"CRICKETS"
daddus

Yeah... because apparently if you wouldn't poach an animal, you definitely voted for Obama.

That makes a lot of sense... he would rather skirt the laws set forth in the constitution, so it stands to reason that he wouldn't mind skirting hunting laws as well.

I swear... you can't tell where some people start and where they begin because their heads are securely jammed far up their own asses.

:D

You're conversing with simpletons.........

Hey guys,

First of all, this is definitely question from some narrow-minded, anti-hunting, bambi saving, tree hugging type. But I don't care what people like that think because they don't understand what we do and why we do it. They just don't get it and never will. They will never even attempt to try to understand so I choose to not worry one iota what they think...

But on to the question. It is difficult to answer honestly based on the info. It doesn't all add up to me. It is pretty unlikely that 30 minutes before legal shooting a hunter could see well enough to ethically take this shot. Maybe under absolutely perfect conditions though, I suppose. The bigger question to me is, "Is this a safe shot?" Can you see clearly enough to make an effective kill shot? If it is, I guess I don't have a huge issue with it. It would be pretty tough to not take that shot. I'm not saying it's right, but if I'm honest with myself, I don't know that I pass - if it's light enough to take a safe shot. I'd like to say I would pass, but if I can see the animal as clearly as it is described, I might shoot. Again, this might be a pretty far-fetched example, it just doesn't all add up. The description eludes to seeing the antlers clearly and even seeing the steam from it's nose. I hunt in the north and have seen steam from a deers nose. You cannot see it if it is dark. It is unlikely that you see this much detail this early. But with snow on the ground, clear skies, the sun just over the horizon, and a full moon, I guess maybe. But anyway, I draw a big distinction between shooting an animal a few minutes prior to shooting time (or a few minutes after) and poaching an animal. I wouldn't consider this person a poacher.

To those that say this is poaching and claim to stick to the letter of the law to a T - I wonder if it was 5 minutes before shooting, would you take the shot? How about 1 minute? or 30 seconds? Based on the arguments I heard earlier, you would consider yourself a poacher for shooting this animal 10 seconds before legal shooting. What if 1 minute after legal shooting time you see this deer? I've even been hunting under adverse conditions -thick snow (also thick fog), overcast, no moon, and didn't feel right about taking a shot during legal shooting hours. I'm just curious what some thoughts are on this.

Lastly, we need to back off the name calling a bit. Here's same PETA moron coming on here and getting us all riled up at one another. We should be getting on Canadian Newsfairy's case, not each other.

North22---Here are several comments regarding your post:
First---You are putting way too much into the OP question. He asked if you would shoot an animal before legal hours if it was a big buck. The simple answer if you're an ethical hunter and follow ALL the laws is NO!!!
Second---Whether this guy is a true hunter or a PETA supporter, your answer that you might shoot even one minute before legal time if you could see well means that you are a violator, pure and simple, if you did take the shot!
Third---After legal shooting hours start you can shoot IF you can properly see the target and everything in the area based on the conditions to know that you can take an accurate, safe shot.
Fourth---I really have to laugh at your last paragraph telling members to stop the name calling and then you call the OP a moron and Fairy!!!

I would lay the hammer down! Most of you have and would shoot an animal before legal shooting hours as well! I'm not saying go out at night ect but being truthful we all know u can safely and ethically see shortly before and after the legal hours begin or end. Particularly in archery most of you would shoot an animal regardless if u admit it or not!

***Baloney, as to you saying what others would do and have done! However, after reading your thoughts on the turkey thread on the long distances you would shoot, this answer here doesn't surprise me one bit! Sounds to me like you need a hunter safety and ethics course and maybe throw in one on what integrity means. Either that or maybe just plain keeping quiet, rather than openly stating you would violate the law! Some of the comments you make on this website seem to be just to stir up trouble and this may be the worst yet. Also, FYI it's against the rules of this website to openly speak of violating game laws and saying things that are detrimental to hunting and that could be used by the antis. Please See rule #6

Take a few deep breaths top gun and lighten up a little. I'm not going to engage you in your attempt to attack me personally for being honest. I don't see my comments anything but truthful despite your thoughts!

That was not a personal attack of any sort, but rather just saying that you are openly stating you violate the law. Engage you for being honest, LOL! Now you have put up a second post saying you're an outright law violator and I would hope a Moderator reads both of your posts and takes appropriate action for violating website rules---Nuff said and this will be my last post to you to avoid any rules violations myself!!!

Reading comprehension my friend I said I would pull the trigger not I did pull the trigger! If you think the majority of hunters look at a watch phone whatever to determine if its legal to shoot particularly in archery season then you are misled! I represent the majority not the minority and do not feel my post was in any way unethical but simply am man enough to not put on false personas behind computers that I am something I'm not.