Have guns do shoot

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

boa10

Moderator
As an non American it seems by what I have read on these pages the mentality is if it moves shot it, be it legal with papers or just not protected, with money, it seems, being the object in most cases. With reference to ratttlesnake round ups its a fact the numbers are not as many as in the "good old days" and the sizes are on the whole are smaller. Likewise with the alligator hunting. I know its not in texas,if hunters keep taking the large animals out it will take years for them to recover in these areas so you see smaller and smaller animals being taken until there is not much left to hunt and the hunters have to move to new hunting grounds. I live in Peru where they have the same outlook, and everything is "protected", but they have an excuse which is, they are very poor or ignorant. Whats yours?
The obsession that a lot of Americans have with guns and to an extent killing animals is beyond me.
An English man in Peru
 
...if it moves shot it, be it legal with papers or just not protected,...
Click to expand...
Yes, that's correct. If it's legal game, during the proper season and you have the correct permits, then it is perfectly fine to shoot it as long as you abide by the other imposed hunting regulations that apply. Those regulations include specific rules about the type that may be taken, number that may be taken, and other related aspects. The money spent on permits and collected on sporting goods taxes is used to insure that the populations are properly managed and that animals are not hunted to extinction or even to an unhealthy level.

So, for example, in some areas you might be able to shoot only a single whitetail buck with a particular antler point count, while in other areas, with much higher populations, you may be able to legally harvest more animals, even possibly including does. There are specific restrictions about how the animal must be processed and tagged, etc.

Here is an 80 page document from my state that summarizes the hunting and fishing regulations and restrictions. About 44 pages deal with hunting rules.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/cs_bk_k0700_284_2012_2013.pdf

As far as shooting unprotected species, I believe you would be surprised to find out how few species are actually unprotected. For example, when it comes to birds, in my state, there are only 3 species that are unprotected. European starlings (an imported species), English sparrows (another imported species) and feral pigeons, a ubiquitous pest species.

There are 11 unprotected animal species in my state, not including feral animals and "exotics" which are non-native species. The unprotected animals are pest species and/or animals which are extremely common, or that are, for one reason or another, not in any danger of extinction from hunting.
...if hunters keep taking the large animals out it will take years for them to recover in these areas so you see smaller and smaller animals being taken until there is not much left to hunt and the hunters have to move to new hunting grounds.
Click to expand...
I don't know what to tell you other than what I've already said. Hunting is carefully regulated by aggressively enforced game laws which prevent the kind of gradual, localized extinction you're concerned about.

The system isn't perfect, but it is working quite well.
 
I will begin with this. No animals have ever gone extinct because of controlled sport hunting. The biologists that determine the hunting seasons and limits set them to preserve the species hunted. The vast majority of hunters in the U.S. are conservation minded and obey all season dates and limits.

Hunting benefits the species as a whole. Taxes on every firearm and ammunition sale are set aside to benefit wildlife. This money pays for the protection of our wildlife and habitat improvements. The taxes and hunting license fees total many millions of dollars a year that go directly to preservation of wildlife.

Hunting restrictions and seasons are set to remove animals from the population that would otherwise starve to death in winter. At the same time the animals being removed makes the surviving animals stronger, because they hauve better food supply during the winter.

Nearly every hunter eats what they kill. Hunting is fun. Killing is not. Killing is not the reason, it is the necessary means to an end.

Until you have pitted yourself against an animal that is keenly aware of its surroundings, has eyes that are better than yours, a nose that can smell you from 500 meters, and ears that can hear a single toothpick size branch break at 100 meters, you just won't understand how thrilling the victory is. Nor will you know the sorrow that you feel that your opponent had to die for you to be successful.

Every specie of big game animal in the U.S. that is hunted has a larger population now than in 1900. Our system as a whole is working towards more animals, not less.
 
In my experience, most hunting trips are unsuccessful. I couldn't help but to notice the stab at rattlesnake hunting in Texas, of course I do have a thread on that.

I think some well managed game preserves can almost guarantee a succesful hunt, but Joe Blow hunting usually nets very little.

Some nuisance animals, such as, coyotes may not ever see lower numbers.

Besides, it's very difficult to eat an animal without first causing its functions to cease. I guess it would work for a bit, but the animal may have some opposition to it.
 
Last edited:
My family, as well as millions of American families spend countless hours and money for the perpetuation of wild animals, " if it moves" we want to see it, and if it's numbers need reduced we want to eat it.
Have a nice day English Fella and THANKS FOR COMING!!!!!!;)
 
Legal game can be hunted only when the population of that species has a surplus. It's numbers are increasing and there is a limit to what the habitat can support. We have voluminous regulations concerning methods and allowable numbers of kills.

In the U.S., all game species are increasing in numbers. All.

