Shame on you hunters

[emerald]

i can split the nuts of a coyote at 300 paces :;:cheers

 

[Kurtr]

What’s the deal with that blue guy?

 

[johnr]

Meh

 

[guywhofishes]

What’s the deal with that blue guy?

that’s The Tick (a great show)

but beyond that I have no clue

 

[Kurtr]

that’s The Tick (a great show)

but beyond that I have no clue

He posts it quite often was wonders what the heck it was

 

[Meelosh]

About the actual article at hand here. I’d like to point out something the condescending Mr. Port said, specifically “Hunting is a hobby”. Like it’s something that’s really not all that important. Well here’s the deal, the meat I get from hunting represents a significant amount of the protein I consume on a yearly basis. I’ve never calculated it, but I’d guess anywhere from 10-20%. That is not insignificant.

*This is where my tinfoil hat might be coming out. Consider yourself warned.*

So let’s say that I have to replace that wild protein with some domestic protein because I can’t get access to wild game for whatever reason and let’s face it, I’m not going vegan anytime soon. Who benefits from that situation? Specifically, monetarily?

If care to look at this from that perspective, look up Shane Mahoney and the Wild Harvest Initiative. The idea is to quantify just how many calories we take from wild sources as opposed to raised/domestic sources so the knowledge is public just how valuable that is. There has been some people on here before that don’t particularly care for Mr. Mahoney. Pay close attention to where those individuals usually lie on every issue that comes up with these types of topics.

 

[Kurtr]

About the actual article at hand here. I’d like to point out something the condescending Mr. Port said, specifically “Hunting is a hobby”. Like it’s something that’s really not all that important. Well here’s the deal, the meat I get from hunting represents a significant amount of the protein I consume on a yearly basis. I’ve never calculated it, but I’d guess anywhere from 10-20%. That is not insignificant.

*This is where my tinfoil hat might be coming out. Consider yourself warned.*

So let’s say that I have to replace that wild protein with some domestic protein because I can’t get access to wild game for whatever reason and let’s face it, I’m not going vegan anytime soon. Who benefits from that situation? Specifically, monetarily?

If care to look at this from that perspective, look up Shane Mahoney and the Wild Harvest Initiative. The idea is to quantify just how many calories we take from wild sources as opposed to raised/domestic sources so the knowledge is public just how valuable that is. There has been some people on here before that don’t particularly care for Mr. Mahoney. Pay close attention to where those individuals usually lie on every issue that comes up with these types of topics.

I don’t care for that guy he rubs me the wrong way. I don’t think the law should change.

 

[Meelosh]

You’re an enigma Kurt. You seem to genuinely care about hunting, wildlife and public lands but anyone who’s not a TV personality that advocates for those things “rub you the wrong way”.

So be it I guess.

 

[Bed Wetter]

About the actual article at hand here. I’d like to point out something the condescending Mr. Port said, specifically “Hunting is a hobby”. Like it’s something that’s really not all that important. Well here’s the deal, the meat I get from hunting represents a significant amount of the protein I consume on a yearly basis. I’ve never calculated it, but I’d guess anywhere from 10-20%. That is not insignificant.

*This is where my tinfoil hat might be coming out. Consider yourself warned.*

So let’s say that I have to replace that wild protein with some domestic protein because I can’t get access to wild game for whatever reason and let’s face it, I’m not going vegan anytime soon. Who benefits from that situation? Specifically, monetarily?

If care to look at this from that perspective, look up Shane Mahoney and the Wild Harvest Initiative. The idea is to quantify just how many calories we take from wild sources as opposed to raised/domestic sources so the knowledge is public just how valuable that is. There has been some people on here before that don’t particularly care for Mr. Mahoney. Pay close attention to where those individuals usually lie on every issue that comes up with these types of topics.

You’re over thinking this, Meelosh. When I read that bit I said, “If hunting is just a hobby, farming is just gardening.” That’s a horseshit statement meant to get you good and pissed off at farmers and landowners. He’s intentionality trying to rile is up and fight. Don’t take the bait.

