Wasteful hunters

[Nutterbuster]

"Don't post those pics online" kinda has too much of a Catholic Church vibe to me. And I have nothing in particular against that particular organization, but I think that's the quickest way to convey what I mean. No offense intended to Catholic members, because I realize the vile actions of a few don't necessitate judgement against the whole. Unless, of course, you covered for them.

I don't see the need to post the pics, aside from gossip. Which, to be fair, is a good bit of what this forum is. Idle conversation about a favorite topic. I kinda agree with ole kyler about pearl clutching and internet points. But me and my twisted little moral compass are more concerned with any attempted cover-up than two dead deer or the pitchfork mob crying over them.

 

[Jagger0502]

We had this happening a lot where I am. Dead deer with backstraps and antlers removed left laying in the fields. Enough that people really started reporting it hard and kept a look out. Because the word was out a few guys had some pictures on their game cameras that helped. They were placing them in the fields edges to catch anyone shooting deer out of their fields at night and catch them walking thru to get the meat. A few pictures later they identified the fella doing it and the game officers had enough to arrest him and they found over 30 sets of backstraps in his freezer and lots antlers in the garage.

It’s jack wagons like this that give real honest hunters a bad rap. If you see something that represents the sport in a negative light, do something about it if you can.

 

[Country]

If you all want to flex your Saddlehunter forum muscles, why don't you send the op a private message instead of bashing him publicly. The guy's got 10 messages on here. This has a really bad Archery Talk ring to it, which is unfortunate.

 

[bj139]

I reported some salt blocks at a hunting area to the PA game commission. I haven't heard anything about it.

 

[bj139]

If you all want to flex your Saddlehunter forum muscles, why do you send the op a private message instead of bashing him publicly. The guy's got 10 messages on here. This has a really bad Archery Talk ring to it, which is unfortunate.

I just re-read the thread thinking I missed something. I don't see where the OP was bashed. The assumption he was is a bad sign.

 

[PEEJAY]

I dont get why posting this was wrong. I guess the picture can be used out of context for anti-hunting ammo/agenda but the thread in general conveys that hunters have the same opinion on this as anti-hunters:

THis is not what we are about. This is not the norm and conservation of our natural resources is what hunting is really all about.

 

[bj139]

I have seen worse road kills from a visual perspective. I have seen anti-hunters become pro hunters after they hit a deer. The insurance companies want the deer reduced by any means in certain areas to cut their auto accident expenses.

 

[PEEJAY]

I have seen worse road kills from a visual perspective. I have seen anti-hunters become pro hunters after they hit a deer. The insurance companies want the deer reduced by any means in certain areas to cut their auto accident expenses.

Some of the areas around me have 140+ deer per sq acre.
famine, inbreeding and car accidents/ins. claims are out of control until hunting comes in to play and qualified hunters can effectively "manage" the herd. I'm an insurance agent and let all my clients know that the rut is a very dangerous time to be on the road and extra caution should be taken while driving in oct/nov.

 

[bj139]

Some of the areas around me have 140+ deer per sq acre.
famine, inbreeding and car accidents/ins. claims are out of control until hunting comes in to play and qualified hunters can effectively "manage" the herd. I'm an insurance agent and let all my clients know that the rut is a very dangerous time to be on the road and extra caution should be taken while driving in oct/nov.

My wife hit one last year the first night of gun season. She said a whole herd of deer ran in front of her. The must have been scared because of the gunfire that day.

 

[Jmiller]

Some of the areas around me have 140+ deer per sq acre.
famine, inbreeding and car accidents/ins. claims are out of control until hunting comes in to play and qualified hunters can effectively "manage" the herd. I'm an insurance agent and let all my clients know that the rut is a very dangerous time to be on the road and extra caution should be taken while driving in oct/nov.

Let's say an average deer is 1 foot wide by 4 feet long, so each deer accounts for 4 square feet.

That's 560 square feet of deer per acre.

Given that one acre is 43,560 square feet, that amounts to one deer every 75 feet or so. Basically you'd need 8 deer per average 600sq ft paved driveway to hit this mark. That's a lot of deer.

 

[GCTerpfan]

Let's say an average deer is 1 foot wide by 4 feet long, so each deer accounts for 4 square feet.

That's 560 square feet of deer per acre.

Given that one acre is 43,560 square feet, that amounts to one deer every 75 feet or so. Basically you'd need 8 deer per average 600sq ft paved driveway to hit this mark. That's a lot of deer.

I think @PEEJAY meant 140+ deer/sq mile. That's still really high but, at least the deer have room to move. haha.

 

[Weldabeast]

Without catching them in the act ...law probably can't do anything about it

 

[PEEJAY]

lol sq mile. correct hahahaha. Its packed like a walmart on black friday

we have some of these little areas set up around in the nearby forests and its amazing what these animals can do to the native flora AND consequently, fauna (due to the lack of native plant diversity)...this picture doesnt do it justice.

When anti-hunters open their mouth, its our duty as the REAL conservationists of this country to put them in check. There is literally no other realistic and effective option right now to control herds.

No, taking hind quarters and letting the rest rot isn't right, and was probably a POS poacher if i had to guess. Most all hunters condemn it and if youre reading this and you're one of those "guys"... shame shame know yaw naaaame

 

[SaddleUpPartner!]

I have 0 issue with posting these pictures on here. These things should be brought to light and should be condemned. Who cares what anti hunters think about this, maybe they should see that hunters actually do condemn this behavior instead of hide it. Maybe the two groups would be in agreement that this is wrong and find some common ground for once.

 

[DroptineKrazy]

I have 0 issue with posting these pictures on here. These things should be brought to light and should be condemned. Who cares what anti hunters think about this, maybe they should see that hunters actually do condemn this behavior instead of hide it. Maybe the two groups would be in agreement that this is wrong and find some common ground for once.

Your assuming said anti'hunters are reasonable.

 

[Nutterbuster]

Your assuming said anti'hunters are reasonable.

The reasonable ones are the only ones I'm concerned about, and there are plenty of them. The bulk of the people on either side of any issue are plenty reasonable. Extremists on either side are just easier to notice because they tend to be louder.

There's one way to change an extremist's mind, and for me it's not worth the prison time. Might as well ignore them and talk to the people capable of critical thinking.

 

[DeadHeadSpread]

Yeah it's really a shame that a few deer died and someone didn't take all the meat but really why get worked up about something like this? The coyotes, possums, skunks, buzzards, etc will make sure it doesn't go to waste. No different than a roadkilled deer from the perspective of waste. Yeah the guy that did it shouldn't have, yeah he's probably a scum bag, but his poor judgement is on him and nothing another hunter, a warden, or an internet forum does is gonna change him. As far as guys saying anti hunters could use a pic a guy posts on a forum of some chopped up deer against hunters, who cares? Anti hunters are gonna be anti hunters. A picture on an Internet forum isn’t going to eliminate our right to hunt. Who cares what anti hunters think? If a guy wants to post a picture of something why talk down to him and preach why he shouldn’t have?

 

[woodsdog2]

The reasonable ones are the only ones I'm concerned about, and there are plenty of them. The bulk of the people on either side of any issue are plenty reasonable. Extremists on either side are just easier to notice because they tend to be louder.

There's one way to change an extremist's mind, and for me it's not worth the prison time. Might as well ignore them and talk to the people capable of critical thinking.

Yes, the 80-10-10 Rule which I personally believe is more like 90-5-5, but something like 80% of the population does not hunt, 10% are against hunting and the remaining 10% are in support of regulated hunting for wildlife conservation or the wise use of natural resources. I personally believe the numbers are more in line that 90% of the overall population does not hunt but generally they have no proclivities either for or against. It is important as ethical hunters that we concentrate on the 80 or 90% who most likely vote that we are absolutely the most ethical, responsible, group who care about the natural resources and that our dollars are the primary driver for a majority of the conservation efforts in this nation via the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937. The anti's are a waste of time and effort!!! Its the 80 or 90% we need to continue to make sure have a positive and educated understanding of the hunter's important role in conservation.

 

[kyler1945]

Yes, the 80-10-10 Rule which I personally believe is more like 90-5-5, but something like 80% of the population does not hunt, 10% are against hunting and the remaining 10% are in support of regulated hunting for wildlife conservation or the wise use of natural resources. I personally believe the numbers are more in line that 90% of the overall population does not hunt but generally they have no proclivities either for or against. It is important as ethical hunters that we concentrate on the 80 or 90% who most likely vote that we are absolutely the most ethical, responsible, group who care about the natural resources and that our dollars are the primary driver for a majority of the conservation efforts in this nation via the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937. The anti's are a waste of time and effort!!! Its the 80 or 90% we need to continue to make sure have a positive and educated understanding of the hunter's important role in conservation.

I think you’re exactly right! rolling up “hunting” as part of a package of conserving the planet is the answer. Not just because I think it’s the right thing to do, but because you’ll get that 80% of the people who don’t hunt on your side. Anti hunting doesn’t have a pitch - there’s no real agenda. It’s just squishy charades. But having picture evidence of redneck hillbilly stupidity gives their act a lot more potency.

hunters keeping their cool, working together, and recognizing that their hobby can be viewed as part of a set of ideals that resonate with most folks is essential. If you just want to hunt and don’t care about the planet that’s fine too - your best bet is to fake it, or shut up.

sorry if I was hot out of the gate. I don’t mind folks posting here to get recognition and be a part of a team - I do it. But it’s a special kind of thing that really grinds my gears when the effort to do so is the cutting down of someone else - deserved or not. The post doesn’t accomplish anything. I’m not saying I want to cover it up or hide it. But in my opinion, if you’re gonna rip a scab off or cut a puss infected wound open - you better take some responsibility and get in there and clean it up.

 

[bj139]

sorry if I was hot out of the gate. I don’t mind folks posting here to get recognition and be a part of a team - I do it.

I thought conveying useful information to others was the point of posting. I didn't know I should be seeking recognition.