my "isnt that the point of forums" was a pro-banter comment, not a "stop arguing" one, seems like it came across the opposite way, i am new to the idea of pods as well, have benefitted from the discussion. still think they're nuts lol.
-
The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
-
We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules
Pods
- Thread starter Nutterbuster
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2021
- Messages
- 2,180
Yes I agree. I should have separated those two thoughts.
this is an area where you can get in trouble quickly. i did it once adding salt to a recipe by volume instead of weight, assuming two salts were the same density and the result was inedible. measuring by WEIGHT and measuring by VOLUME are two different things. 1 teaspoon of salt for example is 5.7g (5700mg). 1 teaspoon of sugar is 4.2g (4200mg). to the eye/hand they look and feel very much the same. take that example and apply it to a 10-50mg sample, we're talking very small amounts - 1/100 of a teaspoon here however because the dosage is that small the margin for error/overdose is also that small.
Personally, what I've started to gather reading other articles is that the substance being used is a heavy sedative. I can't or won't pretend to be an expert on the subject matter but from what I'm seeing you could hypothetically just shoot them with a tranquilizer gun and finish them off how you please. This was done and researched in an article I found using the SCC powder. Essentially they had to eliminate urban deer so shot them with bullets containing SCC, and would walk up to them and euthanize them. To me at least that's the dilemma in all of it. I'm still undecided about it though... There are right answers on both sides supporting whichever argument that are both very valid.
Yep I get and understand that. I was hoping maybe someone besides me was familiar with the powder but also give a comparative measure. What we had was about like confectioner sugar. May google that just for a relative comparison.
ah sorry, i lost track, the succinyl chloride i was familiar with (by proxy, working with anesthesiologists, never administering it myself) was in liquid form, found it in powder online though with a molecular weight of around 145, sucrose has a molecular weight about 340 so it's roughly half as dense as powdered sugar
Last edited:
Random thought.
We've got 56 voters. I'm surprised that a slight majority don't oppose legalization. Kinda worried I legitimately confused people with a gradeschool-level double-negative trap, but kinda also unsurprised if some folks haven't seen fit to respond but are willing to anonymously acknowledge they don't see a problem.
I'm assuming the key players in the convo caught the wording, but I'll throw it put there that you should still be able to vote or change your vote. I did see numbers shift after the wording was initially brought up.
We've got 56 voters. I'm surprised that a slight majority don't oppose legalization. Kinda worried I legitimately confused people with a gradeschool-level double-negative trap, but kinda also unsurprised if some folks haven't seen fit to respond but are willing to anonymously acknowledge they don't see a problem.
I'm assuming the key players in the convo caught the wording, but I'll throw it put there that you should still be able to vote or change your vote. I did see numbers shift after the wording was initially brought up.
After re-reading the study, both used the crystalline SCC. So the discrepancy between 10mg and 500mg is definitely weight v. volume between the two studies.
Powder form was used in pods. If in fact anectine powder is about the same weight as confectioner sugar then a pod with 3/4 teaspoon of powder would be roughly 1950mg in the pod. Half a teaspoon would be roughly 1300mg. The research info that has been posted indicates using 8-10mg to immobilize elk in a couple minutes. Even if half or more is pushed out from arterial bleeding there is still significantly more than needed in the system to put a deer down quick and in a hurry.
agreed. which is why i dont like the idea lol. but yes, blood trailing would be easier. yes there's benefit, but to what point/end. draw your own line in the sand as to what's sporting and what's not, what's ethical and what's not, but i odnt want to eat it, and prefer to not risk getting shot by it, though the personal calculus weighs the former much more heavily than the latter. i'm just repeating myself now too.
Dug a little deeper and the molecular weight of anectine is 290.40 and powdered sugar or sucrose is 342.30 so I am guessing that means there would be more mg's of anectine in a teaspoon than powdered sugar.
I'm with you on not wanting to use it. I feel the public optics are far worse than the recovery benefits for the individual hunter or the whole of all bowhunters.
I'm increasingly curious how much we worry unduly about public perception.
I've heard my whole life to clean an animal of blood and tuck its tongue for trophy pics. I've heard it promoted for both better quality pics (no brainer there for me) and "to not give the antis ammo." But, I've seen PLENTY of gory pics of hunters with poo-eating grins.
I've never seen an anti-hunting ad targeting the general public using any of these images. Do they exist? Can somebody show me one?
As I've dived into more of that culture off and on for a decade, I get the distinct impression that there are way bigger fish to fry than deer hunters if you're concerned about animal cruelty. Lab testing, factory farming, pet trade, etc.
I've heard my whole life to clean an animal of blood and tuck its tongue for trophy pics. I've heard it promoted for both better quality pics (no brainer there for me) and "to not give the antis ammo." But, I've seen PLENTY of gory pics of hunters with poo-eating grins.
I've never seen an anti-hunting ad targeting the general public using any of these images. Do they exist? Can somebody show me one?
As I've dived into more of that culture off and on for a decade, I get the distinct impression that there are way bigger fish to fry than deer hunters if you're concerned about animal cruelty. Lab testing, factory farming, pet trade, etc.
I would mostly agree with you for most of the time I have been hunting but things have changed. Having social media now where information flows wider and more freely than ever before in history puts issues in people's faces whether they were actively looking for them or not. I suspect the avg non-hunter that otherwise supports hunting might be swayed by scare tactics used by anti's around the use of pods. The needle of public perception moves faster than ever before and hunters are going to have enough battles to face going forward without throwing the other side a dumpster of free ammo.
"the other side" is much more of a small vocal minority and a large amount of people that go along with the status quo/what they've been fed. I know because I learned more and changed teams lol. We need to worry less about what the antis are going to do, because their viewpoint isn't changing and more about how we just keep appealing to the ignorant majority (what I feel like I used to be). I found my own way to the facts and truth thankfully, but there's tons more people that are wilfully ignorant. To think that 10 years ago I thought there was no point to owning an AR, and now I'm debating what lower/upper/factory build to buy first. Whew I'm pulling this way off topic. Pods. Still don't like em. Guns. Now I like em.
ThereWillBeSpuds
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2019
- Messages
- 648
I would be concerned with spillover effects if the contents of the pod didn't all end up in the deer what is it going to do to small animals in the immediate vicinity? Just like lead shot is banned for migratory birds, whats the downstream toxicity of this stuff? Is a bobcat, buzzard, eagle, condor or bear getting into your gut pile going to be affected?
Sent from my SM-A516V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A516V using Tapatalk
BenG
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2017
- Messages
- 412
Yeah, I'm pretty sure you corrupted your own data. I voted again just because I wasn't sure how you had it worded and how I voted.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2020
- Messages
- 5,968
Easier to fry a bream than a whale.
Facebook is 18 years old. It wasn't the first social media site. It's role in the past 3 elections have been vigorously debated but widely acknowledged. The thing you're talking about isn't coming, it's become the new norm.
I'm not saying that a party couldn't use scare tactics or misinformation on social media because regardless of our political views we all agree that's happened. I'm specifically asking for an example of that thing in the past decade.
I do not disagree but hunters have not attempted to introduce or re-introduce such a polarizing issue in that time span either. The closest thing would be re-opening the grizz hunt in WY and the anti's went full bore on social and through the courts to try and did stop it. What I am saying is there is not, imo, sufficient reason to push for re-introduction of pods relative to the potential public perception damage that could be done with non-hunters and the additional infighting that would occur within our own ranks.