Contest Shut Down By Antis

[Five Seasons]

18 minutes ago, Rattler said:

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.

what would you say to studies that show the only really effective way to reduce numbers is to trap them? It's not that hunting them doesn't help, but it's not really doing jack shit.

keep in mind I just spent a bunch of money on coyote hunting gear. 

Edited January 29, 2020 by Belo

[Just Lucky]

Is the money raised still going to the fire department?

[moog5050]

19 minutes ago, Belo said:

what would you say to studies that show the only really effective way to reduce numbers is to trap them? It's not that hunting them doesn't help, but it's not really doing jack shit.

keep in mind I just spent a bunch of money on coyote hunting gear. 

I have read enough on yote control to know that there are lots of conflicting views and nothing definitive that convinced me that any of the positions were 100% correct and others 100% wrong.  Logic tells me that taking some out can't hurt control efforts.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, Belo said:

what would you say to studies that show the only really effective way to reduce numbers is to trap them? It's not that hunting them doesn't help, but it's not really doing jack shit.

keep in mind I just spent a bunch of money on coyote hunting gear. 

and imagine living in a state like CA where they just totally banned trapping. I can't wait to see the coyote issue they will have in 10 years. The tax payers are going to love having to pay the same guys that were willing to do it for free to just get rid of some. And since it will be nuisance work it is likely that the furs will not be allowed to be salvaged and utilized. How is that for being "GREEN" and properly utilizing a resource.  I am kind of getting a kick out of the anti fur demonstration popping up all over with all the demonstrators wearing their synthetic fabrics and being anti fur. Next week they will be out marching against the big oil and chemical companies wearing a product made by that industry.   

[phade]

2 hours ago, Belo said:

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. 

Which part of doing or saying nothing meets the definition of support? It's pretty basic, and not very bold if you really think about it.

Definition of support

: to promote the interests or cause of

: to uphold or defend as valid or right 

: to argue or vote for

: ASSIST, HELP

        : to provide with substantiation 

        : to pay the costs of

        : to provide a basis for the existence or subsistence of

        : to keep (something) going

Edited January 29, 2020 by phade

[Culvercreek hunt club]

3 of my favorite quotes about the subject of sitting on the sidelines.  It doesn't make you bad or wrong to sit and do nothing But it does allow those against us to move unfettered. 

 

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

"Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing."

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.”

 

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by Culvercreek hunt club

[phade]

I like the analogy between people and fires.

There are three types of people - those who run away from a fire, those who watch it burn, and those who run toward the fire to help put it out.

Some people just like to watch their own house burn apparently.

Edited January 29, 2020 by phade

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, phade said:

Which part of doing or saying nothing meets the definition of support? It's pretty basic, and not very bold if you really think about it.

I'm glad to see you active again phade, but relax man.

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

3 of my favorite quotes about the subject of sitting on the sidelines.  It doesn't make you bad or wrong to sit and do nothing But it does allow those against us to move unfettered. 

I'll play this game.

What has anyone who is throwing stones in this thread done regarding this topic?

I still haven't received much of an answer regarding my question on talking points but do appreciate the few that made an attempt at it.

You guys are all chastising a few members who brought up some valid points, but unless I'm mistaken, none have written a letter, made a phone call, donated to a cause or entered the tournament. 

[Five Seasons]

30 minutes ago, phade said:

I like the analogy between people and fires.

There are three types of people - those who run away from a fire, those who watch it burn, and those who run toward the fire to help put it out.

Some people just like to watch their own house burn apparently.

do you think a coyote hunting contest has ramifications on the hunting community? 70%+ of americans and actually growing support hunting. I donate to several organizations and I'm raising 3 boys in the outdoors. I'm just fine with where I'm at on this burning house of yours. 

