own worse enemies in terms of how they have conducted themselves and that we need to aspire to higher ethic for the sport. Frankly, I think the latter route holds more promise.

Jines there is not ANYTHING I can say that will change your opinion of me or how I actually feel or believe about hunting.

You are no different than the individuals that are working to get hunting stopped.

I have no idea how old you are or how long you have been hunting, but for me it has been 50 years +.

I don't like what has happened to hunting in America, but I am not going to alienate those that hunt and support hunting simply because they do not view things the way I do, you cannot say the same.

And, for yours and other peoples edification and information, if it comes down to a choice between supporting lion and elephant hunting in Africa and supporting hunting in general in America, you lose!

quote:

Social media is going to be the death of our sport. People now have a platform to make their voices heard to the masses and unfortunately they’re not all intelligent and do and say stupid shit on a regular basis. The number of douchbags looking for attention is sky rocketing and it’s not a positive for us

And that Gentlemen is as truthful as it gets!

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:
Social media is going to be the death of our sport. People now have a platform to make their voices heard to the masses and unfortunately they’re not all intelligent and do and say stupid shit on a regular basis. The number of douchbags looking for attention is sky rocketing and it’s not a positive for us

I joined a Facebook group with over 20,000 hunters. While there were no doubt some very fine people in that group, the sheer stupidity of many was mind boggling. The absurdity of the things they would say would leave me shaking my head totally astounded that anyone could be that ignorant. That video of the red stag and the reaction was the beginning of the end for me. I finally withdrew. I just could not take it any longer.

Mr. Shores, you seem to be having the same problems with the actions/attitudes of some "Hunters" that I do, so why cannot a middle ground be found?

Oh, the seemingly annual Crazy "Why can't we all just get along" "discussion" regarding anything goes taking of animals. (as long as it is legal-very important.)

I think it is actually very simple and may have been addressed on page 1 of this informative thread.

Ok I am typing slow so no one misunderstands what I am saying.

Let's call hunting the by the definition on one of the earlier pages involving "fair chase." You know animal has a chance.

Now I will type even slower. I think most folks on AR have read a topic regarding going and killing a Bison. Almost always the first words typed by the poster are "this was a shoot and not a hunt." You see we all understand, I have never seen anyone get flamed for shooting a bison and not "hunting" one- we all get it, no shame. And I have not seen a topic regarding a bison hunt that the person didn't have a great time- they got to use some cool gun or crossbow, they were able to see some beautiful new country, or many other enjoyable aspect of the event.

It really is a simple concept. The problem is when someone goes on a shoot and for some reason wants to call it a hunt, and worse yet film it and put in on the world wide web for everyone to see.

It might be helpful to hunters if the shooters would just let everyone know they are not hunting.

I went on a pig shoot in TX with my son a couple years ago and had a great time. It was "hog" fenced so I was pretty sure hogs were going to be seen and taken and you payed for each hog shot recovered or not. I had a great time and I will never forget the smile on my young son's face after he spanked a pig a little bigger than a bulldog. I drove a long ways with a young hunter who wanted some action, so we went to a place where the odds were in our favor.

So in review, the thread title should have been Hunters vs Shooters. Neither are bad just different and should not be confused.

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:
Social media is going to be the death of our sport. People now have a platform to make their voices heard to the masses and unfortunately they’re not all intelligent and do and say stupid shit on a regular basis. The number of douchbags looking for attention is sky rocketing and it’s not a positive for us

I would argue that social media is responsible for much more than damaging hunting. It is fomenting so much social discontent over nonsense that our entire society is in jeopardy. If it disappeared tomorrow the world would be a better, happier place.

quote:

Let's call hunting the by the definition on one of the earlier pages involving "fair chase." You know animal has a chance.

Here is the fallacy of the above statement and total lack of comprehension on the persaon making it!

