Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 127

Thread: Ethical Hunting

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    During the gold rush, services would be traded for gold dust. Just a pinch. A smart madam would squeeze a dried pea between her thumb and finger creating a deep indentation. Then when she got her pinch of gold dust she would get about 10 times as much and no one was the wiser.
    Interesting, Thanks,, I'll bet there were lots of sneaky things going on in those days, I seen a documentary where they said there was lots of gold dust found under saloons ,, it would fall through the cracks in the floor ,, especially in the area of the bar.


  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    North Georgia Mountains
    Posts
    2,222
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    My philosophy is that if I kill it, I eat it. If I catch a big bass and it's legal to eat, I eat it.

    Same goes with deer and hogs. I don't care much for the antlers as I don't hunt for my ego but rather for meat.

    Now, I have my own set of rules. I will not shoot a doe or sow if it has little ones with it. If they are alone it's a diff. story.

    I don't shoot the biggest hog, because it's just too much meat. I like the smaller ones.


    I'm not in favor of the quality deer management. If it's a legal kill or catch, I eat it.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    130

    Default

    i honestly don't worry about it. if i'm camping,canoeing,or just fishing nearby. if i want to eat the fish i could careless about slot limits or what have you. i just eat the damn thing and don't worry about it. i honestly don't worry about 'their' rules.
    when i'm camping and want fish for dinner, the last think i'm thinking about is the law(s). i just want fish for dinner... and i'm going to have fish for dinner...simple as that!
    and i have no oversion to killing bambi if i need deer meat.
    but as the above post says, i as well will not kill a doe or cow elk if it has young with it. besides a wet doe taste like crap anyway. i made the honest mistake of killing a wt doe a couple of years ago that was wet (the yearling was about the same size as her so i didn't realize it until it was to late). we ended up canning the whole damn thing and mixing it with other meat in stews to kill the taste.yuck.

  4. #24
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    57,378

    Default

    I sure hope you don't cross someone that doesn't care about the law and kills YOU. It's about wildlife management not about your pleasure for the moment.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    I sure hope you don't cross someone that doesn't care about the law and kills YOU. It's about wildlife management not about your pleasure for the moment.
    you do realize i'm just talking about having a couple of fish for dinner.
    not dynamiting the whole damn lake.
    god i love montana. no one i know worries about stuff like this.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    I sure hope you don't cross someone that doesn't care about the law and kills YOU. It's about wildlife management not about your pleasure for the moment.
    Sometimes it's about wildlife management. Sometimes it's about politics.

    Wolves are a prime example of politics over management.

    Honestly, you'd be better off being charged with illegally killing a person than an animal. Animals have more clout politically.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountain1 View Post
    ... god i love montana. no one i know worries about stuff like this.
    Amen brother!

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mosquitomountainman View Post
    Sometimes it's about wildlife management. Sometimes it's about politics.

    Wolves are a prime example of politics over management.

    Honestly, you'd be better off being charged with illegally killing a person than an animal. Animals have more clout politically.
    thank you
    i don't think most folks really understand the politics behind "wildlife managment". rick is worried about me keeping a few fish to eat that aren't "legal". should we tell him about the federal goverment poisining a whole entire ecosystem in the bob marshell wilderness on purpose. killing millions upon millions of trout. and he's worried about me keeping a couple of fish.
    i guess it's ok though since the 'goverment' is doing it. BS i say

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountain1 View Post

    ...i made the honest mistake of killing a wt doe a couple of years ago that was wet (the yearling was about the same size as her so i didn't realize it until it was to late). we ended up canning the whole damn thing and mixing it with other meat in stews to kill the taste.yuck.
    I killed an antlered doe about three years ago bowhunting. He/she/it was lactating. The meat was okay on it. First one I ever saw and didn't know it when I shot. Thought it was a buck.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountain1 View Post
    thank you
    i don't think most folks really understand the politics behind "wildlife managment". rick is worried about me keeping a few fish to eat that aren't "legal". should we tell him about the federal goverment poisining a whole entire ecosystem in the bob marshell wilderness on purpose. killing millions upon millions of trout. and he's worried about me keeping a couple of fish.
    i guess it's ok though since the 'goverment' is doing it. BS i say
    He's from Indiana. Lots more people there and less wildlife per person. They have to manage it closely or they won't have any left.

    It's difficult for Easterners to comprehend the vast space we have here either.

  11. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mosquitomountainman View Post
    He's from Indiana. Lots more people there and less wildlife per person. They have to manage it closely or they won't have any left.

