View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 231. You may not vote on this poll
WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
07-01-2006 | 08:34 PM
#51
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,525
Likes: 0
From: creemore Ontario Canada
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
Sorry I haven't taken time to read about the WHA ,but after reading what most of the guy's opinion's are ,I think I'd be safe to say that I'll most likely be against it myself .
nubo
nubo
07-02-2006 | 11:57 AM
#52
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
if you shoot any animal or human with a tranquillizer it damages the meat. like when i work cows and they get shots you give it in there neck so you dont damage the meat. now these random idiots want a non fatal hunting. damn i wish i could find thatDavid guy and kick his butt! i hunt for meat plain and simple if i gots anlters its just a bonus. turning hunting into a profit is just wrong.
07-07-2006 | 02:34 PM
#53
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,145
Likes: 0
From: IOWA/25' UP
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
ORIGINAL: quiksilver
I'll play some devil's advocate here...
I don't know about you guys, but I'd hunt with a trank gun if it was legal. Personally, I'd really rather enjoy seeing my downed game awaken and return to his natural state. It works for fishing. Not all that much different, really. Besides, it seems a little more challenging than your garden-variety rifle hunt.
I don't really see what the big deal is with all this crying. It's no different than the local sports shop having a big buck contest, except the big bucks are tranked instead of killed. If I was a deer, I know where I'd stand on this issue.
I'll play some devil's advocate here...
I don't know about you guys, but I'd hunt with a trank gun if it was legal. Personally, I'd really rather enjoy seeing my downed game awaken and return to his natural state. It works for fishing. Not all that much different, really. Besides, it seems a little more challenging than your garden-variety rifle hunt.
I don't really see what the big deal is with all this crying. It's no different than the local sports shop having a big buck contest, except the big bucks are tranked instead of killed. If I was a deer, I know where I'd stand on this issue.
07-07-2006 | 02:37 PM
#54
Banned
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,145
Likes: 0
From: IOWA/25' UP
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
ORIGINAL: newtowha
Quicksilver, I am with you on this issue.. what would the deer rather prefer? end of life or a deep sleep?
everybody needs to stop crying [&:]
Quicksilver, I am with you on this issue.. what would the deer rather prefer? end of life or a deep sleep?
everybody needs to stop crying [&:]
HCH
07-13-2006 | 06:35 PM
#56
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
Quicksilver, I think this is just one of those issues you "can't" or rather maybe "don't want to" play devil's advocate on.
People get pretty passionate about this issue.
However, if you really really wish that you could see a deer that you just shot get up and walk away, sell your guns and/or bows and buy yourself a nice camera.
Oh, and get ready cuz HCH is gonna put a size 10 up your backside I think [8D]
EDIT! Sorry, just realized it was some newtowha that posted that thought...but perhaps you feel the same way?
People get pretty passionate about this issue.
However, if you really really wish that you could see a deer that you just shot get up and walk away, sell your guns and/or bows and buy yourself a nice camera.
Oh, and get ready cuz HCH is gonna put a size 10 up your backside I think [8D]
EDIT! Sorry, just realized it was some newtowha that posted that thought...but perhaps you feel the same way?
07-14-2006 | 01:16 AM
#57
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,340
Likes: 1
From: ne bama
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
here is what i said about it the first time i heard the idea, i still stand by this, personally i consider it a joke and a black eye for hunting
RE: Catch and Release Hunting? - 8/22/2005 8:54:52 PM
showPicture("8/22/2005 8:54:52 PM",0,0,0,1170885,3)
m.t.hands
titleAndStar(2531,0,false,false,"","")
Addicted to HNI
[align=center]
[/align]
Posts: 2531
Joined: 9/2/2004
From: ne bama
Status: online
[blockquote]quote:
immobilized the animal long enough for a photo-op, and you would then simply make sure that the deer recovered and climb back into the stand.[/blockquote]
i'm not a "trophy" hunter, my primary reason for killing a deer in the first place is to eat it, if its a "trophy" thats just a plus, and i have killed my share of decent deer,i'm sorry but this does not sound like avery practical plan, alabama's dnr is urgeing people to kill more, of course i guess that people that shoot them in pens, and drug them and have to be lead by the hand before "they" can kill one, this could work for them, other than that it sounds like somethinga tree hugger would come up with. "oh we could just let the deer go" don't think so.
