|
fake?
Jan 21, 2010 19:17:18 GMT -5
Post by sleepergsx on Jan 21, 2010 19:17:18 GMT -5
Look at their prices, 8k seems reasonable......lol ha...the scary thing is...for most high fence hunts...it is cheap...I met a guy at dixie deer classic last year charging 16K...makes me sick
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 23, 2010 10:24:39 GMT -5
Post by INDeerhunter on Jan 23, 2010 10:24:39 GMT -5
I would never pay to kill a deer in a fenced area or one that was genetically manufactured but the real question is who the heck has that kinda money to waste on a botched hunt that all your buddies would consider not a trophy cuz the way u killed it ? I think this type of outfit shuld be againist the law, and we wonder why ppl think hunting is unethical and wrong ! 8k or 16 k either way thats just simply ridiculous. And the fact that there are guys out there that would pay that just to say they killed a huge buck sickings me ! If you cant get it on your own dont hunt ! Thats right up there with poachin to me !
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 24, 2010 14:16:19 GMT -5
Post by huxbux on Jan 24, 2010 14:16:19 GMT -5
This is the type of thing I've heard some call "business opportunities".
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 25, 2010 16:24:07 GMT -5
Post by Sasquatch on Jan 25, 2010 16:24:07 GMT -5
This is the type of thing I've heard some call "business opportunities". Of course, Hux, there are those that say if a man is dumb enough to pay $$$$$ to shoot a tame deer then perhaps it is time for that man and his money to part ways....
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 25, 2010 16:34:22 GMT -5
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 25, 2010 16:34:22 GMT -5
I would never pay to kill a deer in a fenced area or one that was genetically manufactured but the real question is who the heck has that kinda money to waste on a botched hunt that all your buddies would consider not a trophy cuz the way u killed it ? I think this type of outfit shuld be againist the law, and we wonder why ppl think hunting is unethical and wrong ! 8k or 16 k either way thats just simply ridiculous. And the fact that there are guys out there that would pay that just to say they killed a huge buck sickings me ! If you cant get it on your own dont hunt ! Thats right up there with poachin to me ! C'mon man, what does it matter to you what others do to legally take game? Acceptance of others rights to kill game by any legal means should be everyones goal. Their is nothing unethical or wrong about what they are doing, so they want to pay to have the "opportunity" to kill a big racked buck. I accept any legal method of taking game, period. To do otherwise is playing into the hands of divide and conquer anti hunting groups. Anti talk plain and simple.
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 25, 2010 17:13:26 GMT -5
Post by dadfsr on Jan 25, 2010 17:13:26 GMT -5
I would never pay to kill a deer in a fenced area or one that was genetically manufactured but the real question is who the heck has that kinda money to waste on a botched hunt that all your buddies would consider not a trophy cuz the way u killed it ? I think this type of outfit shuld be againist the law, and we wonder why ppl think hunting is unethical and wrong ! 8k or 16 k either way thats just simply ridiculous. And the fact that there are guys out there that would pay that just to say they killed a huge buck sickings me ! If you cant get it on your own dont hunt ! Thats right up there with poachin to me ! C'mon man, what does it matter to you what others do to legally take game? Acceptance of others rights to kill game by any legal means should be everyones goal. Their is nothing unethical or wrong about what they are doing, so they want to pay to have the "opportunity" to kill a big racked buck. I accept any legal method of taking game, period. To do otherwise is playing into the hands of divide and conquer anti hunting groups. Anti talk plain and simple. If throwing $$ at a tame/genetically altered deer makes you happy in your hunting pursuits then more power to you....Prostitution is legal in a few places too-that doesn't mean I'm going to partake in it. To each his own judgement and pursuit of legal happiness
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 25, 2010 18:09:24 GMT -5
Post by Decatur on Jan 25, 2010 18:09:24 GMT -5
Dadfsr!
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 9:43:36 GMT -5
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 26, 2010 9:43:36 GMT -5
Whatever Dadfsr, you sound like another typical anti. It is not about me, it's about others enjoying the outdoors the way they desire. Just because me and you would not do what this guy did is no reason to throw him and others under the bus based on your perspective. YOU DON"T HAVE TO PARTAKE TO ACCEPT! This whole board is full of anti hunters who love to demonize others for legally enjoying the outdoors in the manner they wish.