[chrisw]

I did not read through all of this thread, but saw the majority. I do not agree with if you aren't advocating for it then you're an advocate against it argument. There isn't a single person that agrees with everyone hunting or fishing regulation. Same as there probably isn't a republican or Democrat that hasn't disagreed with their party's policies from time to time. The whole statement is near sighted. So I support hunting as a whole to it's fullest but because I don't particularly like trapping I'm an anti Hunter? I've never once bashed someone for trapping, and don't care to participate. So am I against trapping? No. I just choose not to participate. I'm with the few on here who thinks the premise of quantity kill contests are a bad look to the scrutinizing public. That doesn't mean I'm against them, I don't agree with antis. It's just distasteful in my opinion. I've shot a fair amount of coyotes, I don't choose to "stack them like cordwood" and plaster the picture all over the place. Part of it has to do with the fact that I use little to no part of the animal.
I'll get a bunch of loyal crusaders with a case of cabin fever responding to this but I truly don't care. You don't get to choose what "sportsman" means for everyone and your opinion is no greater than mine. The whole "hoorah we're hunters and we'll kill any animal we want and throw it in their faces mentality isn't always the best solution," IN MY OPINION...

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[The_Real_TCIII]

I did not read through all of this thread, but saw the majority. I do not agree with if you aren't advocating for it then you're an advocate against it argument. There isn't a single person that agrees with everyone hunting or fishing regulation. Same as there probably isn't a republican or Democrat that hasn't disagreed with their party's policies from time to time. The whole statement is near sighted. So I support hunting as a whole to it's fullest but because I don't particularly like trapping I'm an anti Hunter? I've never once bashed someone for trapping, and don't care to participate. So am I against trapping? No. I just choose not to participate. I'm with the few on here who thinks the premise of quantity kill contests are a bad look to the scrutinizing public. That doesn't mean I'm against them, I don't agree with antis. It's just distasteful in my opinion. I've shot a fair amount of coyotes, I don't choose to "stack them like cordwood" and plaster the picture all over the place. Part of it has to do with the fact that I use little to no part of the animal.
I'll get a bunch of loyal crusaders with a case of cabin fever responding to this but I truly don't care. You don't get to choose what "sportsman" means for everyone and your opinion is no greater than mine. The whole "hoorah we're hunters and we'll kill any animal we want and throw it in their faces mentality isn't always the best solution," IN MY OPINION...

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

I always hated the “If you’re against this then you are as bad as the antis, we have to have a unified front” claims as well. As though we have to agree with everything proposed by sportsmen. I can tell you if deer baiting was ever proposed I’d be as active as possible to fight it, and in some eyes that would make me an anti I guess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Marion]

I always hated the “If you’re against this then you are as bad as the antis, we have to have a unified front” claims as well. As though we have to agree with everything proposed by sportsmen. I can tell you if deer baiting was ever proposed I’d be as active as possible to fight it, and in some eyes that would make me an anti I guess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I'd be for it but I don't really care either way so I wouldn't do much either for nor against

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Steve D]

I personally do not make judgment on any kind of legal hunting without actually experiencing it. If I don't get a chance to experience it I will not make judgement one way or the other.

 I have participated in coyote/fox contests and enjoyed them but will not hunt in anymore. What they have evolved to is just not my cup of tea. The stakes are higher, the prizes are bigger, entry fees are higher than ever, rules are getting more stringent, and the image being presented is not to my liking.  I won't bash them and wish they were all were held for the purpose of raising money for a good cause such as a fire department instead of winning a high dollar prize(s).

 If I don't have a use for it and can't do something constructive with it I am not going to hunt it or trap it. So many predator hunters shoot them just so they have a chance to win a big prize at the "local" contest and probably never hunt again until the next contest.

 I hunt because I enjoy it and wish more would feel the same way instead of hunting, trapping, varmint  hunting, or fishing in hopes of getting the biggest buck, winning the contest, or the big money prizes awarded to the "winners".

Like it has been mentioned ….as long as it is being done  legally;  that is all that matters and will have less of a chance of being scrutinized by everyone.

 

 

[left field]

The burning house analogy seems like a bit of a stretch.

There are two issues here. The first for me is personal. I guess if asked, I'm not a fan of this type of contest. (Or many contests for that matter.) I come at this as a new hunter but with 60 years of life, thought, success, failure, experience and perspective behind me, so my personal feelings are funneled through my filter and this type of event just isn't for me. That said, I have no objection to it as long as it is legal. But I'm not going to support it by word or deed. I would however defend the rights of those who wish to pursue it. Some may not see the difference there but I do and I'm comfortable with that.

The second issue is one of public perception. Right or wrong. Listen to Belo's Rinella link and you will hear them use a particular word a few times when it comes to coyote contests ... "carnival". That is the hurdle to overcome when it comes to the public. If this was presented as a DEC-initiated predator hunt to control numbers (as I guess it was), I don't think you'd have as much pushback.

