Rant for the day

[----]

This is why I believe many states have a definition stating before you leave the kill site. It requires an action prior to another action, vs. an action after the fact.

Due to the incident you mentioned above, Montana changed from 'immediately' to this for this season.

 

[Jamen]

I agree they would be a total D-bag if they did give a ticket. What people do for there pictures is up to them I really don't have a huge problem with that. For me I just wouldn't put myself in that type of situation in the first place. My biggest rant was the situation I came upon this fall. One can argue it is a dumb law to require orange or any certain color and others can argue the opposite. If you cannot follow a simple law like that do they follow the other laws? That I cannot say if they do or not but leaves it open for question that they do not.

 

[el unit]

Sounds like the game warden in Delta County, Colorado before he retired about 8 years ago.

 

[MNElkNut]

One thing I like about orange in the pictures is that in a woods full of shadows, twigs, and branches, the antlers typically show up really well against a solid orange background.

Slightly off topic, but I have seen some people get upset about 1 person posing with a 2 person limit of birds or whatever. They never consider a person taking the picture. however, with product like Clip-Shot ( a really neat little camera mount that mounts to anything to let you take pictures when you want everyone in the frame), you don't need to have a second person there. Just something you might want to consider if you are planning on posting the pictures on Facebook, etc.

 

[maxx]

What is the purpose of wearing orange? Its the law.
Why is it the law? I have no idea. I can't think of any rational reason for only rifle hunters to wear orange. Can you? Its not for safety. You're the one with the gun doing the shooting. If it was for safety, it would be required of dog walkers, bird watchers, fishermen, fossil hunters and everybody else afield that time of year.

In montana, I don't have to wear it if I'm packing my bow for a high country september muley, but the guy across the basin rifle hunting goats does. He's the one with the gun, why does he need orange and not me? Illogical.

I think we should repeal laws like this. I really hope there are not people carrying deadly weapons around that feel they can't decide for themselves what color clothing to wear without a government mandate.

Edit: packing out antlers, I ALWAYS put orange over the head/antlers. Always. no matter how sure I am that nobody is around.

No offense but come hunt WI rifle season on public ground without orange. I wouldn't step out of a truck to take a piss without orange on during the WI 9 day rifle season. Honestly I don't get much enjoyment hunting it anymore but I go because my dad enjoys it and it would kill him if I stopped doing it.

I get it where you hunt. Not all places are the same.

Pictures don't mean that you didn't take the game legally. I killed my biggest buck with a bow this year. I took a few pictures before I tagged it. Law stats within 15 minutes of finding it or before moving it. I took a few pics, tagged it and drug it to the truck. I was by myself and wanted better pictures so the next day I took down in the back yard and took more pictures. I took the tag off the rack to have my wife take some pictures and then I put the tag back on.

 

[TheJason]

My God it's going to be a long off-season.

 

[TheJason]

The statement that orange is not for safety is myopic at best.

 

[kansasdad]

Your rant got quite a varied response Jamen!

Properly tagging in Kansas means the tag is applied to a rear leg, and our orange requirement for big game hunting is a hat and vest (specified 200 square inches total on front/rear.) Every state has their own rules for its hunting, and it the sportsman's responsibility to know and follow said rules.

 

[brymoore]

It just left a bad taste in my mouth this fall to watch people clearly not follow the rules and then harvest a bull of a lifetime. I had all the evidence in the world to turn them in but what would prove? The animal was still shot and they may have gotten a small fine for not wearing it?

You sound jealous of another hunter. Get over it.

I don't wear orange because it isn't required in Idaho. I cut my tags when I arrive at the animal but you'll never see one in a photo.

 

[Schaaf]

I hate orange in photos. I was unaware people would assume I was not wearing orange since it wasn't in my grip and grin. I even spent more on an orange vest this year than I ever dreamed of to send some money TRCP's way.

 

[Jamen]

Jealous over another hunter? Never once said I was jealous of them I said I was mad they were breaking the law. We found elk in another drainage and he took a very nice bull. I guess people like you don't care if people follow the laws even if it is just about wearing orange.

 

[LuketheDog]

I hate it when I see folks breaking the rules, it just makes things harder for the people who follow them...

I keep my orange on the whole time I'm in the field if I'm hunting public land during rifle season, regardless of whether I'm tagged out or not. Just this past 3rd rifle season in Colorado TWO of our group had other idiots fire over their heads at deer. If keeping my orange vest and hat on improves my odds of getting home safe to my wife and daughters, they stay on.

 

[tjones]

My God it's going to be a long off-season.

Lots of first world problems need solving.

 

[Flatrock]

What is the purpose of wearing orange? Its the law.
Why is it the law? I have no idea. I can't think of any rational reason for only rifle hunters to wear orange. Can you? Its not for safety. You're the one with the gun doing the shooting. If it was for safety, it would be required of dog walkers, bird watchers, fishermen, fossil hunters and everybody else afield that time of year.

