ebike bow hunting - Alabama style + Zero hunting motorcycle

[Nehmo]

If not for your ancestors doing exactly that [seeking out, stalking, and killing an animal in his or her natural habitat], you would not exist. :wink:

I don't live in the same environment that my ancestors lived.

Or we can employ a reductio ad absurdum argument: Considering you have 2 parents, 4 (or 2^2) grandparents, 2^3 great-grandparents, and so on (2 raised to an exponent equal to the number of generations before you). And considering what's called human beings have been her for, some, 150,000 generations, your ancestors (2^150,000 of 'em) did lots of things. By sheer numbers, we can conclude some of your direct ancestors engaged in rape and some in incest, and you are a product of these activities. "If not for your ancestors doing exactly that, you would not exist."

Does this mean you currently condone raping your sister?

 

[Nehmo]

Small sample, maybe, but hardly anecdotal when based on field experience.

Maybe you use a different defition for "anecdotal" than that of other English speakers.
"3. based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation: anecdotal evidence."
Your statement is not only anecdotal, it's subjective and self-aggrandizing.

Interesting if true. A small university study

You are deprecating Purdue because you think it's a small university?
Purdue, with a total student enrollment of forty thousand, "is one of the nation's premier institutions" and is one of the most respected universities in the world. It ranks number 62 in the US News hierarchy.

may not be the final answer. The process of their study may well have filtered the quality of rifle hunters above average or changed the hunting conditions in other ways that affect the result.

My previous link, Crippling Losses and the Future of American Deer Hunting, notes a few studies, but the section the link led to concentrated on one. The one I indicated by page numbers was the Purdue one. The actual full study isn't available online (unless I go through some trouble), but the first page partially describing the methods of the study is. Basically, it's distilled self-reporting form 5,100 archers. The rifle data used for comparision is probably from the Iowa Game Department study. Iowa's numbers are similar to others I've found.

But in any case the study does not support the statement that archery hunters don't trail their wounded deer. Perhaps that comment was anecdotal.

Almost every argument you present is un-researched reaching conjecture and even borderline ridiculous (small university, small sample). And my not-trailing comment, "considering the dedication of your typical beer-party hunter, nobody trails the animal to finish them off", is definitely an anecdotal observation, but the drinking part is a very popular one. Look at the number of results to the stupid rhyme, We drink beer and kill deer. Hunters go out to have an alcohol-killing party. And my comment by its introductory element, is predicated on a reasonable estimation of the dedication of someone partying with alcohol. But don't misunderstand me, I'm not anti-drunk; I'm anti-hunting in any condition. I'm pointing out the typical attitude of an either bow or gun hunter.

Even if true it is irrelevant in the big picture since vehicular wounding and killing of deer far exceeds hunting, at least where I live. Weather and loss of habitat are even larger factors and have just about wiped out hunting in a lot of areas. Plus the take by archery is small compared to rifle so the total impact on the herd due to archery is insignificant.

You can't justify something simply because something else, particularly something else outside of your control, causes more severe damage. If you killed your neighbor, would criticism of the act be "irrelevant in the big picture since vehicular... killing" of neighbors in comparison makes the number of neighbor-killings by you insignificant?

Also, just in reading two pages of that report I can see that the science is questionable. For example "compound users often shoot the arrow completely through -- compounding the problems of tracking", indicates an inadequate understanding of the processes involved. In addition, through and through wounds have a much better chance of healing.

How does that indicate "an inadequate understanding of the processes involved"? You can't simply say it shows inadequate understanding, you must say how or nobody will understand what you are saying.

The ability of an animal to recover from a through-wound is addressed in almost every work on the subject I've looked at so far. You are hardly coming up with something new. It is, of course, better for anybody to receive a through-wound than on from a barbed-head arrow.

Archery hunting is a lot safer for the hunter as the effective range is reduced, improper identification of targets is significantly reduced and shooting at noises in the brush is not practiced with arrows. In addition, beer party hunters don't use bows,

Who are you trying to kid? Here's a couple of stills form the same vid, which I won't link to, which also, BTW, use as background music Drinkin' Beer And Wastin' Bullets by Luke Bryan.

rifles are much easier and archery hunting is too much work for them. It is also more pleasant in the woods for hunters and other forest visitors without all the rifle noise.

