|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Hunters can always be trusted to treat the hunted fairly. Good thing that good hunting practices are being transfered from generation to generation. Rural folks who live off the land understand the relationship between man and nature... CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. "Obviously, this got a little out of hand," Dave Ware, state Department of Fish and Wildlife game division manager, said during a phone interview from Olympia on Monday. Ware said the hunters who gathered around a herd of elk on Bill Johnson's beef ranch five miles west of Concrete on Saturday "lacked discretion" and "took advantage of the situation" when they shot dozens of arrows into the panicked herd. The state wildlife agency had opened elk hunting in an area roughly bounded by highways 9 and 20, east to the intersection of 20 and Cape Horn Road. The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County. However, Ware said the agency closed the season Monday afternoon on an emergency basis because of the Saturday spectacle. One neighbor who asked not to be named said the event, which slowed traffic on Highway 20 as people watched, was a "testosterone-poisoned circus." She called it "savage and inhumane." A Fish and Wildlife officer was at the scene Saturday, but didn't stop the hunters because they had not violated the law. The property's owner said Monday that once neighbors spotted the elk in his south pasture, the word got out. "A few of my neighbors have friends who are bow hunters," Johnson said. The word began to spread until a dozen or more bow hunters were in Johnson's field trying to encircle the herd, which by then had moved to the north pasture. Johnson, whose family has farmed on the Wilde Road property since 1915, wasn't pleased with the way the situation progressed. "The whole thing kind of got out of control," he said. Other hunters in the area said Saturday's incident disgusted them. "How can you call that hunting?" asked Bob Coombs, 70, of Mount Vernon. 'You pin some animals inside a barbed wire closure then allow people to come in there and take shots at them with arrows. Good Lord. That can't be called hunting. There are some fair chase rules that any ethical hunter subscribes to." Longtime hunter Walter Gillespie, 82, of Sedro-Woolley, agreed. "I think it was an atrocity," Gillespie said. "It's not a sportsman's way. It sounded to me like a fiasco, and it was something that didn't have to happen at all." He said the hunt wasn't fair, with the elk penned up and hunters coming from both sides of the herd. Gillespie said the worst part wasn't the elk that died and were hauled away. "How many more were shot damn it," he said. 'That's what bugs me. If one didn't fall down, they'd shoot another one. The whole thing was like a comedy a bad, bad comedy." Last year, some hunters were licensed to hunt elk in the area with muzzle loaders. Some of the hunters trespassed on private property or took shots from the highway, officials said. So Fish and Wildlife limited this season to archery to try to prevent some of the abuse, Ware said. Next year's season will be more restrictive, Ware said. Skagit County Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Bill Heinck said officers would be in the area this morning enforcing the emergency hunting closure. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:06:54 -0500, Gene
wrote: On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote: snips CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. What the hell is wrong with you people up there? That's like me asking you about SC state politicians. it's a different part of the state. NRA/Republican. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
"Gene" wrote in message ... On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote: snips CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. What the hell is wrong with you people up there? I'm a member of the BPOE (Benevolent and Protective Order of Elk), and find that to be horrific. I didn't even know there was a season for us Elk up there! I won't be visiting soon. g --Mike |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
jps wrote:
Hunters can always be trusted to treat the hunted fairly. Good thing that good hunting practices are being transfered from generation to generation. Rural folks who live off the land understand the relationship between man and nature... CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. "Obviously, this got a little out of hand," Dave Ware, state Department of Fish and Wildlife game division manager, said during a phone interview from Olympia on Monday. Ware said the hunters who gathered around a herd of elk on Bill Johnson's beef ranch five miles west of Concrete on Saturday "lacked discretion" and "took advantage of the situation" when they shot dozens of arrows into the panicked herd. The state wildlife agency had opened elk hunting in an area roughly bounded by highways 9 and 20, east to the intersection of 20 and Cape Horn Road. The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County. However, Ware said the agency closed the season Monday afternoon on an emergency basis because of the Saturday spectacle. One neighbor who asked not to be named said the event, which slowed traffic on Highway 20 as people watched, was a "testosterone-poisoned circus." She called it "savage and inhumane." A Fish and Wildlife officer was at the scene Saturday, but didn't stop the hunters because they had not violated the law. The property's owner said Monday that once neighbors spotted the elk in his south pasture, the word got out. "A few of my neighbors have friends who are bow hunters," Johnson said. The word began to spread until a dozen or more bow hunters were in Johnson's field trying to encircle the herd, which by then had moved to the north pasture. Johnson, whose family has farmed on the Wilde Road property since 1915, wasn't pleased with the way the situation progressed. "The whole thing kind of got out of control," he said. Other hunters in the area said Saturday's incident disgusted them. "How can you call that hunting?" asked Bob Coombs, 70, of Mount Vernon. 