Resignation PHASA President

[billc]

I have never been to DSC . . and now, will never go. Ugh.

But hank I will make sure I make it if you go. LOL It is a fun time that is for sure. I have missed a few myself but hope to get to the next one.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I guess for me a public forum were hunters go at one and another is not the place I like to see some of the stuff happen.

It takes two to tango as they say Bill. If you don't want to see a fight on AH, then neither start one nor give one to those you think are. Consider for a moment when you see a comment/post that it's not meant to be personal just because it is in opposition to how you think. Keep calm and re-read the reply asking yourself if it comes across as explaining your view on the matter alone, or if that person could take anything your saying personal. One warning however, you can write the clearest post that is 100% insult free, but there will still be those who feel attacked.

I've had the pleasure of meeting Red Leg a couple of times now. Drank a beer at Vegas with him and a couple of fine gents from Zim. Had good conversation and look forward to the next opportunity.......and yet clearly we have opposite views on CBL hunting.

So it can be done and I think should. I'm not afraid to have non-hunters see there are issues in the hunting world. Pretending there isn't is being dishonest and it will be seen. I'd rather they see there are those willing to deal with those problems.

 

[Royal27]

But hank I will make sure I make it if you go. LOL It is a fun time that is for sure. I have missed a few myself but hope to get to the next one.

@Hank2211 ,

I'm sure Bill and Pieter will let you be in the middle if you show up in Dallas.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Royal, I'm trying very hard to get past the Hank/Bill thing . . . you always seemed so reasonable up to that point!
.....

It'll be ok.

 

[BRICKBURN]

I will be very disappointed if this does not get to 12 pages. I will blame Stan Burger and then start looking for others.....

 

[cagkt3]

I think @AfricaHunting.com would be high on that list....he was the OP....just saying

 

[BRICKBURN]

I think @AfricaHunting.com would be high on that list....he was the OP....just saying

I've tried to sell AH out from under him and it did not work. If you can make a suggestion I'll be happy to try it.

 

[Royal27]

I think @AfricaHunting.com would be high on that list....he was the OP....just saying

You may be pretty new here, but you're fitting in just fine!

Keep posting!

 

[billc]

You may be pretty new here, but you're fitting in just fine!

Keep posting!

He seems ok but don't give him a big head yet. He has more to earn before he can get a pink shirt. But it is nice to see a new guy jump right it and realize no matter what we can all still be friends.

 

[cagkt3]

You may be pretty new here, but you're fitting in just fine!

Keep posting!

I try to keep to my strong suit - being a giant smart ass 99% of the time. I'm glad you all enjoy it because my wife most certainly does not!!

He seems ok but don't give him a big head yet. He has more to earn before he can get a pink shirt. But it is nice to see a new guy jump right it and realize no matter what we can all still be friends.

Like many have stated already, we have to stick together. The best way I know how is to give each other a hard time

 

[BRICKBURN]

...........
I definitely believe you could support high fence hunting in an enclosure of X acres of an animal that was born and raised in the area (and even initially stocked) and not support the same animal breed being raised in a pen, then being hunted on the same number of acres when it was released this morning. ...

Plenty are not looking for the grey.

"Canned" anything has now becoming synonymous with high fences. Now we bare witness to Outfitters "distancing" themselves and catering to this perception, through marketing; "low fence", "free ranging", no fences, etc.

 

[BRICKBURN]

It will be interesting to see what the next PHASA AGM provides.

 

[Red Leg]

Logically speaking, I agree.

Killing some animals and not others merely on it's face. No. There is no logical distinction.

Only the ugly ones and not the cute ones. Subjective.
We may need to protect (not kill) some critters for species preservation. Subjective.
We choose to kill cleanly (humanely) Subjective.

This is an important point - and an important one in the collective conscious of those who are ambivalent to hunting; where, I again believe is the ground upon which we are really waging the battle for the future of hunting. If we take the living creature argument to its ultimate extreme, we are chewing up living organisms and tissue whenever we have a salad. (A fun discussion point to have when you are next forced to sit adjacent to a vegan). And in a court of law one would be hard pressed to plead innocence to the murder of a cow by paying someone to drive a bolt into its head as opposed to shooting a whitetail oneself. But that sort of rhetorical gymnastics only carries one so far. I do believe, however, that most of the great urban unwashed accept the notion that there is a difference between a chicken, or even a cow, and an elephant - or perhaps a lion? Never will they hear a commercial - "Jumbo" or "Simba" "It's what's for dinner!" (an analogy probably wasted on some of you younger fellows.) But they do see "Eat more chikin!" and don't throw up on their couches or rise up in righteous social media outrage at the thought of cute birds and elsie being turned into tenders and hamburger. That gives us something to work with doesn't it? I frankly believe that acceptance is what gives us traction with the sustainable use argument. If so, then whenever possible, we need to really be able to make the case there is a reason to shoot something other than the fact we want to do so or we can afford it. That is a fairly easy argument to make with most game species where we are taking excess from burgeoning herds - whether within or without an enclosure. I don't know how to do that for the animal released into an enclosure simply to be killed.