I recognize it's easier to hunt with a rifle than a bow & arrow. And I realize this ease of use may attract a lower-brow hunter to guns. However, we are discussing how inefficiency in hunting tools causes a higher proportion of cripples verses kills. The other elements of bow & arrow hunting, noise etc., may have merit, but they aren't relevant.

It is difficult to carry a bow on a bicycle. Mounts are available for ATVs but they are generally crosswise which is less of a problem on a vehicle as wide as an ATV. Bows are fragile and difficult to safely grasp for a mount. The market for bicycle bow mounts is pretty small. The successful hunter also has a challenge bringing home the take on a bike.

 

[liveforphysics]

The only hunting that would impressive me, would be extremely dangerous game with a bow, or relatively safe game (like deer) with a knife or bare hands.

The only way I would want to hunt deer would be getting a choke locked in on its neck through tedious stalking and waiting for a surprise attack and try to hold on while it's kicking you fighting for its life.

I've gone deer hunting with rifles once. I saw nothing happen that I would consider sporting or exciting.

I think bare handed would be a worthwhile experience though.

 

[Alan B]

Perdue's study was of a rather small data set. Hardly a representative sample statistically. A small study. Self reporting studies are significantly inaccurate. Counting information from self reporting is hardly scientific research which depends on fundamental observation, measurement and verification. There is a lot of poor science from this type of "research". It really is a stretch to call this science. It sounds more like a classroom homework assignment. Your evidence is weak.

You have no data on the typical attitude of a hunter.

You have no data on the healing rate of archery wounds versus rifle wounds.

You have no data on crippling. How is this even defined?

You have no actual data on drunk hunting. Are they actually hunting drunk, or just drinking a few beers around the campfire to make their stories sound better. I don't think drinking has any place in hunting.

You appear to have no actual field experience with hunting.

Animals that die from hunting wounds are a loss of resource, wounding and killing from vehicles is a far more significant loss of resources. Even if the wounding rate for archery is greater than rifle it is not a significant factor in the big picture as the archery take is too small. If you are concerned about the well being of the herd there are many other things you can focus on that are of far greater importance. If you are just focused on limiting other's freedoms that is very sad. The conclusion of that line of reasoning is a world in which no one would want to live. Whether you like hunting or not you should support other's rights to do so. That's what freedom is about.

Anti hunting activists are a form of terrorist that engages in illegal activities in the pursuit of their ideology. They attack people and property in this pursuit and defy law to carry out their goals. They seek to limit the freedom of others and go against one of the founding principals of our country. Are you a member of that group?

Drunk hunters don't represent hunting anymore than drunk drivers represent transportation.

Hunting with a bow is difficult. It takes about ten times the skill of rifle hunting to be successful. Archery successes are at an average of less than 20 yards. It is quite difficult to get that close to a wary animal and make a good shot. The people who engage successfully in that are more dedicated and skilled than the average hunter. It is quite challenging. Not quite as challenging as Luke's approach, but pretty close.

Deer kill a number of people every year, they are not as defenseless as you might think. The front hooves are almost as dangerous as the antlers. Firsthand observation of two bucks locking antlers fighting is absolutely amazing. Confronting a buck with a knife could easily be the last thing you ever do.

If you have no experience in the field you might not know that blood trails come from exit wounds, not entrance wounds. Even if some does come from an entrance wound, a better trail results from having both. Following a trail looks easy on TV but in real life is a difficult project.

Reading a few articles on hunting and claiming knowledge on the subject is rather like reading a few books on motors and electronics and claiming to be an expert on motor controls. It takes a bit more experience to actually know about something.

Obviously you don't like hunting and use your significant word skills against it, even if armed only with questionable statistical paper studies and anti-hunting emotion. But do you really believe that people should not have freedom? Do you believe you know what is best for everyone?

 

[john7700]

To me, it's intuitively objectionable to seek out, stalk, and kill an animal in his or her natural habitat, often somewhere distant from civilization.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

To you maybe. In the real world we call it supper. You don't object to bow hunting. You object to hunting. Would you feel better about it if the guy sat in his living room, had some one lead a deer in and then shot it? Of course you wouldn't. So those words after "to me,it's intuitively objectionable" are just that words with no meaning what so ever. You want other people to do your killing for you. To me, I find that intuitively objectionable.

The only hunting that would impressive me, would be extremely dangerous game with a bow, or relatively safe game (like deer) with a knife or bare hands.

