Predator Contest?

[cantgetdrawn]

Some of the guys you are referring to were in the mix and instrumental in getting the wolf delisted. Just sayin,,,,,,

I'm sure hunters up north appreciate that as do I, but siding with antis against other hunters who might happen to participate in a contest is not how we are going to insure the future of hunting.

Antis were appeased and wolves were introduced. When they reached the numbers in the original EIS antis went to court and kept de-listing from occurring for at least another decade.

Siding with anti-hunters so they won't outlaw this or that is simply not a winning strategy. All it does is create a lot of resentment and puts more hunter and ranchers in the kill-them-all crowd. Using logic and rational conservation which promote stable populations of both predators and prey is what we should all strive for. These contests are not inconsistent with that goal, each hunter still has to follow every rule and regulation any other hunter has to follow.

 

[shoots-straight]

I'm sure hunters up north appreciate that as do I, but siding with antis against other hunters who might happen to participate in a contest is not how we are going to insure the future of hunting.

Antis were appeased and wolves were introduced. When they reached the numbers in the original EIS antis went to court and kept de-listing from occurring for at least another decade.

Siding with anti-hunters so they won't outlaw this or that is simply not a winning strategy. All it does is create a lot of resentment and puts more hunter and ranchers in the kill-them-all crowd. Using logic and rational conservation which promote stable populations of both predators and prey is what we should all strive for. These contests are not inconsistent with that goal, each hunter still has to follow every rule and regulation any other hunter has to follow.

I'll put you in the "Don't" category.

 

[jryoung]

I can't speak for everyone, but you are severely mistaken if you think that I'm siding with the anti-hunters.

 

[cantgetdrawn]

JRYoung, I apologize if I misunderstood your argument.

My understanding is you are arguing we should appease anti-hunters by eliminating predator contests and professional hunters so they would have to find other means of motivating potential donors. If that is correct I see very little difference in appeasing and "siding with."

Again I apologize if I misunderstood you.

 

[tjones]

I'm sure hunters up north appreciate that as do I, but siding with antis against other hunters who might happen to participate in a contest is not how we are going to insure the future of hunting.

Antis were appeased and wolves were introduced. When they reached the numbers in the original EIS antis went to court and kept de-listing from occurring for at least .

Thanks, I wasn't quite sure how it all went down.

 

[shoots-straight]

JRYoung, I apologize if I misunderstood your argument.

My understanding is you are arguing we should appease anti-hunters by eliminating predator contests and professional hunters so they would have to find other means of motivating potential donors. If that is correct I see very little difference in appeasing and "siding with."

Again I apologize if I misunderstood you.

How many wolves have you taken?

Coyotes?

Do you trap?

 

[shoots-straight]

Last weeks coyote:

 

[shoots-straight]

Thanks, I wasn't quite sure how it all went down.

So that's how they did it?

 

[JLS]

There is a big difference between siding with someone in order to appease them, versus realizing certain practices are highly detrimental to the image of hunters because they don't coincide with the beliefs/philosophies of the NON-HUNTERS (note I didn't say anti-hunters).

 

[cantgetdrawn]

How many wolves have you taken?

Coyotes?

Do you trap?

Congrats on your kills, but your pictures prove my point. Anti-hunter troll the internet and include these pictures on their social networking sites. There is one here in NM that does just that. You can't appease them because they will just find another way to evoke those negative emotions.

Here is the link to the facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/StopGunhawkFirearmsCoyoteKillingContest

To answer your question I've never killed a wolf, still illegal here, I've killed a few coyotes but never really targeted them exclusively. I just happen to see one and shot it. Perhaps if I can find time I will try my hand at calling next time there is a contest. I tried trapping in High School back in the eighties. I wasn't very good at it, there seemed to be less predators back then. There were more ranchers, professional trappers etc. killing them. Pelts also seemed to be worth more.

Regardless of whether I trap or not I still don't see the logic or justification for appeasing anti-hunters.