The MAJORITY of us that have ANY actual hunting/shooting erxperience at all can and do consistently make kill shots from 300 to 500 yards out with our modern scope sighted rifles. Anyone dumb enough to believe that is "Fair Chase" is dillusional! What about the proponents of shooting game at 800 to over 1000 yards?

How is that any more "Fair Chase" than shooting a deer at 100 yards at a timed feeder, It Is NOT!!!!

I see no reason to worry about someone who wants to hunt a penned lion, from a timed feeder. I am not interested in it but that does not matter.

What I find ironic is that people actually believe that if the ways of hunting are changed, "if we do it really nicely", and be apologetic to anti idiots, that they will in some way relent. This will never happen and it does not matter if you hunt with a bow and loin cloth, and donate all of your meat to the homeless, THEY HATE HUNTERS!

I do not have to agree with CHC, or half of the other nut job attorneys on this site that tell me about "ethics". I will hunt how I want, legally, and it will not make a difference.

What will make a difference (maybe) if hunters unite and not worry about their methods.

PS: Facebook is stupid!!

Ah, I feel better now

I know I should not be emulating Edmond, but how many on here rea;lly understand the concept pof "Fair Chase" and thev period of time it evolved in?

How many of you know when the Boone and Crockett Club was founded?

1887 by Theodore Roosevelt, a time when hunters were switching over from Black Powder cartidges to Smokeless. Roosevelt and his cronies felt that gave hunters an unfair advatage because smokeless powder cartridges were not affected by weather and had more power/greater range.

How many of you realize that TR did not believe that the "Average" American of that time should be allowed to hunt, because he felt that they did not truly appreciate or would adhere to the more manly aspects of hunting and wildlife conservation, this from a man who had no problem "Jack Lighting" deer in the Adirondacks during late summer.

I have been studying and reading of Roosevelts exploits over most of my 67 years, including his book concerning his African Safari with his son Kermit, and one concept is repeated over and over again thru out his life, he was an elitist and he firmly believed that the "Common American" had no business hunting.

What is your point?
Many rich and/or powerful people feel the same way. Some conceal the fact better than others.
We (can) control those folks at the ballot box. People talk about what a great country this is yet somethinng like 70% don't bother to vote. Why is PETA a force to be considered? They get out the vote. A scary thought but think about the possibility of our national leaders, the folks that will be charged with the care and feeding of America, being decided by a voting bloc of PETA members or a voting bloc whose concern was abortions. And it could happen while we hunters were squabbling over high fences, feeders, tree stands, and such.

quote:

What is your point?

My point is, a lot of hunters throw the term "Fair Chase" and "Ethical Practices" around in the hope that PETAS and the other anti groups will back away from their goal of wanting ALL hunting stopped.

From my point of view, some hunters seem to honestly believe that if certain forms of hunting, forms they do not partake in are outlawed, with their support, they will be able to keep on hunting in the manner they prefer or deem more acceptable.

They seem to be totally blinding themselves to the reality that once the folks wanting all hunting stopped, achieve getting one or a few forms of hunting stopped it will simply become easier to get other forms of hunting stopped.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

My point is, a lot of hunters throw the term "Fair Chase" and "Ethical Practices" around in the hope that PETAS and the other anti groups will back away from their goal of wanting ALL hunting stopped.

You must just be an idiot or so obtuse that information inconsistent with your rant cannot possibly sink it. It has been said at least five dozen times that no one believes that anything hunters do or do not do will change the views of PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting. It has been said at least five dozen times that no one is trying to convince PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting of a damn thing, zip, nada. It has been said at least five dozen times that the fight we are in today is a fight for the vast segment of the population that is largely indifferent to hunting, that are neither strongly opposed to or supportive of hunting. To those folks what we do and how we do it can influence their views of hunting and hunters . . . and it is that group that will determine whether or not hunting is allowed to continue in the future since hunting exists at the pleasure of the public at large. That said, I am highly confident that given your demonstrated ability to either be unable to or unwilling to understand (I have increasingly become of the view that it must be the former sadly to say) the foregoing that you will persist in mischaracterizing the issue.