The only way I would want to hunt deer would be getting a choke locked in on its neck through tedious stalking and waiting for a surprise attack and try to hold on while it's kicking you fighting for its life.

I've gone deer hunting with rifles once. I saw nothing happen that I would consider sporting or exciting.

I think bare handed would be a worthwhile experience though.

So, since you (unlike the above poster) has actually been hunting using modern techniques how many did you get? How many people were you with and how many did they get? The hunter success rate in my state, using modern techniques, is 22%. Best of luck with the jump out of tree wrestle them bare handed method but I got to tell yea, I see a trip to the E.R. in some ones future.

 

[Thud]

Actual hunter speaking now:
#1 archery is king.....(I forwent archery seaon this year with other obligations...I put 4 in the freezer last year with my bow) In the last 15 years of archery I have only lost 1 animal to a weak blood trail/poorly hit. I tracked that animal for 3 days & a 4 mile radius in any direction it may have taken. it happens.

After becomeing proficent with a bow, Gun hunting loses all atraction & feelings of sportsmanship. Target shooting is the only reason to have a long range rifle...pulling the trigger just feels like murder these days. (unless its on verman)

I use Venison as a primary food source, & proccess the meat myself. & there is no way i would attempt to describe the spiritual sence that hunting instills when your heart is in the right place.

Is it absolutly nessiscary? if I raised my own beef for food I couldn't afford lipo.

Another huge issue is the animal population. In Michigan in 2010, there were 55,867 reported vehicle-deer crashes with 11 people killed.
Thats only the reported incedents..... thats 155 a day.

you can find all kinds of video of stupid rednecks looking stupider with guns & booze.....they in no way reflect any of my experiances in the woods.

 

[LI-ghtcycle]

I wonder how many are getting a "youtube" education or "experience" with hunting.

There are hunts, and there are hunts.

On my first hunting trip, I was taken to a older gentleman's favorite spot, and was it sporting? I guess that depends on your reason for hunting.

This was in Eastern Montana where it's mostly flat and foliage is sparse, mostly there are rolling hills/trenches cut by seasonal rain called "coolies" to hide in, and plenty of sage.

He wasn't sure of my skill level (I had been in the Air Force, and long before that did a lot of sport shooting and practical training for self defense with pistols) and had limited rifle experience, so I had all the best opportunities in a virtual shooting gallery with game that was not yet pressured.

I hit everything I shot at, and I only took the best shots offered. I took my first deer at 220 yards with a 308 Saiga (sporterized semi-auto based on the klashnikov), and my second at 180 yards, these were all one-shot and they dropped harvests.

No beer involved. :wink:

This same poor gentleman was suffering from a brain tumor (no one knew at the time) and was barely able to take his buck (his vision was being affected on occasion) after several shots in a less than ideal situation (his deer was facing away from us, only a neck shot available, they gave me several opportunities to shoot and I only took the best broad-side shots to give me the best possibility of a clean kill) because after I had filled my tags, there was slim pickings left for them the following days of the hunt.

I don't hunt for sport as much as for meat in the freezer.

If you feel better hiring someone in a factory setting to kill an animal (cow) by shooting it in the back of the head with a .22 at close range before slaughtering, then I guess you either don't know that is how it's done, or are fooling yourself that your any different buying it in the store all neat and wrapped for ya.

I have no problem with harvesting my own game, hanging it to age the meat (just like they do before it comes to the store) and butchering it myself.

Sure, if I did this on a regular basis I would have no time of my own, and I am happy to have someone else to do it so I can buy it in the store, but if you have ever been on a real hunt (they call it hunting, not shooting ) and never seen a single animal, then you would probably better understand what it's all really about.

Even rifle hunting in ideal areas, you can go for days and not see a single animal.

After getting the meat for the winter, I will then take on much more challenging hunts for sport.

Hunting isn't a "blood sport" or a challenge of man vs animal in a fight to the death, it's more about going out in the woods, spending time in nature, and doing nothing different than any other predator or omnivore.

I guess some of you think it isn't very sporting when a mountain lion kills a rabbit instead of taking on a wolf or a bear? :lol:

You all need to stop watching the Disney channel and get out in the woods and experience it. 8)

Watching Animal Planet doesn't count either.

Oh and for those of you will illusions of taking on a deer with your bare hands or even with a knife, here is a nice story for you.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/deer-attacks-kills-cherokee-farmer/nFDTY/

Deer kill about 150 people a year in the Unites States. But most of those deaths happen when deer are involved in collisions with automobiles.

