What is hunting (breakoff from separate thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, the game laws as I've read 'em require you to make every effort to find and collect the animal. So, I guess "wasting" as in leaving it for the coyotes, would perhaps be violating the law. That would be the only reason I'd care, one way or the other. If you shoot a deer and don't want it, though, I'll take it, I'll gut it, I'll butcher it, and if it's just the work you want to avoid, I'll even give you some of it (not the backstraps, though).
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I'll take the meat. In most places it is illegal to leave the animal after you kill it, at least game animals. That doesn't make it inherently wrong and doesn't make it harmful to the game population. I'm not sure why it is illegal except to make some people feel good.

Many times I've heard anti-hunting types say something like "hopefully at least you eat what you kill" or some such. What, would they rather the animal starve to death or maybe be eaten by a predator while still alive because the game animal is too hungry and sick to run away? Is that better than being shot and the body being eaten by the same predator?

Now I've gotten us off on another tangent.
 
I'm not sure why it is illegal except to make some people feel good.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know what you're sayin' and I agree. The reason, I reckon, it's illegal is that you kill a deer and leave it, you don't have to tag it. How're they going to control limits if you go out shootin' dozens of deer to feed the coyote? So, in order to make sure you use a tag on it, you have to collect it. So long as you tag it and get it home, I'm not real sure it's illegal to toss it in the apartment dumpster to feed the rats with, LOL. In the case of game birds, you'd shoot your limit and if the shooting was good, you'd just leave 'em lay as you blast another limit or two.

If guy don't wanna mess with it, he can donate it to food banks often times or that "hunters for hungry" or some such. I've heard here, the senior citizen's center used to take meat donations from hunters and the health dept shut it down, though. No one got sick or anything, just wasn't kosher not being USDA approved, I guess. :rolleyes:
 
I really don't have a problem with anyone using legal means to take game, however it does bother me when I see someone use the spray and pray method. The way I hunt depends on the location, here in SW Missouri I primarily still hunt or use a climbing stand, when I hunt in Kansas I hunt a small piece of ground (60 acres) and it is over a feeder because the property doesn't offer much cover and without a food source you don't see deer, the Texas ranch I hunt is over feeders simply because that is how the ranch is run, my Oklahoma hunting is done the same as Missouri. My goal is always the same...meat in the freezer.
 
I'll respond in italics at each of your ideas with my take on it:
QUOTE: Guys, here is my take on it. I started this because I am not entirely OK with the definitions given about hunters. I'll attempt to elaborate below.

I see 4 distinct types of "hunting." Obviously, these are Archtype categories. More than likely, elements of two or more of these exist in various degrees in most hunters. No one is a "Pure" anything


Sportsman/Trophy Seeking

Horns. We are talking about horns here. Food isn't what drives this hunt even if the meat will be eaten. There is no concern for methods of the hunt or kill-- only that the goal is reached.
Wow, I've been guiding trophy hunters for 10+ years now so I feel qualified to reply. The people I've met are from all walks of life. Some have to save for a year+ for their trophy "dream" hunt, some have a cache of disposable income. It is possible trophy hunters eat more wild game then others. "Methods" are a huge concern, up 3-4 hours before dawn, in 2-3 hours after dusk, glassing, hiking, horseback, stalking, waiting at a water hole. Carrying a pack, rifle/bow, water, and do it 5-7 days in a row. Never quiting. 4' high range fences don't slow down any North American big game, days of seeing nothing but landscape can change in a second. Then an opportunity to stalk, draw the bow and hold, aim your rifle, and then decide not to shoot because you want a bigger rack and let the critter go. That has got to be a high form of charachter and hunting. If no kill is made, the hunting experience was enjoyed, and the hunter gets to hunt again.

Stalking

This is more of a hunt for the sake of the hunt. Repeatedly, we see stalkers come here (who thought you'd see the term "stalker" used in a positive manner in this day and age?) expressing concern for fairness in the hunt. These like the challenge of the hunt. While horns are nice, and meat may be eaten, the driving force behind the hunt is the challenge and experience of the hunt itself. The method is more important than the results.
Stalking is a method that all hunters should know to use. You should be able to switch gears and go from a blind, treestand to a stalk if it was needed.

Canned Hunting

Making an effort not to be disparaging, canned hunting isn't anything more than shopping. On a positive note, this MAY be the first step in getting a new person into hunting. In many families where hunting is not a tradition, this may be the only way to wet your feet into the world of hunting. On a negative note, I can't imagine getting a sense of pride for that.
Even in an enclosure of a large tract of land, if the game can slip away that's hunting.


