ChumpMcgeeMemberNovember 12, 2012 at 3:22 pmPost count: 252
This is my first year hunting and I am hunting on public land. I have done all the homework that I needed to make sure that I have a good hunting experience this season. I was out scouting the land in early May I was out putting up natural blinds in July and August and I have been out hunting every weekend since Sept. 15. Along the way I was stopped and talk to a couple other compound archers and one guy I have talked to several times and texted back and forth talking hunting. I never shown this guy where my blinds are located but he did know the area that I was hunting in on the 128 acres of public land. He was already successfully tagged a doe with his bow earlier this year and last week during gun he shot a 8 pointer but lost the blood trail. This is when he happened to find my blind when looking for his lost deer which he never found. I get a text Friday morning that he ended up taking a 7 pointer that morning and I was so excited to get out of work early that day and head out. It was a windy day and as I am walking out to my blind I stumble across a guy pile sitting in the middle of a public walking path…I new who’s gut pile that belonged too and thought it was bad taste to gut the deer where he did but continued on my way. I sent him another text a couple hours into my hunt, this is when he tells me that he shot that buck out of my blind using his gun…at first I was excited that he got a deer then immediately followed by shocked emotion. I thought it was an absolutely jerk move on his part to hunt out of my blind and use my info to take a deer. I told him in a following text that yes I know it is public land but not very cool to use my blind to take a deer using a gun when I have yet to tag a deer. Am I being to uptight on the situation? Would anyone else consider doing this to another hunter? I don’t think I would ever encroach on someone else hunting spot unless I get the approval from someone or if I know they are not going to be hunting there anymore….I just find it rude and the fact that I told him my close encounters most have increased his interest. Goes to show me that I cannot open my mouth to other hunters regardless its all a game of who can get there first….Now I have to find a new place for next year cause I have a feeling this guy is going to be sitting in my blind now.
lyagooshkaNovember 12, 2012 at 3:55 pmPost count: 600
tkohlhorst wrote: I told him in a following text that yes I know it is public land but not very cool to use my blind to take a deer using a gun when I have yet to tag a deer.
tkohlhorst: not an authority on ethics by any means, but like you said: it is public land. This is something that has kept me out of hunting until I was well into my 30s. I had no mentors that I could learn these “unspoken rules” from, and the last think I wanted was to get into an altercation with people who are armed. This is one of the MANY reasons I decided to bow hunt, traditional hunt, and get into the mindset that a successful hunt is one where you come home safe, with or without game. For your situation, I can only say that I would not have ruined your spot. Knowing you put the work in, I would have asked (since it seems you have shared phone numbers) and even then, limited it to archery. But that is me. Best thing I can say is beg, borrow and plead to get permission to hunt on private land, or do what I plan to do in 13 years, pack up and head for Alaska or Wyoming (or buy a farm and post it). Wish there was an easy solution, but again, the land is public. Good luck and be well.
RipforceNovember 12, 2012 at 4:31 pmPost count: 225
Happens all the time, there a few ethics anymore sad to say I would have been pissed too especially the damn gut pile! If he shot a doe and lost an 8pt earlier he should have quit hunting, as I would have and what hell was he doing in your blind when he shot a doe & lost a buck from his own stand! Sounds like greed to me! I hunt public land but am able to walk to my area so no one knows I even hunt there, I leave no sign that I have been there, as to trail marks, paths etc!I feel for ya but I have had some instances on private land too!
ChumpMcgeeMemberMemberNovember 12, 2012 at 4:40 pmPost count: 252
ripforce…For whatever reason you just sparked something that I should have put 2 and 2 together with this person in the early season. I hunt in Minnesota where you can purchase a bonus tag in my area. The only tag that you can get a buck on is your first tag, the second tag is antlerless only. He first shot a doe with his compound then lost a buck with a rifle and then shot another buck out of my blind all using the same deer tag he never bought a bonus tag at all. He does not call in his calls either to the DNR and just hunts off the grid…I should call in the DNR for poaching on this guy but I have no solid proof on him.
