quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Ty is right.
I cringed when I read that from Klownsco also.
Scott, it's not you being offended we are worried about. Not sure what you get out of kicking a dead feral pig, but hunters are not the issue. Anti hunters are not either, no matter what, they will scream about things. It's the large group in the middle. The ones that put up with hunters on their land, or at the polls you have to worry about.
Talking about kicking a pig in the balls, putting a baseball cap on an animal for pictures. Anything that is disrespectful to our quarry that gets on the internet shows us in a bad light. We need to keep those middle grounders, at least neutral to hunting.

Spot on!

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Ty is right.
I cringed when I read that from Klownsco also.
Scott, it's not you being offended we are worried about. Not sure what you get out of kicking a dead feral pig, but hunters are not the issue. Anti hunters are not either, no matter what, they will scream about things. It's the large group in the middle. The ones that put up with hunters on their land, or at the polls you have to worry about.
Talking about kicking a pig in the balls, putting a baseball cap on an animal for pictures. Anything that is disrespectful to our quarry that gets on the internet shows us in a bad light. We need to keep those middle grounders, at least neutral to hunting.

Spot on!

Its just poor form. weve all done some killing but why dance on a grave?

I am not going to articulate this well, but I am going to try again.

It is not just the optics of it that matters.

The optics is a viable concern. However, it misses the point.

Let us assume no one cares that a feral pig was kicked on the testicals after being killed. The problem is we as hunters, land managers through hunting are required ti give respect for the life we take. The feral pig did not choose to be a feral pig. The hunter, culler, land manager takes it upon himself to kill that pig. It is a life taken. We preach that is done with a full heart under best practices as a necessary thing. We do it with full understanding we are selecting to kill. That requires being done w respect. Pigs are very intelligent creatures as far as animals go.

I have said this a lot in the African Forum, we have forgotten or missed the point. No wonder the middle and the antis are suspicious of us. We do not believe our marketing.

If you are hunting to kill without regard, you are not welcome as a hunter.

As for the Governor, she proved herself to be stupid and harmed all hunting.

My dog kills something on your property, I understand the dog has to die. I am not going to have glee about it. It reflects more on me as a dog owner, trainer than the dog. The idea of killing a dog bc it is not making the grade as a hunting dog is stupid and repugnant.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:


If you are hunting to kill without regard, you are not welcome as a hunter.

So as King for the Day I guess you'll be outlawing prairie dog hunts, crow hunts and other varmint type shoots?

I think primitive weapon hunts don't kill game as quickly or efficiently as modern weapons so that'll be the end of muzzleloader and bow season.

I know previous generation dog handlers that dispatched their working dogs for not making the grade. A stock dog that wouldn't herd, a Labrador that wouldn't water retrieve, a spaniel that wouldn't call off rabbits were put down, no silly adoption or animal rescue. I know these handlers to be good family men citizens and neighbors. The difference I'm guessing you don't get is that they saw domestic animals as tools, assets, aids. How "stupid" would a farmer have to be to keep and feed a mule that wouldn't plow or a cow that wouldn't milk? So in addition to not earning the keep from the farmer it should add additional expense in being gotten rid of?

King, your opinion is worthy only rebuttal.

My position stands.

Those who kill wo regard are not welcome.

It is against everything we say we stand for as hunters.



Apparently, over the years on AR, I have learned for most it is just lip service.

We wonder why people view us they do.

If you kill wo regard, you are not a hunter.

When we are reduced to the motivation of perception, we are lost.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:


If you are hunting to kill without regard, you are not welcome as a hunter.

So as King for the Day I guess you'll be outlawing prairie dog hunts, crow hunts and other varmint type shoots?
Depends on the shooter. Guys who are doing it just to see a prairie dog blow up, or worse, wound a coyote deliberately are bad.

If you are out here trying to reduce predation, I don't have an issue with you enjoying it, but you should be trying to get a clean kill every time. Yes, I have issues with guys who shoot at extreme ranges knowing they are more likely to wound than kill and justify it because its a varmint.

I think primitive weapon hunts don't kill game as quickly or efficiently as modern weapons so that'll be the end of muzzleloader and bow season.
This is actually someting I have issues with. The whole idea of the primative weapon uses was to make you work harder for your game... get closer, be a better hunter.

Its morphed into longer seasons at easier times to hunt (ie rut hunts) because they are not "successful enough"... Most bow hunters I know of take great pains to tell me how much better a hunter they are then me because they use a bow... but say its irrelevant when I note they hunt when the game is unspooked and in the rut... MN is a bit of a different cat there, but by and large that's the case.