'You pin some animals inside a barbed wire closure then allow people to come in there and take shots at them with arrows. Good Lord. That can't be called hunting. There are some fair chase rules that any ethical hunter subscribes to." Longtime hunter Walter Gillespie, 82, of Sedro-Woolley, agreed. "I think it was an atrocity," Gillespie said. "It's not a sportsman's way. It sounded to me like a fiasco, and it was something that didn't have to happen at all." He said the hunt wasn't fair, with the elk penned up and hunters coming from both sides of the herd. Gillespie said the worst part wasn't the elk that died and were hauled away. "How many more were shot damn it," he said. 'That's what bugs me. If one didn't fall down, they'd shoot another one. The whole thing was like a comedy a bad, bad comedy." Last year, some hunters were licensed to hunt elk in the area with muzzle loaders. Some of the hunters trespassed on private property or took shots from the highway, officials said. So Fish and Wildlife limited this season to archery to try to prevent some of the abuse, Ware said. Next year's season will be more restrictive, Ware said. Skagit County Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Bill Heinck said officers would be in the area this morning enforcing the emergency hunting closure. this kind of thing is more widespread than many think. In Missouri we saw an Amish enterprise where they raise basically semi domesticated Deer with big antlers to be sold, we were told to canned hunting outfits in Texas. Apparently some think a hunt is like watching tv and should only take an hour. You select the head you want, shoot it and let the outfit take care of your trophy for you. You proudly display you trophies on your office wall and proclaim your hunting prowess. I counted myself lucky to find a spot to hunt and if I got a deer it was carefully dressed and put in the freezer by me. I have racks but they were second or third or fourth to the hunt. I had about as much pleasure when I didn't get a shot. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Gene wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:19:53 -0500, lil abner wrote: jps wrote: Hunters can always be trusted to treat the hunted fairly. Good thing that good hunting practices are being transfered from generation to generation. Rural folks who live off the land understand the relationship between man and nature... CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. "Obviously, this got a little out of hand," Dave Ware, state Department of Fish and Wildlife game division manager, said during a phone interview from Olympia on Monday. Ware said the hunters who gathered around a herd of elk on Bill Johnson's beef ranch five miles west of Concrete on Saturday "lacked discretion" and "took advantage of the situation" when they shot dozens of arrows into the panicked herd. The state wildlife agency had opened elk hunting in an area roughly bounded by highways 9 and 20, east to the intersection of 20 and Cape Horn Road. The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County. However, Ware said the agency closed the season Monday afternoon on an emergency basis because of the Saturday spectacle. One neighbor who asked not to be named said the event, which slowed traffic on Highway 20 as people watched, was a "testosterone-poisoned circus." She called it "savage and inhumane." A Fish and Wildlife officer was at the scene Saturday, but didn't stop the hunters because they had not violated the law. The property's owner said Monday that once neighbors spotted the elk in his south pasture, the word got out. "A few of my neighbors have friends who are bow hunters," Johnson said. The word began to spread until a dozen or more bow hunters were in Johnson's field trying to encircle the herd, which by then had moved to the north pasture. Johnson, whose family has farmed on the Wilde Road property since 1915, wasn't pleased with the way the situation progressed. "The whole thing kind of got out of control," he said. Other hunters in the area said Saturday's incident disgusted them. "How can you call that hunting?" asked Bob Coombs, 70, of Mount Vernon. 'You pin some animals inside a barbed wire closure then allow people to come in there and take shots at them with arrows. Good Lord. That can't be called hunting. There are some fair chase rules that any ethical hunter subscribes to." Longtime hunter Walter Gillespie, 82, of Sedro-Woolley, agreed. "I think it was an atrocity," Gillespie said. "It's not a sportsman's way. It sounded to me like a fiasco, and it was something that didn't have to happen at all." He said the hunt wasn't fair, with the elk penned up and hunters coming from both sides of the herd. Gillespie said the worst part wasn't the elk that died and were hauled away. "How many more were shot damn it," he said. 