quote:

---

I would secondly advise you that your ass is walking home

---

..even if it is HIS truck?

Are situations always black and white, good or evil?

I'm not sure that certain people blindly follow unjust and unpopular law, written by someone far away? For instance, some ranchers are anti lion. Some rural folks are anti eagle, anti wolf.

Did everybody drive 55MPH when it was the law of the land? In fact, nobody did. Fudging on taxes is admired, by some?

In some jurisdictions, it is against the law to drive off existing road, even if the road is impassable, due to a wash out.

I am amazed at the number of relatively small offenses that have been jacked up into a class ? felony, since I was young. When I was a kid, before there was a law, I may have shot a chicken hawk, so I wouldn't want to cast the first stone. Also, I'm a city slicker, the ones that pass all the laws that country folks have to abide. I have always observed many more fish and game violation by rural folks than dudes, but I am not the Crusader that some are. I have my creeds, but occasionally, I have difficulty judging others.

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on June 18, 2006, 08:49 AM:
 
Leonard,

I usually drive, and if I'm not driving, the game warden will likely give me a ride to where someone can pick me up. That's why God made cell phones, and there are very few places in my area where a cell phone doesn't work. If I'm in one, I go to the next hill or as far as I need to walk. As my recently excused "hunting partner" leaves me standing by the road, I will be logging his tag, vehicle description, time of offense and location for my testimony. There was a time - not sure if it's still so - where violation of the federal raptor protection laws offered a reward of half the assessed fines to the reporting party upon conviction. On an eagle, the minimum is a $5,000 fine. I have no problem dropping a dime on a game slob that I have no intentions of ever hunting with again when I think of all I can buy with what's left of $2,500 after taxes.

As far as raptors causing losses, that's still as simple as calling the game warden, working with him/ her to assess the problem and devising a workable solution. I've seen them work as a liason between the property owener and the USFWS agent on that very type of problem and come to successful resolutions. In my area, and as far as farm poultry goes being what I usually see as fact, the problem is as much the producer's for creating an opportunity for the bird to snag a free meal as it is the bird doing what it is hard-wired to do. There are viable solutuions that don't involve breaking the law.

If you break the law, you break the law. No excuses. Everyone bends the law a bit, myself included, but that's a matter of degrees. Infraction? Misdemeanor? Felony? There are differences between the three.

As far as someone shooting a deer out of desparate need, I've seen people do it, and I've seen them arrested. Judges in this area frown upon the claims of social parasites that say they had no other option - they had to feed their familes. Bull! There are jobs out there, as well as people willing to help you out. Doing so is no different in my eyes than to enter someone's home in their absence and helping yourself to their pantry. You're still stealing, but instead of it being from one person or family, you're stealing from all the people in your state who hold joint ownership of that resource.

I've got one guy here locally who would love to snag me in a violation because he sincerely wants to destroy my credibility as a writer and sportsman. He's gone so far as to make false reports against me that have resulted in multiple visits from the local mallard marshal. It was only in the past year that the constable heeded my advice that should he continue to investigate me without reasonable cause in doing so, he and I would meet together with his immediate supervisor and the Director of Law Enforcement for the state and come to a mutual understanding of what contitutes harassment. I have a lot at stake by allowing myself to bend a law, even once. It doesn't happen. And I have no tolerance for those who think otherwise.

Yeah, I'm a hardliner and a hard ass, but being so makes sure there are no misunderstandings and no confusion over how much "wiggle room" you have if you gun for me.

A good friend of mine was the State Director of the Division of Law Enforcement for our Dept. of Wildlife & Parks. One day, while riding along with him, we were talking about hunting with other people and he said that he dreaded the thought and very rarely did so any more simply because even the best hunters committed error after error in the field and he found great distaste in compromising his principals if even for a moment. Rather than "turn a cheek", he just turned them down when they called, and made it a point to say that he checked them out and gave them the same patrol attention as anyone else when on duty.

Again, if you don't like the laws, find a way to work within them, or get them changed. But it's wrong to violate those same laws just because you personally disagree with them.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on June 18, 2006, 08:53 AM:
 
Cdog911: I see this thread is directed at me and i think i should clear up a few things. First off youre beloved chicken hawk is alive and well, now you can sleep better tonight knowing this. There are other means of correcting a problem with a chicken hawk without haveing to shoot it. Like Tim stated earlyier the laws for feathered pred. is out dated. For youre information there are more birds of prey here than there are fox. I enjoy haveing fox and coyotes around, I like to watch them hunt and play and i also love to hunt them.
There is room on this planet for all of Gods creatures. I don't think coyotes should be shot when there fur is not prime but that is my belief. But over time from talking with other hunters and understanding there views on the subject its ok with me if they shoot a coyote in summer months and when they have finished i will offer to give them a ride back to town.
Now lets get down to the word you used, i believe it was slob- hunter. First off if i could put my hand through the screen and grab you by the neck i would punch you right in the nose. You know nothing about me and right away you want to stick a label on me well shame on you Cdog911. LOL
 

---

Posted by Okanagan (Member # 870) on June 18, 2006, 09:36 AM:
 
Cdog911, thank you for your candor. Any writing of this sort tells us far more about the person writing than it does about his subject, and you have proven that rule. It must be very hard to go through life on duty to catch and punish every infraction you encounter in others. Thank you for telling us about yourself. I will stay as far as possible away from you at all times and would prefer not even to have a cup of coffee with you. If you are married and have children, my heart goes out to them. No anger or meanness intended here, just feel bad for you and anyone around you. You should not be in law enforcement.

[ June 18, 2006, 09:38 AM: Message edited by: Okanagan ]
 

---

Posted by Greenside (Member # 10) on June 18, 2006, 09:45 AM:
 
http://volokh.com/posts/1133293946.shtml
 

---

Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on June 18, 2006, 10:33 AM:
 
"Those rapter protection laws are antiquated and need to be repealed. I'm not saying we need to open season on rapters, but they deserve no more protection than the pigions."

Amen Brother.

On the subject of not allowing any wiggle room, zero tolerance, all offenses will be reported and prosecuted, I just can't understand that thinking.

A real scenario for you. And my apologies if my reporting of the laws aren't accurate, this is just what LEO's in both states have told me. In Utah, it's not legal to lean your rifle over the hood of your truck. Shooting from in, on or around a vehicle is a no-no. In Wyoming, you're fine as long as both feet are on the ground - pulling off a two track and leaning the rifle over the hood is fine. I'm shooting prairie dogs near the border. Get out, take a few potshots off the hood in Wyoming. Drive 400 yards and do the same thing in Utah. This is something I've actually done, many times. And you would turn me in for that? Walk your ass 15 miles to get a signal on your cell phone, or leave me to do the same? Frankly, I feel that is just assinine and unreasonable.

I'm sorry Lance, but we can't be hunting partners . LOL!

- DAA
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on June 18, 2006, 10:48 AM:
 
TA-

I started this thread by saying, "Not to point a finger,..." which I meant. Your comment simply compelled me to start a thread on this subject. Nothing I've ever read in your posts ever made me regard you as a slob hunter. As far as the hawk, I had no knowledge as to the outcome of that encounter you had with the hawk and I'm glad to hear it is okay. Gladder (is that a word) to know that you didn't step over the line. But, since you're feeling guilty,...

