|
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:39:01 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 5/3/2012 1:07 PM, wrote: On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John wrote: ...and those who find hunters despicable. http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg There's a place in gawds kingdom for all animals; usually right next to my mashed potatoes. Still folks out there that would rather see the things slowly starve to death... Makes you wonder how any animal species ever survived without man killing them in mass. Without man, there was nobody there to care, if they slowly starved to death from poor weather, diminished food stocks, or overpopulation. Who mourned the extinction of the dinosaurs? Species go extinct each and every day. Why do we care? Because if ALL species go extinct except man, we'd be next. That's a stupid argument. |
For animal lovers...
In article , says...
On 5/4/2012 12:25 PM, wrote: 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. 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 won't even talk about what fishermen do to the bait. That is down right medieval. Yes, but private citizens can't protect themselves from Government with fish hooks... And Scotty beats Harry to the political **** once again. |
For animal lovers...
In article , says...
On 5/4/2012 1:08 PM, iBoaterer 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. I won't even talk about what fishermen do to the bait. That is down right medieval. I know! Those rubber worms and Rapalas that I use are SO abused..... 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. |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
In article , says...
On 5/5/2012 1:40 AM, wrote: 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. Of course nobody eats fresh water Bass, he just said it, it's what he does... You are ****ing CRAZY!!!! Where did you ever get the idea nobody eats bass? I have some in the freezer!!! |
For animal lovers...
In article om, 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. |
For animal lovers...
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? |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 10:35 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:55:57 -0400, wrote: In , says... On 5/4/2012 3:54 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 3:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:17:34 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 2:52 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:31:00 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. It is basically the same as the canned hunt you are talking about on a game ranch and I am not sure where the danger is ... unless the boat sinks. I wasn't making a comparison to a canned hunt but to "regular" hunting, and if you've never been aboard a boat targeting 500-pound fish, you have no idea of the dangers involved...that have nothing to do with the boat sinking. What dangers? We are not talking about Alaskan crab fishermen here. How many recreational fishermen are killed every year? (tossing out the ones who just get drunk and fall out of the boat) You mean, other than being pulled overboard by a fish, being bitten by a pelagic, falling and hitting your head, arm strain, neck strain, back strain, being impaled with large fish hooks, stabbed by knives, sun poisoning, and heatstroke, among other things? All of those injuries could happen walking through the woods, and dragging back a 1200 pound animal... dumb ass... Really? You're going to be bitten by a pelagic, and be impaled with a large fish hook in the woods??? The issue was risk (although I am not sure why Harry brought it up) I think I would rather fall in the water than fall out of a tree stand and I know I would rather take a fish hook on the finger than get shot. We won't even get into the difference between getting bit by a fish on the deck and mauled by a bear in the woods. I thought shooting other hunters on a canned hunt was part of the fun. Just ask Dick Cheney. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/2012 7:16 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 5/5/12 1:40 AM, wrote: 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. Note that in my comment, I singled out "lots of people." I've seen people eating largemouth freshwater bass they've caught, right in your state. I wasn't talking about "serious bass fishermen." There are many, many recipes on the internet for largemouth bass. In a simple search, I found 10,000+ hits for "recipes for largemouth bass." Here's one from a Florida resident: Title: Baked Bass Teriyaki by retired1950 Type: Entree Servings: Difficulty: Easy Prep Time: Marinate overnite Cook Time: 25 minutes Ingredients: Bass Fillets bottle of teriyaki sauce lemon juice lemon pepper 1 medium onion, thinly sliced Directions: Marinate the bass fillets overnight in the teryaki sauce. Place bass in bread pan lined with aluminum foil. Sprinkle lemon juice and lemon pepper over the fillets. Place onion slices on the fillets. Cover the bass fillets with aliminum foil and bake at 375 for approximately 20 - 25 minutes. Enjoy Other Notes: One of my favorites - Very tastey! Date Added: 04/16/09 11:10 AM As I posted, lots of people eat largemouth bass. That recipie would work with bluefish as well. Only, I would leave out the marinade. Who wants fish that tastes like soy sauce? Sheeesh. |
For animal lovers...
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. |
For animal lovers...
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. |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
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? |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
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. |
For animal lovers...