Why are there so many more bow tags/its so much easier to draw them?

I know previous generation dog handlers that dispatched their working dogs for not making the grade. A stock dog that wouldn't herd, a Labrador that wouldn't water retrieve, a spaniel that wouldn't call off rabbits were put down, no silly adoption or animal rescue. I know these handlers to be good family men citizens and neighbors. The difference I'm guessing you don't get is that they saw domestic animals as tools, assets, aids. How "stupid" would a farmer have to be to keep and feed a mule that wouldn't plow or a cow that wouldn't milk? So in addition to not earning the keep from the farmer it should add additional expense in being gotten rid of?

The difference is that these older generation guys were not bragging on killing the dog and then excusing it "because it wouldn't have been a hunter anyhow... As I understood it, they would be more than happy to give the unsuitable animals away if someone wanted them, its just they couldn't justify keeping an animal that wouldn't earn its keep. It wasn't with joy they killed a suboptimal dog. Farm animals always had the option of becoming food. A pig that caused problems became pork... a cow that was barren became beef... they were not dispatched with a kick to the testicles "just because" except by folks that caused issues.

Admittedly, much is all about attitude and is impossible to write a law about... but I have refused to hunt with folks who got their jollies out of shooting to wound or deliberately took longer shots than necessary just to prove their "skill" at the expense of a humane kill.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
King, your opinion is worthy only rebuttal.

My position stands.

Those who kill wo regard are not welcome.

It is against everything we say we stand for as hunters.



Apparently, over the years on AR, I have learned for most it is just lip service.

We wonder why people view us they do.

If you kill wo regard, you are not a hunter.

When we are reduced to the motivation of perception, we are lost.

That you think anyone else not welcome I suspect the adults in the room dismiss.

Most of the full grown folks here are on a first name basis with the likes of people I mention and agree with my assessment of their character. That you children anthropomorphize your pets we can't help.

Grow up Sonny, it's a big world out there with many fine upstanding citizens that don't hold your sister in laws sensitivities as Gospel. In mine and M.E.'s time we've known many that have no confusion regarding the place of animals in Mans World.

Are the odds stacked against us? I'm sure of it. You "Wokesters" may think you can come to an agreement and good for you, the delusion you have is complete.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:


If you are hunting to kill without regard, you are not welcome as a hunter.

So as King for the Day I guess you'll be outlawing prairie dog hunts, crow hunts and other varmint type shoots?
Depends on the shooter. Guys who are doing it just to see a prairie dog blow up, or worse, wound a coyote deliberately are bad.

If you are out here trying to reduce predation, I don't have an issue with you enjoying it, but you should be trying to get a clean kill every time. Yes, I have issues with guys who shoot at extreme ranges knowing they are more likely to wound than kill and justify it because its a varmint.

I think primitive weapon hunts don't kill game as quickly or efficiently as modern weapons so that'll be the end of muzzleloader and bow season.
This is actually someting I have issues with. The whole idea of the primative weapon uses was to make you work harder for your game... get closer, be a better hunter.

Its morphed into longer seasons at easier times to hunt (ie rut hunts) because they are not "successful enough"... Most bow hunters I know of take great pains to tell me how much better a hunter they are then me because they use a bow... but say its irrelevant when I note they hunt when the game is unspooked and in the rut... MN is a bit of a different cat there, but by and large that's the case.

Why are there so many more bow tags/its so much easier to draw them?

I know previous generation dog handlers that dispatched their working dogs for not making the grade. A stock dog that wouldn't herd, a Labrador that wouldn't water retrieve, a spaniel that wouldn't call off rabbits were put down, no silly adoption or animal rescue. I know these handlers to be good family men citizens and neighbors. The difference I'm guessing you don't get is that they saw domestic animals as tools, assets, aids. How "stupid" would a farmer have to be to keep and feed a mule that wouldn't plow or a cow that wouldn't milk? So in addition to not earning the keep from the farmer it should add additional expense in being gotten rid of?

The difference is that these older generation guys were not bragging on killing the dog and then excusing it "because it wouldn't have been a hunter anyhow... As I understood it, they would be more than happy to give the unsuitable animals away if someone wanted them, its just they couldn't justify keeping an animal that wouldn't earn its keep. It wasn't with joy they killed a suboptimal dog. Farm animals always had the option of becoming food. A pig that caused problems became pork... a cow that was barren became beef... they were not dispatched with a kick to the testicles "just because" except by folks that caused issues.

