body count mentality

[walking buffalo]

Keep in mind.

There is a place where hunters need to step up and kill more animals even if the freezer is full.

If hunting becomes about Antlers, it won't be around for much longer.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Keep in mind.

There is a place where hunters need to step up and kill more animals even if the freezer is full.

If hunting becomes about Antlers, it won't be around for much longer.

...and there are places that hunters should show some restraint as well

[Lefty-Canuck]

There is enough folks hunting without antlers in mind to make up for those who do. Moose and Elk fill the freezer, deer are the challenge for me where I focus my time on the challenge of taking a mature specimen....I have never relied on deer to fill the freezer.

LC

[sns2]

I'm in the enjoy the hunt stage. Used to kill me to have a tag left, but at that time in my life we also needed the meat as money was more tight.

This year changed for me in that my 14 yr old and I got a dog, so we were chasing pheasants, ducks and geese for two full months before the November opener. Then my buddy split a cow moose with us. This is the first year since I was 14 that I have not purchased deer tags. I asked the boy this morning if he wanted to go shoot a deer, and he said, "No Dad, we have already had a great season." We are grateful for what we have and are moving on to ice fishing now.

[58thecat]

I hunt for whatever I legally feel like, some years I pass up, some years I tag out, never carry more than two tags but I mostly do it for the woods, being out is a great thing...watching, learning just peaceful.

Back in Saskatchewan we had food banks, a large population of whitetails, so the land owner can get nuisance tags and take out what was allotted to them yearly, we are talking a hundred plus deer coming into the feed so we would take out the number allowed to that farmer, gut, skin, and off to the food bank, that was a good thing for all involved if not implemented there was so many vehicle collisions, farmers loose feed and some go without the great meat from the food bank. I know a few hunters that would donate one of there deer to the bank too, all in all it was a good thing.

[Passthru]

This will be the first time I haven't filled a whitetail tag in a while. Not for lack of trying or opportunity but lack of bucks showing themselves and being limited to weekends this November. Last day I came across a small buck and a doe trying to sleep in the middle of the field. The buck looked so worn out, rolling his head around in a daze. Kinda felt bad for the guy and thought" well buddy you made it this close to the end of the season". Watched them for five min at 20 yards until they finally noticed me and took off. Would have been real easy as they bedded down 100 yards from my parked quad. The freezer is full of moose from earlier in the season so they both walked away. Another year

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Keep in mind.

There is a place where hunters need to step up and kill more animals even if the freezer is full.

If hunting becomes about Antlers, it won't be around for much longer.

Not about antlers for most and doubtful that demographic is going to change much or has changed much over the last 25 years nor will harvest stats either unless we put more hunters in the field. You can't make the current hunters shoot more than they want to shoot. Some would I suppose and we could issue more tags for those people instead of offering them to outfitters I guess but essentially the gov't isn't going to do that, instead they do what the gov't does and that is listen to the squeaky wheel. Outfitters lobby gov't and hunters don't. If we don't want outfitters getting more tags then we residents must lobby louder and more persistently than the outfitters. Resident hunters going on a killing spree filling every tag possible isn't going to change that. We would be shooting ourselves in the foot as we have already seen happen in the past, when the animals population is thinned down the outfitters will still get their allocations and the residents will be the ones who get cut back.

[Hillbilly 12]

Originally Posted by Passthru

This will be the first time I haven't filled a whitetail tag in a while. Not for lack of trying or opportunity but lack of bucks showing themselves and being limited to weekends this November. Last day I came across a small buck and a doe trying to sleep in the middle of the field. The buck looked so worn out, rolling his head around in a daze. Kinda felt bad for the guy and thought" well buddy you made it this close to the end of the season". Watched them for five min at 20 yards until they finally noticed me and took off. Would have been real easy as they bedded down 100 yards from my parked quad. The freezer is full of moose from earlier in the season so they both walked away. Another year

X2, Nice post!, bro took a moose at the start of november so that's plenty of meat for us, so the deer ticket goes on the tree. I'm not one for people just having to kill just because they have the ticket, or hunt for horns and donate the meat... But say they are helping the poor.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Some people were never taught the golden rule of hunting growing up.

“Take only what you need and leave the rest.”