This petition was written by an idiot. Honestly, how hard could it have been to counter? Educate the public? Stand tough?

I live in NYC and and my friends come from every walk of life - straight, gay, other; liberal, conservative, politically agnostic; outdoorsy, and not; and when I decided I wanted to start hunting I prepared myself for the condemnation. You know who criticized me? No one. A few had questions but nobody gave me grief. 

While they are certainly people against all hunting whose minds will never change, I sometimes think that we are fighting a strawman. The hunters ed courses continue to sell out, the hunting clothing brands are making record sales, and the deer corn is flying out of Dick's door. In my limited experience, hunting (ever changing) seems fine. 

 

[Rattler]

I think the main issues with a coyote contest are only two things.  

On one side we have the contest and why it exists.  As I stated prior, it's a management hunt that gets the yote population under control, to the benefit of other wildlife that fall prey to these predators.  It generates income for good causes.  It also provides income for the local economy, during the contest as well as the rest of the year.  Hancock is a tiny, rural Catskill mountain town on the upper Delaware river, that depends very heavily on sportsman's hunting and fishing dollars.  There are very few job opportunities in this area besides hospitality jobs and restaurant employment.  If deer and turkey numbers decline, so does the number of sportsman and so does the revenue they brought to the town.  In a small town, a big event has a big impact.  Is it any wonder the locals would become so aggravated when the contest is being attacked by people who have no interest at all in the town, or it's economic survival?  Hancock has about 1000 residents and the anti contest petition was signed by 20,000 people.  What does that tell you?  The Hancock folks don't normally do ugly things during this contest.  They are doing them in a visceral way now, as a reaction to the contest attack, to show the anti's they have no right to be involved in the issue there.  I wish they weren't doing these things, but I can understand why they do.

BTW, the contest that is being held is donating all the proceeds to the FD too.

On the other side, we have the anti's, who have a strong desire to involve themselves in a cause they are passionate about.  They want to prevent animal cruelty, and attack anything they see that fits that description in their eyes.  If you extrapolate into the future, you will come to understand this contest furor is just a tactic that works for them at this time.  ALL animal "cruelty" is on their long term goal list.  ALL hunting, ALL animal farming, ALL meat eating, ALL trapping, ALL of the fur and leather industry, ALL fishing, anything that infringes on any animal's right to live completely free and unmolested by human constraints.  Look at how many other states and localities have been attacked by the same people for having bear, mountain lion or even dove and pigeon hunts.  In NY they recently succeeded in passing a law to fine dog owners who don't bring the dog inside when it's cold.  It's a very extreme agenda and they are very militant about it.  They do not care about the cost to humans in this goal.  Radicals have even gone so far as to endorse eliminating ALL human life to benefit the animals.  It's a self loathing psychosis belonging to people who feel no usefulness to their existence, that want to attach themselves to something big, so they can look good to others they admire.  They love animals and hate people!  It's also interesting to note they do not spend their money on any type of habitat improvement or practical environmental goals that would benefit wildlife, choosing instead to pay for lawyers and lobbyists that work through the courts, to bludgeon their opponents.  In the end, they desire the elimination of all animal "cruelty", while not realizing, or perhaps realizing, the simultaneous elimination of many animal's existence because of that agenda.  Nobody will invest in raising livestock, protecting deer, bear, turkey, waterfowl, small game, trout or other game fish, if they cannot get a return on that investment.  Of course they could demand we all pay higher taxes to cover the costs.  Think they would?

One side of this issue is willing to use a renewable wildlife resource for the benefit of the community, while the other side wants to eliminate use of a renewable wildlife resource in it's drive towards totalitarianism regarding animals.

So, why defend the coyote hunt?  The big picture is why.  You see the two sides of the issue listed above.  You can stand on the sidelines and watch the fight, accepting the outcome as fate.  Or you can decide to support a side based on the total picture and where it is going to lead us in the future. 

IMHO, the side with the most support is going to come out on top in the end.

 

[phade]

15 hours ago, Belo said:

I'll play this game.

What has anyone who is throwing stones in this thread done regarding this topic?

