Hunters Are Awesome

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

You are really outspoken about something that is clear to everyone you know absolutely nothing about. The industry you want to put out of existence is a 3 Billion dollar industry.
Hunters spend a lot on charities related to conservation and other animal causes. Hunting provides a major source of protein for many families trying to make ends meet during these tough times.

http://www.gohuntn.com/gohuntn/968-t...ry-gives-back/

Now about that Deer Relocation effort, I'd be curious as to the logistics?

.How would you go about trapping these deer in the many thousands of square miles they live in?

.How would you go about transporting all these deer you catch in your relocation effort?

.Where would you move these deer to?

When you move these deer what metrics would you use to determine when you will have to move them from their new overloaded home?

I never said I was against people hunting for food.

With regards to relocating animals, as I said in my previous posts, I have no idea whether it would be feasible in Pennsylvania. In general, I think there are plenty of cases where it would not be feasible. But there are also cases where it is feasible. I have read about plenty of cases where wild animals were relocated. Wild mustangs have been relocated before.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Are you a vegan, Rupert?

I have a mainly vegetarian diet but I am not a vegan. If you are a vegan, you need to take Vitamin B12 supplements. That fact alone makes me think that we are not meant to be total vegans. If you eat a ton of meat, you will end up with blocked arteries. That tells me that we are not meant to eat a lot of meat.

I eat a lot of fruits and vegetables. I have fish a few times a week. I eat chicken a few times a month. I eat red meat once every month or two.

In another thread a couple of months back, we were talking about how much healthier grass-fed beef is. I finally tried grass-fed beef for the first time last week. I thought it was great. I think it is worth the extra money, both in terms of taste and health benefits.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by jms62

What you are skeptical that the links to all those statistics to seemingly valid news and research articles are wrong becuase that person can't spell?

Yes. And I am even more skeptical after I google the owner of the site and find out Idaho has suspended his hunting and fishing license for three years for elk poaching:

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?...0#.UMpDS6Wl00s

[jms62]

xx

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I never said I was against people hunting for food.

There really isn't any other way for a rational person to take your initial post other then hunting should be illegal. Of course you will fall back on the "That is not what I meant since I didn't say those words EXACTLY" defense



With regards to relocating animals, as I said in my previous posts, I have no idea whether it would be feasible in Pennsylvania.

You are hardly a dumb guy. The scope of relocating deer in PA or anywhere else for that matter never occurred to you? Why say something that would be declared infeasible in 20 seconds by a 5 year old.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Yes. And I am even more skeptical after I google the owner of the site and find out Idaho has suspended his hunting and fishing license for three years for elk poaching:

http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?...0#.UMpDS6Wl00s

So what does that have to do with the links to external sources?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I have a mainly vegetarian diet but I am not a vegan. If you are a vegan, you need to take Vitamin B12 supplements. That fact alone makes me think that we are not meant to be total vegans. If you eat a ton of meat, you will end up with blocked arteries. That tells me that we are not meant to eat a lot of meat.

I eat a lot of fruits and vegetables. I have fish a few times a week. I eat chicken a few times a month. I eat red meat once every month or two.

In another thread a couple of months back, we were talking about how much healthier grass-fed beef is. I finally tried grass-fed beef for the first time last week. I thought it was great. I think it is worth the extra money, both in terms of taste and health benefits.

So you are all for depriving animals of their right to life if it means you can eat tasty beef.

Rupert, I'm actually on your side when it comes to population control of predators- I don't think that's the sort of thing that should be offered via hunting licenses because I don't think the populations are large enough to sustain recreational hunters who are itching to display their own wolf skin. It's not like people eat wolf meat. When it comes to big predators, I really think population control should be performed by Parks Departments, and not by the private citizen.

But it's very true, as others have pointed out, that hunters are an economic force for wildlife conservation because in order to have good hunting, you must have good HABITAT, and habitat loss is the greatest threat to most species of animals, not hunting. And in the case of herbivores like deer, that have thrived to excess in the absence of large predators, hunters help control the population, and their zeal for their sport will, I hope, help conserve wild habitat which benefits us all, including the species they hunt. And most of the hunters I've known have eaten at least some of what they kill.

Your proposal to move animals is sweet, but in the absence of enough habitat, not possible. There have been a fair number of coyotes showing up in Central Park over the years. Because they have are getting pushed out of habitats further north. Freaking coyotes. In Manhattan, which is as non-rural as you can get.

The other option for population control is involuntary birth control (because of course, with animals, it must be involuntary), which has been tried in some areas, but I don't know to what success.

That said, I hope PA doesn't follow through on the occasional threats to opening hunting up seven days a week (currently, I think, it's not permitted on Sundays). While I support hunters in their sport, I do think hikers, trail walkers, horseback riders, etc. should get one day a week during the season when they don't have to fear getting accidentally shot.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 3kings

In Pennsylvania alone last year there were 14,000 reported accidents and 41 deaths caused by deer being hit by cars. Certainly hunting helps reduce this number and it is still out of control.