btw this is how i like my season to work
bow hunting, i will shoot the first thing i see, by this time of year i am running low on deer meat, we use it in place of ground beef 75-90% of the time, i will try to kill 3-5 does with my bow, since our buck/doe ratio is so out of wack, if a nice buck comes by more the better, at the start of m/l'er season if i have had a dry bow season i'll go for the first deer i see most times, if its a buck more the better, rifle season, i hunt so many different pieces of property some hold some good deer 100+", others just hold little basket rack 6 pointer and the like, i like to kill a buck, and i will take a small buck or whatever, when i've done all these things i will only hunt (if i have not killed something bigger in the other hunts)for a "trophy" and i don't need to see him on the ground to know he is a "trophy". i hold out for 125-130+" deer for this,an average season for me is 5-7 deer i have killed as few as 2, and as many as a bunch[:-], all legal btw. but putting them to sleep for a camera op does not appeal to me.
RE: Catch and Release Hunting? - 8/22/2005 8:54:52 PM
showPicture("8/22/2005 8:54:52 PM",0,0,0,1170885,3)
m.t.hands
titleAndStar(2531,0,false,false,"","")
Addicted to HNI
[align=center]
[/align]Posts: 2531
Joined: 9/2/2004
From: ne bama
Status: online
[blockquote]quote:
immobilized the animal long enough for a photo-op, and you would then simply make sure that the deer recovered and climb back into the stand.[/blockquote]
i'm not a "trophy" hunter, my primary reason for killing a deer in the first place is to eat it, if its a "trophy" thats just a plus, and i have killed my share of decent deer,i'm sorry but this does not sound like avery practical plan, alabama's dnr is urgeing people to kill more, of course i guess that people that shoot them in pens, and drug them and have to be lead by the hand before "they" can kill one, this could work for them, other than that it sounds like somethinga tree hugger would come up with. "oh we could just let the deer go" don't think so.
btw this is how i like my season to work
bow hunting, i will shoot the first thing i see, by this time of year i am running low on deer meat, we use it in place of ground beef 75-90% of the time, i will try to kill 3-5 does with my bow, since our buck/doe ratio is so out of wack, if a nice buck comes by more the better, at the start of m/l'er season if i have had a dry bow season i'll go for the first deer i see most times, if its a buck more the better, rifle season, i hunt so many different pieces of property some hold some good deer 100+", others just hold little basket rack 6 pointer and the like, i like to kill a buck, and i will take a small buck or whatever, when i've done all these things i will only hunt (if i have not killed something bigger in the other hunts)for a "trophy" and i don't need to see him on the ground to know he is a "trophy". i hold out for 125-130+" deer for this,an average season for me is 5-7 deer i have killed as few as 2, and as many as a bunch[:-], all legal btw. but putting them to sleep for a camera op does not appeal to me.
07-14-2006 | 01:41 PM
#59
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,716
Likes: 0
RE: WHA WORLD HUNTING TOUR (OBJECTIVE POLL)
Trembow,
I'm not really concerned about what Hardcore thinks. I've heard enough out of himto make my own decisions about his opinions.
-------
Back on topic, I think this IS an idea that both sides of the issue need to be explored.Big bucksare a finite resource. If those guys want to go out and kill fifty trophy bucks tofilm their show and appease the television masses, they have the manpower and the money, and they're entitled to it.
