Contest Shut Down By Antis

[WNYBuckHunter]

10 minutes ago, left field said:

By posting that you determined that I'm bending to the whims of PETA? You figure Posewitz is too?

First off, PETA doesn't subscribe to whims. They are very focussed in their goals and messaging. Hunters less so so. 

There seems to be this weird disconnect between hunting game animals and predators. One is to be honoured, the other (on the extreme) exterminated. I see this often in fishing. Some fly anglers will gently slide a trout back into the water but toss a chub into the air to smack on the water. Sorry, but I don't understand that mindset or agree with it.

Now, killing my livestock, it's probably going to die. I understand and have no issue. Need fur? Go for it. But making a contest out of killing as many coyotes as possible because they're "pests" and may harm or kill livestock and then posting pics of a dead stack is going to be a tough sell for many people. Some hunters included.

There's a fellow who posts coyote videos here. Now he has a legal right to kill those animals and post the video for that matter, but it's always struck me as odd. They're not hunting videos; they're killing videos. Why anyone would want to watch a series of coyotes (or any animal for that matter) beng shot with no context is beyond me. 

I happened to be listening the The Hunting Collective podcast this morning and their interview with Tovar Cerulli, author of The Mindful Carnivore, and he and the host touch on some of these issues. Worth a listen.

 

I was just commenting on what you posted. I know how PETA operates, no need to nit pick what word I used.

I have no issue with any type of hunting contest, as long as the participants are following all of the laws, no problem as far as Im concerned.

Half the reason why the hunting community falls short with organizing against the threats to the sport, is because you have all of these little factions that have their mind made up that something is awful because its not what they would do, regardless of the legality. Alot of those factions act like they are afraid of their own shadow when it comes to anti hunting groups. "Dont post pictures of dead animals online." "Dont wear camo in public." "Legal contests are bad.", etc etc. To hell with that stuff, be proud of being a hunter, and support your fellow hunters that are doing what they do legally, even if you wouldnt choose to hunt that way. If someone is hunting illegally, go ahead and be vocal about it, but stop bashing other hunters because they dont hunt like you choose to. If we dont start supporting each other and standing shoulder to shoulder against these threats, we are going to seal the fate of the sport that we love.

[grampy]

3 minutes ago, WNYBuckHunter said:

I was just commenting on what you posted. I know how PETA operates, no need to nit pick what word I used.

I have no issue with any type of hunting contest, as long as the participants are following all of the laws, no problem as far as Im concerned.

Half the reason why the hunting community falls short with organizing against the threats to the sport, is because you have all of these little factions that have their mind made up that something is awful because its not what they would do, regardless of the legality. Alot of those factions act like they are afraid of their own shadow when it comes to anti hunting groups. "Dont post pictures of dead animals online." "Dont wear camo in public." "Legal contests are bad.", etc etc. To hell with that stuff, be proud of being a hunter, and support your fellow hunters that are doing what they do legally, even if you wouldnt choose to hunt that way. If someone is hunting illegally, go ahead and be vocal about it, but stop bashing other hunters because they dont hunt like you choose to. If we dont start supporting each other and standing shoulder to shoulder against these threats, we are going to seal the fate of the sport that we love.

I was going to post something to this effect. But you said it much better than I would have John.

Again.......United We Stand.  Divided We Fall.

 

[left field]

19 minutes ago, WNYBuckHunter said:

I was just commenting on what you posted. I know how PETA operates, no need to nit pick what word I used.

I have no issue with any type of hunting contest, as long as the participants are following all of the laws, no problem as far as Im concerned.

Half the reason why the hunting community falls short with organizing against the threats to the sport, is because you have all of these little factions that have their mind made up that something is awful because its not what they would do, regardless of the legality. Alot of those factions act like they are afraid of their own shadow when it comes to anti hunting groups. "Dont post pictures of dead animals online." "Dont wear camo in public." "Legal contests are bad.", etc etc. To hell with that stuff, be proud of being a hunter, and support your fellow hunters that are doing what they do legally, even if you wouldnt choose to hunt that way. If someone is hunting illegally, go ahead and be vocal about it, but stop bashing other hunters because they dont hunt like you choose to. If we dont start supporting each other and standing shoulder to shoulder against these threats, we are going to seal the fate of the sport that we love.