Jines you have the right to view things on this or any other subject as you choose or believe, I have no problem with that.

How about you proving that you are the superior intellect you believe yourself to be and allow me that same right?

As long as other hunters openly state that they support the outlawing of such activites as hunting white tail deer from an enclosed blind overlooking a timed feeder, because they believe it is unethical and that by outlawing such methods those wanting to stop hunting will view hunters more kindly.

All any actually open minded person has to do is go back thru the responses in this discussion and the one about hunting lions in Africa, it is stated that if hunters clean up their act and conduct themselves on a supposedly "Higher Ethical Plane", they will be viewed more favorably and those wanting hunting stopped will ease up on hunters.

The non-hunting Public, at this point in time really are on the fence with many of them having no problem with hunters/hunting.

The concept you and those that believe as you, do not comprehend is that by wanting to see various forms of legal hunting closed because for whatever reason you do not like or approve of it, you are/will be alienating all those hunters that enjoy and participate in those forms of hunting.

Are you really naive enough to believe that if you and your cronies succeeded in getting hunting white tails at a timed feeder outlawed that all those hunters that will have had a form of hunting they enjoyed taken from them, they will support you and your cronies ability to contiinue hunting lion or elephant??

As a GROUP hunters have to support each other, we can not afford to pick and choose. Even though the one thing we have in common is the love/desire to hunt, we are all still human beings and as such if another human or group of humans take something away from us, there will be retaliation.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

The non-hunting Public, at this point in time really are on the fence with many of them having no problem with hunters/hunting.

. . . so let's start behaving more responsibly and ethically and stop giving them reasons like Dr. Palmer and Cecil and canned lion hunting to form a negative impression of hunters/hunting.

For those here who are not Crazy, there is an interesting article in the latest B & C magazine (Spring 2018). "Talking about ethics only divides hunters?" Many thought provoking points, including:

"All you're doing is dividing hunters when hunters should be united" is an interesting position, but one that doesn't hold much water, especially if you understand the reason for having ethics in the first place. In any human activity, ethics are the guiding principles people agree upon as the right and responsible approach."


Fish and Game departments as well as state legislatures are not substantially influenced by hunting ethics.

quote:

Originally posted by Navaluk:
For those here who are not Crazy, there is an interesting article in the latest B & C magazine (Spring 2018). "Talking about ethics only divides hunters?" Many thought provoking points, including:

"All you're doing is dividing hunters when hunters should be united" is an interesting position, but one that doesn't hold much water, especially if you understand the reason for having ethics in the first place. In any human activity, ethics are the guiding principles people agree upon as the right and responsible approach."


Fish and Game departments as well as state legislatures are not substantially influenced by hunting ethics.

First thing is to separate the practices that are truly unethical and those that are merely less sporting.

Second thing is defining the groups of "people" that agree one thing or another is unethical.

Good luck doing either.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
It has been said at least five dozen times that no one believes that anything hunters do or do not do will change the views of PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting. It has been said at least five dozen times that no one is trying to convince PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting of a damn thing, zip, nada. It has been said at least five dozen times that the fight we are in today is a fight for the vast segment of the population that is largely indifferent to hunting, that are neither strongly opposed to or supportive of hunting. To those folks what we do and how we do it can influence their views of hunting and hunters . . . and it is that group that will determine whether or not hunting is allowed to continue

Mike,
You and I have butted heads in the past on some issues but recently I have found myself agreeing with you on just about every position you take. On the above I could not agree with you more....

Crazy,
What you don't seem to understand is that Mike is not saying that some huge segment of hunting should be outlawed. It is simply that some detestable practices that are carried out by a few "hunters" should be corrected by the larger hunting community. This will make hunting more acceptable to the majority of the non hunting public.

If we defend the practices of the few "bad apples" we make hunting look far worse to the eyes of the general public.