In montana, I don't have to wear it if I'm packing my bow for a high country september muley, but the guy across the basin rifle hunting goats does. He's the one with the gun, why does he need orange and not me? Illogical.

I think we should repeal laws like this. I really hope there are not people carrying deadly weapons around that feel they can't decide for themselves what color clothing to wear without a government mandate.

Edit: packing out antlers, I ALWAYS put orange over the head/antlers. Always. no matter how sure I am that nobody is around.

Really? Orange isn't for safety? Come on man. A landowner we know gave permission to some guys he didn't know to hunt. At the end of the day, he asked how they did and the guy said, "well we got off 2 sound shots." Landowner asked what the hell that was and the guy said "we heard a sound in the trees so we took a shot." WOW.

Another one. A friend's dad said years ago, a guy shot a moose by accident in ND while deer hunting. Game warden asked him if he knew the difference between a moose and a deer and the guy said "oh I didn't see it. I just saw something move in the trees so I shot."

There are so many assclowns out there, I wouldn't EVER consider not wearing orange for rifle season, even if the state didn't require it.

 

[tjones]

That landowner story has been making the rounds for years and most landowners will tell it. Insert two Texans, or WI. I have heard it many times. Think about it, if cover is so thick you can't see what you are shooting at, how is a bullet going to make it through the cover to kill a moose? I know wardens who chuckle at that story and it has been spun on everything from horses to llamas. It's like the story I heard as a kid, a Montana kid and a ND kid were standing across from each other on the state line. The ND kid was throwing fire crackers at the Montana kid, so the Montana kid lite them and threw them back.

Here is my take, modern hunters are accustomed to hunters having to wear orange and assuming if it's not wearing orange it probably something to shoot. Now take away the orange law and you actually have to make sure of what you are shooting at. Like needing seatbelt laws we need .gov to make us safe.

 

[LopeHunter]

I wear orange even if not required. I am all too well aware of some of the people in the woods that make me nervous. I wash my hunting clothes in non-UV brightening soap. Many of the leading soap brands have UV brighteners and this causes your clothes, orange or not, to glow blue to deer and elk.

I notch the tag immediately upon getting to the downed critter but will take pictures before placing the tag on the animal. I also unload the gun as soon as reach the animal unless expect issues with large predators.

I am a stickler for following laws while outdoors though getting a couple of pictures is a risk I will take before placing the already cut tag on the animal.

 

[Jorgy]

I see a few outdoor shows a year filmed in Colorado that the host isn't wearing orange when they shoot their animal. Drives me nuts.

I wear orange (minimum a hat) when bird hunting and I have had a few guys try and explain to me that I don't need to. Um, yes I do, but thanks

 

[Flatrock]

That landowner story has been making the rounds for years and most landowners will tell it. Insert two Texans, or WI. I have heard it many times. Think about it, if cover is so thick you can't see what you are shooting at, how is a bullet going to make it through the cover to kill a moose? I know wardens who chuckle at that story and it has been spun on everything from horses to llamas. It's like the story I heard as a kid, a Montana kid and a ND kid were standing across from each other on the state line. The ND kid was throwing fire crackers at the Montana kid, so the Montana kid lite them and threw them back.

Here is my take, modern hunters are accustomed to hunters having to wear orange and assuming if it's not wearing orange it probably something to shoot. Now take away the orange law and you actually have to make sure of what you are shooting at. Like needing seatbelt laws we need .gov to make us safe.

That story has been making the rounds? I have never, ever heard that story from anyone else. Also, that wasn't just something I "heard." That was a landowner, telling it to me face to face. He's as down to the earth as they get and doesn't even hunt. The second story, my friend's dad read it in the newspaper many years ago. That wasn't some second or third hand story either.

Also, the comment about a bullet not making it through cover to kill a moose makes zero sense. You're saying a bullet couldn't go through a shrub and kill a moose on the other side? Or through a pine branch? A bullet can go through both front shoulders but not a little branch?

Finally, I should just assume that anything in the woods that moves and isn't wearing orange is fair game to shoot at? I don't have to positively ID what is moving before I shoot? I gotta be missing something here.

 

[tjones]

I have heard the same story many times, from different land owners face to face so ya it's making the rounds. So you want us to believe a bullet shot randomly will go through a branch then accurately hit a moose in the vitals and kill it without the shooter seeing the moose?

 

[Flatrock]

I have heard the same story many times, from different land owners face to face so ya it's making the rounds. So you want us to believe a bullet shot randomly will go through a branch then accurately hit a moose in the vitals and kill it without the shooter seeing the moose?

So you've had many landowners say that happened to them personally on THEIR land? Or that it happened on so and so's land? The landowner I know had it personally happen to him. It wasn't a story making the rounds. It happened.

Yes that's absolutely what I'm saying about a moose. A hunter sees movement, deliberately aims at said movement and pulls the trigger. Chances of it being killed is less than wounded but yea, if a hunter shoots at an object, it's only logical to think that the animal could be killed.