In a perfect world, they'd just leave everything alone and drop the ball on their hunting contest. That's not gonna happen. They see Bassmasters and can smell the money. They've got themoney to finance this endeavorand they're going to take their shot.
I understand that they're mostly hunting in enclosures, which, likealmost everyone else,I'm opposed to. However, I must say that canned hunting is easier to swallow when they're not actually killing anything. The vast majority of their downedbucks will recover and live to their full genetic potential, being selectively bred or culled by "hunters" (guys who paid to sit inside the fence) sometime later down the road. We can question the ethics of those guys some other time.
On level of offense, I'd argue that killing deer for sportinside an enclosure is more offensive than just tranquilizing them for sport inside a fence. It's still not fair to the animal, and a little pathetic. As a matter of degree, however, I'd say that the idea of using the trank gun in lieu of a deer rifle or bow is more favorable. Seriously, these guys don't want the deer they kill, they probably don't even want the antlers, so why not use non lethal force?
I guess if you look at the end results, it becomes more obvious.
What would you prefer? (Remember, there are only two options)
A.) A hunting contest that you dislike where they award a million dollars to a "pro" who kills 53 trophy bucks inside a big fence. They give the meat away and the racks are laying in a garage or barn somewhere.
B.) A hunting contest that you dislike where they award a million dollars to a "pro" who kills 2 trophy bucks, and tranquilizes 51 others inside a big fence. The meat from the two bucks is inedible and thrown away,while the two racks are laying in a garage or barn somewhere. Of the remaining 51 deer who were tranquilized, 10 lived full lives and died of natural causes. 41 others were shot by paying customers, most of whom mounted the racks in their homes and ate the venison that they harvested. Five of them were harvested by disabled kids on charity hunts. All of the bucks were selectively bred for the rest of their respective lives.
You pick.
I'm not really concerned about what Hardcore thinks. I've heard enough out of himto make my own decisions about his opinions.
-------
Back on topic, I think this IS an idea that both sides of the issue need to be explored.Big bucksare a finite resource. If those guys want to go out and kill fifty trophy bucks tofilm their show and appease the television masses, they have the manpower and the money, and they're entitled to it.
In a perfect world, they'd just leave everything alone and drop the ball on their hunting contest. That's not gonna happen. They see Bassmasters and can smell the money. They've got themoney to finance this endeavorand they're going to take their shot.
I understand that they're mostly hunting in enclosures, which, likealmost everyone else,I'm opposed to. However, I must say that canned hunting is easier to swallow when they're not actually killing anything. The vast majority of their downedbucks will recover and live to their full genetic potential, being selectively bred or culled by "hunters" (guys who paid to sit inside the fence) sometime later down the road. We can question the ethics of those guys some other time.
On level of offense, I'd argue that killing deer for sportinside an enclosure is more offensive than just tranquilizing them for sport inside a fence. It's still not fair to the animal, and a little pathetic. As a matter of degree, however, I'd say that the idea of using the trank gun in lieu of a deer rifle or bow is more favorable. Seriously, these guys don't want the deer they kill, they probably don't even want the antlers, so why not use non lethal force?
I guess if you look at the end results, it becomes more obvious.
What would you prefer? (Remember, there are only two options)
A.) A hunting contest that you dislike where they award a million dollars to a "pro" who kills 53 trophy bucks inside a big fence. They give the meat away and the racks are laying in a garage or barn somewhere.
B.) A hunting contest that you dislike where they award a million dollars to a "pro" who kills 2 trophy bucks, and tranquilizes 51 others inside a big fence. The meat from the two bucks is inedible and thrown away,while the two racks are laying in a garage or barn somewhere. Of the remaining 51 deer who were tranquilized, 10 lived full lives and died of natural causes. 41 others were shot by paying customers, most of whom mounted the racks in their homes and ate the venison that they harvested. Five of them were harvested by disabled kids on charity hunts. All of the bucks were selectively bred for the rest of their respective lives.
You pick.
