I've about had it!!
01-09-2006, 02:15 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the Great Plains
Posts: 351
I've about had it!!
If you all don't mind, I would like to explore an issue that was recently debated on here in hopes of politely shedding some light on the topic. The topic, you ask? Running dogs.
First off, let me say I hunt deer with bows, primitive firearms and modern rifles. I also hunt several other species of Oklahoma wildlife. I am a hunter to the core. However, I have never hunted deer with dogs, but I understand what it must be about. I will try to make my point politely, and tactfully, even though I have a strong opinion.
This post is not intended to put a wedge between any of us or or stir up animosity, but rather to shed some light, raise a few points and hopefully unite hunters even more so than now.
I do not understand how a hunter can say dog hunting is unsportsmanlike or unfair. I am an avid deer hunter, but I've decided that some deer hunters need to rethink the way they look at other hunters. Deer hunters do not own the woods and if we're not careful, we, with our"superior set of ethics,"could ruin things for everybody that enjoys the woods.
If running dogs is unfair to the deer, then so is sitting up in a treestand where deer are less likely to hear, see or smell you. If running dogs is unfair, then so is using camoflauge. If running dogs is unfair, then so is using scents, calls and even guns and bows. If running dogs is unfair, then all hunting is unfair.
Of course, we all know it is rediculous to say that hunting is unfair. We love it and do it out of passion, instinct, drive, hungeror whatever else motivates us. But we forget something. Yes, hunting is about far more than killing an animal, but the end goal, no matter what people try to say, is usually, for most people, to at least try to harvest an animal for both food and sport.
To do this, we consider our leads and work to create advantages. That's what camo, scouting, better ammunition, treestands and faster bows are all about - advantage. These things also make hunting more fun for us. And so do dogs for the guys that use them. Advantages, whether camo, scents, calls, treestands or dogs (if you really think dogs are an advantage) are all basically the same in nature. They are allefforts put forth by the sportsmen to make the hunt go his way (successfully and enjoyably)if possible.
I hunt squirrels with dogs. I take the dogs to the woods, turn them lose and work through the woods with them, making an effort to help the dogs by putting them in woods that usually contain squirrels. When they locate a squirrel using their brains, eyes, noses and ears, they are supposed to bark and make an enormous fuss so that I know they have located a squirrel. Then, I am supposed to do the best I can to see the squirrel they tree and then shoot it out over them. They get some fur in their mouth and I get some meat for the table. These dogs have been carefully bred for a long, long time to instinctively do what they do. And it is all about the sport of watching the dog tree some game. They really get worked up and it is exciting to watch and enjoy.
If I wanted to kill a limit of squirrels every time out, you can bet I wouldn't use dogs. I would sit down somewhere in full camo with a .22 and call them in until I bagged my limit. But with a young dog, you are sometimes lucky to get a few or even one if you have pups. It is about the sport. Therefore, hunting squirrels with dogs is "sportsmanlike."
Birddogs are the same way. I'd like to hear somebody who says deer dogging is "bad" try to justify why they think it is fair to let a very refined and well bred Pointer instinctively blow the cover of a covey of quail so that hunters armed with shotguns can shoot the birds when they flush. I would almost bet money that some of the people who shun deer dog hunters love a good quail hunt with dogs, yet they don't seem to think using dogs to pinpoint the exact location of birds is unfair. But, if running deer with dogs is unfair, then so is letting an extremely instinctive, accurate pointer locate birds for you to harvest.
It is the same thing with dogs. It is about sport, and just because they are running a bigger animal does not make it more unfair. An animal is an animal no matter what the size. Now granted, deer hunting with dogs is becoming an issue because of land availability and other factors, but if it is legal, what is the beef about it besides that it (boohoo
) makes somebody unhappy. Ifa hunter is (boohoo) whining about dogs just because it messes with their own agenda, they become just like the anti-hunter who is boohooing and trying to ruin the fun for those that enjoy it.
Does anybody see what I mean? When deer hunters get high and mighty about hunting, I, as well as many logical thinkers here, realize that those people are not necessarily a good representative of hunters, especially when they start touting their ethics that are sometimes self-imposed and not established in the law. But when we get cocky like that, we risk messing up a lot of things. If we say hunting with dogs is unsportsmanlike, then we agree with anyone whose agenda opposes the hunter's passion.
If sportsmen back them on anything, give them even an inch, they will bite the hand that feeds them.