David PetersenMemberNovember 12, 2012 at 9:13 pmPost count: 2749
Troy — Any illegalities aside, this is not simply a public lands issue; since you met and talked with this jerk and he knew that blind was yours and you hadn’t yet scored, it becomes a personal issue and insult.
In the bigger picture: I do most of my hunting on public lands, as do most westerners since we have so much of it. Thus the areas are far greater than what you are dealing with there. Consequently, if I find a brush blind at a favorite hunting location, and nobody is around, I will sit in it if I choose to. And I expect the same treatment with my brush blinds. Otherwise, greedy people would go around building blinds or hanging tree stands on every good spot in order to keep others out. To heck with that. My worst example is Coues whitetail hunting on AZ national forest lands. For a trad bowhunter it’s almost impossible to get a good shot op without ambushing water. Thus, waterholes are the name of the game and darned scarce in the desert. I even had one where the terrain allowed me to sit uncomfortably on the ground in a brush blind and not get scented by approaching bucks. Then a baiter came along –worse, an “outfitter” who would use an ATV to bring in a couple bales of alfalfa and some sweet feed to this pond every Friday afternoon, so that the “hunter” would be all set. There was a treestand placed over the bait, and several game cams scattered around. Might as well have posted “Private, Keep Out” signs. Sure, I could have legally sat in or near that stand all week. But then I would be using the bait. And to me, baiting isn’t hunting and I am there to hunt. I and friends felt so strongly about it that we had to completely abandon that precious bit of water to the bad guys. (But not quietly: We launched a letter-writing and phone campaign to get AZ to outlaw baiting on or near waterholes, and it comes up for a vote this month.)
That’s a long-winded way of saying that if done politely, it’s acceptable to use another’s brush blind on public land when that person isn’t around, but we must willingly abandon it if the “owner” shows up. Without this mutual understanding, the greedheads would “claim” every good ambush spot with a blind, as many will argue and attempt to do anyhow. I don’t use other’s tent blinds or tree stands, but I’ll not hesitate to build my own blind right there if they’re not around.
And you have it far worse. With your tiny area to share with others, well, it’s not enough to go around and there will always be problems with slobs. There are vastly too many of us trying to use way too little common grounds. We need to trim on one end and grow on the other, but we’re doing precisely the opposite. Best luck.
ChumpMcgeeMemberMemberNovember 12, 2012 at 10:10 pmPost count: 252
I know what this guy did is not illegal by any means, but ethically I think its terrible what he did. Quiet honestly if someone wants to use my blind then by all means its public land and you can do that. Now if I were to walk up on someone using my blind I may ask them to leave and if they don’t ok well we both can share this blind then 😀 I just think its very disrespectful to me that I did all the leg work early season and have had some very good hunts this year at that location just not good enough to harvest any animals yet, for him to use my blind to shoot another deer. Needless to say I will not be in contact with this person anymore. I just hope that this weekend will be the chance that I can take my first traditional kill and first hunting kill. Not going buck hunting but if one were to step out in front of me what a bonus it would be!! Cheers and Happy Hunting!
RalphModeratorNovember 12, 2012 at 11:15 pmPost count: 2554
Some places they’re ain’t much except what you bring with ya. I had a friend once that shot a deer (rifle), went to fetch it, was positioning it to gut and that’s the last he remembers till he woke up in the hospital. Apparently someone shot him for his deer. He lost his leg from the gunshot. I know that’s probably the only one low life in the world like that but there’s plenty other trouble out there. 99.999% of the time things are pretty cool, your gonna come across people or just as your fixin to let loose or pull the trigger someone else beats you to it. Not much can be done about that.
Jim Finch and I had a dude tracking along behind us one time breaking branches, just making all kinds of racket. Late that evening Jim found where that feller was sitting in a tree in that vicinity so he sneaked (can’t believe the English dictionary don’t allow “snuck”) up behind him and scared the bedevil out of him. Tickled me!!!
