When you think about the fact that Kirk Gibson holds an aviation record, he’s constantly looking for new ways to inspire his team.

Indeed, I can think of no better proof of that thesis.

Gibson is an avid outdoorsman and hunter.

#######, is that interesting.

That aviation record, according to Wiki, was flying a Cessna 206 to an altitude of 25,200 feet - 9,500 feet above its service ceiling.

I'm sure that poor animal had it coming. Wow, human beings can be pieces of sh!t.

I'm sure that poor animal had it coming. Wow, human beings can be pieces of sh!t.

You know goddamned well that pore ol' Kirk Gibson had to shoot that varmint just to keep his family fed.

That aviation record, according to Wiki, was flying a Cessna 206 to an altitude of 25,200 feet - 9,500 feet above its service ceiling.

I can find no mention of such a record on the FAI web site. A search reveals no hits for the name Kirk Gibson, and the only ratified record involving a Cessna 206 was a duration record set by Denise Weiderkehr in 1974.

http://www.fai.org/records

I know heaps of people hunt for sport around the world. Outside of the U.S., I know it's popular in many European nations and such, but you know what? I just don't get it. Now if you are hunting for sustenance like those Inuit who live off of seals or some African tribe killing water buffalo, that I understand. But shooting some big arse deer with a big ol' gun, I just don't get that.
Is there anyone here who is an avid hunter, I would love to be enlightened regarding the appeal? No, that is not meant to be snark, I am genuinely interested in what the appeal might be.

We have a few (I'm certainly not one of them; I've never fired anything more substantial than a BB gun in my life), & perhaps they'll show up & share their advanced viewpoints. The subject came up a few weeks ago in some thread about, I think, Craig Kimbrel & his bride havin' a good ol' time slaughtering game fer fun 'n' stuff on their honeymoon.

Oops. For some reason, "Edit" isn't working in this thread, at least not for me. In any event, I admit that I was culturally insensitive just now to drooling rednecks, having grown up among same.

#7, I remember the Kimbrel thread and thought it odd you'd take your wife hunting. But if that's your thing, then so be it. I just would like to hear a coherent, intelligent position regarding the sport of big game hunting(Does this qualify? That thing in the picture looks pretty big). I enjoy being outdoors. I also enjoy seeing wildlife when out trail running. I'm just never inclined to want to hunt it.

I will not snark in response. I may have a question or two, but no snark.

I think a lot of it comes down to approaches to life that start with "Why not?" vs. "Why?"

I've seen a lot more "Why not?" attitude when I moved west of the Mississippi.

Wow, that was a pretty majestic animal.

There are several very good reasons for hunting.

1) it's actually a necessity. Some animals get a tremendous boost from wildlife preservation areas. Others (notably deer) will overpopulated an area to the point of starvation.

2) your a part of nature. You spend time in the woods, you join the food chain on a personal level.

3) tradition. I'm not making some argument that just because its always been done means it always should be done. I'm saying that it is the traditional father son bonding activity (or other cultural event), and that that's a pretty good "why." My dad took me hunting, those are memories I cherish, I want to have similar memories with my son one day. You can argue there are other things, but in the tradition of the south, hunting is one of the best bonding experiences around.

4) food. I may not need the meet, but I'd rather eat a deer I shot than a cow someone else hit with a hammer. Elk, deer, rabbit, duck all taste better wild.

I used to hunt when I was younger. Mostly it was an excuse to go north, hang out with my friends and shoot things. After a while I realized I didn't love eating the waterfowl, it was kind of expensive, it was wicked early in the morning, and we could still sit around and hang out without the hassle. Kids blew another hole in the enterprise, but it was listing pretty heavily before they sent it to the bottom.

#12. Thank you.

I know here in Australia, they allow hunters to cull Kangaroos, plus a whole heap of feral animals like wild boar, camels, water buffalo and such as they get out of control in the national parks. I also get the idea of being part of nature. On this level I just prefer to run through it, as opposed to stalking something in it; though when I trail run you do reach a very basic level of coexistence with your surroundings. I can how one would satisfied with being able to provide for themselves and I would imagine most recreational hunters aren't out there every day shooting something.

I can't remember, but from the Kimbrel thread was it determined that a large majority of recreational hunters will consume the meat themselves?

I own a gun, have no illusions about where my food comes from, and have shot game (although I haven't in some time). I understand that the lack of apex predators means animal herds need to be culled, and I certainly respect the notion of recreational hunting as both a part of that effort, as well as fulfilling social functions and passing on a sense of context about our world and how it works. I just don't care for the all too frequent ghoulish trophy taking/self aggrandizing aftermath.

I find it very interesting when folks will happily eat meat (which is no longer necessary, as a calorie/nutitional matter), but then decry hunting as barbaric.

Seems to me its more civilized to be honest about where your steak comes from. If you won't kill an animal yourself, that's a good sign you should be a vegetarian.

(I say this as a proud and happy meat-eater and avid fisherman, but someone who has considered vegetarianism and views it as entirely reasonable and sane.)

stupid double post.

but having done that, my daughter and SO are vegetarians, and it does seem eminently reasonable.

Echoing bigglou,

(1) My family has a deer lease in Central Texas and, when driving to it at night, it's not uncommon at all to see many deer even in town on the streets, in people's yards, etc. It's population control for the good of the entire species. All those differential equations, predator-prey models, etc.

(3) My dad and son both really enjoy it. I'm there for the ride. I hunted as a middle and high schooler, but grew out of it eventually for the reasons Cris gives in [13], notably "wicked early in the morning" and usually pretty damn cold on top of that. I go now mostly to bridge the gap between them, but did bag my first ever deer a couple of months ago.

(4) My family also has a large rice and soybean farm in South Louisiana, and we hunt geese there in the winter. To lou's point of eating something you personally harvested vs an animal bred solely to be killed at a slaughterhouse, meat doesn't get much more organic and free-range than wild game. When society breaks down and Wal-Marts are empty, there will still be meat to be had around my campfire... at least until I run out of shells and have to start stalking game close enough to where I have to club them with the butt of the gun.

And to answer [14], yes, we eat everything we shoot or give the meat to friends who will eat it.

I find it very interesting when folks will happily eat meat (which is no longer necessary, as a calorie/nutitional matter), but then decry hunting as barbaric.

I hope this wasn't directed at me? I don't think I have decried anything. I do eat meat, and enjoy it very much. I've never hunted, nor had the desire. I know it's an emotive issue and fortunately both bigglou and PRdelight were able to provide intelligent discussion regarding the matter.

And to answer [14], yes, we eat everything we shoot or give the meat to friends who will eat it.

As mentioned earlier, I can see the satisfaction in being able to do that.

If you won't kill an animal yourself, that's a good sign you should be a vegetarian.

And if you won't treat raw sewage yourself, that's a good sign you shouldn't have indoor plumbing.

If you won't kill an animal yourself, that's a good sign you should be a vegetarian.

And if you won't treat raw sewage yourself, that's a good sign you shouldn't have indoor plumbing.

Ichiro could kill a deer with raw sewage if he wanted to.

I just don't care for the all too frequent ghoulish trophy taking/self aggrandizing aftermath.

Yeah, this is the only part of hunting I really don't understand. Why would you want a mounted deer head on your wall?!

And if you won't treat raw sewage yourself, that's a good sign you shouldn't have indoor plumbing.

Actually, maybe you shouldn't. Paying others to do various kinds of dirty work, and then look down on them for being willing to do it is one of the more unfortunate aspects of human behavior.

"And if you won't treat raw sewage yourself, that's a good sign you shouldn't have indoor plumbing."

Talk about missing the point. We who have the advantage of life's conveniences should try not to take them for granted. If you are "above" killing a chicken or a cow or a fish, or it is too much for your delicate nature, you really ought to go tour a slaughterhouse or a cannery. You would be surprised how civilized killing a big elk looks compared to a commercial killing enterprise. You don't have to treat the waste yourself to earn the right to use a toilet, but there isn't anything wrong with having an appreciation of the process, especially if you are questioning the motives of those who undertake it.

"Yeah, this is the only part of hunting I really don't understand. Why would you want a mounted deer head on your wall?!"

1. They are very cool looking.
2. It's something you did and are proud of.

Some people have portaits painted of themselves. Some people hang degrees on their wall. Some people hang pictures they took. Some people have trophies all over. What is the big deal about a deer head? How about a fish? Is that ok?

