Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, February 25, 2013

Kirk Gibson on off-season hunting and the great outdoors

Ted Nugent is a friend of mine
His killings have no purpose
No reason, or rhyme
Ted Nugent is a friend of mine

He is one of the most interesting managers in baseball.  When you think about the fact that Kirk Gibson holds an aviation record, he’s constantly looking for new ways to inspire his team.

Gibson is an avid outdoorsman and hunter.

Repoz Posted: February 25, 2013 at 04:49 PM | 396 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: diamondbacks

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 4 > 
   1. The District Attorney Posted: February 25, 2013 at 05:52 PM (#4375881)
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.
   2. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:01 PM (#4375890)
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.
   3. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:01 PM (#4375891)
I'm sure that poor animal had it coming. Wow, human beings can be pieces of sh!t.
   4. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:06 PM (#4375898)
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.
   5. vortex of dissipation Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:09 PM (#4375901)
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
   6. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:13 PM (#4375903)
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.
   7. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4375910)
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.

   8. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:23 PM (#4375912)
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.
   9. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:35 PM (#4375924)
#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.
   10. smileyy Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:35 PM (#4375925)
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.
   11. Lassus Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:41 PM (#4375929)
Wow, that was a pretty majestic animal.
   12. bigglou115 Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:58 PM (#4375936)
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.
   13. Cris E Posted: February 25, 2013 at 07:20 PM (#4375950)
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.
   14. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: February 25, 2013 at 07:22 PM (#4375953)
#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?

   15. spike Posted: February 25, 2013 at 07:51 PM (#4375966)
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.
   16. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: February 25, 2013 at 07:58 PM (#4375968)
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.)
   17. spike Posted: February 25, 2013 at 08:02 PM (#4375972)
stupid double post.

but having done that, my daughter and SO are vegetarians, and it does seem eminently reasonable.
   18. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: February 25, 2013 at 08:05 PM (#4375975)
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.
   19. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: February 25, 2013 at 08:12 PM (#4375982)
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.

   20. Urkel's Boner Posted: February 25, 2013 at 09:30 PM (#4376012)
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.
   21. Urkel's Boner Posted: February 25, 2013 at 09:32 PM (#4376013)
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.
   22. Hello Rusty Kuntz, Goodbye Rusty Cars Posted: February 25, 2013 at 09:36 PM (#4376018)
Ichiro could kill a deer with raw sewage if he wanted to.
   23. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: February 25, 2013 at 09:48 PM (#4376023)
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?!
   24. Bhaakon Posted: February 25, 2013 at 09:50 PM (#4376025)
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.
   25. Tim D Posted: February 25, 2013 at 10:06 PM (#4376030)
"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.
   26. Tim D Posted: February 25, 2013 at 10:12 PM (#4376032)
"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?
   27. Bhaakon Posted: February 25, 2013 at 10:18 PM (#4376034)
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.
   28. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 25, 2013 at 10:26 PM (#4376036)
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".
   29. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 25, 2013 at 10:43 PM (#4376038)
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.
   30. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 25, 2013 at 11:02 PM (#4376042)
I once got splinters from Jenga-- truly, the most dangerous game.
   31. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: February 25, 2013 at 11:26 PM (#4376050)
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.
   32. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:14 AM (#4376062)
Did Gibson use the Willie Bloomquist Signature Series to shoot that thing?
   33. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:14 AM (#4376064)
There are more deer now than in the Colonial Era. We could use more hunters, not fewer, although it is not my sport.
   34. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:16 AM (#4376065)
#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.
   35. PreservedFish Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:23 AM (#4376068)
So in this thread, it's the hunters that are thoughtful, measured and reasonable.
   36. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:29 AM (#4376071)
Thank you for [34], Hugh.
   37. Tim D Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:33 AM (#4376074)
"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.
   38. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:44 AM (#4376080)
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.
   39. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:59 AM (#4376085)
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.
   40. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:27 AM (#4376090)
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.
   41. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:30 AM (#4376091)
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.
   42. Publius Publicola Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:36 AM (#4376093)
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.
   43. Publius Publicola Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:41 AM (#4376095)
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.
   44. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:58 AM (#4376100)
I think we need more wolves.

The US would be better if there were more wolves roaming around.
   45. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:10 AM (#4376103)
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.
   46. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:25 AM (#4376105)
I think we need more wolves.

