Just where in the good 'ol continental USA (lower 48) can one hunt truly wild big game?
Now by truly wild I mean:
1.) Big game is naturally stalked and killed by natural predators (wolf, cougar, bear, etc) and I mean under heavy pressure from said predators, meaning there are a LOT of wolves, cougars, bears, etc.
2.) No one is putting out food plots for the wild game to munch on! This includes State, Federal, Bunny Huggers, or Hunters!
3.) No intervention by man to improve the herd population and/or eliminate die off, excessive predation, etc.
I cannot think of one place in the lower 48, where there are ample predators still alive, NO significant food plots, and not a wildlife management system in place to maintain an over-population of big game animals for the betterment of the State (ie increased revenue from the killing of these farmed public domain big game animals).
As far as I am concerned the lower 48 is nothing more than a BIG communal game ranch for white tail deer and elk. With a hand full of mule deer and pronghorn for good measure, but these two species are of secondary importance on the communal game ranch, which is subsidized by ALL of our tax dollars! So please get off of your high horses and shut the F up! If humping meat out of high country floats you boat, good for you, but understand you are simply shooting an animal which was FARMED BY THE STATE in which you shot it!
You have not been to the Frank Church Wilderness Area in Idaho. After you check that out go to the Bob Marshall Wilderness in Montana. Then even try any of the Forest Service lands in NW Montana, and around Bozeman or the North Cascades in Washington. They has plenty of Bears and Cougars and the wolves are in Montana and Idaho now. The only "management" is a hunting season. No Roads, no cars, no fences, no food plots and nothing but straight up and straight down. It is humping meat out of the high country but it sure as hell is not "farmed". You are clueless. Nice try but no cigar. Actually not even a nice try.
Posts: 4917 | Location: Wenatchee, WA, USA | Registered: 17 December 2001
I agree with customstox and his opinion.I to have been to Chamberlain Basin (Frank Church Wilderness)and have spent some good years in the Selway Wilderness and see know signs of anything that would relate it to fenced or managed hunts.We also have plenty of Bears-Cougers and the Wolves are becoming a real problem and the State wants nothing to do with them so it is left up to the Nez Pierce Indians to manage??It's one thing to buy a fenced hunt and another to hunt the Wilderness area's of Idaho-Montana and Wyoming.We also have Grizzly bears and there transplanting more for whatever reason.
Just my opinion.Jayco.
Posts: 565 | Location: Central Idaho | Registered: 27 February 2004
Just another troll looking to get a rise out of the "heathens" that are too dumb to realize meat and milk come from the store. After his last couple of posts, I'm starting to wonder what planet he is from.- Sheister
POESUR is another of ScottS's Troll identities. He said he was leaving but evidently one of his alter egos is still hanging around. What a Mope
Quote: By POSEUR on the Africa Forum:
I believe a "Mope" is any of a group of pathetic morons! It is therefore a subjective species, as a "pathetic moron" is dependent upon one's point of view!
Sort of a self fulfilling definition eh.
Posts: 6277 | Location: Not Likely, but close. | Registered: 12 August 2002
Did I mis something? Where does it say wilderness hunting.com at the top of the page. If we all could be independently wealthy,we could quit working and do nothing but hunt wilderness areas in Canada and elsewhere. But, seeing as we have to work for a living, I guess we will just have to cower in a corner of our own little woods and make believe it is a totally wild area. If you can hunt wilderness areas, fine, but many of us can't. Like I to;d the last smarta$$ that was here. Relief is just a mouse click away. Good riddance.
Where the heck do you live anyway? Newark, NJ. or Manhatten, NY. or Disneyland, maybe?
