Do you feel that Rattlesnake hunting is legitimate hunting?

Do you feel rattlesnake hunting is a legitimate form of hunting.

  • Yes

    Votes: 63 75.0%

  • No

    Votes: 8 9.5%

  • On the fence need more info

    Votes: 13 15.5%
  • Total voters
    84
  • Poll closed .
I don't think some people realize how thick they are in some places rickyrick. If they had to deal with them all the time, all over their property, they might change their tune.
 
I don't know if I'd call it "hunting" but if it's legal, then by all means, do it. I don't think that rights activists should have the ability to ban it if there is no present danger to the species. I wouldn't do it, but I'm sure it gets some people going.
 
I don't see a problem with rattlesnake hunting if you are going to eat it or use it in some way (i.e. skins) or if it is a nuisance in the area that its in. If its not for one of those reasons I don't think it should be legal no matter what the animal is though.

Also, here in Tennessee rattlesnakes are protected. They may be plentiful in other states or maybe even other parts of Tennessee but their population has decreased a lot where I live. Back when I was a kid it was normal to see at least 5 rattlesnakes in our yard every summer. I'm 27 now and I haven't seen a rattlesnake in 5 years.
 
Well, I could be paranoid, but with all of the hatred I'm reading, it looks like the beginning of the end to hunting in the US.
 
rickyrick, that is one way to look at it.

The other way to look at it is that in some areas, rattlesnakes are not nuisances due to scarcity, and also due to scarcity they are protected.

I am not sure how that translates to hatred or anti-hunter sentiment - unless you are saying that hunters don't care about elimination of a species. If that is what you are suggesting, then you should look first at yourself, if hunting gets banned.
 
The other way to look at it is that in some areas, rattlesnakes are not nuisances due to scarcity, and also due to scarcity they are protected.

I am not sure how that translates to hatred or anti-hunter sentiment - unless you are saying that hunters don't care about elimination of a species. If that is what you are suggesting, then you should look first at yourself, if hunting gets banned.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Hunters are the reason we have hunt-able species in many areas. The reintroduction of Wild Turkeys and Elk to areas where they had previously eradicated, along with the continued stocking of other native and non-native game animals is all because hunters want them there. Hunters license fees and taxes from hunting equipment buy land and pay for food plots for the general public to enjoy. Hunters are the true conversationalists. Many folks don't realize that without hunters, many of the animals they enjoy having around would be gone, their habitat greatly reduced and those cute little forest creatures soon become frustrating pests. What sticks in the heads of these same folks is negative images of hunters. Newspaper articles about poachers/violators needlessly killing animals out of season or way over their bag limits. Pictures or hearsay of property damage done by hunters, either on purpose or just negligence. Disrespectful public display of dead animals, as hangin' in trees or nailin' to the side of a building for long periods of time.

No one here has voiced an objection to the hunting of rattlesnakes where legal. Some have suggested the illegal hunting of snakes in areas where they are protected. Which one of these opinions would most likely upset a non-hunter or someone neutral to hunting?
 
When I was young and going to high school (and T-Rex roamed). I used to hunt rattlesnakes and take them to the college so they could be milked for anti venom. My weapon of choice was a custom made aluminium pole with noose. I had an aluminium pet cage and some gunney sacks. Catch a snake, bag it, tie it, put it in the case. The college paid me $3 each. Which was a lot of money back then. I was able to buy my cigarettes, get a lunch or two, and sometimes even take out a date to the movies. Makes me wonder if the Western DB is on the California endangered list now. Oh well, if it is, then there is still surfing.
 
I haven't seen one around here in a long, long time. So I reckon I'd let it go.

On the other hand, we have lots and lots of cottonmouths. I kill them on sight and will continue to do so until I start seeing rats or other vermin.

We've killed them with .22LR, .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, .380 Auto and my son got one with a bow and arrow. I think a short .410 shotgun would be ideal, but they never seem to be around if I have a shotgun.

You don't suppose they ate the rattlesnakes do you?
 
Well, the good news is; I silenced one opposing forums claims by providing overwhelming evidence countering every claim made against the snake hunters. I don't hunt them, but I couldn't stand by while half of Texas was being insulted with racial slurs, accused of animal torture and environmental destruction. This argument was crossing into all forms of hunting.
 
rickyrick, it sometimes helps to point out that only hunters and gardeners are do-it-yourselfers for their food. When we get our food from a grocery or a restaurant, we've hired somebody else to do the dirty work.
 
Having been told what a rattlesnake bite did to an English setter as well as what a huge sum of money and vet care could not undo, I'm all for hunting and killing every rattlesnake.
 
Curly, your grasp or ecological balance is breathtaking - in a sad way.

Can rattlesnake hunting be legitimate? Yes.

Is it, always, everywhere? No.

Kill 'em all is normally very poor wildlife management.
 
My "hunting" them consisted of driving dirt roads at night and then shooting them with 38 shot capsules. Wasn't much of a hunt but it was fun and they are good eating.

In general, I probably let more go than I kill. Around the house they get the shovel.
 
Only had one incident. Found a bunch of babies under the dog food bag. Euthanized them and still wonder where Mama went.
 
MLEAKE, Obviously, you cannot begin to understand what that rattlesnake did with just one bite. This setter bitch was a top 1-2% dog, and the owner's breeding line depended on it to the point that he invested ten thousand $ or so trying to save it (let alone how it suffered). And, since any rattlesnake can poison anybody or any animal that it chooses to bite, I'm all for exterminating each and every one of them. Can you prove to me that the rattlesnake lives where no non-venomous snake can live and hunt vermin? So what purpose does the venomous snake serve? Maybe for scientific research. If so, then let the rattlesnake live in a lab environment so its venom can be used for research. Besides, haven't you ever watched True Grit? Need I say any more?
 
Typically, we find out what niche a critter had filled after the fact, when we see the results of eradication.

The Laws of Murphy and of Unintended Consequences tend to teach unpleasant lessons.

Meanwhile, snakes kill dogs. My in-laws lost a dachsund to a rattler a few years back. They could just as easily have lost the dog to a red-tailed hawk. Should we hunt hawks to eradication?

Emotional, irrational responses to threats are how we normally like to define antis. Obviously, those responses are not limited to antis...
 
I'm mainly concerned with actual hunting of snakes to be sold by the pound and made into merchandise. While many hunters remove nuiesence snakes for people, I'm talking about the same format as most other types of animals....going to private lands leased for hunting and procuring the snakes. I must insist that the western diamondback population is not in any distress. The population is bountiful and healthy. Their numbers vary by climate, hunting them as a whole has negligible impact. I can assume that there are some farms with lower numbers due to hunting, but that's only a guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top