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! |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:44:58 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/5/12 10:35 AM, wrote: On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:55:57 -0400, wrote: The issue was risk (although I am not sure why Harry brought it up) I think I would rather fall in the water than fall out of a tree stand and I know I would rather take a fish hook on the finger than get shot. We won't even get into the difference between getting bit by a fish on the deck and mauled by a bear in the woods. I thought shooting other hunters on a canned hunt was part of the fun. Just ask Dick Cheney. Any day you can shoot a lawyer is a good day in the woods ;-) We never heard the specifics but it is clear someone was out of position there. There is a strict protocol about where people are walking in a bird hunt like that so nobody is in the other's line of fire. Occasionally there is still a stray pellet tho. We had a guy get hit at the Manassas skeet range and everyone was doing everything right. The extremely low velocity of the pellet suggested it was a strange bounce off of a claybird. Is there anything on the conservative side that you will not try to rationalize? Dick Cheney was careless; he shot a friend in the face and chest. Period. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote:
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. Who "he"? |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 6:42 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 5/5/2012 1:40 AM, wrote: 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. Of course nobody eats fresh water Bass, he just said it, it's what he does... "Of course nobody eats fresh water Bass..." Yet another example of your not knowing anything real. Plenty of people eat freshwater largemouth bass. |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 1:47 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would support. That is true. There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there were when the Mayflower landed. Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in Foggy Bottom. We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way from the 'country'. The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers. I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner). It takes a real man to shoot a tiny bird like a quail. |
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would support. That is true. There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there were when the Mayflower landed. Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in Foggy Bottom. We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way from the 'country'. The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers. I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner). No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were almost wiped out. |
For animal lovers...
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:03:47 -0400, Oscar wrote:
On 5/4/2012 4:22 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:54:33 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 3:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:17:34 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 2:52 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:31:00 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. It is basically the same as the canned hunt you are talking about on a game ranch and I am not sure where the danger is ... unless the boat sinks. I wasn't making a comparison to a canned hunt but to "regular" hunting, and if you've never been aboard a boat targeting 500-pound fish, you have no idea of the dangers involved...that have nothing to do with the boat sinking. What dangers? We are not talking about Alaskan crab fishermen here. How many recreational fishermen are killed every year? (tossing out the ones who just get drunk and fall out of the boat) You mean, other than being pulled overboard by a fish, being bitten by a pelagic, falling and hitting your head, arm strain, neck strain, back strain, being impaled with large fish hooks, stabbed by knives, sun poisoning, and heatstroke, among other things? I am sure that pales in comparison to the number of hunters who fall out of tree stands, drown in freezing water, get attacked by the animal they are hunting, get bit by snakes, get shot by other hunters or just shoot themselves. They still have all of those exposure risks, knife injury risks and strain injuries trying to drag that elk out of the woods. I suppose we could get some kind of numbers but I don't care that much because they are probably meaningless. You are still ignoring all the fishermen who are simply bottom fishing off their dock. (probably analogous to shooting squirrels off your porch) Indeed, I was discussing big game fishing, since you mentioned sportfish boats, tuna, ballyhoo and mates. Oh, I wouldn't shoot a squirrel or any other animal. Man is animal. It's OK to kill baby humans. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 6:22 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:03:47 -0400, wrote: On 5/4/2012 4:22 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:54:33 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 3:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:17:34 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 2:52 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:31:00 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. It is basically the same as the canned hunt you are talking about on a game ranch and I am not sure where the danger is ... unless the boat sinks. I wasn't making a comparison to a canned hunt but to "regular" hunting, and if you've never been aboard a boat targeting 500-pound fish, you have no idea of the dangers involved...that have nothing to do with the boat sinking. What dangers? We are not talking about Alaskan crab fishermen here. How many recreational fishermen are killed every year? (tossing out the ones who just get drunk and fall out of the boat) You mean, other than being pulled overboard by a fish, being bitten by a pelagic, falling and hitting your head, arm strain, neck strain, back strain, being impaled with large fish hooks, stabbed by knives, sun poisoning, and heatstroke, among other things? I am sure that pales in comparison to the number of hunters who fall out of tree stands, drown in freezing water, get attacked by the animal they are hunting, get bit by snakes, get shot by other hunters or just shoot themselves. They still have all of those exposure risks, knife injury risks and strain injuries trying to drag that elk out of the woods. I suppose we could get some kind of numbers but I don't care that much because they are probably meaningless. You are still ignoring all the fishermen who are simply bottom fishing off their dock. (probably analogous to shooting squirrels off your porch) Indeed, I was discussing big game fishing, since you mentioned sportfish boats, tuna, ballyhoo and mates. Oh, I wouldn't shoot a squirrel or any other animal. Man is animal. It's OK to kill baby humans. Once they are born and actual baby humans, conservatives don't give a **** about them. "“Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear.” ~William E. Gladstone |
For animal lovers...