And I realize we are all on a slippery ethical slope. I "shoot" pigeons and tower released pheasants. It is great fun, but no more "hunting" than a round of clays. Ethically, it is also much harder to justify games where we use animals as targets. But neither PETA nor the ambivalent masses have made much of an issue about these sports (yes, pigeon shooting was banned in many places early in the last century) in recent years. See comments about chickens above. If a twitter storm ever did develop we could likely make the utilization case for pheasants, quail, etc regardless of how they are brought to the table. But I am not eating squab.

Here in Texas we have a lot of operations which mirror some of the smaller farms in the RSA. They typically will have 500 to 1000 acre enclosures into which a mixture of animals are released. For instance, a current animal which is selling well is the Texas Dall sheep. It is a registered animal which in horn conformation and coat resembles a wild Dall sheep. You can go, pay the fee, and sit at the feeder and shoot him; drive up to him and shoot him; or role play, and stalk him and then shoot him. It's not for me, but if you own the sheep and someone is willing to pay for privilege, more power to you. But, I am not going to defend the practice as "hunting". Fortunately, I also don't believe it is an issue back on the battleground - again see comments about chickens and cows above. I would also note many of those small operations have done a great job increasing populations of otherwise nearly extinct animals. The scimitar horned ibex is merely the most famous. That probably buys us a bit of grace.

So, if much of what we hunt falls into the chicken and cow argument (you aren't going to see many suburbanites crying over murdered deer either) of sustainable resources, then we are left with the problematic justifications. We are living the elephant issue, though a sustainable use argument is grudgingly accepted in some places - though likely never on social media. And of course the same argument is being attempted in Tanzania and Zim with regard to wild lions. I think we undermine that argument and confuse that effort with put and take shooting - particularly the lion. No one has done that with elephant yet - but with Ringling Bros closing there may be opportunity for an entrepreneur with contacts among Russian Oligarchs...... I don't know how to justify that practice to that great majority who have the power to bring all our hunting to a halt. That worries me, and it causes me to speak out about the practice. Those who disagree with me absolutely have that right. But simply saying it is legal, I believe, undermines traction we may be making elsewhere.

And Brickburn - please note not an ad hominin remark anywhere in my post. You might have a real angle to explore in digital group therapy. Probably could get the Canadian government to pay for it.

 

[LivingTheDream]

Plenty are not looking for the grey.

"Canned" anything has now becoming synonymous with high fences. Now we bare witness to Outfitters "distancing" themselves and catering to this perception, through marketing; "low fence", "free ranging", no fences, etc.

You forgot no internal fences allowing them to be free range...I like that one the best.

I disappeared for 3 pages of this and listened to some very fine discussions which proves me wrong that we have not beat this to death. However, when binge reading these posts it seems like it abruptly turned to pink shirts @billc lol. I think that should be a new topic, or maybe a new trophy scoring system, what is necessary to earn a pink shirt.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

This is an important point - and an important one in the collective conscious of those who are ambivalent to hunting; where, I again believe is the ground upon which we are really waging the battle for the future of hunting. If we take the living creature argument to its ultimate extreme, we are chewing up living organisms and tissue whenever we have a salad. (A fun discussion point to have when you are next forced to sit adjacent to a vegan). And in a court of law one would be hard pressed to plead innocence to the murder of a cow by paying someone to drive a bolt into its head as opposed to shooting a whitetail oneself. But that sort of rhetorical gymnastics only carries one so far. I do believe, however, that most of the great urban unwashed accept the notion that there is a difference between a chicken, or even a cow, and an elephant - or perhaps a lion? Never will they hear a commercial - "Jumbo" or "Simba" "It's what's for dinner!" (an analogy probably wasted on some of you younger fellows.) But they do see "Eat more chikin!" and don't throw up on their couches or rise up in righteous social media outrage at the thought of cute birds and elsie being turned into tenders and hamburger. That gives us something to work with doesn't it? I frankly believe that acceptance is what gives us traction with the sustainable use argument. If so, then whenever possible, we need to really be able to make the case there is a reason to shoot something other than the fact we want to do so or we can afford it. That is a fairly easy argument to make with most game species where we are taking excess from burgeoning herds - whether within or without an enclosure. I don't know how to do that for the animal released into an enclosure simply to be killed.