 

[jryoung]

Is it just me or is that a big friggen bobcat?

 

[spook12]

How many wolves have you taken?

Coyotes?

Do you trap?

Fodder for the Antis?

 

[shoots-straight]

There is a big difference between siding with someone in order to appease them, versus realizing certain practices are highly detrimental to the image of hunters because they don't coincide with the beliefs/philosophies of the NON-HUNTERS (note I didn't say anti-hunters).

The "Get's it" column.

 

[shoots-straight]

Fodder for the Antis?

The "Don't" column.

They aren't in traps, alive, displayed in a disrespectful way. So how are those pictures fodder?

 

[shoots-straight]

Congrats on your kills, but your pictures prove my point. Anti-hunter troll the internet and include these pictures on their social networking sites. There is one here in NM that does just that. You can't appease them because they will just find another way to evoke those negative emotions.

Here is the link to the facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/StopGunhawkFirearmsCoyoteKillingContest

To answer your question I've never killed a wolf, still illegal here, I've killed a few coyotes but never really targeted them exclusively. I just happen to see one and shot it. Perhaps if I can find time I will try my hand at calling next time there is a contest. I tried trapping in High School back in the eighties. I wasn't very good at it, there seemed to be less predators back then. There were more ranchers, professional trappers etc. killing them. Pelts also seemed to be worth more.

Regardless of whether I trap or not I still don't see the logic or justification for appeasing anti-hunters.

You need to get past the "appeasing anti-hunter gig, and move on to "not moving the undecided" into the anti category.

 

[spook12]

What I meant by that comment, and also touched on by the editorial was a reference to the hired gun to kill two packs in the Frank Church. The states have earned the right to manage the populations, and that should be done through sportsman IMO. To me it seems like social management and not scientific. If I could see a report from the biologists noting that it was necessary to the health of the herds future then I would feel differently. .

J.R. I can't think of a State or Species that isn't managed with a ''Heavy'' dose of ''Social management''. Every State that I can think of uses methods other than ''Sportsman'' to manage wildlife. If other Wildlife isn't managed strictly scientifically why would you expect Wolves to be? Obviously the States need to work within the agreements that have been made but how they do that will and should vary among them.

 

[shoots-straight]

J.R. I can't think of a State or Species that isn't managed with a ''Heavy'' dose of ''Social management''. Every State that I can think of uses methods other than ''Sportsman'' to manage wildlife. If other Wildlife isn't managed strictly scientifically why would you expect Wolves to be? Obviously the States need to work within the agreements that have been made but how they do that will and should vary among them.

Spook, what you say is a very sad, but a true story. That doesn't mean we shouldn't press at every opportunity, the fact that wildlife should be managed by the science available.

 

[jryoung]

What Shoots said though I would emphasis "best" science available and we should constantly invest in said science. The Bitterroot Elk Study, the Wyoming Forage Study, Yellowstone Cutthroat and Grizzlies....I think each one of these recent studies opened a lot of eyes as to what actually is going on in these habitats. There is so much more to learn and we should make every effort to know exact what is going on so we can make the best decisions for wildlife.

 

[Western_Hunter]

How many wolves have you taken?

Coyotes?

Do you trap?

Offensive? I call this badass! In no way disrespectful photos. If you feel like they are disrespectful than you need to open your eyes, and get off your medications. This is the REAL world!!! Like Donnie Vincent said, "make no mistake about it, I'm here to kill him (Steve)". People are getting more and more brainwashed by the antis. I see way more violence, blood, and guts on TV of humans...... but no one even blinks. Oh thats right, some of the guys on here probably voted for Obama!!

 

[spook12]

The "Don't" column.

They aren't in traps, alive, displayed in a disrespectful way. So how are those pictures fodder?

I'm guessing you missed the question mark and the .

I was in no way suggesting that they are,or should be, but I'll bet we can agree that we have both seen equally benign photos used in ''Fund Raising'' materials.