I still haven't received much of an answer regarding my question on talking points but do appreciate the few that made an attempt at it.

You guys are all chastising a few members who brought up some valid points, but unless I'm mistaken, none have written a letter, made a phone call, donated to a cause or entered the tournament. 

You are mistaken.

[phade]

16 hours ago, Belo said:

I'm glad to see you active again phade, but relax man.

Didn't or couldn't answer? Deflection.

[phade]

15 hours ago, Belo said:

do you think a coyote hunting contest has ramifications on the hunting community? 70%+ of americans and actually growing support hunting. I donate to several organizations and I'm raising 3 boys in the outdoors. I'm just fine with where I'm at on this burning house of yours. 

Does it have ramifications? Yes. I think it's quite hard to believe otherwise. Ramifications are both positive and negative.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

15 hours ago, chrisw said:

I did not read through all of this thread, but saw the majority. I do not agree with if you aren't advocating for it then you're an advocate against it argument. There isn't a single person that agrees with everyone hunting or fishing regulation. Same as there probably isn't a republican or Democrat that hasn't disagreed with their party's policies from time to time. The whole statement is near sighted. So I support hunting as a whole to it's fullest but because I don't particularly like trapping I'm an anti Hunter? I've never once bashed someone for trapping, and don't care to participate. So am I against trapping? No. I just choose not to participate. I'm with the few on here who thinks the premise of quantity kill contests are a bad look to the scrutinizing public. That doesn't mean I'm against them, I don't agree with antis. It's just distasteful in my opinion. I've shot a fair amount of coyotes, I don't choose to "stack them like cordwood" and plaster the picture all over the place. Part of it has to do with the fact that I use little to no part of the animal.
I'll get a bunch of loyal crusaders with a case of cabin fever responding to this but I truly don't care. You don't get to choose what "sportsman" means for everyone and your opinion is no greater than mine. The whole "hoorah we're hunters and we'll kill any animal we want and throw it in their faces mentality isn't always the best solution," IN MY OPINION...

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
 

Chris,

I hope I didn't come across as saying anyone not supporting "these" is equal to the anti's. I don't believe that. I DO believe that while we may not agree with the activity and it is legal we should be actively supporting their ability to do it. I also think we need to voice our concerns about what others are doing (even if legal) that could cause us all issues. I was never into trapping and honestly it was something that didn't really sit very well with me becasue I was never brought up around it. I decided this last summer that I wanted to learn about it and took the course and have read and watched a ton on it since. I got beat up a bit on a trapping Facebook page becasue there were some posting pics (it is a closed group but who really knows who is in the group) that I thought were in poor taste and could be used to shed the activity in a poor light. I questioned them.  Perception is a lot when trying to expose someone to anything that they know nothing about. Things I believed about trapping were just dead wrong becasue I didn't know any better. I can see a need to try and have those not involved with an open mind until someone can shed light on what we do and I can see how the perception of these contests could close someone's mind.  What those against this contest don't seem to realize is it is likely these same participants would have been doing what they are that day anyway. Bag limits are still in effect. It isn't like game laws are suspended for these. The last "squirrel slam" they had out buy us I didn't participate but did send a donation. I can see the social atmosphere draw of these. I can remember how every bar had a buck contest too. There was a entry fee, prizes and usually the ones I was in had a party associated with the end of the season. It was social and didn't effect the population or harvest numbers. 

[chrisw]

My comments were aimed at anyone who portrayed people who don't actively support something although they may not agree as the enemy. That is sheer ignorance. If you want to follow that logic you're no better than a cow following the next cow in line with no idea where you're heading. I'm a human and have the gift of higher reasoning so I choose to use it. I don't have to follow any group or club or ideology fully, as I can step out at anytime and refute something although I stand behind the main cause.
I never said I'm against contests or even hunting contests. I just think that we as hunters sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot when it comes to public perception. Killing is bloody and graphic and some people will never get it. Hell, even my father who has been an active Hunter his whole life has been losing the desire for the "kill." I just do not see where killing a bunch of coyotes in an event, piling them up and drawing attention to ourselves is going to help the hunting scene. Looking at it from their point of view I'm sure it looks barbaric. A bunch of people out spending thousands of dollars on fancy equipment to shoot small wild dogs that they do not eat or even want after the shot and putting dollar figures on body counts all while standing next to stacks of bloody fur, smiling.
Again, the only reason I even commented on this thread as I had no intention too is because one person specifically essentially called me an anti Hunter (by default) and I take extreme offense to that. What gives him the right to tell me what I should do or think or be the ultimate judge in how I'm classified? You can post up all sorts of quotes, label me whatever you think I am. But they too are just one person with an opinion, some people just believe that they're opinion weighs more because they're more intelligent.
And at the end of the day you can put whatever spin you want on this coyote contest but honestly, people are joining it not to give money to the FD because you don't even have to leave your house to do that and they'll gladly take your money any day of the year.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Five Seasons]