We as a society have been given a false reality packaged by Disney et all that the forest is filled with friendly "pets" that sing a chorus with you skip down a trail.

These are wild animals, and they deserve respect and shouldn't be underestimated.

Wasn't too long ago in Montana that a woman was hospitalized with critical wounds when a buck crazed while in rut came into the university campus and proceeded to kick her with it's front hooves which are razor sharp (how else do you think they fly up steep slippery terrain?) and she barely lived to tell the tale.

You can think what you want about hunting, but until you have been threatened by a bear or stalked by a Lion, you don't really realize how dangerous it truly is.

The most dangerous wild animals are the ones that idiots have fed, because then they start loosing their natural fear of humans and start associating people with food.

I have had to stare down a Grizzly in Montana that fortunately decided that I wasn't worth the trouble (this is probably the same one that later that year or two my friend who lived in the area had to put down for attacking the side of his house and smashing a neighbors car on regular basis) when I was on my first solo deer hunt.

I saw him in the distance with my binoculars moving away from me, and thought, hmmm I wonder what that big brown thing is in the distance.

I was so fascinated that it didn't occur to me when he was about 300yrds away, that he stopped, sniffed the air and was now coming right to me.

He was on the other side of a draw, and moving steadily, and after about 10 seconds or so I realized he wasn't just heading my direction, but coming RIGHT to me.

I was forced to make a decision because in the next few minutes he came with in about 10 yrds of me and stood up, and I don't know why I didn't crap my pants, I surely was scared enough!

If you don't know already, bears have been clocked at over 30 MPH in a charge, and you don't get any time to do anything about it if they decide to charge unless you're prepared.

When he stood up I had my finger on the trigger, staring him down through my scope, with both eyes open to make sure I had an opportunity to get a couple shots off before he charged, literally praying that I didn't have to shoot him!

After looking at me a few moments, he went back down on all fours and went around me, and continued down the spur road I had just walked in on.

There was a pretty fresh snow, and I was able to see his tracks, and it stopped me cold! He had such large paws that they were longer and wider than the length of my feet!

No matter how "safe" you may think you are in the woods even hunting, or that you are even the only "hunter" often, there is plenty stalking you as well.

We had more problems with lions than bears, in Montana, but people tend to get complacent like Timothy Treadwell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Treadwell and think they know something because they manage to get away with doing stupid things for a while, and there have been many instances when I was in the woods when I have no doubt I have been stalked, and it's not like the Lions are going to walk up and talk to you about it. :wink:

Another friend of mine had been confronted by a lion just walking around on a trail near town in Missoula Montana with his son, and fortunately he was armed, as the lion was hungry, and wasn't even fazed when he fired 4 rounds at it's feet, it didn't attack, but another time he was out, a young black bear charged them, and he hit it 5-6 times in the heart with his 9mm that he carried when ever in the woods, and the bear didn't stop until just a couple feet in front of them, looked dazed, and climbed up a near-by tree and THEN bled out.

If that bear had a mind to, it would have torn them both up before bleeding out, and this is with holes in it's heart!

Still think hunters are "unsporting" for going out into the woods with a weapon? :wink:

Also, getting into bow hunting, unless you have "urban deer" to hunt or another place where deer are used to people and not easily spooked, if you're going for them out in the forest, don't expect to get an opportunity to even shoot one for the first year or two that you go out.

Many people start bow hunting for a greater challenge, and it's also a lot more expensive to get all the gear needed, you don't just buy a cheap bow and go out in the woods and shoot a deer!

I would love to bow hunt some day, but I don't have the money for too many hobbies, and although I would rifle hunt if I get the opportunity, I know that it would take much more dedication, money for gear and time to learn to stalk up on animals to 30 yrds or less to hope you have a good shot!

Anyone thinking that bow hunting is some "beer party" hunting needs to go out there and try it themselves, and then tell us how it worked out for them. :wink:

 

[TonyReynolds]

Well said...

 

[Harold in CR]

Hear, hear. Excellent information. I could tell ya's a bunch of hunting stories, with not much blood letting, also. :lol:

 

[SoSauty]

Experience speaks volumes. Too bad few kidos here in Kalifornia can't auditorially distinguish between an elk in rut and the scream of cougar, or a chainsaw from a scooter. (Actual teacher comparison I made with a new Tennessee child in my CA class).

