# Grand Forks Herald Endorses Fair Chase Initiative



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

THE LINK:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/article ... on=Opinion

THE OPINION:

OUR OPINION: N.D. game farm plan strengthens our ethical code

Tom Dennis Grand Forks Herald

Published Sunday, April 27, 2008

There is hunting and there is killing. The difference is why North Dakota Hunters for Fair Chase ought to get its initiative on the November ballot and then why the measure ought to pass.

The initiative would "prohibit shooting captive deer, elk and exotic mammals behind escape-proof fences," the group's Web site reports.

"We support hunting without reservation," the Web site continues. "We base our support on sound science and ethical behavior applied in the interest of wild game. Shooting tame deer, elk and exotic mammals inside escape-proof fences is unethical and a poor example for our children and grandchildren."

Thanks in part to Teddy Roosevelt, America has a unique relationship with "shooting sports" and wildlife that has served hunters, nonhunters, conservationists and everyone else for 100 years. It's based in part on the distinction between hunting and killing - hunting being defined by the rules of "fair chase," and killing being for-pleasure practices that can and do violate those rules.

So: Cockfights are illegal. Pheasant hunting is not. Dogfights are felony offenses, while veterinarians and animal shelters legally and humanely euthanize dogs every day.

Deer hunting is legal; but even Texas - where game farms are common - has banned "computer assisted remote hunting," the practice where someone uses a computer to remotely aim and fire at a live animal.

Hunters for Fair Chase believes a majority of North Dakotans feels the same the same way about game farms here. The "fair chase" tradition is part the state's DNA, so much so that many hunters themselves feel repulsed when animals aren't given a sporting chance.

But game farm animals are privately owned; they're livestock, owners will counter. If that's the case, though, then the animals should be slaughtered in the manner of livestock. Cattle owners don't sell the privilege of shooting cows.

By the way, Montana voters debated and passed a similar initiative in 2000. Afterward, game-farm owners challenged the constitutionality of the initiative on property-rights grounds. They lost. Voters were within their rights to impose the ban, the courts concluded (up to and including the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals).

Property rights don't override the voters' own right to reasonably regulate property use.

All this being said, the case for the initiative isn't open-and-shut. Honest and moral people own, operate and enjoy game farms. In fact, some number of owners got into the business with the encouragement of and even financial support from the state. Should the state consider reimbursing the owners for their losses if the initiative should pass? If the group hasn't done so already, Hunters for Fair Chase should figure out if the answer could be "yes."

Society evolves, and what was acceptable in one decade becomes unacceptable in the next. The initiative would have a better chance of passing if voters knew the game-farm owners wouldn't be unfairly hurt.

Besides hunting vs. killing, another distinction applies in this argument: public vs. private. Like our national parks, wildlife are a public resource that Americans own in common. This common ownership, one of Teddy Roosevelt's great conservation achievements, has helped species recover from the brink of extinction and let wildlife stay "wild" while still being enjoyed and appreciated by humans.

Passing the Hunters for Fair Chase initiative would preserve and strengthen this legacy. Jim Posewitz, executive director of a conservation and hunting-ethics group called Orion, The Hunter's Institute, said it best:

"Game farming commercializes the last remnants of the great wild commons. It seeks to privatize what was held in trust by all of us, it domesticates the wildness we sought to preserve. .?.. The things we value die inside the woven wire of game farms."

For these reasons, North Dakota should sign the Hunters for Fair Chase petitions and approve the measure once it's on the ballot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

> The Hunter's Institute, said it best:
> 
> "Game farming commercializes the last remnants of the great wild commons. It seeks to privatize what was held in trust by all of us, it domesticates the wildness we sought to preserve. .?.. The things we value die inside the woven wire of game farms."


I couldn't have summarized it better myself.


