Pot Hunter?

[GoodOlBoy]

I was reading through an article the other day and it mentioned that those who used a 32-20 to hunt with were typically pot hunters. I had never heard the term so I went out and found that a Pot Hunter is somebody who hunts for the cook pot, not nessicarily for sport or even for hunting sake. I also found that it is looked down upon at all the sites I visited to find the descriptions. Well let me tell you what is the descriptions are true then yes me and my whole family have always been pot hunters. In one of the articles about it the writer was running down the hunter because they would "shoot at game they were not currently hunting in order to fill their game bag". Uhmmm yea? So if I am squirrel hunting and I take a rabbit I am a bad human being? So if I am squirrel hunting and take a deer thats stupid enough to walk out 10 feet in front of me then I am a horrible person?

What gives?

GoodOlBoy

[BILLY D.]

GOB

The term was popular during WW2.

Meat for city folks was rationed as were many other things and people hunted to get extra meat. Some legally, others not.

It was not a derogatory word, just a fact.

There is nothing wrong with hunting for the pot.

The only things I shoot that I don't eat are varmints. Never could warm up to Gopher or Pasture Poodle Stew.

I'll bet Rachael Ray has arecipe though. :eek:

Best wishes, Bill

[GoodOlBoy]

Never was much on coon and possum myself. Not to mention armadillers.

GoodOlBoy

[rattus58]

My son not long ago lived in South Carolina outside of the city some on 15 acres of land. My son was astonished at the liberal hunting seasons that were allowed in his area and that a hunting license wasn't required.

He also learnt of some neat ways to hunt deer. He sent me a couple of pictures of deer he shot as well as some from his neighbor who had a stand set up next to his corn fields... unique... I'd more likely callit a hide, but what it was were three pipes staked into the ground into a V... across the top of the V was covered with burlap bags, as were the sides. It were long enough to hold a pitcher of favorite libation, a table for the Sports illustrated and other hustler types, as well as a 30-30.

Along the numerous trails that surrounded the property but in front of the "hide", the industrious neighbor went ot hanging lolipops (trawberry and grape if I remember) from the tree limbs over the trail, and when the deer went vertical to taste it... well that was pot hunting... :)

Aloha... :cool:

[M.T. Pockets]

If you have a license and the game is in season, there is nothing unethical about taking an animal of a different kind than what you had in mind when you went out hunting. The last thing we need as hunters is to judge another hunter who is hunting legally and ethically. Nothing unethical about taking advantage of a chance at a squirrell when you're hunting rabbits.

Where I come from a "pot shot" is when a duck is shot on the water. This might be legal, but it doesn't pass the smell test when it comes to being ethical.

[fabsroman]

MT,

If a person is a "pot hunter", shooting a duck on the water shouldn't be an ethical issue for them if it is legal.

Seriously, what is the difference between ethics and legality? If somebody is poor as dirt and only owns a .22 rimfire and it is legal to hunt deer with it in their state, I could care less if they go out there and kill a deer with it. Now, if somebody is filthy rich and has a choice of guns for deer hunting and he takes out the .22 rimfire, then I have a problem with that. I guess I just answered my own question about ethics versus legality. The ethics part of it needs to be done on a case by case basis, but the legality is USUALLY an open and shut case.

As far as the original post is concerned, I have shot at rabbits plenty of times while out hunting pheasants. Same goes for quail on an occasion or two. The seasons overlap here in Maryland, so it is entirely legal to hunt all three species at the same time, and you can usually find all three in the same places. Most importantly, they all taste real good in the pot.

[wrenchman]

I gess i am a pot hunter i have killed deer ducks and pats in the same day.
I eat the duck and the pat on the grill that nite when we got in frome bow hunting one of the best days hunting i had.
p.s. we washed them own with beer to and i must say it was good.

[rattus58]

Originally posted by M.T. Pockets
If you have a license and the game is in season, there is nothing unethical about taking an animal of a different kind than what you had in mind when you went out hunting. The last thing we need as hunters is to judge another hunter who is hunting legally and ethically. Nothing unethical about taking advantage of a chance at a squirrell when you're hunting rabbits.

Where I come from a "pot shot" is when a duck is shot on the water. This might be legal, but it doesn't pass the smell test when it comes to being ethical.

Yeah... I got into this with a fellow I work with on developing a game management plan for the state of Hawaii. I hunt without a dog. If I see an Erkel, I shoot it, ground or air. Turkey, ground or air, quail, ground or air, pheasant, which if you see it on the ground its dang near 100 yards away already... but given the chance... ground sluicing I've heard it called.... yep absolutely.. and I do all this carnage with a single shot muzzleloader shotgun... and I do it legally.

Now, Mr. M.T. Pockets, maybe you should be doin a little ground sluicing yourself and fill them MT Pockets.... :grin: How in the world could shooting a duck, a quail, a turkey, any of these be unethical? What is the point of hunting? TO KILL THE DAMN THING! And trust me, without a dog, the ETHICAL thing is to kill it, and the best way to do that is to kill it when I can, not when its running. And its funny, when you shoot into a covey and you aim at one bird, usually its that bird only except on rare occasion in the case of quail, maybe 1 or two others... the rest go off in a cloud of dust.