And, no, I would not have lost any sleep over it, (God makes lots of hawks) but Okanagan, if you go thru life observing and conforming to only those laws that suit your personal interests, then (Okanagan), I don't care to share a cup of coffee with you anyway. You're just not my kind of people. Call me a snob. But be assured, I mean nothing personal. If you had ever hunted with me or knew me, I don't think you'd regard my previous comments as being out of character for me. Those with whom I have shared a camp will attest to that fact, and I'm really not all that bad a guy.

Dennis,

I'm in a hurry and made it only so far as the part about there being no obligation to report a crime for common folks, society of informants, and McCarthyism. Really? Isn't what your contribution is eluding to pretty much in support of anarchism? And I'm curious why you would have such ready access to a site like that. Hmmm? (scratches head).

For about seven years, I was a sworn law enforcement officer. I didn't surrender my ethics or my conscience when I turned my commissioned deputy's card back to the Sheriff and Undersheriff. I didn't leave that profession because I was forced out by my own improprieties, but rather, because I saw an opportunity on the near horizon that better suited my demeanor and talents. In my heart, I still carry the same sense of honor and conduct as I did when my wallet lie heavy with a badge. In Kansas, if you see a crime (as an LEO) and you fail to act upon it, you are, yourself, guilty of a crime and can be charged, convicted and sentenced for it. As such, I am proudly a snitch. Guess that means the potential pool of future hunting partners around here just got a whole lot smaller. And, I always thought this was a more upstanding group of sportsmen. I'll be careful not to judge all by the remarks of a few.

And Okanagan, your post reveals equally as much about your character. Except that I'm at the other extreme. Just where I want to be. My kids and my wife are fine. All three of them are highly respectful of the law and consider them to be mandates rather than friendly suggestions. Sure, we miss out on a lot (apparently), but that's a cross we'll bear. At least we don't carry the guilt of committing crimes against our neighbors. I presume you think there is room for flexibility within the construct of the law and it's all legal until you get caught. In that, I disagree. Believe it or not, one can live within those laws and still maintain a rather high standard of living, quality-wise.

There have been many times as an LEO when I used my sense of judgment and may have let someone off with a warning, but I hold a different outlook on game violators. Poachers, game violators and trap thieves are all held in the same high disregard in my book. And if that makes you not want to hunt with me, believe me, I'm very happy with that. Thanks.

(Edited for spellcheck.)

[ June 18, 2006, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 18, 2006, 10:53 AM:
 
Something to ponder, blindly following laws with a feel good intention, but narrow in scope.

Lions have been needlessly protected in California for almost thirty(30) years. They are so numerous that they have been preying on humans for years. In one case, they have been decimating a bighorn sheep herd in the Sierras. Lions, that are protected and sheep that are protected....from humans. There are people that would be tempted to perform a bit of vigilante justice, if they observed a lion stalking a bighorn lamb. A cellphone solution is no solution, at all.

Good moral debate. LB
 

---

Posted by Buffalobob (Member # 825) on June 18, 2006, 11:12 AM:
 
Being retired after twenty years of being the Big Chief fish cop and treehugger, I will say I have put a lot of people in jail for stuff. I have cooperated on US Fish & Wildlife investigations that put people in jail.

Growing up in rural Alabama on a farm, I am well versed in the chicken hawk mentality and that was what was practiced on the farm although in all the years I was growing up with chickens on the farm, a hawk never actually got one that I was aware of.

Humans are complex organisms which respond differently to different situations. I think nothing of running at 130-140mph on an interstate with traffic while racing another car. I am sure all of the mothers with a minivan full of kids think I should be put in jail. Poaching deer and shooting raptors irritate me no end. Shooting does during buck season and letting them lay irritates me. On the other hand I have had to give up one of my favorite pasttimes while being employed in my particualr field. That little game involved using a 17 Rem on late season ducks that would sit out in the middle of lakes beyond shotgun range. If you set up on the downwind side of the lake, the dead ducks will float and be pushed to you. I am sure duck hunters didn't appreciate my version of duckhunting and as I said I gave that up decades ago because it was/is illegal even though it is a lot of fun.

I spent more than a few years of my career trying to protect the endangered species such as the blackfooted ferret. I was fired long ago for trying to prevent the irradication of the Colorado squawfish and humpedback chub in the San Juan River basin. Lots of hunters have very strong feelings against wolves but once again my whole career has been directed to trying to restore fish and animals and habitat. I did that job because when I got up in the morning I looked forward to my work and when I came home at night I felt I had done something worthwhile. Few things made me feel better than putting people in jail.

For those of you who don't know, I will say that I have never in my life killed a coyote and when I registered here I was going to start up coyote hunting but it seems that y'all frown on shooting coyotes during the denning season so I have held off on going coyote hunting until everybody thinks it is the correct time of the year. I am amazed no end at the fact that most of you self regulate yourselves.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on June 18, 2006, 11:36 AM:
 
Buffalobob: enjoy youre retirement and get out there and shoot some coyotes. I'll try to look the
other way. good shooting and have fun.
P.S. the only reason we in S.C. Minn. frown on shooting coyotes out of season is because we don't have that many and we like to leave some for seed. More fun to hunt alot of them instead of just one.

[ June 18, 2006, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: TA17Rem ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 18, 2006, 11:43 AM:
 
some excellent input.

Bob, I just can't bow down to every single (ill advised) law, until such time it is repealed. (whether I observe it, or not, such as 55MPH)

Some of the LEO that I know believe they are above the law , (laws of man and God) especially concerning traffic laws and adultery. My former Lieutenant, L.A. County Sheriff brother-in-law was guilty of running around on my sister and over limit on trout, but not sited. Driving with that guy was like red lights and siren all the time, to the grocery store, U turns against traffic, blowing stop signs; flash a badge, etc.

But, yeah, many of us do try to cut a little slack to coyotes, whenever possible. It's not a law, it's a belief system.

Some things just do not lend themselves to a black and white interpretation.

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Locohead (Member # 15) on June 18, 2006, 01:00 PM:
 
On more than one occasion I've been witness to accidental law breakage. I've seen many hen pheasants shot, roosters badly hit and lost and even big game animals taken in the wrong accidentally. I been around lots of party hunting.

I believe that if I were to accidentally kill a large game animal or accidentally kill two. I'd have to think twice about turning myself in. Some Game wardens just need to hear the truth and will understand a mistake. Many others are just looking to put you on the front page just so that they can see their name in print as the guy making the bust. Some folks are just plain black and white. I live my life in the grey! Perhaps I've indecisive, neutral, or just too easy going - but I'd sooner give a real heart to heart talk to a buddy on how and what it means to be a genuine sportsman. And believe me, I have on several occasions had talks with folks about not drinking while driving while hunting, not drinking around guns, and watching what the hell they are shooting at. I even severely chastised a friend for shooting 3 does and not finding them before finding his fourth one hit. I wasn't even hunting with him and it made me really mad.

But I'd never be a nark. It would just plain embarrass me.

NOTE: I am in no way advocating turning ones back to bad stuff, nor do I condone slob hunting. I, like Lance am just telling how I am and what I'd do.