16 hours ago, The_Real_TCIII said:

I always hated the “If you’re against this then you are as bad as the antis, we have to have a unified front” claims as well. As though we have to agree with everything proposed by sportsmen. I can tell you if deer baiting was ever proposed I’d be as active as possible to fight it, and in some eyes that would make me an anti I guess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I've been an anti-hunter the moment I joined this forum and wadge my crusade against the crossbow 

 

speaking of, where's doc been?

[Rattler]

7 minutes ago, chrisw said:

And at the end of the day you can put whatever spin you want on this coyote contest but honestly, people are joining it not to give money to the FD because you don't even have to leave your house to do that and they'll gladly take your money any day of the year.

As a member of a volunteer FD in Delaware County, I can attest to the fact, donations to volunteer FD's go way up when people have an incentive to donate.  Most of the time, we are "out of site, out of mind".

[Five Seasons]

15 hours ago, Steve D said:

I personally do not make judgment on any kind of legal hunting without actually experiencing it. If I don't get a chance to experience it I will not make judgement one way or the other.

 I have participated in coyote/fox contests and enjoyed them but will not hunt in anymore. What they have evolved to is just not my cup of tea. The stakes are higher, the prizes are bigger, entry fees are higher than ever, rules are getting more stringent, and the image being presented is not to my liking.  I won't bash them and wish they were all were held for the purpose of raising money for a good cause such as a fire department instead of winning a high dollar prize(s).

 If I don't have a use for it and can't do something constructive with it I am not going to hunt it or trap it. So many predator hunters shoot them just so they have a chance to win a big prize at the "local" contest and probably never hunt again until the next contest.

 I hunt because I enjoy it and wish more would feel the same way instead of hunting, trapping, varmint  hunting, or fishing in hopes of getting the biggest buck, winning the contest, or the big money prizes awarded to the "winners".

Like it has been mentioned ….as long as it is being done  legally;  that is all that matters and will have less of a chance of being scrutinized by everyone.

 

 

by some people's definition, your passive non-active view and opinion of the topic makes you an anti.

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, Rattler said:

I think the main issues with a coyote contest are only two things.  

On one side we have the contest and why it exists.  As I stated prior, it's a management hunt that gets the yote population under control, to the benefit of other wildlife that fall prey to these predators.  It generates income for good causes.  It also provides income for the local economy, during the contest as well as the rest of the year.  Hancock is a tiny, rural Catskill mountain town on the upper Delaware river, that depends very heavily on sportsman's hunting and fishing dollars.  There are very few job opportunities in this area besides hospitality jobs and restaurant employment.  If deer and turkey numbers decline, so does the number of sportsman and so does the revenue they brought to the town.  In a small town, a big event has a big impact.  Is it any wonder the locals would become so aggravated when the contest is being attacked by people who have no interest at all in the town, or it's economic survival?  Hancock has about 1000 residents and the anti contest petition was signed by 20,000 people.  What does that tell you?  The Hancock folks don't normally do ugly things during this contest.  They are doing them in a visceral way now, as a reaction to the contest attack, to show the anti's they have no right to be involved in the issue there.  I wish they weren't doing these things, but I can understand why they do.

BTW, the contest that is being held is donating all the proceeds to the FD too.

I haven't seen a member in this topic come out against the tournament. In fact I support it. Why this turned 3 pages is because some members stated it wasn't their kinda thing and were then tossed in the bucket with anti's. 

I freaking hunt and eat squirrel for God's sake. I've shot and killed just about every legal animal in this state besides a blackbear and that's just because I've failed the last 3 years trying that. To call me an anti is just dumb.