Don White wrote:
That's it...in this case the fenced in area was small and the hunter pays
money so he can walk right up to some of the prey.
They also had some pretty exotic animals..such as tigers, lions etc wqhere
the great white hunters had a safe place in a bunker or platform and the
cats were let out of a cage to be gunned down before they could getaway.
One case had what looked like a mountain goat standing at a fence with an
arrow sticking out of it's back.
It seemed to sense what was coming and starred out through the links. The
'hunter walked up, fully clothed in camo, to within
20 feet or so and shot another arrow into the animal.
If these guys are that desperate to kill...send them to Iraq.

Even non-canned hunting doesn't seem especially sporting.

Couple of big guys go out in a field with a couple of dogs. The dogs go
ahead and scare little birds out of the brush. As the little birds try
to escape, the guys blast them with shotgun pellets.

Guys sit up in a tree, make deer deer, elk, moose calls. Moose moves in,
thinks he's going to get laid. Guys open up with high-powered rifles and
kill the critter.

Guys sit in a blind near a body of water. Fake ducks or geese are
floating in front of them. Guys make duck/goosing sounding noises. Birds
fly in, get blasted.

Yep. It surely is a manly "sport."





--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


Even non-canned hunting doesn't seem especially sporting.

Couple of big guys go out in a field with a couple of dogs. The dogs go
ahead and scare little birds out of the brush. As the little birds try
to escape, the guys blast them with shotgun pellets.

Guys sit up in a tree, make deer deer, elk, moose calls. Moose moves in,
thinks he's going to get laid. Guys open up with high-powered rifles and
kill the critter.

Guys sit in a blind near a body of water. Fake ducks or geese are
floating in front of them. Guys make duck/goosing sounding noises. Birds
fly in, get blasted.

Yep. It surely is a manly "sport."

I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour south of
Rochester. I went "hunting" with him on that land a couple of years ago. He
brought no weapons of any kind. We spent the weekend stalking deer. He took
written notes which enabled him to identify the one he wanted. He did this
for 3 weeks afterward. Then, he brought his bow with him and got the deer
he'd chosen. A week later, he got a permit for another. I'm not sure how
that works, but I think it's got something to do with the fact that we're
overrun with deer. He took another month to choose and take the right one,
this time with a long gun.

This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one deer,
just enough for their families.

There are slobs, and there are artists. It's not much different from people
who fish, and pigs who snag salmon with enormous treble hooks, all the while
keeping their eyes peeled for the DEC game warden.

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


Even non-canned hunting doesn't seem especially sporting.

Couple of big guys go out in a field with a couple of dogs. The dogs go
ahead and scare little birds out of the brush. As the little birds try
to escape, the guys blast them with shotgun pellets.

Guys sit up in a tree, make deer deer, elk, moose calls. Moose moves in,
thinks he's going to get laid. Guys open up with high-powered rifles and
kill the critter.

Guys sit in a blind near a body of water. Fake ducks or geese are
floating in front of them. Guys make duck/goosing sounding noises. Birds
fly in, get blasted.

Yep. It surely is a manly "sport."

I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour south of
Rochester. I went "hunting" with him on that land a couple of years ago. He
brought no weapons of any kind. We spent the weekend stalking deer. He took
written notes which enabled him to identify the one he wanted. He did this
for 3 weeks afterward. Then, he brought his bow with him and got the deer
he'd chosen. A week later, he got a permit for another. I'm not sure how
that works, but I think it's got something to do with the fact that we're
overrun with deer. He took another month to choose and take the right one,
this time with a long gun.

This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one deer,
just enough for their families.

There are slobs, and there are artists. It's not much different from people
who fish, and pigs who snag salmon with enormous treble hooks, all the while
keeping their eyes peeled for the DEC game warden.


Well, I see no need to get into a discussion of fishing versus hunting,
but I will point out a few differences. I just don't see hunting as
"sporting."