'That's what bugs me. If one didn't fall down, they'd shoot another one. The whole thing was like a comedy a bad, bad comedy." Last year, some hunters were licensed to hunt elk in the area with muzzle loaders. Some of the hunters trespassed on private property or took shots from the highway, officials said. So Fish and Wildlife limited this season to archery to try to prevent some of the abuse, Ware said. Next year's season will be more restrictive, Ware said. Skagit County Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Bill Heinck said officers would be in the area this morning enforcing the emergency hunting closure. this kind of thing is more widespread than many think. In Missouri we saw an Amish enterprise where they raise basically semi domesticated Deer with big antlers to be sold, we were told to canned hunting outfits in Texas. Apparently some think a hunt is like watching tv and should only take an hour. You select the head you want, shoot it and let the outfit take care of your trophy for you. You proudly display you trophies on your office wall and proclaim your hunting prowess. I counted myself lucky to find a spot to hunt and if I got a deer it was carefully dressed and put in the freezer by me. I have racks but they were second or third or fourth to the hunt. I had about as much pleasure when I didn't get a shot. Canned hunters should be shot. Is that why Cheney shot his buddy? They were, after all, on a canned hunt. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
jps wrote:
Skagit County Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Bill Heinck said officers would be in the area this morning enforcing the emergency hunting closure. If they allowed me and a few of my buddies in with our guns, we would have done a real "stumpy" on them. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 29, 8:13*pm, "mgg" wrote:
"Gene" wrote in message ... On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote: snips CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. What the hell is wrong with you people up there? I'm a member of the BPOE (Benevolent and Protective Order of Elk), and find that to be horrific. I didn't even know there was a season for us Elk up there! I won't be visiting soon. g --Mike Seattle doesn't sound like a very nice place. ?;^ ) |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote:
Hunters can always be trusted to treat the hunted fairly. Good thing that good hunting practices are being transfered from generation to generation. Rural folks who live off the land understand the relationship between man and nature... Well, on this we can agree. It's an atrocity. Unfortunately we're seeing problems like this all over the US and not only on hunting lands but in recreational fisheries and land use. Instead of GM, maybe we should be putting some money into our land, forest and game management - at least we'd get some results out of it. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
jps wrote: Skagit County Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Bill Heinck said officers would be in the area this morning enforcing the emergency hunting closure. If they allowed me and a few of my buddies in with our guns, we would have done a real "stumpy" on them. God rest his wooden soul. I miss him. Sniff sniff. -- I get so upset by these spoofers, that I think I am going to make more crossposts between rec.boats and numerous unrelated newsgroups, because at least that is not detrimental to rec.boats. This group needs some new blood, and that is always a good way to get some new posters who enjoy boating as much as i do. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
"Gene" wrote in message ... On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:13:21 -0800, "mgg" wrote: "Gene" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote: snips CONCRETE, Wash. (AP) - The killing of about seven elk cornered in a farm pasture in eastern Skagit County has spurred state officials to close the elk archery season in the area and angered others who either witnessed or heard about the killings. What the hell is wrong with you people up there? I'm a member of the BPOE (Benevolent and Protective Order of Elk), and find that to be horrific. I didn't even know there was a season for us Elk up there! I won't be visiting soon. g --Mike Really? Oak Island #2769, here.... Yup, San Jose #522. --Mike |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 30, 12:36*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. *It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. As long as the elk were dressed and eaten, in the end it wasn't ideal but it was effective. If there are herds of elk that will stand around and let themselves be surrounded and fired upon by men out in a field, they definitely have an elk problem. They need to open the season back up. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis
wrote: On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:08:29 -0800, jps wrote: Hunters can always be trusted to treat the hunted fairly. Good thing that good hunting practices are being transfered from generation to generation. Rural folks who live off the land understand the relationship between man and nature... Well, on this we can agree. It's an atrocity. Unfortunately we're seeing problems like this all over the US and not only on hunting lands but in recreational fisheries and land use. Instead of GM, maybe we should be putting some money into our land, forest and game management - at least we'd get some results out of it. My statement was, of course, tongue in cheek. What I hear over and over is that the rural folks have an affinity for and a relationship with the land and resources that us city folk couldn't possibly understand. I understand that some rural folks are ****in' *******s with no common sense and little regard for humane behavior. Is that what's being passed down to these idiots? |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote:
The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. Deer are like vermin. I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 31, 6:31*am, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. *Deer are like vermin. *I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. *Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. *Yet, the population has remained stable. * Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Jack wrote:
On Dec 31, 6:31 am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. Deer are like vermin. I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". It's too bad we've destroyed so much of the habitat wild critters used to have...and now we use that as an excuse to hunt them. Well, the upside, I suppose, is that a decent number of hunters end up shooting each other. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 31, 6:27*am, jps wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:36:58 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote: On Dec 30, 12:36*pm, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. *It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. *After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." *Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. *Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. You're a ****in' idiot, as usual. *It was other rural folk who saw it and thought it was a shameful display of testosterone driven idiocy. I'm sure you'd have been right there with 'em. So you think all "rural folk" are Daniel Boone-like, and that there are no liberals, or college educated, or vegans, or PETA members that live outside the Seattle city limits. That sounds about right for you. Narrow-minded to the end. Oh, and I don't bow hunt. But I can field dress a deer. It doesn't scare me. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Jack wrote:
Oh, and I don't bow hunt. But I can field dress a deer. It doesn't scare me. What a man! It's too bad those dangerous deer can't shoot back. I'd pay good money to see them field dress you. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
Jack wrote: Oh, and I don't bow hunt. But I can field dress a deer. It doesn't scare me. What a man! It's too bad those dangerous deer can't shoot back. I'd pay good money to see them field dress you. I need to fire up a few neurons before I make a stupid statement like that again. If that is where my head is, i need help desperately. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote:
On Dec 31, 6:31Â*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. Â*Deer are like vermin. Â*I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. Â*Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. Â*Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". And exactly what is it being managed for? It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. *Deer are like vermin. *I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. *Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. *Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". And exactly what is it being managed for? It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. I think both are involved. At the least with hunting, the herd that is left is more healthy and now sprawling into downtown areas looking for food and shelter... I think in the long run, the herd is much better off. I should note that I don't hunt, at least since I was in my twenties or so.. I was not very good at it anyway, so I am probably better off as are the trees and innocent tin cans that most times would end up my target by the end of the day;) |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
In article ,
says... On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. *Deer are like vermin. *I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. *Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. *Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". And exactly what is it being managed for? It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. http://txtwriter.com/Onscience/Articles/deerpops.html http://mdc.mo.gov/nathis/mammals/deer/populat.htm |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 31, 10:11*am, thunder wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. *Deer are like vermin. *I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. *Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. *Yet, the population has remained stable.. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? *Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. *And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. *Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. *In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. *The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. *If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Well, let's recap... You agree that if they weren't hunted, the herd size would increase, leading to a weak sickly herd becuase of lack of food, etc. Sounds like you agree that the hunt is *indeed* controlling herd size. Now if you want the hunt to *decrease* the herd size below present levels, that would take a longer, more open season to allow more deer to be taken, but there opponents to that as well, even from within the hunters themselves. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. *That's why its called "game management".. And exactly what is it being managed for? *It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. *I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. *Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. *It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. *As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. *It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. OK, so the deer are a natural resource that is being managed and is bringing 100M in to the state budget a year. What's the downside? You could stop the hunting to allow them to overrun residential and farm lands, allowing them to die from starvation and disease as their numbers increase, while costing 10's of millions in crop and property damage. Hunting is certainly more ethical, humane, and fiscally responsible than that. Look, hunting *does* control herd size. It's just being done with a different focus in mind than you think it should be, or than you beleive is being presented as its purpose. But in the end, hunting controls numbers. The exact amount is managed by the hunting season length and rules. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Jack wrote:
On Dec 31, 10:11 am, thunder wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31 am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. Deer are like vermin. I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Well, let's recap... You agree that if they weren't hunted, the herd size would increase, leading to a weak sickly herd becuase of lack of food, etc. Sounds like you agree that the hunt is *indeed* controlling herd size. Now if you want the hunt to *decrease* the herd size below present levels, that would take a longer, more open season to allow more deer to be taken, but there opponents to that as well, even from within the hunters themselves. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. That's why its called "game management". And exactly what is it being managed for? It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. OK, so the deer are a natural resource that is being managed and is bringing 100M in to the state budget a year. What's the downside? You could stop the hunting to allow them to overrun residential and farm lands, allowing them to die from starvation and disease as their numbers increase, while costing 10's of millions in crop and property damage. Hunting is certainly more ethical, humane, and fiscally responsible than that. Look, hunting *does* control herd size. It's just being done with a different focus in mind than you think it should be, or than you beleive is being presented as its purpose. But in the end, hunting controls numbers. The exact amount is managed by the hunting season length and rules. Seems like they are managing population just right. 0 population growth. It's just like a liberal to find problems with everything and then try to fix it. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:36:58 -0800 (PST), Jack
wrote: On Dec 30, 12:36*pm, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. *It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. As long as the elk were dressed and eaten, in the end it wasn't ideal but it was effective. If there are herds of elk that will stand around and let themselves be surrounded and fired upon by men out in a field, they definitely have an elk problem. They need to open the season back up. Amen. -- John H All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Jim wrote:
Seems like they are managing population just right. 0 population growth. It's just like a liberal to find problems with everything and then try to fix it. What's funny is that a piece of **** like you sounds smarter when you try to spoof the IDs of other posters here. When you post as flajim, you come across as the idiot you are. I suppose it tasks you greatly to try to come across as smarter than you are, but even when you try, you don't seem very bright. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
Jim wrote: Seems like they are managing population just right. 0 population growth. It's just like a liberal to find problems with everything and then try to fix it. What's funny is that a piece of **** like you sounds smarter when you try to spoof the IDs of other posters here. When you post as flajim, you come across as the idiot you are. I suppose it tasks you greatly to try to come across as smarter than you are, but even when you try, you don't seem very bright. Do you think your remark sounds smart. I think you are just an angry frustrated old man. -- I get so upset by these spoofers, that I think I am going to make more crossposts between rec.boats and numerous unrelated newsgroups, because at least that is not detrimental to rec.boats. This group needs some new blood, and that is always a good way to get some new posters who enjoy boating as much as i do. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
Jim wrote: Seems like they are managing population just right. 0 population growth. It's just like a liberal to find problems with everything and then try to fix it. What's funny is that a piece of **** like you sounds smarter when you try to spoof the IDs of other posters here. When you post as flajim, you come across as the idiot you are. I suppose it tasks you greatly to try to come across as smarter than you are, but even when you try, you don't seem very bright. This NOT me. This is another one of those moronic assholes who are jealous of me. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:05:03 -0800, Jack wrote:
On Dec 31, 10:11Â*am, thunder wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31Â*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. Â*Deer are like vermin. Â*I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. Â*Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. Â*Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? Â*Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. Â*And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. Â*Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. Â*In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. Â*The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. Â*If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Well, let's recap... You agree that if they weren't hunted, the herd size would increase, leading to a weak sickly herd becuase of lack of food, etc. Sounds like you agree that the hunt is *indeed* controlling herd size. Now if you want the hunt to *decrease* the herd size below present levels, that would take a longer, more open season to allow more deer to be taken, but there opponents to that as well, even from within the hunters themselves. Guy, if a hunter gets all his permits, fall bow, winter bow, muzzleloader, shotgun, etc., he has 116 days of hunting allowed. With multiple kills allowed per permit, I don't see how it could get more "liberal". For the past ten years, or so, New Jersey has been trying to reduce it's deer population through hunting. It isn't working. Look, game are managed to provide a stable recreational resource, and at that they do well. However, in this state, we have an explosion. Deer are like vermin. Every wooded area has a distinct browse line, forget about landscaping. Dead deer are a common site along the roadway. Hunting just isn't enough to control this population. Thinning the herd manages its size and keeps it healthier while helping to limit its effects on man. Â*That's why its called "game management". And exactly what is it being managed for? Â*It's estimated that hunters put @ $100 million into the economy each year. Â*I would say that is what the herd is managed for, not to control numbers. Â*Look, I don't have a problem with hunting. Â*It's a great outdoor, recreational activity, but as numbers control, I think it's myth. Â*As you kill deer, birth rates and survival rates increase. Â*It's the carrying capacity of the land, the food sources, the mast crop, the winter weather, that control the numbers, not hunting, IMO. OK, so the deer are a natural resource that is being managed and is bringing 100M in to the state budget a year. What's the downside? You could stop the hunting to allow them to overrun residential and farm lands, allowing them to die from starvation and disease as their numbers increase, while costing 10's of millions in crop and property damage. Hunting is certainly more ethical, humane, and fiscally responsible than that. Look, hunting *does* control herd size. It's just being done with a different focus in mind than you think it should be, or than you beleive is being presented as its purpose. But in the end, hunting controls numbers. The exact amount is managed by the hunting season length and rules. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:25:04 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:36:58 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote: On Dec 30, 12:36*pm, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. *It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. As long as the elk were dressed and eaten, in the end it wasn't ideal but it was effective. If there are herds of elk that will stand around and let themselves be surrounded and fired upon by men out in a field, they definitely have an elk problem. They need to open the season back up. The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Technically, you can shoot a deer in your backyard from your elevated deck if you are using a bow in Montgomery County, MD. Just make sure you have the proper hunting license. Don't suppose you'd consider renting your back deck and a bow some evening, would you? -- John H "The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money." --Margaret Thatcher |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:04:02 -0500, gfretwell wrote:
The reality with deer, raccoons, rabbits and the other "prey" species is they do better around people than they do in the wilderness. There are fewer predators. Maybe we should introduce Panthers (mountain lions) and Black Bears into suburban areas to hold down the deer population ... and make it illegal to harm them. That is what they are doing in South Florida. I think it's being done without our help. There have been denials by the Dept. of Fish & Game, but I'm convinced cougars are returning to New Jersey. I know two reputable friends that have stated they have seen a cougar. One siting was with cubs. Now, perhaps it was an escape, but there are cougars here. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:25:04 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:36:58 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote: On Dec 30, 12:36 pm, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. As long as the elk were dressed and eaten, in the end it wasn't ideal but it was effective. If there are herds of elk that will stand around and let themselves be surrounded and fired upon by men out in a field, they definitely have an elk problem. They need to open the season back up. The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Technically, you can shoot a deer in your backyard from your elevated deck if you are using a bow in Montgomery County, MD. Just make sure you have the proper hunting license. Don't suppose you'd consider renting your back deck and a bow some evening, would you? I'll lend you my expensive shot gun. Point and shoot. Bang! Supper is on the table. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
