It makes me sick every time I think about it..This guy is a regular at a archery shop I know, and he killed a doe the other night.He comes into the archery shop with the doe talking about how many he saw that night and how he killed this doe then he asked if any of us wanted it? He said that his family wont eat deer meat and that he didnt have time to fool with it because he had to go into work early so that he could get off the next morning before daylight because he was going back to hunt the same spot..I asked him why he was going back if he or his family didnt eat deer?? He replied that he still has 2 more deer tags to fill.. He is legal to kill more deer but why?? if you dont eat it?? He was talking about how far the shot was and how powerful his bow was. A wheelie bow by the way. I just dont understand people but what I did understand that night is why I was always taught to pray before you eat.. It never really hit me until that night. A animal has been killed so that we may survive.. respect the game we hunt
You just have to realize that not everyone is going to feel the same as most of us. My neighbor is the same way. He loves to hunt but his family refuses to eat anything that doesn't come from the store. Just be thankful that this guy wanted to see the meat get used rather than go to waste.
Wanton waste is illegal in many....if not all states.
But to answer your question "WE" do.
I agree with Maxflight i hunt with a guy who is a great outdoorsman and kills a lot of deer. He always takes care of the meat but as far as i know he never has eaten the deer he kills. In the county i hunt in there are a lot of people who struggle to put food on the table and they are always thrilled when he gives them the meat from the deer. I dont see any problem with a guy who loves to hunt but doesnt eat what he kills.
I donate at least 2 deer to the food pantry (if I get enough of my own) Missouri has a program where they pay for part of the processing if you donate it to the food bank. So I buy the extra tags and pay $45 for the process on as many as I don't use that I can get. I like to hunt, and it'a a way to give thanks for what I have and the blessing of being able to (still) live in a country where I can hunt, and put food on the table for my family. BTW my wife won't eat deer because she's afraid of wasting disease. My boys, on the other hand, do it justice! None goes to waste. Even the dog eats the heart, lungs, liver.
God must be a great who created deer!
Sam
I don't think the problem is that he killed the deer with intentions of giving it away, as several of us, including myself, do give some away to people in need. The problem is he took the animal without having someone to give the meat to ahead of time so if no one would have taken it, it would have been wasted. All said he basically just killed the deer to be killing it.
The more people I meet the more I love my dogs...
I agree with Gordon. He killed it not knowing ahead of time what to do with it. What if no one takes it, then what. At least line up a food pantry program or someone to give it to.
To me there's a long list of things that make us look bad. This being one of them. Another one is most of the hunting shows on TV.
I agree with Buckeye,
I give two or three does away every year but always have place for them before season gets here, as far as the title of your post... What gives hunters a bad name is parading thru town with that deer hanging out of the back of the truck or strapped to rack of a four wheeler on a trailer, going into a public place covered in blood and being an ignorant braggard like the fellow your talking about.
We all like to tell our story but we need to do it with taste and respect and not flaunt it to those who don't really want to hear it. JMO
your right buckeye that was not his intention. he said that that if anyone didnt want it that it was coyote food.. I have no problem with donating meat to those who will eat it.. I have dont that many of times but before killing a deer I always know who I can give it to if I cant use it
I agree a hunter should always be responsible after he takes a animal. Sounds like he needs to find someone who needs the meat so he will have a plan next time he kills something. I know at least 10 people who would love to have some fresh deer meat and dont mind paying to have it processed.
QuoteOriginally posted by hydrasport205:
He was talking about how far the shot was and how powerful his bow was. A wheelie bow by the way.
I understand what you're saying, but using the "power" of one's equipment to justify taking what are generally seen as poor shots is far from exclusive to modern bowhunters. I've read numerous threads and posts over the past few days on other sites where folks with recurves and longbows are bragging about trying to shoot big game animals in all sorts of questionable ways: pointed away and through the pelvis, head-on, quartering-toward and through the shoulder bones etc. I know rifle hunters who wouldn't even take some of these shots, yet when someone brags about doing it with a "magic arrow/broadhead combination" the response I usually hear is the chirping of crickets.
Respect. Upright actions and proper reverence due from all creatures to the creator. Humility. Kindness.
I could go on and on. There are a lot of attributes seriously lacking in this world.
Please read the quote I use as a signature.