1. Fishing from a boat in salt water (and some bodies of fresh water) is
inherently dangerous for several reasons, including incurring the wrath
of mother nature in terms of the weather, falling overboard and
drowning, et cetera, or incurring the wrath of the fish in terms of
being bit. I have incurred these wraths, so to speak.

2. Catch and release fishing is becoming more popular, and as fishermen
get more used to this, more of the fish survive. Very few critters who
are blasted by guns can be released.

3. While sport fishermen attempt to attract their prey with bait, if
they do, they still have to hook and reel in the fish. If you get a deer
within your sights, and you're within range, the deer is dead.


Mind you, I have no problem with someone who goes out to shoot an animal
to put food on the table. But I feel better about it when the animal has
at least a sporting chance, eh?

Hey, when I go out to kill skeet, at least I miss a few. Sometimes.



--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour
south of
Rochester. I went "hunting" with him on that land a couple of years ago.
He
brought no weapons of any kind. We spent the weekend stalking deer. He
took
written notes which enabled him to identify the one he wanted. He did
this
for 3 weeks afterward. Then, he brought his bow with him and got the
deer
he'd chosen. A week later, he got a permit for another. I'm not sure how
that works, but I think it's got something to do with the fact that
we're
overrun with deer. He took another month to choose and take the right
one,
this time with a long gun.

This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the
farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one
deer,
just enough for their families.

There are slobs, and there are artists. It's not much different from
people
who fish, and pigs who snag salmon with enormous treble hooks, all the
while
keeping their eyes peeled for the DEC game warden.


Well, I see no need to get into a discussion of fishing versus hunting,
but I will point out a few differences. I just don't see hunting as
"sporting."

1. Fishing from a boat in salt water (and some bodies of fresh water) is
inherently dangerous for several reasons, including incurring the wrath
of mother nature in terms of the weather, falling overboard and
drowning, et cetera, or incurring the wrath of the fish in terms of
being bit. I have incurred these wraths, so to speak.

Hunters have to deal with weather that can only be called "utterly stupid",
risking frostbite and hypothermia. Deer season here corresponds with weather
that's cold and wet, which is inherently more dangerous than three feet of
snow in January.


2. Catch and release fishing is becoming more popular, and as fishermen
get more used to this, more of the fish survive. Very few critters who
are blasted by guns can be released.

OK, but there are shortages of certain fish, which is WHY we release them.
In many areas, the deer populations are way beyond what the place is able to
support. Hunting them doesn't threaten the entire species in a given area.

Harry, here's a response that's not allowed: "Well, the deer you shoot are
certainly threatened". :-) Thought I'd save your fingers a little work.


3. While sport fishermen attempt to attract their prey with bait, if
they do, they still have to hook and reel in the fish. If you get a deer
within your sights, and you're within range, the deer is dead.

That's a big "IF", Harry. I know hunters who have been coming back
emptyhanded for years. Most of them couldn't sneak up on a garbage can.


Mind you, I have no problem with someone who goes out to shoot an animal
to put food on the table. But I feel better about it when the animal has
at least a sporting chance, eh?

Sporting chance? You have to wear bright orange clothing, or risk your life.
The deer can smell you coming a mile away, and may even be spooked by scent
of your 1/2 hour old footprints. And, they're blazingly fast on their feet.
And, good hunters won't even take a shot if they think it may result in a
wounded deer that'll get away.

I'm not a hunter, and I have plenty of skepticism about some of the clowns I
know who tote rifles around the woods. But, there are some decent hunters.

In *both* fishing and hunting the objective is to convince your prey that
it's gonna get a free meal or get laid. Then when it falls for the routine,
you get a *chance* to put it in the car or the boat.

I'm not sure how "sporting" any of it all is - but it's far from a certain
meal either. It's not easy to outsmart a deer, most birds, or some types of
fish.

None of this has anything to do with the canned hunting of exotic animals
for trophies - which I think is sickening.

-W



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some
REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour
south of
Rochester. I went "hunting" with him on that land a couple of years
ago.
He
brought no weapons of any kind. We spent the weekend stalking deer. He
took
written notes which enabled him to identify the one he wanted. He did
this
for 3 weeks afterward. Then, he brought his bow with him and got the
deer
he'd chosen. A week later, he got a permit for another. I'm not sure
how
that works, but I think it's got something to do with the fact that
we're
overrun with deer. He took another month to choose and take the right
one,
this time with a long gun.

This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the
farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one
deer,
just enough for their families.

There are slobs, and there are artists. It's not much different from
people
who fish, and pigs who snag salmon with enormous treble hooks, all the
while
keeping their eyes peeled for the DEC game warden.


Well, I see no need to get into a discussion of fishing versus hunting,
but I will point out a few differences. I just don't see hunting as
"sporting."

1. Fishing from a boat in salt water (and some bodies of fresh water) is
inherently dangerous for several reasons, including incurring the wrath
of mother nature in terms of the weather, falling overboard and
drowning, et cetera, or incurring the wrath of the fish in terms of
being bit. I have incurred these wraths, so to speak.

Hunters have to deal with weather that can only be called "utterly
stupid",
risking frostbite and hypothermia. Deer season here corresponds with
weather
that's cold and wet, which is inherently more dangerous than three feet of
snow in January.


2. Catch and release fishing is becoming more popular, and as fishermen
get more used to this, more of the fish survive. Very few critters who
are blasted by guns can be released.

OK, but there are shortages of certain fish, which is WHY we release them.
In many areas, the deer populations are way beyond what the place is able
to
support. Hunting them doesn't threaten the entire species in a given area.

Harry, here's a response that's not allowed: "Well, the deer you shoot are
certainly threatened". :-) Thought I'd save your fingers a little work.


3. While sport fishermen attempt to attract their prey with bait, if
they do, they still have to hook and reel in the fish. If you get a deer
within your sights, and you're within range, the deer is dead.

That's a big "IF", Harry. I know hunters who have been coming back
emptyhanded for years. Most of them couldn't sneak up on a garbage can.


Mind you, I have no problem with someone who goes out to shoot an animal
to put food on the table. But I feel better about it when the animal has
at least a sporting chance, eh?

Sporting chance? You have to wear bright orange clothing, or risk your
life.
The deer can smell you coming a mile away, and may even be spooked by
scent
of your 1/2 hour old footprints. And, they're blazingly fast on their
feet.
And, good hunters won't even take a shot if they think it may result in a
wounded deer that'll get away.

I'm not a hunter, and I have plenty of skepticism about some of the clowns
I
know who tote rifles around the woods. But, there are some decent hunters.

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:1BKyb.268713$mZ5.1957235@attbi_s54...

In *both* fishing and hunting the objective is to convince your prey that
it's gonna get a free meal or get laid. Then when it falls for the
routine,
you get a *chance* to put it in the car or the boat.

I'm not sure how "sporting" any of it all is - but it's far from a certain
meal either. It's not easy to outsmart a deer, most birds, or some types
of
fish.

None of this has anything to do with the canned hunting of exotic animals
for trophies - which I think is sickening.

-W

Browse messages at rec.hunting for a week or two and you'll get a real taste
of what SOME hunters are like. There seems to be a subculture of guys who
pack up the whole dang family and a bunch of .22 rifles, and find a place to
shoot prairie dogs for a couple of days. Maybe prairie dogs are a pest to
somebody, but still, these people are from another friggin' planet.

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:1BKyb.268713$mZ5.1957235@attbi_s54...

In *both* fishing and hunting the objective is to convince your prey that
it's gonna get a free meal or get laid. Then when it falls for the
routine,
you get a *chance* to put it in the car or the boat.

I'm not sure how "sporting" any of it all is - but it's far from a certain
meal either. It's not easy to outsmart a deer, most birds, or some types
of
fish.

None of this has anything to do with the canned hunting of exotic animals
for trophies - which I think is sickening.

-W

Browse messages at rec.hunting for a week or two and you'll get a real taste
of what SOME hunters are like. There seems to be a subculture of guys who
pack up the whole dang family and a bunch of .22 rifles, and find a place to
shoot prairie dogs for a couple of days. Maybe prairie dogs are a pest to
somebody, but still, these people are from another friggin' planet.



Republicans, no doubt.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:0Nwyb.2817
I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour south of
Rochester.

Avoca, Bath area?


This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one deer,
just enough for their families.

That is true enough. When I lived there, I had no problem with people
who lived in the area taking a deer to feed there families. But, I
really didn't care for all of the people that came to the area from
Rochester, Buffalo, Syracuse who came and just blasted everything in
sight. Ever look at Rochester's landfills after deer season? They are
full of deer carcasses, rotting, after they took the deer home to
parade it up and down the streets.

"basskisser" wrote in message
m...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:0Nwyb.2817
I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour
south of
Rochester.

Avoca, Bath area?

East Bloomfield, around routes 5 & 20.


This guy's not that unusual. I've met his neighbors down at the
farmland.
They're the same way. They go out for 40 hours and come back with one
deer,
just enough for their families.

That is true enough. When I lived there, I had no problem with people
who lived in the area taking a deer to feed there families. But, I
really didn't care for all of the people that came to the area from
Rochester, Buffalo, Syracuse who came and just blasted everything in
sight. Ever look at Rochester's landfills after deer season? They are
full of deer carcasses, rotting, after they took the deer home to
parade it up and down the streets.

The Brooklyn hunters who infect the Catskills are quite a crew, too. All
amateurs. When I was in college, my roommate and I were sitting in the
Roscoe Diner when a NYS trooper walked in and sat down a few stools away. We
were hoping that the neon "We Are Stoned" signs on our foreheads weren't
noticeable. There were a bunch of hunters in the parking lot admiring each
others' new guns, new orange vests, etc. Suddenly....BLAM! One of the idiots
shot out the windshield of the trooper's car. Poor cop shook his head, says
to the waitress "Oh no....they're back", and goes outside & starts
collecting guns and taking names.

Around here, at least 2-3 hunters are killed each year, either with their
own guns, falling out of tree stands, or due to the stupidity of their
hunting partners. My former landlord was shot in the leg with an arror by
another hunter. He was in a tree stand on totally flat land, wearing blaze
orange. I guess he looked like one of them thar tree deer. :-)

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ...
"basskisser" wrote in message
m...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:0Nwyb.2817
I disagree, but based only on being very familiar with the way some REAL
hunters hunt. My former neighbor's dad has about 1000 acres an hour
south of
Rochester.

Avoca, Bath area?

East Bloomfield, around routes 5 & 20.

Ah, I know the area, somewhat. I used to live in Avoca, if you know
where that is. I lived on Neil's Creek, a nice trout stream. Was funny
to watch on April 1st as the city boys invaded in there brand new
Orvis gear, thousand dollar fly rods, etc. I knew every fish holding
hole in the creek, and would come out, poor farm boy, with my Mitchell
300 that was older than I was, and start pulling fish! They'd even try
to BUY fish from me!

The Brooklyn hunters who infect the Catskills are quite a crew, too. All
amateurs. When I was in college, my roommate and I were sitting in the
Roscoe Diner when a NYS trooper walked in and sat down a few stools away. We
were hoping that the neon "We Are Stoned" signs on our foreheads weren't
noticeable. There were a bunch of hunters in the parking lot admiring each
others' new guns, new orange vests, etc. Suddenly....BLAM! One of the idiots
shot out the windshield of the trooper's car. Poor cop shook his head, says
to the waitress "Oh no....they're back", and goes outside & starts
collecting guns and taking names.

Around here, at least 2-3 hunters are killed each year, either with their
own guns, falling out of tree stands, or due to the stupidity of their
hunting partners. My former landlord was shot in the leg with an arror by
another hunter. He was in a tree stand on totally flat land, wearing blaze
orange. I guess he looked like one of them thar tree deer. :-)

We used to hate it when they invaded our local bar, we were just
country boys, and for various reasons, some legal, we wanted to be
left alone. They drew cops around us, and generally raised hell, which
was OUR vocation!