To interpret the last statement in English...If you back anti-hunters on the fairness of running dogs, don't be surprised when you finally have your "dogless" woods all to yourself and the environmentalists come running after you, too.
I recently read on a thread that perhaps some legislation should pass that would prohibit shooting .22 rifles inan upward direction, which would basically illiminate squirrel hunting with .22s. Why in the world would hunters want to pass any legislation that would infringe on their own fellow hunters? This came in the wake of a boy getting shot by another guy who claimed he thought the boy in the tree was a squirrel. He left the kid there to die though, and even went out on the town that night. Next thing you know, hunters are saying we should take .22 hunting away because somebody could shoot a bowhunter in a treestand. Well first off, anybody that shoots a person (twice by the way...he shot him twice!) and then knowingly leaves them is not squirrel hunting. They are a little off in the first place. Legislation won't fix people like that. It would just ruin it for everybody that does it right.
Now I am rambling, but my intent on this post is to politely suggest why some guys like hunting with dogs. It is for the sport. It is for the same reasons that the rest of us like to hunt the way we were taught. I would hate for somebody to take my hunting rights away, butit would sting even worseif the ones that took it away were my fellow sportsmen who decided they knew better.
Now my disclaimer is that I am not addressing all the little issues like tresspassing, mistreated dogs that are starving to death, etc. These kinds of issues are tagents that I bet will still get brought up even though I've specifically said I'm not talking about them. It happens in every thread. One time I put a post on suggesting that deer hunters not shoot people's hunting dogs. I specifically said I wasn't talking about wild dogs and strays, etc, but people still seemed argued those points. These kinds of issues are present no matter what the topic.
I hope everybody had or is having a great deer season and that they take from it what they love about it, even if it means turning the hounds lose fora fun afternoon full of that sweeet country hound dawg music!
First off, let me say I hunt deer with bows, primitive firearms and modern rifles. I also hunt several other species of Oklahoma wildlife. I am a hunter to the core. However, I have never hunted deer with dogs, but I understand what it must be about. I will try to make my point politely, and tactfully, even though I have a strong opinion.
This post is not intended to put a wedge between any of us or or stir up animosity, but rather to shed some light, raise a few points and hopefully unite hunters even more so than now.I do not understand how a hunter can say dog hunting is unsportsmanlike or unfair. I am an avid deer hunter, but I've decided that some deer hunters need to rethink the way they look at other hunters. Deer hunters do not own the woods and if we're not careful, we, with our"superior set of ethics,"could ruin things for everybody that enjoys the woods.
If running dogs is unfair to the deer, then so is sitting up in a treestand where deer are less likely to hear, see or smell you. If running dogs is unfair, then so is using camoflauge. If running dogs is unfair, then so is using scents, calls and even guns and bows. If running dogs is unfair, then all hunting is unfair.
Of course, we all know it is rediculous to say that hunting is unfair. We love it and do it out of passion, instinct, drive, hungeror whatever else motivates us. But we forget something. Yes, hunting is about far more than killing an animal, but the end goal, no matter what people try to say, is usually, for most people, to at least try to harvest an animal for both food and sport.
To do this, we consider our leads and work to create advantages. That's what camo, scouting, better ammunition, treestands and faster bows are all about - advantage. These things also make hunting more fun for us. And so do dogs for the guys that use them. Advantages, whether camo, scents, calls, treestands or dogs (if you really think dogs are an advantage) are all basically the same in nature. They are allefforts put forth by the sportsmen to make the hunt go his way (successfully and enjoyably)if possible.
I hunt squirrels with dogs. I take the dogs to the woods, turn them lose and work through the woods with them, making an effort to help the dogs by putting them in woods that usually contain squirrels. When they locate a squirrel using their brains, eyes, noses and ears, they are supposed to bark and make an enormous fuss so that I know they have located a squirrel. Then, I am supposed to do the best I can to see the squirrel they tree and then shoot it out over them. They get some fur in their mouth and I get some meat for the table. These dogs have been carefully bred for a long, long time to instinctively do what they do. And it is all about the sport of watching the dog tree some game. They really get worked up and it is exciting to watch and enjoy.
If I wanted to kill a limit of squirrels every time out, you can bet I wouldn't use dogs. I would sit down somewhere in full camo with a .22 and call them in until I bagged my limit. But with a young dog, you are sometimes lucky to get a few or even one if you have pups. It is about the sport. Therefore, hunting squirrels with dogs is "sportsmanlike."