"A peculiar virtue in wildlife ethics is that the hunter ordinarily has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. Whatever his acts, they are dictated by his own conscience, rather than by a mob of onlookers..." A.Leopold
That is, of course, unless you open yourself up like an idiot to critizism. I invite folks over for dinner, serve them something out of this world, and then wait for them to ask me questions. You'd be surprised how many hearts are softened to hunting via this approach. Otherwise, I keep my mouth shut (it's a survival strategy in Comifornia) Sounds like that "hunter" needs some attention.
What difference does it make if the KILLER eats it or not....
There are a lot of hunters that do kill deer, and never eat a bite of it....me included.
I do not like venison, never have, never will, but I ALWAYS, skin, and dress the animal then give the meat to a landowner, or Hunters Feeding the Hungry programs.
At least the guy you're running down was attempting to find someone who wanted or needed the meat.
Get off your soapbox.
Billy
No one is on the soap box and no one is saying that it is wrong to give the meat away. We are saying it was wrong to shoot it without someone to give the meat to before hand. if he hadn't found someone to take it he would have let it go to waste. Read all the post!
I did read ALL the post, and I have personally killed game without having someone to give it to at that particular moment, but have yet not been able to find someone happy to have in short order.
Billy
In the UK hunting has got a very seriously bad reputation simply because anti's perceive hunters to be killing things just for the sake of killing something. If you want to add more anti's to the anti stable then there's nothing more encouraging for them than people killing for killing's sake.
I donate most of the deer i kill to either family or friends that need it. I have "wheelie" bow friends who are some of the most ethical hunters/people i know. Waste is waste regardless of the choice of weapon.
Respect... Humility. Kindness.
Like I said, sorely lacking in the world today.
No one is on a "soap box", let's remember the rules of TradGang and why it is that folks like me visit this place on a very regular basis. That's right, folks like me. I pay particular attention to my actions and the ways in which I have an affect on people. I fear that far too many couldn't give a rat's butt.
You are correct NCH. Fortunately, there are some people in the world who still have some of the mentioned attributes.
Take up target archery if you don`t eat what you kill.
QuoteTake up target archery if you don`t eat what you kill.
Never saw this in the rules. Did not know I have to eat the woodchucks, coyotes, etc I kill every year. Deer are very overpopulated every year where I hunt - as in years past, I will kill far more then I can eat personally. Those I don't use will be given to any of a number of people I know will utilize them - seldom preselected. I will continue to do so legally and refuse to be judged by anyone - anti or elitist.
I think that's generally the theme here, Steve. I too kill coyotes and other critters I won't eat. My conscience is clear.
What's being debated here, as I understand it, is perception. Had this man simply asked if anyone wanted any venison and been on his way I don't think we'd of heard about it. My personal position is that we will do the sport and ourselves a great service to speak with reverent and respectful words with regards to what we kill and why we kill it. Most people are rational and given enough reason will see the logic in things like predator depredation.
My $.02 is up.
Lets not fight amongst ourselves on this one. Doing that, and "they" have won. There shouldn't be a person on this forum that objects to the benefical use of an animal harvested, be it the one who harvested it, or made sure one in need was supplied.
It is all in how we present ourselves in the actions we either elect to take, or must (interesting post on an "Aussie" brother who had to do the unpleasant thing to put suffering critters down with an act of archery - see "Dry Fire Help" thread - I can only imagine what his non-hunting accomplices thought, though I am sure it was done in a "tasteful/respectful" manner).
Even the limiting of nuissance animals should be heralded as "done right" as such controls help rebalance the tilt in the natural process we have caused in out growth. But never at the disrespect of the animal.
That makes us look poor.
We have a mighty responsibility....
Whats the problem sounds like you want to put your morality in front of his he is going to give it away not wast it I think you should give your head a shake its not you that should decide what he does with his deer if he wants to hunt and take game it's his business not yours! :readit: :banghead:
I don`t eat coyotes I kill either. I do eat woodchucks. (fantastic eating) I do not eat ground squirrels that tear into the garden. Or skunks...possums...ect.
I DO think that when someone kills an animal such as a DEER, without ever having any intention of eating it, that it DOES give hunters a bad name. Donating the meat is a very good thing. BUT... Some people are always going to equate killing something you don`t eat, or EVER intend to eat, as killing for the joy of it. Regardless of what happens to the meat.
This thread is about what gives hunters a bad name. I believe this is one of them.