RipforceNovember 12, 2012 at 11:27 pmPost count: 225
What happens up here is that they will drive around and look for parked vehicles, wait till you leave then go back and set right near your spot, now I only bow hunt even during rifle season, usually they only give it ago for couple days hoping to get a quick kill and then they are gone! There is a lot of state land around me and plenty of room for more hunters with out them hunting out for your back pocket! I ask one guy why he did it and his answer was simple it was easier to infinge on somebodies spot than to scout and and find his own, he didn’t want to put the time in! Thats why I keep my spots secret and make them real unasuming and hard to find! People are really lazy sometimes for sure!
lyagooshkaNovember 13, 2012 at 1:42 amPost count: 600
You pretty much nailed why I would rather do a tour in Afghanistan than go out opening day of rifle season here in PA. I swear you are likely to hear something like “Hey Bob, hold my beer, I think I see one”. Yes, there are 99% good, ethical hunters out there, but the 1% tends to speak for all of us as far as the non-hunters are concerned. Here, the antlered and antlerless season overlaps, so the “if it’s brown it’s down” mentality prevails. I would like to think that your friend was shot by one of these people and not by someone who had the intention to take his deer, killing him in the mean time. If that is truly the case, I am not sure how hunting will survive, or if it even should if we the hunters allow this. I am actually happy with my Trad Bow decision. Taking pot-shots with a rifle or smoke-stick is tough. But with my ADD, I can whack dead stumps and sticks all day and still get some hunting in. Anyway, I hope your friend fared well after losing his leg and that he has gone out afterwards. The biggest shame is that he was kept out of the woods, while the person who shot him (for whatever reason) still walks them freely. Be well.
David CoulterMemberNovember 13, 2012 at 1:21 pmPost count: 2270
Well, that last comment took a turn for the worse. There’s a lot of good people who use technology for good purpose, including staying touch with friends.
What we don’t need are people taking advantage of the good will of others. Tough world out there. I had a grown man try to take a deer from me when I was a kid. I was ready to walk, as my dad taught me not to argue with anybody over a deer. It’s not worth it. Fortunately, an old timer walked up, asked me where I was standing and said, “nice shot.” The jerk left immediately and the old timer even gutted the deer for me. I got to see both sides of human nature in the space of a few minutes.
lyagooshkaNovember 13, 2012 at 5:55 pmPost count: 600
dwcphoto wrote: I got to see both sides of human nature in the space of a few minutes.
DWC, unfortunately, I think we are losing too many of the good and gaining too many of the bad. I really don’t want to sound cynical, but from what I have seen in my short time outdoors (and my time in the prisons [working, not guest 😆 ] and the service, and on SGL 205…), I really don’t know. We have the “if it’s brown it’s down” folks who always seem to be the ones the media spots first. Gee, thanks. Speaking of media, we have a bunch of drama queens in the press who are not interested in reporting, but in selling air time. And what sells? Remember the song “dirty laundry”? “We got the bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who Comes on at five She can tell you ’bout the plane crash with a gleam In her eye It’s interesting when people die…”. IMHO – it’s an unfortunate reality. And let’s not even bother getting into the anit(s). So what can we do? Your dad was absolutely right; a deer is never worth it. But how long before the whole thing becomes “not worth it”? And the saddest part is we are doing it to ourselves. We are our own worst enemy, yet we can be our own greatest savior(s). Well, that’s about all the cheerfulness I have for today. Be well.
David CoulterMemberNovember 13, 2012 at 8:27 pmPost count: 2270
I tend to agree that the good folks are in for a struggle. That’s everywhere. I used to be in the news business and there’s darn little of that left. For a quick tangent on that, there was law, I believe the Fairness Doctrine, that was abolished in 1987. In a brief over-simplification, that law required news agencies to provide equal time for all political points of view. When that guideline was taken down it opened up the door for news providers to tell one sided stories. The trickle down effect of that has been info-news, celeb news, babble with every program ending with a story about how somebody’s cat got stuck in a tree.