Alligators: Once threatened because of the demand for their hides for shoes and purses, they were protected for a number of years. Now, in many areas, their numbers have increased such that they are a threat to pets and people. They are hunted within a permit system--and the numbers are still on the increase.

Rattlesnake hunting gets publicity, but "festival" gatherings are sporadic and quite localized. Vast areas of public and private lands never see any such hunting or gathering.
 
We have strict management of deer on our club. If you shoot something that isn't legal by the rules, break out the checkbook, it's going to cost you.

Hogs are a nuisance, the standing rule is kill every one you see. They are prolific breeders and can multiply many times over in a year. They destroy habitat and eat food sources before deer ever get a chance. But, they aren't stupid either, daytime activity goes way down as a season progresses.

Alligators are becoming a nuisance as well. I live in a neighborhood on a golf course and we have them in the ponds of the course. They are getting bolder and more aggressive towards people as their natural shyness wears off due to more encounters with people. I for one would hate to see a child or someone's dog get snatched by a 8-10 or bigger gator. Though they do make desirable shoes, wallets and purses.

Coyotes, foxes and bobcats are major predators on fawns, rabbits, quail and turkey and have to be controlled in order to keep the game species populations up.

What you perceive as indiscriminate killing of some animals is sometimes merely population and predator control in order to facilitate the advancement of the game species we pursue.

Thank you for the concern for American animals, now, go worry about those in your own country.
 
The obsession that a lot of Americans have with guns and to an extent killing animals is beyond me.
Click to expand...

The idea that hunting is immoral but buying meat from the store is ok, or that animals can kill to eat but humans cannot is beyond me.

Surely you are a vegetarian, no?
 
OP: Not meaning to be rude, but if you don't approve of guns or hunting why are you on a site that is for gun owners and hunters?
 
Surprised to see staff members responding to such a troll post and not simply deleting it!

There's no educating this guy. Or, more likely, this 13 year old girl who lives in CA.
 
bird_dog said:
Surprised to see staff members responding to such a troll post and not simply deleting it!

There's no educating this guy. Or, more likely, this 13 year old girl who lives in CA.
Click to expand...

Whether or not the OP is a troll requires more information that your inkling.

The OP is in Peru.

Just because you might not like the question, doesn't mean they're a troll.

We'll see if they return in a reasonable time to contribute anything to the discussion. If not, we'll close the thread.
 
So.... you think rattlesnake roundups are a bad thing, because there are fewer rattlesnakes now than there were in the past?

There are fewer rattlesnakes because the habitat for rattlesnakes is not what it was: most of that prairie (and the prairie dogs that populated it) is gone. It is intensively farmed/ranched with corn, soybeans, wheat, alf-alfa, sunflower/other oilseeds, cattle, sheep ..... without which, many people around the world, human beings, with families that love them, would starve to death. Simple as that.

Conditions change, and animals that can not adapt to the changes will cease to exist.

There are people that think we should restore the prairie, giving it back to the rattlesnakes and bison, by forcibly removing the people that feed a good portion of the world's population by farming and ranching that prairie (look up "Buffalo Commons") ..... such people are dangerous nutbags, IMO.
 
With reference to ratttlesnake round ups its a fact the numbers are not as many as in the "good old days" and the sizes are on the whole are smaller. If hunters keep taking the large animals out it will take years for them to recover in these areas so you see smaller and smaller animals being taken until there is not much left to hunt and the hunters have to move to new hunting grounds.
Click to expand...

Within the last few years the number of large trophy animals such as deer taken annually is greater that ever. Many of these are taken in areas where they were once hunted close to eradication or where they didn't even inhabit years ago. This is due to modern hunters being selective and harvesting animals that have reached maturity and only taking the amount of animals the population can handle. In Wisconsin the average age of bucks taken during bow and gun seasons both has increased over the last few years. This shows that responsible hunters and a good system of hunting seasons and regulations is achieving their goals. Many fishermen now practice catch and release making the average size of fish caught, along with numbers of fish caught increasing. In the U.S. one of the main reasons we have animals to hunt/fish at all is because of hunters and their support of game regulations and the maintaining of habitat. Their desire to always have the opportunity to hunt/fish for them and their children/grandchildren is very important. This is the real obsession of the majority of hunters here. Very few of us here hunt to survive. Might be a reason game management and the impact on animal size and populations may differ from here and Peru.
 
It's clearly a snake person as 'boa' in the screen name.

Herpetology clubs and forums have launched an organized smear campaign against western diamondback hunters in Texas. This is in response to Animal Planet's highly dramatized series on Texas diamondback hunters. Their claims are largely false information or irrelevant. Their arguments are emotion based with little reasoning involved. When presented with hard facts, they resort to insults and racial slurs....funny because Texas is very diverse in reality.
 
Whether or not the OP is a troll requires more information that your inkling.

The OP is in Peru.

Just because you might not like the question, doesn't mean they're a troll.