I can say with all honesty however, that Lance is a wonderful hunting partner. He is a very interesting person and very well versed on many outdoor issues. He is passionate about the things he loves including his family and the outdoors. Lance isn't the only hard ass I know I just so happen to be
a very soft one!

[ June 18, 2006, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: Locohead ]
 

---

Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on June 18, 2006, 01:10 PM:
 
What an interesting,and revealing thread. Laws; Im one of those who looks at them from two sides, there is(excuse the spelling) "malum en fey" and "malum prohibitum", one being a wrong of moral or ethical principle,the other being a wrong of mans created law.
A for instance, your wife is about to deliver a baby,it's 3 in the morning,no traffic,and your rushing to the hospital. On the way you blow thru three red lights,no traffic,no real risk;as I see it, you are guilty of no real wrong,other than the fact you violated a made up law by mans own hand...just scribbling on a piece of paper.
Contrast that with say, commision of murder, which is a violation of human morals and ethics and gods law if you believe in such things, big difference to my mind?
I guess where I fall down on the raptor shooting scenario is this, if the hawk is indeed harrassing your chickens, I have no problem with a guy shooting it, no harm,no fowl:)
If I hunted with a guy who just happily shot at every hawk we passed, yeah I might ask the simple question, "why", do you want to do that? God knows, Ive killed a bunch of raptors in my lifetime, as kids we just looked at them as targets of opportunity, like jackrabbits etc. Now of course, I would never think of shooting one,and have mild regret at those many I tipped over with 22s and shotguns.
The part I can't get my mind around is turning in a hunting partner for a violation? A stern warning,or chastizing of him for doing some silly shit is one thing, but asking to be let out of truck to walk,call him in to be ticketed...come on now, thats silly as hell in my opinion.
Im much more concerned with the safety habits and gun handling of a hunting partner, than I am of with what he chooses to take a shot at. A hunting accident,or dangerous firearm act,is far harder to reconcile to my mind, than a guy taking a pot shot at a damned hawk.
I can walk away from a stupid act of hawk shooting or poaching,and choose not to take the guy again, but turn him in, it's just not warranted in my mind.
As for coyotes, I don't hunt them in summer,nor do any of my hunting partners,if they do, it's not with me present. I encourage them to leave them alone till winter,and most understand why. To my mind it would be like shooting a buck deer with shed antlers, what kind of trophy is that? I believe Im more disgusted when I see a glory shot photo of a guy squatting behind a summertime coyote, than If a guy was holding a hawk by the wingtip and grinnin' big for the camera...but thats just me:)
 

---

Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on June 18, 2006, 01:23 PM:
 
I have a scenario for ya.

How about a fella that owns alot (relatively)of land. He raises cattle and crops. Hes not a hunter, but loves turkey and deer meat. He has alot of turkey and deer on his farm and they eat his food and live on his land year round.

If this farmer wants to eat a turkey or a deer, even though it may not be season and he may not buy a tag, and he may not be desperate to feed his family, is there a problem with him eating one when he wants?
 

---

Posted by Locohead (Member # 15) on June 18, 2006, 01:39 PM:
 
Perhaps if you ate the turkey before killing it...like Jack prefers his monkey brains!
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on June 18, 2006, 02:01 PM:
 
AZ-hunter good read.
Andy L. If the rancher is going to eat the turkey i would'nt have a problem with him shooting it out of season.
 

---

Posted by JoeF (Member # 228) on June 18, 2006, 02:13 PM:
 
I've started about 99 replies to this thread and have deleted them. That Az. guy kinda covered 98.5 of them.

I really hope that this is a case of our fragile medium striking us about the face and kneck. I don't think that anyone advocates indescriminately shooting a hawk w/o reason these days.

What troubles me and what I hope I'm interpreting wrong is CDogs definition of reason and the fact that he has repeatedly stated how he would put an animal's welfare before a persons. Or was that an animal's law before a people's. Kinda like those PETA folks.

He believes that a rural persons first, only, and best defense against an animal problem should be a gov. agency. Sorry, city boy. Don't work that way. Were you the guy who asked "where's Bush" a few hours after the hurricane hit?

I'd never hunt twice with someone who indescriminately shot a hawk. I'm even less fond of people who elevate animals to some higher plain.
Cdog, I'm glad you gave up law enforcement and I truely hope your fish do not endure too much pain.
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on June 18, 2006, 02:32 PM:
 
Buaffalbob,

Welcome to HM. If you keep your ears open long enough and put some feelers out, it usually isn't long until you find a coyote that needs killing because of his habit of crossing wires with people. Mostly happens during denning season and, to most folks here, is an acceptable reason to circumvent our self-imposed moratorium on hunting outside of fur season. This is the only reason I'll warm a barrel when the fur isn't peelable and especially when there's a chance of whacking a wet bitch. I try my best - within my experience - to identify the specific offending coyote and target that individual and regard it as an opportunity to return the favor to a landowner who has graciously allowed me trespass privileges on their land, oftentimes for many years, so I might do what I so love doing - calling coyotes. Once the problem is neutralized and no longer exists, the guns get locked up until the phone rings again.

There are guys here like Cal Taylor and Scott Huber that elevate this business to an art form and are very knowledgeable and effective at what they do. My hat is off to them. But killing for the sake of killing at this time of the year (or at anytime) pets me wrong as well. And Vic, I'm not offended by your remark about hero shots in the off season. I've included them recently to add some variety to the board, but each of these coyotes were pointed at by a cattle producer or homeowner in the local "outback" and the order/ request received to kill 'em. We did. In a place where 98% of the real estate is privately owned, you do what you're asked to do, or someone else has your hunting spot next season.

Loco - I understand what you're saying, and I guess where I separate your two arguments is that accidentally taking an animal because of misidentification or whatever is vastly different than the guy that kills a protected animal with intent and forethought. The accident is just that. An accident. The latter is a crime.
Intent is the distinction.

Dave,

Does that mean you're not buying me coffee either?

Do understand that I'm not stupid. If it's fifteen miles to the nearest cell access, I'll keep my mouth shut until I get home. If you were, let's say, to buy me coffee and then committed your transgression, I might not report you, but I probably wouldn't be calling you to go hunting again anytime too soon either. But, around here, you're never more than a mile from a road and I walk 14 miles a day at work, so I don't see it as a problem.

And Vic, I guess it's all about how you define sportsman and hunter. How often are we hunters quick to defend ourselves by pointing out that poachers are not "hunters", they're "criminals", that we don't want to be lumped in with by the general, non-hunting public and that we take offense at them being called "hunters"? I don't think turning in a criminal is silly as much as it is consistent.