Hunting

I actually use the generic term "hunter" as a specific type. To me, a hunter is one that has no concern for horns. A trophy is not the driving force of the hunt. They are not driven by the challenge of the hunt. Purely speaking, they are meat hunters. A freezer full of venision is the criteria for a fruitful hunt. While they would love to see a trophy deer, it isn't enough of a force for them to alter their hunt towards that goal. While they could enjoy stalking, they either don't have the situation, time, skill, or equipment to do so.
I haven't met the person you describe.


Hound Hunting/ Drives

Best motive I can see is the social aspects. I am awaiting someone with experience in this area to ellaborate on Motives/Positives/Negatives.
I've met people from the south who hunt deer with hounds, as I understand it the areas are so overgrown it's almost fruitless without the dogs. Another hunts wild hogs with dogs and a knife. In the west you need them for cougar or black bear, and it is a hard hunt with no garuantee.
, Bill W. aka Harve Curry


I post this not to disparage any group, nor am I seeking to elevate any group. I thought that it may be a good idea to attempt to give this topic some structure.

A Disclaimer: In the above criteria, I would be considered a "Hunter."
EDIT: For the purposes of this thread, I am omitting Waterfowl Hunting.
-- John
 
Another thought comes to mind on this subject. Folks will say that such and such a method is cruel (ie spring traps or bow hunting) because it "tortures" the animal or causes undue suffering. They will say that it gives the antis ammunition. To this I say DON'T ANTHROPOMORPIZE GAME ANIMALS! To do this is also a slippery slope for the war against the antis. I mean, no, personally, I would not want to be caught in a spring trap over night if I was a raccoon, but guess what, raccoons aren't HUMAN! I would also not want to get shot in the head with a .22! From the spring trap it's not far to the bow which kills slowly by bleeding out the animal. I mentioned gator hunting already. You are out there to KILL the animal. That, alone, is illegal to do on humans. You EAT the animal. Unless you're Jeffrey Dahmer, would you do that with a human? You mount a duck on your wall, do you have any human shoulder mounts up there?
 
I really don't have a problem with anyone using legal means to take game, however it does bother me when I see someone use the spray and pray method.
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with the "spray and pray" method. How does that work? Do you just walk up to a big brush pile, say to yourself "there must be something in there worth shooting" and start firing blindly?

Sounds to me more like a lack of skill with whatever arm the guy is using than an actual method.




To this I say DON'T ANTHROPOMORPIZE GAME ANIMALS!
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes. Yes. Is it worse for the animal to be shot or trapped than to have it's intestines pulled out by a coyote while it's still alive? Nature is hard. There is no easy way for an animal to die unless it does so while asleep.

That being said, most of us try to bring the animal down as quickly as possible.



Canned Hunting

Making an effort not to be disparaging, canned hunting isn't anything more than shopping. On a positive note, this MAY be the first step in getting a new person into hunting. In many families where hunting is not a tradition, this may be the only way to wet your feet into the world of hunting. On a negative note, I can't imagine getting a sense of pride for that.
Even in an enclosure of a large tract of land, if the game can slip away that's hunting.
Click to expand...

If someone legally has deer or elk or other game on their ranch and is raising it legally for food, either for themselves or to sell to restaurants, I don't have a problem with shooting the animals when it is time for slaughter. If I raised an elk to sell to a restaurant and it happened to have antlers big enough that someone would pay me $10,000 to let me shoot it and he gets the antlers while I get to sell the meat, I say GOOD FOR ME!! I wouldn't call that hunting, but if it's my elk and someone will pay me to let them slaughter it for me, what is the problem with that? Is it just that the guy gets a big set of antlers for the wall that he didn't have to work for? Work in that case being "trudge 20 miles through the snow uphill both ways", as opposed to "go to a job that he may not even like and save money for the privilege of slaughtering a big animal."

I think the big problem with "canned hunts" is the word "hunt". Maybe "canned trophy shooting" would be a better name.
 
Bitmap, you are correct it is more a lack of skill than a method, however I have heard people say "I figure the more lead I throw out there the better my chances are." so I would say that is their "method".
 