How is it unethical to kill the animal you are going after? This is not competition. This is hunting, not horseshoes. The consequences are if I miss, I may not eat... bad. If I hit it, I get to eat... good. This equates to the wrong/right thing to do.. :grin:

Aloha.. :cool:

[Swift]

Sure I've heard the term, but if it's in season and taken legally who cares? I sure don't.

[YoungBuck14]

I don't hunt ducks but i do hunt dove and will only shoot a bird off the ground or a tree if i or a fellow hunter with me obviously clipped it with a previous shot. The only reason is it will likely die later and i would rather eat it than a yote. I don't disagree with young hunters killing birds not in flight to build confidence but see no reason for older qualified hunters to do it.(disclaimer) unless they NEED the food. I don't hunt dove because i need the food i do it because i like to eat them. If me or my family EVER have any kind of question about having food to put on the table i will shoot ever landed dove, duck, quail and sparrows if it gets bad enough.

Covey shooting is very unethical tho one or two birds may fall have you ever counted how many pellets are in a single 7.5 shot. if even half of those pellets hit birds that don't go down that is plenty of wounded birds. My most common hunting partner is my cousin and one time last year sticks out specifically to me. We had walked serveral sunflower fields and jumped a couple of dove but nothing special. We finally decided to walk over the tank dam and see what we saw. As we crested the dam there was a cloud of dove enough to literally make a shadow. We both stood in aww and watched and when they were all gone we just asked why the other didn't shoot. The answers were the same.."there was no single birds to shoot at. we would have wounded WAY to many birds" so everyone of those hundreds of birds flew off. Moral of that story i felt much better about not shooting those birds and wounding none than dropping a few but wounding many more.

[skeet]

YOU are what is known as an ethical hunter. Thanks....and congratulations:D

[Brithunter]

Well I have shot way more Pheasants on the ground than in the air as I do it to eat them not for sport. For sport I go and shoot clays ;) . In fact I have shot more Pheasants with my 22LR than a shotgun, even took head and neck shots with a 7x57 and 30-30 at the end of a days stalk to fill the pot for the morrow. Why buy meat from the supermacket full of god only knows what chemicals when I can have fresh naturally fed game?

[rattus58]

Well skeet and Mr. Youngbuck14 I don't think you either have a handle of the term "ethical" versus "unethical".

While you have YOUR opinions, my opinion for my hunting is to enjoy the outdoors. I don't hunt doves in flyways, and of course I'm not the great shot you are at flying birds. I don't have cripples when I come across a bird on the ground either. Sure I've shot birds when they've risen, probably 2 of every 3 of the birds I've shot come from them taking off, but you are saying that if I see one on the ground and kill it that's unethical... I beg to differ.

I've watched, in fact I love to watch dove shooting and duck shooting and pheasant and quail videos... great videos and I've watched many cripples fly away in these videos as well.. but apparently you don't give a rip if you cripple it in the air as that surely is legal and certainly ethical. Well not me, friend, I leave you to hunt legally while I will do my very best to also hunt legally.

I'll tell you both however, if one is hunting legally, it is not your place to criticize their legal hunting decisions as long as those decisions are safe.

Aloha... :cool:

[M.T. Pockets]

I'm as big a meat hunter as anybody, but no matter how hungry I am for fresh duck I'll flush it before I take a shot at it on the water. This is also taught in the ethics portion of firearms safety classes to the next generation of hunters. Right when we teach them not to skybust and to wait for a killing shot and to look for cripples. I'm not claiming to be more ethical than anyone else on this board and if it's legal I'm not going to criticize anyone who would rather "pot" one on the water.

Hunting pheasants with a .22 is legal where I live, and I do shoot one on the ground occasionally. If I'm carrying a shotgun I let them flush first. That's just me.

Fabs, I agree with you on the methods and means to supply meat. I see many hunters in the field with expensive gear and fill their trucks with game that is going to sit in their freezer til they throw it out next year, then I see a guy who really does depend on what he brings home to feed his family. I know which one I have the most respect for, no matter if he "pots" one or not.

[skeet]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rattus58
[B]Well skeet and Mr. Youngbuck14 I don't think you either have a handle of the term "ethical" versus "unethical".

Actually I didn't address anything towards you...or your methods of killing. And I certainly uderstand ethics. I also uderstand fair chase.


While you have YOUR opinions, my opinion for my hunting is to enjoy the outdoors. I don't hunt doves in flyways, and of course I'm not the great shot you are at flying birds. I don't have cripples when I come across a bird on the ground either. Sure I've shot birds when they've risen, probably 2 of every 3 of the birds I've shot come from them taking off, but you are saying that if I see one on the ground and kill it that's unethical... I beg to differ.

And again I did not say anything about YOUR methods of hunting. Understand,though, that shooting a duck on the water IS technically illegal. Learning to shoot well isn't that hard a thing to do. I taught many women...and a lot of kids!