----------



## faithsdave (Jan 8, 2004)

:beer:


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Good article.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Ted Kerasote endorsed the measure yesterday:

Ted Kerasote started writing at age 10. At age 17, with a 3 day career in hardware on his résumé, Ted quit the rat race and went fishing for the summer. At the end of the summer, Ted sold Outdoor Life an article based on his angling adventure. He has been pushing words ever since and is a regular on Best Seller lists. Ted is the author of Navigations; Bloodties, Nature, Culture, and the Hunt; Heart of Home, People, Wildlife, Place; In the Wild in a Wired Age; Out There, a National Outdoor Book Award winner, and his latest book: Merle's Door: Lessons From A Freethinking Dog. In addition to writing the books listed, Ted Edited Return of the Wild.

Ted, a lifelong hunter, wrote the following about high fence operations and fair chase hunting:



> 'Canned hunting' is a misnomer. More accurately defined as 'shooting animals in small enclosures,' the activity has nothing to do with the motives that inform authentic hunting: procuring healthy, organic food; participating in the timeless cycles of birth, death, and nurturing; honoring the lives that support us; and reconnecting with wildness. No matter where one stands on hunting-vehemently opposed to it or seeing it as yet another way to live sustainably on Earth-one ought to decry shooting animals behind fences.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Yep read all about it, and you can find it at where? The HSUS website

http://www.hsus.org/hunt/campaigns/cann ... tions.html


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

> participating in the timeless cycles of birth, death, and nurturing; honoring the lives that support us;


I wonder if Ted eats beef or pork. I wonder if he sees every other livestock industries as part of this ""cycle".



> reconnecting with wildness


What does that mean? Sounds like someone in a fantasy world wishing they could go back to the 1800's and live off the land. Wonder how many more people in the world would be starving if Ted had his way. Today hunting is recreation, has nothing to do with "wildness". It is done purely for fun and sport.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

4590, you think shooting animals in pens is ethical? Almost every ethical stand point says its wrong.
If you don't have a problem with shoot penned in animals, do you want to come dairy cow hunting on my farm? Our current stock is 37 cows in the barn and 15 outside. I will charge you $1800 to come shoot a tied up cow and if you really want we can take it outside of the barn and tie it up in the yard so its "more natural".

If you have no problem with penned in hunting, then you are supporting the death of hunting.


----------



## cwoparson (Aug 23, 2007)

blhunter3, what is your definition of a pen? is it 50 square feet, 100' by 100', 1 acre, 10 acres, 3000 acres ?


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

> If you don't have a problem with shoot penned in animals, do you want to come dairy cow hunting on my farm? Our current stock is 37 cows in the barn and 15 outside. I will charge you $1800 to come shoot a tied up cow and if you really want we can take it outside of the barn and tie it up in the yard so its "more natural".


blhunter, maybe you should check with your boss first before selling his herd :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll: :eyeroll:



> moved to Battle Lake, MN. Now I work on a tie stall dairy farm. So call me what you want, farmer or city people.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

He up for it, I already asked him. Nothing wrong with getting rid of a kicker, or a bad milker.

Any sort of a fence that prevents the animals from leaving that area. I think that the fence shooters have absolutly no ethical stand point to back their postion.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ethics.....

Some people say it is unethical to send a child to there room with out supper one night because of disobedience. Some think it is unethical to not hold the door open for people. Some think it is unethical to use a bow. Some think it is unethical to shoot an animal with a high powered rifle. Some think it is unethical to kill anything at all. Some think it is unethical to milk cows....yes milk cows. Some think it is unethical to mass produce beef and hogs for slaughter. Some think it is unethical to use dogs.

You see ethics is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

But you have to have a standpoint if you want to say what is right or wrong.

What I mean is, sure you can say its unethical to milk cows, but you have no backing is you just that. You have to have some backing behind it.
Trust me, I'm taking ethics right now in college, and we have been talking about penned shooting for the last two class periods. We have both sides of the arguement in the classroom. The teacher is the moderator. It is very interesting. But according to all of the the ethical standpoints, the people who believe shooting penned in animals is ethical have almost no backing.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

This whole arguement will come down to ethics. If you want to debate somethign you have to have an ethical standpoint. So if someone wants to debate I would really be interested in seeing what your ethical standpoint is.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

blhunter3, So in your debate, why not ask,why it is ethical to shoot a bison in a pen and not an Elk or Deer.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

blhunter....

interesting....