As far as antiquated raptor laws, I dont totally disagree. Yup, there are more great horned owls out there than you can shake a stick at. Used to be the same for red-tailed hawks. But, West Nile Virus put a big hurt on all those around here. Those that are left are still being assaulted by well-meaning farmers who once saw a red tail stoop on a covey of quail or heard about it happening over coffee, and, ever since, now regards all "chicken hawks" as being the ultimate demise of the bobwhite in North America. Never mind that they've forever eliminated the necessary habitat by turning primo quail habitat into just another wheatfield and that they fail to understand that their actions serve to do more damage than any hawk will ever do. Without some regard for the needs of the resource, there will be neither hawks or quail, yet the blame will go to the former. In the end, I think those laws that protect all raptors, and which were drafted and implemented with the intent of protecting specific species during the days of DDT and Silent Spring need to be replaced with new laws that allow for controlling those pop'ns as a means of managing other species that serve as their table fare. The old laws were passed for a reason and conditions have changed. Review, reassessment, and adjustments should be made specific to the local conditions. If your area is overrun with hawks, the state should be able to do something to resolve the problem. the same way if a landowner is having a problem, he or she should be able to protect their property. Be it from hawks or coyotes. No distinction in my book. But there are processes to be followed at this point in time and as long as the laws exist in their current state, I think it prudent that we follow them or seek for them to be changed. Bear in mind, though, that the public won't tolerate killing for the sake of killing. Therefore, maybe they should have an open season for consumptive users. Anyone got a good recipe for barred owl?

Andy,

Your question about everyone's feelings about a landowner or rancher helping himself to the resource just because he can is only a short hop from the same mindset that is gradually, but most certainly, killing the sport of hunting in this country. Kansas is a prime example. Through lease hunting and guiding, landowners have greedily laid claim to the wildlife resource - a public trust - as their own and are happily doing with it what they want. Rather than shooting a deer or turkey once in a while for personal consumption, justifying their actions because they've fed them and provided for their survival, they're just selling the rights to access, locking gates, and eliminating opportunities for middle class, taxpayers like me and many of my friends and customers who cannot afford $20 an acre to hunt deer for 10 days out of the year. It matters not to folks around here whether they're shooting them for personal consumption or selling them to people from out of state. The fact remains that they're stealing from the people of the state of Kansas to make a profit. Just my opinion, (which I'm certain will ruffle a few efeathers) and also the opinion of a local judge who heard the case of a guy whose shop was found to be full of turkey feathers peeled off dozens of wild turkeys he'd killed because they were "his". Turned out that they weren't, and he'd been money ahead buying turkeys at the Piggly Wiggly.

It's a good debate, and full of interesting replies to the original question: What would you do?
 

---

Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on June 18, 2006, 02:43 PM:
 
You still didnt answer my question Lance. Does the fella in question need to be jailed? Were talking about two or three turkeys and one deer a year here. Not selling anything.
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on June 18, 2006, 02:50 PM:
 
Joe,

Where you said,

quote:

---

What troubles me and what I hope I'm interpreting wrong is CDogs definition of reason and the fact that he has repeatedly stated how he would put an animal's welfare before a persons. Or was that an animal's law before a people's. Kinda like those PETA folks.

---

enlighten me. And, first off, it's not the "animal's law". It's the law of the land - our laws - to which I refer.

Where did I put an animal's welfare before that of people? Did I chastise anyone who found themselves in an "us or them", hand to talon battle with a hawk? Don't recall doing that. Again, the scenario I offered was one in which you're hunting a stand and the guy you're with hauls off and shoots a hawk. You aren't set up over his chicken pen trying to get one that's wiped out half your flock. He just got bored, saw an opportunity and took it. No justification. No reason other than he simply couldn't control himself. Again, what would your reaction be? WHAT WOULD YOU DO? Slap him on the back? Give him a high five and an attaboy? From the rest of your remarks, I doubt it and therein lies the agreement between us.

My remarks are directed at killing protected animals simply due to an inability to control one's juvenile urges. And again, from the rest of your remarks, I think we actually agree but are unclear on certain details.

As far as the the post-hurricane remarks and relying on the government for your every need, you obvisouly don't know me too well. Then again, I'm sitting here wondering what the hell that has to do with someone blasting a hawk off a fence post when he was supposed to be coyote hunting. Can you say S-T-R-E-T-C-H?

Maybe it's a difference between where I live and that of others. Hereabouts, we have processes one call follow to fix what ails them, and it's done within the letter of the law. No one needs the government to fix their every problem, but the laws clearly expect that you do what needs to be done under the auspices of those authorities we pay to oversee the resources and who have the education and experience to ensure that the job is done properly and to everyone's benefit. If your state doesn't offer those opportunities, maybe you need to change the way things are done where you live.

It's been fun, boys, but I've got a shop full of deer heads that need my attention and, truth be told, I don't think there's much more of a chance of changing my mind on this as there is of me changing yours. Off to work.
 

---

Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on June 18, 2006, 02:50 PM:
 
Naw, I'll still buy you a cup of coffee, if the opportunity presents.

Definitely, we won't be going hunting together, though.

My hunting time is my sanity time. The last thing I need is to bring the rat race with me by having someone along ready to pounce on the first mistake I make, and cost me a not insignificant amount in fines, and possibly much worse - confiscation of equipment, loss of hunting privileges, having a "record" etc. Anyone that would do that to a hunting partner, over something as stupid and trivial as some of the scenarios described in this thread, is someone I want as far away from me as possible when I'm out enjoying my precious sanity time. It's precisely the kind of bullshit I'm trying to escape and forget for a day or two. There will be plenty of my fellow men out to stick it in me over the slightest percieved transgression just as soon as I get back home to civilization...

- DAA
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 18, 2006, 02:55 PM:
 
Still an interesting discussion of ethical and moral considerations. Please be careful about knocking another man's belief system, agree with it or not.

I also tend to agree with Vic. I don't shoot hawks or owls or eagles and I don't poach game out of season. If I were to observe someone do those things, I may form an opinion about your charactor, but I don't think I would notify authorities?

I really hope that I see some "wiggle room" as DAA said. I remember a case of overzelous game law enforcement, here in CA, several years ago. Seems some guy miscounted his quail and he had one in his vest pouch and a limit in the cooler. They crucified him. Just last yesr, we were hunting dove down below Yuma and I dropped all the birds (two limits) at my son's house. When I got home, I found a bird in one of my field jacket pockets. Is cuff 'em and stuff 'em the best and only solution?

They used to argue something about "intent" in breaking a law, maybe that doesn't apply anymore? Like, did that 'yard intend to kill six people because he was caught tresspassing, or was he defending himself, as some claim?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Okanagan (Member # 870) on June 18, 2006, 03:07 PM:
 
Cdog911,
"And Okanagan, your post reveals equally as much about your character. Except that I'm at the other extreme. Just where I want to be. My kids and my wife are fine. All three of them are highly respectful of the law and consider them to be mandates rather than friendly suggestions. Sure, we miss out on a lot (apparently), but that's a cross we'll bear. At least we don't carry the guilt of committing crimes against our neighbors. I presume you think there is room for flexibility within the construct of the law and it's all legal until you get caught. In that, I disagree. Believe it or not, one can live within those laws and still maintain a rather high standard of living, quality-wise."

Cdog911, of course it reveals more about me than it does the subject. However, you have again proved my point in that you read into my words an assumption that is not stated, not implied and simply is not there. No where did I advocate nor condone breaking of laws. I just don't want anything to do with your attitude nor approach to life. As you did with me and you have written about others, you presume the worst, read the worst into others, seem to enjoy nailing others. No thanks. I do not violate games laws nor other laws except as in the common sense conditions AZ has thoughtfully laid out. My kids are responsible adults, one of them in a high position of Federal responsiblity.