    It's difficult for Easterners to comprehend the vast space we have here either.
    yeah i know, i try to keep things into prespective but it's hard sometimes for me to imagine. that's why i never leave the state unless i'm going to AL to see my family (once every 3-5 yrs or so). even there in bama' i grew up in very rural northern AL in the "hills". none of us there ever bought hunting or fishing license. we just went on about our merry way and did as we pleased and never hurt anyone.
    i don't know; i guess i just grew up different than most folks. we never worried about the "law" we just did what we wanted to do and didn't worry about it . i still live by that same philosophy today.
    i have to say, that most folks i know in MT are the same way.
    'cause no harm. and leave me alone. it's none of anyone's damn buisness what i do...'
    this is why i love montana
    Last edited by mountain1; 01-09-2011 at 02:58 AM.

  12. #32
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    57,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountain1
    if i want to eat the fish i could careless about slot limits or what have you. i just eat the damn thing and don't worry about it. i honestly don't worry about 'their' rules.
    Those are your words. You continue to express a wanton disregard for hunting rules. You also insist on changing the parameters to meet your argument. You go from killing turkeys to killing bears in another thread because it better suits your argument. Or condemn the government for their act and then interject some sentiment I never expressed.

    And MM it has nothing to do with where I live. I obey hunting and fishing laws where ever I am. And since you aren't from Indiana it's a bit difficult to know what we have or do. And just as an aside, I've been to Montana. SHOCK. I do comprehend the vast space.

    And when you can't support your argument further you talk about how far you live into the mountains and no one can get there for days so no one will know.

    You guys exhibit the same mentality that has decimated the buffalo herds, elephant populations, tiger populations, etc. It's one thing to stop a raiding bear. It's quite another to talk about doing whatever you want and damn the consequences. By the way, we have that kind in Indiana, too.

    Nothing I say is going to change the way you hunt or fish. I know that. But I can see a wolf even if it wears camo. When I do, I generally point them out.

  13. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    I agree Rick,, shame these guys think they are above the law,,,,

  14. #34

    Default

    I've never met anyone who obeyed every law on the books. We all make decisions as to which laws we obey ... or not. Have you ever crossed a street outside the marked lines? Parked over the time limit? Worked for pay "under the table?" Driven a vehicle illegally? Driven or ridden without a seat belt? If you've always obeyed every law you were aware of then go ahead and accuse others of thinking they are above the law. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite deciding which laws are important for "other people" to obey.

    The laws are different in MT due to several influences. If wildlife is threatening you or your livestock you have the right to kill it. No charges will be pressed although in some cases the evidence better be obvious. In other cases merely having a predator near your residence, showing no signs of fear, is enough justification for shooting it. Mountain lions, bears, and wolves being prime examples. In many cases FWP is called and in some will try to capture and relocate the animal but quite often they'll just say kill it and notify them. Relocation often doesn't work.

    Montana is open range. That means that if you want to let your stock roam free you can do it. There's no legal requirement to keep it fenced in and if livestock comes on your property and walks through your garden it's your responsibility to build a fence around your property. Same thing if livestock is in the road. It's your responsibility to avoid it. The owner cannot be held responsible for it.

    It is a different way of life here. I've even known a few (very few) instances of game wardens being careful to not "see" some things when they knew the "poaching" was done by people who needed the meat. I'd rather see someone take an "extra" deer in the season than apply for welfare or food stamps. If it gets out-of-hand things will be done and it only applies to subsistance hunting ... not trophy or market hunting.

    Comparing the person who may take a couple of fish without a license to the full-scale, government supported, market hunting that wiped out the buffalo is disingenuous. Those who make their home here have a lot of respect for wildlife. I can guarantee it isn't the climate or economic opportunties that brought them here. In fact, the people who might take an extra fish or two are probably better educated, more astute conservationists than the city slicker who got their outdoor education from Walt Disney Studios.

    Hunting, fishing, and other outdoor recreation is what keeps many if not most of us here putting up with the lousy climate and economic situation. Does anyone here really believe we're going crap in our own bed and destroy that heritage?

    Too many hunting and fishing regulations in the US, and especially in the West are a result of political appeasement rather than based on sound, scientific game management. Wolves have far exceeded the original objectives for "sustainable growth" yet remain on the endangered list because of the decision of a federal judge ... not wildlife biologists. Look at the ban on hunting mountain lions in Kalifornia. What did that have to do with game management?

    What would you do if some outside group with a lot of political clout decided to build a prison in your neighborhood? Our an oil refinery or any other business that would negatively impact your way of life and the judiciary bcked them up on it? Would there be some resentment present? That's the way Montanans see wolf introduction. We didn't want them but they were forced on us by the left coast. Wolves are not good neighbors. They kill wildlife and domestic animals and endanger our way of life and our economic system. There have been numerous times when wolves killed livestock and the dogs valiently trying to protect those livestock. Can you imagine what it's like for a ranch family to see their dogs running out in a field to fight off wolves that are killing livestock then see the dogs get ripped to shreds by the wolf pack? It happens here. Those supporting wolves are writing checks on someone else's account and are no different than welfare queens taking money out of our pockets with a complete disregard for how it impacts those footing the bill for their fetish.