I did not intend to try to force my morals on anyone. I am not an anti, or any type of elitist. :o
I wish I could take more deer than I could eat. Since having kids, it has never happened. :campfire:
When in the woods I conduct my self to my standards which I like to think are higher then most. I won't shoot at an animal unless I have a 90% chance of making a clean kill. I won't shoot if the animal is over 20 yards. I won't shoot a moving animal. These are my rules for my self and I do not impose my rules on anyone else. You can discuss this until hell freezes over and still not please everyone.
Dang guys I was going to let this die but its back up so. I don't think the problem is with him killing something he won't eat it is that he did not have a plan ahead of time. How hard is it to ask a couple people ahead of time? You would not go into the mountains and kill a giant elk and then think hmmm How am I going to get this thing out of here? I don' understand why anyone would disagree with that. I don't know why it keeps going back to just killing something you are not going to eat. I saw an idiot at the local Sonic walking up to car after car and asking if they wanted a deer that was dead in the back of his truck, tell me how that is going to look to someone who does not hunt.
Quote... we will do the sport and ourselves a great service to speak with reverent and respectful words with regards to what we kill and why we kill it. ... [/QB]
That is worth repeating.
I know it rankles some to have to moderate their language in any way regarding a sport they feel strongly is their given right to participate in, but when we speak about hunting and only describe it in terms of our first "kill" and our bow has "drawn blood" or has been "bloodied" it does not forward our message in regards to those who might be on the fence in forming opinions about whether or not to become anti.
Its not that hard to be thoughtful when choosing how we express ourselves about hunting, a first successful hunt or a new bow that was used toward that end. And it is not an inroad on our autonomy or our independence by doing so.
I'm impressed with trad bowhunters though. A more conscientious group I think would be hard to find anywhere.
Joshua
So only the killer of game should be able to eat it?
"Sorry, honey but I killed it so you don't get any! I know you cooked it but you now the rules....none for you either little Billy!"
Sounds kinda retarded doesn't it?!
Who cares who eats it just so somebody does!
I need to become a known shipper on an air cargo carrier between billy shipp and myself!
For myself, part of the hunt is eating the kill.
I believe just the fact that we hunt gives us a bad name in some circles. I have met some very narrow minded people that when they find out I hunt the first thing outta their mouth is "OMG you kill Bambi"! My response to that is "No, I do not kill Bambi because Bambi is a fictional cartoon character". When I try to talk with them about hunting they want nothing to do with it. People like this will always consider us "bad" and no amount of discussion will change their minds. The problem is that they are raising their children to think like them.
***Soapbox***
We need to stick together as hunters, supporting each others right to hunt no matter what method is chosen as long as those methods are legal. We need to educate our children in ethical hunting ways. If they choose to be hunters then that is wonderful. If they do not at least they will be non-hunters who understand what real hunting is.
***done***
QuoteOriginally posted by misfire:
We need to stick together as hunters, supporting each others right to hunt no matter what method is chosen as long as those methods are legal.
I would disagree with this statement.
Until recently it was legal in the UK to get a pack of 50 dogs that were selectively bred to not be fast enough to catch the fox or deer they were chasing thus making the fox or deer run terrified for several hours until it was totally exhausted at which time said pack of dogs would then catch up to it and tear it to pieces and the goons on horses that chased after the dogs would cover each other in the blood of the torn apart carcass of the quarry claiming it was a tradition.
This kind of legal hunting turned the majority of the UK population against hunting - all kinds of hunting were tarred with the same brush of the cruelty perceived by the general public when they saw the pictures and videos of dog pack hunting. I am proud to say that i personally protested against this barbaric cruelty and am totally glad that it is now illegal. If again it is legalised i will again become an anti against it.
Sticking together with all hunters regardless of whatever attitude and methods they use whether legal or not is to my mind just going to tar the ethical hunters with the same brush as the sickos who have no regard or respect whatsoever for the animals they hunt.
You are extremely lucky in the USA to have the opportunities to bow hunt the beautiful places that i see in the photos that people post on this forum. But you live in a democracy and it's all too easy to set people onto the anti's side if they perceive pointless cruelty or senseless killing. The more you send to the anti's side, the more chance you will end up with more and more controls and limitations on what you can hunt, how you can hunt and where you can hunt, until you end up like the UK where it's basically impossible to hunt without break some law unless you have a lot of land or a lot of money.
I agree freefeet, just because they're a hunter doesn't make them an advocate for the sport. Someone who aimlessly kills an animal with no prior plan of usage and openly says "if no one takes it it's gonna feed the coyotes" may as well be an anti because they are only giving fuel to the fire.