Think of it like this.......*Fair Chase*. You hunt an animal and make a poor shot. The animal runs away. You track it for miles and miles, hours and hours. You find it then dispatch it. Or you don't find it. Ethical??

*Fenced hunt.* Same thing....you make a poor shot. You track the animal....not miles or hours (depending on pen) and you dispatch it. You see you don't lose this animal because you can't.... it is in a fence. Ethical??

Which one is more ethical......The animal suffering longer or escaping. Or the one that suffers less time and is dispatched?


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

g/o, your right about shooting the bison in the pens. I cannot debate you there.

Chuck Smith
Its not humaine to shoot penned in animals peroid. They do not have a chance to run away. Sure they can run, but the fence will prevent them to escaping completly. That right there in unethical. Not being able to escape. In the wild the animals can run where ever and not have to worry about a fence.

This is a rough example but do you guys remember the Red Brim Ranch mess in Wyoming? That huge antelope herd died becasue they couldn't escape.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> In the wild the animals can run where ever and not have to worry about a fence.


These arent wild animals though. They are raised for one purpose and one purpose only, to die. No different than the dried up ole cow on your farm. No different than a beef cow, or a hog. Destined to die by mans hand.
Stop comparing these animals to wild ones. They are not the same and therefore should not fall under the same provisions.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> Sure they can run, but the fence will prevent them to escaping completly. That right there in unethical.


So eating a steak from a penned in beef steer is unethical? Because, according to your statement, it was fenced in, and couldnt escape. Or eating some cheap burger made from one of your farms dried up old non-producing milk cows is unethical, because she too was penned in and couldnt "escape"?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

blhunter......

Does using Scentlok (contrary to the lawsuits), cover scents, high powered rifles, 6-20 power scopes, compound bows, blinds, pits, decoys, dogs, trail cams, bait, food plots, mineral licks, etc. ethical?

Here is the thing I understand what you are getting at. But things that hunters use to help aid in the taking of game could be considered unethical by many.

Plus what we are talking about is not wild animals in a fenced area. It is a domestic herd. Is it ethical to put a beef cow in a chute and have a butcher dispatch the animal with a .22 behind the ear? They cant escape?


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Domestication, my friend. Cows, pigs, horses, and sheep have all been doemstacted. Deer, elk, and other animals some people shoot in pens, are not domesticated. They are born in captivity, there is a difference. They still should be treated as a wild animal, and shooting them in a fence or in an abnormal environment in unfair to them.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

If they were born in captivity and have know no other way of life.....how is this different than a cow or pig?

I have seen domesticated animals that run from the site of humans.....now are they considered wild?


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> Domestication, my friend. Cows, pigs, horses, and sheep have all been doemstacted. Deer, elk, and other animals some people shoot in pens, are not domesticated. They are born in captivity, there is a difference. They still should be treated as a wild animal, and shooting them in a fence or in an abnormal environment in unfair to them.


I know alot of beef cows that should be treated as a wild animal as well.

These animals may not be considered "domesticated" in the normal context of the term. But you honestly cant tell me that an animal that is born and raised in captivity, and has several generations of lineage in captivity is wild?


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Technically it is still consider wild. It takes thousands of years to domesticate any animal.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Its not humaine to shoot penned in animals peroid. They do not have a chance to run away.


Is it humane to dispatch beef cattle and hogs in a chute?

Is it humane to not recover a wounded animal?

Like my above situation.....which one is more humane or ethical......