    Now regarding Indiana ... I have relatives in Indiana and Wisconsin. I've been there. I, as a Montana resident do not believe I should be forcing my wildlife conservation views on you and we'd appreciate the same courtesy from those who live outside our state. Let each state handle their own wildlife without federal intervention. Is that too much to ask?

  15. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    The thread is about ethical hunting,,,, not ethical driving,,,

  16. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Case View Post
    The thread is about ethical hunting,,,, not ethical driving,,,
    "I agree Rick,, shame these guys think they are above the law,,,,"

    There's a concept stated here that goes beyond hunting. It's about picking and choosing which laws you think should be obeyed. LIke I posted ... 'If you've always obeyed every law you were aware of then go ahead and accuse others of thinking they are above the law. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite deciding which laws are important for "other people" to obey.'

    Do you believe people should obey all laws or only those they believe should be obeyed?

  17. #37
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    57,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MM
    Let each state handle their own wildlife without federal intervention. Is that too much to ask?
    I'd actually be quite pleased if Montana were able to handle their wildlife without intervention. But since you guys are the ones that posted your disregard for your own laws it doesn't seem like it's happening. You also managed to twist the argument around to jaywalking and motorcycles and whatever...again. I'm not the one that said they did what ever they wanted to do. That's all I take exception to. Follow your own state's laws and all is good. By the way, I'm done with this post so feel free to post your rebuttal.

  18. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California, High desert
    Posts
    7,436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mosquitomountainman View Post
    "I agree Rick,, shame these guys think they are above the law,,,,"

    There's a concept stated here that goes beyond hunting. It's about picking and choosing which laws you think should be obeyed. LIke I posted ... 'If you've always obeyed every law you were aware of then go ahead and accuse others of thinking they are above the law. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite deciding which laws are important for "other people" to obey.'

    Do you believe people should obey all laws or only those they believe should be obeyed?
    Yes,,, they "Should",,,, If they dont and brag about it they should expect ridicule,,,, I dont really care if you eat illegal fish or not,, its your a$$ if you get caught,,,,

  19. #39
    Senior Member 2dumb2kwit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Northeastern NC
    Posts
    8,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2dumb2kwit View Post
    How big of a gun do I need, to hunt ethicals?

    ...and does anybody have a good recipe, for them?
    Anyone.....


    ...anyone???
    Writer of wrongs.
    Honey, just cuz I talk slow doesn't mean I'm stupid. (Jake- Sweet Home Alabama)
    "Stop Global Whining"

  20. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    I'd actually be quite pleased if Montana were able to handle their wildlife without intervention. But since you guys are the ones that posted your disregard for your own laws it doesn't seem like it's happening. You also managed to twist the argument around to jaywalking and motorcycles and whatever...again. I'm not the one that said they did what ever they wanted to do. That's all I take exception to. Follow your own state's laws and all is good. By the way, I'm done with this post so feel free to post your rebuttal.
    There'd be a whole bunch of us pleased if each state handled their own affairs without federal intervention.

    My point was that anyone who disregards any law has no right to vilify others for doing the same thing. We all pick and choose and maybe the reason is because so many of the laws are intrusive and have nothing to do with justice.
    For example, if a woman is about to be raped and shoots her attacker dead it's justifiable. If she has been raped and waits until the attacker is leaving then kills him with a rifle from her front porch as he walks under a street light she's committed a murder. But now I'm really digressing from the topic.

    Game laws are a tough issue here primarily because of past abuses. We've had to put up with restrictions on our lifestyles due to grizzly bears for years. Most forest service roads are gated to protect grizzly bears. Years ago there were "studies" that purportedly showed that grizzly bears avoided "roads" so the feds blocked off vehicle access to large parts of the national forest. The state was compelled to do the same by the federal government. Locals thought is was nonsense because we see grizzlies on roads all the time. Years later the FWP people admitted that the problem with road access didn't have anything to do with the bears avoiding roads (by then the evidence was so overwhelming that they could no longer support that lie) but they closed roads to keep the people out of bear habitat because when the people and bears met, the bears lost. So, we're deprived of reasonable access to millions of acres of national forest property because of federal intervention citing bogus "scientific research."
    To say there's a little resentment toward outside control is a huge understatement.

    Like I said earlier, Montanan's are not going to destroy what we've come here to enjoy. The destruction is coming from outside the state in the form of federal interference.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •