Dogcat:

Thanks for posting this. Very good; I was expecting the usual 10:1 anti comments as well, but a surprising number of people commented positively.

I was at the next table over while the bidding was going on for the tag referenced. I have to admit I saw the reporter / Photographer with her credentials hanging around her neck and really figured it was going to be just another hit piece. This article was a very pleasant surprise.

Great article. Certainly showed the truth about most hunters, that they really are conservationist and have a great love of the outdoors and it's wildlife.
I was also there, with my 14 year old grandson. He was awarded Youth Hunter of the Year Award for a massive Dall he took on his first sheep hunt. He hooked and will definitely follow in his Papa's foot steps.

Pretty amazing that that came from the New York Times!

I wrote a response. I started reading all the responses. One thing becomes crystal clear to me. Hunters are concerned with the survival of the species. The anti hunters are concerned with the life of each animal.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
The anti hunters are concerned with the life of each animal.

Even if it means allowing the species to become extinct. Those very words came out of the mouth of the HSUS whackjob on the 60 Mins piece on TX ranch oryx.

That said, this article was a refreshing surprise. Why? Because it was objective for a change.

I really enjoyed the article, in this day and age of "fake" news and an agenda at every opportunity I was really pleased with the article, no complaints and one hell of a ram in the picture at the end.

I am not sure what this means. My response was one of seven NYT picks. I would like to think that means I made sense.

Well written piece. The writer did an excellent job on the story.