I wish you and your family the best. I hope I am wrong and have misread the rigid, vindictive approach to life you've described. Change your mind? Rigid things don't change, they break.

[ June 18, 2006, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: Okanagan ]
 

---

Posted by JoeF (Member # 228) on June 18, 2006, 03:35 PM:
 
CDog, I do not have the time to debate things in detail. I will say that your earlier posts came across as a rental cop. A uniform, a badge, but no freakin gun....

I have absolutely no use for anyone who would interpret and live by the letter of the law without consideration of practicality.

You stated "I think we actually agree but are unclear on certain details."

Of that, I have no doubt.
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on June 18, 2006, 03:39 PM:
 
I have a ethic's situation for you Cdog911. There is this hunter here at home, he is retired and collects social security. Anyway i new of him for years and i was like you and put a label on him as a slob hunter. He would shoot deer when ever he had the chance and any other game animals he could find. I always told myself if i ever catch him doing wrong i would turn him in,well it never happened. One day i was out in the snow hunting coyotes and i had one up and running and i stayed on his track and kept dogging him. I finally got close enough for a shot and got the coyote. When i got to the road i was 4 miles from my truck and i started walking down the road and along comes this guy. He offered me a ride back to my truck and on the way there we got to talking and i found out this guy was'nt as badd as i thought.
We ended up hunting coyotes together and i got to know him a little more each time out. I talked to one of his son's and found out that social security is'nt what its cracked up to be. Anyway this guy fishes all summer to provide food for the table and dureing the fall he hunts ducks and geese. Then deer season rolls around and he harvest's a few deer mostly doe's . Then pheasent season starts up and he is out everyday shooting birds from the road. Later when the snow starts to fly he is out after fox and coyotes for the fur. When all the season's end then he does what you call ADC work. He goes out and does work for farmers that have CRP lands, if there is a problem with running dogs, birds of prey, stray house cats, raccoons, skunks, ect. he takes care of the problem with a bullet from his gun. The results of all this so called slob hunting; We have more pheasants here than we have had since i can remember, the deer herds are healthy and produceing some nice bucks, more ducks sticking around and haveing there young, and the mange seems to be showing its self less and less each year which means more well furred coyotes. Alot of the local farmers hunt pheasants and deer and so far they are real happy with the results. Infact they are so happy that there are'nt to many places in this area that we cannot hunt coyote's. And this so called slob hunter also likes to watch birds and other wildlife, and has a dog. In youre eyes Cdog911 i should turn him in, and what go back to the way hunting once was, no way. Oh buy the way this guys freezer is full of wild game, he eats it year round, dose'nt buy pork or beef, has a few bucks left over for gas and bullets. I've been coyote hunting with him for over 15 years is this man a slob hunter not in my eyes, he's more of a surviver.
 

---

Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on June 18, 2006, 05:39 PM:
 
Lance,
Im not slamming you. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Ours dont see exactly eye to eye, but thats ok too.

Im guilty of being a reformed chickenhawk killer. I grew up. I know some guys that still do it for "sport", but Im over it. Honestly, there are too damned many of them around here at least. Seems they are on every telephone pole and lone tall tree. Unreal. I wouldnt hesitate to kill one if it caused me problems. I think the turkey farmers around here kill several. I also wouldnt turn anyone in for that. Unless they were guilty of other things as well.

As for farmers in my question, we dont square up on that either. Landowners own the land, hence the name. I dont see anything wrong with a guy eating something off his own land. Im not talking about commercial hunting or anything, just a few to eat, when he wants. As for leasing ground, I dont like it, but I sure wont tell someone they cant lease their hunting rights to make money off their own land. That sounds almost, dare I say it, Liberal!!

Anyway, do what you want of course. I dont see a reason to get into it with a bunch of guys you buddy with on a board over something like this. I would still go to coffee with ya and hunt with ya, if you dont mind being around a slob like me.

 

---

Posted by UTcaller (Member # 8) on June 18, 2006, 05:50 PM:
 
Yea, I don't understand the problem.If you have a problem with a "chickenhawk" or any other wild animal killing your chickens or other livestock kill the damn thing.If you're out calling and you see a hawk just sitting on a fence post in the middle of the desert leave the damn thing alone.On thing for sure the last thing hunters need in there life is more government,whether its local law enforcement or fish and game.Like Vic said just don't hunt with them anymore if they are killing shit just for the sake of killing it.Good Hunting Chad
 

---

Posted by Tim Behle (Member # 209) on June 18, 2006, 06:50 PM:
 

quote:

---

Still an interesting discussion of ethical and moral considerations. Please be careful about knocking another man's belief system, agree with it or not.

---

That's one of the big things that I love about this board, and I know that some guys hate it, and it has run a few good people ( with thin skins ) off to other places.

Leonard isn't here to protect anyone's feelings. If you have an opinion, spit it out. But don't expect anyone to hold your hand if someone else doesn't like your opinion and tells you so.

Morals and ethics are a real touchy subjects, people get fired up fast when theirs are questioned. I think Leonard does a hell of a good job at keeping the flames to a minimum, while allowing each person fair space to voice their thoughts.
 

---

Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on June 18, 2006, 07:34 PM:
 
I can see myself in Tim Behle's shoes, and if a hawk swooped down and grabbed one of my chickens I can see myself giving that hawk a lesson regarding bullet speed. I know that I said earlier thatI would never shoot a hawk. That is a lesson for ME. Never say Never.
 

---

Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on June 18, 2006, 07:56 PM:
 
Dave said,

quote:

---

Anyone that would do that to a hunting partner, over something as stupid and trivial as some of the scenarios described in this thread, is someone I want as far away from me as possible when I'm out enjoying my precious sanity time.

---

The only scenario I've described is the one I suggested at first and that is of a guy willfully and deliberately shooting a federally protected bird of prey. I then went on to ask if there is a difference between doing that and, say, shooting a squirrel or a deer. That's where things get a little "iffy".

I went back and re-read everything I posted here and I think I've been consistent in saying that shooting a federally protected species deliberately is wrong and I will always view it as such. It's apparent that my upbringing and experience are different than just about anyone's here in that I was brought up to regard anyone that consider laws to be up to your own subjective interpretation with respect to game laws to be an unethical hunter, and I use the term "hunter" quite loosely.

Would I turn you in? In truth, that would depend upon the circumstances. I can say for sure that any game warden in this state that's worth his shit doesn't go around giving friendly warnings to violaters. At least, not if they plan on keeping their jobs. Their job is to make sure laws are being followed and, if not, they issue citations, make arrests and allow the county attorney to decide as to prosecutorial action. My experience was in general law enforcement. The only time I ever saw anyone get off with anything less than balls to the walls criminal justice when committing a serious crime was as the result of making a deal with someone like drug enforcement to provide information and intel on their higher ups. You shoot a hawk around here and I know the guy that's going to be hunting for you, and it won't be with a warning ticket. Is he wrong, too? Or is he just doing his job?

I'm not looking to drop a dime on any of my soon-to-be-former hunting buddies, but by God, if you're dumb enough to commit a flagrant violation of the law, and do so with intent rather than an explainable accident, then shouldn't you be man enough to take the punishment?

Joe, If I recall, you were in law enforcement. Right? How many guys out there lost their DL's for DUI and blamed it on "that sonofabitch Joe whatever-your-last-name-is". It's never their fault, is it? Yeah, they get drunk, drive all over and once, twice, three times they get busted. It's always the cop's fault. They never take accountability for it. And in a similar way, I turn you in for deliberately killing something like a hawk and it's my fault you lost your license to hunt. You broke the damned law. What's so grey about that.

Should that landowner get busted? Jailed? Probably not, but if he gets caught, it will be the job of the LEO to cite him and let the judge decide based upon sentencing guidelines.
Make the arrest and let the County or District Attorney decide whether to prosecute.

TA.17Rem,

Sounds like you and that old guy have become close. I presume from your story that he doesn't have a hunting license. And cannot afford one because he is of modest means. You didn't say or, at least, I didn't see it. Legally, he's in the wrong. Morally, it may be necessary for him to supplement his pantry with game. The ADC work is pretty much consistent with what I do so I consider it returning a favor by offering your expertise and talents pro bono in exchange for trespass rights. But, if I were you, I'd take him and get him the license on your dime so he didn't have to break the law to survive and you didn't have to worry about what would happen to him if he ever did. Teach a man to fish... But that's just an idea.

No, it isn't all black and white. But I think a lot of you got so pissed reading the evolution of this thread that you couldn't read straight. My scenario was rather straight forward and in no time, it became loaded down with "what ifs". I can appreciate your many and varied reasons for turning the other cheek, but we'll have to diplomatically disagree on some things. You shoot a hawk just to shoot something and you've broken the law. Shoot a hawk because he's eating your chickens or damaging your property - you have the right to protect your belongings. Apples and oranges. Two completely different situations. One is strictly forbidden and totally illegal. The other is manageable within the laws simply by speaking with the authorities and working with them to find a solution. Even if it is shooting the offending bird. I'm not that attached to that bird.

I know and am good friends with several dozen law enforcement officers, game wardens, agents for state and federal law enforcement agencies. I would find it very difficult to stand by and watch someone deliberatly break the law, then spend personal time with those guys and act so hypocritically as to make them think I regard the laws as always necessary only when I don't have to lose friends or hurt someone else's feelings because THEY chose to step outside the lines.

If that makes you not want to hunt with the likes of me, so be it. Won't be losing any sleep over it. Just know that if the time comes that we do share a stand, it's really very simple. DON'T DELIBERATELY COMMIT A CRIME. Up until the past few hours, I sort of felt that this concept wasn't so abstract. Go figger.

Oh, and for the record, I've hunted with several people on this board and have yet to turn anyone into the authorities. (Except for Loco, but I posted bail for him a couple hours later.)
 

---

Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on June 18, 2006, 08:04 PM:
 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still an interesting discussion of ethical and moral considerations. Please be careful about knocking another man's belief system, agree with it or not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll go along with that. And I don't mean to come across like I'm knocking Lance's beliefs. I just can't understand them, that's all. I mean, seriously, just can not comprehend. Not even enough to say I "disagree".

To try and put it in the context in which I'm taking it... You are out hunting with a guy. Now, for me, the fact I'm out hunting with someone, says that I've got a history and some sort of relationship with this person. It's somebody I know. Somebody I like. Somebody I hold in some esteem. I'm just extremely jealous of my hunting time and there really just aren't that many people I'm willing to spend it with.

But let's say it's someone I met here on Leonard's board, and it's one of our first trips out, just as a for instance. Out of the blue, the guy up and blasts a hawk. Damned odd behavior, for sure. And I'm not likely to be happy about it. Depending on the particulars, our hunting relationship may not go any further. But, to take it as far as Lance has suggested, to turn the guy in... Whoa! Like Lance himself partially described, the penalty for capping a raptor can be very severe. A big ass fine, at the very least. With a chance for even worse than a big fine. Confiscation, a record, loss of hunting privileges, perhaps a restriction on firearms etc. In other words, we're talking a fairly big deal for the guy that shot the hawk. You're jacking with his life in a major way. I'm going to do that to my hunting partner? Over a hawk? Not in this lifetime, I'm not.

Like I said, I simply can't understand that. But, so be it. Different strokes and all that. Lance and I obviously agree that we wouldn't ever want to hunt with each other. No hard feelings about it here, and I'm sure he has none either. Just a discussion, nobody has actually been harmed. And we're both forewarned now, which is good. No big whoop, from where I sit.

To answer the original question directly -- I'm really not sure what I'd do. It would depend on the specifics of the situation and my history with the guy. But I sure wouldn't turn him in. No way.

- DAA
 

---

Posted by TA17Rem (Member # 794) on June 18, 2006, 08:27 PM:
 
Cdog911; I have read all youre posts, some twice and i think you did a good job of presenting youre side and i can see where you are comeing from and i also would like to say job well done. You have read our veiws on the subject and i hope you understand were we are comeing from. From what i have read none of us are badd hunters, and we don't go out of our way to kill those poor birds unless they are being bad, and its not a very pleasent job but it has to be done. As far as my friend goes , yes he does have a lic. and he donates money to the DNR every year, about 75.00. I won't drink coffee with you, but would be glad to hunt with you anytime. P.S. leave cell phone at home though. LOL No hard feelings here.
 

---

Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on June 18, 2006, 08:43 PM:
 
Not to pick at a sore that shouldn't ought to be picked at, but...

And worse, I really hate it when anyone does the line-by-line quote and reply. But I'm about to do a teeny little bit of it myself...

Lance, you just said:

"The only scenario I've described is the one I suggested at first and that is of a guy willfully and deliberately shooting a federally protected bird of prey."

No, that is not the only scenario you described. In your original post, you included capping a tweety bird like a meadowlark or any other non-game animal (a broad term - take your pick, chipmunk, songbird, whatever...). Like I said, I hate the line-by-line pick it apart style of posting, so I won't do anymore of it. But you did not limit the discussion to wanton destruction of a hawk. Further, you initally stated that breaking the law is breaking the law and that there are no excuses. That, in fact, if you were hunting with anyone that intentionally shot any illegal animal, game or non-game, you would make them walk, and turn their ass in. That's what you said. Isn't it? You went on later to say there isn't even any wiggle room as far as you are concerned. Break the law, I'm turning your ass in. Period. Shoot a tweety bird and I'm signing the ticket when the warden gets here Pal. That's how I read it?

Now, you're saying that you were only talking about the hawk scenario, and now you seem to be saying that there actually is room for common sense, and that there actually are gray areas, and that you might not actually turn a hunting partner in for shooting a tweety bird.

If you had said that in the first place, I doubt this thread would have gone anywhere, and there would be fewer guys that have read this thread sitting home saying to themselves "holy shit, I never want to hunt with that guy...".

Your last post comes across a lot different than your first couple. Again, that's how I read it anyway?

But, still, no big whoop.

- DAA
 

---

Posted by Okanagan (Member # 870) on June 18, 2006, 08:44 PM:
 
DAA, thoughtful post. As to the original post, the first problem that has generated more problems is that it is a hypothetical situation. Never make up a case study is the first rule for using them, and this is a case study. In real life, I know exactly what happened, or my perception of it, and what I actually did.

Second, in the original situation I might even turn the guy in, almost certainly would never hunt with him again. If I turned him in it would be with grief, not self righteous joy.

I used to live in a remote area where most folks weren't particular about following game laws. When invited to hunt with those who were my friends, I had a set little mini-speech with a smile. I'd say that if I went we'd have to follow the game laws, and if that was going to mess up their hunt, I'd best not go. I only had to do that a time or two, because their response was, "We know how you follow the laws. We wouldn't have invited you if we weren't going to stay legal." There are a whole bunch of pertinent factors I'm leaving out that shed more light on this story, but that's the heart of it.

I don't feel the least bad that I wasn't on the phone all of the time turning my neighbors in. One of the finest elk roasts I've ever tasted came as a gift with the words, "Ask me no questions." A long time later the story of that meat, told over a campfire in the snow, was even more delicious than the roast. It was technically illegal, morally a right thing to do. Guess I should have sicced the Feds on that old photographer, a lifetime friend and the most scrupulous about law of anyone I know. His moral compass is why he broke the law.

He is still a friend and I look at one of his framed photographs as I sit here. The poacher who killed the elk was caught and charged. The elk are doing fine. I see no good that could have come from turning him in, only negatives.

Then perhaps, another notch on one's psyche for having called the authorities and accused a friend or acquaintence of lawbreaking might count as a positive for some of us.

Some who read this will have eyes to see the subtle point. Some won't. Life is in colour, and it moves. It's not a black and white still photo, however hard we try to make it so.

[ June 18, 2006, 09:16 PM: Message edited by: Okanagan ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 18, 2006, 08:46 PM:
 
I think we have at least cleared the air a bit. I can respect another man's opinion and tolerate some degree of behavior that doesn't square with my own. Whatever the action, it may forever alter our relationship?

You know, several people have qualified the misdeed, as provoked or as an accidental killing, but some sort of reason, other than blasting a bird of prey just to kill something.

In the first place, I don't know anybody that I would be out hunting coyotes, and on a stand, they pop a hawk. Never happened to me and I would probably be taken aback by it if it did happen. That sounds strictly amateur hour, and I don't like to hunt with what Lance describes as a "slob hunter".

Would I make the guy walk? Places I hunt, that could be a very serious offense, on my part. You can't drive off and leave somebody in the desert, miles from pavement, so I wouldn't even consider it. I'd take the a$$hole home in the most direct route as existed with a minimum of conversation.

Would I call the cops on him? Maybe, if he shot a friggin' cow or livestock, but probably not for shooting a hawk, just for fun? I do not approve of it, but those things can cause you more trouble than satisfaction, and if he's a real jerk, best not to turn your back on him. But, if he shot a deer or a cow while in my truck, we would have more than a heart to heart talk. Maybe it is not logical, a law is a law, but I don't know? With a hawk, I seriously doubt that I would consider notifying authorities? This does not mean that I condone his actions, it just means that the man lacks a moral compass, and as I said before, I try not to be a Crusader on selective issues.

Lance, I would hunt with you, the reason being that you won't find a reason to rat me out so I'm not worried.

Good hunting. LB

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Cal Taylor (Member # 199) on June 18, 2006, 09:12 PM:
 
Everybody decides what rules to follow, or not to. It doesn't matter if it is "law" or not. I don't shoot birds of any kind. Just never cared for it, legal or not. Most places it is illegal to shoot from a truck window, but in the case of a coyote I will occasionally make an exception, but on the other hand I would never do the same or let one of my hunters do the same when it comes to big game. Go figure? I regularly break the speed limit, I run at least 5 MPH over all the time, even when I'm going hunting. I occasionally roll thru a stopsign without completely stopping. I do all kinds of things that are illegal, but I also draw the line at many others. I make my kids wear seatbelts, but not really because it's a law. It really is up to the individual, and I doubt if there is ANYONE here that doesn't occasionally break the law, and I would suppose that there is NO ONE here that hasn't broken a law ever. It just depends on what laws are the most important to that particular person.
 

---

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on June 18, 2006, 09:47 PM:
 
I'm easy going and tolerant. I have never reported anothers misbehavior to authorities ever in my life. I have a time or two explained to a person the reason why I never want anything to do with them again. My attitudes and beliefs are pretty much the same as Az Hunter's and DAA's which means I have nothing new to add to this thread, EXCEPT, I spent a couple of days with Lance Homman calling coyotes in Co. last Nov.
It was a terrific and memorable experience and I am so looking forward to doing it again this Nov. I've bumped heads with a couple of other men on this board in the past and formed negative opinions about them. I am very grateful that I had the opportunity to meet them in person and discover how completely I had misjudged them.
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 18, 2006, 11:12 PM:
 
Oh yeah? Well cuts both ways, Rich. Higgins works a room, or a campfire like a pro.

But, if there is any way possible, I'll be there with you and Lance in November.....and Lance; I'll drive, if you don't mind?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by Rich Higgins (Member # 3) on June 19, 2006, 07:11 AM:
 
Leonard, you have to keep Nov. open so you can make that hunt. After all, you were personally invited by Tom Redmund.
Bring plenty of ammo. I saw lots of chicken hawks on the ranch.

Note to all F&G LEOs:
Just tweaking Lance a little because he is my friend and I know he can take a joke.
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 10:16 AM:
 
A "mistake" when hunting. Hmmmmmm. Would that be interpreted as "carelessness"? Maybe "recklessnes"? How about "blatent disregard"? OK, maybe just "unsafe practices"?
So, which one of these would you be willing to consider "excuseable"?

Now here's a little revelation about my character. If you and I were hunting together and you indulged in one of the above mentioned "mistakes", that would be our last hunt together.

I not really a hard-ass, just ask anyone who's hunted with me. But I cannot afford the risk of being around someone with poor judgement and a loaded gun.

[ June 19, 2006, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: NASA ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 19, 2006, 10:44 AM:
 
All well and good, Tom.

Forgive the low blow, just for the sake of argument: I do recall that you have admitted to a serious "mistake" with a firearm that would cause many people to be careful in your presence. Would you want, expect, and deserve another chance? Most of your friends here would probably give it to you?

Good hunting. LB
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 11:46 AM:
 
No, I wouldn't want or expect to be "given" a second chance. I would have to earn that privilege. That's the same quarter I'd give anyone else.

BUT!! Let's say we were out together and spot an eagle or even a red-tail sitting on a pole out 10 miles from the nearest paved road. You say "stop, I want to take the shot." We'd have a short discussion. If you insisted, I might give you the option of walking home if you take the shot. Either way, you'd have a hell of a time earning my respect back.

On the other hand, let's say we were pheasant hunting. Something flushes close from thick cover and you take the shot. As you squeeze off a snap shot you realize it's a Swainsons hawk. Bummer! Another 3 seconds and you'd have known it wasn't a game bird. Not intentional, but still a mistake. Not something I'd make you walk home over.

In the first scenario I see a character flaw and maybe a lack of true hunting "experience". Over time he might improve, but I don't want to wait around for him.