I've watched, in fact I love to watch dove shooting and duck shooting and pheasant and quail videos... great videos and I've watched many cripples fly away in these videos as well.. but apparently you don't give a rip if you cripple it in the air as that surely is legal and certainly ethical. Well not me, friend, I leave you to hunt legally while I will do my very best to also hunt legally.

I actually don't like to watch those videos. Been involved with a few in the past while guiding. I have always enjoyed my own hunting. Yep I ground sluiced a quail one time. Got my butt handed to me. The people I hunted with just didn't do it that way. We hunted with dogs and lost almost no cripples. Oh, we also included lost birds in our bag. I was taught to hunt in the old ways

I'll tell you both however, if one is hunting legally, it is not your place to criticize their legal hunting decisions as long as those decisions are safe.

I did not accuse you of anything illegal,immoral or unethical. Why do you always want to start an argument? I didn't even address you at all. Sheesh. Get a grip!! Btw I'm not going to answer your paranoid ranting anymore


Actually, I was taught to only shoot what I would eat...I and my mentors were MEAT hunters. That's why I got a cow elk license this year. And when we hunted for upland game we always came back with a mixed bag

:D :D

[GoodOlBoy]

We have come back with mixed bags many times. That is why I didn't understand why all the sites were referring to it in deragatory terms. Many is the day my great grandfather came home with quail, dove, squirrel, and rabbit in the same bag.

GoodOlBoy

[rattus58]

Actually I wasn't starting an argument, but when one applauds (and I'm not saying that youngbuck doesn't deserve it) others who criticize other hunters or through innuendo may suggest that a certain type of hunting is less than honorable as you have just now done yourself... But you KNOW what Fair Chase is, you are adding your approval of others comments.

I could argue, my friend, that hunting with dogs is not fair chase, just fair recovery. But I don't. Some record books insist upon fair chase, though I'm not sure how the quail, pheasant, and ducks, are guaged for fair chase in their respective record books, and though some may choose to only shoot over dogs, others may choose to hunt over shoe leather only.

I don't feel that being in any way divisive is healthy for hunters. If you see folks shooting out of season, over bag limits, wrong sex, etc, they are worthy of criticism, otherwise if it is legal, I would suggest that hunters refrain from being contentious when it comes to us presumably being a brotherhood.

Aloha... :cool:

[skeet]

Originally posted by GoodOlBoy
We have come back with mixed bags many times. That is why I didn't understand why all the sites were referring to it in deragatory terms. Many is the day my great grandfather came home with quail, dove, squirrel, and rabbit in the same bag.

GoodOlBoy

Well in squirrel season I almost always came back with a mixed bag. I often came back with squirrels some Kale some wild growin spinach and peanuts from some that were planted in error. But squirrel only lasted from Oct 5 -31st..When rabbit season came in we really got a mixed bag..Quail rabbits doves ducks..a goose or two. We hunted. It was as much a way of life as anything.

[skeet]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rattus58
[B]Actually I wasn't starting an argument, but when one applauds (and I'm not saying that youngbuck doesn't deserve it) others who criticize other hunters or through innuendo may suggest that a certain type of hunting is less than honorable as you have just now done yourself... But you KNOW what Fair Chase is, you are adding your approval of others comments.

What the H is all that above?? No one was criticised. If you feel you were ...you are just being paranoid. Oh and yes you were trying to start an argument. Seems you enjoy that. I wasn't starting an argument ...BUT.... means that exactly. You want to argue.

I could argue, my friend, that hunting with dogs is not fair chase, just fair recovery. But I don't. Some record books insist upon fair chase, though I'm not sure how the quail, pheasant, and ducks, are guaged for fair chase in their respective record books, and though some may choose to only shoot over dogs, others may choose to hunt over shoe leather only.

The way we hunt quail is very simple. We use dogs to find and stand the quail. Some use flushing dogs..but we flushed the birds. We picked a single bird out to shoot and never flock shot as you so stupidly suggested. We very seldom got to shoot more than twice at a covey rise. Very very seldom did we loose a bird . If we hunted the busted covey we shot single birds. We very seldom lost a cripple. The reason we used setters and pointers was for the experience...Good dog work is a beautiful thing to see...in case you haven't experienced it. We would never flock shoot on the ground or in the air. Record books for quail??!! Again...get a grip. What an ignorant statement.

I don't feel that being in any way divisive is healthy for hunters. If you see folks shooting out of season, over bag limits, wrong sex, etc, they are worthy of criticism, otherwise if it is legal, I would suggest that hunters refrain from being contentious when it comes to us presumably being a brotherhood.

Again ...get over your snit. Nobody accused you of anything. If you think they did you are wrong.. CAN you understand that?? I applauded Youngbucks actions as it seemed he, as a young man, really cared about his perception by others. I'm glad you hunt. I am glad you hunt legally. Keep doing it that way. And as far as the denigration of other hunters..You only have to look at the 2nd paragraph starting I could argue. You did a pretty good job. Again..get a grip.

I can't believe I actually did this....again!