The US would be better if there were more wolves roaming around.
   47. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:02 AM (#4376109)
ugh.
   48. bigglou115 Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:19 AM (#4376110)
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.
   49. valuearbitrageur Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:19 AM (#4376111)
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.
   50. zachtoma Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:24 AM (#4376112)
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)
   51. Darkness and the howling fantods Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:32 AM (#4376115)
People on this board have to live in Jersey, no?

If that's the punishment, then I'm out.
   52. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 26, 2013 at 09:18 AM (#4376158)
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.


QFT. And I also sign off on the more wolves post. As I have said before "real meat" eating will likely tamper off with the invention of "vat grown" meat in the next twenty years.
   53. Publius Publicola Posted: February 26, 2013 at 09:30 AM (#4376167)
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.


What's the down side of a miss? Nothing. Either you miss completely or the wounded animal runs off somewhere to die an agonizing death hrs or days later. Nothing at all happens to you. I've fired rifles before. Once you get the hang of it and acquire some accuracy, you should be able to hit an elk in the lungs from 100 yards.

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.


Watch any of the hunting shows on ESPN. After the kill, the hunter will crouch next to the dead animal and grab ahold of the antlers and hold the head up to say like "Look at me! Look what I did!" Now maybe that doesn't happen on the hunts you have been on but then why would they put that on a show for hunters, if it was deemed offensive? And there are a lot of hunters with the same mentality as Nugent. A LOT. When you drive by a "NO HUNTING" sign, ever notice that they always seem to be riddled with bullet holes?
   54. Tim D Posted: February 26, 2013 at 09:52 AM (#4376176)
So, baseball players who get excited and carry on after doing great things are arrogant, concieted self-absorbed asses who should be shunned, right?

And it's not the shot that is so hard to make, it's getting a chance at the shot. The "downside" of a miss is you are back to square one. Every animal within five miles is gone. You might get a shot at a deer once a year, once every two years. The inevitable kill in the TV shows doesn't happen very often. They are a lot like courtroom shows where you go from the occurrence to the trial in 30 seconds and skip the year or more of litigation and discovery in between.

I get so sick of the hunters are red-neck jerks stuff. There are 750,000 deer hunters in Michigan alone. Would you concede that at least one of them isn't an a-hole?
   55. Rants Mulliniks Posted: February 26, 2013 at 10:10 AM (#4376186)
You would be surprised how civilized killing a big elk looks compared to a commercial killing enterprise.


This a million times. The acts of even the worst of the trophy whore hunters are morally superior to what goes on at a typical slaughterhouse. I don't agree with either practice, but in killing an animal purely for sport with a rifle, at least it dies a quick death after living a natural life. The life and death of a cow, pig, chicken or turkey in a CAFO can be pure hell, literally.
   56. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 10:16 AM (#4376192)
I will tell you this, I've been to West Virginia and seen the shape those deer people are in. They're better off being shot by hunters than slowly starving to death.


Much better.
   57. BDC Posted: February 26, 2013 at 10:21 AM (#4376196)
I haven't thought much about it. I didn't grow up hunting (I grew up in Chicago, a third-generation urban immigrant from a family that couldn't afford to get out of the city much). But I'm not a vegetarian, and I've enjoyed eating game that friends have shot. I have gone fishing sometimes and had no problem killing and eating the catch. I have no problem cutting up chickens that (as many have noted) live and die miserably – though I do want to buy more pastured chicken and other humanely-sourced meats, and options are getting better to do so.

From what I know of American gun culture, which features a high percentage of crazy, the vast majority of hunters are way over on the entirely-sane side of the scale.
   58. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM (#4376200)
I've got a cousin who was a long time vegetarian and is now a hunter. Of course, what he hunts are local squirrels. He is doing his part to keep the tree rat population under control.
   59. tfbg9 Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM (#4376222)
My brother in law in suburban NJ got lyme disease, probably from a tick, off one of the numerous deer that had wandered into his back yard. The left side of his face became paralyzed as a result. Screwed uup his entire life for a couple years.
   60. SandyRiver Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4376227)
almost nobody eats musky.

I find their smaller cousins, pickerel and pike, quite palatable, though the extra set of bones makes for more work. Is it the muskie's loner, "fish-of-10,000-casts", big-game status that causes most anglers to refrain from kill-and-eat?