Admittedly, much is all about attitude and is impossible to write a law about... but I have refused to hunt with folks who got their jollies out of shooting to wound or deliberately took longer shots than necessary just to prove their "skill" at the expense of a humane kill.

Perfect post! Came on here to say much the same. There are animals you enjoy hunting and eating etc, and animals which you kill for pest control reasons. You can enjoy hunting the pest control ones simply for the hunt and skills you use doing such.
never have I felt the need to denigrate such an animal because it does not have the intrinsic value of another. it was still A life taken, and not its fault it had to be killed. I dont think Ive ever had the need or desire to kick a dead animal, and consider those who treat any dead animal with disrespect, as flawed.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:


If you are hunting to kill without regard, you are not welcome as a hunter.

So as King for the Day I guess you'll be outlawing prairie dog hunts, crow hunts and other varmint type shoots?
Depends on the shooter. Guys who are doing it just to see a prairie dog blow up, or worse, wound a coyote deliberately are bad.

If you are out here trying to reduce predation, I don't have an issue with you enjoying it, but you should be trying to get a clean kill every time. Yes, I have issues with guys who shoot at extreme ranges knowing they are more likely to wound than kill and justify it because its a varmint.

I think primitive weapon hunts don't kill game as quickly or efficiently as modern weapons so that'll be the end of muzzleloader and bow season.
This is actually someting I have issues with. The whole idea of the primative weapon uses was to make you work harder for your game... get closer, be a better hunter.

Its morphed into longer seasons at easier times to hunt (ie rut hunts) because they are not "successful enough"... Most bow hunters I know of take great pains to tell me how much better a hunter they are then me because they use a bow... but say its irrelevant when I note they hunt when the game is unspooked and in the rut... MN is a bit of a different cat there, but by and large that's the case.

Why are there so many more bow tags/its so much easier to draw them?

I know previous generation dog handlers that dispatched their working dogs for not making the grade. A stock dog that wouldn't herd, a Labrador that wouldn't water retrieve, a spaniel that wouldn't call off rabbits were put down, no silly adoption or animal rescue. I know these handlers to be good family men citizens and neighbors. The difference I'm guessing you don't get is that they saw domestic animals as tools, assets, aids. How "stupid" would a farmer have to be to keep and feed a mule that wouldn't plow or a cow that wouldn't milk? So in addition to not earning the keep from the farmer it should add additional expense in being gotten rid of?

The difference is that these older generation guys were not bragging on killing the dog and then excusing it "because it wouldn't have been a hunter anyhow... As I understood it, they would be more than happy to give the unsuitable animals away if someone wanted them, its just they couldn't justify keeping an animal that wouldn't earn its keep. It wasn't with joy they killed a suboptimal dog. Farm animals always had the option of becoming food. A pig that caused problems became pork... a cow that was barren became beef... they were not dispatched with a kick to the testicles "just because" except by folks that caused issues.

Admittedly, much is all about attitude and is impossible to write a law about... but I have refused to hunt with folks who got their jollies out of shooting to wound or deliberately took longer shots than necessary just to prove their "skill" at the expense of a humane kill.

So it's much more complex than heyms "my brother's wife's feelings are hurt!" sensibilities.

I agree.

My brother’s wife’s feeling have nothing to do with it.

That is the point. It your engagement w hunting is based on outside perception, you have mused the point.

Read about the elephant cullers, those with any humanity grew sick of it.

I remember an episode of Tracks Across Africa. They were hunting tuskless cows.

A cow they did not want to kill charged. The PH did what he had to.

The PH, I believe his name was Len something, was visible upset at having to kill that cow. His quote after minutes of silence was something like, “Hell of a thing to have to do.”

Elephants in the area were overpopulated to the point of being vermin to Zim locals. This elephant was actively trying to kill them.

A groundhawg or prairie dog did not choose to be those creatures. If you can kill them so thought, I do not need you, and hunting does not need you.

If you can kill without regard you are not a hunter.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
King, your opinion is worthy only rebuttal.

My position stands.

Those who kill wo regard are not welcome.

It is against everything we say we stand for as hunters.



Apparently, over the years on AR, I have learned for most it is just lip service.

We wonder why people view us they do.

If you kill wo regard, you are not a hunter.

When we are reduced to the motivation of perception, we are lost.