Good news reporting is hard to find.
Where I live in Eastern PA, it’s increasingly crowded and there’s more bowhunters every year, with the increase of technology and the allowance of scope sighted crossbows. I haven’t seen much outdoor style tv lately, but I’m sure it’s still pretty much oriented toward competition. Bigger, badder, equal better. We get a lot of encouragement to be aggressive these days and it’s a shame.
My jaw must have dropped to my knees a few years ago to learn that there was a fly fishing tournament around here. Why the hell anyone would want to make fly fishing a competitive sport is beyond me.
I guess I’m just naive.
William WarrenMemberNovember 14, 2012 at 1:46 amPost count: 1384
In my home state public land is first come first serve which includes blinds that you built. Simple as that. If you shot a deer and did not retrieve it you must cancel one of your tags. So not cancelling a tag and then shooting another deer may have been illegal if your state laws agree. I have killed most of my deer on public land and have met all kinds, most were good people but theres always a few outlaws in every bunch. First off don’t make an obvious blind, instead use existing featurs like a blow down or other terrain features to hide in and tread lightly clearing no trail that others will follow. If you can gain access through private tracts others won’t see where you are parked and follow. That was the biggest secret to my public land success. I never intended to hunt the private tract as it was too open and too small. But that permission is golden. Even after all your efforts theres still the chance that someone will find your spot anyway. That the way it is on public land.
stalkin4elkNovember 14, 2012 at 4:08 amPost count: 63
, greedy people would go around building blinds or hanging tree stands on every good spot in order to keep others out.
Even though we have miles of public land there are areas with very limited decent public land whitetail habitat and these areas are littered with other people’s treestands that are left up all season with others left up all year. Most of these never have people in them,so they are really trash claim markers at the hotspots. When the tree has overgrown the chain or the strap has rotted off it is time to think about the ethics.
Etter1November 14, 2012 at 3:08 pmPost count: 831
I don’t know how big your public lands are (sounds like the one you were hunting is pretty small), but if you can find some bigger tracts, you just have to push deeper than most others are willing to go. It is first come, first served on public land. I have never knowingly climbed a tree near somebody else, but I won’t hesitate to go into an area where somebody has a stand and just get there earlier. There are no private areas out there.
Most of the wma’s and national forest areas that we hunt here are pretty huge. If you can find places where you have to walk .5 mile or more, you will not likely encounter anybody else. That’s always my philosophy on public land whether it be in PA for the gun opener or turkey hunting a ga wma. Any place that’s easily accessible is going to give you fits.
Good luck and hope your season turns around!
ray montoyaNovember 14, 2012 at 4:41 pmPost count: 40
I found a guy sitting in my treestand overlooking a pond this past September…after a long and heated arguement, my Fed buddy pulled out his badge and told the man that the treestand is considered private property, and he would be getting a call from the local sheriffs department later…years ago, when we could bait bears here in Colorado, you would find hunters sitting in your stands over your baits…
Hunting ethics on public lands is really bad out west, where guys fight over water holes, outfitters block roads and try to deny access to other hunters, and my worse pet pev, is other hunters trying to get between you and the bull you are working…this happens a lot to us around here, even when youre way back in the wilderness.
The thing to remember when dealing with hunters you find using your setups is to keep a cool head and dont loose your temper…
David PetersenMemberNovember 14, 2012 at 5:15 pmPost count: 2749
Yes, all of this bad news and more. Yet we fall right into the industry lie that says “unless we create more hunters, hunting will lose its political power and cease to exist.” I have never gone for that and can only repeat that we don’t need more hunters, we need better hunters. Only industry greed needs more and more. The entire culture has largely forgotten about quality in favor of quantity. But let us be careful with such discussions and keep them general, leaving out partisan politics.