On Dec 31, 1:03*pm, thunder wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:05:03 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 10:11*am, thunder wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:30:58 -0800, Jack wrote: On Dec 31, 6:31*am, thunder wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:22:17 -0500, gfretwell wrote: The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Same here in New Jersey. *Deer are like vermin. *I would argue hunting is not an effective way to limit populations. *Each year, here in NJ, hunters take @ 60,000 deer. *Yet, the population has remained stable. Bad winters, or limited mast crop seem to have more effect on the size of the herd than hunting. Not an effective means, huh? *Ask yourself what the population would be like without the hunters taking 60k of them out every year? To help you out, the herd would be... larger. *And more destructive. Because food supplies would be strained, they'd be weak and sickly. More auto accidents and encroachment on farm and residential lands. That's my point. *Here in NJ, food supplies are already strained. *In most places, the land is already at carrying capacity. *The herd is estimated to be 200,000, of which 60,000 are taken yearly. *If it weren't for hunting, I will agree the herd would become weak, sickly, and prone to collapse, but as for controlling numbers, it ain't working. Well, let's recap... You *agree that if they weren't hunted, the herd size would increase, leading to a weak sickly herd becuase of lack of food, etc. *Sounds like you agree that the hunt is *indeed* controlling herd size. *Now if you want the hunt to *decrease* the herd size below present levels, that would take a longer, more open season to allow more deer to be taken, but there opponents to that as well, even from within the hunters themselves. Guy, if a hunter gets all his permits, fall bow, winter bow, muzzleloader, shotgun, etc., he has 116 days of hunting allowed. *With multiple kills allowed per permit, I don't see how it could get more "liberal". *For the past ten years, or so, New Jersey has been trying to reduce it's deer population through hunting. *It isn't working. * The kill yield through bow and primitive weapon is a good bit lower than with rifle and shotgun. Much of your season is limited in what weapon you can use. Add in all the restrictions on *where* you can hunt and *what* you can kill, and the season isn't nearly as productive as it could be. In any case, your are correct, it is managed with a purpose, through hunting. The hunters want plenty of good deer, with protected times for their chosen weapon. The farmers want the herds thinned down to decrease crop loss. Insurance companies want the same to reduce car damage claims. The anti-gun and anti-hunting PETA droolers want it completely outlawed. The lace-underwear cappuccino drinkers don't want to see or hear about it, and certainly not in their backyard as they are grilling steaks. Meanwhile, none of your taxpayers (or legislators) are really willing to see the hunting income go away. Your state wildlife department is probably doing the best they can while being pulled in ten directions at once. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
John H wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:25:04 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:36:58 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote: On Dec 30, 12:36 pm, wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:00:16 -0500, Tom Francis wrote: Well, on this we can agree. It's an atrocity. If I was a PETA person I would point out, nobody cares if you round up a dozen cows in that pen and kill them. If you do eat meat you have to say "so what"? At least they died fairly quickly in archery hunting terms and none crawled off and died a slow death without being recovered. What would the PETA folks say if it was a pack of wolves that had the elk trapped in there? You know, canned hunts are wrong, but I'm kind of with you on this one. After all: "The hunting season was created to keep elk out of the residential and farm areas in eastern Skagit County." Well, they were most definitely in a farm area, the state wildlife commission felt they needed a hunt to bring the population down, and it accomplished exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately it was visible to some cappuccino drinkers passing by, who want their steak medium- rare on their plate but don't want to think about how it got there. As long as the elk were dressed and eaten, in the end it wasn't ideal but it was effective. If there are herds of elk that will stand around and let themselves be surrounded and fired upon by men out in a field, they definitely have an elk problem. They need to open the season back up. The last time I was in Chuck county Md a farmer could get a permit to shoot any deer they saw on their property, night or day. Just turn on the flood light and blast away. They are 180 pound rats up there, evidently. Technically, you can shoot a deer in your backyard from your elevated deck if you are using a bow in Montgomery County, MD. Just make sure you have the proper hunting license. Don't suppose you'd consider renting your back deck and a bow some evening, would you? I'll lend you my expensive shot gun. Point and shoot. Bang! Supper is on the table. You moron. A shotgun is used to great people who come to the front door. i use my Glock 18 for hunting. it makes it much easier to field dress the animal when you don't have to remove all the buckshot. it is so easy to spot those spoofing me, you are all stupid as dog turds, without any of the redeeming social value of a dog turd. |
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
|
Sportsmen involved in humane harvest
Harry wrote:
Damn, these people have me so upset i made a typo. I'll lend you my expensive shot gun. Point and shoot. Bang! Supper is on the table. You moron. A shotgun is used to GREET people who come to the front door. i use my Glock 18 for hunting. it makes it much easier to field dress the animal when you don't have to remove all the buckshot. it is so easy to spot those spoofing me, you are all stupid as dog turds, without any of the redeeming social value of a dog turd. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com