Very few of us here are sustenance hunters. For most of us hunting is a luxury we can afford and there is not a real need. If there is actually a need most of us would be better served by working a bit more and buying more food. I do not think your golden rule has anything to do with need.

I hunt because I like game meat but I really do not need it. I do not fill all my tags, because I bought more tags because I wanted more opportunity and not because I am trying to conserve the deer population. The places I hunt there is a good population that if anything needs thinning.

I do believe in limiting your bag in relation to some species like sharp tails because I think they are sensitive to over hunting and their range is getting smaller.

I have never been a trophy hunter because I prefer younger and tastier meat and because larger animals are more work. I know it probably takes more hunting skill to hang a big one on the wall. That said, I have turned down more larger deer than smaller deer. I can not recall the last time I have turned down a spike or a fork when I had a tag. I can recall the last two large mule deer that I chose not to shoot including one that was the largest mule deer I have ever seen during hunting season. My opportunity to shoot this hugh deer came by 100% luck and not skill on my part. If this big guy would have been a fork or a doe it would have been in the back of my truck in short order.

I in no way ever feel guilty for taking an antler less deer when legal.

I think that the people that figure out tag allotment in certain areas must know what they are doing and there will be no real advantage if I do not fill all my tags.

I have no problem shooting meat animals and leaving the trophy deer for real hunters.

I will apply your golden rule to this thread. I will take what opinions I can use and leave the rest.

[Hogie135]

I want to tag out every year. Why? Because I only buy the tags that I need to feed my family for the year. I don’t spend extra on tags that I know I won’t fill because I can’t afford it. Today I tagged out on my whitetail. I also tagged out on my moose this year. That’s all I bought. Because someone says that they want to tag out, Does not mean they want to kill everything they see. It means they have set a certain goal for themselves and want to accomplish that.

Am I disappointed if I don’t tag out? No. It means I have to try harder next year.

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Your right transients are not in tune with the area you know most, just saying if it seems over run with game taking a few to feed others, help out really does look good on the hunting community.

I agree.
When the deer numbers are down I know of several locals that don't use doe tags or do not allow doe hunters on their land.
They know the population and conditions.
I don't think many transients apply that sort of logic but rather just go with "its legal so I will fill the tag".
I haven't shot doe for 20 some years now and probably pull the trigger on a WT every 4th or 5th year.
I look at the cost of a tag as pretty cheap for the amount of hours I get to hunt.
With the abundance of elk and moose the freezer is usually too full anyways.

[HowSwedeItIs]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

Very few of us here are sustenance hunters. For most of us hunting is a luxury we can afford and there is not a real need. If there is actually a need most of us would be better served by working a bit more and buying more food. I do not think your golden rule has anything to do with need.

I hunt because I like game meat but I really do not need it. I do not fill all my tags, because I bought more tags because I wanted more opportunity and not because I am trying to conserve the deer population. The places I hunt there is a good population that if anything needs thinning.

Well said

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by Hillbilly 12

I'm not one for people just having to kill just because they have the ticket, or hunt for horns and donate the meat... But say they are helping the poor.

If one really wants to help the poor donate the cost of tag and cost of the day's hunt to the poor or instead of going hunting volunteer at the food bank instead of hunting.

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by covey ridge

I have never been a trophy hunter because I prefer younger and tastier meat and because larger animals are more work. I know it probably takes more hunting skill to hang a big one on the wall.

Trophy hunters may or may not be more skilled, plenty of meat hunters are just as skilled if not more, they're just not dedicated to hunting trophies. The vast majority of trophy animals are not killed by trophy hunters rather are killed by average hunters who just happen to be in the right place at the right time. Trophy hunters are hardly ever lucky enough to actually kill a trophy.

[walking buffalo]

Time and place....

We have areas that NEED hunters to take more deer and elk, typically for social purposes.

Originally Posted by Bushrat

Not about antlers for most and doubtful that demographic is going to change much or has changed much over the last 25 years nor will harvest stats either unless we put more hunters in the field. You can't make the current hunters shoot more than they want to shoot. Some would


I suppose and we could issue more tags for those people instead of offering them to outfitters I guess but essentially the gov't isn't going to do that, instead they do what the gov't does and that is listen to the squeaky wheel. Outfitters lobby gov't and hunters don't. If we don't want outfitters getting more tags then we residents must lobby louder and more persistently than the outfitters.

Resident hunters going on a killing spree filling every tag possible isn't going to change that. We would be shooting ourselves in the foot as we have already seen happen in the past, when the animals population is thinned down the outfitters will still get their allocations and the residents will be the ones who get cut back.

Sorry Bush, but this is not what is going on at F&W and the stakeholder consultations.

There is a proposal to be decided on this winter that would change determining outfitter allocations to be based on "Opportunity" vs the current "Allowable Harvest".

This is one of the questions asked in the proposed allocation changes survey. Resident lobby groups are part of the discussion.
http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...tter+landowner


What this means is that as instead of the current system,

Lets say residents have an allowable harvest of 100 animals translates into an allowable harvest of ten animals by outfitters, the actual number of licences for residents and outfitters is then determined by their success rates, say 50% for Residents equalling 200 tags, and 70% for outfitters equalling 14 tags.

The new system of "opportunity" means that the outfitters will get 10% of the Resident licences issued, in the example above, outfitters will get 20 tags instead of the previous 14, a 42% increase.

As more Residents eat their tags, the success rate drops, and the outfitters get even more tags.


This is the new reality we are facing.

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

As more Residents eat their tags, the success rate drops, and the outfitters get even more tags.


This is the new reality we are facing.

Do you know for sure more residents are eating their tags? I doubt they are eating any more than they ever have. If we are not shooting enough animals why not let outfitters fill the gap.

I've killed 10 big game animals in 45 years of hunting, could have killed hundreds. Not likely to change and it is my right to hunt and shoot whatever animals I feel like or not.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by hal53

Why would you be concerned about a hunter choosing not to shoot a particular deer ?

I certainly am when they are plugging up the draw system. What is the difference between an anti hunter drawing tags to prevent harvest and a hunter glutting on draw tags just in case and then not filling them?

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by chuck

I certainly am when they are plugging up the draw system. What is the difference between an anti hunter drawing tags to prevent harvest and a hunter glutting on draw tags just in case and then not filling them?

I doubt many people 'glut' draw tags with no intention of using them 'just in case'. I have priority 17 in some draws and when and if I decide to draw one I fully intend to use it, but am not going to use it on a spike buck. The 999 system addresses this problem better than any other draw system. I could see your point in random draw scenario where a person applies for every draw available hoping to get drawn for one or two and gets drawn for 4 or 5 draws in one year in different areas at the same times but only has the time or funds to hunt one of them. I applied for draws in BC for 18 years never ever getting drawn. Yet friends often would get drawn for multiple tags and not be able to hunt more than one or two, that's what I consider a waste of draws and it is a poor system in my opinion.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Bushrat

I doubt many people 'glut' draw tags with no intention of using them 'just in case'. I have priority 17 in some draws and when and if I decide to draw one I fully intend to use it, but am not going to use it on a spike buck. The 999 system addresses this problem better than any other draw system. I could see your point in random draw scenario where a person applies for every draw available hoping to get drawn for one or two and gets drawn for 4 or 5 draws in one year in different areas at the same times but only has the time or funds to hunt one of them. I applied for draws in BC for 18 years never ever getting drawn. Yet friends often would get drawn for multiple tags and not be able to hunt more than one or two, that's what I consider a waste of draws and it is a poor system in my opinion.

You need to read this thread again.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

A quick rant here,
There's a fine line with hunting. When to know when enough is enough. For me, it's when my freezer is full. When you're thinking about who to give meat to, maybe you're done for the year?

I might get flamed out over this post, but there's a point when just because you have a tag for something, doesn't justify filling it. In my opinion anyway....

Don't we always say that hunting IS conservation?

Cheers.
John
Highlander Hunting Podcast

So another self congratulatory thread started by someone basically new to the forum advertising a pod cast or website.

In your few months here you have come to the conclusion that we immoral red necks need a lesson from the high road that is Highlander Hunting.

Your freezer is full you say. Well my freezer would easily hold 10 Whitetails and maybe 15 is they were young ones. It would alternatively hold an elk or two, a moose and a few deer if I was after the other allowable and perhaps a possession limit or two of fowl. If my freezer was empty from the start and I decided to fill it each year I would feel like a slob pig hunter, but that's just me, I would never project on to others.