It could be, if human numbers continue to grow (nobody even talks about overpopulation and birth control any more, but only jobs and “growth”) while wildlife habitat continues to shrink and what is left is overused, all states eventually will be forced to go to draw-only hunting. Not a good option, but better than shooting one another in the woods over treestand locations. Sometimes I feel so lucky to be old …
lyagooshkaNovember 14, 2012 at 7:24 pmPost count: 600
Dave, I didn’t really want to bring some things up, but you nailed them, so thanks. The increasing (human) population and decreasing habitat is HUGE. I posted a “poke the skunk” topic a few months ago about high-fence game preserves. One thing I did not mention, but it was one of the reasons preserves were on my mind at that time, is that preserves may be the next big cash-cow in hunting. Soon, the lack of viable hunting land and the dwindling game numbers may force the entire industry into a lottery system much like Elk here in PA. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning while winning the Power Ball than drawing a Pennsylvania Elk tag. So may it be for others and much sooner than people realize.
One bad thing is that the anti-hunters are being suckered into backing developers. I apologize in advance to Robin (and others) for this comment, but the idiots like PETA are dumb enough to be dangerous. I know these forums are not a place to be mean, or to name-call, but they are causing actual harm to the very animals they claim to protect. Most (I would guess) unknowingly, but I am sure there are those who are in the pockets of developers, politicians, etc. They have no concept as to the role hunters (2-legged, 4-legged, etc) play in habitat management. When you try to tell one of these people that loss of habitat is the number one cause for the decline of any animal, they say it’s just hunter propaganda so that we can keep on killing to fulfill our blood-lust. I have learned that there is no talking with these people to educate them, much like the radical hunter types who actually have the very blood-lust PETA is referring to. But where is there an organization that is truly for the ethical treatment of animals? One comprised of hunters, farmers, ranchers, vegetarians (which I at one point was), regular concerned citizens? I used to laugh, but now I cringe every time I see some PETA-like group protesting a hunting spot, or the like, all of them holding their name-brand coffee, coffee that came from a strip mall, a strip mall that was built over habitat that was used by all the things that the group claims to be protecting, habitat that will never again be used by those animals, animals who probably died of hunger or disease, or being hit by cars (probably causing human harm as well). Good Job! Meanwhile, organizations like DU and NWTF (and many others) have set aside millions of acres that will NEVER be a strip mall, or a mega-store, or anything but natural habitat for animals to live in. And many of these millions of acres are open to hunting because these organizations realize that hunters manage wildlife better than any politician or organization ever could.
OK, I am done my rant (for now). I know that whole tirade was off topic, but it is (loosely at least) on topic in that if we are busy fighting ourselves, and busy setting a bad image to the 80% of people who are not hunters, but who are still supporting us, we are going to be in BIG trouble. I’m going to take my BP meds now. Sorry again. Be well.
Etter1November 14, 2012 at 11:32 pmPost count: 831
Dave, I agree with you entirely on most of your points. I’m digusted to read the average hunting forum. Most people know absolutely nothing about ecology. Most don’t know plants, trees, birds, etc, etc. I took up traditional archery and recently, flintlock muzzleloading to add challenge and make hunting more intimate. To most hunters, that idea seems silly. Why hunt a bedding area with a stickbow when you can climb into a tower over your food plot and kill deer at 400 yards with a 7mm mag?
What I don’t understand is when you knock hunters who use legal tactics to kill animals in a way that is entirely necessary for the management of the species. Bear hunting over bait in a lot of areas, or hounding for lions is the only way to keep population numbers in check. I understand that you don’t want to hunt that way, but why criticize a form of hunting when it is necessary for the management of the species? Lion hunting was outlawed in california. Now, there are more “problem lions” killed than when they allowed hounding. That doesn’t make sense. The closing of Ontario’s spring bear hunt is another example of feeble-minded politicians making decisions about hunting ethics and hurting the very creatures they claim to protect.