I only have your words to go by.

Generally, I don't agree with the soft language or action of "harvesting" and not wearing camo in public, etc. I don't see the obsession with social media posting of dead animals but I also don't take grip-and-grin fish pics. However, you have to acknowledge that there is a considerable difference of perception between a deer killed for the table and a dozen coyotes shot an displayed for a contest. I could sell the first to a vegan, while I have trouble selling the latter to myself. Especially when I began to look into it and realized that killing coyotes may not be doing what we think it's doing. 

To be clear, I'm not "not supporting" contest hunters. While I don't agree with them, I'm not trying to take away or obstruct their legal right to do so. I'm simply pointing out that these types of contests aren't helping any hunters overall cause. 

 

 

[phade]

WNYB nailed it.

Failure to support contests is supporting anti-hunting. No different than choosing not to place your republican vote in the ballot box in NY because the state always ends up swinging blue. Inaction is unacceptable.

Honestly, I'm rather disheartened by some of the people and posts in this thread.

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by phade

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, left field said:

My understanding is that coyotes moved into the NE about 100 years ago after we eradicated the wolves. If you're advocating bringing back wolves, cool. 

that doesn't make them native... 

[left field]

22 minutes ago, phade said:

WNYB nailed it.

Failure to support contests is supporting anti-hunting. No different than choosing not to place your republican vote in the ballot box in NY because the state always ends up swinging blue. Inaction is unacceptable.

Honestly, I'm rather disheartened by some of the people and posts in this thread.

Defne "support" in this particular case.

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, grampy said:

I was going to post something to this effect. But you said it much better than I would have John.

Again.......United We Stand.  Divided We Fall.

 

agreed. There is not a single Hunters associate. There is rocky mountain elk, nwtf, wild sheep foundation, ducks unlimited just off my head. Then you have the land groups like BHA, TRCP. Then the groups within the species like QDMA, NYBH, NYCC, Field to Fork. Firearms groups like SCOPE and the NRA looking out for gun hunters.

None of these groups are bad, they're focused and fractured and when one of them goes up against PETA or HSU they're vastly outnumbered. The closest we have from what I've researched is The Sportsmans Alliance. But they struggle too. They may get a frenzy of people who care that Maine might lose its black bear season, and an elk hunter out in CO says who cares? Doesn't affect me. Whereas HSU is like BEARS ARE BEING MURDERED IN MAINE AWMAGAWD. And the lady in NJ sends a check for $20.

And we haven't even touched on fishing lol

[phade]

10 minutes ago, left field said:

Defne "support" in this particular case.

Some possible examples:

• Recognizing the greater good and opting to keep one's mouth shut.
• Donating to the cause being supported
• activism, voting, signing, reaching out to politicians or other officials, etc.
• Indirect support via logistics, set-up, communications
• direct participation
• Remembering the first bullet when one gets the urge

Edited January 28, 2020 by phade

[Five Seasons]

before we go to far off topic, I'd just point out that being a hunter doesn't mean you have to blindly accept and follow all of it. If you're not a trapper or a predator hunter you shouldn't be shamed. Generally speaking you should probably take a neutral stance though as I agree these things do have a blast radius.

I'm a republican and can list 3 things right now I dont agree with. Doesn't mean I'm a bad republican... I just am my own person with my own opinions. 

[phade]

1 minute ago, Belo said:

before we go to far off topic, I'd just point out that being a hunter doesn't mean you have to blindly accept and follow all of it. If you're not a trapper or a predator hunter you shouldn't be shamed. Generally speaking you should probably take a neutral stance though as I agree these things do have a blast radius.

I'm a republican and can list 3 things right now I dont agree with. Doesn't mean I'm a bad republican... I just am my own person with my own opinions. 

With all due respect, neutral or ambivalent stances is exactly how we got to where hunting is today. See your example about bears via the elk hunter.

[Five Seasons]

8 minutes ago, phade said:

With all due respect, neutral or ambivalent stances is exactly how we got to where hunting is today. See your example about bears via the elk hunter.

and I dont disagree, maybe i worded it poorly. I just started coyote hunting. Reason mostly is because I'm at a time and place in my life where being in the woods at 10pm on a friday is more appealing than drinking or watching a movie on the couch. 

Most of what took so long for me is that I have a very real struggle with killing for lack of use, which is why before I really decided to do it, I looked up all sorts of ways I could do a skull mount, how to skin and even tan my own hides etc. I think my posting history on the subject supports this.

I have never thought differently of any hunter who shoots a few dogs and leaves them where they lay. I have even let yote hunters on my land who were in active tournaments. I see a headline like this and I'm bothered by it for the same reasons you are. But I'm not a tournament guy and probably never will be... and at the risk of further lashings, I'm not sure this tournament being cancelled could show a correlation to the loss of any hunting privilege. 

[Five Seasons]

i remember the bill that came up on this, I actually sent it to Rinella because it bothered me. Here was the post in that thread from April of 2019

 

I know not everyone loves Rinella, but he has the #1 outdoor podcast and an estimated couple hundred thousand listeners each episode. I emailed them a few weeks ago to alert them to this topic and he actually brought it up in this weeks live episode. I thought that it was pretty cool and the more awareness the better.

 

Starts around the 1 hour mark

 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-meateater-podcast/id960902903?i=1000436052254

 

[left field]

22 minutes ago, phade said:

Some possible examples:

• Recognizing the greater good and opting to keep one's mouth shut.
• Donating to the cause being supported
• activism, voting, signing, reaching out to politicians or other officials, etc.
• Indirect support via logistics, set-up, communications
• direct participation
• Remembering the first bullet when one gets the urge

Those are fairly general. What specifically and concretely has been done by the NY hunting community to address the Hancock issue? 

This is a polite conversation. No one has come out against this event. I questioned its perception to the general public. If this forum can't take that we're all screwed. 

 

[phade]

17 hours ago, left field said:

Those are fairly general. What specifically and concretely has been done by the NY hunting community to address the Hancock issue? 

This is a polite conversation. No one has come out against this event. I questioned its perception to the general public. If this forum can't take that we're all screwed. 

 

The area federation picked up the contest and is holding it. Not supporting is coming out against it - that's the problem WNYB, Grampy, me, and others have articulated. Neutrality is being complicit due to failure to act; questioning it as a whole because of your moral/ethical compass benefits only one side. And, that side isn't hunters.

There's plenty of "in or out" stuff I don't agree with in the hunting community that is legal and/or respected in certain hunting circles, but I'm not going to raise awareness to that premise and certainly not by questioning it. This is a butterfly-hurricane effect - we should all recognize this. It'll hit home sooner or later.

 

[Rattler]

Are the bunny huggers running a campaign to stop the slaughter of rats in NYC these days?  If not, they're being selective and obviously prejudice in the animals they support.  Coyotes are more like rats than dogs as far as consequences go.

[Rattler]

If the public's perception of coyote hunting contests is negative, we hunters have allowed that to happen by not refuting the anti's propaganda campaign with factual information regarding why these contests were started in the first place. 

Backing down only enhances the public's perception there is something wrong with them, and hunter's who don't support them help to enhance the public's negative image.

I'll bet a lot of these contest haters also condemn killing terrorists.

[GreeneHunter]

19 hours ago, Belo said:

 I just am my own person with my own opinions. 

Not so sure that's allowed these days !    LOL

And I agree whole heartedly with what you said !

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, phade said:

The area federation picked up the contest and is holding it. Not supporting is coming out against it - that's the problem WNYB, Grampy, me, and others have articulated. Neutrality is being complicit due to failure to act; questioning it as a whole because of your moral/ethical compass benefits only one side. And, that side isn't hunters.

There's plenty of "in or out" stuff I don't agree with in the hunting community that is legal and/or respected in certain hunting circles, but I'm not going to raise awareness to that premise and certainly not by questioning it. This is a butterfly-hurricane effect - we should all recognize this. It'll hit home sooner or later.

 

agree to disagree I guess. You're insinuating that because I dont donate or participate I'm somehow against the tournament? 

Honest question not just to you, but for anyone.  Would you rather I come out against the tournament than just keep my opinion to myself? I mentioned earlier that I do take some issue with shooting dogs for a tournament if the hides weren't saved. The negative light shined on that could have ricochet effects to all hunters. 

I'm not a trapper, and probably never will be. That kind of thing isn't for me. Am I anti-trapping? 