Here it is again:


> Think of it like this.......Fair Chase. You hunt an animal and make a poor shot. The animal runs away. You track it for miles and miles, hours and hours. You find it then dispatch it. Or you don't find it. Ethical??
> 
> Fenced hunt. Same thing....you make a poor shot. You track the animal....not miles or hours (depending on pen) and you dispatch it. You see you don't lose this animal because you can't.... it is in a fence. Ethical??
> 
> Which one is more ethical......The animal suffering longer or escaping. Or the one that suffers less time and is dispatched?


Because every hunter knows this happens year after year. Two days ago trout fishing. I found three deer carcasses. One had an arrow stuck in it (gut shot) and one I saw a bullet hole in the hide quarter. Now did they die a humane or ethical death?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Because every hunter knows this happens year after year. Two days ago trout fishing. I found three deer carcasses. One had an arrow stuck in it (gut shot) and one I saw a bullet hole in the hide quarter. Now did they die a humane or ethical death?


Tell me where that is, I don't want to live there or anywhere I can't hunt predators. Around here there is nothing left but bones this time of year.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Plainsman....

This is in SE MN. Not as many predators as in the Dakota's. Only mice and small critters chewing on it. The bullet wound was on one back hide throw the bone and not the other. So a one leg hit. The arrow was hanging out one side of the hide. I stretched the hide out and the arrow wound was a gut shot.

But still know one answered my question.....which scenario is more ethical??


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here I will even take another aspect of this....

How is it considered ethical to shoot a beef steer in captivity ethical and not shooting an elk?

What is the difference of one being in a chute and one is in a pen? Both are in a confined area with out escape.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

blhunter3,

Not sure what your "technical" definition of domestication would be, but you left a few good examples off your list. Like: turkeys, ducks, bison, reindeer, deer, elk, trout, all are being raised in a livestock confinement situation. I can actually prove to you that deer and elk have been ranched as livestock for serveral thousand years.

You also mentioned an "ethical standpoint". I would love to know what that means for you. If it is the underlying source of your ethics, I can easily give you mine. It is the Bible. God said "subdue the earth", bring it under your subjection. He certainly didn't give us a list of animals that we could and could not raise for our use. If you have a higher authority for your "standpoint", I would like to hear it. In all of life we must go to someone higher than ourselves for the basis of our morals/ethics, or else we might as well make any rules we want and let the chips fall where they may. ( In many cases our society is headed there. )

I have asked Bruce, the church councilman, and others to back up their "ethics, with something besides emotion and "gut feelings", and so far no one has tackled it.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

> g/o, your right about shooting the bison in the pens. I cannot debate you there.


I'm glad blhunter, now maybe you can understand why this initiative measure is unfair and should be killed.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> Technically it is still consider wild. It takes thousands of years to domesticate any animal.


Who says? You say?

Ive seen beef cows as wild and dangerous as any WILD elk or deer. And ive seen plenty of evidence to support that captive raised deer can be as tame as any beef or dairy cow. So.....who says it takes thousands of years to domesticate an animal? And further, what is the definition of "domestic"?

Websters dictionary defines "domestic" as- living near or about human habitations.

Based on this definition of the term, most of our WILD wildlife should be considered domestic. 

Websters also defines "domesticate" as- to adapt (an animal or plant) to life in intimate association with and to the advantage of humans.

I think that pretty much sums up these animals existence. And I think it also makes the argument of considering them "wild" that much harder to drive home.


----------



## cwoparson (Aug 23, 2007)

> the people who believe shooting penned in animals is ethical have almost no backing.


Wait a minute now. You mean they do have some backing? That they do indeed have a standpoint, what ever that is. So what is your standpoint other than just you saying it is unethical? No offense but you're putting yourself in a spin position with your comments.

Now you also say any fence that doesn't allow the animal to escape. Well let's say you have tracked the buck of a lifetime for several miles. You've caught sight of him several times and he is huge. You top a rise and there he is, standing against a 12 foot fence around a military installation. He can't escape, he is trapped. Do you take the shot or say it is unethical and walk away. Kind of a stretched imagination of a scenario I know but my money says you take the shot. It doesn't even have to be a fence but maybe something like a boxed canyon.