1. They are very cool looking.
2. It's something you did and are proud of.

Some people have portaits painted of themselves. Some people hang degrees on their wall. Some people hang pictures they took. Some people have trophies all over. What is the big deal about a deer head? How about a fish? Is that ok?

Deer heads don't bother me, because people actually hunt deer for food and the trophy is byproduct of that. Trophy hunting lions or giraffes or other animals where the only point is to say "look, I traveled half way around the world to kill and skin this rare/exotic/possibly endangered animal," not so much.

Gibson was a throwback in many ways. 60 years ago, the following 184 players named either "hunting" or "hunting and fishing" as their principal hobby / hobbies, in a survey conducted by the Baseball Register. About a third of the 400 players surveyed didn't respond, which means that Kirk Gibson would've had a lot of company if he'd played 30 years earlier.

Joe Adcock, Richie Ashburn, Toby Atwell, Loren Babe, Matt Batts, Hank Bauer, Vern Benson, Steve Bilko, Don Bollweg, Leon Brinkoff, Johnny Bucha, Paul Burris, Jim Busby, Andy Carey, Bob Cerv, Mel Clark, Joe Collins, Walker Cooper, Billy Cox, George Crowe, Jim Delsing, Dom Dimaggio, Bob Elliott, Del Ennis, Hoot Evers, Ferris Fain, Whitey Federoff, Ed Fitzgerald, Nellie Fox, Owen Friend, Carl Furillo, Les Fusselman, Tommy Glaviano, Billy Goodman, Sid Gordon, Fred Hatfield, Grady Hatton, Billy Hitchcock, Gil Hodges, Ralph Houk, Dixie Howell, Monte Irvin, Billy Johnson, Willie Jones, George Kell, Bob Kennedy, Ted Kluszewski, Dick Kokos, Johnny Lipon, Lucky Lohrke, Sherm Lollar, Peanuts Lowrey, Mickey Mantle, Fred Marsh, Willard Marshall, Billy Martin, Barney McCosky, Roy McMillan, Catfish Metkovich, Cass Michaels, Willie Miranda, Dale Mitchell, Johnny Mize, Don Mueller, Ray Murray, Gus Niarhos, Swish Nicholson, Andy Pafko, Dave Philley, Rip Repulski, Dusty Rhodes, Phil Rizzuto, Eddie Robinson, Pete Runnels, Ebba St. Clair, Carl Sawatski, Red Schoendienst, Kal Segrist, Andy Seminick, Bill Serena, Bud Sheely, George "Shotgun" Shuba (naturally), Suitcase Simpson, Dick Sisler, Enos Slaughter, Roy Smalley, Harrison Smith, Steve Souchak, Gene Stephens, Russ Sullivan, Wayne Terwilliger, Don Thompson, Faye Throneberry, Joe Tipton, Bill Tuttle, Eddie Waitkus, Rube Walker, Preston Ward, Wally Westlake, Ted Williams, George Wilson, Ken Wood, Tommy Wright, Gene Bearden, Vern Bickford, Charlie Bishop, Rog Bowman, Harry Brecheen, Lou Brissie, Lew Burdette, Harry Byrd, Tommy Byrne, Cliff Chambers, Mike Clark, King Cole, Bill Connelly, Murray Dickson, Joe Dobson, Harry Dorish, Carl Erskine, Bob Feller, Mike Fornieles, Bob Friend, Ned Garver, Marv Grissom, Warren Hacker, Harvey Haddix, Swede Hansen, Earl Harrist, Ray Herbert, John Hetki, Frank Hiller ("Hunting, fishing, guns and beagle hounds"),
Billy Hoeft, Ken Holcombe, Sid Hudson, Larry Jansen, Ernie Johnson, Sheldon Jones, Alex Kellner, Monte Kennedy, Bill Kennedy, Ellis Kinder, Clyde King, Ron Kline, Jim Konstanty, Dave Koslo, Max Lanier, Dutch Leonard, Johnny Lindell, Dick Littlefield, Eddie Lopat, Dave Madison, Forrest Main, Dick Marlowe, Walt Masterson, Paul Minner, Ernie Nevel, Hal Newhouser, Bobo Newsom, Phil Paine, Harry Perkowski, Bud Podbielan, Howie Pollet, Bob Porterfield, Joe Presko, Ken Raffensberger, Vic Raschi, Allie Reynolds, Preacher Roe, Johnny Sain, Carl Scheib, Bob Schultz, Frank Shea, Frank Smith, Gerry Staley, Marlin Stuart, Virgil Trucks, Herm Wehmeier, Ted Wilks, Hoyt Wilhelm, and Eddie Yuhas. Plus 5 of the 16 managers: Phil Cavarretta, Bucky Harris, Fred Hutchinson, Al Lopez, and Marty Marion.