I’m an avid reader of your writing and appreciate your posts on here, but I just can’t understand it. It seems to me that sitting over a waterhole in an arid landscape would be like shooting fish in a barrel. I’ve never done it and I’m sure it’s not, but neither is hounding for lions or baiting for bears.
I can understand how you could have an ethical dilemma but as a person with a background in wildlife biology, I can’t understand why you would want these things ended when they are, in a lot of cases, the only way to manage (and I hate that word when referring to critters but it’s a necessity these days) wildlife populations.
-ps, I have hunted bears over bait many many times. More often than not I’ve been unsuccesful. I am going on a guided lion hunt this february over hounds. I have no qualms with either of these tactics. I do, however, live in a state that allows baiting for deer and I’ve never done that and never will. I also would never hunt turkeys or ducks over bait. I can’t explain the difference, as I don’t know what it is myself, but that’s how I feel
David PetersenMemberNovember 15, 2012 at 1:11 amPost count: 2749
Etter — All good questions and fair, and politely put as appropriate to this forum, thank you. All I can say is that I’ve written and spoken tens of thousands of words attempting to explain my “biases,” and just can’t reduce such complex and personal topics to a website post. While I totally understand your position and thus, you confusion with my stance, I must disagree that baiting bears, and shooting treed lions, is necessary for management, that is, predator population control. Necessary to what, to whom? I try hard to see the big picture and the long run, even when the “answers” don’t sit well with what I would prefer. I have always, most always, viewed the intelligent, educated, interested, open-minded nonhunter as my primary reader or audience, convinced that’s the best way to force myself to fight free of my personal biases and address hunting issues as the majority of people do (those at least who give a damn, which most of course do not). This isn’t a dodge, but simply the best I can do here, after doing my best to be as fair-minded and unbiased as possible through a lifetime of dealing with these hard questions. Thanks again for your good questions and lack of emotion, and I apologize if I’ve failed to supply a satisfactory answer, either here or in a career of doing my best to do so. I can say that I rank “hunters” who take long crazy low-odds shots with impotent arrows, then boast in public about their “stuck ’em” woundings and lack of efforts to recover, and speak of the animals we hunt as if they are enemies is some stupid oil war, or of no more value than cockroaches … compared to these scum among our ranks, our differences on your issues of concern are insignificant. Dave
Etter1November 15, 2012 at 1:58 amPost count: 831
David Petersen wrote: Etter — All good questions and fair, and politely put as appropriate to this forum, thank you. All I can say is that I’ve written and spoken tens of thousands of words attempting to explain my “biases,” and just can’t reduce such complex and personal topics to a website post. While I totally understand your position and thus, you confusion with my stance, I must disagree that baiting bears, and shooting treed lions, is necessary for management, that is, predator population control. Necessary to what, to whom? I try hard to see the big picture and the long run, even when the “answers” don’t sit well with what I would prefer. I have always, most always, viewed the intelligent, educated, interested, open-minded nonhunter as my primary reader or audience, convinced that’s the best way to force myself to fight free of my personal biases and address hunting issues as the majority of people do (those at least who give a damn, which most of course do not). This isn’t a dodge, but simply the best I can do here, after doing my best to be as fair-minded and unbiased as possible through a lifetime of dealing with these hard questions. Thanks again for your good questions and lack of emotion, and I apologize if I’ve failed to supply a satisfactory answer, either here or in a career of doing my best to do so. I can say that I rank “hunters” who take long crazy low-odds shots with impotent arrows, then boast in public about their “stuck ’em” woundings and lack of efforts to recover, and speak of the animals we hunt as if they are enemies is some stupid oil war, or of no more value than cockroaches … compared to these scum among our ranks, our differences on your issues of concern are insignificant. Dave
Dave, I totally agree with you, but as someone who has hunted extensively in the boreal forest of canada, I can say without a doubt that baiting or hounding bears in that area is the only way to get any kind of “harvest”. I’m sure you know, in areas of high bear populations, bears can and do decimate populations of deer and elk, as well as kill their own young in order to promote future sow breeding.