There are lots of places in the US that you can (still) put on a pack or jump on a horse and in a week or so you'll only see from zero to 5 or 6 other people and LOTS of wild game, great fishing, etc. But it does take some work
Sorry to jump in your stuff
Posts: 626 | Location: The soggy side of Washington State | Registered: 13 July 2003
Pissewer, there is no true wilderness left anywhere on this planet. If you would like true wilderness then you will have to depopulate the earth. How about we start with a twit like you. You obviously exist and therefore consume things to exist, therefore you are just as much to blame for the wilderness being consumed as the rest of us. Some of us just like to consume it directly by our own hand which brings us much closer to reality than those who purchase it indirectly packaged from a grocery store, lumberyard or at a gas station etc. You live in a house and have utilities, probably drive a car and are surrounded with plastic everywhere you go, you use all sorts of consumer goods, to have these things wilderness is consumed and kinds of species are killed for your convenience. Your hands are just as bloody as mine, the only difference is your kind refuses to see the blood on your hands. You people may be in denial but your just as much to blame for the continued decimation of the natural earth as anyone else.
Posts: 372 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 13 December 2001
Oscar, I'm sure glad to hear that, here all this time I thought those 8 to 10 days I spent in the Goat Rocks was a wilderness area. I guess not seeing a human was only an oversight on my part. Several years ago due to one hell of a snow blizzard, we damn near didn't make it out, about a 12 mile hike in the middle of the night with the horses and my two hunting buddies and camp was left behind and somewhat recovered in the spring time but I guess that was not a wilderness.
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
Cliffs2, I think you missed a lot. Look at his post and what he asked. We responded to that. If you want to hunt in someones horse pasture in Hudson WI. that does not mean everyone else has to use that as the center of their universe. And you would be amazed how cheap a wilderness hunt can be. We do it ourselves and hunt on foot and pack it out on our backs. And I am not young and I do it every year .......... and work too. Where and when I choose to take my time off is carefully planned so I dont have to hunt in someones pasture and particularly so I don't have to decide that is all there is for me.
Posts: 4917 | Location: Wenatchee, WA, USA | Registered: 17 December 2001
Jimmyd, it's all in ones interpretation of wilderness. My interpretation of wilderness is somewhere no man has been and hasn't been mapped. There is no place today on earth man has not been. I can go out in the bush for weeks on end and rarely or never see another man but it isn't necessarly wilderness, at least to me. Some of the areas they call wilderness are full of campers, hikers etc. Some of these places were close to being wilderness and rarely saw a human, until they decided to save it by designating it a wilderness area, then it gets flooded by tourists.
My dictionary defines wilderness as; 1; a tract or region uncultivated or inhabited by man., 2; an area undisturbed by human activity, together with its naturally developed life community., 3; an empty or pathless unsurveyed area or region where man has never been present.
Posts: 372 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 13 December 2001
Oscar, why hell man, ifn' I had a dictionary do ya think I would spell the way I do
In today's world of hunter's, I have found most hunt within a mile of the road if not from the road. So, from my stand point the hunts I have done packing in and without seeing other human life form, other than hunting buddies from camp, I will still consider these to be a wilderness hunt.
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
I think we're drawing too hard a distinction here that there is only wilderness hunting or fenced canned hunts. I love hunting wilderness areas. As Chic said with planning it can be done for a reasonable cost and a bit of effort. And Chic is also right that he's not young But I tell you what, he's the energizer bunny going up and down mountains. BUT, there is also good and real hunting in non-wilderness areas. I live in Michigan where we have 1.5 million whitetails. I get 3 weeks of vacation a year. One of those is slated for a wilderness hunt in Idaho. The other two are slated for family activities with my wife and kids. That leaves my hunting at home confined to weekends and evenings after work. So I'm supposed to sit on the couch for the entire 3 month whitetail season in Michigan because since there is no chance I'll be charged by a grizzly so therefor it's not a real hunt? Bullshit! I live on 10 acres in a mixed agricultural/suburban area. I can sneak out behind my house and hunt Sunday morning before church or after work. I have access to some other property that varies from 40-100 acres. I have a treestand that I can watch high school football games from. Another that I can watch school buses picking kids up but anyone who thinks hunting whitetails in that kind of habitat is easy is full of crap. I love hunting in the mountains but outside of the fact that it is physically more difficult to get to game elk and mule deer are a cake walk by comparison to mature whitetail buck that lives around people and I offer no apologies for hunting them.
Jeff
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
jeff, I think this all boils down to how one wants to hunt and the amount of effort they are willing to put forth. IMHO I feel there is alot of Wilderness left in these western states but that does not mean that someone could not hunt smaller amounts of land and have a sucessful and satisfying hunt. When you are 20+ miles from the nearest trailhead it will give you an idea of the vast wilderness surrounding you. If one cannot or will not try this fine but as I said I consider it wilderness.
I remember your hunt with chic and howard and the area you were in.
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
Whatever are you talking about? Where did I ever say I was anti-hunting or a member of PETA! I am anti-dickheads, if I am anti anything. These dorks that think they are hunting truly wild game because they packed in 5 miles. They are still hunting managed game, which is by definition free range farming!
My point simply is that there are NO unmanaged big game in the USA! Anyone that says differently is either a fool or a liar! Every single state has game management. This is done for the benefit of the State. Every state has supported the widespread extermination (or mass reduction in population if you prefer) of four legged predators. This was done to maximize the horned big game populations, which are in DEMAND. The State is simply farming horned big game animals (the SUPPLY) to the hunting publics DEMAND to make money.
So there is NO difference between the State and the private game ranch EXCEPT THE SIZE OF THEIR REPECTIVE FARMS!
To put it even more clearly:
EVERYONE IS HUNTING FARMED (MANAGED) ANIMALS, WHETHER IT IS A 150 ACRE GAME PRESERVE OR THE STATE OF MONTANA!
Why don't you come out and shotgun hunt deer in the Midwest sometime. It is far more challengin' than shooting at elk from 300 - 400 yards away as is done in the ol' Rockies.
In shotgun country, you better get within 50 yards to insure a clean kill, and the corn fields offer NO cover! Did I mention that most corn fields are at least 1/2 mile wide? Now shooting them with a rifle is EASY, but that is ILLEGAL since it isn't very sporting.
I am talking about Illionis, Iowa, sourthern Minnesota, etc not Ohio, Indiana, Michigan which offer considerable tree cover for the deer and the hunting is much easier (believe it or not).
By the way, the combined total of wolves running around in ALL the Rocky Mountain states is less than 1/3 the number of wolves loose in Minnesota. The deer in Minnesota are far more "wild" than the elk in the Rockies.
"My point simply is that there are NO unmanaged big game in the USA!"
So what? This and several other recent threads have all become so convoluted lately that it's ridiculous. I love to hunt. I love hunting in the wilderness in Idaho. I love hunting the wide open badlands in Eastern Montana. I love hunting farm country whitetails. I love hunting ducks on small ponds. I love hunting grouse in thick cover. I love hunting pheasants in overgrown stubble. I love calling turkeys in the spring. I love hunting bushytails in a small woodlots. I love the sights, the sounds, and the smells. I love the comraderie and shared experiences. I love the anticipation before and the tired muscles after. I don't need to hunt for a living and I don't need to hunt for food. I need to hunt for ME and I get really tired of the constant bashing of each other and the need for one upsmanship. It's all good.
Jeff
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
Every State got rid of predators? Where the hell have you been in a box? Timber Wolf Populations are at a all time High in Minnesota, Grizzly Bears and Mountain Lions are at a all time high in Montana and Wyoming. As for game management I hate to tell you every continent on the planet Manages game where there is hunting that is why they have hunting seasons and regulations that includes Canada by the way. You are talking out your ass but your mouth knows better!!!
Quote: Timber Wolf Populations are at a all time High in Minnesota, Grizzly Bears and Mountain Lions are at a all time high in Montana and Wyoming
I think you are the one living in a box. All time high since when?
There are nowhere near the grizzly levels there were 150 years ago, nor wolves, nor cougar, nor bison. Get your head unplugged before you spout off, you want make such a fool of yourself.
BTW, last time I checked there was no game management on Antarctica.
Why don't you come out and shotgun hunt deer in the Midwest sometime. It is far more challengin' than shooting at elk from 300 - 400 yards away as is done in the ol' Rockies.
Is there a Gremlin somewhere that illustrates the fact that I am rolling on the floor crying my eyes out with laughter and doing everything I can to keep from wetting my pants.
Quote: The deer in Minnesota are far more "wild" than the elk in the Rockies.
Uh Oh, here I go again.
Chuck
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003
By the way, the combined total of wolves running around in ALL the Rocky Mountain states is less than 1/3 the number of wolves loose in Minnesota. The deer in Minnesota are far more "wild" than the elk in the Rockies.
Care to post a link to the printed facts....and thanks for the chuckle first thing in the morning
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
BallBuster, why would it be a trick? Plain and simple I would like to read this if, in fact it is true. I thought this was a fairly simple request since it was stated as "Fact", must be printed somewhere. BB, I would really like to debate and argue with you but you keep showing up "unarmed
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
According to the Minnesota DNR Wolf Plan of 2001, in the last population survey done in 1997-98 there were 385 packs consisting of 2450 wolves in Minnesota (Appendix VI p58).
Jeff
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
Jeff, thanks for the link, sounds as if you boys got one hellva bunch of wolves. I just scanned the link and will read more later but I didn't see anything yet comparing numbers with other states. Do you see many of these packs while hunting or being afield?
Posts: 1605 | Location: Wa. State | Registered: 19 November 2001
Poseur, There is a big difference between "managed" game running in a wilderness area, and "managed" game behind a fence. If you get right down to it, there is no place on earth that wildlife isn't "managed" to some degree. If you're looking for a place to hunt with lots of predators (mountain lions, griz, wolves), lots of wildlife, and in a true wilderness setting...try the Thorofare. It is the most remote place in the lower 48 (~30 mile pony ride any way you cut it). I'm sure the you'll probably want to stick with your shotgun (you won't want to shoot anyone's house in the subdivision where you hunt) and high fence.
Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks wolf plan lists the population estimate for wolves in the Northern Rockies (Montana, Idaho, and Greater Yellowstone Area)as slightly under 450 combined for 2000.
Jeff
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
Now I could find a bunch more but If you still have doubts go to google and find your own. As for your great Mountains you speak of I say "Forget the Mountains show me the Bush" Also this was on the radio last week hunters in Wyoming had 230 reported Grizzly Bear encounters last year but I suppose that is because there #'s are down right?
Reminds me of someone I know who was sitting in a meeting with local bioligists and Fish and Wildlife peoples. The "experts" gave some wonderful figures concerning Grizzly populations in the area, real nice and neat. Upon hearing these numbers, the uncle sitting next to this chap promptly leaned over and whispered in his ear; "If that is the number of Grizzlies around here, I shot everyone of em this spring".
I take population figures with a healthy dose of salt!
Chuck
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003
Posseur, Sorry if I took you the wrong way but your post sounded like another greenie troll attempt to stir things up. We will never have historic levels of wolves or grizzlies as we simply have no place to put them as a goodly portion of their former range is developed and heavily populated. In the areas where their is suitable habitat for them they are doing very well and in some places they are over capacity and being pushed out of these areas into places where it is a good idea not to have them. Up here in canada the grizzlys and wolves are showing up in places they haven't been seen or wanted for a hundred years, yet the envirogreens still claim that they are on the verge of extinction.
Posts: 372 | Location: Alberta | Registered: 13 December 2001
So, from my stand point the hunts I have done packing in and without seeing other human life form, other than hunting buddies from camp, I will still consider these to be a wilderness hunt.
Also this was on the radio last week hunters in Wyoming had 230 reported Grizzly Bear encounters last year but I suppose that is because there #'s are down right?