I was just reading the "What's happened here" thread and if you are actually wondering just reread your opening preamble to this fine thread. We the general public, although bound by legal restriction, need to better control our primal nature to kill, kill, kill until there is nothing left to kill. Well thanks so much for enlightening us for we would have never known.

Hunting IS conservation you say. Well not if you don't kill anything. If you don't kill you are merely a passive bystander outside of the food change. Because the likelihood of yourself actually being eaten is next to nil, you simply become irrelevant.

Deer numbers (and most other game) have rebounded nicely since the last winter kill in spite of our ignorance and poor management practises. Winter BTW is the deciding factor not a couple or extra tags filled. As mentioned, there is a deer a day killed on most secondary highways in Alberta. I only hope they don't cost more families their lives as numbers start to get too high again.

You need to educate yourself on land carrying capacities and the true role the hunter must play in conservation. Whitetail deer are not even a native species. Left to their own devices they will starve out themselves and other animals, cause havoc on the highways and introduce disease that may be the end of not only themselves but maybe us as well. If the winters truly become shorter and warmer, which seems to be the case, we need to step up our harvest and encourage others to do so as well.

Then there is the Darwin theory of a healthy herd. Trophy and selective hunters want to challenge themselves to take the smartest, biggest and healthiest animals AND there is nothing wrong with that. True conservation is about harvesting the young, stupid or slow in numbers so they don't challenge for the resources that feed the others. The strong will survive and although smaller in over numbers the animals will be bigger, stronger, faster and healthier than the previous generations. This is why we have big northern Whitetails not in spite of our ignorance.

HABITAT LOSS AND OVER POPULATION ON LIMITED LAND is THE enemy of a healthy ecosystem and good hunting. By buying tags, introducing new hunters and harvesting animals we become stewards of the environment because WE ALL WANT NICE PLACES TO HUNT WITH A HEALTHY POPULATION OF ANIMALS.

HUNTING CONSERVATIONISTS should go one step further by supporting ACA, Ducks Unlimited and other organisations founded by outdoorsman rather than spending their time looking down their noses at others. These organisations purchase enormous tracks of land that ensure our hunting future, educate non hunters on the important role we play and welcome everyone that wants to get involved.

So I would like to offer a big congratulations to those participating in the hunt as a part of the ecosystem and not as conscientious bystanders. Numbers are up so increase your harvest and enjoy the rewards. A special shout out to Father of Five on a great season and sharing your conservation efforts in this great thread. http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=334087

Be sure to check out my pod cast, follow my twitter, like me on Facebook, ogle my instagram......

[covey ridge]

^^^^^

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by MK2750

So another self congratulatory thread started by someone basically new to the forum advertising a pod cast or website.

In your few months here you have come to the conclusion that we immoral red necks need a lesson from the high road that is Highlander Hunting.

Your freezer is full you say. Well my freezer would easily hold 10 Whitetails and maybe 15 is they were young ones. It would alternatively hold an elk or two, a moose and a few deer if I was after the other allowable and perhaps a possession limit or two of fowl. If my freezer was empty from the start and I decided to fill it each year I would feel like a slob pig hunter, but that's just me, I would never project on to others.

I was just reading the "What's happened here" thread and if you are actually wondering just reread your opening preamble to this fine thread. We the general public, although bound by legal restriction, need to better control our primal nature to kill, kill, kill until there is nothing left to kill. Well thanks so much for enlightening us for we would have never known.

Hunting IS conservation you say. Well not if you don't kill anything. If you don't kill you are merely a passive bystander outside of the food change. Because the likelihood of yourself actually being eaten is next to nil, you simply become irrelevant.

Deer numbers (and most other game) have rebounded nicely since the last winter kill in spite of our ignorance and poor management practises. Winter BTW is the deciding factor not a couple or extra tags filled. As mentioned, there is a deer a day killed on most secondary highways in Alberta. I only hope they don't cost more families their lives as numbers start to get too high again.

You need to educate yourself on land carrying capacities and the true role the hunter must play in conservation. Whitetail deer are not even a native species. Left to their own devices they will starve out themselves and other animals, cause havoc on the highways and introduce disease that may be the end of not only themselves but maybe us as well. If the winters truly become shorter and warmer, which seems to be the case, we need to step up our harvest and encourage others to do so as well.