The lions are not only a problem in Kalifornia suburbs, but have decimated the wildlife, basically leaving the Sierra's and other wilderness areas comparatively barren of wildlife.

A decade ago, the 'group think culturally misinformed metros' voted to ban 'Cougar' hunting and further more, to ban any data collection on the status of their population. Naturally the population of lions increased, thereby decreasing the population of Bambi causing not only stress on the deer but also the lions who have now resorted to preying on poodles and domestic kitties.

Back then I trekked into the forest 13X's with PCP air rifle, several times a dozen miles back on e-bike in search of illusive tree sporting squirrels. 1) 1 occassion a pregnant lion circled me 50' radius (more interested in hotdogs than me). 2) I cut accoss a valley w/out trail, after all, I was moving 15mile that day over 4 passes, carrying a backpack with 40lbs of beer (sarcasism). 1st came across a steaming bear stool. Next noticed Mr.Bear walking directly toward me. He dissappeared in a ravine. Later hiking downslope parrellel to ravine I caught a glimpse of his back. Pulled out flare gun just in time for his feint; 25yds out he charged from the ravine, stopped 10' short, stood sniffed the air, did an about face, trotted away. As he climbed up the far side of the ravine, I fired hitting him with a slow ball of fire which bounced meakly off his hind quarters. (He should associate fire, not food with people). 3) back in nowhere I heard a human shuffling sound. 2 folks with rifles from 50' peered out at me from an 8' by 1' slit in the side of the mountain. (Checked this out on a later venture) I moved on and 5min later heard a hi-powered rifle fired from where I saw the marijuana growers. (Note: mari is practically legal now).

Only got 1 shot at a sporting squirrel, he surprised me on a small limb just 8' above too close for a scope and shot the 1" limb he perched upon. The Hmong, from Fresno, hunt in large groups every 3rd year. They have special priviledges due to being a minority with traditional ways, mainly no limit on squirrel they take. They go out in groups of 4-8 carrying long barrel 12ga. semi-autos. They surround the squirrel who from high in a tree, can't avoid hunters on all sides. I ran into a camp of about a dozen who were skinning out 80 grey squirrel from their day of hunting. Then they skip a year as they aren't enough squirrel.

Alabama makes an interesting hunting comparison to Kalifornia. The people of AL know their land and resources, and manage to the benefit of wildlife populations and hunters. Their next generation is learning to respect those resources passed on to them. Kalifornians have an increasingly lawless backcountry, and an upcoming Disney Land Good Feelings generation to play the role of wildlife stewards.

Cheers to the hunters of our day, bow harvesting (and to some extent air rifle) is the future. Cheers as well to e-bikers that can slip thru the woods without scuttling wildlife and annoying the rest of us.

 

[Nehmo]

… You don't object to bow hunting. You object to hunting.

I’ll clarify. I object to modern hunting in America in general on the simple basis that it is intuitively objectionable. This means that I don’t need to give it much thought before it strikes me as wrong.
(For simplicity, in this post, when I use the term “hunter”, I mean the modern hunter in America.)
However, different methods of hunting have different degrees of disgustingness. A bow & arrow, although it, being a human-powered device, is more elegant in its use of energy, is less effective than a gun for killing. Thus, more animals are needlessly injured with a bow & arrow verses a gun.

Would you feel better about it if the guy sat in his living room, had some one lead a deer in and then shot it? Of course you wouldn't.

Your guilt has caused you to defend against a dishonorable aspect of hunting that I haven’t mentioned, the concept that a modern hunter isn’t giving the animal a fighting chance. Actually if there were a choice between an animal dying a slow antagonizing death from dealing with an arrowhead stuck in her/his neck, verses a quick shot to the heart, I would choose the more merciful, quick, heart shot. So you are wrong in estimating my “feel better about”. Having the animal led in front of the “hunter” would be preferable for the animal, and to me.
But to continue on your line of thinking, I also find the disparity of advantage distasteful, particularly when the “victorious” hunter showcases the dead carcass pretending it means the hunter is masculine and powerful. And that’s just what they do. It’s a little man who needs such delusions to prop up his masculinity.

So those words after "to me,it's intuitively objectionable" are just that words with no meaning what so ever. You want other people to do your killing for you. To me, I find that intuitively objectionable.

