On 5/5/2012 8:50 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Fri, 4 May 2012 13:08:23 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:42:28 -0400, wrote:

In , says...

On 5/4/2012 9:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John
wrote:

...and those who find hunters despicable.

http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg

More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the
animals" kooks combined.

Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do
things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't
just whine about it.

BTW I don't hunt.

Yeah, killing animals saves them. Got it!

Finally...

Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it.

I do think it is funny that these avid fish hunters draw the line at
killing a deer or a rabbit.

Since I wrote the above, I take it you are talking about me. I catch and
release.

Maybe if we rigged an ear of corn with big treble hooks. snagged the
deer, dragged the deer up to the truck with a winch, kicking and
bleeding. Then put him, live, in an air tight box to slowly suffocate
it would be OK.

I catch and release.



So if I just dragged the deer up to the truck, ripped the hooks out
and let him stagger away, it would be OK.

You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

You don't hardly speak English, do you? Gonna need a cite for that
suffering claim.

On 5/5/2012 9:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In raweb.com, 5@
5.com says...

On 5/4/2012 8:31 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 5/4/12 8:19 AM, BAR wrote:
cats are rodents in my book.


Well, of course...you joined the marines instead of getting an
edu-ma-ka-shun.


Why you dirty rat!

I have had the Bozo in my Bozo Bin for a couple of months.

I hope enjoys it.



Not me. I don't want the asshole to enjoy anything.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

Is that the source for your science?

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:57:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 4 May 2012 13:50:50 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:06:26 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...



Well it figures that you'd think that killing an animal is saving it.

Figures you would bring it down to the single animal level to make a
point, when the conversation is about hunting in general... Frekin'
engineers... snicker

What engineers came up with the notion that hunting in general is a good
thing? But, it DOES come down to the single animal. It's that simple. I
guess, that because of overpopulation of humans on the earth, then you
should be okay with killing off people, abortion, etc. right?

Without the money hunters pump into the system you might actually come
down to that single animal, starving to death and bringing on
extinction.
The animal lovers barely collect enough money to support their own
bureaucracy and put virtually nothing into conservation efforts.

The best example is the hunting ranches in Texas that hold the largest
populations of endangered African animals on the planet. Without the
incentive of allowing someone to shoot one now and then for outrageous
amounts of money, they would simply go extinct.
These ranchers ensure that there is always a healthy breeding
population and suitable habitat for them. That is a lot more than the
Africans are doing.
I find it strange that the animal rights people would rather see an
entire species go extinct than to allow them to be managed for profit.
I wonder what our grand kids would say about that after the animals
are gone forever.

I know that in the imaginary utopia you lefties live in, animal lovers
would buy and maintain millions of acres of pristine habitat for the
animals to live in peace but the fact is, the animal lovers want
someone else to pay for that.
Those people are hunters.
They do it via a surcharge on all hunting equipment, license fees,
private club dues and direct payments to land owners for the right to
hunt there.

Well, kill 'em all then.

You will if you shut down the hunting ranches where these exotics are
raised. It is certain that the Africans are not going to save them.

Right... No animal species on earth can survive without man killing
them, huh?

Not without suitable habitat. The hunters seem to be the only ones who
are willing to actually PAY for that habitat.

And why is there not "suitable habitat?

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 09:06:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

Bass fishermen are different, nobody wants to eat a freshwater bass
anyway, and artificials are perfect for them... Other fishermen catch
fish you want to eat, and they don't do as well with artificials. I
suppose you are gonna' tell us you never took a fish, never killed a
fish, and never used natural bait, right??? Pffffttt. I suppose you will.

Really? I LOVE bass, as does my whole family. You suppose wrong, idiot.
As I've stated right here in between your political whining, I eat fish
and animals. I don't mind someone eating what they kill.

... even if that is a deer?

No problem. I get deer sausage every year!

wrote in message ...

On Fri, 04 May 2012 19:28:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:


Bass fishermen are different, nobody wants to eat a freshwater bass
anyway, and artificials are perfect for them... Other fishermen catch
fish you want to eat, and they don't do as well with artificials. I
suppose you are gonna' tell us you never took a fish, never killed a
fish, and never used natural bait, right??? Pffffttt. I suppose you will.


Lots of people eat freshwater bass, jerkwater.

Not serious bass fishermen.

That is the old fish story isn't it? The largest recorded large mouth
was reportedly caught by an old woman who had it weighed at a local
store. When the word got out about it and the record people tracked
her down, they were just finishing it up ... or so the legend goes.

After all it is a fish story.

None of the guys I fish fresh water with keep a bass. They will catch
a mess of specks if they want a fish fry.

On the other hand all of the salt water people I know are in the
fillet and release club.
------------------------------------------

Go your local Asian market with live fish sales. There will be those Bass
for sale.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:37:50 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 10:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

So?

I am just pointing out the incongruities in "I"'s argument

He started out saying he was always catch and release, then he said he
eats the bass he catches, now he says the fish doesn't even feel a
hook in his cheek. That is denial.

I'm sorry, please point out where I said I always catch and release,
would you? Betcha can't!

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:39:49 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

Is that the source for your science?

It seems to be the source for your science against hunting.,

Nope, my stance is simple. How is killing an animal saving it? We are
encroaching on there space, not the other way around you know?

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:41:10 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

Right... No animal species on earth can survive without man killing
them, huh?

Not without suitable habitat. The hunters seem to be the only ones who
are willing to actually PAY for that habitat.

And why is there not "suitable habitat?

Because nobody else is willing to pay the money to set it aside.

We are all living on the original habitat. The food we eat comes from
the original habitat and we drive on some more.
I suppose if we could just get rid of a few billion people, the
animals would have more elbow room. Obviously, most of this population
pressure is coming from the 3d world right now. That is why it is
significant that some hunting ranches are making room for soon to be
extinct African animals. The number that get shot every year pales in
comparison to the number killed in Africa by development..

Exactly my point! We are encroaching on the animal's land, not the other
way around.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:41:30 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 09:06:51 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

Bass fishermen are different, nobody wants to eat a freshwater bass
anyway, and artificials are perfect for them... Other fishermen catch
fish you want to eat, and they don't do as well with artificials. I
suppose you are gonna' tell us you never took a fish, never killed a
fish, and never used natural bait, right??? Pffffttt. I suppose you will.

Really? I LOVE bass, as does my whole family. You suppose wrong, idiot.
As I've stated right here in between your political whining, I eat fish
and animals. I don't mind someone eating what they kill.

... even if that is a deer?

No problem. I get deer sausage every year!

Then what the hell are you arguing about?

Hunting for "sport", and the fact that somehow, killing an animal is
thus saving it.