Then there is the Darwin theory of a healthy herd. Trophy and selective hunters want to challenge themselves to take the smartest, biggest and healthiest animals AND there is nothing wrong with that. True conservation is about harvesting the young, stupid or slow in numbers so they don't challenge for the resources that feed the others. The strong will survive and although smaller in over numbers the animals will be bigger, stronger, faster and healthier than the previous generations. This is why we have big northern Whitetails not in spite of our ignorance.

HABITAT LOSS AND OVER POPULATION ON LIMITED LAND is THE enemy of a healthy ecosystem and good hunting. By buying tags, introducing new hunters and harvesting animals we become stewards of the environment because WE ALL WANT NICE PLACES TO HUNT WITH A HEALTHY POPULATION OF ANIMALS.

HUNTING CONSERVATIONISTS should go one step further by supporting ACA, Ducks Unlimited and other organisations founded by outdoorsman rather than spending their time looking down their noses at others. These organisations purchase enormous tracks of land that ensure our hunting future, educate non hunters on the important role we play and welcome everyone that wants to get involved.

So I would like to offer a big congratulations to those participating in the hunt as a part of the ecosystem and not as conscientious bystanders. Numbers are up so increase your harvest and enjoy the rewards. A special shout out to Father of Five on a great season and sharing your conservation efforts in this great thread. http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=334087

Be sure to check out my pod cast, follow my twitter, like me on Facebook, ogle my instagram......

So you won't be giving us a good Itunes rating then? LOL.
Feel better now?

[HowSwedeItIs]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

So you won't be giving us a good Itunes rating then? LOL.
Feel better now?

With honest reviewers like "MrsHighlander" there to boost your rating, probably won't matter much =)

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by HowSwedeItIs

With honest reviewers like "MrsHighlander" there to boost your rating, probably won't matter much =)

Wive's can't support husbands? Pretty obvious who she is. Not like she was trying to hide it.

[HowSwedeItIs]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Wive's can't support husbands? Pretty obvious who she is. Not like she was trying to hide it.

=)

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by MK2750

So another self congratulatory thread started by someone basically new to the forum advertising a pod cast or website.

In your few months here you have come to the conclusion that we immoral red necks need a lesson from the high road that is Highlander Hunting.

Your freezer is full you say. Well my freezer would easily hold 10 Whitetails and maybe 15 is they were young ones. It would alternatively hold an elk or two, a moose and a few deer if I was after the other allowable and perhaps a possession limit or two of fowl. If my freezer was empty from the start and I decided to fill it each year I would feel like a slob pig hunter, but that's just me, I would never project on to others.

I was just reading the "What's happened here" thread and if you are actually wondering just reread your opening preamble to this fine thread. We the general public, although bound by legal restriction, need to better control our primal nature to kill, kill, kill until there is nothing left to kill. Well thanks so much for enlightening us for we would have never known.

Hunting IS conservation you say. Well not if you don't kill anything. If you don't kill you are merely a passive bystander outside of the food change. Because the likelihood of yourself actually being eaten is next to nil, you simply become irrelevant.

Deer numbers (and most other game) have rebounded nicely since the last winter kill in spite of our ignorance and poor management practises. Winter BTW is the deciding factor not a couple or extra tags filled. As mentioned, there is a deer a day killed on most secondary highways in Alberta. I only hope they don't cost more families their lives as numbers start to get too high again.

You need to educate yourself on land carrying capacities and the true role the hunter must play in conservation. Whitetail deer are not even a native species. Left to their own devices they will starve out themselves and other animals, cause havoc on the highways and introduce disease that may be the end of not only themselves but maybe us as well. If the winters truly become shorter and warmer, which seems to be the case, we need to step up our harvest and encourage others to do so as well.

Then there is the Darwin theory of a healthy herd. Trophy and selective hunters want to challenge themselves to take the smartest, biggest and healthiest animals AND there is nothing wrong with that. True conservation is about harvesting the young, stupid or slow in numbers so they don't challenge for the resources that feed the others. The strong will survive and although smaller in over numbers the animals will be bigger, stronger, faster and healthier than the previous generations. This is why we have big northern Whitetails not in spite of our ignorance.

HABITAT LOSS AND OVER POPULATION ON LIMITED LAND is THE enemy of a healthy ecosystem and good hunting. By buying tags, introducing new hunters and harvesting animals we become stewards of the environment because WE ALL WANT NICE PLACES TO HUNT WITH A HEALTHY POPULATION OF ANIMALS.

HUNTING CONSERVATIONISTS should go one step further by supporting ACA, Ducks Unlimited and other organisations founded by outdoorsman rather than spending their time looking down their noses at others. These organisations purchase enormous tracks of land that ensure our hunting future, educate non hunters on the important role we play and welcome everyone that wants to get involved.

So I would like to offer a big congratulations to those participating in the hunt as a part of the ecosystem and not as conscientious bystanders. Numbers are up so increase your harvest and enjoy the rewards. A special shout out to Father of Five on a great season and sharing your conservation efforts in this great thread. http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=334087

Be sure to check out my pod cast, follow my twitter, like me on Facebook, ogle my instagram......

So kill as many animals as you can. Gotcha.

That's about the only conclusion I can draw from such an impassioned/irate response to a suggestion that perhaps we shouldn't kill every animal we legally can.

And as for "Then there is the Darwin theory of a healthy herd. Trophy and selective hunters want to challenge themselves to take the smartest, biggest and healthiest animals AND there is nothing wrong with that. True conservation is about harvesting the young, stupid or slow in numbers so they don't challenge for the resources that feed the others.", which is it? Kill the best, or kill the worst?

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

So kill as many animals as you can. Gotcha.

That's about the only conclusion I can draw from such an impassioned/irate response to a suggestion that perhaps we shouldn't kill every animal we legally can.

And as for "Then there is the Darwin theory of a healthy herd. Trophy and selective hunters want to challenge themselves to take the smartest, biggest and healthiest animals AND there is nothing wrong with that. True conservation is about harvesting the young, stupid or slow in numbers so they don't challenge for the resources that feed the others.", which is it? Kill the best, or kill the worst?

We decide as a group using scientific research to determine how many tags are issued. Too many animals on land is much more dangerous to the health of the herd than someone taking their legal limit of animals. Northern Michigan is a prime example where disease has devastated the herd.

When one steps up and says "Yeah it's legal but I am above the killing and filling of all tags" it divides and alienates part of our demographic. If in fact too many tags are issued we should speak up as a group and make certain the powers to be are aware of our concerns.

So are you are just wanting to mindlessly contradict as usual or was there a point to quoting me again and adding a smart comment to take my point of view out of context? No I did not say "Kill as many animals as you legally can" I said the harvest itself is the most important part a hunter plays in conservation and we don't need some high horse riders telling us how to conduct ourselves when we are acting in a legal, moral and ethical manner. I went on to say that harvesting animals is just as morally sound and IMO more so than someone that watches from the side lines pointing fingers at others.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

which is it? Kill the best, or kill the worst?

What ever turns your crank, just don't try to force your moral beliefs onto others. It divides us as a group and harms our conservation efforts. Harvesting the young, slow and weak has been scientifically proven to strengthen the herd if that is your question.

I had seven deer within 20 yards of me yesterday, two even had a wee nap. One button buck separated from it's mother because of the rut was literally within reach. I was no threat to them as my killing days are near over but I commend people like Father of Five that takes his boys out hunting, fills their tags and keeps the population healthy.

[Wisebuck]

Originally Posted by MK2750

We decide as a group using scientific research to determine how many tags are issued. Too many animals on land is much more dangerous to the health of the herd than someone taking their legal limit of animals. Northern Michigan is a prime example where disease has devastated the herd.

When one steps up and says "Yeah it's legal but I am above the killing and filling of all tags" it divides and alienates part of our demographic. If in fact too many tags are issued we should speak up as a group and make certain the powers to be are aware of our concerns.

So are you are just wanting to mindlessly contradict as usual or was there a point to quoting me again and adding a smart comment to take my point of view out of context? No I did not say "Kill as many animals as you legally can" I said the harvest itself is the most important part a hunter plays in conservation and we don't need some high horse riders telling us how to conduct ourselves when we are acting in a legal, moral and ethical manner. I went on to say that harvesting animals is just as morally sound and IMO more so than someone that watches from the side lines pointing fingers at others.

Love the eloquence of this statement. Also believe the same train of thought. Bravo.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

So you won't be giving us a good Itunes rating then? LOL.
Feel better now?

I never felt bad, just don't take kindly to people telling me and others we should when we have done nothing wrong.