Hunting is a coward's pastime!

Merriam Webster: "one who shows disgraceful fear or timidity".......<the soldiers who ran as soon as the first shots were fired were branded as cowards>

As some previous posters have commented, I also take exception to the once again improper use of the word "coward" It seems lately that its sole use in the English language anymore is to simply demean, diminish and name call, It really does have a defined meaning yet is seldom used in that way.There are plenty of words that would accurately describe the situation (any) at hand rather than some slang catch all utterance which conveys nothing other than the disdain of the mutterer.
How many times have you heard or used this term improperly.
 
kawicrash said:
No, I have not. Feel free to correct me if I am completely out to lunch here.
The skill of tracking and stalking, oh wait, no tracking or stalking while sitting in tree reading book
The thrill of potentially coming face to face, oh wait, no face to face while sitting in tree reading book.
The exhilarating feeling of pushing your phisical limits climbing, running,fording swamps, oh wait, no fording while sitting in tree reading book.
The heroic exploits of the hunter sitting in a tree shooting fish in a barrel ��
Just not my thing.
Click to expand...
What would you consider putting bait on a hook and trying to catch a fish, fishing or not fishing. Give it a try with the bears and let us know how easy it is
 
I hunt for meat . I do not understand trophy hunting but I will not throw them under the bus because after they outlaw trophy hunting they are coming after regular hunting.This dentist guy is a.poacher and a felon.
 
Corry said:
I gather you wouldn't fish then either right?
Click to expand...

That is a great analogy , It really shows how grey everything is, as humans we really have a knack for conditional morality. How many of you who are against trophy hunting (where the meat is left to waste) go out and bring Armageddon to to local coyote population.
People sure do like to get on their high horses and condemn others.
 
man! for less $200 in tags a year, you get a #### ton of GOOD food. most people blow that once a week one garbage thats full of hormons or sugar. if we only had boar in soouther ontario
 
I can not defend the dentist that illegally shot the lion. iMO the man is a criminal not a hunter and whatever his fate he deserves it.

In saying that, I do think that at least in Africa there is a place for trophy hunting. The sport is quite likely the preservation for many of the endangered species of animals that live there. The sport hunting industry in Africa puts millions of dollars into the preservation of their game to ensure large or at least sustainable populations of game if for nothing more than to have huntable populations. The sport hunting industry generally tries to protect its crown jewel spicies to keep the sport hunting alive and well and put money into the economy. It goes as far as having armed guards to protect it rhinoceros populations.

I am a not a trophy hunter nor do I care to be one, but I can say although it's not my " cup of tea " it does have a important place in that part of the world. I as a hunter refuse to comdem that act of trophy hunting and hunters because of the round about way it actually in its own way protects many of game species like lion, rhino , elephant, etc...

As for the dumb ass dentist .....he will become PETA' s flavour of the month to showcase their agenda and unfortunately fuel the antis disgust for all things hunting. And yes it sucks.

If you' re a hunter and become engaged in an argument with an anti stay calm hold your tongue and try to educated if you can. And if you really want to support the heritage of hunting and the outdoors offer to take the anti hunter along on your next hunt. So they can attempt to understand the experience.
 
Well as I have posted before, I come from a very anti firearms family / non hunters. I grew up loving animals, and was never much for hunting so most of my views are very conservative still today, but I have opened my eyes a bit.

My main switch into hunting came when I was working at a zoo for 4 years as a zookeeper when I was younger. Now since this was a preservation of animals place, I was very much for animal rights (still am to a point). But My eyes were opened one day with a lead zookeeper and I working together and were talking. I assumed he was the largest anti hunting animal lover environmentalist, but I was wrong. He was a man I have high respect for, and in our conversation, we were talking about conservation. He told me that he has no problem with proper hunting, and in fact prefers to see people wearing leather / furs over synthetics and things like rain coats. I was floored, so I asked why, to which he replied, humans always need protection from the elements, its been like this forever, and when the day comes that your coat is no longer good and you throw it away, which do you think is better for the environment? a side of the picture I never even thought about. we talked a lot more and really came to understand a lot better of how things worked!

Of course he is not a supporter for trophy hunts, and neither am I. Yes I know the monetary economics of this, but just because I don't support this, I don't personally take offense because someone else does it. As long as it is managed properly, if can provide income to some, and ecological control (again if managed properly, and I'm sad to say many area's of our world is not managed great).

I hunt now (to some extent, I am in no way an expert), I do enjoy being out in the woods. My first kill was hard for me, I like animals more than most people, and remember staring at the partridge for a long time before taking the shot LOL. After, yes was a bit sad, but the meat was delicious! Went deer hunting too, but only saw doe's (except for a buck I almost hit with my car after hours and on the drive back!)

I always wanted to do a bear hunt because I would love to have a bear rug (yes would not provide clothing, so kind of a trophy) but since I cannot stand the taste of bear meat, I would not hunt one just to have a rug! This is my personal decision as I feel that to kill a bear to make a rug is not aligned with my views. Now If I could give away the meat to someone who would use it, then I could feel better about getting my rug (or if I could figure out a way to choke it down, but steak, hamburg, canned, mixed with other meat, just still tastes like a skunk of me)

There was a fellow on here a while back posted pictures of his African hunt. Beautiful pictures and nice animals he got, I was a little off at first because of this, but when he told me that all parts of the animals were used (he ate some, the rest the guides split it up) and I think he could keep the hides and such, so I felt this was a win win! He got exotic trophies, and a great vacation, and the animals did not go to waste plus economic benefits.

Now for killing this lion, does outrage me here. Anyways you slice it, it was illegal, and playing the card he didn't know or whatever, sure it happens where you think you are getting something but its different, does not sit well as an excuse for me. Not much can be done about it because it is over, but I think for him will have personal complications with his dental practice and personal life for years to come.
 
This dentist will never be known for the thousands of lions he just saved.

His stupidity has generated hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in donations to the park where Cecil lived.

Antis never mention this part.
 
yomomma said:
This dentist will never be known for the thousands of lions he just saved.

His stupidity has generated hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in donations to the park where Cecil lived.

Antis never mention this part.
Click to expand...

Although he incidentally may have saved more lions than the lion he killed...Imo is still a monumental dumbass. Poacher and general all round POS. I'd rather he follow the rules and not be come the anti's poster child.

But your statement is not an untrue one and you make a good point!
 
cdn1canhunt said:
Although he incidentally may have saved more lions than the lion he killed...Imo is still a monumental dumbass. Poacher and general all round POS. I'd rather he follow the rules and not be come the anti's poster child.

But your statement is not an untrue one and you make a good point!
Click to expand...

The amount of rage surrounding this is scary. This guy hasn't been to trial. Uncle Ted is going to freak. Nothing good will come from this incident.
 
Was there in fact NO permit for the lion? In Zimbabwe lion hunting is allowed WITH permit...I haven't seen on the news where they clearly state there was no permit.
 
if it wasn't for sport hunting giving them a dollar value to the state, game animals all over the world would to all intents and purposes have completely disappeared by now, including those found in North America. We had enough people interested in eating them who had no notion of preserving the species of anything.
 
scott_r said:
Ive moved passed the point of caring about anything other then myself and my family now a days.... A poacher kills a lion....big deal..PETA hates hunters....whats new.
Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from Scott R. But if we don't at least comment on the situation and PETA manages to fulfill the part of their agenda that one day affects you, your family, me and every other law abiding outdoors person and hunter.

How would we have helped our selfs or one another? Just saying. No argument intended.
 
HeavyT said:
Was there in fact NO permit for the lion? In Zimbabwe lion hunting is allowed WITH permit...I haven't seen on the news where they clearly state there was no permit.
Click to expand...

There was a permit for area B. This lion came from protected area A (the accusation is he was baited to leave this area). The issue is that this particular animal was already tight with the humans. Killing a deer sounds palatable to some, killing Bamby makes most see red and demand vengeance. Humanity assemble!
 
Xplorer said:
The amount of rage surrounding this is scary. This guy hasn't been to trial. Uncle Ted is going to freak. Nothing good will come from this incident.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% as for uncle Ted although he does a lot of good ...he can be quite the Jack Ass when it comes to this stuff. I hope it does not become the 3 ring circus he is known to make these things. I'd prefer is quietly fade into the past.
 
cdn1canhunt said:
Agree 100% as for uncle Ted although he does a lot of good ...he can be quite the Jack Ass when it comes to this stuff. I hope it does not become the 3 ring circus he is known to make these things. I'd prefer is quietly fade into the past.
Click to expand...

I hope that everyone that leaves a death threat for this guy on social media get put into a registry of potential violent threats to society. These are exactly the type of people who should be denied firearms. It's almost like they know what they are capable of, and maybe that's why they are afraid of us sane folk. This whole story bums me out.

Ted is perfect for this crowd I think, he speaks their language but has the facts.
 
Xplorer said:
There was a permit for area B. This lion came from protected area A (the accusation is he was baited to leave this area). The issue is that this particular animal was already tight with the humans. Killing a deer sounds palatable to some, killing Bamby makes most see red and demand vengeance. Humanity assemble!
Click to expand...

Thank you.

Isn't it completely normal and likely that the lion wandered from its protected home range? Animals will do that. If it was collared and part of a study is it possible the collar worked its way into the lions mane rendering it invisible? The researchers surely would know the neibouring range was a hunting reserve, perhaps they should have taken greater steps to identify the animal for the event of it wandering into hunting territory?
Don't get me wrong, if this guy was in the wrong he should be held accountable, but clearly we are not privy to all the details.
 
I hunt, and I usually consider myself a trophy hunter...which simply means that in addition to the meat, I hope to keep some form of memento or remembrance of the animal, and therefore need to be more selective before I pull the trigger. Silly me! Forcing myself to practice some restraint, to spend more time and energy and effort finding the "right" animal, passing up easy shots and often accepting the fact that I won't be successful and will come home empty-handed if the "right" animal isn't found. I guess I'm fortunate to have finally had my eyes opened to the truth: the apparently undeniable fact that a guy who goes out for meat, shoots the first legal animal that presents itself and then scurries home to his freezer is in some way morally superior to me if I seek more than just meat. I am a bit confused about the bear rug thing...I have a couple of bear mounts (definite trophies, and thus evil), but also a beautiful bear rug that I now know is "kind of a trophy":rolleyes:...is that one also evil? I ate those bears...does that make killing them "kind of okay"? Is the rug "kind of okay, but mostly evil"? I have a big lifesize bear mount, but only took a small bit of the meat for myself, sharing out the bulk of it with some locals I met in the hunting area...that's a tough one, I'm gonna guess probably about 60% okay, 30% "kind of okay" and 10% totally evil, since I should have left the skin to rot rather than preserving it as a mount.

As for this dentist, I won't judge because I just don't know the facts (some of you guys should try that someday, just for ####s'n'giggles). If...IF, mind you...he is indeed guilty of the previous offences as claimed, and IF he knowingly poached this lion, he should be charged. BUT...consider a couple of things first. Let's say you're a Canadian hunter in Africa, and therefore are legally required to hire a licenced PH (i.e. a guide). Even if you do as much research as possible to become familiar with the legalities surrounding your hunt, you are essentially at the mercy of the PH and must trust his word and his judgment to guide your own decisions and actions. If my PH (whether in Namibia, Newfoundland or North Dakota) tells me we are in a legal area, and the animal in front of me is a good specimen based on my criteria as we have previously discussed...I will trust him, and shoot.

But wait...you can't kill that critter...he has a NAME! Yep, sorry about that, but if he is a nice specimen, in a legal area and time (information which I am being forced to pay a licenced professional to provide) then he is going to receive a bullet.

And then, to add insult to injury...he has a collar! He has been trapped, tranquilized, weighed, studied, swabbed, injected, inspected, measured, vaccinated, sampled, poked, prodded, tagged, sanitized and then released to tell his buddies about it! Lucky him...don't overlook the fact that a percentage of study animals die as a result of this manhandling. He's a celebrity, and perhaps he has indeed provided researchers with useful and valuable data...or maybe he is just another victim of the mindset that demands every "wild" animal needs to spend its life with an tag in its ear, a radio collar around its neck, a number painted on its side and a dart in its ass. Personally, the presence of the collar would diminish the experience somewhat for me, just as the wing tag I found on my first turkey (indicating a transplanted bird) was a bit of a let-down...but it wouldn't necessarily stop me. Sorry, PETA, but if you don't want study animals to be shot...don't study them in areas where they are legally hunted. Oh, sorry, I forgot...you're not studying them...you're "saving" them. V:I:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom