If you pay $8000 for an Elk, is it a Trophy?

[Seldom Ever]

It has everything to do with it Del.Plus I never complained to anyone here,I expressed my opinion, just as you did yours,get it ?

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-21-2004 19:21: Message edited by: Seldom Ever ]</font>

 

[Delw]

SO. let me get this straight, you screwed up part of your life with alcohol and now you Know whats ethical as far as drinking for everyone else?

OK you made me a believer.....
Delw

 

[Seldom Ever]

You win,I give up.Once again you've won out through the use of your superior intellect.I apologize,sorry I bothered you.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Seldom,

Settle down, and let your two elbows rest..

Look at it this way, we are a country governed by laws, laws passed by elected representatives (for the most part, not counting Dubya, as he actually got second place, but used the Courts to install himself

).

As a society, we have decided that it is OK to have a beer, assuming you are greater than 21. And as far as I am aware, there is no growing movement to ban alchol. This country tried that (remember when you were in grade school during the '20's

) and we repealed the Prohibition.

So, as a Society, we say that Alcohol is "acceptable", but then we all start drawing our own "ethical" lines. Each of us has these lines based on experience, influence (churches, parents, schools), and other factors. Each person's line is in a different place. I personally feel that driving AFTER drinking is wrong, but I have no problem drinking and then heading to a sleeping bag in a tent. You can draw your line where you want. I won't give alcohol to minors, and I'll quit serving guests in my home if I feel their behaviour is inappropriate.

But, High Fence Elk Shooting is barely legal in some states, and there is a growing movement to end the activity in other states. Therefore, one must conclude that much of Society does not feel it is acceptable. And if we as hunters wish to project a positive image, we must not do what is un-acceptable to the Majority of Society, or we will find ourselves having Laws passed to further restrict our hunting.

Are you unable to see the irony in you calling someone un-ethical because they drink a beer, yet find it acceptable for someone to shoot a deer tied to a tree? Which do you think the majority of Society views as accpetable behavior, and which is un-acceptable?

 

[The Hedgehog]

seldomquiver...

I appreciate the sermon. All good things should be done in moderation.

Are you a Spank-o-holic too?

 

[Tom]

Some people are pretty emotional about this issue.

Chuck Adams has way more P&Y animals than any other human being, so he knows a lot about what we are talking about, and I am much more interested in his thoughts on the subject than most others thoughts because he is more informed.

Up until 2001 P&Y judged ranches on a case by case basis. Chuck Adams got 3 whitetails in P&Y from Texas high fence hunts in 1992, 1993, and 1994. (see p.235 of his biography, Life at Full Draw, 2002)

Here's the direct quote from p.236 that I was quoting from memory yesterday.
"As far as my Pope and Young animals, everything's been free-ranging except the three Texas whitetails that the club accepted. Those deer were wild as hell, and the club was right to accept them."

He had 111 P&Y animals entered when that book came out, he's gotten more since then. All 7 of his whitetail deer in P&Y at that point were from Texas. He also has 189 animals in the SCI record books back then including animals like blackbuck, aoudad, and wild boar.

You get 0 points for shooting a $50 record book animal instead of an $8000 animal.

You get 0 points for hiking 10 miles instead of stepping out of the truck and shooting.

You get 0 points for hunting two weeks instead of one morning.

The record books don't mean it was a great hunt, they mean it was an exceptional animal. There's more to hunting besides hiking and drinking beer and being emotional about bragging on that type of activity.

What's the elbows stuff? You guys been drinking?

 

[Washington Hunter]

Seldom is the one who brought up the elbows, and he doesn't drink.

Why should an exceptional animal make the book, when it became that way by artificial means? I don't have as much of a problem with hunting whitetails behind a fence as I do elk (as long as it stays in Texas) but I don't think any animal from a high fence ranch should be allowed in the book.

 

[Tom]

I guess we agree, whitetails are less of a problem than elk, to have in a fence and have a hunt still. We disagree about what is "artificial" and what is not artificial. To me, a fence is not any more of an artificial management tool than many others that people have been using since the middle ages. Its "artificial" to limit tags too, but they are in the book, if shot from a limited quota area. All the elk in the Jackson Hole elk refuge are artificially fed in the winter, right? You think they should not be in the record book? I think you're just more used to that type of artificial than you are other types maybe.

 

[chambero]

The key word is high fence. In my opinion, no animal taken inside a high fence should be considered a tropy. I believe I'm correct in that such animals are not eligible for B&C or Safari Club. However, that isn't my definition of a trophy either. A trophy in my opinion is any animal that you have had to work very hard or spend a lot of time trying to get. I was awfully proud of my first Colorado mule deer that was a forkhorn.

I think it is important that we distinguish between high fence ranch hunts and hunts on large, expensive ranches like Vermejo Park, etc. Even though you have a very good chance of killing an animal on open ranch hunts, you are still hunting wild animals that are free to come and go as they please.

I can't stand the high fence ranches in Texas that are springing up in ever greater numbers these days. They are artificially inseminating whitetails like you wouldn't believe. I'll have no part of that.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Tom, I don't believe in feeding elk either. They do it here in Washington because the elk have very little winter range left. They do it to keep elk out of orchards and farms, and of course to keep the elk numbers artificially high to keep hunters happy and to sell more tags. My feeling on this is that if feeding were not an option, people would see the loss of winter range as more of a problem. If elk were dying off in large numbers in the winters due to lack of food, and farmlands and orchard were being destroyed, I believe there would be more support for buying up and protecting land for elk to spend the winters, and that would be a long term solution without the problems such as CWD associated with feeding elk.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-22-2004 11:44: Message edited by: Washington Hunter ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Tom,

I don't need Chuck Adams to tell me what is ethical and what is "wild as hell", and I don't consult the SCI record books to determine if my hunt would be considered Fair Chase. If the only way you know if a hunt is Fair Chase is to read Chuck's biography, then you are really missing an Ethcial Compass.

Why don't you try a bit of common sense? If it seems like it is not fair chase, then it isn't. You will NEVER put up a picture of some Large Mouth Striped Chinese Billy Goat that you killed behind a High Fence and impress me. But hopefully, you don't care to impress me. I am not going to support your right to shoot Chinese Goats in Texas, and if given the opportunity, I would probably support any legislation to end the High Fence hunts in Texas.

How about if Texas pulls all their fences down, and enacts state wide laws that you can only shoot 5x5's with a controlled tag. Everything else walks. It is amazing that the State does not manage their deer herds in Texas, but instead, relies on a bunch of big belly'd guys with Bob for a middle name.

No wait, actually, don't answer. I don't give a flying 'flip what happens in Texas, and I don't care to have an answer. I am glad you enjoy what you have down there, and I hope all Texans can be happy, and never have to leave Texas, for even a minute...

And to make it even, I won't ever hunt there....

 

[elkfarmer]

Washinton Hunter "I don't have as much of a problem with hunting whitetails behind a fence as I do elk (as long as it stays in Texas)"

whats the difference, so its ok for this and not for that.

 

[Tom]

Elkgunner, You do have the opportunity to work against high fence hunting; if you want to, you can join the anti-hunter Humane Society, they have been trying to pass a federal bill limiting high fence hunting for some years. I think their strategy, as is that of many anti-hunting groups, is to cut away at hunting, one piece at a time, since its hard to stop it all at once. Hopefully, your common sense tells you not too do that.

 

[Washington Hunter]

elkfarmer, I didn't say it was ok, just that I don't have as much of a problem with it. I'm flabbergasted that you don't know the difference between whitetail deer and elk, being an elk farmer seems you would have read up on the subject. But I suppose the fact that you live in New York explains it. How can I say this in simple terms...well basically an elk requires more area than a whitetail deer. Does that make sense? If not I would recommend you read some books by Dr. Valerius Geist.

Tom, At least the Humane Society is good for something. In this case they are right and a lot of so called "hunters" are wrong. It makes no sense to support something simply because the Humane Society doesn't. The Sierra Club is against polluting air and water...are you against clean air and water just because an environmental organization is for it? I didn't think so. There is a group in Oregon that got the state's borders closed to importing live deer or elk. They are called the MADelk Coalition(Measure Against the Domestication of Elk.) Members of the coalition consisted of environmental, anti-hunting, and hunter's organizations. Here is a list of all members of MADelk:

Animal Protection Institute, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep-Oregon Chapter, The Fund for Animals, Hells Canyon Preservation Council, Humane Society of the United States, Izaak Walton League of America-Oregon Division, Multnomah Anglers and Hunters, National Wild Turkey Federation-Yamhill County Chapter, Oregon Humane Society, Oregon Hunters Association, Oregon Natural Desert Association, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Orion the Hunter Institute, Portland Audubon Society, Science and Environmental Health Network, Sierra Club-Oregon Chapter, WildernessHunter.org.

Notice the Humane Society in there? And the Oregon Hunters Association? See, the Humane Society and hunters do agree on some things. I wouldn't be surprised if they were also involved in the initiative against canned hunts in Montanta.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-23-2004 10:23: Message edited by: Washington Hunter ]</font>

 

[beardown]

Amazing I only see a guy from New York and a guy from Texas sticking up for canned hunts. Why does that not surprise me, two people from two of the most worthless states!Please stay in your own crappy states and try to sell your worthless canned hunts to all the idiots in your own backyard!

 

[elkfarmer]

man beardown, you are a tough guy. you have impressed me.

hey washington huntress, yea i know, the deer are the big ones right.... you had me worried there for a minute. come on now, be a man if you can, ok try it for a minute. if you are going to believe in something , believe in it 100%. deer, elk, hogs, exotic or whatever is hand raised should not be shot for fun. ok, i said it for you. you are wlcome.

 

[Washington Hunter]

elkfarker, you still don't seem to get it..I couldn't care less if you want to shoot tame animals for "fun." Heck animals are for eating, if you're going to own them you may as well get some use out of them. I do think it may cause non-hunters to think less of hunting when they see or hear about these so called "hunts" of fenced-in animals, so from that perspective I don't think it's a good thing. But the only thing I am against, and I must have said this same thing dozens and dozens of times by now, but the only thing I am against is ownership of wildlife. Understand now?

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-23-2004 17:00: Message edited by: Washington Hunter ]</font>

 

[elkfarmer]

no, lets go over it one more time. i will listen to you this time i promise washington huntress

 

[Washington Hunter]

No thanks elkfarker..obviously there is no hope for you.

 

[Moosie]

Bearturd (Since everyone else is Changing names, I figured I'd jump in also so I'm as cool

) (

) I'm not From Texas or NY, and I'm not Against them.

Hey Washington Hunter, You've stated MANY a time "TAME ELK BEHIND FENCE", so if you stick with :

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> elkfarker, you still don't seem to get it..I couldn't care less if you want to shoot tame animals <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then you should have no problem With someone Shooting a Elk behind the Fence. Acording to Webster (AGAIN) ": living things and especially mammals, birds, and fishes that are neither human nor domesticated "

If the Elk are "domesticated" (By your own Preachings OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER....) Then you've killed your Own case which you're fighting for...