The same is said of lions. When lion hunting is outlawed, lions are only killed by farmers shooting them with spotlights over their goat herds. This just can’t sit with me.
In either case, there are millions of, I think, ethical hunters who would gladly take on the challenge of doing either.
I respect your opinions and have always wondered about how your ethics can align with biology.
Nice talking with another hunter with very strong opinions. Drinking a beer now, and so…cheers!
David PetersenMemberNovember 15, 2012 at 2:06 amPost count: 2749
Yes, and let’s leave it at that: we agree to disagree, both claiming science on our side. Mine at the moment is wine, and likewise, Cheers! The different ways different folks perceive this small brief world we all share, matter not a whit in comparison to our ability and willingness, or lack thereof, to talk about those differences in a civil way. Selah …
lyagooshkaNovember 15, 2012 at 3:00 pmPost count: 600
Dave, I know you want to put this to rest, and I am by no means trying to poke the skunk here, but your statement of “I must disagree that baiting bears, and shooting treed lions, is necessary for management, that is, predator population control” sounds a bit off to me. My example is New Jersey and bears, whereas Etter1’s is California and lions. In both places, when hunters were not allowed to legally and ethically hunt those animals, people quickly realized that livestock, pets, people are all on the menu, and overpopulation leads to nastiness. I do not hunt predators. It is a personal choice. I do not mind the “competition”. I heard someone say that in one of these forums, and I couldn’t agree more. But in cases of bear and lion, it almost becomes self-defense in some cases. Almost, but still. So we allow hunting, but limit it so severely that the animals (who are by no means dumb) simply become nocturnal to avoid the two-legged nuisance. Then, the antis use the lack of decrease in vehicle collisions, attacks on humans, pets and livestock, etc as “proof” that hunting does not work. IMHO I really cannot see the “ethical” difference between setting up bait in the open forest versus digging a hole in the middle of desert country and filling it with water to attract sheep, deer, etc. As you can probably tell from my earlier post, unlike you and Etter1, I tend to let emotions get ahead of me. I am very new to hunting and I have absolutely no Biology experience. That said, when I hear people who are otherwise against hunting actually asking why “they don’t just shoot them”, I tend to see it as an issue well beyond simply “taking out the competition”. Again, IMHO. You (as usual) said a very intelligent thing in “agree to disagree”, so I have no problem with that, and I am sure your philosophy is more profound than the several hundred words of each post would allow. Again, I am not trying to re-hash the topic. I just wanted to add my 2¢. Be well.
ray montoyaNovember 15, 2012 at 6:59 pmPost count: 40
Gotta say this, then I will shut my mouth…those that have never owned or hunted behind dogs, will never understand the reason why guys love it so much. Its not about running bear or lion just to kill it, its about the joys and satisfaction of seeing your dogs working, the pride you feel when your dogs work out a confused track and tree the animal…I know a lot of hound hunters that walk up to treed lions and bears, take pictures and video, leash up the dogs and walk away…Years ago, we let a lot of female lions go, but know we get asked by DOW officers to kill them.
It doesnt matter to me if you support hound hunting or not, but what matters is that you stand beside them in the attacks from groups that want to outlaw bear and lion hunting…
Etter1November 15, 2012 at 8:34 pmPost count: 831
Ray Montoya wrote: Gotta say this, then I will shut my mouth…those that have never owned or hunted behind dogs, will never understand the reason why guys love it so much. Its not about running bear or lion just to kill it, its about the joys and satisfaction of seeing your dogs working, the pride you feel when your dogs work out a confused track and tree the animal…I know a lot of hound hunters that walk up to treed lions and bears, take pictures and video, leash up the dogs and walk away…Years ago, we let a lot of female lions go, but know we get asked by DOW officers to kill them.