:rolleyes:

[PJgunner]

GOB, the eason for the backlash about pot hunters or meat hunters is just a bunch of snobs that feel they are betetr than the rest of us with their holier than thou attitude about "pot hunters"' or "meat hunters". It seems they also get their panitied in a wad when it comes to defining "fair chase". Just what is fair chase anyway and for whom? If you're some dude in say the mid 30's to mid 40's in exceleent condition and can run up a 9,000 foot mountain without breathing hard, then the concept of "fair chase may be one thing to you. How about a paralegic who has to hunt from a wheel chair, or does he have to give up hunting to the sophistic elitists? What would be allowable fair chse for him. Does he have to drag himself through the brush with his arms to make some snob happy?
Or how about some fellow with a bad knee or maybe a bad hip that makes walking difficult? I guess Mr. Snob wants him to stay home as well.
I know some fairly well to do types that hang out at the range where I shoot. They're always spouting off the "fair chase" BS yet the last two years one I know for sure shot his deer from his truck while road hunting. But, to hear him tell the story, it was a difficult four hour stalk in rough terrain with shifting winds and the shot was at 500 yards. The truth of the matter was the der was maybe 30 yards off the road looking at him when he shot it. it wasn't even a big one.
Paul B.

[skeet]

Hunting who couldn't do for themselves. Yep we tried our best to make it easy for 'em...but no matter what we did they always seemed to have a good time. We rigged up a blind on a creek for a fellow in a wheel chair once..right in the marsh. That fellow had the best time. He shot his geese and 2 ducks. One of his friends carried him into the marsh on his back. Hell I felt so good I carried him out.(he wasn't a very big fellow anyway! BTW we didn't have any of those snobs where I came from..they were all too poor to be snobs. We hunted to eat. Took a friends son hunting doves one time. He had never been. His father really didn't hunt much. Man we had a LOT of doves in a sunflower patch..He didn't kill too many..but his shoulder was so black and blue I didn't think he would ever hunt again.. But ya shoulda seen the smile on his face. He hunts (a meat hunter too) today just as he did then. For eatin and enjoyment of nature.:cool:

[Brother Rockeye]

When it comes to NEEDIN to fillin yer belly~man's laws mean squat.
On your second day in the bush in the middle of nowhere with a whacked compass and no grub,anything you can kill and eat is in season.
lotsa folks lived hand to mouth not so long ago...it's where the "sport" originated.
If yer full,hunt a trophy.
If yer empty,hunt for meat.
If yer able,hunt.

[Ol` Joe]

I`ve always concidered shooting game on the ground "opportunity" and in the air "wing shooting". Finding game is "hunting" and it all goes in the "pot" if I do my part.

As for "ethics", I`d much rather see someone take a partridge out of a Aspen or Birch then take a crack at a Mallard 80 yd out and going full tilt.
JMO

[rattus58]

You know Skeet.... You need to get into the no child left behind program because you are having a very hard time understanding things.... No one is accusing me of anything because there is nothing to accuse me of nor, Bub, did I say, mention, or suggest anyone had. Stopped being so wrapped in YOURSELF.

On the other hand I don't name call either. On the other hand I don't call legal hunting UNETHICAL. On the other hand I don't insinuate anything either.

Now, Skeet, when someone denigrates how others might hunt, especially when it is legal, I happen to feel is divisive. That you don't, shows how we differ.

[gd357]

If I may interject....

seems to me this whole thing got started over a discussion of the term "pot hunter". Now when I heard the term, it was assumed (possibly incorrectly at the time) by my elder hunters to be someone who took unethical shots "pot-shots" at game. If the terminology actually means someone who is hunting for the pot (dinner), then I've been a bit mis-informed. And I probably fall into that category (they were called "meat hunters" where I grew up). As far as taking birds on the ground? I've done it (on at least one occaision - haven't hunted birds in a while besides turkeys and my memory suffers a bit when it comes to small game). Is it terribly sporting? probably not. But darned if it didn't taste great. JMHO

gd

[GoodOlBoy]

rattus58 first of all YOU are the one who insinuated that somebody accused you, not Skeet.

You also seem to have alot of hands.

That being said it is not illegal to shoot squirrel with a 50 BMG rifle. It WOULD be unethical. Defend that one. It is also not illegal in most states to shoot a deer at 200 yards with a 9mm pistol. It would ALSO be unethical to attempt to do so. Defend that one next. When you are done I can cite about fifty more examples.

As for name calling, calling someone BUB IS namecalling and is insulting in circles of folks who were raised right.

Skeet isn't wrapped up in himself and has never been anything but helpful to anybody I know of. He has only ever offered solid advice, so I don't think he is the one wrapped up in himself.

Now if we can ALL get back to the subject at hand.

gd357 I can understand that misunderstanding. Many times terminology is warped by those who hear it without understanding exactly what is going on. Particularly once it gets mixed in with a bunch of hard heads, or hot heads. Sporting takes a back seat when it comes to putting meat on the table. If you are a multimillionare, or even just plain wealthy I can see why you would want to keep it sporting. If you are hungry I can see why you would be less interested. I have shot quail on the ground, heck as a kid squirrel hunting in East Texas I have shot deer, rabbit, quail, dove, coon, and possum. I still don't feel bad about it.