I don't hunt for the sport, I don't hunt for the meat (As in I don't need the meat, I like it but I don't require a kill to survive.) I don't hunt for the rack.... I hunt because I am a hunter. I can't explain it anymore than that.
Click to expand...
Seems I read a story about someone asked an Indian what his tribe would do when the bison were gone and he replied "Then we'll hunt mice because we are hunters."
Click to expand...
The quote "then we will hunt mice" is from Sitting Bull I know it well . my Great Grandmother was A full blooded Sioux maybe that explains it
Ske1etor No need to explain it any one with "IT" in your blood know why you hunt Once long ago I was stuck in a larger city with little means to go real hunting I hunted lizards with a home made blowgun because I am a hunter
Since I no longer need the meat and and don't care for "trophies" I would be one the hunt is more important than the kill
As far as dog hunters there are two type of dog hunters [I was raised with hunting dogscoonhounds beagles squirrel dogs foxhounds] one type use dog to find/get more game the dogs are tools the other type it is like the method type hunters it is about watching the dogs work listening to the race the dog are you partners my friend get upset with me because I listen to my beagles and let the rabbit run on by
I don't care as long as it is legal and fair chase ,how you chose to hunt. what does get my goat is those that try to make people think that the only why to hunt is a cannon from a mile away
 
Remember that old bit of wisdom about hanging separately if we don't hang together? Folks just need to accept that there are many types of hunters. Hunting is an endangered species in most of the developed world, and we all need to stick together.

Besides you don't want to throw too many stones. What would be considered "real" hunting in much of the lower 48 would be considered *WAY* too civilized to be real hunting up here. And for those criticizing canned hunts, I have more news for you. Most hunting I've seen in the lower 48, esp. east of the Rockies, would be considered a canned hunt up here. The amount of wild space is so limited and restricted what's left is no different from a game ranch. The line gets even less clear when you have a family-owned parcel where game are encouraged so the family can go on a hunting vacation in the fall. This is one reason I was so confused by the reports of the unarmed "hunters" who got mowed down by that fellow in the midwest a few years back. The idea of a group of hunters who are almost totally without firearms is unheard of here. If you have no weapon you are by definition not hunting. But to them, a "hunting trip" is a family vacation to family property where a few of the men may go off and actually shoot a deer at some point.

By the same token, some of the things I've done up here legally would be both illegal and seen as highly barbaric in the lower 48. Blasting grouse or ptarmigan on the ground with a .22 for example ;-) To me they are hamburgers with wings. I've even used a rock to finish one off. If I see one by the side of a gravel road I start to salivate and have to be restrained from capping off rounds. The idea of buying a $5,000 scattergun and getting them to take to the wing before shooting them makes no sense at all. But then riding horses never made sense to me, either.
 
I'm gonna take issue with some word usage in the opening post: "Canned Hunting".

In Texas, that is a specific term in law. It means an animal confined to a small area with no chance of evasion or escape from the view or the gun of the shooter. It is illegal.

One might wish to describe a guided hunt, using an elevated and enclosed stand and overlooking a feeder as "canned hunting", but that's an incorrect usage of the words. Personal opinion, but the style is more for a hunter who is long on money and short on time--and may lack knowledge of such things as stalking. But it sure beats sitting in an office with a copy of Game&Fish and just wishing.

Art
 
"canned hunts"
Click to expand...

When I was growing up in SE central Illinois we had few deer and no larger game animals nor large predators - think fox being the largest. Upland game, and to a limited extent waterfowl, was the name of the game. I remember that when the state opened the put and take pheasant area in Richland County, the hunting was thought to be not very challenging as the pen raised birds tended to sit much tighter and had not developed the survival mechanism of the wild birds. Is this a "canned hunt"; I would say it meets one definition but not in the same sense you would think of for other types of game. Pheasant don't really have a home range like quail which generally live their entire lives on a home range of 20-40 acres. You can have a lot of pheasant - pen raised or wild - on 40 acres and they will tolerate the high population where quail wouldn't tolerate another covey on their home range.

