WHA Question
07-14-2006, 02:36 PM
#81
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 505
RE: WHA Question
For everyone on here who is trying to justify the WHA why dont you just go start a forum page on there website. I dont care if that sounds bad or its tellen someone to leave i am sick and tired of ppl calling themselves true hunters and trying to justice the wha. Im jus done hearing ppl try to prove that the WHA is ok and good for our sport. Plain and simple its NOT. Stop tryin to BS your way around the facts to try and prove to almost all the ppl here that its fine.
07-14-2006, 02:51 PM
#82
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: East Texas
Posts: 367
RE: WHA Question
ORIGINAL: Windwalker7
I would rather know some facts before I decide my stance not jump on the band wagon.
Are they hunting ranches or enclosures?
Are there weight or speed limits on the bows used?
Is ther a specially designed arrow that is used to cushin the blow?
Do they shoot for the ribcage or the hindquarter?
These are some of the questions I'd like answered before I decide.
Apparently others would rather put a spin on things instead of getting real answers.
Spin;
1. 300fps bows
2. hunting in small fences
3. deer walking around all drugged up
4. vets are there to make sure the animals don't die from the severe injuries the will recieve
Come on guys. Get some facts before we debate this. Facts not assumptions
ORIGINAL: TxStarr
Here goes:
1. I realize there will be vets there and they will be monitering the drugging and checking the animals health and age. That still does not make it right. It seems to be cruel and inhumane to subject an animal to this over and over (because we know if it is a large buck they will all want it again and again) -- unless there is limit to the number of times an animal can be 'shot'. And I can hear you jumping up and down yelling "And killing the animal is not cruel and inhumane?!?!" Everybody I know practices and practices and practices and practices so that their aim is accurate and the animal does not suffer a needless, prolonged death. I remember how I felt when I came out of surgery and cannot imagine inflicting this on an animal ... who will not know why it was done and not understand why it feels the way it feels. It just seems to be demeaning to the animal. And people who do this on a regular basis to attach radio collars and track animals do not do it for money on TV. They do it for the benefit of the animal and to learn more about the animal. Repeat: not in it for the money. You seem to think these mature whitetail bucks won't learn anything the first time they get darted. I think after they get darted once they will become even harder to get. Look how quick they learn to avoid hunters once hunting season opens. To think these deer will just get shot over and over, I just don't buy it. THIS IS SPIN #1 I guess I look at it, as a deer gets hit with a dart and falls asleep. Let's go away from the darting several times if this is a problem for you. And I will admit that the WHA site states that the deer will be tagged and not be shot more than once in a competition. I still say that ONE time is one time too many! And I have a closed mind on this point ... call me what you will.
2. Does birth control work? For it to work you would have to administer it to every female in an area. Hmmm ... see that happening? And is the birth control 100% effective? I know mine is only 90 something percent effective. And if you want to use birth control just think of all the possible other problems that could cause. Kinda like a throwing a small stone in a pond and the ripples it causes. I'm not for the birth control. I just realize that antis might get the wild idea that this is a way to control populations without killing deer.
3. Who is saying that people who are against hunting will be in favor of this? Just because it is a 'catch and release' deosn't mean the anti-hunters will be for it. It just means they will see another reason to attack hunting and people who hunt. And, mentioning money -- Nonhunters may favor it over killing deer is what I am saying. Try asking a nonhunter you know how they feel about what WHA has planed. Ask someone that doesn't hunt. Explain it so they don't know how you feel. Listen to their response. I did. That's how I came up with what I said. [/b]If a person is against hunting I am pretty sure they will not watch this show. Why would you want to watch something you are morally opposed? Just because the animal will live to see another day is not going to make it more interesting to people who don't see the sense in it to begin with.[/b]
4. HUNTING IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY. Just because there are people out there who make money to hunt doesn't mean they are there for the money. These are people who were hunting to begin with. These are people who would hunt to this day even if they were working as a construction worker, lawyer, banker, bartender, truck driver, pilot, etc. They just got lucky enough to get picked out of the group to hunt wonderful places and get paid to do it. Who among us wouldn't love to be paid to do what we love? Hunting is a way of life. It is how you live your life. It instills in you a sense of awe and reverence for life and respect for the animal(s) you are hunting. 'Just darting them for money' -- where is the respect and awe and reverence in that? And the people who get money for their world records and the replicas, etc ... they were not getting paid to hunt when they took the animal were they? [/color]If you watch any of the outdoor hunting type shows, you'll be seeing lots of guys getting paid to hunt. Look at all the DVD's, videos on the market today. Are those guys getting paid for hunting. Look at all the products and advertisements for hunting gear. Someone is getting paid. I believe they are called them Pro Staff members. Do all those people show a lack of respect for animals because they get MONEY for what they do? If " they are not out there for the money", what then? I think you missed my point ... these are people who hunted BEFORE it was their job. Yes they are getting paid to hunt now but THEY WOULD HUNT EVEN IF THEY EARNED THEIR MONEY ANOTHER WAY. They are just lucky enough to have been able to make their hobby their job. They are not competing for money when they hunt. I love to read and work for a publishing company ... does that mean I am getting paid to read? Yes. I come to work for the money I make here. Even if I worked somewhere else I would be reading. Just like the pro-staffers would still be hunting if they worked somewhere else.
