A sad day for hunters and wildlife

[Wally Dog]

Ith,
Tell John Q Farmer he has to raise high moisture corn rather than onions, beets, alfalfa.........see what he says. That's only part of the equation. It's progress, market change or whatever you wish to term it. The pheasant issue is a very lame arguement for habitat loss on public lands. What do goat permits have to do with anything? Is grazing/logging the root of fewer sheep tags?
I was not here in 1978, but chukar hunting is pretty darn close to how good it was in 1980 (maybe better).
Steelhead and salmon fishing has been exceptional in the last few years.
I can't hardly get out of subdivisions 15 miles from my house anymore. So I have turned to feral cat hunting locally and drive a ways for the others.
What's a big mulie?
I had a late big buck tag in unit 40 last year and I saw a good number of nice bucks. Many that most guys would give their eye teeth for. I've seen a few this year as well.
I'm beginning to wonder if you just choose to grumble and gripe rather than get off the blacktop and look around.
WD

 

[cjcj]

Originally posted by Ithaca 37:
Interesting comments. I don't suppose any of you will ever be doing anything to try to save wildlife habitat from Dubya's schemes. Do you actually think wildlife is better off now than it was 4 years ago? Get your heads outta your ass and take a look at what's happening to habitat under the Dubya/Halliburton administration! Now's the time you should be getting off your asses and doing something to defend wildlife and the future of hunting and fishing.

Well i saw more Turkeys and other Game on my recent Turkey hunt than ever before!! And i asked the "turkey" if it was "better off" than it was 4 years ago[ it said it was ] then i shot it!..

 

[MattK]

I believe the real point is an oil field doesn't make great habitat for deer elk etc... The reason large corporations haven't been able to rape the land is because of the eco-nazi's and conservationists. Sometimes it seems to be difficult to argue with those who want more restrictions on public lands. Maybe they are the reason for better opportunities for outdoorsmen. In fact this may be the largest difference between the 1950's (when game supplies were short) and now. I have a feeling large corporations or "money people" were not trying to cater to hunters.

 

[Nemont]

I wonder if having more then double the number of people in the state competing for hunting opportunities and quality animals had any impact on your experience. Also Ithaca, which year did you move to Idaho and add to the increasing population problem?

Source

Nemont

 

[Ithaca 37]

I wonder if some of you could read my first post again and explain how the parts I made bold are going to be good for wildlife?

 

[MarlandS]

Ithaca, the glass is half full not half empty. On the Fed level gun owners have 4 years of clear sailing, their time and resources won't be spent on gun issues.

If the environmentalists can keep from sounding shrill they can get a large audience to help defeat the really bad initiatives and help shape the one's that aren't so bad.

 

[Nemont]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While some of you so called hunters and fishermen are gloating about 4 more years of Dubya, maybe you should look at it from a true outdoorsman's point of view. Your hunting and fishing opportunities are going to suffer and wildlife will continue to lose habitat at an unprecedented rate. No real hunter or fisherman could ever be happy about that. Of course, if you're one of those lazy slobs who puts your fatass on an ATV and calls that hunting you won't understand that.

"OIL-ENERGY


At a time of soaring oil prices, Bush is expected to continue promoting new energy production and press Congress for laws that encourage development of traditional fossil energy sources — oil, coal and natural gas.


He also is likely to renew his call for Congress to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Environmentalists strongly oppose drilling there.


Look for a continued effort to make it easier to develop oil and gas on federal land. He will push Congress to require reliability standards for power lines and provide incentives for new power line construction. But he opposes enacting federal requirements for utilities to use renewable fuels, arguing that should be up to the states.


His hands-off policy on energy prices is to continue. And he is likely to continue pumping oil into the government's Strategic Petroleum Reserve and reject calls to use the government oil except to counter a major supply disruption.

ENVIRONMENT

Bush's top environmental priority is to rewrite air pollution laws and regulations. His agenda could be overshadowed by an international climate treaty taking effect without U.S. participation.

He hopes finally to persuade Congress to pass his stalled "Clear Skies" plan for curtailing power plant pollution but not emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas linked to global warming.
Tough court fights loom on his easing of rules that require older industrial plants and refineries to add pollution controls if they expand. Under court order, the EPA is due to introduce by March the first national cap on mercury emissions.

Bush plans to cut spending on low-interest loans for local clean water projects and to seek more federal support for development of a hydrogen-fueled car. He also wants to overturn a Clinton-era ban on 58 million acres of roadless areas and allow logging and road-building in them unless governors petition the federal government to preserve them. He would keep Yellowstone National Park open to snowmobiling, despite a challenge in federal court.........."

How could any real hunter or fisherman be gloating about that?

No where does it say "will" do all those things. Apparently the majority, with both the popular vote and the electoral college, of the people in this country think that he is the better man to reflect what they think is important. News Flash you: it isn't the United States of Ithaca, we select new leadership every year.

Every sportsman who voted for Bush should be highly offended by your insinuation that no REAL sportsman would vote that way. I voted for him and I love this country as much as anyone else. I am a REAL sportsman and I couldn't boil my vote down to a single issue like the environment because I have to consider what the war on terror will do my kids. You apparently only care if you can shoot pheasants but not about the threats to our country.

Nemont

 

[Delw]

OK I will answer your questions from the leftwing bs you normally post.

He also is likely to renew his call for Congress to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Environmentalists strongly oppose drilling there.

if he did renew his call then I might say it would hurt wildlife, but what wildlife are they talking about? lemmings?

Look for a continued effort to make it easier to develop oil and gas on federal land.

ot all depends on what type of oil rigs he is going to use

He hopes finally to persuade Congress to pass his stalled "Clear Skies" plan for curtailing power plant pollution but not emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas linked to global warming.

Sorry I dont buy the greenhouse deal

He also wants to overturn a Clinton-era ban on 58 million acres of roadless areas and allow logging and road-building in them unless governors petition the federal government to preserve them

Roads and loggin dont hurt wildlife, look at all the elk and deer people are killing in clear cuts and off the side of roads


What would Kerry do?
Delw

 

[jig maker]

Fact is that all the land we have for wildlife is great, but it does no good for the hunter if we can't hunt cause some peckerhead wants all our guns like Kerry. He tries to put himself off as a hunter What BULLSHIT

 

[Delw]

Ithacas got a point to a certain degree, we are loosing land pretty fast everywhere in the USA.
problem is he just has his facts a little wrong its not Bush and its not kerry, its our population is grown and land developers are the ones taken the land.
Clinton was one of the ones who allowed this to happen via trading prime land to citys for more land. the out skirts of phx is a prime example.
If we quite building house's we wouldnt need to get more land.

Its still progress and unless we want to depend on the Arabs for oil we will have too find our own, unfortunatly that means we have to drill on our land.
if ya really want to start bitching get something going about the japanese takeing our trees, if there was a way we could stop this logging would be dropped way down.
our land in the USA can support everything we need however we cant support every freaking country out there too.

Japan has alot of wilderness area's(most of the interior of Japan is a wilderness area) and a hell of alot of trees They dont get there own cause they can get it from the states, and theres is very hard to get. But they can do it.

Thats one example. this has been going on well before the 70's

 

[cjcj]

Overpopulation fueled by greed and illegal immigration....Rapid growth is bad,bad thing for the environment...loss of habitat is the #1 problem.. but for some reason [greed] its never addressed..case in point.. Arizona has a "water Problem" [shortage] our Governor has proposed a "water university" [just on paper]...she wants everyone to conserve water[fine]...but at the same time she helps support more freeways and light rail to handle the growth [2 million] that is coming...never do you hear "Maybee we should address GROWTH.. lets face it until we talk about Growth... the rest of our problems will get worse pollution/crime/water and oil shortages etc. If we had the balls we could deport 15-20 million people that are here illegally...it would be a start...but it will never happen [politically incorrect].

 

[Ithaca 37]

del, "Roads and loggin dont hurt wildlife, look at all the elk and deer people are killing in clear cuts and off the side of roads"

You can't be serious!! After all the info we've had here about the effects of roads on elk you still think roads don't have a negative effect on elk! I give up! Your comments on oil rigs and the ANWR are so far off base it would take a book to answer them. I suppose you never heard of roads leading to oil rigs.

And if the rest of you think Dubya's administration is wildlife or environmentally friendly you just haven't been paying any attention.

Nemont, Here's what I said, "Your hunting and fishing opportunities are going to suffer and wildlife will continue to lose habitat at an unprecedented rate. No real hunter or fisherman could ever be happy about that. "

Notice I didn't say anything about voting for him.

Based on Dubya's first four year record, I'll give you good odds that his administration for the next four years will be even worse for wildlife and the environment than before. He's a disaster for hunters and fishermen.

 

[BuzzH]

Ithaca, theres no point in even attempting to deal with the issues with these guys, its not worth your time.

When someone still wants to believe that roads and clearcuts are great for elk...how do you reason with that "logic"?????

You cant do it. Its tough for me to believe that they've ever picked up a copy of BUGLE magazine, a newspaper, or even watched the 6 0'clock news. You'd have to be bunking with Bin Laden to have missed all that...

Theres a few people on this board that kill big animals every year, and I mean every single year. I wonder how many kill big elk, mule deer, sheep, etc. off roads in clearcuts??? Ask Greenhorn, mtmiller, etc. how many bulls and bucks they've killed while standing in a logging road shooting into a clearcut.

I guess the experts better rewrite the books, as the successful hunters have it all wrong...wasting all that time and energy hunting in roadless areas for trophies, thats just plain ridiculous

They need to head to the clearcuts, logging roads, abandoned mines, oil fields, strip malls, etc. to find quality big-game hunting opportunities.