Hunters (excepting Zuckerberg, if “hunter” can apply to him), don’t kill to be philosophy consistent. They do it for fun.

Furthermore, you are saying that you find that having people other than yourself kill food for you is intuitively objectionable. But this is what lots of people, including, presumably, you, do. It would be societal confusion if everybody killed their own meat. Is this what you really mean?

 

[johnrobholmes]

I don't hunt for fun. I hunt for meat. Is there a thrill to hunting for food? Sure there is. I will also put down an animal that threatens me though, and we have been seeing mountain lion tracks all over the farm lately. Damn straight I carry a gun when I go out there now.

I find objections to hunting by meat eaters funny. So you are OK with the inhuman slaughters done at meat farms, but find hunting a horrible thing? Please do tell.

 

[liveforphysics]

The only hunting that would impressive me, would be extremely dangerous game with a bow, or relatively safe game (like deer) with a knife or bare hands.

The only way I would want to hunt deer would be getting a choke locked in on its neck through tedious stalking and waiting for a surprise attack and try to hold on while it's kicking you fighting for its life.

I've gone deer hunting with rifles once. I saw nothing happen that I would consider sporting or exciting.

I think bare handed would be a worthwhile experience though.

So, since you (unlike the above poster) has actually been hunting using modern techniques how many did you get? How many people were you with and how many did they get? The hunter success rate in my state, using modern techniques, is 22%. Best of luck with the jump out of tree wrestle them bare handed method but I got to tell yea, I see a trip to the E.R. in some ones future.

Three guys in the pickup, 2 with deer tags, we went to a spot that had deer over-population, walked a few hundred yards to the first obvious animal trail with deer droppings all over the place, sat down and waited. In less than an hour, we shot deer #1 as it walked around the corner from upwind and exposed itself to us, shot in the neck with my 30-06 (that a friend was using). Made some terrible noises and kicked and thrashed and collapsed. Dragged it to a more open spot, and the most experienced guy showed us the gutting process that was pretty nasty. Cut about 1/2" deep from the genitals to the ribcage, ripped the flesh open and cut the fat and abdominal muscles still holding in the intestines (without cutting the intestines or bladder), picked it up and shook it from it's hind legs so it's guts fell out, cut the anus and genitals out that were still connected and looking terribly nasty. The cut through the diaphragm and reached up to cut the esophagus and trachea as high as possible, pulled the lungs and heart and liver down, was amazed at how strong the blood vessels connected to the heart were, I could not rip them, everything had to be cut. Then dragged it with it's back skin down back to the truck. Then, while leaving, another deer popped out from the bushes and just stood still, so that one was shot from the truck, drug a little ways back from the road, gutted, and joined it's companion in the truck. It was maybe 1pm at this point, and we were headed back home, for the nasty and labor intensive process of skinning, and then butchering the meat from a corpse into steaks, which got bleed out over ice in coolers for a few days (evidently this reduces the gamey taste), and then most was frozen, some was turned into jerky, and the skin went to a guy that cures the hide into nice leather (which we just gave him to use for his leather stuff).


And that was that. Was it nice to get meat for just the cost of gasoline, a few bullets, and a relaxed morning/afternoon in good company? Of course, and I have no moral objections with any of it of course, if you're going to eat meat, killing an animal that at least once got to be free and wild seems much better than a slaughterhouse execution.

However, I still wouldn't consider any of it to meet my personal terms of "sporting" or "exciting".

If you killed one with your bare hands in a choke, it would then meet my definition of "sporting" for certian. If you killed one with a bow, in an area that there were sparsely populated in, so you really had to exhaustively stalk and wait to get your shot, and were shooting a buck that was aggressive and saw you and charged before you had made your shot, then I would also call that sporting. I wouldn't call it sporting if you just waited all safe in a tree-blind and took your shot though, it wouldn't seem much different in my eyes than using a weaker shorter range rifle with open sites and shooting from your truck (though the bow obviously takes much more skill).


The deer having a chance to kill you is what makes it sporting in my eyes. If you go to kill one with your bare hands, you're giving the deer a chance to win, and you're putting yourself in an extremely difficult situation to get the timing and jump you need. I could see it being a multi-year process to accomplish, and it would likely injure you under the best of circumstances, and kill you under bad circumstances. This makes it sporting in my eyes. That doesn't mean I have any objection with people rife hunting, but it's just not something that personally held any sporting appeal to me, just seemed pretty damn easy compared to the things I like to do for activities to challenge myself.