5. Let's not forget that that 'dart' has drugs in it. How can drugging an animal not look bad? And can you really call it hunting if the only thing you will get out of it is money? [color=#cc00ff]Drugs? Drugs are in everything. You know how many drugs are given to beef cattle, swine, poultry? Yes I do and that is one of the reasons we hunt and raise our own cows. Unless there is someone out there drugging the animals or they stumble up on something poisonous, killing your own animal is as close to all natural as you can get. And definately more humane that what is done to the animals at packing plants.
If anti-hunters are opposed to the killing aspect ... let them give up eating all meat. Seriously. If you are opposed to someone killing an animal that they (or someone else) are going to eat then you should not be hypocritical. This means eating no meat -- none. Period. Just because we would also like a nice set of antlers with our meat doesn't overshadow the basic reasons for hunting. I agree 100% with you here. They shouldn't wash their pets with flea shampoo either. That flea has as much right to live on this planet as a majestic bighorn sheep. tell the antis that one, they don't know what to say.
Basically, hunters see this is a moral and ethical issue and they also see it is another reason for people who oppose hunting to criticize what we love. If we can stop it before it gets started then that is one less attack we have to contend with. I don't think hunters have all the facts to even decide. They don't have any facts. They just spin. Every one calls hunting gear Mfg.'s to get their opinion, then the jump on the band wagon. I this does go big, you will see many Mfg's change their stance when they see their compitition raking in the money. Watch and see.
Just my opinion in a non-name calling post. You've got to stand for something or you will fall for anything and this is where I am making my stand. This is wrong on all fronts. Whether you agree with me or not does not change that.
Shannon
Here goes:
1. I realize there will be vets there and they will be monitering the drugging and checking the animals health and age. That still does not make it right. It seems to be cruel and inhumane to subject an animal to this over and over (because we know if it is a large buck they will all want it again and again) -- unless there is limit to the number of times an animal can be 'shot'. And I can hear you jumping up and down yelling "And killing the animal is not cruel and inhumane?!?!" Everybody I know practices and practices and practices and practices so that their aim is accurate and the animal does not suffer a needless, prolonged death. I remember how I felt when I came out of surgery and cannot imagine inflicting this on an animal ... who will not know why it was done and not understand why it feels the way it feels. It just seems to be demeaning to the animal. And people who do this on a regular basis to attach radio collars and track animals do not do it for money on TV. They do it for the benefit of the animal and to learn more about the animal. Repeat: not in it for the money. You seem to think these mature whitetail bucks won't learn anything the first time they get darted. I think after they get darted once they will become even harder to get. Look how quick they learn to avoid hunters once hunting season opens. To think these deer will just get shot over and over, I just don't buy it. THIS IS SPIN #1 I guess I look at it, as a deer gets hit with a dart and falls asleep. Let's go away from the darting several times if this is a problem for you. And I will admit that the WHA site states that the deer will be tagged and not be shot more than once in a competition. I still say that ONE time is one time too many! And I have a closed mind on this point ... call me what you will.
2. Does birth control work? For it to work you would have to administer it to every female in an area. Hmmm ... see that happening? And is the birth control 100% effective? I know mine is only 90 something percent effective. And if you want to use birth control just think of all the possible other problems that could cause. Kinda like a throwing a small stone in a pond and the ripples it causes. I'm not for the birth control. I just realize that antis might get the wild idea that this is a way to control populations without killing deer.