And I realize we are all on a slippery ethical slope. I "shoot" pigeons and tower released pheasants. It is great fun, but no more "hunting" than a round of clays. Ethically, it is also much harder to justify games where we use animals as targets. But neither PETA nor the ambivalent masses have made much of an issue about these sports (yes, pigeon shooting was banned in many places early in the last century) in recent years. See comments about chickens above. If a twitter storm ever did develop we could likely make the utilization case for pheasants, quail, etc regardless of how they are brought to the table. But I am not eating squab.

Here in Texas we have a lot of operations which mirror some of the smaller farms in the RSA. They typically will have 500 to 1000 acre enclosures into which a mixture of animals are released. For instance, a current animal which is selling well is the Texas Dall sheep. It is a registered animal which in horn conformation and coat resembles a wild Dall sheep. You can go, pay the fee, and sit at the feeder and shoot him; drive up to him and shoot him; or role play, and stalk him and then shoot him. It's not for me, but if you own the sheep and someone is willing to pay for privilege, more power to you. But, I am not going to defend the practice as "hunting". Fortunately, I also don't believe it is an issue back on the battleground - again see comments about chickens and cows above. I would also note many of those small operations have done a great job increasing populations of otherwise nearly extinct animals. The scimitar horned ibex is merely the most famous. That probably buys us a bit of grace.

So, if much of what we hunt falls into the chicken and cow argument (you aren't going to see many suburbanites crying over murdered deer either) of sustainable resources, then we are left with the problematic justifications. We are living the elephant issue, though a sustainable use argument is grudgingly accepted in some places - though likely never on social media. And of course the same argument is being attempted in Tanzania and Zim with regard to wild lions. I think we undermine that argument and confuse that effort with put and take shooting - particularly the lion. No one has done that with elephant yet - but with Ringling Bros closing there may be opportunity for an entrepreneur with contacts among Russian Oligarchs...... I don't know how to justify that practice to that great majority who have the power to bring all our hunting to a halt. That worries me, and it causes me to speak out about the practice. Those who disagree with me absolutely have that right. But simply saying it is legal, I believe, undermines traction we may be making elsewhere.

And Brickburn - please note not an ad hominin remark anywhere in my post. You might have a real angle to explore in digital group therapy. Probably could get the Canadian government to pay for it.

It's hard for me to argue with what you say. However while today the majority may separate cows/chickens from lions/elephants, what about tomorrow? In comparison to when I was a kid, I just shake my head at where we've arrived at and the momentum seems only to be gaining in putting a stop to hunting as a whole. I don't believe that is imminent, but then again I never thought we'd be where we are now.

Lion hunting by virtue of the USFWS import ban is all but shut down. Elephant too. Have the anti's stopped their activities as a result of or have those victories further emboldened them? I believe it to be the latter. So I just have a hard time buying into another ban/closure having any positive impact.

 

[K-man]

Lion hunting by virtue of the USFWS import ban is all but shut down. Elephant too. Have the anti's stopped their activities as a result of or have those victories further emboldened them? I believe it to be the latter. So I just have a hard time buying into another ban/closure having any positive impact.

I agree. Look at what they are trying to say about giraffes being the "next" endangered...

 

[Royal27]

I just shake my head at where we've arrived at and the momentum seems only to be gaining in putting a stop to hunting as a whole. I don't believe that is imminent, but then again I never thought we'd be where we are now.

Loss of habitat and human encroachment. We always point at this as a reason animals such as lion, elephant, and wolf here in the States have dwindled in number. That habitat and encroachment are the culprit much more than hunting. And I believe this to be true.

Point being, perhaps it isn't the antis who are truly winning. Perhaps it's just that our hunting habitat is just smaller than. It used to be. We talk about urbanization of society some, but do we truly understand the impact it is having on us? I don't know...

 

[Royal27]

Lion hunting by virtue of the USFWS import ban is all but shut down. Elephant too.

And this brings up my favorite topic....

The bans haven't shut down hunting. Hunters have. Hunting can and does still occur. When the trophy on the wall becomes more important than the hunt in the bush, then and only then, will an import ban be successful.

 

[BRICKBURN]

................
And Brickburn - please note not an ad hominin remark anywhere in my post. You might have a real angle to explore in digital group therapy. Probably could get the Canadian government to pay for it.

 

[lwaters]

With all these import bands that our self serving government has imposed makes me want to go shot an ele or lion. Never really had much interest before but may do it for the principle of it.