Good points Freefeet.Nothing like a perspective from those who have had their hunting rights taken away.there is one thing i have not heard mentioned or brought up in this thread.Refridgeration and freezers were invented long ago.why cant someone who may not be inclined to eat what they kill,freeze the meat untill a worthy recipient is found?Its not like we hafta eat it before it goes bad anymore.
Okay... I read the whole thing and here's my take on it.
I do NOT have any problem with someone killing a bunch of deer and giving them away. I think hunters for the hungry and food pantry donations are a great boon to the overall reputation of hunters in general and I wish I was in a position to donate a couple deer per year myself. I have in the past accepted deer from friends who had shot them and didn't want them.
However... What I do have a problem with is going out and killing a deer with no intentions of using it in any way regardless of whether you find someone who wants it or not. If you go back and read again, it started out that this guy came into a shop and asked if anyone wanted a deer he'd shot. So far so good but what if nobody wants it? He said that it'd be "coyote food". Why? Because he was being lazy. Had a sob story that he had to go to work or something like that. Again, PROBLEM.
What I'm getting at is basic responsibility.
If you kill a deer and don't want to eat it then you have a responsibility to see that it does not go to waste. As someone else said above, it's the law in most states.
Steve H., You asked : "So only the killer of game should be able to eat it?"
"Sorry, honey but I killed it so you don't get any! I know you cooked it but you now the rules....none for you either little Billy!"
I think maybe you're making a joke? Of course animal meat is not limited to consumption only by those who kill it. I don't think that was the point most people were trying to make. The idea is just that it doesn't go to waste.
Like you said: "Who cares who eats it just so somebody does!" But coyotes don't count in my book.
I don't think most people have any problem whatsoever with people giving away meat. It's when a guy is trying to unload a dead carcass so that HE doesn't have to do the work or spend the money to process it himself. That's all this one was about. The guy shot a deer, didn't want it. Tries to give it away either because he doesn't like the meat or doesn't want to do the work involved. Now, if he was persistent about finding someone to take it "as is" I'm still okay with it if he's successful but it dang sure can make a bad impression to have a guy standing in a store, bar or where ever trying to "get rid of" a deer just so he can go try to kill another one tomorrow morning. If the guy can't find somebody on short notice to take it he'd better call off from work and take care of it himself or get it into a cooler so he can do it later. Didn't sound like that was in the plan for this guy.
How about if you're on a hunt for some sort of big critter like elk or moose in a remote drop camp somewhere and you kill a big old moose about 4 miles from camp in the bottom of a draw? Don't you have the responsibility to pack the meat out? You can't find some other hunters camp and ask them "Hey, any of you guys want a moose? There's one upriver a ways you can have. I want to go shoot another one tomorrow if I can."
You shoot it, you track it. You find it, you pack it out. Give it away when you get home if you want but have some freezer space handy to use until you find a home for it.
Oh yea, and the times where I had friends give me a deer they didn't want... If I'd said no, they WOULD have either cut it up or had it processed rather than let it go to waste. The only reason they didn't was because they knew I preferred to cut up my own meat and were trying to get it to me ASAP.
Right on, Dave. Many times I have not gone on a day hunt for deer just because I had to work the next day. I could not hunt all day, shoot one in the afternoon or early evening, and have it in the coolerator in time to get any sleep before sorting and carrying my route.
It boils down to personal responsibility, which I feel the hunter in the story was sweeping under the rug in order to boost his "manly" image. All fun and no work, this idiot is just a jerk. This is kinda like the father to 20 bastards who never parented a one.
Killdeer
Where I live if a guy walks into a bar and asks if anyone wants a fresh kill just about everyone would say yes. Many times while working as a bartender I would get a call about the location of a road kill and it would be gone real quick...PR
Oh Ya BTW, I dont think this gives us a bad name compared to those that dont practice before taking a bow into the woods or all the trespassing and littering ...PR
Dave, Kathyrn
Thanks for pointing out the obvious here and saving me (and the Gang from) a lengthy sermon! Hunting is a privilege, not a right! We can start by acting like we deserve it! If you don't know that you or others will use the animal, don't shoot it! If you don't have time to take care of the meat, you didn't have time to go hunting! Get over the notion that you are some benevolent provider to the grateful, protein-deprived masses! Anybody that takes your deer "as is" is doing you the favor by bailing your lazy ass out of your responsibilities as an ethical hunter. At least have the decency to properly process the meat or pay to have it done. Deliver it ready-to-use with profuse thanks and appreciation, for the recipient is doing far more to protect your hunting privileges than you are!