An average year sees 350,000 deer shot legally in PA, where would you like to relocate them and who will pay for it?

whitetails are incredibly adaptive animals. they thrive even in large cities. the amount of deer in this country now dwarfs the herds from colonial times. factor in that there are less and less people hunting each year, along with less predators, and more land clearing which helps the deer....it's a growing problem.

and in most, if not all states, hunters and fisherman are the ones who provide funds for game and fish, natural resources and other budgets thru license and permit fees. ridding the country of hunting and fishing would cause an already bad problem to become a lot worse.
there are towns and municipalities here and elsewhere who are having issues with wildlife and their mayhem and destruction. many places have instituted bowhunts and other hunting plans to cut back on the urban deer populations. people like wildlife until it's eating their shrubs and attacking when you're trying to get in your car.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

So you are all for depriving animals of their right to life if it means you can eat tasty beef.

Rupert, I'm actually on your side when it comes to population control of predators- I don't think that's the sort of thing that should be offered via hunting licenses because I don't think the populations are large enough to sustain recreational hunters who are itching to display their own wolf skin. It's not like people eat wolf meat. When it comes to big predators, I really think population control should be performed by Parks Departments, and not by the private citizen.

But it's very true, as others have pointed out, that hunters are an economic force for wildlife conservation because in order to have good hunting, you must have good HABITAT, and habitat loss is the greatest threat to most species of animals, not hunting. And in the case of herbivores like deer, that have thrived to excess in the absence of large predators, hunters help control the population, and their zeal for their sport will, I hope, help conserve wild habitat which benefits us all, including the species they hunt. And most of the hunters I've known have eaten at least some of what they kill.

Your proposal to move animals is sweet, but in the absence of enough habitat, not possible. There have been a fair number of coyotes showing up in Central Park over the years. Because they have are getting pushed out of habitats further north. Freaking coyotes. In Manhattan, which is as non-rural as you can get.

The other option for population control is involuntary birth control (because of course, with animals, it must be involuntary), which has been tried in some areas, but I don't know to what success.

That said, I hope PA doesn't follow through on the occasional threats to opening hunting up seven days a week (currently, I think, it's not permitted on Sundays). While I support hunters in their sport, I do think hikers, trail walkers, horseback riders, etc. should get one day a week during the season when they don't have to fear getting accidentally shot.

except that many are limited to wknd hunting, and no sundays means they're limited to saturday only.

as for the latter, wear orange. i wear it when i walk around where we live during hunting season, because we're in the country.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by jms62

So what does that have to do with the links to external sources?

Well, some of the links don't go anywhere, so those statements fall under "unsubstantiated." And with some he draws conclusions that aren't supported by the data- case in point, a Yellowstone piece showing changes in elk distribution he interprets as "wolves will exterminate all elk" which is quite a reach.

And there's the approvingly presented quote from someone wishing that all wolves be exterminated because apparently a wolf killed a pregnant mule deer, ripped out the calves and ate part of them, therefore, wolves are bloodthirsty, barbaric monsters. At which point I just put my head down on my computer for awhile.

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

When people live in areas inhabited by animals, that is going to happen. What is the answer? Should we kill all the animals so that there will be no more car accidents?

Animals have just as much right to inhabit the country as we do. I realize there are situations where a herd gets so big that something needs to be done.

I believe in survival of the fittest. I also think that people should not slaughter animals without reason. Many animal or rodent populations need trimmed for the betterment of society, I have no issue with this if it's done correctly.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Danzig

except that many are limited to wknd hunting, and no sundays means they're limited to saturday only.

as for the latter, wear orange. i wear it when i walk around where we live during hunting season, because we're in the country.

Yeah, I'm sure the orange vest will keep a horse quiet when guns are firing. A lot of hikers and horseback riders are also limited to weekends only, so they too, are only getting one day a week. It seems a reasonable share to say one weekend day off so other weekend warriors can enjoy their own sports safely.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

So you are all for depriving animals of their right to life if it means you can eat tasty beef.

I certainly don't feel good about eating anything that has to be killed. If I lived out in the wilderness and I had access to fruits, vegetables, streams with fish, cattle, chickens, grains, nuts, etc., and I had to fend for myself, I wouldn't have the heart to kill a chicken or a cow. I would force myself to catch some fish. I wouldn't like it but I would force myself. As I said before, I don't think it's very healthy to be a total vegan.

I live in a city, so I obviously don't have to find my own food. I can go to the store or to a restaurant. When you think about it, I am basically hiring someone to get the food for me. I know I am being somewhat of a hypocrite in occasionally eating meat, since I wouldn't have the heart to kill a cow myself.

I will tell you one thing. From everything I have heard, the conditions and the way animals are treated in slaughterhouses is supposed to be horrific. This is an area where I think the government should be even more stringent in terms of making sure the animals are treated in a humane way.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by 3kings

I believe in survival of the fittest. I also think that people should not slaughter animals without reason. Many animal or rodent populations need trimmed for the betterment of society, I have no issue with this if it's done correctly.

That sounds like a reasonable position. I have no problem with that.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Yeah, I'm sure the orange vest will keep a horse quiet when guns are firing. A lot of hikers and horseback riders are also limited to weekends only, so they too, are only getting one day a week. It seems a reasonable share to say one weekend day off so other weekend warriors can enjoy their own sports safely.

people hunt from horseback around here. and hunters are limited to a few weeks a year, whereas everyone else has all year long.
and there are a lot more places to go hiking and riding, whereas hunters are limited to where they can go. not exactly a fair sharing of areas.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I certainly don't feel good about eating anything that has to be killed. If I lived out in the wilderness and I had access to fruits, vegetables, streams with fish, cattle, chickens, grains, nuts, etc., and I had to fend for myself, I wouldn't have the heart to kill a chicken or a cow. I would force myself to catch some fish. I wouldn't like it but I would force myself. As I said before, I don't think it's very healthy to be a total vegan.

I live in a city, so I obviously don't have to find my own food. I can go to the store or to a restaurant. When you think about it, I am basically hiring someone to get the food for me. I know I am being somewhat of a hypocrite in occasionally eating meat, since I wouldn't have the heart to kill a cow myself.

I will tell you one thing. From everything I have heard, the conditions and the way animals are treated in slaughterhouses is supposed to be horrific. This is an area where I think the government should be even more stringent in terms of making sure the animals are treated in a humane way.

the only difference between you and a hunter is the hunter cuts out the middle man. i think people have lost touch with certain things because they go to a store and buy sanitary packages of 'meat'. it's beef, not cow. or pork, not pig.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the only difference between you and a hunter is the hunter cuts out the middle man. i think people have lost touch with certain things because they go to a store and buy sanitary packages of 'meat'. it's beef, not cow. or pork, not pig.

I agree with you. When a person buys a hamburger, they are basically hiring someone to kill a cow for them. Most people don't really think about that. When you're sitting there eating a hamburger, you're not thinking about a cow being killed (often times in a horrible way) in a slaughterhouse.

As I said before, I can't knock someone hunting for food. Unless a person is a vegan, I think they are being a hypocrite if they criticize someone who hunts for food.

I'm not going to be critical of someone who hunts for food. But what percentage of hunters hunt for food? I doubt the percentage is all that high. A large percentage of hunters simply do it for fun. It's awfully hard for me to defend killing an animal for fun.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I agree with you. When a person buys a hamburger, they are basically hiring someone to kill a cow for them. Most people don't really think about that. When you're sitting there eating a hamburger, you're not thinking about a cow being killed (often times in a horrible way) in a slaughterhouse.

As I said before, I can't knock someone hunting for food. Unless a person is a vegan, I think they are being a hypocrite if they criticize someone who hunts for food.

I'm not going to be critical of someone who hunts for food. But what percentage of hunters hunt for food? I doubt the percentage is all that high. A large percentage of hunters simply do it for fun. It's awfully hard for me to defend killing an animal for fun.

So you established that you have no idea what percentage of hunters eat their kill. If you have no idea then how can you then say "A large number of hunters simply do it for fun"? Personally I know about 30 hunters and 100% of them eat what they kill. All of them not 29 of 30 , ALL of them. The line I hear over and over from them is "Don't kill what you won't eat".

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

So you established that you have no idea what percentage of hunters eat their kill. If you have no idea then how can you then say "A large number of hunters simply do it for fun"?

Whether it is 10% or 70%, there are tens of thousands (at the very least), who do it for fun.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Whether it is 10% or 70%, there are tens of thousands (at the very least), who do it for fun.

You specifically stated that a large percentage of hunters do it for fun. Please show me your evidence supporting your position that a large percentage of hunters do it for fun. Don't simply pull more numbers out your ass.

[Danzig]

'for fun'.

not sure how one would decide if it's purely for 'fun'. can people buy food instead of hunt? sure. but they choose to do it on their own. and i'm sure there are many reasons for deciding. i know the last few years i haven't bothered to go. it's a lot of work, and i guess i just decided it was more work than enjoyment.
and i have to say, it's the act of being outside, seeing things you never see if you're not out there that's fun. the act of shooting isn't fun. and for most it's the same way. people like their venison, or whatever they're hunting. and it's not easy to get the stuff from the grocer.
besides, much like other hobbies, it's not incredibly enjoyable. people like to work on their cars, but they could certainly pay a mechanic. it may not be fun to do some of the work, but it's nice to have that sense of satisfaction, that you can do it all yourself.
when we take a deer, it never leaves us. we take care of it from start to finish. lots and lots of work. it'd be a lot easier to just buy a side of beef.