Deer meat is, IMO, the best of all red meat, with moose a close 2nd. I'm privileged to live on our 80-acre woodlot, where I can legally hunt as soon as I leave the house (nearest neighbors over 500' away.) It's also thick stuff, as has been the case for all my hunting in Maine. Only once have I fired at a deer more than 80 yards distant. Of course, hunting is a personal choice. My wife probably wouldn't kill an animal if she were starving, but she gladly shares in consuming whatever I can bag.

To me, the main enjoyment from having a trophy on the wall would be memories of the hunt, not bragging rights. When we moved out of northern Maine (mid-1980s), the U-Haul had no room for my antler collections - moose sheds and deer bagged. I most regret leaving the little 3-pt "rack" from my 1st ever deer, a Pennsylvania yearling (and there was room for that one - I just had a brain cramp), not the nice matched pair of moose antlers that was worth several hundred dollars. Memories.

Hunting African big game is something in which I have no interest (nor sufficient wallet), but there's some important context on how it's often done today. In much of the continent, elephant populations have dropped 90% over the past 50 years, and poaching (for ivory, or to prevent crop/property damage) is by far the leading cause. The critters are best holding their own where sport hunting for them is done, South Africa and Botswana as some examples. Where the beasts become an important part of a region's economy, both cash and meat, residents are more tolerant of their propensity for smashing fences and destroying food plots. Where they are considered huge vermin (or illicit profit), their future is a lot cloudier.


   61. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:14 AM (#4376231)
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.


AFAIK, for some reason no one in my family has ever hunted; at least, I've never seen any evidence of guns or the like in their residences during visits & can't ever recall hearing any references to the activity. As a Southerner born & bred (I think I've spent maybe 2 weeks of my life north of the Mason-Dixon line; I grew up in Arkansas & now live in Alabama), I suppose that's unusual, & god knows the people in question aren't any more effetely liberal than any other enclave of good-ol'-boyesque stereotypes. My dad died when I was a child, but I gather he wouldn't have wanted to be around gunfire & the like because of PTSD from the Korean War. I vaguely remember that fireworks made him uncomfortable.
   62. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:15 AM (#4376232)
Since I think fishing and hunting are probably similar enough, I'll try to explain why fishing is so wonderful.

First off, its ####### hard. It's easy to "go fishing", I guess, because any ####### can sit by some water and stick a rod in it. And there are types of fishing that are easy and, for me, would be unenjoyable - going to some stocked lake and fishing with bait, etc. But fishing, generally, and particularly fishing well, is incredibly difficult. So when you succeed - when you catch a fish - there's a rush from the success.

Second, fishing requires integration of lots of skills. You have to read the conditions to guess at what the fish are biting and where they are. 9 times out of 10, your first guess will be wrong, and you need to logic your way to what the correct pattern is. This requires an intimate understand of your surroundings - what is the sky conditions, the wind, the water temp, the time of year. Are you in a high elevation lake that may be running behind the low elevation lake you fished yesterday? What kind of water is in this lake - clear, cloudy? Is there a thermocline? How deep is it? Where is the structure? What is the mini-ecosystem of this lake - what are the fish going eating?

So you integrate all these things and come up with a plan, and you need to be hugely attentive and observing, always, because each thing you see or hear or smell is a little code to solve the matrix. Hear a splash - was it a fish splash? If it was, where was it? Was it some sort of panfish hitting a dragonfly - that's not that helpful. Was it a big fish hitting a baitfish - that IS useful? Was it a goddamned carp splashing around? A frog slipping into the water off a pad?

Then you also need to make calculated risk decisions. You want to catch the biggest, most beautiful fish possible. Say you've found a pattern than is landing you a steady stream of medium-size fish. Do you bail on that approach and take a shot for something bigger? Stick with what's working, even if you think you may not catch something extraordinary? Often its not just a matter of switching a lure, but zooming over to a different part of the lake. Maybe the medium size largemouth bass are hitting your jigs in the weeds, but you've heard over on that shore there are some deep piles that hold huge smallmouth. Do you go? If its getting late, maybe you dont, you stick around for the topwater bite to start. If its morning, and things are slowing down, maybe you go check out the smallies since that deep bite isn't quite as time-dependant (because the fish aren't waiting for flat light so that they're less exposed to birds).

And then there's technique. Each different type of lure and condition requires a different type of presentation. Even with rod-and-reel (I don't do much fly fishing, which is even more technique-intensive) you have to learn how handle your lure. I fish a lot in small natural lakes and ponds in new england, which have very clear, cold water and require finesse fishing. This requires supreme patience, fishing with small hooks, small lures, waiting for the faintest tugs and then not reacting to it, but calculating the moment the fish has taken enough of the worm that it can be hooked. But sometimnes, I used to fish in the Charles in suburban Boston, and that's a muddy, warm river in the summer, lined with reeds and pads. There I would be flipping jigs into cover with a heavy rod, and if the fish hit the jig it was about as subtle as lady gaga. Totally different techniques.

And then you wait. And you wait and you wait and you wait. Because even if you're good, there will be days when you're skunked or catch nothing but little shitty fish. And even the good days might be punctuated with long stretches where you cast and cast and cast and nothing the #### happens except the sun beats on you and you set hooks into weeds. And even if you catch fish, 95% of the fish you catch are ordinary, because thats how population dynamics work.

But then one day, and it might only be once or twice a year, you set a hook into something big. And you KNOW it, because the rod bends so and the drag goes and . . . then it comes up to the surface to shake you, and its big and its a ####### beast and you have finally triumphed after hours and days of waiting and casting and thinking and experimenting and then there is a big, beautiful fish on your line. And it feels wonderful, it makes you want to yelp and dance.

So this is why fishing (and, I presume hunting, which I'm sure has its own set of analogous challenges) is awesome. And that says nothing about the ancillary joy of, for example, spending a gorgeous autumn day on a lake or knee deep in a mountain stream, smelling the air and seeing the leaves . . .
   63. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM (#4376235)
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?


Short of self-defense (or defense of another person), there is absolutely no excuse for shooting an animal with that degree of intelligence. It's just despicable.
   64. Worrierking Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:45 AM (#4376253)
I have learned quite a bit about the hunting culture of the south since I moved to Louisiana 25 years ago. Much of what I thought about it growing up in Illinois in a culturally liberal family with no hunters in it was wrong. It is truly a rich persons' hobby. The amount of money spent on deer leases, duck hunting camps, fishing boats etc., is staggering. Most of the biggest hunters I know are people with a fair amount of money or property. Here, it's stockbrokers, realtors, lawyers, accountants and businessmen who are hunting, not the poor bubbas.

I also had no idea of the conservation efforts of the hunting community. Ducks Unlimited is a huge organization.

My brother-in-law brought me duck hunting a few times, in part to see his son learn the sport. I enjoyed it, except for the 4am alarms. I have other hobbies that are more important to me, and I don't think I will ever go again, but I can see how hunting can be all-consuming. Some people are obsessed with hunting and fishing, others with golf, for me it's baseball, running marathons and old beer cans. In "The Sportsman's Paradise" I am the oddball.
   65. TerpNats Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:48 AM (#4376255)
Venison for everybody!
   66. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:49 AM (#4376261)
So in this thread, it's the hunters that are thoughtful, measured and reasonable.


Except when they go out into the woods and for no good reason - if they're not going to eat it - shoot some defenseless animal that was minding its own business.

That said, I don't get worked up about hunting (and I'm happy to eat meat). I think it's silly, but I'm sure I do lots of things that others would find silly. You're taking a gun and shooting an animal that doesn't have a gun itself and can't shoot back. If that floats your boat, if you see that as a grand accomplishment, have at it.
   67. The Good Face Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:49 AM (#4376262)
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.


NJ does indeed have a surprisingly large number of black bears, but most of them are concentrated in the relatively unpopulated western parts of the state. There are encounters, and a few times a year a young male will invariably wander deep into the densely populated suburbs and make a hilarious nuisance of himself, but unless you're camping or you live way out in the more remote burbs, they're not really that big a deal.

Deer are a much bigger concern, since pretty much every NJ resident has either hit a deer with their car or knows somebody who's hit a deer. The damn things are everywhere, and they have very little fear of people. They'll wander into open garages and make a mess, eat Halloween pumpkins left on a porch, and devour entire gardens with ease.
   68. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:50 AM (#4376263)
Venison for everybody!

And there's no chili like venison chili. That's why God created deer.
   69. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM (#4376269)
It all seems like an absurd exercise in dick-waving to me.