Amen
olddogrib,
I agree with you except for one point....
You said "Hunting is a privilege, not a right."
WEEEELLLLLL....... That isn't my take at all. I consider hunting to be a God given right and some states are putting it in their laws that way.
However, like anything else, with freedom and rights come responsibilities. I believe it is our right to hunt animals but that we have the responsibility to police our own ranks, manage animals as a renewable resource, use the meat and other parts to avoid waste and promote ourselves positively by being polite, responsible and law abiding around the general public. Just like it's your right to have children but then you have the responsibility to raise them properly.
I don't believe in never wearing camo in public and stuff like that. Rather, I'll proudly walk through Walmart in my camo and smile and nod to other people, hold the door for a lady and in general be polite and try to make a good impression. The exception is if my camo is bloody, that's going a bit too far even if only for sanitary reasons and "gross out factor".
You'd be surprised how many people smile back at me and say hi (people I don't even know) when I'm in a store. Especially when I have my kids with me and they are dressed up in their camo too. They think it's cute. Maybe it's a midwest thing but people around here seem to appreciate a Dad doing things with his kids more than they dislike hunting. Instead of making us look bad as is the subject of this post, I think it makes us look good.
Anti-hunters give hunters a bad name. That is our number one source of it.
Bowhunting is going through a phase; its a whack em and stack em; shoot the 'management buck' 'shoot the doe only as a part of responsible game management'; 'I put the crosshairs on him; and pulled he trigger and BOOM down he went- I smoked him!' bowhunters world right now.
I had a lady visit me that I used to work with over 20 years ago. She sat on my couch and said: "Most of my friends would not be able to sit here; and have dead things on the wall: stare at them".
She commented about hunting shows; and how to her friends they are considered 'snuff films'.
And I could understand that. I am sick of seeing guys and gals kill animals just so they can say they killed them.
This topic started with a story about a guy that bragged about shooting a doe; and then wanted to give away the meat.... but I think IMHO; that he wanted to brag. If he doesn't already know someone that would take the meat; he is not in touch with his world.
But it is a phase. I have long wanted to clearly separate we traditional bowhunters as being on a different ship than the guys with pre-sighted in bows that require no practice; and are used only to show their prowess with 'any weapon' to kill things.
That ship of theirs has a lot of good people on it; I think it is sinking; and I hope that the good people can go back to rifle or muzzleloader hunting; or even with a compound can enter the woods mentally instead of just going to kill something.
I praise this site for just being the other boat. Kind of a ghost ship in its silence on certain issues; letting the wind that has pushed us for hundreds of centuries through all kinds of times and turmoils.
The concept that hunting is not civilized; and should be in our past - is the base line logic of anti hunters; and anything that feeds that gives us a bad name.
I see these times as troubled water for the other ship; and I hope we can steer clear of the wake of it and continue sailing forever.
No act can make us look good to those that hate us; and I think the blackest eye we have comes from making the animals we hunt inanimate objects; instead of being fellow creatures that comfort our souls: on our adventures with our bows -whether we ever shoot at them or not.
I see this site as a testament to that.
Keep the main sail set moderators: and keep the ship on course....
Antihunters of course try to give us a bad name but why do we need to help them?
For the people of different anti hunter organisations etc, i do think some of them also look for a "human" kill of the animal. Lot of people that not are against for example bow hunting will easily turn over to the "no hunting" side when they go to youtube or other sites and look at clips of hunting where the hunter/hunters wound an animal, bad shoot placement, making jokes about it etc. These kind of sometimes "good intentions clips" makes many people turn every hunter over the same comb. I do really think it is a mistake some hunters do when they publish their hunts where there is several hits on the animal with several arrows and the animal actually is suffering. Of course there is very few people doing this and i know that all hunters agree on respect for what you hunt. But by doing this they actually buying the gas to the fire the "NO organizations" need for lobbying and working against the way of life so many of us love.
Let me be clear of one thing, I am a hunter, both rifle and bow. I eat what i hunt and i also give meat to people around me. I really love to watch hunting DVD`s, clips on the net etc. But it has to be serious and responsible. All i`m saying is that unfortunately a quick search on the net for hunting clips will give you an idea.
Of course we also need to see that it is not just the text book shoot on every animal. I just saying that the people publishing clips also need to think about this side of the medal before publishing their last adventure.
