Live Crows as Decoys in the AR Varmint thread.

I'm linking to this post here because there are plenty of varmint hunters in this forum who don't frequent the varmint forum. And I am a bit curious to see the opinions of mainstream hunters on this topic!

Thanks, Mike

I think it's wrong, cruel, and makes us all look like pigs. Could be illegal as well I guess.

Sorry,

no tears shed here.


Daryl

If its a personal decision to not do it yourself due to your own vaules more power to you.

But making a decision based upon what your enemies think of you, you fucking deserve to lose your guns.

What such hunters don't seem to realise is that anything relating to them 'owning a gun' makes them look like a 'terrible killer'anyway

The public can't tell the difference between shooting bambi and using live crows to shoot something.

They will be just as happy to blame 'baby fur seal trapping', 'poaching in Africa' ,'bear traps' and the hole in the ozone layer and a million other things you have no power over on you anyway.

One of theantis best methods is to get you guys hating yourselves for differences in your own hunting ethics.

The bow hunter against the muzzleloader against the autoloader against the guy who 'uses dogs to hunt cougars' to the guy who 'uses live crows as decoys'.

Draw a line in the sand for yourself and sell any else above you out.

Be divided and conquered.

Karl.

Use to do it all the time back in th 60's wing a crow tie it out let it yell worked great.

Karl, I would guess that as long as a poacher is a hunter, you approve. Your statement is total bullshit.
As a hunter we need to take whatever game hunted in a humane manner.
To make "ANY" game , bird, varmit or whatever suffer is not being a responseable hunter. Animals do and will be wounded but to use that wounded game as a decoy is totally wrong.
Just think for a slight moment what "PETA" would do and use against us if they got ahold of this, not counting the media.

I have hunted crows and varmits for over 40 years and never had to resort to this type of thing.

It may not be defined in game book regulations but I would bet the Humane Society would press the issue

Don't be so stiff-necked jimmy boy . With your standards , it would seem that dynamite would be the only humane way to catch fish and playing out a trout on a fly rod should be considered animal tourture.............

I think it's great, I wish they would kill every one of them dang birds. They are a pest and should be taken by any safe means necessary.

Good Luck!

Reloader

sd, my standards are very simple, put your game down in a humane manner, maybe even with a follow up shot.
Fishing is not involved in this discussion but since you brought it up, yes I fish and I do my damnest to get that nice steelie to the bank the best I can, I don't play him for the fun of it
This topic is about "crows" and yes I hunt the dirty bastards and kill everyone I can but I sure don't endorse the use of a wounded crow as a decoy. Crows are nest robbers, crop robbers and several other things.
Baiting game with live bait is wrong, plain and simple.

quote:

---

There is no unethical way to kill crows. Dynamite, shotguns, rifles, lasers, or even nukes are perfectly acceptable.

---

On Crows???.....

Oh, other crows. I was thinking the crow was to attract PETA members.

quote:

---

Baiting game with live bait is wrong, plain and simple.

---

Baiting with live bait is NOT wrong,
plain and simple.


I suckered a large stuburn bull moose in once with a chestnut coloured horse.
I use ravens to attract wolves.
I have captured crows to effectively draw in other crows into shotgun range.


I also agree with Karl. If you worry about what Peta thinks, give up your guns now.



Daryl

PETA isn't half as dangerous as the humane society ! I guess I better not mention those chickens I hang upside down for yote bait !
Is useing live minnows against the play book as well ?

Leaving a wounded pest on the ground to attract other pests into gun range is no more unethical than putting out poison for rats.

We are currently having a problem with thousands of crows roosting inside a nearby city. These birds are congregating in vast numbers in some very large, old trees. They are leaving unbelievable quantities of waste on the streets and sidewalks.

The city claims there is no health risk associated with this mess. I am somewhat hesitant to believe that. I am well versed in the health risks assosiated with pigeon feces and would be surprised to learn that crow waste is less septic.

By no stretch of the imagination can I find the reduction of a disease vector such as rats, mice, pigeons, and crows to be unethical by any means. The only consideration to me is: How efficient is the eradication method? How many can we possibly kill?

Karl and Yukoner: I don't care what PETA thinks either, but I am concerned about the 80% of the general population that is "neutral" on hunting. Those are the people PETA would love to have join them. They are also the people who may move from "neutral" to "Anti".

As you say the average guy indeed could not care less about anything that does not effect him directly.

And the antis don't really bother trying to make him either, apart from recurting hard core activists.

The antis of any type,target the goverment as the main agenda, not the public- its way too cumbersome, and through whatever means they can, they make enough noise as to create an inflated view of their voting strength.

The goverment listens to whoever puts the most noise out - Us or the antis, and the last step is the uninformed masses come on side with whatever new law results.

And that's the main point MrHawg.

Why back down a minor point of ethics about using crows as live decoys, when they will quite happily switch to blaming you for illegal poaching in Africa and the 'destruction of endangered species next'.

How do you intend to defend the right to own semi autos, handguns and pump action weapons when 'gang killings' and 'firearms crime' in general are blamed on you?

Where do you go from there?

Hand in your guns altogther to spare giving a liar ammunition to use against you in the public eye?

Is that the American way?

As we found here a few nasty public noises and the next thing weaklings were regulating the hell out of each other to meet demands.

Which works well, until next your type of hunting comes under attack.

Then its-
"Oh my god we listened to everything they said but now they are lying about us!!!".

Shee-it you can't trust a pack of scheming lying assholes these days who can you trust.


Karl.

Regarding the "80 per cent undecided", if you live your life worring what strangers might ultimately think then you end up surrendering any vestige of principle. Don't let the ignornant chart you life's path.

BTW, MrHawg if association with pigs bothers you then change your damn username.

If you don't worry about what strangers might think, why not hang up your hunting gear right now because if sportsmen don't educate that "80%" someone who is against hunting will do it for you.

Don't be so ignorant to think that someone has an agenda that is contrary to your beliefs...and why you're at home "not thinking about it", they are planning their assault on influencing those riding the fence.

MG

Madgoat, right on with your post. It seems some people will never learn. This whole image thing is very important if we are to argue and win this fight. We must convince these non-hunting/non-fire arm owners that is our rights to keep and bear arms.
We in Wa. state are going to have a major fight on our hands with our new GOV, not sureat the moment but I think there are about 20 new bills on all sorts of gun regs.
They had an open forum with speakers for and against and trust me, our side had a couple of real "bubba's" that were just blowin steam and spoke of no real facts. These two fellows are just like a few on this thread.
We also had a few that spoke very well, very well informed with facts and presented facts that were well recieved.
For me I will try to reach these fence sitters in the best way possible. It is alway fun to take some of these people to the range and let them shoot several types of guns, from the 22's to hunting rifles to the nasty looking assult weapons.
After taking a husband and wife out shooting/ non-hunter or gun people, I brought out the AR-15's and let them run a few 100 rounds though them, at the end the wife told her husband she wanted one. made me fell damn good that I had converted them.

Idahoe hunter, I think I recently read that crows or ravens are one of the biggest carriers of west nile virus here. I find a piece of old fake fur and a can of ketchup spread on the snow make a mighty powerfull bait as well.

jimmyd223 you are so right I have found that if you can get the non shooters to the range give a bit of instruction they have fun. They lose most of there fear of guns and at the least they do not listen to the antis BS. Or they become gun owners themselfs.

I don't think the 80% should be ignored but getting two or five or twelve of them to the range with you over the course of a year does not have any effect as a percent of the people you need to reach, even if it is satisfying on a personal level. Send money to the right state and national organizations that are going to tackle the problem on your behalf or better yet volunteer some time to work with them. And I stand by the principle that I will not live my life against what I beleieve just because I happen to be in a minority opinion. That doesn't make me wrong. And for the record I never tied a wounded animal up as a decoy but I did make my pet chicken sit in a scendero one morning to help me chum up coyotes. I figured it was time to make him earn some of that grain he'd been lappin' up for years. Besides, I had his six.
And jimmy, its not about fun; its about winning. Then the fun comes.

The 'non shooters having fun' will have just as much fun going to an animal shelter the next day and looking at a deer without a mother because 'some bad hunter shot it'.

The public just doesn't care. They have two million other issues to worry about anyway.

Should fast cars be allowed?
Should pot be allowed?
Shold smoking be allowed indoors?
Should we ban guns?
Should we ban crossbows?
Should we ban vicious breeds of dogs?

What makes you think you are going to be able to take their attention from all the other groups fighting for notice?

The answer is you can't of course.


Which is why the antis don't target the public.


The antis target the goverment, since once it is on side with new laws, the mass media can then target 280 million members of the public in one night.

Karl.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimmyd223:
Karl, I would guess that as long as a poacher is a hunter, you approve. Your statement is total bullshit.

---

The point is if you clean up the crow situation what happens when they start blaming you for things you aren't doing?

One of the antis greatest angles is linking all gunowners to crime in general.

You stop using crows to keep them happy.

Now do you stop using guns to clean up crime?

"Damned big game hunters, shooting up homeboys down in Crenshaw LA".

Better ban us.

The antis said its true, so it must be...

quote:

---

As a hunter we need to take whatever game hunted in a humane manner. To make _"ANY"_ game , bird, varmit or whatever suffer is not being a responseable hunter. Animals do and will be wounded but to use that wounded game as a decoy is totally wrong.

---

PETA says hunting animals for any reason is totally wrong.

And they tell the public that too.

Now where does that leave your public image?

You must be ready to hand your guns in on the strength of that if you are so worried what PETA is telling the public.

Deos you enemy have that much power over you?

Lets's see...

quote:

---

Just think for a slight moment what _"PETA"_ would do and use against us if they got ahold of this, not counting the media.

---

-Yep looks like it.

PETA blames us for anything gun related as they already do.

They would tell you bear hunting is immoral and wrong.

They would tell the public hunting elk endangers them, as they do.

They would tell the public we have killed all the wolves, as they do.

The would tell them we are responsible from killing all the elephants in africa and endangering the baby fur seals, as they do.

So what are you so afraid of a pack of fucking liars?

Do americans base their actions in fear of what Liars say about them these days.

quote:

---

I have hunted crows and varmits for over 40 years and never had to resort to this type of thing.

---

Most people never have to resort to hunting at all.

Should we ban ourselves to stay in their good books?

quote:

---

It may not be defined in game book regulations but I would bet the Humane Society would press the issue

---

So its not defined in regulations, so you would like to make your own regultaions to ban it?

In other words if I don't like people who kill animals period(like peta says), I am within my rights to ban all of us.


You are an anti's dream and a complete fucking idiot

Karl.

Personally I like crows and ravens. Smart birds, worth watching. Next to a duck, crows are rocket scientists. Ravens are smarter than your average PETA member--that can be evidenced by listening to raven vocalization and compared to the mindless blather spewed out by PETA recruits.

Live decoys are a long way from fair chase when employed on social animal groups. It speaks to a lack of hunting skill IMHO.

So Karl ol'boy, just for you , it is stated in game regs that baiting with live animals is illegal.
On another note, since you have done such a bang up job on gun rights in your wonderful country, why don't you spend your time working to preserve what "little" rights you still have left

I use a "crow and owl fight" tape to bring them in to either rifle (more fun) or shotgun range. However if one gets wounded, I let him squawk as it brings others in. Damned things are varmints that carry disease, eat song bird, quail and turkey eggs.

I've also used a chicken tied to a stake with a string long enough to remain in the light radius of a coleman lantern. Brings in the coyotes aomething fierce. And Oh yeah, I almost forgot during OEF we used all kinds of "bait" to bring the Al-Quaida and Taliban varmints out, then laze them and drop an GBU-12 on them. All the same in my book.jorge

tomk, I would lean toward your argument for fair chase game hunting but then there is little difference these days between live bait and hightech decoys (as deployed in goose and duck hunting) so how do you deal with that? To me there is no difference. Especially if you are on a guided hunt with expert callers and top of the line decoys. Secondly, most crow hunting in my part of Texas is over pecan orchards and it is pest control, not sport. We try to harrass them any way possible to teach them there are better places to hang out. Sport and fair chase are not even issues in this case.

I like jorge's GBU-12 application...now that's varmit hunting Will that work for PETA?

The original post was posed for mainstream hunters and so is my reply. If I owned a few thousand acres of crops being eaten by crows I imagine my fascination would be tempered some...and that is another subject.

I have shot as many geese as I want to shoot with low-tech decoys and found them to be just about as intelligent as ducks. Can't speak to using guides and callers as we have tended those duties ourselves... but if the service and goods are sold and perceived as an asset, then fine with me.

I would not use a live decoy. It is a substitute for hunting skills in either case IMHO. Based on observation, I rather doubt that geese respond emotionally in the same manner a crow or raven responds, to the distress of one of their brethren.

Somewhere along the way you for draw a line and that is simply where mine falls.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimmyd223:
So Karl ol'boy, just for you , it is stated in game regs that baiting with live animals is illegal.

---

Jimmy,
As I said orginally where you draw the line is up to you and more power to you.

As long as it is your opinion and not an urge to placate an enemy you are afraid of.

Considering you have not mentioned again any fear of 'what PETA says', and have not disagreed with the rest of the points in my last post, I assume you are now reduced to your own opinion.

Excellent. Welcome back to being your own man.


Now as to Australia,

quote:

---

On another note, since you have done such a bang up job on gun rights in your wonderful country, why don't you spend your time working to preserve what "little" rights you still have left :confused

---

We still have better or similar gunrights to a lot of your states, like New York, or Massachussets, and some of you bigger cities.

And better hunting regulations than your entire country put together.

90% of hunting here is done with no seasons, no licences or tickets required and there are no bag limits for most species.

You can shoot 100 animals in a weekend if you want.

However we did suffer badly in 1996.

The big difference between us and the US was pointed out by the guy who did the most to keep what guns we have now. Mike375 who posts here.

Demographics. We have 90% of people in our cities so you take out the cities and the country goes quickly.

You guys have a massive rural sprawl amonsgt urban sprawls, which sets up barriers against fashions/brainwashing taking hold so fast, and also you have a lot more power and pull with the UN.

We only have 20 million people here so its a lot tougher to tell them to fuck off.

My original point coming from experience is regardless of what your personal line is, the biggest fucking mistake you can make is trying to placate your enemy.

The way to change public opinion which you all keep talking about 'is to change it'.

Make the normal seem nice and the abnormal seem normal.

Gays did it and it worked.

Blacks, feminists, satan worhsippers, anti abortionists all of them did it.

Do not change yourself in response to a veiwpoint your enemies are giving.

Pure logic dictates this will get you nowhere but where your enemy wants you.

And that was my original point.

Karl.

I really don't give a rat's a$$ what PETA thinks, but I think it's a wrong thing to do. As a lifelong hunter, I have no problem killing an animal, but do have difficulty watching any animal suffer.

If you are actually asking for opinions, that's mine!

Most (not all of you) fella's need to check out this link I posted, it is to crowbuster's hate/mail. It is fucking hillarious!! (you will love it!!) PS: I have used live crows as decoys & the farmers really appreciated it.
Regards Mike
Hate Mail

The problem with using a wounded crow is that they will quiet down after a few minutes. You then have to "encourage" them with a little foot pressure.

Now for the yote decoy, you just can't beat a live rabbit. What you do is employ a single hole paper punch on those ears about every 10 minutes. You will clear out most of the Coyotes in the area. To polish off the rest, stake out a Chihuahua, snap a back leg and prepare for some hot action. The little dog will be good for at least 2 -3 additional Coyotes and then the carcass, statigically placed will call some of those crows back in. BWAHAHAHA

I've been using 3 legged cats for shark bait for years

Quote: "Make the normal seem nice and the abnormal seem normal. Gays did it and it worked.
Blacks, feminists, satan worhsippers, anti abortionists all of them did it."

Good to see such open-mindedness coming out of Oz, where apparently a black man is in the same category as a Satan Worshipper, as well as with feminists. If it weren't so disturbing, that'd be hilarious. I find your hate-spewing both ignorant and tired, Karl.

As to the original question: I don't have the least bit of a problem with killing crows or other varmints, but personally I draw the line at having a wounded one suffer. So no, I *personally* don't find it ethical, and since it's against the law here anyway, it's a non-issue.

Use an owl decoy and have at it; no live decoys necessary. Or do as my buddy does, and mouth call them--they come in gangbusters!

Kamo Gari

With all the technology out there, this kind of stuff just gives the anti's another reason to bitch. I personally don't care what you use for bait, as baiting is illegal in my state anyway. Finding different ways to hunt makes us better hunters.

I am THE LAST person to advocate placating the opposition. I also realize the left-wing, animal-rights whacko's are what they are and are not going to go away (unless you can keep them from breeding) anytime soon.

We as sports/outdoors people need to stick together. I remember when I was young (30 or so years ago), hunting and fishing were thought of as normal and "mainstream." A few years later, if you hunted you were some kind of a psycho-freak, animal killer.

Now the tide seems to be turning back to hunting becoming more "mainstream." Maybe it's our President, maybe it's not. This type of unnecessary and inflammatory behavior only exists to strengthen the anti's agenda.

We sure don't need that.

So if we don't say anything to the anti's about it....

is O.k to use a wounded crow for bait.

Just curious.

It seems that, what the anti's think, is the big issue.

I don't give a shit what the anti's think. They are going to think what they want to regardless of what I do or don't do.

What they don't know can't hurt them. (Anti's)




Daryl

DITTO!!!!

I've said this before, but I guess you missed it. I don't care what the anti's think either, but what concerns me is what the majority of the public (most of whom are non-hunters, but they are not "anti" hunting) think. These are the people that can easily become PETA members if they see something that offends them. Also, it's against the law in Wyoming.

quote:

Originally posted by MrHawg:
I've said this before, but I guess you missed it.

I don't care what the anti's think either, but what concerns me is what the majority of the public (most of whom are non-hunters, but they are not "anti" hunting) think. These are the people that can easily become PETA members if they see something that offends them.

Also, it's against the law in Wyoming.

You are ABSOLUTELY, 100% CORRECT.