GoodOlBoy

[rattus58]

Well unfortunately my first response to you didn't take... so I'm going to respond later.

Short version... You nor anyone has the right to criticize ones choice of firearm. And Yes, I'd like the 50 other examples, because these two are riduculous... 50 BMG, as over the top of an example as you could find for being the squirrel police but that's ok... none of your business. 200 yards with a pistol? That pistol in Hawaii would be illegal... so end of story. But if it had a 1 1/4" case and was .357 or more, its none of your business what one shoots or at what range. How ethical is it to shoot a deer with a .22? Some people make a living with a 22 and killing deer... unethical?

Oh... and tell me, how is it ok, in YOUR WORLD for one to shoot at birds on the ground when you're new but not ok when your more experienced? Are you all now psychics, by the way... how do you know when some has confidence or not?

Give me a break... We need unifiers in the hunting community and bringing phony criticisms... as your's certainly are, isn't bringing hunters together for the battleground ahead.

[GoodOlBoy]

First of all it is ok IN MY WORLD for anybody to shoot a bird on the ground. Second you don't know anything about my world.

Third it is illegal to shoot a deer with a 22 in Texas so your argument is null and void. Pretty much like everything else you have said.

GoodOlBoy

[YoungBuck14]

Is it legal to kill a deer with a 22LR or Mag? no not in texas or any other rimfire. What about a hornet or other 22 calliber centerfire? Yes it is in fact my grandmother killed a deer with a .218 Bee. But would i ever do it, prolly not unless i practiced quite a bit more to where i trusted myself with consistant head shots. Could a first time hunter who has fired a gun twice in their young life hunt with a 22 Hornet, .218 Bee, 22-250, 17 Rem, 220 swift and still be legal? Here in Texas that answer would be yes but would that be ETHICAL to torso shoot a deer with one of these calibers.

As a hunter matures they themself are allowed to make decisions on what they personally consider fun or sporting depending on their confidence level. When i first started i "skillet" shot birds (this is the term i grew up hearing not POT) but as i grew and matured it really didn't seem fun to shoot a standing still bird. Personal opinion if you enjoy it blast away. But if you consider shoot a standing still object loads of fun shoot a fence post or shoot the dang tree that the bird landed in its just about as hard. I don't know when someone has confidence, that person however will know and will be able to make the decision their self.


its none of your business what one shoots or at what range. Why is it none of my business if my neighbor slings lead at any deer that moves and wounds a bunch of them just trying to make these hero shots. Those deer will go off and die days later just to be varmit food. I mean WTH its legal to take long unethical shot but IBD if i take any kind of stand for it. It is my business cause that deer could be one that me, my dad, or any other ethical hunter could shoot LEGALLY and ethically to put in the freezer.


PS. When it comes to this brotherhood thing I don't believe my first statement said anything degrading about anyone elses hunting styles. Getting all upset about someone elses opinion about what they personally consider ethical or sporting and firing back degrading remarks towards them seems to kinda throw a wedge in that whole brotherhood statement.

[YoungBuck14]

This is another thought that just came to me. Just because something is legal doesn't make it eithical and that was stated in my last post. But just because something is "illegal" doesn't make it unethical in all circumstances. If your walking back from your deer stand or hunting area and there is a wounded deer (either in deer season or not) and it obviously isn't gonna make it is it unethical to kill this deer and keep the meat because in texas it is illegal? I personally believe that meat going to good use is much better than going to waste. Just another opinion.

[LoneWolf]

hmmm, what I see is alot of people who belive in mostly the same thing arguing about stupid things.
If ya'll want a peeing match head on over to Obama and the pig lips .com.
Other wise --- if it is in season and the gun is legal, it tastes good :)

[rattus58]

Why is it anyones responsibility to be critical of legal behavior? You talk about situations where being legal is not being ethical. So far I've had two examples that were ludicrous even in the example.

See here is why I don't suggest you comment on ethics when you have no idea of what you're speaking, and you alluded just now to it yourself. If YOU, had confidence, hours on the range, were competant, and were able to deliver the shot where you want it, and you wanted to hunt with that gun on deer or whatever, why is it up to anyone to say... "gee.. he's hunting deer or pronhorn or whatever with a 218Bee... isn't that unethical"? What do they know of how proficient someone is? You don't and YOU DON'T, nor Skeet or anyone else.

If you see specific examples of either illegal or unethical behavior that is one thing, and gut shooting a deer DELIBERATEY I agree, would be unethical. Hunting with a 22 is not, in states that permit that kind of stuff.

I agree with you, some rules just don't make sense. If you find a wounded deer you can put your tag on it or not. If not and your state says you cannot shoot it, puts you into a moral delimma, doesn't it.