3. Who is saying that people who are against hunting will be in favor of this? Just because it is a 'catch and release' deosn't mean the anti-hunters will be for it. It just means they will see another reason to attack hunting and people who hunt. And, mentioning money -- Nonhunters may favor it over killing deer is what I am saying. Try asking a nonhunter you know how they feel about what WHA has planed. Ask someone that doesn't hunt. Explain it so they don't know how you feel. Listen to their response. I did. That's how I came up with what I said. [/b]If a person is against hunting I am pretty sure they will not watch this show. Why would you want to watch something you are morally opposed? Just because the animal will live to see another day is not going to make it more interesting to people who don't see the sense in it to begin with.[/b]
4. HUNTING IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY. Just because there are people out there who make money to hunt doesn't mean they are there for the money. These are people who were hunting to begin with. These are people who would hunt to this day even if they were working as a construction worker, lawyer, banker, bartender, truck driver, pilot, etc. They just got lucky enough to get picked out of the group to hunt wonderful places and get paid to do it. Who among us wouldn't love to be paid to do what we love? Hunting is a way of life. It is how you live your life. It instills in you a sense of awe and reverence for life and respect for the animal(s) you are hunting. 'Just darting them for money' -- where is the respect and awe and reverence in that? And the people who get money for their world records and the replicas, etc ... they were not getting paid to hunt when they took the animal were they? [/color]If you watch any of the outdoor hunting type shows, you'll be seeing lots of guys getting paid to hunt. Look at all the DVD's, videos on the market today. Are those guys getting paid for hunting. Look at all the products and advertisements for hunting gear. Someone is getting paid. I believe they are called them Pro Staff members. Do all those people show a lack of respect for animals because they get MONEY for what they do? If " they are not out there for the money", what then? I think you missed my point ... these are people who hunted BEFORE it was their job. Yes they are getting paid to hunt now but THEY WOULD HUNT EVEN IF THEY EARNED THEIR MONEY ANOTHER WAY. They are just lucky enough to have been able to make their hobby their job. They are not competing for money when they hunt. I love to read and work for a publishing company ... does that mean I am getting paid to read? Yes. I come to work for the money I make here. Even if I worked somewhere else I would be reading. Just like the pro-staffers would still be hunting if they worked somewhere else.
5. Let's not forget that that 'dart' has drugs in it. How can drugging an animal not look bad? And can you really call it hunting if the only thing you will get out of it is money? [color=#cc00ff]Drugs? Drugs are in everything. You know how many drugs are given to beef cattle, swine, poultry? Yes I do and that is one of the reasons we hunt and raise our own cows. Unless there is someone out there drugging the animals or they stumble up on something poisonous, killing your own animal is as close to all natural as you can get. And definately more humane that what is done to the animals at packing plants.
If anti-hunters are opposed to the killing aspect ... let them give up eating all meat. Seriously. If you are opposed to someone killing an animal that they (or someone else) are going to eat then you should not be hypocritical. This means eating no meat -- none. Period. Just because we would also like a nice set of antlers with our meat doesn't overshadow the basic reasons for hunting. I agree 100% with you here. They shouldn't wash their pets with flea shampoo either. That flea has as much right to live on this planet as a majestic bighorn sheep. tell the antis that one, they don't know what to say.
Basically, hunters see this is a moral and ethical issue and they also see it is another reason for people who oppose hunting to criticize what we love. If we can stop it before it gets started then that is one less attack we have to contend with. I don't think hunters have all the facts to even decide. They don't have any facts. They just spin. Every one calls hunting gear Mfg.'s to get their opinion, then the jump on the band wagon. I this does go big, you will see many Mfg's change their stance when they see their compitition raking in the money. Watch and see.
Just my opinion in a non-name calling post. You've got to stand for something or you will fall for anything and this is where I am making my stand. This is wrong on all fronts. Whether you agree with me or not does not change that.
Shannon
I would rather know some facts before I decide my stance not jump on the band wagon.
Are they hunting ranches or enclosures?
Are there weight or speed limits on the bows used?
Is ther a specially designed arrow that is used to cushin the blow?
Do they shoot for the ribcage or the hindquarter?
These are some of the questions I'd like answered before I decide.
Apparently others would rather put a spin on things instead of getting real answers.
Spin;
1. 300fps bows
2. hunting in small fences
3. deer walking around all drugged up
4. vets are there to make sure the animals don't die from the severe injuries the will recieve
Come on guys. Get some facts before we debate this. Facts not assumptions
Shannon
07-14-2006, 02:52 PM
#83
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,102
RE: WHA Question
Windwalker7,
Please tell me what additional facts you need beyond,tranqulizer darts,High fence, competetion,money and prizes?I am quite certain that none of that is being spun.
If that is not enough to have you view the WHA as a terrible and disgusting idea than nothing ever will be.
Please tell me what additional facts you need beyond,tranqulizer darts,High fence, competetion,money and prizes?I am quite certain that none of that is being spun.
If that is not enough to have you view the WHA as a terrible and disgusting idea than nothing ever will be.
07-14-2006, 03:10 PM
#84
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: East Texas
Posts: 367
RE: WHA Question
ORIGINAL: Cabelas4Toys
Shannon, I don't really see them as being that far apart.
"So basically someone is paying to tranqualize an animal for scientific and/or research purposes and so the Vet Society can learn about the migration patterns, etc of the animals?"
I guess if you accept on the face their statement that it is strictly for research and not for commercial reasons then you could try to make an argument but when they're getting thousands of dollars from clients willing to pay to shoot these animals do you really think it can be solely managed in the interest of science? I'm sure that the needs of science will be adjusted to meet whatever demand there may be for animals to dart. It's all about money or the "scientists" wouldn't be allowing amateurs to fling dart tipped arrows at them to begin with.
"They are not drugging the animal just to score it? And the person who fires the dart is not going to make loads of money (is in fact PAYING money for this)?"
In effect is is darting them just to score it, at least from the hunters perspective. Some measurements will be taken (I'm sure whatever scoring system is used on that particular species will be measured and documented for the "hunter") a bunch of trophy pictures will be shot and a lot of back slaping will ensue. Is it really a stretch to envision that being a whitetail in those pictures and the "hunter" hoping that nobody darts a bigger deer so he can win some prize money to boot? Money is exchanging hands either way, large sums of money, and the practice has already made its way onto television.
"And these animals are not born and raised in an enclosed area?"
Actually, my understanding is that most hunting in South Africa takes place on fenced game preserves. Larger than the 1,200 acres that was mentioned earlier in this thread for sure but maybe not larger than say a good sized Texas fenced operation. I guess I'm not sure where the dividing line on fair chase vs. unethical is. Is 1,500 acres too small? How about 10,000? 20,000? 50,000?
ORIGINAL: TxStarr
So basically someone is paying to tranqualize an animal for scientific and/or research purposes and so the Vet Society can learn about the migration patterns, etc of the animals? They are not drugging the animal just to score it? And the person who fires the dart is not going to make loads of money (is in fact PAYING money for this)? And these animals are not born and raised in an enclosed area?
Am I the only one seeing the differences in 'green-hunting' and WHA?
Shannon
So basically someone is paying to tranqualize an animal for scientific and/or research purposes and so the Vet Society can learn about the migration patterns, etc of the animals? They are not drugging the animal just to score it? And the person who fires the dart is not going to make loads of money (is in fact PAYING money for this)? And these animals are not born and raised in an enclosed area?
Am I the only one seeing the differences in 'green-hunting' and WHA?
Shannon
"So basically someone is paying to tranqualize an animal for scientific and/or research purposes and so the Vet Society can learn about the migration patterns, etc of the animals?"
I guess if you accept on the face their statement that it is strictly for research and not for commercial reasons then you could try to make an argument but when they're getting thousands of dollars from clients willing to pay to shoot these animals do you really think it can be solely managed in the interest of science? I'm sure that the needs of science will be adjusted to meet whatever demand there may be for animals to dart. It's all about money or the "scientists" wouldn't be allowing amateurs to fling dart tipped arrows at them to begin with.
"They are not drugging the animal just to score it? And the person who fires the dart is not going to make loads of money (is in fact PAYING money for this)?"
In effect is is darting them just to score it, at least from the hunters perspective. Some measurements will be taken (I'm sure whatever scoring system is used on that particular species will be measured and documented for the "hunter") a bunch of trophy pictures will be shot and a lot of back slaping will ensue. Is it really a stretch to envision that being a whitetail in those pictures and the "hunter" hoping that nobody darts a bigger deer so he can win some prize money to boot? Money is exchanging hands either way, large sums of money, and the practice has already made its way onto television.
"And these animals are not born and raised in an enclosed area?"
Actually, my understanding is that most hunting in South Africa takes place on fenced game preserves. Larger than the 1,200 acres that was mentioned earlier in this thread for sure but maybe not larger than say a good sized Texas fenced operation. I guess I'm not sure where the dividing line on fair chase vs. unethical is. Is 1,500 acres too small? How about 10,000? 20,000? 50,000?
