Hunter's regret after giant kill

reply to post by jpmail


True, as sport hunting is pointless. Alaska has a healthy sized bear population. As for the wolves I mentioned I have 2 pics to show and ask yourselves.. What would I do?




Now for the scary one.

Originally posted by hangedman13
Do any of you grasp that hunting serves a purpose beyond the meat? What natural predators do bears have? What happens when the population gets too big for the area?

Was this part of bear population control in Alaska?

Or are you just saying that without any relation to this case?

reply to post by hangedman13


Well, living in Minnesota, those are big Timber Wolves. Wolves are one of the greatest animals on the planet, I have seen them on a hunt from a hilltop. It is way cool and goes on for hours. They are very selective in the kill. Take out the weak. If we did not have wolves, then disease and possibly mutated animals would be the result. They have now started a season on wolves again, sad really. I have come across a few in the woods while deer hunting with my father, they won't attack you unless they have no other food source or you get too close.

I used to only hunt for food, don't hunt anymore but would for survival. I do eat meat, all kinds too except beef!! Don't need cancer.

I understand thi smans feelings, I have withheld taking a shot and admired the stance of the animal for serveral minutes. I have stood 10 feet from a bear, very exciting, wouldn't recommend it though, almost crapped me pants.

But yea, trophy hunting is a joke. The people that do it have no idea and I would think that they should be dropped off with only a knife, lets see them get a trophy then!!!!

Originally posted by STFUPPERCUTTER
jsut by a quick show of hands, how many of you in this therad eat meat?

Me - but i don't kill for sport.

My god those wolves are BEAUTIFUL! How could you ever kill something like that?

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
My god those wolves are BEAUTIFUL! How could you ever kill something like that?

We don't know the circumstances. Speaking for myself, if they'd been threatening me, my family, or my property in any way, I'd have no issue whatsoever in shooting a wolf, bear, or any other animal.

reply to post by Zelong


Sad...any amount of condemnation on that person is waste. If he didn't knew what would happen with a gun, why not try on his family or himself first.

reply to post by STFUPPERCUTTER


interesting how many marines never feel the need to shoot an animal after shooting at humans.. hunters are just too big of pussies to do something like mma or toughman fights. YES HUNTERS ARE PUSSIES!! get in a ring with a fighter and feel tough. i have made ghillie suits, put on warpaint, laid in mud pits for two days, tracked, survived on slugs. or go play paintball, much more fun anyway..

Originally posted by hangedman13
Do any of you grasp that hunting serves a purpose beyond the meat? What natural predators do bears have? What happens when the population gets too big for the area? Or would you kind hearted folks rather the animals starve? Just wait the wolves will be next to be hunted again. And before that statement gets jumped on, ask yourself how would you feel if the wolves were eating your pets?

One aspect of sport hunting that I can't stand is trophy hunting. If you believe in natural selection, the strongest, biggest, fastest, most intelligent survive to pass on their traits. Culling the best leaves the inferior specimens to reproduce, the inverse of what I would think is preferable.

reply to post by hangedman13


Could you please provide a link to the 'scary pic' picture origins. There is no way that I can believe that pic is not photoshopped. Not saying it was done by you. I have seen several of dogs done that way also to make them appear larger.

Originally posted by hangedman13
Do any of you grasp that hunting serves a purpose beyond the meat? What natural predators do bears have? What happens when the population gets too big for the area? Or would you kind hearted folks rather the animals starve? Just wait the wolves will be next to be hunted again. And before that statement gets jumped on, ask yourself how would you feel if the wolves were eating your pets?

Then the question begs...who hunts us?
What natural predators do humans have? What happens when the population gets too big for the area? Or would you kind hearted folks rather the humans starve?
We think ourselves high and mighty, and that is what is wrong with humanity. One day a reckoning will come, and we will feel miniscule at the feet of something bigger than us. The old saying goes. Reap what we sow.

Trophy Hunting is stupid, it's weak, it's pathetic and it's wrong....

If your going to hunt be a Man and go out with a bow under conditions where the animal has a chance...

Big men with those wolves...