You say this like its a bad thing.
   70. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: February 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM (#4376270)
For the most part, I don't think there's that big of a divide between the hunters and non-hunters here (I, as revealed in a thread a week or three back, am decidedly a non-hunter). There's some jerks that hunt (as with most things), no agreement on how large that contingent is (but it's not thought to be a majority), but the act of hunting is, at absolute bare minimum, no less ethical than factory farming.

So, baseball players who get excited and carry on after doing great things are arrogant, concieted self-absorbed asses who should be shunned, right?

Some say so. Also, are you suggesting that stealing third and killing an elk are equivalent acts? Each has their positive function, but they're pretty different.

Oh, I ######' hate fishing. Can't stand it. Power to those who enjoy it, though.
   71. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM (#4376274)
It's not so pleasant for the fish, either, coming up for a bite and getting a hook through it's mouth. But nobody cares about the fish. Including me. I refrain from fishing, though to be honest I can hardly imagine anything more boring anyway.
   72. Lassus Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:03 PM (#4376277)
People on this board have to live in Jersey, no? You guys have all kinds of bear issues from what I can tell.

If the issue is lack of, I'm sure Bruce Vilanch can get behind that sentiment.


It's not so pleasant for the fish, either, coming up for a bite and getting a hook through it's mouth... I refrain from fishing, though to be honest I can hardly imagine anything more boring anyway.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel.
   73. The Good Face Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:13 PM (#4376285)
It's not so pleasant for the fish, either, coming up for a bite and getting a hook through it's mouth... I refrain from fishing, though to be honest I can hardly imagine anything more boring anyway.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel.


Yeah, but you don't drink, so by definition, you'd be doing fishing wrong. Not sure what Ray's issue is though.
   74. Ron J2 Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:37 PM (#4376304)
#73 I think Ray's argument wold be that there are more comfortable places to drink (assuming that's the real point)

And I've never heard of anybody bringing good port on a fishing trip. No real reason you couldn't do so of course. It's just not traditional.
   75. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:44 PM (#4376313)
#73 I think Ray's argument wold be that there are more comfortable places to drink (assuming that's the real point)


Yes.
   76. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:49 PM (#4376317)
If hunters were going out into the woods and playing some sort of real life version of The Hunger Games -- competing against each other and shooting themselves in a test of survival -- I might not laugh at the dick-waving. As it is, by shooting defenseless animals, your dicks are about 7 inches shorter than the 8 inches you think they are.
   77. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:55 PM (#4376320)
I love beeing on boats and love walking/hikng in the wilderness. No interest in hunting or fishing though. Went to the boundary waters (BWCA) years back and relaxed and read in the non-fisher-boat while the fisher-boat, well, fished. We all had a great time (and ate well, despite a lack of fish caught).
   78. Urkel's Boner Posted: February 26, 2013 at 12:56 PM (#4376324)
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.

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.


I take nothing for granted. I fully appreciate the privilege of living in a first-world country and thank the gods for my fortune every morning. My point was merely that there are a litany of things that we as first-worlders don't do for ourselves and wouldn't want to do for ourselves, so when a recreational hunter gets on his high horse and pulls out the cliche "If you wouldn't kill an animal yourself, you shouldn't eat meat" argument I find it dripping in hypocrisy. Would you want to mine the radioactive metals and expose yourself to the toxic factories required to manufacture the iPhone you used to instagram that snapshot of your kill? No, well then stick to smoke signals.

I'm actually perfectly fine with hunting, just not some of the self-righteous arguments hunters make in support of it.
   79. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:00 PM (#4376327)
I take nothing for granted. I fully appreciate the privilege of living in a first-world country and thank the gods for my fortune every morning. My point was merely that there are a litany of things that we as first-worlders don't do for ourselves and wouldn't want to do for ourselves, so when a recreational hunter gets on his high horse and pulls out the cliche "If you wouldn't kill an animal yourself, you shouldn't eat meat" argument I find it dripping in hypocrisy. Would you want to mine the radioactive metals and expose yourself to the toxic factories required to manufacture the iPhone you used to instagram that snapshot of your kill? No, well then stick to smoke signals.



I don't like treated raw sewage because it smells like ####. I don't like mining uranium because . . . actually, I've gone uranium prospecting back in my geologist days so that's a bad example. I don't like making iPhones because its grueling, back-breaking labor. Why do I not like killing animals?
   80. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:04 PM (#4376331)
find their smaller cousins, pickerel and pike, quite palatable, though the extra set of bones makes for more work. Is it the muskie's loner, "fish-of-10,000-casts", big-game status that causes most anglers to refrain from kill-and-eat?