Hunting is our heritage and our way of life, just like farming is to the family farmer.

I don’t hunt out of some economical justification, and neither does the family farmer stay on the farm for the money.

 

[PrairieGhost]

So let’s say that I have to replace that wild protein with some domestic protein because I can’t get access to wild game for whatever reason and let’s face it, I’m not going vegan anytime soon. Who benefits from that situation? Specifically, monetarily?

I'm sure that's it for some of the proponents of auto posting, but in that same vein the outfitters and guides like it too. Not unlike how happy gun shops were when the 1968 gun law passed. No longer could you order a rifle for yourself from a catalog like we had before. We had to go to a licensed dealer and prices rocketed up.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Fritz’s inside baseball take was correct

they’re super pissed that we didn’t take the electronic posting crumbs that were offered last time

so when it comes back, and oh yes it will, it’s gonna be clean/simple with no consideration of outdoorsmen’s interests whatsoever

What really happened. SB 2315 passed the Senate. Three conservation orgs sent Sen. Erbele a letter supporting electronic posting. Sen. Erbele held the letter up as proof everyone was negotiating in good faith. Then the same three conservation orgs blew things up in the House totally opposing an app. A double cross. Erbele never released to the press the names of the three individuals who were signatories.

Anyway Guy, it's a pretty safe bet proponents of a trespass law won't be asking those three conservation orgs to play their part again.

If it comes back, it will be simple, concise. Amendments not welcome.

 

[johnr]

Again MEH

 

[luvcatchingbass]

I will make this very easy from my standpoint. I am totally against the post everything law and wrote to the legislators about it many times like many others on this site.

If it passes someday. The first thing that should happen is all ranchers should immediately have to remove all cattle from all state and government owned public land. And if you don't think so please enlighten me as to why. This will never happen but it should. Only makes sense.

Then you guys make sure you keep Your Ranchers out there in the "better western part of of the state" because out here in the "crappy eastern side" the ranchers have learned a thing called conservation and if they over run the public land is desperation of feed, high water or they are feeding the hay bales that they just baled 2 months ago just not to sell out. As a sportsman/outdoors enthusiast and trying to give opportunities this is pitiful of many that consider yourselves outdoors men and "fighting for the cause". I WILL NOT STAND FOR THE BASHING OF RANCHERS IN A NO PROOF FORM NO LONGER AFTER ALL THESE YEARS! Many of my friends ranches and farms died off and many of us are trying to start over with new families, HELL most of us will probably go bankrupt trying starting at 30-35yrs old, but most of you ignorant heads don't care. We all fought hard to not loose the first time and we will fight even harder this time around, which now the stakes are harder with wives and children. All the while we are trying to change as a group to change the stigma of greedy landowners and opening up more free but controlled numbers of people for a reason. Do any of you Dumbsticks ever think about the wildlife numbers in a certain area that involve owners that enjoy monitoring what the land has to potentially offer, have your ever thought that at times landowners aren't denying killing but maintaining/practicing conservation, trying to keep a certain balance the best they can as every animal has a purpose(if some sat and actually read the Bible you might understand), have you ever thought that if you are a strictly public hunter and have a problem with what you see in the public lands maybe you should have proof and give it to the the elected officials and make damn sure you actually document it officially and back it up and when they don't want to show any interest/change then you bring it to the public (even in a place like this)?

 

[Uncle Jimbo]

What really happened. SB 2315 passed the Senate. Three conservation orgs sent Sen. Erbele a letter supporting electronic posting. Sen. Erbele held the letter up as proof everyone was negotiating in good faith. Then the same three conservation orgs blew things up in the House totally opposing an app. A double cross. Erbele never released to the press the names of the three individuals who were signatories.

Anyway Guy, it's a pretty safe bet proponents of a trespass law won't be asking those three conservation orgs to play their part again.

If it comes back, it will be simple, concise. Amendments not welcome.

Yup. No way this guy has been in contact with Gabe or any of the ND lockout folks. Nothing to see here. Move along.