 

[MadRhino]

The only game that I hunted for sport is the duck, for more than half of duck species are absolute crap to eat. All those who eat fish aren't good to eat, so it is much better to hunt them ducks in the fields if you are after meat. Yet, hunting them on the water is a challenge, and I've killed a lot of ducks that were not good, other than for the sport of calling and shooting a game that flies 40 Mph.

Duck hunting is a challenge in more that one way: Skeet shooting practice all year long is necessary to achieve the skill, retriever dog training, and breeding for many, wood decoy crafting and painting to natural shape and colours, fabrication of stealth hunting boat...
Then one has to learn the call of various ducks, and go hunting in a boat in freezing weather at 5 AM.

I practiced duck hunting for more than 20 years, for it was a family tradition that I started at 10 years of age. I did quit because it was too much involvement for my busy life with wife and kids and staff and horses to care for. I have hunted many other game, but it was for my taste for good food, without any sporting ambition. Today, I like fishing better.

 

[LI-ghtcycle]

The only hunting that would impressive me, would be extremely dangerous game with a bow, or relatively safe game (like deer) with a knife or bare hands.

The only way I would want to hunt deer would be getting a choke locked in on its neck through tedious stalking and waiting for a surprise attack and try to hold on while it's kicking you fighting for its life.

I've gone deer hunting with rifles once. I saw nothing happen that I would consider sporting or exciting.

I think bare handed would be a worthwhile experience though.

So, since you (unlike the above poster) has actually been hunting using modern techniques how many did you get? How many people were you with and how many did they get? The hunter success rate in my state, using modern techniques, is 22%. Best of luck with the jump out of tree wrestle them bare handed method but I got to tell yea, I see a trip to the E.R. in some ones future.

Three guys in the pickup, 2 with deer tags, we went to a spot that had deer over-population, walked a few hundred yards to the first obvious animal trail with deer droppings all over the place, sat down and waited. In less than an hour, we shot deer #1 as it walked around the corner from upwind and exposed itself to us, shot in the neck with my 30-06 (that a friend was using). Made some terrible noises and kicked and thrashed and collapsed. Dragged it to a more open spot, and the most experienced guy showed us the gutting process that was pretty nasty. Cut about 1/2" deep from the genitals to the ribcage, ripped the flesh open and cut the fat and abdominal muscles still holding in the intestines (without cutting the intestines or bladder), picked it up and shook it from it's hind legs so it's guts fell out, cut the anus and genitals out that were still connected and looking terribly nasty. The cut through the diaphragm and reached up to cut the esophagus and trachea as high as possible, pulled the lungs and heart and liver down, was amazed at how strong the blood vessels connected to the heart were, I could not rip them, everything had to be cut. Then dragged it with it's back skin down back to the truck. Then, while leaving, another deer popped out from the bushes and just stood still, so that one was shot from the truck, drug a little ways back from the road, gutted, and joined it's companion in the truck. It was maybe 1pm at this point, and we were headed back home, for the nasty and labor intensive process of skinning, and then butchering the meat from a corpse into steaks, which got bleed out over ice in coolers for a few days (evidently this reduces the gamey taste), and then most was frozen, some was turned into jerky, and the skin went to a guy that cures the hide into nice leather (which we just gave him to use for his leather stuff).


And that was that. Was it nice to get meat for just the cost of gasoline, a few bullets, and a relaxed morning/afternoon in good company? Of course, and I have no moral objections with any of it of course, if you're going to eat meat, killing an animal that at least once got to be free and wild seems much better than a slaughterhouse execution.

However, I still wouldn't consider any of it to meet my personal terms of "sporting" or "exciting".

If you killed one with your bare hands in a choke, it would then meet my definition of "sporting" for certian. If you killed one with a bow, in an area that there were sparsely populated in, so you really had to exhaustively stalk and wait to get your shot, and were shooting a buck that was aggressive and saw you and charged before you had made your shot, then I would also call that sporting. I wouldn't call it sporting if you just waited all safe in a tree-blind and took your shot though, it wouldn't seem much different in my eyes than using a weaker shorter range rifle with open sites and shooting from your truck (though the bow obviously takes much more skill).