Aloha... :cool:

[YoungBuck14]

Most people do not deliberately gut shoot a deer. But people do take perfectly legal but very difficult shots. I believe it is our responisbility as ethical hunters to call these people out and openly stand against it. i think there is a fine line between what can be done and what should be done. I'm a pretty good shoot nothing amazing but decent. Do i think i can make a good enough shot with a small caliber gun to kill a deer. Yes i do but i choose not to because i know i am human and can make mistakes. and out of respect for the animals i hunt i do my best to make the cleanest kill possible. Does this mean that i'm going to hunt with a 50 BMG no because i believe that i can make just as clean of a kill with my 308 as i can with the higher calibers but with less lost meat. I believe i could make clean kills with small calibers but the chances go way up that i will would that animal and why should i hunt with this 218 when i also own a 308? I think it IS our job as hunters to question each other. and to make sure that everyone we enjoy the outdoors with is giving all of us a good image.

[rattus58]

Youngbuck... while I admire your enthusiasm, and don't fault your thinking a bit, you can only apply your opinions to yourself. Ethical hunters are concerned about shot placement. Caliber doesn't matter. You can drop an elephant with a .22, as has been done. To say that ground sluicing is unethical, on the other hand, is beyond your scope of opinion until you witness something that you deem unethical and if you want to call out someone YOU HAVE SEEN... fine, but to say, for example that ground sluicing is unethical is not only not true, its none of your business if legal.

You can tell a sportsman by how he conducts himself in the field. It has nothing to do with caliber, with style, or with his competance. Sportsmanship, on the other hand, has nothing to do with hunting, other than letting a geezer shoot first out of consideration of age or letting the ladies shoot first. Some people think sportsmanship has to do letting a bird fly first before shooting, or stalking bears rather than over bait, but wait.... what about cow calls or Bull elk roars... is that sportsmanship? Luring in a lovesick elk, moose or deer? Many many questions that for some they feel isn't a challenge and therefor not ethical.

well gotta go ... but I'll be back.... :)

[rattus58]

Sportsmanship and ethics are entirely different. Ethics is a measure of your belief system. A kid taught jack-lighting by his parent believes that to be ethical. When one is taught to hunt within the boundaries of what is legal, that too is ethical behavior. Now taken in a vacuum, which is more ethical than the other?

My perspective of people discussing ethics, is that they need to confine that conversation to their circle of experience and refrain from making pronouncements that may affect others when they have no right in the first place to call any legal hunting activity anything but legal, and ethical.

A sportsman behaves in a legal and ethical manner. A sportsman will take shots that he knows he can accomplish. A sportsman is not driven by the need to kill, but more by the need to challenge himself. A sportsman shares his self with others to further the "sport" of hunting. A sportsman will try to council those that he sees are less gifted or experienced that he. A sportsman will certainly not belittle or criticize hunters fresh into the ranks, nor will he criticize legal behavior. He might, when he sees a shot for example that he wouldn't take being taken want to find out more about why that individual took that shot. The answer's sometimes can be humbling.

If one doesn't like ground sluicing, in MY OPINION, the way to present that is IN MY OPINION, is to say something like, "while shooting birds on the ground is certainly legal and maybe an assured way to harvest dinner, I prefer to flush the birds or have the birds fly from under our dogs as I think it is more of a challenge for me and helps me develop my shooting skills more so than does shooting birds on the ground. You make your point.

Aloha... :cool:

[GoodOlBoy]

Youngbuck14 I believe you have a pretty firm grasp on the realities of the situation. Don't let a few lunatics every spoil hunting for you. Be they tree huggers, eviromentalists, or others. Hunting responsibly is hunting responsibly and there are some things that just are respinsible and somethings that aren't.

Like I said YB14 I think you have a good grasp on it already. It IS our jobs as hunters to question each other. Otherwise we cannot grow. To not say anything is to let hunters, and hunting become stagnant as old pond water. A good discussion is healthy, but sometimes you are arguing with a post. You also have to know when it is the discussion is productive, and when the post is just gonna be a post.



GoodOlBoy

[DogYeller]

If someone hunting with me shot a bird on the ground in front of my dog they would probably never do it again. I know they would never hunt with me again.

[rattus58]

"If someone hunting with me shot a bird on the ground in front of my dog they would probably never do it again. I know they would never hunt with me again."

What exactly does "in front of my dog" mean.... :) If I shot anything in front of my wife, she'd freak out probably... Is your dog sensitive in some way?

I think this whole discussion of shooting birds on the ground is ridiculous... and this is MY ENTITLED OPINION. Lot of snobbery goin on in MY PERSONALLY DEVELOPED OPINION.

[DogYeller]

I would never hunt with you.

[skeet]

Originally posted by DogYeller
I would never hunt with you.

Can't be said any better:D :D

[rattus58]

Well that's fine... you still didn't answer the question I was asking about shooting birds on the ground "in front of your dog"... meaning... if you missed the context.. what does the dog have to do with it?

And for the sake of conversation... Do you discuss your shooting parameters with your hunting partners before you hunt or do you just ASSUME everyone does it YOUR WAY? How often do you hunt with new people?

[skeet]

I'm just goint to try to explain. Not saying you aren't an ethical , safe or legal hunter. So don't get your panties all wadded up. Just try to read and understand.