Pike indeed are tasty, as long as you can navigate the 'Y' bone in cleaning it. You don't see it on menus too often. I'm convinced those walleye eating worshippers in Minnesota wouldn't know the difference in a blind folded test.

re: why does nobody eat musky. It doesn't taste very good. I've been told by a guide I use each year in Canada, that the only good tasting musky are those which are 'too small to keep.' In other words, if you want a tasty meal of musky, you've got to break the law to do it. Most state minimums for muskies are at about 36 inches, anything tasty apparently is under 30, nobody's gonna keep a musky that size, at least I hope not.

The females are the ones that get uber big, and while they may be alone, they usually aren't too far away from a pair of smaller males, especially during spawning. The female is in shallow, near the shore, while the males generally are within 50 yards. If you're not on these fish right at the end or after the spawn (at least in Western Ontario in mid-late June) then yes, the fish of 10,000 casts, you won't find 'em that easily and you have to get out the heavy ass musky tackle, which I loathe. I caught my 45 pounder on a 2 inch Fat Rap, right at shore under tree cover.
   81. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:30 PM (#4376343)
I come to threads like this whenever I catch myself thinking that righties are the only dumb people.

   82. tfbg9 Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4376346)
I too have come to feel worse for the line or net-caught fish than the rifle-shot deer, if its not sent back into the water after the photo-op. The whole panicky, suffocating to death bit bugs me. Flopping around helplessly...I find it kind of horriffic.

   83. Urkel's Boner Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:41 PM (#4376348)
I don't like treated raw sewage because it smells like ####. I don't like mining uranium because . . . actually, I've gone uranium prospecting back in my geologist days so that's a bad example. I don't like making iPhones because its grueling, back-breaking labor. Why do I not like killing animals?


I was under the impression there was quite a bit of labor and possibly some unpleasant smells (and to some, sights - women folk mostly) in the bleeding, disemboweling, skinning and butchering of a large animal. Do I only have be willing to press the button that results in its death to get my meat-eating license? I think I can handle that.
   84. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:52 PM (#4376355)
I too have come to feel worse for the line or net-caught fish than the rifle-shot deer, if its not sent back into the water after the photo-op. The whole panicky, suffocating to death bit bugs me. Flopping around helplessly...I find it kind of horriffic.


It's a pretty horrid thing to do to a fish, especially if you're just catching and releasing as opposed to eating, which would actually serve a purpose. Yes, yes, I know that catching and releasing is supposed to have its benefits, and there are barbless hooks (whoopee!), and that the fish supposedly aren't supposed to feel pain. Whoop dee doo.
   85. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 01:57 PM (#4376357)
Hunting is a complicated issue for me. I gave up meat because I no longer wanted to be part of the mass industrial slaughter of animals and so I certainly don't want to hunt and am probably predisposed to look down on it. On the other hand, I have cats and I'm pretty sure the goop that's in the cans I feed the little monsters isn't tofu. I've also known plenty of hunters and lived in places where it's really ingrained in the culture and don't think many of the fine people I met in these places are "bad". And it's true that many hunting and fishing organizations are incredibly important in the fight to preserve wild spaces and sources of fresh water. I think I hold a place of contempt for 3 kinds of hunters:

1. People who go on canned hunts. I just will never think this is anything but gross but, evidently, it's a growing and lucrative business.
2. People who travel to poor countries to kill endangered species. #### you rich ########.
3. People who kill indiscriminately. I remember seeing a documentary about how fat Texans are and, just in passing, they showed a video of this fat Texan on his little piece of land with a rifle just shooting at whatever bird happened to pass by. I don't know how common that attitude is, but #### you indiscriminate fat slobs of doom. (Nothing against Texas intended. I like Texas, actually, but statistically, y'all are fat, according to the Discovery Channel.)
   86. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:01 PM (#4376361)

It's a pretty horrid thing to do to a fish, especially if you're just catching and releasing as opposed to eating, which would actually serve a purpose. Yes, yes, I know that catching and releasing is supposed to have its benefits, and there are barbless hooks (whoopee!), and that the fish supposedly aren't supposed to feel pain. Whoop dee doo.