We'll see if they return in a reasonable time to contribute anything to the discussion. If not, we'll close the thread.
Click to expand...

Gotcha -- and, hey, I think you guys do a great job!
 
Sirs/madams, Thankyou for your comments to my post. As a biologist that specilizes in reptiles I must remind you that the main problem of animals becoming a problem to humans is that in most cases its humans that cause the problem. As stated with alligators eating peoples pets. Why? Isn't because there are more and more people going into the animals habitat to live and not excepting to live side by side. Feeding them also causes problems. But having the attitude of "we're here now" be it alligators or rattlesnakes is no excuse of killing them on sight and saying there's plenty of space elsewhere for them isnt always correct. Also saying its a way of controlling their numbers also really doesn't stand up. Just look at alligators almost made extint with the attitude of there's millions of them. It didn't take long for that to change. The TV shows on reptile hunters being brave people are laughable. No its just away to make money at the expensive of animals. There's one thing the need for killing animals for the "pot" another in large scale killing for money and sport/fun.
By the way England banned fox hunting years ago because it is crule and had no effect no real on fox numbers and more important no place in a civilized world.
An Englishman in Peru

P.S If people think that removing 100s or more rattlesnakes a season has no effect on numbers and size. Then who is the troll? Im not attacking responsable hunters a few animals a year, although if you multyply the few animals per hunter a year, then I suggest that may be a cause for concern in the future. It's this bravdo that these TV programes seem to promote that sickens me. Even when there is a quota its the attitude of "we must use the quota" at all costs that you see animals of all sizes being taken it doesn't seem to matter.
An Englishman in Peru
 
I think you may misunderstand the amount of rattlesnakes taken each year.

Too the other members; see what I'm talking about lol?
 
If people think that removing 100s or more rattlesnakes a season has no effect on numbers and size.
Click to expand...
It's not a matter of what people "think". The roundups are localized, periodic events, and there is no evidence to show that they affect numbers and size.
I suggest that may be a cause for concern in the future.
Click to expand...
If it's not affecting the numbers (i.e. if the take from each roundup is similar in quantity/quality to previous roundups), why would it be any cause for concern at all? Do you have any data at all to support your concern? If you do, then it would be interesting and informative to everyone if you would provide it.
Just look at alligators almost made extint with the attitude of there's millions of them. It didn't take long for that to change.
Click to expand...
Well, it has changed now, and alligator numbers, as mentioned, are on the rise. Again, if the numbers show that hunting alligators is not reducing their numbers and that the management approach currently in use is actually increasing population size, where is the cause for concern?
As a biologist that specilizes in reptiles...
Click to expand...
It doesn't really matter that you are a herpetologist. If the data does not support your assessment of this situation, then it has no more weight than anyone else's.
It's this bravdo that these TV programes seem to promote that sickens me.
Click to expand...
How you FEEL is one thing. Whether or not that feeling actually has any bearing on the reality of the situation is another thing entirely.

If you have some data applicable to the species and areas that you are apparently concerned about that supports your view, then post it in your next visit to TFL.

If you do not have any data, then you may consider your opinions and feelings duly noted and this thread will be terminated.
 
Boa10 as holder of a Wildlife Conservation and Management degree I would be happy to debate the health of wildlife in the U.S with either Peru or Europe.

In the last 40 years or so professional wildlife managers and biologists have "taken over" the various state and federal agencies that manage them. The result? Thriving healthy populations of nearly all hunted species. In fact hunted species are usually in better shape than non-hunted ones because they are a economic base in many places while things like songbirds and non game while important aren't.

Don't believe all the tripe you see in print or on the internet about americans and their guns destroying the wildlife of the country. Even some of the species that were essentially extirpated from many areas in the lower 48 are making a come back, Mountain Lions, Wolves to name a couple of the slower recovering species, others like the wild turkey and whitetail deer are at numbers to be considered nuisance species in many areas.

I am a hunter and most of my family hunt, I can't remember a time when we harvested a full quota of anything except maybe small game like squirrels and there certainly is no shortage there. Wildlife agencies, and organizations have spent billions of dollars on wetlands, refuges, and protecting many species during vulnerable times like breeding seasons. The biology and science are there to support the practices and harvest limits set and the results pretty well speak for themselves.

I will happily admit that much of the "problems" with wildlife species especially reptiles comes when we as humans move into their habitat, sometimes they eat our pets or bite us, but so far I don't see those populations vanishing.

I hope you don't feel like I am being rude, its just that the stereotype perpetuated by PETA and other groups agains the american sportsman/hunters is essentially wrong. Sportsman were even the first ones in america to make the pleas for seasons, limits, and limitations, but I am beginning to digress so I will stop.

I will say that I appreciate that you had the inerest & integrity to log on to a site like this one and ask a question, most in your position would simply have taken the onesided argument and accepted it as gospel. For that alone sir you have earned my professional respect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top