[Five Seasons]

42 minutes ago, Rattler said:

If the public's perception of coyote hunting contests is negative, we hunters have allowed that to happen by not refuting the anti's propaganda campaign with factual information regarding why these contests were started in the first place. 

Backing down only enhances the public's perception there is something wrong with them, and hunter's who don't support them help to enhance the public's negative image.

I'll bet a lot of these contest haters also condemn killing terrorists.

poking the bear here. 

Tell me the factual information regarding the benefits of a coyote tournament. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

49 minutes ago, Rattler said:

If the public's perception of coyote hunting contests is negative, we hunters have allowed that to happen by not refuting the anti's propaganda campaign with factual information regarding why these contests were started in the first place. 

Backing down only enhances the public's perception there is something wrong with them, and hunter's who don't support them help to enhance the public's negative image.

I'll bet a lot of these contest haters also condemn killing terrorists.

But they will march their feet bloody at a pro-choice rally. 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

4 minutes ago, Belo said:

poking the bear here. 

Tell me the factual information regarding the benefits of a coyote tournament. 

usually they are a pretty effective fund raiser for whoever is hosting them. 

[Five Seasons]

1 minute ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

usually they are a pretty effective fund raiser for whoever is hosting them. 

sure. but so are car washes, banquets etc. You guys at the QDMA don't have them. If i'm at a dinner party what are my talking points in support of the tournament? 

[grampy]

4 minutes ago, Belo said:

agree to disagree I guess. You're insinuating that because I dont donate or participate I'm somehow against the tournament? 

Honest question not just to you, but for anyone.  Would you rather I come out against the tournament than just keep my opinion to myself? I mentioned earlier that I do take some issue with shooting dogs for a tournament if the hides weren't saved. The negative light shined on that could have ricochet effects to all hunters. 

I'm not a trapper, and probably never will be. That kind of thing isn't for me. Am I anti-trapping? 

Of course you are entitled to have your own opinion Belo! Everyone has their own! No problem at all with that, as we are all individuals. I think the point, is that as long as what any other hunter does is legally done, we as fellow hunters should support it. Even if it is something we may not do ourselves, be it ethically, morally, or just something we ourselves are just not interested in doing.

I went duck hunting a couple times, and decided I love watching and seeing ducks much more than I liked eating or hunting them. But still bought my duck stamp every year. Just an example. Doesn't make me any better than you or anyone else. Just that I support "ALL" hunting, even if I choose not to participate in certain aspects of hunting myself. 

We are all too often caught up in bickering amongst ourselves, like crossbow vs compound vs recurve, 243 vs 30-06, stand vs ground, and the countless variables that define us as individual hunters. When in fact, we sometimes lose focus that we are all just hunters! And we should all respect our differences, and stick together for the common good of "ALL" hunters. Because as seen in this thread, there are many organizations out there, that would love to conspire against us, and tun us against one another. To end all hunting as we know it. They also seem to support each other in funding for their cause, and common goals, much better than we do. While we bicker and dicker over the little things. and lose focus of the big picture.

Again......and I can't say it enough. Together We Stand. Divided We Fall.

[Rattler]

1 hour ago, Belo said:

poking the bear here. 

Tell me the factual information regarding the benefits of a coyote tournament. 

The Hancock contest was instituted when the local DEC office determined the local coyote population was far beyond the desired number and was causing depletion of deer and wild turkey populations in the area.  It is a management hunt and the money paid by the participants supports the Hancock FD.  Without such coyote management in the area, which was not popular during January or February prior to the contest, the coyote problem would still exist.  That is why another group jumped in to sponsor the hunt immediately.

The anti's have been allowed to portray it as some kind of blood thirsty event that hurts wildlife.  That is far from fact and should not be tolerated.

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, grampy said:

Of course you are entitled to have your own opinion Belo! Everyone has their own! No problem at all with that, as we are all individuals. I think the point, is that as long as what any other hunter does is legally done, we as fellow hunters should support it. Even if it is something we may not do ourselves, be it ethically, morally, or just something we ourselves are just not interested in doing.

I

whole heatedly agree and i think we all sort of said that. Phade made some pretty bold statements that by just saying nothing, we weren't supporting it... and I don't agree with that.