Margly
I have long wanted to clearly separate we traditional bowhunters as being on a different ship than the guys with pre-sighted in bows that require no practice; and are used only to show their prowess with 'any weapon' to kill things.
I don't like that. Please don't turn on those ethical compound hunters fight with them and write those shows and ask them what the crap are they thinking. Don't think the anti hunters are going to let you keep hunting because you like to listen to the birds more when you ram a sharp stick through an animal.
I do agree those guys on tv are killing us with those sickening shows and there shootin deers and drinkin beers shirts.
QuoteOriginally posted by Brian Krebs:
Anti-hunters give hunters a bad name. That is our number one source of it.
I can't agree with that.
It puts all the blame and so all the responsibility for our image on others.
I can tell you I have seen some pretty stupid and inconsiderate behavior from hunters. I think our number one source for image problems comes right form us. Sure they us it. But using is not creating it.
So don't kid yourself. It is the hunters that don't care what anyone thinks about them and behave accordingly who hurt our image.
Joshua
Well, I'm new to this board, so will just jump right in.
I read this thread and have to say: How come I don't have this kinda luck? Man, a guy comes in a place I'm standing and says "Who wants a deer?", I'm all over that action! Free meat! Even those bones would be in the oven being turned to broth!
But, I'm thinking if a guy has a place to donate the meat ahead of time, ok. If he doesn't, that's just not proper. In this state, it's a violation of game law to knowingly let an edible portion of game go to waste. If I wasn't going to eat the meat, I wouldn't bother to hunt the animal. To me, the eating is part of the whole experience. It's like hunting for mushrooms. It's a beautiful walk in the forest whether or not I find some King Boletes. But when I find those mushrooms, what an experience to eat from my own hand beginning to end! I believe this animal gave its life to me and what better respect can I show than to let this animal give me life by eating it. That animal, in a real sense, becomes a part of me. It's humbling and the skinning, gutting, and dealing with the meat puts a whole new perspective on where food comes from. It also gives me a whole new respect for the people who do that every day for a living in salughterhouses.
I hunt and eat jackrabbits. Lots of people shoot them as "varmints" and don't eat them. I eat the whole animal, to include the organs (except the intestines and stomach) and the bones get rendered into broth for a awesome soup. Would I shoot a coyote? Probably not unless I wanted the pelt. I'd need to get something tangible from taking a life outside the realm of, say, defending myself against an animal. That's just me, I'm not saying everyone has to do that. I hunt for many reasons and food is high up on that list. Hunting jackrabbits and cottontails here is practically a guaranteed source of nearly free meat.
I knew of a guy who wanted the experience of hunting and stalking without killing an animal he wouldn't eat. He bought a camera. Guy had some amazing photos.
JHG:
quote:Originally posted by Brian Krebs:
Anti-hunters give hunters a bad name. That is our number one source of it.
JHG : I can't agree with that.
Consider that bowhunting is considered the cruelest form of hunting by anti-hunters. They are set in their ways; and will not back down - no matter what our behavior.
True enough bad behavior is going to put us in a bad light to non hunters; but anti-hunters ... hunting in and of itself is bad behavior.
I watch some hunting tv shows and I myself am disgusted by them. Money can buy you things; but it cannot make an experience richer.
QuoteOriginally posted by Mo. Huntin:
I have long wanted to clearly separate we traditional bowhunters as being on a different ship than the guys with pre-sighted in bows that require no practice; and are used only to show their prowess with 'any weapon' to kill things.
I don't like that. Please don't turn on those ethical compound hunters fight with them and write those shows and ask them what the crap are they thinking. Don't think the anti hunters are going to let you keep hunting because you like to listen to the birds more when you ram a sharp stick through an animal.
I do agree those guys on tv are killing us with those sickening shows and there shootin deers and drinkin beers shirts.
What kind of separation do you think about??
Trolley shooters with pre-sighted bows that need no practice?? Sir! Have u ever tried to shoot a compound? No practice? As for all kinds of weapons used I can promise you that all off them need practice. I guess there is a lot of people (also tradgangers) including my self that switch between different bows compound/trad and really practice with both of them.
The organisations that are working against the right to hunt will of course not care about what kind of weapon u are using for the kill, BUT what gives us hunters a bad name have nothing to do with what these kind of people think!!
WE as hunters are responsible for the behaviour we present in and around other people and animals in hunting situations. If we as hunters offend the public or do stupid things then WHO is to blame?? The "NO hunt org`s" or the representant for this way of living?? I guess that if u take that thought to consideration u probably will find the same answer as I did.
And by the way those sickening shows u are referring to are probably the biggest channel for making more people try hunting, and all the shows I've seen on TV or on net are all highly responsible and serious. How do you think they got the possibility to go on TV??
And what is wrong with shooting a deer and afterwards back in camp around the fire sitting and sharing the experiences and drinking a beer?
If u don't drink beer, well then take a coke :) I'll not judge u for that :)
Margly
Couldnt agree more Margly!
Dividing compound and trad shooters serves no one!
Together we stand, divided we fall.
Although I do agree that we should not always stand together, as Freefeet so well explained... Although I live in Norway I am english and have also witnessed and actively protested against the so called sport of fox hunting with hounds.. which has given all forms of hunting in the Uk a bad name... I still have non hunting friends that cannot believe that I hunt with a bow, but am against fox hunting... to them, all hunting is the same... Non hunting people do not know or really care about the nuances of hunting... its all bad... but the antis... they love to misinform and "educate" people to the evils of bowhunting... just take a look on youtube.. so much false information thats its unbelievable!
For example: web page (http://www.youtube.com/user/AnimalRightsUnited)
Now with this kind of misinformation and propoganda on the net do we really need to add fuel to the fire?
Now I am not pointing any fingers here, but I think that all bowhunters need to think twice about videos pictures etc that are published on the net. Most forums, including this one are public and the posts can be read by anyone... I am 100% sure that PETA and the others are regularly in here reading posts and checking vids etc etc...
And yes, even here on trad gang I have seen videos that any anti would love to use and twist to show how "barbaric" bowhunting is.....
We may be in the woods alone, but on the net we are not! We are solely responsible for our own reputations, the image people see of us is the image we project.
On our recent rip to Africa I and Margly learnt alot about african game and hunting... In fact we were very surprised that due to many bad outcomes that many PHs are wary of trad equipment...
We were free to hunt with our trad bows, but after hearing all the info and stories this very experienced bowhunter and PH had to say, well I decided to hunt only small game with my widow on this trip and used my Compound to hunt big game, All of which was a one arrow one kill situation with total pass throughs on everything. 100% recovery...
Now I am by no means a bad shot with my trad bow, In fact I am 2009 Norwegian Field Champion and Margly is 2009 bowhunter champion and I will be returning, but I will be returning with more poundage on my trad bow and in fact more poundage on my compound. I know that poundage is not everything and that a well placed arrow from a 50# bow will take down most animals... but as soon as the arrow has left the bow its in the laps of the gods... In a less than perfect hit situation I owe it the animal AND the reputation of bowhunting to have as much chance of that arrow penetrating through to something vital as possible.
I come from a country where hunting rights weapon rights are severly restricted, I am now living in a country where hunting is more a part of the way of life, and very soon we hope to have Bowhunting legalised here in Norway... It is so important that bowhunting is seen in a good light at this crucial time for us here in Norway... the world is very small today and I am sure that antis here in Norway are in touch with antis everywhere and irresponsibly posted videos, pictures or stories are not what we or anyone else needs.
So with all respect I ask every hunter to think twice before you post on the net, here or elsewhere....ask yourselves: can this video/foto/story set bowhunting, or hunting in a bad light?
Good hunting to all of you this season.
Nathan
Buejeger (Norwegian for Bowhunter)
You got me wrong Margly That top part of my statement is what Brian Krebs said I copied it and pasted it but don't know how to make it bold faced so that is why you thought I said it.
The middle part is where I was disagreeing with him and saying we should not seperate from compound hunters.
Now I don't know what shows you are watching but cept for Fred Eichler and roadtrips and I have to admitt I am a Nugent fan I don't even watch that crap because it makes me mad. I could go on all day about long shots with guns bows that no one should be taking and I say that because when they did hit it it was not anywhere near where the shot should have been. For me it is all about shot placement if you routinely shoot 70 yards and hit an animal in the throat or rear then that is to far. If you make shots that far and put it in the reasonable kill zone then I got no problem with that.
I do drink beer but I don't where a shirt picturing a drunk redneck with a gun that says " Shootin deers and drinkin beers". How can that be good for hunters?
Hi Mo. Huntin
Ok. I`m sorry i misunderstood your post.
Anyhow: Have a nice day :)
Margly
I feel we traditional bowhunters have already been separated from compound shooters. Here in the capitol of Idaho- Boise; if you walk into a bowshop and ask for traditional gear... your verbally spat upon for the very thought of hunting with a traditional bow.
As more and more bowhunters of either ilk go into the woods - the higher the impact. When I see people with compounds making kills for their tv shows at 60 to 80 yards with regularity.. well that might be fine for them - but the increase in the number of kills - that will lead to controls on bowhunting. I know that is a statement based on geography in a great part; as some areas have more animals and situations differ from area to area.
But - when I look at an Idaho photo array of elk taken with 'bows' this season; I see many many elk taken with a compound; and none with a longbow.
And - when the rifle hunters finish this elk hunt; if they don't see and kill the numbers of elk they want... you better believe they will not forget the many elk taken with a bow.
And that will lead to revenge; and it will effect both traditional bowhunters as well as compound bowhunters....even though the traditional bowhunters are not making much of a dent in the elk populations in and of themselves.
I don't want to be in the same boat as the compound bow hunters. I don't want to suffer any repercussions from their actions; and the reactions that result.
And if comments are going to be made in general about wounding rates by trad hunters compared to compound hunters - I want details; I want to know if it is a general feeling all over africa; or just the tiny part you visited.
That is a huge statement you made; and I want to know the specifics of it.
I have seen a problem with African guides as to the fact they tell you when to shoot; and get mad if you don't.
They want to control the hunt and shot; which is something that shows a lack of understanding of what we trad hunters do.
So - facts please.
:campfire:
Hi
where i hunted we were lucky , 7000 hectares, massive area, and we had no PH breathing down our neck.dropped off in the morning, picked up when we radioed in a kill or at ythe designated time, be it walk and stalk, treestand, groundblind, or pit blind, we were on our own. Really fantastic.
Now I dont have the facts in front of me, this was a summary of several conversations with the PH over several evenings around the fire.
There have been several referances to this kind of thing here on trad gang too, with stories of trad hunters shooting sevaral animals and recovering a very low percentage,,, less than 10%.
Now what I said was that after hearing the stories and info from the PH I decided to use my widow for small game only on this trip... 53# at 29" I would have been happier with 63# at least...
That was my choice, based on what I saw and what I was told by experienced folk there and then.
this particular PH used to shoot with a longbow, has bowhunted for over 30 years and was IFAA world champion 2004... so he knows what he is talking about.
I can try and ring him when I get time and see if he can give me some facts.... but that is not really the point of my post... the point I was trying to make was that I didnt want to risk giving trad bowhunting a worse name by me screwing up and adding to the statistics.,. I felt that after seeing the African animals up close, shooting them with my compound, skinning them and gutting them, examining the bone structure etc etc etc that I really needed a heavier trad bow.... So i chose to not use my trad bow on anything bigger than Impala.. as it turned out the Impala wernt playing ball so I never got a shot.
So i felt I was doing my bit not to give (trad) bowhunting a bad name,,,, I hope you get what I am trying to say here :)
Not so much facts, but feelings.... and this is also something that applies to the antis; you can throw as many cold hard facts at them as you like, but its their feelings that are the problem..
Regards, Nathan
Nathan - not attacking you. I am just curious as to why trad bows are looked at the way they are.
There is the economic factor - in that success rates look good on resumes. I would think a trad hunter that turned down fifty shots would not be figured into success rates; but the compound shooter that took 99 of the shots out of a 100 and made kills would.
I can accept reality; but I don't think we are there yet on this issue.
If you felt you were under-bowed then you did the right thing.
It's a matter of perspective or point of view. To most of us, who consider ourselves ethical hunters, killing game with no intention of using it or at least not having a plan to give to someone who will use it gives a bad name, as will any action that is unethical or shows no respect for the game we take. In that sense we consider a bad name at the level of the individual. To anti-hunters, though, the mere fact that we are willing to kill an animal for whatever reason makes all hunters evil - even if we could solve world hunger by taking a single game animal. Therefore, I no longer really care much about any other person's criticisms. If I can respect the ethics of the guy I see in the shaving mirror and can justify my actions to my maker, I feel O.K. about myself. With that being said though, we can't just ignore totally the opinions of those who don't like us, because, unfortunately, such philisophical disagreements usually get worked out in the political arena, meaning that we must be very active to project an honorable image and work diligently not to let anybody legislate us out of existence. I don't personally get into "discussions" with the other side anymore, because I lack diplomatic skills and do have one basic Neanderthal thought - most any isuue can be settled by a good right cross.
Good post Sam!