Birddogs are the same way. I'd like to hear somebody who says deer dogging is "bad" try to justify why they think it is fair to let a very refined and well bred Pointer instinctively blow the cover of a covey of quail so that hunters armed with shotguns can shoot the birds when they flush. I would almost bet money that some of the people who shun deer dog hunters love a good quail hunt with dogs, yet they don't seem to think using dogs to pinpoint the exact location of birds is unfair. But, if running deer with dogs is unfair, then so is letting an extremely instinctive, accurate pointer locate birds for you to harvest.
It is the same thing with dogs. It is about sport, and just because they are running a bigger animal does not make it more unfair. An animal is an animal no matter what the size. Now granted, deer hunting with dogs is becoming an issue because of land availability and other factors, but if it is legal, what is the beef about it besides that it (boohoo
) makes somebody unhappy. Ifa hunter is (boohoo) whining about dogs just because it messes with their own agenda, they become just like the anti-hunter who is boohooing and trying to ruin the fun for those that enjoy it. Does anybody see what I mean? When deer hunters get high and mighty about hunting, I, as well as many logical thinkers here, realize that those people are not necessarily a good representative of hunters, especially when they start touting their ethics that are sometimes self-imposed and not established in the law. But when we get cocky like that, we risk messing up a lot of things. If we say hunting with dogs is unsportsmanlike, then we agree with anyone whose agenda opposes the hunter's passion.
If sportsmen back them on anything, give them even an inch, they will bite the hand that feeds them.
To interpret the last statement in English...If you back anti-hunters on the fairness of running dogs, don't be surprised when you finally have your "dogless" woods all to yourself and the environmentalists come running after you, too.
I recently read on a thread that perhaps some legislation should pass that would prohibit shooting .22 rifles inan upward direction, which would basically illiminate squirrel hunting with .22s. Why in the world would hunters want to pass any legislation that would infringe on their own fellow hunters? This came in the wake of a boy getting shot by another guy who claimed he thought the boy in the tree was a squirrel. He left the kid there to die though, and even went out on the town that night. Next thing you know, hunters are saying we should take .22 hunting away because somebody could shoot a bowhunter in a treestand. Well first off, anybody that shoots a person (twice by the way...he shot him twice!) and then knowingly leaves them is not squirrel hunting. They are a little off in the first place. Legislation won't fix people like that. It would just ruin it for everybody that does it right.
Now I am rambling, but my intent on this post is to politely suggest why some guys like hunting with dogs. It is for the sport. It is for the same reasons that the rest of us like to hunt the way we were taught. I would hate for somebody to take my hunting rights away, butit would sting even worseif the ones that took it away were my fellow sportsmen who decided they knew better.
Now my disclaimer is that I am not addressing all the little issues like tresspassing, mistreated dogs that are starving to death, etc. These kinds of issues are tagents that I bet will still get brought up even though I've specifically said I'm not talking about them. It happens in every thread. One time I put a post on suggesting that deer hunters not shoot people's hunting dogs. I specifically said I wasn't talking about wild dogs and strays, etc, but people still seemed argued those points
. These kinds of issues are present no matter what the topic. I hope everybody had or is having a great deer season and that they take from it what they love about it, even if it means turning the hounds lose fora fun afternoon full of that sweeet country hound dawg music!
01-09-2006, 06:15 AM
#4
RE: I've about had it!!
Mike good post ! I agree with you about the "Ethic Standards" that some on hereprofess to having and want to holdover others. I think its great if you feel your a total 100% ethical hunter ...but by "who's" standards? I live in north Alabama wheredeer hunting with dogs is illlegal however I have friends who live in west Alabama where it is legal ..who am I to tell them they are "cheaters" or unethical? I do notthink using dogs to deer hunt with is ANY more of an advatage then using a compound bowwith 85% let off would be but then I do not think either is "unethical" .... I do however remember the "old timers" laughing at the guys using compound bows when the first came out back in the late 60searly 70's ... I think "ethics" is a very personal thing ..something that you pass on to your family ....kind of like teaching your childrenmanors ..you know like "respecting your elders" which I find very little of on here ... I thinkthe bottom line to "ethics" is we all know what is right and what is wrong and we do our best to try to do whats right ...sometimes there are exceptions and you have to make a choice between whats moral and whats ethical ..I respect everyones right to hunt the way they want to hunt as long as they are considerate and part of that consideration is not forcing YOUR standars on me and visa versa... as for "ethics" I have yet to read the book that anyone on here has written on the subject although SOME act like they are the author of one. Live and let live I've always been told ..when your pointing a finger at someone you always have three pointing back at you !
dd
dd
01-09-2006, 06:30 AM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: MN USA
Posts: 1,489
RE: I've about had it!!
I'm glad you brought this up Mike, I was thinking of starting a post a few weeks back on fair chase but decided against it. People talking about what is and isn't fair chase, such as canned hunts. Well like you pointed out, wearing camo while elevated 30 ft in a tree with a high powered rifle by todays standards in considered fair chase. I fail to see whats fair about that. Using dogs to point and flush pheasants is considered fair chase, but using them for deer is not. Personally I never use dogs for deer nor have the desire to do so, but as long as it is legal in your area, it should be your own choice and anyone who screams that it is not fair chase has no right to do so. In my opinion, fair chase for deer went out the window a long time ago and I don't think anyone has the right to put anyone else down for their opinion of what fair chase is. Bottom line is, use your dogs, stay safeand have a great time hunting.
01-09-2006, 06:56 AM
#6
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: I've about had it!!
MN Deerman said it very well. Ethics are a subjective thing. I dont care to hunt with dogs or over bait and I dont want them to become legal where I hunt, but that's based more on what I'm accustomed to and how I was raised more than anything else.
If it's legal where you hunt and you enjoy it then by all means do it and enjoy!!
If it's legal where you hunt and you enjoy it then by all means do it and enjoy!!
01-09-2006, 09:25 AM
#7
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location:
Posts: 662
RE: I've about had it!!
I agree with you guys totally. I think what causes people at least me to feel like they have an advantage is the fact I can't do it where I hunt. Sure if baiting became legal I might try it and if you guys had a bad season I am sure some of you would to. If running dogs became legal I might try that to but it isn't so I don't have to worry about that. I feel to each his own. AlthoughI don't see how hunting from a tree dressed like a tree in unfair. You don't force the deer to walk by you and if it needed to it could escape danger. But if someone ever came by me and mistaked me for a squrrel he would be in some serious trouble if he shot me. A hunter that looked like a squrrel that would make for a weird story now wouldn't it. Could you imagine his court appearince, AAAA yes judge I shot a boy cause I thought he looked like a 150 pound squrrel come on.
01-09-2006, 09:31 AM
#8
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
RE: I've about had it!!
Hunting deer out of a stand is generally a very quiet, organized, neat, orderly activity. In contrast, other forms of hunting, especially those involving dogs,can appear to be very chaotic. Just the differing natures of particular hunting styles can cause misunderstandings or cause people to pass judgement onanother style that seems strange or different.
01-09-2006, 10:02 AM
#9
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: WC FL
Posts: 26,323
RE: I've about had it!!
There's a female in the senate of Louisianna, that is trying to put a stop to hunting hogs with dogs in her state![:@]
I have been dog hog hunting and breeding hog dogs for almost 50yrs and would not like it to happen to FL.!
Here in FL on WMA's there are hog dog areas where you can only hunt in that WMA. In west central Fl. there are hundreds of dog deer hunters and that's ok with me. I have done itmany times also. Many, many standhunters have killed thier deer cause of the dogs.
In many states the terrain and conditions are different and one has to hunt accordingly to his conditions and I respect that. To each his own and different strokes for different folks!
I have been dog hog hunting and breeding hog dogs for almost 50yrs and would not like it to happen to FL.!
Here in FL on WMA's there are hog dog areas where you can only hunt in that WMA. In west central Fl. there are hundreds of dog deer hunters and that's ok with me. I have done itmany times also. Many, many standhunters have killed thier deer cause of the dogs.
In many states the terrain and conditions are different and one has to hunt accordingly to his conditions and I respect that. To each his own and different strokes for different folks!
01-09-2006, 11:04 AM
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 4,485
RE: I've about had it!!
good post SWMIKE,
Although I have never hunted with or even seen dogs used, I would not oppose it. I would like to try it even. I know there have been plenty of thick, thick places I've been huntingin thinkin' "I wish I had one of those deer-chasing rabbit beagles to throw in there and see what comes out."
On another note
Doctor Death--would it be possible for you to not write everything in BOLD--it is very hard to read.
Thanks
Although I have never hunted with or even seen dogs used, I would not oppose it. I would like to try it even. I know there have been plenty of thick, thick places I've been huntingin thinkin' "I wish I had one of those deer-chasing rabbit beagles to throw in there and see what comes out."
On another note
Doctor Death--would it be possible for you to not write everything in BOLD--it is very hard to read.
Thanks