What the Anti Hunting crowd really thinks

[Marble]

Hunt To Eat Show | Episode 17 - The HSUS Black Bear Petition

Episode 17 - The HSUS Black Bear Petition

On today’s episode, I chat with Wendy Keefover, Senior Strategist of Native Carnivore Protection with the Wildlife Protection Department at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). This episode was a chance for all of us to pause and spend some time listening to each other to better...

www.podbean.com

Just listened to this podcast that had a representative from the Hemane Society on it. She is the one who signed a petition or request submitted to the California Gane Commission to ban all bear hunting in CA. It was not geared towards arguing with the person, but to listen to what she had to say. And she said a lot!

Her definition of "trophy hunting" was if you did ANYTHING with ANY part of the animal, including taking a grip and grin pic, you are a trophy hunter.

She also claims the bear population has plummeted because the take numbers are so low. They are so low because we can't use hounds here anymore.

Anyways, the reason I put this on here is so some guys who haven't listened to what the anti hunters really think have an opportunity to hear first hand their rationale. Flawed as it may be.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[JBrown1]

Is it possible that she is correct: that even a grip and grin make you a trophy hunter?

The term "trophy hunter" was synonymous with "conservationist" back in TR's days. The definition changed over the past 100 years, to the point that sport hunters now shun the term.

Maybe we need to reclaim the title?

I say this as a proud trophy hunter, sport hunter and subsistence hunter.

 

[wapitibob]

Anyways, the reason I put this on here is so some guys who haven't listened to what the anti hunters really think have an opportunity to hear first hand their rationale. Flawed as it may be.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Pretty sure they think our rational is flawed as well.

 

[jimh406]

We don't have to go somewhere else, there seems to be plenty of anti-hunting and anti-gun people here. I don't know if they actually hunt or not. For sure, they draw some arbitrary lines about what should be allowed.

On the plus side many were exposed recently which makes it easy for some of us to click the Ignore option, and never see their drivel again. Well, unless someone else quotes them.

 

[*zap*]

what we need is 'common sense' hunting laws....

 

[KBC]

Is the bear population dropping in California? Here in BC it's exploding.

 

[WKR]

Is the bear population dropping in California? Here in BC it's exploding.

No it is not, it is exploding here as well. Its very common to go on a hunt or scouting trip and see more bears than bucks. We also have bears coming in to the suburbs quite often.

The idea that the population is dropping because we don't meet the harvest quota is a fallacy, we don't meet the quota because, as the op stated, we can't run hounds on bears anymore. All you have to do is look at the numbers pre-ban and thats all the data you need.

 

[bojangles808]

The goofiest thing about the predator hunting bans is they are still killing bears and mtn lions because of nuisance/ overpopulation and what not it's just not hunters doing it so antis feel better about it. they have to pay ppl to come in and do it with tax dollars instead of hunters that will pay to do it. Just makes zero sense

 

[dtrkyman]

The goofiest thing about the predator hunting bans is they are still killing bears and mtn lions because of nuisance/ overpopulation and what not it's just not hunters doing it so antis feel better about it. they have to pay ppl to come in and do it with tax dollars instead of hunters that will pay to do it. Just makes zero sense

Was just starting to type a similar response, unfortunately logic has gone out the window a long time ago, particularly in CA.

My wife has a lot of city friends from Chicago, fortunately they are intelligent enough to listen to someone talk about something they know nothing about and have a positive discussion about it. They are not anti they just have no experience with it, so they ask me a lot of questions.

Unfortunately this is not normal.

Years ago the deer population in Cook county was approaching 200 deer per square mile, they wouldn't allow bowhunting in these urban areas so the state has been paying to kill deer since the 90s, I remember that county alone spent nearly a million dollars killing deer the first year, they could have made crazy money allowing hunting!

 

[Marble]

Pretty sure they think our rational is flawed as well.

Oh that's for sure. They really can't comprehend how we could kill something.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

We don't have to go somewhere else, there seems to be plenty of anti-hunting and anti-gun people here. I don't know if they actually hunt or not. For sure, they draw some arbitrary lines about what should be allowed.

On the plus side many were exposed recently which makes it easy for some of us to click the Ignore option, and never see their drivel again. Well, unless someone else quotes them.

There are some people here that are not as pro-hunting as others. But this gal, and HSUS, are in a completely different ballpark.

They want no predator hunting at all. Period.

She wants everyone to go hug a bear. Seriously....

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

No it is not, it is exploding here as well. Its very common to go on a hunt or scouting trip and see more bears than bucks. We also have bears coming in to the suburbs quite often.

The idea that the population is dropping because we don't meet the harvest quota is a fallacy, we don't meet the quota because, as the op stated, we can't run hounds on bears anymore. All you have to do is look at the numbers pre-ban and thats all the data you need.

Totally spot on.


Growing up I would see a bear every several years. Literally it was a shock to see one. Now, for the last 5 years, I've seen more bears than bucks every year. And it is not hard to fill a bear tag with a rifle here in Nor Cal. Just need to drive the roads and you'll run into one.

We killed 3 bears last year. 1 with a bow and two with a rifle. And we weren't even targeting bears. We were just deer hunting and ran into them.

There are already two bears in the spot from last year.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[FLATHEAD]

Half an hour ago I took a pic of some tomatoes from my garden.
I guess they're trophy maters?

 

[grfox92]

Half an hour ago I took a pic of some tomatoes from my garden.
I guess they're trophy maters?

Your a real sicko. Growing vegetables just for pictures, likes and shares.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Listened to that one awhile back, hard listen but good to know the anti mindset. They just need to get a grip on the concept of the North American model of conservation and that we can’t let nature take its course on a planet of 7 billion people destroying habitat.

 

[JjamesIII]

Hunt To Eat Show | Episode 17 - The HSUS Black Bear Petition

Episode 17 - The HSUS Black Bear Petition

On today’s episode, I chat with Wendy Keefover, Senior Strategist of Native Carnivore Protection with the Wildlife Protection Department at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). This episode was a chance for all of us to pause and spend some time listening to each other to better...

www.podbean.com

Just listened to this podcast that had a representative from the Hemane Society on it. She is the one who signed a petition or request submitted to the California Gane Commission to ban all bear hunting in CA. It was not geared towards arguing with the person, but to listen to what she had to say. And she said a lot!

Her definition of "trophy hunting" was if you did ANYTHING with ANY part of the animal, including taking a grip and grin pic, you are a trophy hunter.

She also claims the bear population has plummeted because the take numbers are so low. They are so low because we can't use hounds here anymore.

Anyways, the reason I put this on here is so some guys who haven't listened to what the anti hunters really think have an opportunity to hear first hand their rationale. Flawed as it may be.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

I’m not going to waste my time listen to this c you next Tuesday blab on. I know all of their little talking points already because they sure aren’t quiet about their opinions. The whole anti hunting stance is supported by manipulating data without honestly looking at it objectively and without emotional bias.

 

[Marble]

Your a real sicko. Growing vegetables just for pictures, likes and shares.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Vanity... one of the 7 deadly sins!!

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

I’m not going to waste my time listen to this c you next Tuesday blab on. I know all of their little talking points already because they sure aren’t quiet about their opinions. The whole anti hunting stance is supported by manipulating data without honestly looking at it objectively and without emotional bias.

Welli hope you do listen. It was actually informative and the guys patience that was doing the interview was awesome. Maybe not patience but...restraint. he actually says at the end of the podcast, with her not there, the point was to get her on there to have her explain so that we could really hear their opinion.

And I think we all have some emotional bias towards having others understand information in a way that benefits our point of view.

I actually listen to the super liberal points of view semi-regular just to understand what they are going to say. It's actually entertaining at times.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Yoder]

There's nothing wrong with trophy hunters as long as the meat is used by someone. Who doesn't try to kill the biggest buck or bull? Does that make you a trophy hunter? I don't care. The Humane Society are a bunch of crazy people just like PETA. They don't run animal shelters and save dogs. They are just activists. Most people don't even know that.

 

[long hunter]

Welli hope you do listen. It was actually informative and the guys patience that was doing the interview was awesome. Maybe not patience but...restraint. he actually says at the end of the podcast, with her not there, the point was to get her on there to have her explain so that we could really hear their opinion.

And I think we all have some emotional bias towards having others understand information in a way that benefits our point of view.

I actually listen to the super liberal points of view semi-regular just to understand what they are going to say. It's actually entertaining at times.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

If you do not listen you are one step behind these idiots--Rule #1 in this type of situation is to know your enemys objectives, therefore you learn there weak spots which enables you to effevtively counter strike with authority.