On Sat, 5 May 2012 16:45:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would support. That is true. There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there were when the Mayflower landed. Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in Foggy Bottom. We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way from the 'country'. The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers. I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner). No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were almost wiped out. Kevin, you just made the case for today's hunting laws. They bring back the animals. Now, there needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain healthy. Thanks for your insightful post. Well done. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/12 6:29 PM, John H. wrote:
Now, there needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain healthy. I agree. We need to thin out conservatives. “Today’s so-called ‘conservatives’ don’t even know what the word means. They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right. It’s not a conservative issue at all.” ~Barry Goldwater |
For animal lovers...
On 5/5/2012 6:22 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 18:03:47 -0400, wrote: On 5/4/2012 4:22 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:54:33 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 3:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 15:17:34 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 2:52 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:31:00 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:09 PM, wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2012 12:39:56 -0400, X ` Man I don't do much fishing anymore. I do, however, think it is more sporting than hunting. There's nothing sporting about seeing an elk or a moose a few hundred yards away and then shooting it with a high powered rifle and scope. How is that any less "sporting" than sitting in the lounge of your sport fish, sipping a cold drink, waiting for a tuna to hit one of the ballyhoo you are trolling? The mate probably rigged the bait and struck the fish. All you did was reel it in. Well, it is less sporting because fishing for big pelagics is a lot more dangerous than shooting a moose or an elk, but I'm not a fan of that sort of "hunting," either. It is basically the same as the canned hunt you are talking about on a game ranch and I am not sure where the danger is ... unless the boat sinks. I wasn't making a comparison to a canned hunt but to "regular" hunting, and if you've never been aboard a boat targeting 500-pound fish, you have no idea of the dangers involved...that have nothing to do with the boat sinking. What dangers? We are not talking about Alaskan crab fishermen here. How many recreational fishermen are killed every year? (tossing out the ones who just get drunk and fall out of the boat) You mean, other than being pulled overboard by a fish, being bitten by a pelagic, falling and hitting your head, arm strain, neck strain, back strain, being impaled with large fish hooks, stabbed by knives, sun poisoning, and heatstroke, among other things? I am sure that pales in comparison to the number of hunters who fall out of tree stands, drown in freezing water, get attacked by the animal they are hunting, get bit by snakes, get shot by other hunters or just shoot themselves. They still have all of those exposure risks, knife injury risks and strain injuries trying to drag that elk out of the woods. I suppose we could get some kind of numbers but I don't care that much because they are probably meaningless. You are still ignoring all the fishermen who are simply bottom fishing off their dock. (probably analogous to shooting squirrels off your porch) Indeed, I was discussing big game fishing, since you mentioned sportfish boats, tuna, ballyhoo and mates. Oh, I wouldn't shoot a squirrel or any other animal. Man is animal. It's OK to kill baby humans. Well, Harry seems to think so. |
For animal lovers...
X ` Man wrote:
On 5/4/12 9:07 PM, Earl wrote: X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:02 AM, wrote: On Thu, 03 May 2012 20:32:41 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/3/12 8:25 PM, Richard Casady wrote: On Thu, 03 May 2012 18:44:24 -0400, X ` wrote: I live just outside Des Moines, and the local deer are so numerous as to be catagorized as vermin. I lost an auto to one. They cross my lawn on a daily basis. It would be great if hunters would kill vast numbers of them. Casady Typically, the problem you describe is the result of man encroaching on the natural habit of woodland critters and decimating it. So, we take away the land on which critters live, eat, and breathe, and then we shoot them. There are significantly more deer in the suburbs than there ever have been but the residents would not tolerate repopulating the predators necessary for natural control. It turns out white tail deer are very well adapted to suburban living. I have even seen them on the Whitehurst Freeway in downtown DC. Can you imagine the howl people would put up if we dumped a couple dozen cougars around the beltway and in Rock Creek Park? I doubt they would even tolerate that down in rural Calvert County. (yet they did it near where I live here in SW Florida) A few thousand cougars running loose in Florida could only improve the quality of life for everyone in that state. Isn't that the panther in FL? I've read several serious articles about the cats that indicate they are what are commonly known as cougars. I didn't know FL had both.... |
For animal lovers...
X ` Man wrote:
On 5/5/12 1:40 AM, wrote: 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. Note that in my comment, I singled out "lots of people." I've seen people eating largemouth freshwater bass they've caught, right in your state. I wasn't talking about "serious bass fishermen." There are many, many recipes on the internet for largemouth bass. In a simple search, I found 10,000+ hits for "recipes for largemouth bass." Here's one from a Florida resident: Title: Baked Bass Teriyaki by retired1950 Type: Entree Servings: Difficulty: Easy Prep Time: Marinate overnite Cook Time: 25 minutes Ingredients: Bass Fillets bottle of teriyaki sauce lemon juice lemon pepper 1 medium onion, thinly sliced Directions: Marinate the bass fillets overnight in the teryaki sauce. Place bass in bread pan lined with aluminum foil. Sprinkle lemon juice and lemon pepper over the fillets. Place onion slices on the fillets. Cover the bass fillets with aliminum foil and bake at 375 for approximately 20 - 25 minutes. Enjoy Other Notes: One of my favorites - Very tastey! Date Added: 04/16/09 11:10 AM As I posted, lots of people eat largemouth bass. You can mask the nasty taste of a lot of food with Teriyaki sauce. As far as freshwater fish are concerned, I like Walleye, Crappie, Perch, Catfish (small), and trout. Largemouth Bass, from my experience, have a very strong fishy flavor in any size. |
For animal lovers...
|
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... On Sat, 5 May 2012 16:45:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would support. That is true. There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there were when the Mayflower landed. Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in Foggy Bottom. We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way from the 'country'. The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers. I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner). No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were almost wiped out. Kevin, you just made the case for today's hunting laws. They bring back the animals. Now, there needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain healthy. Thanks for your insightful post. Well done. Oh, you poor stupid man (and in your case I use the term man very lightly). You still think I'm Kevin!!!! |
For animal lovers...
On 5/6/2012 1:42 AM, Earl wrote:
X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 9:07 PM, Earl wrote: X ` Man wrote: On 5/4/12 1:02 AM, wrote: On Thu, 03 May 2012 20:32:41 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/3/12 8:25 PM, Richard Casady wrote: On Thu, 03 May 2012 18:44:24 -0400, X ` wrote: I live just outside Des Moines, and the local deer are so numerous as to be catagorized as vermin. I lost an auto to one. They cross my lawn on a daily basis. It would be great if hunters would kill vast numbers of them. Casady Typically, the problem you describe is the result of man encroaching on the natural habit of woodland critters and decimating it. So, we take away the land on which critters live, eat, and breathe, and then we shoot them. There are significantly more deer in the suburbs than there ever have been but the residents would not tolerate repopulating the predators necessary for natural control. It turns out white tail deer are very well adapted to suburban living. I have even seen them on the Whitehurst Freeway in downtown DC. Can you imagine the howl people would put up if we dumped a couple dozen cougars around the beltway and in Rock Creek Park? I doubt they would even tolerate that down in rural Calvert County. (yet they did it near where I live here in SW Florida) A few thousand cougars running loose in Florida could only improve the quality of life for everyone in that state. Isn't that the panther in FL? I've read several serious articles about the cats that indicate they are what are commonly known as cougars. I didn't know FL had both.... Sure. And they have bobcats too. Harry captured one and held it prisoner. But don't tell animal control. They wouldn't approve. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/6/12 12:15 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:17:55 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote: 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. Who "he"? "I" man Oh. |
For animal lovers...
On 5/6/12 1:04 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 06 May 2012 10:43:50 -0400, wrote: I didn't know FL had both.... Sure. And they have bobcats too. Actually quite a few These are running around my wife's country club http://gfretwell.com/wildlife/Bobcat...%20through.jpg The bobcats certainly are more attractive. Maybe your wife should target the golfers, since they add nothing to the view. |
For animal lovers...
In article ,
says... On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:46:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: 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! It was your response to the hunting vs fishing analogy and you even made the point that you don't use live bait Nope, never said that I always catch and release, that's a lie. Now it turns out you are a famous bass slayer and you love Bambi sausage. I assume you have someone else do that killing for you. Yes, I do. Your point? What you fail to understand, and I've stated over and over again, is the killing of animals for sport, and the fact that you still can not answer how killing of said animal saves said animal. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:49 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com