On the other hand, a few years ago Sharon Woods Metro park in Columbus, Ohio was estimated to be home to have 3-400+ (some estimated as high as 600) whitetail deer (roughly 1/2-3/4 per acre) . If that park had been opened to hunting it would certainly meet a definition of "canned hunting" in that there were a lot of deer in a small confined area. If they had no way of escaping the area hunter success would have been very high but success would have gotten progressively harder until the population was shot down to under 20 or so then success would have been a similar to what passes for wild conditions in Ohio (Ohio's deer population before hunting season was estimated at 650K or so. Ohio's square miles is roughly 41K so that gives a population of 16 deer per square mile or one per 40 acres; take out the cities, towns, etc. and it is probably closer to 20-25 per square mile). 600 or so confined acres with 20 deer may still meet the definition of a "canned hunt" but it is a different game than 3-400 or even 40-50 in the same area. And, I don't think anyone would argue that a deer in a five or so acre enclosure isn't "canned hunting". If there is enough of the right kinds of cover a couple of deer in 100 acres could elude a good hunter for quite awhile but eventually a skilled hunter is going to get a deer.

I am not sure what if anything I have added to the discussion other than a long-winded "everything is relative".
 
Waste is kind of ambiguous.
Click to expand...

Waste is actually defined in the game laws, though it varies depending on the state of course. Up here it's OK to leave most of a griz behind once you have the hide and whatever else you want of it. Ditto with wolves and most fur bearers. Nobody is going to criticize you for leaving unedible meat behind. But leave a moose behind and you will get hard time. The juries will want to hang you for it, because doing that is no different from going into their homes and urinating on their winter food supply.
 
308win, you're taking anomalous situations and trying to make them fit into the general, overall, hunting situations we're talking about in this thread. Pen-raised birds are not our concern, here, nor are the problems in no-hunt areas.
 
Waste is actually defined in the game laws, though it varies depending on the state of course. Up here it's OK to leave most of a griz behind once you have the hide and whatever else you want of it. Ditto with wolves and most fur bearers. Nobody is going to criticize you for leaving unedible meat behind. But leave a moose behind and you will get hard time. The juries will want to hang you for it, because doing that is no different from going into their homes and urinating on their winter food supply.
Click to expand...

Yes, waste is defined by law. The fact that it is defined by law and is declared illegal in most cases does not mean it is harmful to the environment or the game population or anything else except someone's sensibilities.

I don't see how shooting a moose and leaving the body is the same as urinating on someone's winter food supply.

If I shot it and took it home they couldn't eat it. Would that be urinating in their food supply, too?

If a guy has a tag for an animal and kills that animal and uses his tag for it, how does his decision of how to dispose of the body affect anyone else's hunting or their food supply? I understand the argument about taking more game than you have tags for. I understand if you pollute a well with it or leave it blocking a road, or something, but really, does one more or less dead critter damage the hunting for everyone else? I would guess not if you can leave the skinned body of a grizzly.

I don't advocate leaving the meat, but if you don't exceed your game limit I don't see how it hurts the game population.
 
The trouble with moderating is that it eats into one's time to really think about one particular thread--which is why I post about bits and pieces in this one. :)

Anyhow, to look at:

"Sportsman/Trophy Seeking

Horns. We are talking about horns here. Food isn't what drives this hunt even if the meat will be eaten. There is no concern for methods of the hunt or kill-- only that the goal is reached."

Here there are two parts, really. There are those who are more interested in the biggest buck on the ranch, like my father generally was. He mostly wanted to demonstrate that he could find the biggest buck (you have to look at a lot of bucks to figure out which is the biggest, and then find him a second time, to shoot him. Not easy.) and kill him. But the meat always got used by somebody, and he hunted ethically.

I've never really met anybody who had no concern for methods when trophy hunting. SFAIK, these types are mostly crooks, like the guy and guide who killed the giant elk in Yellowstone Park. At any rate, for all the publicity when one gets caught, unethical trophy-on-the-brain types are not statistically significant as to numbers.
 
I don't know for sure but tend to think we get a lot of PETA, anti-gun ideals spieled into main-stream press that spills over onto firearm/hunting publications or press. Bad ideal's on the principle of divide and conquer perhaps. In some ways it is working, look at our arguing on gun control/laws discussions right here at THR, where everyone with the exception of a troll or two is a gun owner.

I have been a hunter all my life since I was old enough to shoot a BB gun on my own. Hunted on foot chucker or pheasants and or big/small critters hard all day sometimes with no success but have shot a bird on the ground or a doe laying down looking at me over a bush. Both tasted as good as the bird hit at 40 yards or better than the buck hit at well over 300. Was I a non hunter those days, or did I just use what was presented me at that particular moment? Seems a lot of this stems from what we and or other's have to work with for hunting opportunities.