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 10:25:06 GMT -5
Post by Decatur on Jan 26, 2010 10:25:06 GMT -5
To each his own judgement and pursuit of legal happiness
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 11:00:24 GMT -5
Post by dadfsr on Jan 26, 2010 11:00:24 GMT -5
Whatever Dadfsr, you sound like another typical anti. It is not about me, it's about others enjoying the outdoors the way they desire. Just because me and you would not do what this guy did is no reason to throw him and others under the bus based on your perspective. YOU DON"T HAVE TO PARTAKE TO ACCEPT! This whole board is full of anti hunters who love to demonize others for legally enjoying the outdoors in the manner they wish. There are some people that love to "white wash" (as in labeling everyone an "anti" that doesn't agree with you) a subject with namecalling so that they don't have to take sides and then there are other people that do their research and choose to put up a fence that they are not willing to cross....without resorting to namecalling Call me an "anti" if you wish but you have no idea what my ideals, morales and background are-just because I've elected to NOT cross MY fence. I'm sure that you feel that you've set your fence higher but I also feel that you have lost some sense of reality with where you have put up your "fence". You can call me what you want-it all depends on how you want to define what you're calling me...I'm literally a tree hugger but I'm also a Certified Arborist that deals with trees on a daily basis. I used to get very upset with people calling other people "treehuggers" but realized they were using the whitewash term without really doing their research..... BTW-Segregation used to be legal too
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 15:54:36 GMT -5
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 26, 2010 15:54:36 GMT -5
Dadsfr, I am not here to insult you or take your insults. Obviously you have some deep hatred toward any deer not taken "your way" and are willing to demonize others that don't meet your criteria for hunting. Thanks for the lesson on segregation, the hunting community has always played by that principle.
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 16:00:35 GMT -5
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 26, 2010 16:00:35 GMT -5
Let's cool it guys..
Thanks..
WW
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 16:10:12 GMT -5
Post by dadfsr on Jan 26, 2010 16:10:12 GMT -5
Sorry Woody but when I'm called an "anti" I refuse to back down......something about "from my cold dead hands"!
I have not called him any names just tried to point out some of his flawed reasoning....maybe he's feeling a little backed into a corner??
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 18:51:59 GMT -5
Post by huntingman on Jan 26, 2010 18:51:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 19:02:14 GMT -5
Post by huxbux on Jan 26, 2010 19:02:14 GMT -5
I think the offense taken toward this sort of thing stems from the definition of these practices. The shooting of a domesticated beast bred from the genes of a wild animal which has been raised in the manner of a head of beef , photographed, confined in a pen and commercially advertised as available for slaughter, cannot, by any stretch of the imagination of any sane person, be understood to fall under the definition of "hunting". Bona-fide hunters will naturally recoil in horror that this type of thing is called by the same name as the sport they pursue and understand that the non-hunting public may well become anti-hunters when confusion between the two exists.
Those interested in retaining hunting rights for our future would do well to distance themselves from those who describe these practices as "hunting". I think the vast majority of hunters would agree with dadsfr's sentiments. JMHO
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 26, 2010 20:49:30 GMT -5
Post by Decatur on Jan 26, 2010 20:49:30 GMT -5
Amen Hux!
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 28, 2010 7:53:10 GMT -5
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 28, 2010 7:53:10 GMT -5
Sorry Woody but when I'm called an "anti" I refuse to back down......something about "from my cold dead hands"! I have not called him any names just tried to point out some of his flawed reasoning....maybe he's feeling a little backed into a corner?? The phrase "you sound like another typical anti." was not calling you an "ANTI". I respect your stance on this as it is your perspective and how you were raised. I also refuse to call names and don't feel backed into anything. Differences of opinion is life, and to agree to disagree is maturity.
|
|
|
fake?
Jan 28, 2010 11:16:02 GMT -5
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 28, 2010 11:16:02 GMT -5
I think the offense taken toward this sort of thing stems from the definition of these practices. The shooting of a domesticated beast bred from the genes of a wild animal which has been raised in the manner of a head of beef , photographed, confined in a pen and commercially advertised as available for slaughter, cannot, by any stretch of the imagination of any sane person, be understood to fall under the definition of "hunting". Bona-fide hunters will naturally recoil in horror that this type of thing is called by the same name as the sport they pursue and understand that the non-hunting public may well become anti-hunters when confusion between the two exists. Those interested in retaining hunting rights for our future would do well to distance themselves from those who describe these practices as "hunting". I think the vast majority of hunters would agree with dadsfr's sentiments. JMHO Thank you Hux, I would agree if the details of this kill were such. The point I am "trying" to make is not all "high fence" operations are what you describe above. To lump all of them in the same bucket does nothing but show stereotypical behavior.
|
|