The most unusual entry was for J.W. Porter, a 20-year old widower whose hobby was "Poetry". Sandy Consuegra listed "cockfights", Satchel Paige "Gun collecting" (but not hunting), and Rogers Hornsby "Lobby sitting".

I hunt for all of the reasons in post #12. 90% of my hunting has been small game/waterfowl, I eat the birds and desperately try to avoid shooting any Merganser (duck), they taste like ####. I also fish. For the record, I once caught a 54 inch musky that weighed about 45 pounds. That's a state record in most states with muskellunge in their waters (sans Wisconsin, Minn, Mich, NY, St. Lawrence River, a few other places) That's something I'll likely never see again, let alone catch in my life. I released it. The huge photo I have of that beautiful fish will be more than enough proof and satisfaction, plus almost nobody eats musky.

The lone 'trophy' that I would like to do is Big Horn sheep in Wyoming. I have the connections to the state, I know the process is tough, but have an 'in', and it is extremely expensive to do it right (somewhere around $10,000 for the trip). If I did it and got a Big Horn, I'd keep the 'trophy' and solely because the challenge is so incredibly high for me.

3. Tradition: this is fairly big, as it is generally rare to 'get into hunting' as an adult. People typically don't wake up and decide to buy a rifle and pick up big game hunting. It has a lot of meaning to me, to hunt with family and friends.

I'll also add another element, and that is one of responsibility, and accomplishment. There are a large number of skills that one learns while hunting. Tending for yourself and others in conditions which are at times far from ideal doesn't just happen and going through these experiences and learning how to adapt becomes quite valuable not only in those situations but in life.

Others, like my boss (and we work in the securities biz and live in larger metropolitan areas) are just fanatics. Hunting with recurve bows, making your own arrows, actively maintaining acres of land/forest, taking personal stewardship for the environment in which he hunts and plays.

I once got splinters from Jenga-- truly, the most dangerous game.

1. They are very cool looking.
2. It's something you did and are proud of.

1. No they don't. They are grotesque.
2. You shouldn't be. You won a game (with a gun) that the animal didn't even know you were playing. Kill a dear with you bare hands and then we'll talk.

Did Gibson use the Willie Bloomquist Signature Series to shoot that thing?

There are more deer now than in the Colonial Era. We could use more hunters, not fewer, although it is not my sport.

#29, Thanks for the thoughts. As the non-hunter with the original query, it's refreshing to get thoughtful insight. It does make sense that as an adult one just doesn't get into hunting. I think the "culture"(damn, I hate that word really) of hunting, as you state, starts with family or close friends.

There are a large number of skills that one learns while hunting. Tending for yourself and others in conditions which are at times far from ideal doesn't just happen and going through these experiences and learning how to adapt becomes quite valuable not only in those situations but in life.

I appreciate any skills which tests ones ability to survive in the wild. I think most non-hunters just envision either 4 hicks named Billy-Joe Bob or 4 rich guys from NY out there shooting anything willy-nilly from the back of some massive pick up truck. I am sure these types of people exist, however it is refreshing to hear there is a much more responsible hunting community which respects it's environment and appreciates the prey it seeks.

No, I have not been persuaded to try hunting as I've never even fired a gun/bow, let alone own one, but the candid responses have been great.

So in this thread, it's the hunters that are thoughtful, measured and reasonable.

Thank you for [34], Hugh.

"1. No they don't. They are grotesque.
2. You shouldn't be. You won a game (with a gun) that the animal didn't even know you were playing. Kill a dear with you bare hands and then we'll talk."

1. There is nothing grotesque about an animal's head, alive, dead, mounted or otherwise.

2. Humans kill with tools. That's how they survived to be able to tell about it. I'd rather bow hunt or hunt with black powder, but if we had to kill with our bare hands we would have starved off the face of the earth long ago. Research indicates humans never would have made it to the point of agriculture had they not had meat to supplement their diets. As for the "dear" not knowing we are "playing" a "game," well, the deer live in the state of nature and they are involved in surviving every minute. They know that being stalked/heard/smelled/seen can lead to death. That's why they can run so fast and hide so well in those thickets. It isn't a game at all, whether they are hunted by a man or a wolf. And gun or not it isn't easy to "win."

You apparently have forgotten that you, too, live in the state of nature, and that bad things can happen to you over which you have no control. Maybe you should try to shoot something instead of just ordering it medium rare.

I think most non-hunters just envision either 4 hicks named Billy-Joe Bob or 4 rich guys from NY out there shooting anything willy-nilly from the back of some massive pick up truc

Guys like this exist, they aren't hunters, they are poachers, and they are criminals. Believe it or not every year in most states with high % of hunters, guys like this are arrested for blasting a law enforcement staged deer decoy from the road. Others do this while 'shining' at night. People like this do need their guns taken away (and often that is a penalty) and in some states they take your car.

If you poach a 'big game trophy' there's an interstate compact that will basically wipe out your hunting rights in about 30 states, in addition to the $40k in fines and likely jail you'll face.

People on this board have to live in Jersey, no? You guys have all kinds of bear issues from what I can tell. I remember reading about a new bear hunting program in the state. Bears number somewhere at or greater than 3,000, mostly in the NW part of NJ. That's a lot of bear for such a small state, I would imagine encounters are high, and I'm sure the anti-hunting crowd is behind every corner to try to stop it.

Managing that kind of a situation w/o some kind of controlled hunting cannot be fun for the State. There's endless debates on what to do in more remote areas of the country related to grizzly encounters, reintroduction of wolves, etc. and those kinds of battles involve communities in the 000s, or maybe low 1,000s. I can't imagine how that is managed in a place like Northern NJ, even if we're talking heavily forested regions of the NW part of the state, it is still the most populated state per sq. mile.

There are more deer now than in the Colonial Era. We could use more hunters, not fewer, although it is not my sport.

This is a problem (# of hunters dropping) as it relates to certain states with high deer population. My native state of Wisconsin saw its peak # of hunters in 1990 with about 700,000 licensed deer hunters and it stayed flat to a slight dip til 2000. It has fallen off to about 600,000 last year. Wisconsin has been in good shape in terms maintaining its # of hunters relative to some other states. Meanwhile, deer herd #s are still several hundred thousand great than the State's goal of about 750,000 post hunt herd. The post hunt #s have bounced between 1 million and 1.5 million for the past decade or so. Pre-hunt #s are usually between 1.4 to 1.8 million deer. By comparison the WI DNR states that pre-hunt deer population in 1980 was around 800,000. The State hasn't been 'at its goal' in 20+years. Either the goals are flawed, and badly, or there aren't enough hunters (or other predators, wolves, Chronic Wasting Disease (a much bigger potential threat)).

CWD severely damaged deer densities in Colorado and Wyoming awhile ago, but with lower densities, it was first found in Wisconsin in the 2002, and is slowly spreading, despite very aggressive efforts to quarantine the regions. Also an issue in eastern Iowa and Northern Illinois.

I have nothing against hunting deer or duck, or other wildlife. I respect the hunters who give similar arguments presented in this thread (p.s. - thanks), and I understand the arguments regarding population control, etc. I'd never do it myself; I just can't bring myself to pull a trigger on an animal. That's just me.

What I don't understand are exotic big game hunters. I recently watched some reality hunting show, where a man was literally in tears because he shot and killed some big-ass elephant, saying it was the best moment of his life. Does this count as "population control?" What purpose did this serve? I'm sorry, but I have trouble understanding the skill or thrill behind shooting something that's as big as a house. I'm aware of my hypocrisies. I'll swat a fly if there is one in my apartment, and I'll set a mousetrap if I have to. I enjoy red meat and pork and chicken, and as socially liberal as I am, I'm not a tree-hugging hippie, but senseless slaughter of animals just bothers me.

1. They are very cool looking.
2. It's something you did and are proud of.

I guess cool-looking is in the eye of the beholder so I'll let that one pass (personally, I think they're kind of creepy looking). But the second I have strong objections too. With the high-powered scoped rifles and other accoutrements hunters have at their disposal, I don't think shooting an animal from 100+ yards away is something to be all that proud of. What is really weird to me is how a hunter, after taking the life of the animal, futzes around with the antlers and acts like King Kong after taking down the T-Rex. Really, is that what makes you feel like a man, to kill an animal that has no opportunity to contest the outcome? It all seems like an absurd exercise in dick-waving to me.

That's a lot of bear for such a small state

I don't know. That 1 bear for about every 3 square miles. If you count cubs being with mothers, then that would probably double it, to one bear or bear family for every 6 square miles. I'm not sure that's a lot. Now, if we're talking Grizzly bears then, yeah, that's way too many bears.

I think we need more wolves.

The US would be better if there were more wolves roaming around.

Colorado has 11,000 black bear. 104,000 sq miles
New Jersey 3,250 (split the diff on the estimates). 7,790 sq miles, no doubt they are concentrated in the NW.
Pennsylvania 14,000, 45,700 sq miles, parts of Penn definitely have 1 bear per 3 sq mile, that's better odds of seeing a bear than any national park, I guarantee it. If you go to Yellowstone like an average tourist, I bet you won't see a bear (black or grizzly) in 4/5 visits.
Minnesota, 20,000 bear, 84,000 sq miles

2011 estimates.

A black bear kills about 1 person per year across North America (750,000 bears), It is quite rare. Grizzlies, much fewer in number, you can't get a precise count, 25k to 55,000 grizzlies in NA, About a 1,000 in Montana/Wyoming/Idaho/Washington seems to be a reasonable guess. Two grizzly killings in last two years at or near Yellowstone Park (granted those were the first in years), yes Grizzlies much more aggressive. One of the grizzly attacks was on a scientist familiar with the bears, another was an attack on a couple in the park, he died, she managed to escape. They were not prepared for their 'backcountry' hike and they tried to run.

I think we need more wolves.

The US would be better if there were more wolves roaming around.

ugh.

I guess cool-looking is in the eye of the beholder so I'll let that one pass (personally, I think they're kind of creepy looking). But the second I have strong objections too. With the high-powered scoped rifles and other accoutrements hunters have at their disposal, I don't think shooting an animal from 100+ yards away is something to be all that proud of. What is really weird to me is how a hunter, after taking the life of the animal, futzes around with the antlers and acts like King Kong after taking down the T-Rex. Really, is that what makes you feel like a man, to kill an animal that has no opportunity to contest the outcome? It all seems like an absurd exercise in dick-waving to me.

First off, try hitting a target from 100+ yards away, scoped rifle or not, and then we can talk about whether or not it was hard. You also have to find the animal, usually by knowing them well enough to pick out in advance where the animal likes to be. Then you have to remain hidden from an animal that has senses significantly better than your own, rustling a branch when hunting deer means its over. Taking the shot is both a) incredibly difficult, and b) the easiest part of the whole affair.

I've been on many hunts and I've never seen the behavior your describing. Either your fictionalizing what goes on in hunts for some purpose of which I won't venture a guess or your basing it on Ted Nugent television shows, in either case you're dramatically mistaken. All the hunters I know would be embarrassed to be on a hunt with the kind of person your describing. Most hunters I know are happy to have a successful hunt, happy to have the meat, and happy that their work and preparation paid off. I'd wager more people derive their "manhood" from the type of car they drive or their bear league softball team than hunting.

Look, it comes down to one thing. Either you're predisposed to think that hunters are barbarians because you personally could never imagine shooting Bambi's mom, or your not. I will tell you this, I've been to West Virginia and seen the shape those deer are in. They're better off being shot by hunters than slowly starving to death. Make all the arguments you want about it being unfair, but I'm pretty sure the deer would tell you wolves don't play fair either, and if something doesn't hunt the deer the ecosystem crashes. Hate us all you want, we're necessary.

I don't look down on anyone killing animals for food, or even sport, as long as they aren't endangered.

I have no stomach to do so myself.

That aviation record, according to Wiki, was flying a Cessna 206 to an altitude of 25,200 feet - 9,500 feet above its service ceiling.

Then how come he can't get his team to perform above its service ceiling!?

(I apologize if that joke has been made I didn't read the thread)