What if the fish is a real jerk. Like a Nazi fish.
   87. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:04 PM (#4376364)
Or if it's Albert Fish. Probably it would enjoy the pain, plus it's a murderous psycho, anyway.
   88. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:06 PM (#4376365)
What if the fish is a real jerk. Like a Nazi fish.

Kill it! Kill it!
   89. Ray (RDP) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:07 PM (#4376366)
Killing game or fish for no good reason is a religion, like any other religion or way of life. As Lassus could probably testify to, I'm far from an animal rights person. And this is far down on the list of problems. But I know silliness and pointlessness when I see it.
   90. rr Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:18 PM (#4376376)
I have weighed in on this before, and I agree with Shooty here, including the cat part. I have not given up beef and poultry, but I have changed how I buy it, trying to get it through places that supposedly treat the animals better. I still eat fish some and occasionally eat a fastfood burger. As such, I am no position to look down on hunters and fishermen.

But, I do have a visceral reaction against guys like Gibson killing animals like the one above, mostly for fun, using high-powered rifles. I happened to see a video of two guys bear hunting, in which they were appeared to be hundreds of yards or more away from the bear, shooting him in the back while he was climbing up a small mountain. It was a black bear, in the snow, in the open, easy to see. I am sure there was skill involved in tracking him and getting out in the wilderness, etc, and it was far less cruel than what happens to a cow in slaughterhouse, although it took him awhile to die. But they were whooping and high-fiving, and after he was dead, took pictures of themselves with the body, etc. Not my thing.
   91. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4376382)
   92. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:25 PM (#4376384)
First off, its ####### hard. It's easy to "go fishing", I guess, because any ####### can sit by some water and stick a rod in it. And there are types of fishing that are easy and, for me, would be unenjoyable - going to some stocked lake and fishing with bait, etc. But fishing, generally, and particularly fishing well, is incredibly difficult. So when you succeed - when you catch a fish - there's a rush from the success.

On a whim since I'm really against all this stuff, I took my daughter out on Lake Michigan salmon fishing last summer. With all the gear my friend had (sonar, GPS, God knows what else) it was pretty easy. We caught a lot, reeling them in was a bit of a workout. And, yeah, I didn't feel good about it afterward.

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

It's the preening afterward that is so disgusting to me. The posing with the dead animals, mounting the heads, etc. These people are ########. But sure, there are too many dear lots of places. If you want to get a license and go kill and eat one, go for it. Just don't act like a conquering hero, it's a f'ing dear that was probably going to run into traffic in the next ten minutes anyway.
   93. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:25 PM (#4376385)
But they were whooping and high-fiving, and after he was dead, took pictures of themselves with the body, etc. Not my thing.

Yeah, this kind of celebrating rubs me wrong as well. I want some kind of Faulknerian gravity about the process. David Quammen has a good essay about why he hunted and fished and why he eventually stopped in one of his collections. He's my go-to writer for reflections on these kind of things, not that I let him do my thinking for me. I like him because his ideas mirror my own, of course. What more proof of his genius do I need?
   94. Lassus Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:30 PM (#4376392)
Yeah, but you don't drink, so by definition, you'd be doing fishing wrong.

There is that.
   95. BDC Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:39 PM (#4376404)
I remember seeing a documentary about how fat Texans are and, just in passing, they showed a video of this fat Texan on his little piece of land with a rifle just shooting at whatever bird happened to pass by. I don't know how common that attitude is

I suppose there's an ample supply of fat Texans :) But almost all birds are protected in Texas, as I'd imagine they are in every state. (Exceptions are starlings, crows, grackles, sparrows, and pigeons – I don't know why I know this, since I never shoot any birds.) It is indeed against the law to kill a mockingbird, for instance. So this fat guy is also a criminal …
   96. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:44 PM (#4376409)
I caught my 45 pounder on a 2 inch Fat Rap, right at shore under tree cover



Holy ####, you caught a 45 pount muskie on a shallow crank? Did the water just explode when it hit it?
   97. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: February 26, 2013 at 02:48 PM (#4376410)
It's a pretty horrid thing to do to a fish, especially if you're just catching and releasing as opposed to eating, which would actually serve a purpose. Yes, yes, I know that catching and releasing is supposed to have its benefits, and there are barbless hooks (whoopee!), and that the fish supposedly aren't supposed to feel pain. Whoop dee doo.