Hunting where many of us grew up was an entry into manhood for a young'un. It was something where we were expected to LEARN(Emphasis is intentional) safety and certain rules. NOT rules of law or ethics or anything. Hunting was a social sport as well as something to put food on the table. As kids we all did things that were not socially acceptable to the people we hunted with. Everyone had their own pet peeves..but we lived within their guidelines ..Heck we were kids..to go hunting with the adults we would do anything. It was being accepted into their group. Most of these people were farmers and we knew if we were accepted into the circle of friends we had Thousands of acres of land to hunt. Now as to a man that hunted with dogs..especially quail or other critters you just didn't ground swat. It wasn't SOCIALLY acceptable. If you didn't want to live within the social rules you just didn't get to hunt with those people..or get to hunt their land. You can say these social rules aren't "fair" of right or whatever. It was the way we were raised and the way we as adults try to conduct ourselves to this day. I'm sorry you didn't get the opportunities to enjoy the sport and comraderie that we did(it just seems by your posts that you didn't). Nobody has said you are an illegal unethical or unsafe hunter. You are entitled to hunt by yourself in whatever manner you choose. But when you hunt with others..ya just gotta fit in. If you think that is wrong..well...I'm sorry but that is the way it is. So I may post more in this thread but nothing else will be addressed to you. Please stop arguing about semantics.

Oh and another thing..we learned when hunting with a new "friend" that we asked what they expected of us. especially a
when we were kids. Still do it today. 12 of us are getting together this Saturday to discuss our elk hunting foray..guess we'll get the major stuff settled then such as camp chores etc.

[rattus58]

Skeet... I appreciate all that and is no different than what I wrote you, posted here or whatever.... and this is NOT ABOUT ME skeet. It's amazing how you seem to either NOT READ what I've sent you, or just blindly assume things not in evidence.

What I specifically told you if I remember rightly.. but then it was about 20 minutes or so ago, so my memory might be faulty by now, but I seem to remember telling you that what you are taught are your ethics. Didn't I say that somewhere along the line to you... maybe several times? No matter.. if you are taught that ground sluicing is not acceptable then those become your "ethics" if that is what you want to call it. I agree with that.

If you are taught that ground sluicing is ok and its legal, then those teachings are the ethics as you are taught. Are your ethics more important than someone elses?

If someone new comes into your circle, do you take the time to explain what your practices are... IE... we don't shoot birds on the ground... or conversely, shoot birds on the ground but not over my dog... whatever.. rules are established for the game.

I gave you an example of effective range, or did you not read that part... if one has an effective range of 50 yards, is accurate at 50 yards, and kills 100% at 50 yards... does that individual have a right to impose that limitation on others or they are "unethical" as has been suggested is the attitude of some on this forum?

If you go out and shoot constantly throughout the year and get ready for hunting with your pet loads etc, is your guest who hasn't shot at all since last season unethical because he hasn't practiced to assure himself to as accurate as he could be? Would some folks consider that to be unethical skeet?

Now as for the gist of your last post... Please don't patronize me skeet. You've done that enough already besides calling me stupid. I don't go around insulting peoples intelligence as you do skeet and it is right into the playbook of my "criticism" of those who consider their way the only way and everyone else is "unethical".

Please don't ASSUME anything of my childhood skeet or how "disadvantaged" I may have been. The more you do it the more your ignorance is paraded in front of the forum. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THIS WAS ABOUT ME.... so let's get off that theme too could we.

By the way skeet... how was I supposed to take that "panties" reference skeet... and you wonder why I posted what I did? Like I said skeet, its one thing to grow up with a certain practice or "ethics" and a completely different thing to suggest in an open ended manner to assign as unethical the practices of others just because they don't "fit" your mold.

And then there is the flip flop ethic... this is ok if you're new to hunting to get confident, but as you gain confidence its not. Hello?? We have thought police here? We certainly have some squirrel police here, which I found to be really a big haha and points out exactly what I'm saying. Some people have too much time on their hands yet still don't bother to actually think about what they are saying. And I'm still waiting for the list of "unethicals"... I believe there were about 50?

You said it correctly skeet... finally... you practice your hunting style and your friends who are in your circle have certain practices that YOU all accept as how you hunt. Those in YOUR circle who would not subscribe to YOUR "ethics" should be asked to leave. Who's got a problem with that? I certainly don't. But that is not at all what started this conversation.

If it is legal, there are no unethicals. If you know and stick to your effective range in your hunting gear and have studied your quarry as to where to shoot to kill it, you're ready to hunt.

Aloha.. :cool:

[skeet]

Sheesh..Some people are so disadvantaged they don't even realize it. I guess I just don't understand...Ladies and gentlemen..Rattus IS exactly what he portrays himself to be.:D

[rattus58]

Yes ladies and gentlemen... Rattus is exactly what he portrays himself to be.. a prohunter advocate who doesn't preach divisiveness by deriding how other people hunt as others here on this forum seem to relish.

Rattus is a guy who actually participates in preserving, protecting and promoting public hunting.

[GoodOlBoy]

I don't know of a single person on this forum who relishes deriding other people rattus58.