In the second scene, he's a little over anxious. Trying too hard? Trying to impress? Game hog? I'd give him the rest of the day to show me he's better than that. If nothing's changed by the end of the hunt, see scenario #1.

(edit) Leonard, I just read all the posts in this thread (after the fact) and I have to say I agree 100% with your response in your

quote:

---

Whatever the action, it may forever alter our relationship?

---

post.

[ June 19, 2006, 12:03 PM: Message edited by: NASA ]
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 19, 2006, 12:15 PM:
 
Okay. Very unusual circumstances, to my way of thinking? I can't imagine the need to blast something beyond the objections of a hunting partner? I think most of us here are a little more advanced and mature than your scenario allows. More like hunting with a total stranger, which is something I would be unlikely to do, in the first place.

On the other hand, if we cannot see eye to eye on some issue, important to either, (or both) of us, you needn't worry about making excuses for not hunting with me in the future. That invitation wouldn't be forthcoming. If there is anything I hate, it is somebody attempting to impose their will, or their standards on me. I'm not a Crusader, but nobody tells me what to do.

Good hunting. LB

edit: and that, friends, is why it is often difficult to find a good hunting partner, someone who you are on the same wavelength, in all respects.

[ June 19, 2006, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 12:20 PM:
 
Tim, I love 'ya man, but don't shoot those "white-tailed chicken hawks", lol. You may be refering to "white-tailed kites". These hawks are mousers. They "may" take a chick up to pinfeather size, but not if given a choice.

Your chicken operation is going to draw a lot of raptors. Only a very few are actually interested in the chickens themselves. The grain and mash you are feeding attracts mice, rats, and small birds. This is what the majority of the hawks are hanging around for. Like those kites, they're just hoping to bag a mouse or two.

Redtails, Harris, Ferruginous (rough-legged), and Red-shouldered hawks are probably the only ones interested in chickens themselves. But only a golden eagle would snatch a full grown chicken and fly off with it in it's talons. The others would have to eat half of it before they could lift it off the ground.
 

---

Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on June 19, 2006, 12:53 PM:
 
Hey, Tom. You need to weigh in on this subject. Right up your alley, so to speak. http://www.huntmastersbbs.com/cgi/cgi-ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001145
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 12:57 PM:
 

quote:

---

I can't imagine the need to blast something beyond the objections of a hunting partner

---

OK, you're thinking in terms of a more "permanent" type of hunting partner, rather than hunting with someone "just for the day". I haven't had a real hunting partner for about 20 years now.

Because of these bulletin boards, I get to hunt with a lot of different people now days. Some are so-so, some I look forward to hunting with again, and some are like we've been talking about, the "hunters from hell". You can get a vague idea of what a person's like by talking to them, but you won't find out what he's really like until you get him into the field.

[ June 19, 2006, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: NASA ]
 

---

Posted by Tim Behle (Member # 209) on June 19, 2006, 01:11 PM:
 
Don't worry about me Tom, I don't look to kill or even sting any birds of prey. ( It is possible to teach them to avoid my house, and that is always my first choice ) But I don't think the laws reguarding rapters is set up fairly. Why should it be legal for me to kill a fox, coyote, bobcat or even the neighbors dog if caught in the act, But not some damned bird?

If you stop by the house some time, I'd like to show you a dirt mound 323 yards west of the house. It might change your mind on what can fly off with a chicken. Over the years, I've caught Great Horned Owls, Red Tails and White tails red handed with a fresh killed chicken. I know that they aren't supposed to be able to lift off with a chicken, But I can't see any other way for them to get them to the top of the tree, or to the top of that dirt mound with out flying them there.

One of the more annoying side effects of raptor predation is that they generally only go after the hens. Several years ago, they really got into my chickens hard one summer. I ended up with 13 roosters and only 5-6 hens. The hens didn't like all of the attention, so they'd run off and hide from the roosters all day.

Did you know that if thirteen roosters can't find a hen, they all turn queer and spend the day running their buddies down and gang raping each other?

What you you rather see? An occasional dead hawk, or a bunch of gay roosters?
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 02:18 PM:
 
Some hawks and owls are claimed to be capable of carrying their own weight. That's true, sort of. Many will fly/drag heavy prey along the ground to a spot where they feel secure enough to feed on it. Other times a smaller hawk will find the remnants of a larger raptors kill and take it up in a tree to finish it off. Someone seeing this might assume the smaller bird made the original kill, when in fact was just scavenging the leftovers.

What is the average live weight of the hens being taken?

BTW, a hawk or owl only needs to be spurred or wing slapped once to learn to leave roosters alone, lol. Just be glad you don't live in the northern states where they have Goshawks. These guys know how to take roosters!

[ June 19, 2006, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: NASA ]
 

---

Posted by brad h (Member # 57) on June 19, 2006, 02:19 PM:
 
"Did you know that if thirteen roosters can't find a hen, they all turn queer and spend the day running their buddies down and gang raping each other?"

Mallards do the same thing, Tim. That's a tough one to explain to the kids when they get to feed the ducks at grandma's house and all the green heads are agressively mounting each other up.

Brad
 

---

Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on June 19, 2006, 02:27 PM:
 
So let us pretend that I take my friend Nathan Allen Smithsonian Astrogramma (NASA for short) along with me on a coyote hunt. I carry a shotgun because the cover is pretty thick in that area. About four minutes into our third stand, I see a diamondback rattler coiled up behind my buddy, and it is about to strike. I blow off Mr. Rattlers head with a load of BB's, but a couple of flyers from that pattern of BB's strikes old NASA in the arse. Do you think he should report me to the local authorities, make me walk home, tell me thanks for saving him from the snake bite or what? Just curious.
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 02:33 PM:
 
LOL, no I never had any queer roosters. Most of my roosters were fighting cocks and penned seperately. I kept 6-8 for "recreation". Any gang-banging was usually terminal.

I never had more than about 30 chickens total at any one time. Most of mine were for meat/eggs. I had New Hampshires, Plymouth Rocks, Wyandottes, and of course, Rhode Islands.
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 02:36 PM:
 
Rich, how big was that diamondback?
 

---

Posted by JoeF (Member # 228) on June 19, 2006, 03:14 PM:
 
Rich, snakes are a protected species in most jurisdictions so under the zero tolerence black and white rule interpretation you'd get to walk home.... that is if NASA didn't shoot first and ask questions later after you shot him in the can. All of that posted completely tongue in cheek.
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 03:23 PM:
 
Now you see, some people would be grateful to have a rattler blown out from underneath them. But, I'd want to check him out first before anyone pulled the trigger on him. Heck, he might be a trophy class buzz-tail. Wouldn't want to mess up a fine reptile like that with a load of BB's, now would ya?
 

---

Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on June 19, 2006, 03:52 PM:
 
He was a protected species and I had to make a choice real quick, honest I did. Would I lie to you guys about something this importent?

 

---

Posted by Tim Behle (Member # 209) on June 19, 2006, 04:01 PM:
 
Rich,

You can hunt with me and I wouldn't turn you in. But I might buy you a beer after I drove you back to town.
 

---

Posted by NASA (Member # 177) on June 19, 2006, 04:36 PM:
 
OMG Rich! I would trade both of my ex-wives for a beauty like that!!
 

---

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.0