Catching and releasing isn't for the benefit of the fish, its for the benefit of other anglers.
   98. Tim D Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:28 PM (#4376433)
"With all the gear my friend had (sonar, GPS, God knows what else) it was pretty easy. We caught a lot, reeling them in was a bit of a workout."

One shouldn't expect much sense of accomplishment doing a tag-along with a friend/pro. If you had started with your daughter and you looking at that big-ass lake and said "let's figure out how to catch some Coho," you might have had some appreciation and enjoyed getting your picture taken. Especially after coming up empty a few times. There is a qualitative difference between preening and/or "dick-waving" and a genuine sense of accomplishment. Finding an elk and getting a clear shot at it is hard work.

And no one is saying you have to KILL your own meat to have the right to eaat it. We are just saying that if you are a meat eater but hunting turns you off because of the way we sneak up on the poor animals and kill them with guns, you really ought to check out a slaughterhouse and see the industry you are supporting. As for the supposedly more humane commercial killing enterprises, the key word is supposedly. If you are a vegetarian or a vegan it's a different argument.
   99. Darkness and the howling fantods Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:28 PM (#4376434)
this is as good a time as any for my favorite far side

Nice. This thread made me think of this one.
   100. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: February 26, 2013 at 03:38 PM (#4376441)
I caught my 45 pounder on a 2 inch Fat Rap, right at shore under tree cover

Holy ####, you caught a 45 pount muskie on a shallow crank? Did the water just explode when it hit it\


Yeah, that was basically my reaction too when it was apparent that a muskie had snapped it. We were shore trolling for northern pike and some bass (this was Ontario, N-NE of LOTW a little ways) with a guide, we always use a guide on these lakes, as driving the boat is a hazard with all the water, reef, other rocks, w/o their help, plus they fish it all year and know the waters so well). We're mostly using 'tail dancers' and 'husky jerks', or light buck tail and other spinner baits for this type of fishing.

During this time (mid June) muskie season has just opened, and they are still in shallows due to spawn cycle, (usually the spawn is over by the time the muskie season opens, and you won't see the fish in these places, and certainly won't get follows or strikes on the little #### we're using.)

After my companion was fixing a backlash cast, we were moving back out to about 30 yards from shore and I just flipped the fat rap to the shore and probably hit the muskie right over the head in about 2-3 feet of water. She snapped at it within a second of the lure hitting the water, startled the hell out of me as her shadow became visible. Landing the fish was like hauling in a bag of rock salt, I've had more aggressive fighting fish, it still took a good ten to 15 minutes. It was out of the water for maybe 20 seconds after the hook was removed, for a quick girth measurement and photo.
Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 4 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Chicago Joe
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-19-14
(21 - 8:06pm, Sep 19)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogHBT: Talking head says Jeter is “a fraud” and “you are all suckers”
(13 - 8:06pm, Sep 19)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(3348 - 8:01pm, Sep 19)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogEn Banc Court May Call Foul on Bonds Conviction
(8 - 7:27pm, Sep 19)
Last: base ball chick

NewsblogJoe Girardi put Derek Jeter’s farewell tour ahead of the team
(201 - 7:23pm, Sep 19)
Last: Rob_Wood

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-19-2014
(38 - 6:49pm, Sep 19)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogPedro pens a letter to Clayton Kershaw
(57 - 6:36pm, Sep 19)
Last: The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-18-2014
(170 - 6:00pm, Sep 19)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(278 - 5:38pm, Sep 19)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogAraton: The Other Side of a Derek Jeter Hustle Play
(30 - 5:26pm, Sep 19)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogUmpire ejects Braves fan for heckling Bryce Harper
(71 - 5:21pm, Sep 19)
Last: TerpNats

NewsblogRon Washington Acknowledges Infidelity, Doesn’t Explain Why He Resigned
(50 - 5:17pm, Sep 19)
Last: BDC

NewsblogIt’s quite the turnaround for Angels and General Manager Jerry Dipoto
(13 - 5:16pm, Sep 19)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogChris Davis Rescues Man Pinned Under Truck
(52 - 4:43pm, Sep 19)
Last: Joe Bivens, Minor Genius

NewsblogOT: September 2014 College Football thread
(277 - 4:34pm, Sep 19)
Last: JAHV

Page rendered in 1.0810 seconds
52 querie(s) executed