That you think anyone else not welcome I suspect the adults in the room dismiss.

Most of the full grown folks here are on a first name basis with the likes of people I mention and agree with my assessment of their character. That you children anthropomorphize your pets we can't help.

Grow up Sonny, it's a big world out there with many fine upstanding citizens that don't hold your sister in laws sensitivities as Gospel. In mine and M.E.'s time we've known many that have no confusion regarding the place of animals in Mans World.

Are the odds stacked against us? I'm sure of it. You "Wokesters" may think you can come to an agreement and good for you, the delusion you have is complete.

They are not welcome. See Dr. Butler’s post.

My position is not “woke” whatever that means. It is what my adopted father who farmed and worked in the coal fields taught me skinning out a squirrel when he showed me its heart.

Supposedly a lot of folks don't have strong feelings one way or the other about hunting. Best not give them a reason to have strong feelings against it.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
My brother’s wife’s feeling have nothing to do with it.

That is the point. It your engagement w hunting is based on outside perception, you have mused the point.

Read about the elephant cullers, those with any humanity grew sick of it.

I remember an episode of Tracks Across Africa. They were hunting tuskless cows.

A cow they did not want to kill charged. The PH did what he had to.

The PH, I believe his name was Len something, was visible upset at having to kill that cow. His quote after minutes of silence was something like, “Hell of a thing to have to do.”

Elephants in the area were overpopulated to the point of being vermin to Zim locals. This elephant was actively trying to kill them.

A groundhawg or prairie dog did not choose to be those creatures. If you can kill them so thought, I do not need you, and hunting does not need you.

If you can kill without regard you are not a hunter.

Feral goats are a big problem over here. On one property I had, I had too shoot 1000 a year for more than 10 years. I quickly grew sick of it, I found I kind of switched off and went into automatic mode. One day I noticed that Id just killed 30 animals and had not broken my train of thought, A condition professional cullers talked of. I had friends who did not have access too much hunting. Who wanted the chance to shoot lots of animals. So invited them down too help on weekends. But goats have kids all year around- there is no avoiding them- These guys would shoot the entire mob happily, but leave the kids alive because they found shooting them too distasteful or harsh.
So I started going with them and Id concentrate on the kids while they cleaned up the adults. One day one of the guys tells me I have a cruel streak if I enjoy shooting the kids. I went off my tree. Told them I fucking hated it! While they were having fun shooting the adults, that fun came with consequences. Either putting down the kids as well, or leaving them to starve to death and this was not sport for me. That from that point on they could take responsibility for their actions, or fuck off and never come back.
For some time after that period, hunting lost all enjoyment for me. In a search to get it back I turned too the bow and lots of hunting with little killing and slowly my enjoyment returned.

Shanks:

That was tragically beautiful. It is exactly what I am talking.

The fact you cared enough to both do what had to he done, and understand the weight of it is regard in action.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Shanks:

That was tragically beautiful. It is exactly what I am talking.

The fact t you cared enough to both do what had to he done, and understand the weight of it is what regard in action.

+1


.

Thanks Guys. Always nice too know the intent of a post comes across.

Kind of the way I felt about shooting a dingo over in Australia. The ranchers wanted them dead, it was standing there, so I shot it.

Felt pretty badly about it afterwards.

Would I do it again?

Only if I had to… I sure wouldn’t plan a trip to shoot them.

Mr. Dundee, y'all made me laugh out loud.
As to Governor Noem, now she confesses that she really didn't meet North Korea's fat fuckhead leader, even though she wrote that she did.
Great match for Trump, except she acknowledges that such a thing as falsehood exists, which is a huge problem for Trump. And now she is a loser, so she's fired.

I agree, she is lost as a candidate. In the interest of helping the Republic, she can come stay with me.

My PH in Zambia wanted me to shoot a baboon. Even though it was to be used as leopard bait, and so not wasted, I couldn't bring myself to do it. They look too humanlike.

Anyway, why should I contribute a bullet (on which I paid Zambian ammo tax) to some other guy's leopard bait?

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
My PH in Zambia wanted me to shoot a baboon. Even though it was to be used as leopard bait, and so not wasted, I couldn't bring myself to do it. They look too humanlike.

Anyway, why should I contribute a bullet (on which I paid Zambian ammo tax) to some other guy's leopard bait?

I shot one in Zimbabwe. He fell over on his back, laying flat, legs spread looking at the sky and very dead. I stood over him taking him all in and said to myself I ain't never doing that again.