Its no damn wonder some people can draw the best tags in their home states and still fail to kill an animal or at best wack a guppie from the road...

 

[Delw]

Ithaca sorry I dont know what to say.

My main concern is not wildlife, My main concern is my welfare and the welfare of this country.
I dont want to be ruled by the UN. I dont want to have to give %50 of my money back to the gov and give even more as time goes on. If I wanted that I would live in france.

After that and only after that will I even think about wildlife.

The western USA is getting way to crowed, the USA is getting way to crowed, people want to move and buy things. How we going to stop that? Cause if we dont, you arent going to stop losing land for animals.
Its really that simple.

we need oil, we cant be dependant on oil from other countries. so what do we do to get that oil? we have to drill in our country sure people are going to bitch and whine about it but what other choices do we have?
You going to give up your driving? I didnt think so.
you going to give up heating/cooling your house? I didnt think so.
you going to stop having electrity for your house? I didnt think so either.

Thats ok cause you yourself wont make a difference anyway. its going to take alot more than just 1 or 2 people to make a dent.

So basically what the hell do you want to do? you know it would be one thing if you had a solution for your constant bitching and whining about these subjects but you dont. you just seem to constantly bitch about it.

Dont get me wrong I dont like to see forrest gone either. but theres nothing we can do about it.

Are you out there fighting to keep those ranches from going to 40 acre ranchets? at least with the ranches there was land that the wildlife could move a little more freely, with the little ranchetes and houseing developements there loosing everything.

Are you out there fighting for illegal imigration? I didnt think so.

Do you own anything bigger than a 4 cylinder? if you do then your the problem as well.
Own a electric or gas powered lawn mower, then your a problem.
Thinking about buying a new house or some new property, then your the problem
Thinking about adding onto your house fixing the fence? Then your the problem.

Just think Bush owns one house. kerry owns over 6 including a few in some remote places where wildlife could have roamed freely.


Delw

 

[guppie9]

Its no damn wonder some people can draw the best tags in their home states and still fail to kill an animal or at best wack a guppie from the road...

HEEEEEYYYYYYYYY!!!!!! Should I be watching my back or something??????

 

[Delw]

Buzz you know AZ has a road every half mile to mile in this country . why is it that Big elk and mulies are killed very year here? and alot of them not more than 100 yards from a road.

you know there is also a road to almost every water tank in AZ and thats where alot of big bulls are killed.

Delw

 

[Delw]

forgot to add
So if the roads are an issue then people shouldnt be shooting anything here in AZ


Delw

 

[BuzzH]

Delw,

What did your AZ bull score this year again????

Also, the only reason that AZ can pull off the big bulls and bucks is because they give out a handful of tags each year.

In WY, MT, CO, any resident can buy a bull elk tag and hunt from 1-3 months a year. Do you suppose it has anything to do with that?

Let me run one by you. How about we take AZ with all its roads and sell OTC bull tags good for 14 days to any resident that wants to buy one. How many bulls do you suppose you'd have at the end of those 14 days near a road? None, unless they were dead in the back of a pickup. In a couple years your elk hunting would go from world class to total shit, and thats a fact.

Thats the way MT, WY, and CO are, thats our reality. In the areas that have high road densities, easy access, and OTC licenses, you wont be finding bulls over 2 years old and in fact, you'd be lucky to see an elk at all.

There are areas in MT, WY, and CO that have good bulls and easy access, and the odds to draw a tag there are similar or worse than those in AZ. You simply never find easy access, OTC tags, and big bulls happily intermixed, EVER.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Del, "Dont get me wrong I dont like to see forrest gone either. but theres nothing we can do about it."

There is something you can do about it, but it takes work, studying, knowledge, ambition, initiative, time and money. If you really don't believe there's anything we can do about it after all you've read here in SI there's just no sense wasting time trying to explain it to you or anyone else who believes that.

I know what to do, Buzz has often mentioned what to do, elkgunner often tells us what he's done. There is a way to make a difference. If you really liked to hunt and fish and hope your kids and grandkids will be able to someday you'd have figured out what to do by now.

 

[JohnSWA]

Geez! The sky is falling! As if Kerry would have done anything to save his favorite pass time. Please give us all a break. Yes, I will be doing my part to help out the game habitat by volunteering for the AZGF, but that doesn't make me any better than anyone else.

I have to agree with Del on many points here. We have several posters pointing fingers, but not having any alternatives! Bush is bad for this, Bush is bad for that. Let's squash the nature nazis and get something productive done for our favorite pass times and hobbies.

I can go on and on but it's getting late and I have to get up quite early, but I've done lot's of research back in college to destroy the anti's theories and hyperbole.

Bottom line is... most of this stuff is tit for tat and sour grapes. Let's start fresh with a sense of hope and try to keep a positive outlook on things.

If the U.S. is going to hell in a handbasket, just sell your guns become a vegan and join green peace for crying outloud!