Deserved Trophy if you have the Cajones to go out there after one with only a Bow and a knife, ditto for a Bear

If your going to be a hunter learn how to hunt like a Hunter not a commando

reply to post by vor78


Yeah and how often does that happen? Of course self defense is a whole different story. But take people that live on the fringes of Alaskan wilderness. You are in the WILDERNESS! And in widlife's backyard. That is no excuse to kill animals because they are a "threat". If I go backpacking in the woods I'll do everything I can to not attract bears. Using your logic I should backpack like a slob leave all my food out and well if a bear comes into my camp sorry I'll just kill it. That's stupid. Unless it's a rabid mange infested wolf trying to break through your window how many circumstances of self defense justify killing a bear or a wolf? Probably not many. Mountain Lions in a subdivision are a lot different as well than wolves in Alaska or bears in the wilderness venturing into a campsite or a yard.

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
If your going to hunt be a Man and go out with a bow under conditions where the animal has a chance...

I disagree. Its usually better for the animal if the hunter uses a rifle, because its more likely to ensure a quick, clean kill. Its not that a bow isn't capable of doing it as well, but that many hunters can't use them well enough. I'd rather see a hunter blast a deer with a gun twice as powerful as he needs and drop it on the spot than to wound a deer with an arrow and have it run off and die three days later.

reply to post by Zosynspiracy


I don't have any sympathy for someone who invites trouble with the local wildlife, but not everyone does. I'm not going to blame farmer John for shooting a coyote or wolf that is attacking his livestock or anyone that somehow finds themselves threatened by a wild animal. As someone who has lived most of my life in a semi-rural environment, there are times when you don't have much choice.

It's all about intent. When the American Indians made a kill, they thanked it for the meat, and gave it respect and honor. They used everything they could and wasted nothing. That is the way it should be. Eating meat is not bad. Animals were placed on this Earth for us to enjoy looking at as well as eat.

IMO, killing an animal for sport or for fun has no place in a civilized world anymore. STS at it's finest. Taking a life only for your own enjoyment. What a selfish, terrible thing to do. If you were in the wilderness starving, i would understand and it's perfectly acceptable. However to fly to an exotic location simply to kill something and spend tens of thousands of dollars seems a little...ridiculous.

reply to post by vor78


well that is wonderful and compassionate of you, because it really takes a long time to reach the animal if you were in bow shot right and cut it's throat assuring that quick death?

definitely much worse than getting a flank shot that tears it open from it's hind quarters with a scope and taking 15 minutes to reach it right?

And certainly better on numbers of creatures killed?

What your saying is like comparing dynamite fishing to pole fishing in regards to loss because somehow the fish die faster.... doesn't much matter that you kill 100x as many does it?

So.... Two guys goes hunting with an assault rifle from a helicopter.... one kills 8 Wolves... 3 of them don't die for 45 minutes until you land... the other kills 5 and 2 don't die for that 45 minutes

Another Two guys go out with bows...

One of them actually gets killed by the Wolves lol and the other guy pegs one and earned it... and kills it in under 5 minutes because he's 30 yards away when it's hit...

Which hunting philosophy is easier on the Wolves?


Hunting with Guns is for sissies that rape the environment... Hunting with Bows is a genuine Challenge.

Why not just take photos?

Tracking and recording dangerous animals would surely be more interesting. Take your camera, go out and try not to be eaten - that's a popular sport lately and much better than snipin out.

I don't see what's "natural" or challenging about taking out animals with a sniper rifle - why not just buy an old fighter jet and drop napalm? I bet that would be even more fun.

Controlling the numbers? Predators get very competitive when it gets crowded and their numbers should return to "normal".

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
well that is wonderful and compassionate of you, because it really takes a long time to reach the animal if you were in bow shot right and cut it's throat assuring that quick death?

In many cases, yes, it does. A wounded animal is going to still be capable of running for a considerable distance under most circumstances. The point I'm making here is this: given equal circumstances and the same shot, the majority of hunters are more likely to make a clean kill, or, at the very least, a quicker kill, with a rifle than a bow.

And as for that helicopter nonsense, how many hunters do you think have access to something like that? Extremely few and its not something I support, either.





[edit on 24-1-2010 by vor78]

Bear meat taste great pack it up and send some to your friends if you can't eat it all. If we all still lived in tents bears would kill a lot more humans IMHO.