There is killing stuff and there is hunting with foggy shades in between. What is truth for one doesn't necessarily hold true for another. It is not a hunter/gun friendly world out there so a little less "holier than thou" would be a good thing. I admit I have been guilty of non support in some area's an still believe some shouldn't be included as "hunting" but a little corporation or understanding is a good thing. Perhaps I am becoming more tolerant as time moves along but tolerance has never be one of my virtues and believe it is more a understanding of what is happening in various parts of the country.

I could also be wrong here too but suspect we do have a few anti-gun/hunter types here stirring the pot as opportunity's present themselves and hide their true intent very well. I hope I am wrong on that one.
 
The deer populations per acre in Ohio are high - higher than a lot of (most?) well-ran commercial hunting operations. There are a few per-deer hunting operations here and they aren't limited to trophy hunting but they aren't "canned hunting" in the sense of the definition Art refers to. More and more land is closed to hunting; and, hunting leases are very common here now. It is not "canned hunting" but it is the future.
 
I would definitely be considered a hunter. I'm just as happy getting a nice healthy doe than fighting it out for a trophey. I've been hunting since I was just a wee girl and I've shot my share of nice bucks.

Stalking is fantastic and nothing gets my heart pumping harder than seeing a great big buck during the rut - but I love, and I mean I LOVE vension....
 
Hunting: My Definition

Spending time in the outdoors, matching my skills & abilities against those of my quarry . . . sometimes I shoot, sometimes I don't. Hunting is my legacy, my passion, my right. When I harvest, I do so for sustenance, for fur, for the love of watching a good dog work, for the experience that has been handed-down generation-to-generation in my family dating back to 1632 in this country. I am a hunter, a conservationist, an outdoorsman, and one with a deep, abiding respect and understanding of the creatures I may be so fortunate to encounter, whether they are the focus of my particular quest or not. I recognize regulated & ethical hunting as both a conservation tool AND a sport, as well as a viable means to augment my food supply. My hunting methodology may not match that of others, but it makes neither my choice nor theirs more right or wrong . . . may each, effected humanely, enjoy their personal preference.
 
Well my own feeling as a hunter myself is that calling any kind of hunting a "sport" is a bad term as the sides are not equal ie- the animal is unarmed
I do consider every kind of hunting a challenge in it's own way. I used to consider "primitive" hunting cruel, but as has been pointed out already nature is cruel on her own. As for me personally I think it's our duty as the most advanced species/morally superior beings that unless we absolutley need to kill that way to survive and cannot afford other options We should make all hunts as humane as possible(just as you wouldn't put your dog or horse down by shooting them in the chest with an arrow if you had a gun to shoot them in the head with)
 
calling any kind of hunting a "sport" is a bad term

You're right . . . the sides aren't equal . . . that's why every tag purchased is filled every year. But, you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine . . . and I'll continue to consider it, in part, a sport. It certainly isn't a job, tho that would be a dandy!
 
How about "hunting" is defined as what ever legal method we use to take game? Unless they are under water - then we'll call it "fishing".

I butchered a bunch of chickens once. I had to "hunt" for a few hiding behind the coop. The rest I killed and butchered.

Best chicken I ever ate, but it still doesn't match a nice Whitetail backstrap. And the taste of my deer doesn't change whether I had to walk a few miles or I shot it next to my vehicle.

If you are legal, ethical, make a quick kill, respect the animal, and use as much of it as possible. Who in the heck cares how to "define" hunting?
 
My "traditional" hunt -

I plan to go out naked two weeks before the deer opener in northern Minnesota next year. I will have a friend drop me off in an area where I've never been. I will make sure I rub some venison grease on my hands so I have to deal with packs of wolves instead of sleeping at night. Oh - and I will fast for two weeks beforehand to mimic "traditional" conditions.

I plan to craft an atlatl as a weapon, with only my hands. I will only use trees that have already fallen so I do not disturb the balance of nature. I will not use hardwoods or any sort of rock on the tip of the atlatl - that would be an unfair advantage.

I'm still not sure how I'll carry my hunting license. Maybe I'll need to get a piercing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
What Trophy Hunting is.....
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
sm
S
F
  • Locked
are there affordable hunting leases near Houston
Replies
4
Views
874
mbt2001
M
W
  • Locked
Trophy hunting: For or Against?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Singleshotshorty
S
9
  • Locked
Hunting for Trophy?
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
4K
hq
hq
B
  • Locked
After the bear hunt
Replies
14
Views
795
oregonhunter
O
Back
Top