 

[Skeeter]

I will make this very easy from my standpoint. I am totally against the post everything law and wrote to the legislators about it many times like many others on this site.

If it passes someday. The first thing that should happen is all ranchers should immediately have to remove all cattle from all state and government owned public land. And if you don't think so please enlighten me as to why. This will never happen but it should. Only makes sense.

So I go ice fishing for a few hours and come home to read the second dumbest fucking post on this thread. How did this land Posting issue turn into an rancher bashing and now they shouldn’t be allowed to utilize their allotted federal grazing permit?? Public land is still public land. Go out there and use the shit out of it. Run through it naked and roll around in a fucking cactus patch for all I care. Nobody is trying to take that away from you. FYI I think the all land posted deal is dumb as hell and agree with most of what is being said here, but the rancher bashing is uncalled for. They are trying to make a living just like every one else is.

 

[Prairie Doggin']

If someone wants to deed me their land, I will shoulder the burden of posting it "Open to Sportsman" (After I get my deer. Call 555-5555).

I would gladly take down my posted signs once same mission was accomplished, in a perfect world.

 

[Davey Crockett]

Hunters and sportsmen used to be an umbrella term back in the day , Not so much anymore. There lies the problem, It's a fine line in the sand.

- - - Updated - - -

It's pretty much common sense but some get it and some don't .

 

[Obi-Wan]

So I go ice fishing for a few hours and come home to read the second dumbest fucking post on this thread. How did this land Posting issue turn into an rancher bashing and now they shouldn’t be allowed to utilize their allotted federal grazing permit?? Public land is still public land. Go out there and use the shit out of it. Run through it naked and roll around in a fucking cactus patch for all I care. Nobody is trying to take that away from you. FYI I think the all land posted deal is dumb as hell and agree with most of what is being said here, but the rancher bashing is uncalled for. They are trying to make a living just like every one else is.

not sure where you got rancher bashing out of his post. If it's about who owns the land gets to control what happens on it ( which I agree with ) why should they be able to post state school land when it belongs to the public?

- - - Updated - - -

Hunters and sportsmen used to be an umbrella term back in the day , Not so much anymore. There lies the problem, It's a fine line in the sand.

- - - Updated - - -

It's pretty much common sense but some get it and some don't .

on both sides

 

[PrairieGhost]

Public land is still public land. Go out there and use the shit out of it. Run through it naked and roll around in a fucking cactus patch for all I care. Nobody is trying to take that away from you

That's not true. The American Land Council advocates selling off public land. Ask a Farm Bureau person where they stand on that issue. I thought for a while I would have to vote for Cruz for president, but thank God Trump won because Cruz was for selling off public land. Don't try convince me ranchers are not trying to take away our public land.

 

[Skeeter]

not sure where you got rancher bashing out of his post. If it's about who owns the land gets to control what happens on it ( which I agree with ) why should they be able to post state school land when it belongs to the public?

- - - Updated - - -
Really!!! Saying all ranchers should be kicked off of public land if this passes isn’t a jab at them?? Come one man. I can’t answer your question on posting school land Obi. All the years I was involved in the ranch I remember one time my dad went to the state and posted our school section, it was because it was so dry and we had a lot of fires that fall, and he was worried about burning the place up. The rest of the time it was open. It was one of those private landlocked sections that someone else on here said shouldn’t be allowed the only access to it was through the yard. But it was about 3 miles off the main road and hunters would walk in hunt it. Sometimes they would stop down in the yard and ask if they could walk over the hill to it and usually dad said yes depending on the attitude of the guy asking.

on both sides

I

- - - Updated - - -

That's not true. The American Land Council advocates selling off public land. Ask a Farm Bureau person where they stand on that issue. I thought for a while I would have to vote for Cruz for president, but thank God Trump won because Cruz was for selling off public land. Don't try convince me ranchers are not trying to take away our public land.

Most ranchers were I’m from wouldn’t be able to afford to buy the federal land if it ever would come up for sale. That land would be bought up by out of state special interest groups to do god knows what with it.