Its those very kind of statements that are causing the issue now.

I will pm Rocky to lock this thread and end this ignorance.

GoodOlBoy

[YoungBuck14]

If someone hunting with me shot a bird on the ground in front of my dog they would probably never do it again.

This simply means that your hunting with dogs and they go on point to birds. While pointing out the birds the perfectly legal but unwise hunter shoots them on the ground in front of the dogs. They would never do it again because the owner of these dogs would do alot of yelling if he didn't hit you. To even joke about shooting in front of someone especially your wife is ridiculous. But you don't shoot in front of dogs because that dog just might decide to move and then you just harvested a nice pointer or spaniel just guessing but they prolly don't go into the mixed bag.

5 quail
1 pheasant
4 rabbits
1 spaniel

good day and good eats...prolly not

[skeet]

I will pm Rocky to lock this thread and end this ignorance.


YAAAAAAYYYY!!

:D :D

[BILLY D.]

Originally posted by skeet
I will pm Rocky to lock this thread and end this ignorance.


YAAAAAAYYYY!!

:D :D

Me 2,3,4, and 5.

Fact is ya shoulda done it on Page 2.

Best wishes, Bill

[rattus58]

I am in awe of this forum. I really am.... I'm serious.... you folks really need some help here. I've just read Youngbucks post and you folks are an amazement. Honestly this thread has proven beyond all reasonable doubt that you folks are wrapped up with yourselves beyond help.

It also proves to me that most of you don't read or can't read, or refuse to think about what is said.

His point of shooting a bird over dogs WHILE THE BIRD IS ON THE GROUND, (though not what the first statement was, which was "in front of my dog") a simple statement and the only one here to actually answer my question, and YB... I thank you. You are probably the only one with a brain cell on this thread between the two or three that have communicated with me on this issue.

The other two or three of you should belong to science.

And YB... while I appreciate your concern for my wife... and though I realize you mean well you too did not read what I said. Read it again, and maybe again, if you haven't got it then, maybe a third time.... because nobody here seems to be able to understand english.

But just in case you didn't get my private little chuckle, my wife eats what I shoot but can't stand to see anything shot. Not even a mouse. And since NO ONE here seems to remember my frame of reference here, I don't hunt with dogs. I use a muzzleloader shotgun for birds and a muzzleloader for everything else. Flushing dogs, pointers... I think I understand the difference. I did get past third grade, thank you.

Why would anyone be shooting birds on the ground with the use of dogs? I wouldn't, I don't, and I don't know anyone who does. But no one takes the time to read what people say here and things take on a life of its own..... a point I tried to make over and over.



Aloha....

[GoodOlBoy]

Insulting members of this board is not going to ingratiate you to anybody Rattus, and to be perfectly honest its not going to be tolerated. You can aloha and smileyface until you are blue in the face but you are insulting and it is YOU that does not understand plain english. Most of the board members we have are well educated, and even those that aren't are mostly good honest intelligent people.

You opinions have nothing to do with reality, you don't seem to be able to grasp even the most basic concepts of courtesy, and if you can't understand why people would be disturbed by you shooting game directly in front of your wife then you have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that you have little to no reguard for anybody or anything other than yourself.

If I could lock this thread myself I would have already.

Consider all futher posts of yours ignored by me. I will no longer converse with you or acknowledge your existance.

GoodOlBoy

[rattus58]

Excuse me.... But it was skeet that started the insults. And I'm afraid, Good Ol Boy, that you have YOUR OPINIONS about things and I have mine. I've not insulted anyone here my friend, I am only pointing out facts in play. That YOU or the other one or two can't read, won't read, won't look back to what I've posted, then I'm sorry...

Opinions have nothing to do with reality.... never mind.... this board thread whatever you callit... is nothing BUT OPINION... there is no reality here.... get a grip.

As to whether or not YOU pay attention to my posts has been irrelevant, since you are not paying attention to them anyway and are assuming much not in evidence all the way through so it really is a no net loss for me isn't it.

Aloha... and no smiley faces..... :D

[fabsroman]

I read the entire thread last night, and actually started to post a reply in support of you rattus and stating that this arguing is just a huge waste of time. In fact, it gave me a headache reading it. Then, after writing almost a book, I got so PO'ed about this entire thread that I deleted the post. I have been extremely busy with work and a one year old lately. So much so, that I haven't ridden my bike in 3 weeks and can barely find time to hunt. I deleted the post because I didn't want to get involved in this cement head debate. By the time I finished reading the thread, I had almost forgotten what you guys started arguing over. Then I remembered. It was ethics, which is so subjective that it really isn't worth arguing over. There can be so many different scenarios to why a person takes a particular shot, and you never know exactly what they were thinking when they took the shot.

Call a truce and be done with this already.

[rattus58]

Hi Fabsroman.... Well count me in then... I'm man enough to say let by gones be bygones.... So I'm up with it.

Thanks for bring this back to earth.... :)

Much Aloha... Tom :cool:

[petey]

There have been so many of my 10 commandments broken on this thread that I'm closing it before it gets out of hand any more than it already has.