Point is, several hundred acres of fenced property is not a pen by any stretch and I suspect you know that but insist on using the word pen as if that is reality.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

G/O, would do accept a bill that included bison?

Here is an interesting piece on domestication
http://www.fathom.com/course/21701781/session1.html

The one reason why I dislike penned shooting is because its not hunting. The animals do not have a chance reguardless of how big the fence is, because the fence has to keep out other wild animals.

I can see the standpoint of, taking animals to a slaughter house is no different then penned shooting. Well, I think its more about the ehtics of hunting. Those animals that we take to the slaughter hosue have been domesticated and the ones that people shoot are in pens.

After thinking about this and talking to a number of people about this, I have something for all to think about. However this vote turns out its going to hurt hunting. If the bill passes, then down the road its possible that the anti's will try to pass more stricter bills in the future. But if the bill doesn't pass, the anti's are going to get pictures or video tape of people shooting at animals cornered in the pen. Both ways it could end up bad.

To give a background of me, I have lived on a pig and beef farm near Jamestown and then I moved to MN and I know work on a dairy farm. I have deer hunted and I do alot of hunting and fishing. With my farming and hunting background, I have seen a vast difference in wild and domesticated animals. What people forget is that a wild animal can have domesticated charateristic's, but it doesn't make it tame. Hence the deer and elk that are raised in pens. It takes thousands of year to domesticate an animal. Take a look and the reindeer and caribou, they are the same animal BUT, one is domesticated and one is not and you can tell the difference.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> If the bill passes, then down the road its possible that the anti's will try to pass more stricter bills in the future.


True indeed. So why help them on this?



blhunter3 said:


> But if the bill doesn't pass, the anti's are going to get pictures or video tape of people shooting at animals cornered in the pen.


Their going to do this anyway. Even if it DOES pass. They'll attack something else with pictures and videos which will strum the heartstrings of John Q public. Much like the advocates of this measure have.



blhunter3 said:


> The one reason why I dislike penned shooting is because its not hunting.


Theres lots of things I don't consider hunting. I don't consider shooting a deer with a hi-power scoped rifle hunting. Does that mean its unethical and shouldn't be done? Hmmm, I wonder if that will be the next thing the anti's will attack?



blhunter3 said:


> What people forget is that a wild animal can have domesticated charateristic's, but it doesn't make it tame. Hence the deer and elk that are raised in pens. It takes thousands of year to domesticate an animal.


First of blhunter3, good link on domestication. Nothing new to me however. You are correct, TRUE domestications takes many many generations. (However some species can be domesticated much faster than others, there is evidence that proves predators can be domesticated faster than prey species, overcoming the "fight" instinct is easier than the "flight", or so ive read).

You link mentioned two fundamental sides to domestication, the biological, and the cultural.

I quote-
"Domestication begins with ownership. In order to be domesticated animals have to be incorporated into the social structure of a human community and become objects of ownership, inheritance, purchase, and exchange."

Domesticated doesn't necessarily imply the animal is tame, just as tame doesn't imply the animal is domesticated (your link referenced dodo's, and island fox as being tame because they had no fear of humans, but were still wild).

I don't think the animals involved in these types of operations can be considered wild at all. But, it is a ploy referring to them as such by people in support of this measure to attempt to sway the unknowing public. Almost as if they pulled the tactic directly out of PETA's playbook.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Yeah, I see were you are coming from on the wild vs. tame. There is no good answer for this question or will there ever be a good answer for it either. Either way there is a possibility that it could hurt our sport. To bad there isn't an easy fix.

After doing some research at college through some of there network things, I have come to think. However unethical I percive penned shooting, its up to the shooter to decide. I personally would never go to one, because I like ths chase and I have no desire to shoot big horned animals and when I hunt deer I hunt hooves. But my point is if the bill passes I will be glad and if it doesn't I will disagree but I hope that some people will try to enforce stronger regulations of the penned shooting. Such not offering it as a hunt, and have higher fences so there is no way something can get in our out.