Shannon
07-14-2006, 03:13 PM
#85
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: .. NH USA
Posts: 970
RE: WHA Question
Add Bowhunting.net to the opposing list:
http://www.bowhunting.net/artman/publish/DartingDeer.shtml
More companies and orgs to come!
http://www.bowhunting.net/artman/publish/DartingDeer.shtml
More companies and orgs to come!
07-14-2006, 03:15 PM
#86
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southeast, VA
Posts: 2,119
RE: WHA Question
Read closely. I haven't seen anyone trying to "justify" the WHA. Windwalker7 is simply voicing an opinion and some questions. I thought that is what the forums were for. I need to read the forumfine print better. I guess it says something like "feel free to post unless you do not agree with live2hunt, and if so please leave and go to some other forum:". Is that about right live2hunt. By the way I have never called myself a "true hunter" but I think I would like to, what is the definition so I can make sure I fit the criteria.
07-14-2006, 03:23 PM
#87
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,621
RE: WHA Question
Is it high fence? Or is it a ranch like Mossy Oak and Bill Jordan hunt?
Mabe its a ranch like in Texas that manage whitetails?
Drugged deer? They fall asleep
Additional facts I need to know;
1. Is there a weight or speed limit on bows?
2. Is there a specially designed arrow that cushins the blow?
3. Is it high fence or a ranch like all the big shots hunt on? We've all watched the videos of the quality deer managment ranches Bill Jordan, Will Primos, Bob Folkrod, the Mossy Oak crew, etc... hunt. None of you guys bash them.
4. If the WHA hunts were on one of these ranches how would you feel?
Drugged deer. It falls asleep, for crying out loud. You guys spin this as if the deer were wondering around on the ranch all highed up on crack, before the get the dart.
Mabe its a ranch like in Texas that manage whitetails?
Drugged deer? They fall asleep
Additional facts I need to know;
1. Is there a weight or speed limit on bows?
2. Is there a specially designed arrow that cushins the blow?
3. Is it high fence or a ranch like all the big shots hunt on? We've all watched the videos of the quality deer managment ranches Bill Jordan, Will Primos, Bob Folkrod, the Mossy Oak crew, etc... hunt. None of you guys bash them.
4. If the WHA hunts were on one of these ranches how would you feel?
Drugged deer. It falls asleep, for crying out loud. You guys spin this as if the deer were wondering around on the ranch all highed up on crack, before the get the dart.
07-14-2006, 05:28 PM
#88
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 2,621
RE: WHA Question
I found a few things out
The hunts do take place in high fenced areas. I was thinking it may be a ranch but its not. So I answered my own question. This isn't good in my book.
I also found out that apparently they have some kind of patent-pending dart device to shoot at the deer. I'm assuming it is designed to cushin the blow, but I'm not sure on that.
I also learned that the drug used to put the deer to sleep has to have a certain dose for how much the deer weighs. This is not good either. Too much or too little dose could be harmful or fatal to the deer.
I haven't found out if there is a weight or speed limit on bows used, yet.
If there is no limit, then this would not be a good thing either.
It appears that you guys were probably on the right track to not agree with this new type of hunting.
If you guys get any more info, I'd like to know.
The hunts do take place in high fenced areas. I was thinking it may be a ranch but its not. So I answered my own question. This isn't good in my book.
I also found out that apparently they have some kind of patent-pending dart device to shoot at the deer. I'm assuming it is designed to cushin the blow, but I'm not sure on that.
I also learned that the drug used to put the deer to sleep has to have a certain dose for how much the deer weighs. This is not good either. Too much or too little dose could be harmful or fatal to the deer.
I haven't found out if there is a weight or speed limit on bows used, yet.
If there is no limit, then this would not be a good thing either.
It appears that you guys were probably on the right track to not agree with this new type of hunting.
If you guys get any more info, I'd like to know.
07-14-2006, 05:41 PM
#89
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lake County, Il
Posts: 2,205
RE: WHA Question
My best friend is a vet and even though dosage depends on weight there is a range. Since they're hunting mature bucks let's say185-215lbs He's pretty sure a dosage would safely cover that range. Of course he mostly treats dogs and cats, the occasinal bird and iguana(kidding)
07-14-2006, 05:56 PM
#90
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Indiana PA USA
Posts: 3,656
RE: WHA Question
For all that say "its just a tranquilizer dart", how many of you are going to allow me to come into your fenced in back yard and shoot Fido the dog with a dart tipped bow just so I can sell the video and make some money off of it? Nough said!!!!!!!!