The deer having a chance to kill you is what makes it sporting in my eyes. If you go to kill one with your bare hands, you're giving the deer a chance to win, and you're putting yourself in an extremely difficult situation to get the timing and jump you need. I could see it being a multi-year process to accomplish, and it would likely injure you under the best of circumstances, and kill you under bad circumstances. This makes it sporting in my eyes. That doesn't mean I have any objection with people rife hunting, but it's just not something that personally held any sporting appeal to me, just seemed pretty damn easy compared to the things I like to do for activities to challenge myself.

Sounds like a good place to get meat, but I agree, not much fun in that instance. :wink:


I think if you are at all interested in a challenge, and truly want to hunt something that will attack you given the chance, in North America, you really can't beat hunting Hogs!

Wild Boar are an out of control evasive species in nearly all 50 states, and do $1,000,000's of dollars of damage to farm land every year, and in most states, you can hunt them at will, no tags, just a hunting license required as they are not a "game" animal, and are quite tasty I hear.

I have always wanted to hunt them, and if my health continues to improve, I just might get the chance!

If you do however, the gun of choice is a 12GA Auto, a pump can do, but these things are REALLY aggressive and will slash you with their tusks in a heart beat, so you need to be able to do quick follow-up shots, and I believe most hunters hit at least twice to make sure they don't get gored!

They are the most dangerous game available short of Moose in North America, and there are TONS of them in California too. 8)

Some have been taken at over 600lbs, and I believe the record "Hogzilla" was around 800lbs!

These are semi-feral pigs that have become more wild over many generations, and destroy wetlands and golf courses literally over-night as they are mainly nocturnal, you can trap them too, but that's not as much fun!

If I had my choice, I would get another Saiga in 12GA (semi-auto with 10 round mag! ) and fill the freezer every chance I got. They are pretty smart too, so you have to use some skill most of the time either sneaking up on them in the early morning or late at night when they are most active.

And if you just want to have a good time in the woods and hike a bit and maybe see something once or twice a season, try Elk hunting! 8)

Sure there are some that come into farmer's fields from time to time, but usually not during the season, they go up high that time of year and are pretty mobile.

 

[LI-ghtcycle]

The only game that I hunted for sport is the duck, for more than half of duck species are absolute crap to eat. All those who eat fish aren't good to eat, so it is much better to hunt them ducks in the fields if you are after meat. Yet, hunting them on the water is a challenge, and I've killed a lot of ducks that were not good, other than for the sport of calling and shooting a game that flies 40 Mph.

Duck hunting is a challenge in more that one way: Skeet shooting practice all year long is necessary to achieve the skill, retriever dog training, and breeding for many, wood decoy crafting and painting to natural shape and colours, fabrication of stealth hunting boat...
Then one has to learn the call of various ducks, and go hunting in a boat in freezing weather at 5 AM.

I practiced duck hunting for more than 20 years, for it was a family tradition that I started at 10 years of age. I did quit because it was too much involvement for my busy life with wife and kids and staff and horses to care for. I have hunted many other game, but it was for my taste for good food, without any sporting ambition. Today, I like fishing better.

You ever try using mulberries to take the gamie taste away?

A friend of mine sliced up his ducks real thin, marinated them over-night in basic wine marinate, and adds mulberries, and you would think it was the most tender chicken breast you ever tasted.

Until he learned that trick, he gave his away. :wink:

 

[MadRhino]

... sliced up his ducks real thin, marinated them over-night in basic wine marinate, and adds mulberries, and you would think it was the most tender chicken breast you ever tasted.

Believe me, to have a slight chance to achieve that with an Eider duck would require your marinade to be made with hydrochloric acid, and leave it in for a week

 

[Harold in CR]

If Luke is interested in a TRUE sporting event, I know a guy that has a ranch in Florida, that has LOTS of wild hog damage.

Luke can ride in the back of the pickup, at 25-40 MPH, and when the pickup gets alongside the hog, he can jump out of the pickup and wrestle the hog to submission. These can be killed right away, or, taken alive and corn fed for 30 days, to gentle the hog just a little, but more, to help make the meat edible.

Florida rednecks do this all the time, so, any takers ???

In 'Nam, my best buddy was a tunnel rat. He hunted wild boar in the everglades, in Florida, with a .357 Magnum pistol. The grass in head high or so, and, when a hog runs by, trying to rip your leg open, with 3-6" tusks, you try to stop him with 1 shot at best. I lost contact with him, and, believe me, I tried to find him. THAT would be good sport, along with the Wild Hog Drag racing.