I have had a good time debating you guys and I am glad thigns didn't get ugly. I have learned something for your point of view and hopefully you have learned something from me. But I am done debating on this thread. :beer:


----------



## AdamFisk (Jan 30, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> Here I will even take another aspect of this....
> 
> How is it considered ethical to shoot a beef steer in captivity ethical and not shooting an elk?
> 
> What is the difference of one being in a chute and one is in a pen? Both are in a confined area with out escape.


In the case of a cow or pig in a chute, how is that different???? Well, I think this whole debate is about *ethical hunting*, isn't it? So what does the cattle or hog industry have to do with anything? We are talking about *hunting*. I don't think them are hardly fair comparisons, are they?

Chuck, no offense, your post was just easy to quote. I think that all of the examples you guys have used with pigs and cows are moot points. The countless threads on this issue are about fair chase hunting, not ethical practices in the hog/beef industry. They have nothing to do with each other, or better stated, nothing to do with this measure. Just my opinion.

This is my first post on this issue. You know why? I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue. I have followed some of the threads on this, and both sides have good arguments.

Do i feel it is unethical to shoot animals in a pen? Absolutely, and i will never do it. It is clear that some people call it hunting and IMO it is not hunting. Does it have its place somewhere, I don't know. I don't know enough about it to answer that question. Does it give the Anti's something to b!tch about, sure. What don't they b!tch about? That will never stop.

Do I think shooting penned animals should be banned? I don't know. What I do know is I don't like the idea of hunters attacking a different way of "hunting," or what ever term you want to use. The fact is, people associate it with hunting, some even call it hunting, even if you don't think it is. And I think it looks bad when you got 1 group of hunters fighting against another.

Do I think we should be able to force our ethics on others? Um, hell if I know how to answer that question. My gut says no, but I am sure there have been numerous situations where it has been a good idea.

Property rights I don't even want to get in to. But I will say this. I don't like the idea of putting some North Dakotans out of business, unless they're guides or outfitters :lol: .

If I had to vote today I don't know which way I would go. I think there are bigger issues to worry about............. But I do enjoy reading the debates.

Adam


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Adam....good post.

Here is why I keep bringing it up. If people have a problem with these industry calling it hunting.....Ban them from using the word. Don't ban the industry.

Then if this measure is about ethical hunting......Who is to say one persons method of hunting is more ethical than the others.....Some people think bow hunting is unethical. Some people think long range shooting is unethical. You get my point. This should not be about ethics at all. Because ethic's is a personal choice or preference.

Adam....I am like you. I don't like seeing Hunters going against hunters. This is what the anti's want.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

AdamFisk said:


> What I do know is I don't like the idea of hunters attacking a different way of "hunting," or what ever term you want to use.
> Adam


Now that is an extremely logical statement.

There seems to be more and more of this in recent years. Baiting, "high-fence", trophy hunting, jump-shooting, etc etc etc. The "my ways better than your way" attitude. Most of us are guilty of it at one point or another (including myself).


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

barebackjack Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 11:01 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AdamFisk wrote: 
What I do know is I don't like the idea of hunters attacking a different way of "hunting," or what ever term you want to use. 
Adam

Now that is an extremely logical statement.

There seems to be more and more of this in recent years. Baiting, "high-fence", trophy hunting, jump-shooting, etc etc etc. The "my ways better than your way" attitude. Most of us are guilty of it at one point or another (including myself).

I will say I am guilty of "my way is better too"


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

blhunter3,

Glad to see you have somewhat of an open mind to this debate. Sorry to see you didn't reply to my last post. However several of your comments in regard to tame vs. wild and domestication indicate to me that the one part of your research you didn't do is visit a game preserve and observe the animal behavior. Like so many people on this site they have a preconceived idea what happens on a hunting preserve. You might be pleasantly surprised and I am sure they would welcome a visit.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

I have been to one, not to shoot but they are a friend of my grandpa. I will say that the area to shoot is big and all. But I just hate the fact that is called hunting. Maybe that is all I am agianst is the word hunting. I don't know. I personally see a different in butchering cows and pigs vs. shooting a elk in a pen. It all comes down to personal ethics.

Ethics is doing what is right. There are many ethical standpoint you can use. What I wanted to hear for someone is using an ethical standpoint and not a gut feeling. I looked for one along time for both sides of the issue and had some talks with my ethics teacher at college and when both could not come up with a good viable standpoint for either side of the issue. Thats by I backed out. I was wrong in thinking that my thoughts are better then ours. I tried to find something to back both sides of the opinion and could not find anything. So basically this issue will be a sore spot until the vote.

FPP


----------



## bioman (Mar 1, 2002)

blhunter3:

The following rate summary and Top 10 List is from a ranch that Kim Wegenman aka 4590 used to be affiliated (might still be). As you will see, if you are LUCKY enough to find that exclusive, I mean elusive, trophy bull on their 600 acre pen err preserve, the guide that you just paid $125 will be able to tell you much it will cost to pull the trigger. That is if you are lucky enough to actually find this elusive, I mean exclusive elk in the pen. Better start saving your pennies and your government rebate check NOW :beer: .



> Dates and Rates
> Our rates are based on the Safari Club International (SCI) scoring system. They are as follows:
> 
> 300-330 SCI $ 3,900.00
> ...


Dont forget this though:



> Cow hunts now available. You can get a big and fat cow for only $995.00!


And of course, my favorite marketing folly as quoted directly from their website:



> Top 10 Reasons To Hunt With XXXXXXX XXXXXXX
> 10. No overzealous game wardens - You will not be stopped, searched or questioned at our reserve. You will receive a shipping manifest to prove ownership of your trophy.
> 9. Overcome the time constraints of short, state imposed seasons - Book your elk hunting trip early and have your pick of dates from October 1 through February 15. We allow you to hunt with a bow or rifle, whenever "your heart desires!"
> 8. Efficient use of time - You don't have to use all three weeks of your vacation on one elk hunting trip. When you hunt at XXXXX XXXXXX for your prize elk, you'll have time for additional adventures!
> ...


----------



## cwoparson (Aug 23, 2007)

bioman, stooping to the level of putting someone's name in a forum that has chosen to remain anonymous is really low life. Most everyone on here uses anonymous names for various reasons not to mention personal safety. You truly are disgusting and your low life tactics speaks volumes of your character.


----------



## bioman (Mar 1, 2002)

> bioman, stooping to the level of putting someone's name in a forum that has chosen to remain anonymous is really low life. Most everyone on here uses anonymous names for various reasons not to mention personal safety. You truly are disgusting and your low life tactics speaks volumes of your character


Nice post cwoparson, if you can't debate the facts, insult someone. Kim has been outed before, and for good reason, that is not new information. I stand behind my posts. However, classless people like yourself choose to remain anonymous so they can make idiotic posts without any accountability :withstupid: .


----------



## cwoparson (Aug 23, 2007)

> choose to remain anonymous so they can make idiotic posts without any accountability


 :laugh: Coming from someone that calls them self bioman, well what can one say. Especially since you just called a lot of people on this forum idiots. A real work of art you are.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

> However, classless people like yourself choose to remain anonymous so they can make idiotic posts without any accountability.


This is the number one reason serious, civil internet discussions are virtually an oxymoron and why I don't spend much time on this site anymore.

I'd like to see a feature added to the site that if, say, 50 members vote to have you "outed", that you must choose to replace your "handle" with your real name or just go away. That would temper a lot of posters who often operate here with both barrels blazing. Even so, if you're not willing to stand behind an opinion by attributing your name to it, it's not worth much in my book.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Well name is Joseph Koll. I have no problem saying what my name is.


----------