It doesnt matter to me if you support hound hunting or not, but what matters is that you stand beside them in the attacks from groups that want to outlaw bear and lion hunting…
I know a guy who lives in Idaho and personally trees 20-40 lions per year and probably hasn’t shot one in a decade. I know old Don Thomas has written several times that he often goes very long stretches without shooting a lion that they’ve treed. Many years in fact. Got to love to hear those dogs bawl on a trail.
Jason WesbrockMemberNovember 15, 2012 at 10:44 pmPost count: 762
I couldn’t possibly agree more with you. Watching a good hunting dog in action is a thing of beauty. There are certain sounds in the outdoors I absolutely love—the cadence of deer hoofs on dried oak leaves, the thundering gobble of a tom turkey at sunrise, and the bawling of a beagle in full cry in pursuit of a cottontail. I can’t imagine what it would be like to follow a pack of hounds sorting out a lion track; heaven, I suppose. To me, hunting with dogs is never about the kill. It’s always about the dogs themselves, which is something I suspect most people who’ve never owned a hunting dog simply can’t understand. Last week some friends of mine and I took two consecutive mornings off our annual deer hunt to pursue pheasants with some extremely well trained pointers (one GSP on Wednesday and a wirehair on Thursday). Several times I was late to shoulder my gun because I was so caught up watching the dogs work. Truth be known, I was very close to leaving my Remington in the truck and grabbing my DSLR and a friend’s 70-200 f/2.8 lens instead.
Col MikeMemberNovember 18, 2012 at 1:45 amPost count: 911
Etter,Dave,J. ET all.
As the discussion has rebounded from ethics of hunting predators to using dogs. I feel the need to add my 2 pennies.
Have trained dogs for some 50+ years mostly retrievers,pointers and flushers–no hounds. For many years never fired a shot as Etter says just watching and working the dogs was enough.
Today I mushed 12 husky’s with 21 girl scouts as their passengers and 10 mom’s watching. While my wife gave instruction in all that they were seeing and experiencing from how the live to all the equipment and racing. My training log shows that we (Linda and I) have some 15,000 miles behind our team.
Point of all this is to say I know about dogs and hunting with them.
Ethics–OK here I go. I believe that fair chase/trad bow hunting means one hunter with his equipment stalking our ambushing his quarry in their environment. IMHO that doesn’t include tree stands, baits of any type, or the use of dogs (except for upland game and for retrieving). It means in their environment so ambushing water holes is in the environment–the prey are particularly wary there so good luck.
Biology of predator control: It is known that when our species leave them alone predators and prey establish a balance.PERIOD. When prey exceeds the holding area the predators move in and establish a balance and they generally over produce but die out when prey populations reduce. Thus balance.
Our species screws it up when we kill all the predators so we have deer eating your garden. In the west we have lions eating your cats and dogs.
Having ranted I will end by stating that local game regulations seem to me to be somewhat effective in regulating that imbalance created by our society to the detriment of our wild.
I don’t hunt predators. They seem like family to me.
garydavisNovember 18, 2012 at 5:44 amPost count: 101
I’m still killing paper products and an occasional arrow and the dream of someday actually hunting game seems like a far distant activity. Yet, even at this early stage, I know I’ll probably never willingly hunt a predator, nor run game with a dog. I have a Plott Hound pup,but he’ll not be used on bear like his ancestors were. He might do nose work and agility. That’s just me (and him) though. I would not presume to look down my nose at anyone did hunt with hounds as that too can be an art.
It is refreshing to read a thread with no vituperative nonsense in it. Thank you.
I am annoyed with a certain Eastern Washington rancher who runs his cattle on public land and squalled to the State about recently re-introduced wolves causing WF&G to spend $50K+ to kill one of the wolves and another $20K+ to kill four more from a helo with not but dubious “proof” that the wolves killed his cow. I know this is off topic, but, I join my dogs in a howl now and then cause it feels good to do so. It feels pretty good to howl with you guys too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.