Bowsite.com

When are all these hunters going to realize that social media is not our friend?

It's been noted that 10% of the population hunts, 10% is anti-hunting, and the other 80% are neutral. Stuff like this may 'upset the bleeding hearts' but it drives some of those *formerly* neutral folks into the anti-hunting ranks. Is that really something you want to celebrate?

With friends line that....

Bunk. We're not talking about a 'tasteful' picture of meat on the spit, we're talking about deliberate 'gross-out' photos here. And THAT alienates people who determine our fate as hunters. Is it really worth alienating 80% of voters to needle 10% ? I'd call that the mathematics of stupidity.

I didn't know we were a majority. Thought we were a very small minority.

I think the photo is stupid and not helping hunters at all. Keep that photo to yourself if you take it.

And anyone who thinks this is a good way to "take the fight to them" has no clue about how emotional politics works. This is why we're losing the battle in many places.

Well, now that Biden has won the election… at least THAT part should be over.

Folks who share your politics may be in the majority where are you are, but If you think that can be applied on a nationwide basis, you’re absolutely freaking delusional. Go live somewhere where people will ask you if deer meat is actually even EDIBLE for a couple years and tell us what you think THEN.

You can tell yourself that it’s “all those other people” who are crazy or stupid or useless or whatever term you choose to apply, but they would cheerfully disagree, they ARE in the majority, and they VOTE. Dana is correct, except for the fact that it’s more like 2% or 3% of the population who still hunt in a lot of states.

If we cannot conduct ourselves in a manner which even ALLOWS non-hunters to at least RESPECT our traditions, we are never more than one ballot issue away from extinction, and crap like this drives the middle-of-the-road folks the wrong way.

And now we get to the really fun park, where all of the flamers come out of the woodwork to say what a completely effing liberal D bag I am and how I’ve completely bought into the whole agenda…

Every progressive cause that has become mainstream in the last 20 years got that way because they were in your face about and didn't care who they upset.

You don't further a cause by hiding, that only further marginalizes it.

That's fine when you're 49% of the voting population and trying to rally the troops. We ain't.

PS 'preaching to the choir' is easy. Educating the masses, or at least maintaining good relations with them, is hard, and idiots make it harder still. One jackass being obnoxious can undo a lot of 'bridge building' by people working quietly to put our best foot forward.

Now it is all considered mainstream.

It didn't become mainstream by people not being obnoxious about it.

https://forums.bowsite.com/tf/bgforums/thread.cfm?threadid=490557&messages=335&forum=4

https://7news.com.au/news/animals/hunter-merelize-van-der-merwe-poses-with-heart-of-giraffe-she-just-shot-in-south-africa-c-2214544

https://www.facebook.com/Merelizevdm

Now it is all considered mainstream.

It didn't become mainstream by people not being obnoxious about it.

Sure they can. At one time the leaders of progressives (Bill and Hillary) were both vocally opposed to same sex marriages. There is legislation involved with that and other issues such as workplace discrimination, benefits, education, all involving gender identification issues.

Those folks won, and continue to win by being intentionally provocative and in your face at all times and in all media outlets. You ever seen pictures of the gay parades in California. Do you think they are trying not to be provocative? What the progressives do is strategic, and it works.

You do that long enough and things that seemed absolutely crazy thirty years ago you don't think twice about today.

You can't normalize behavior if that behavior is hidden. It has to be exercised notoriously.

If you can’t tell the difference between not hiding and trying to piss people off, you’re beginning at a conceptual disadvantage.

All of the LGBTQEtc people I know have won me (and many others) over by being thoughtful, respectful, and generally just BETTER PEOPLE than the vast majority of people who can’t abide the idea of an “alternative lifestyle”.

You want to make friends for Hunting? Invite a non-hunter to dinner.

It worked for George Costanza!

Agree or not, the political and social progress made by the gender identification movement is astounding. A lot of that was illegal not that long ago, and now gay pride flags are flown at state capitals.

I do concede a significant difference is they had nothing to lose. I am just not sure that playing not to lose means we will eventually win.

This movement isn't successful because they worry about not pissing people off who are on the fence. It is just the opposite.

Or maybe they’re successful DESPITE the minority of provocateurs among them. It’s easy to justify pissing off people you don’t have to deal with every day, but it’s the people you deal with every day who are most likely to shape your opinion regarding one group or another. Fortunately, most people do still trust what they see across the table/counter/back-yard fence more than what they hear and see on the national news.

And FWIW... You don’t suppose that your “news” channel of choice isn't presenting something that already matches your worldview, do ya? You know, just to hold onto Ratings??

I just see what I see, and one side is exceedingly successful at promoting their agenda and changing society. That is not a critique of them, it's a compliment. What they have accomplished is truly astounding in a short period of time. They must be doing something right.

Brother Brotsky raised a good point in some respects; the “mainstream media” is mainstream mainly because it’s just so..... mainstream.

You can believe what you want about them, but whether people want to hear and believe the truth or they want to believe that what they are hearing IS the truth, the mainstream does both shape and reflect the majority mindset.

And anyone who disagrees with the presentation has a choice between offering a rational argument or coming across as a raving lunatic. I guess I have already made as rational an argument as I am capable of in favor of the former, so I guess I’m out. I mean, not Out, you know, but ... you know... not that there’s anything WRONG with that....

I think Link said it pretty well. In translation, some tact is better then an in your face approach sometimes.

I won’t condemn her for her no apology approach to hunting. Because she is in the tent with all of us. But, had she shown the benefit of her investment besides using it to tick people off, she would have accomplished the support of that 80% group when the anti’s jumped on her. By default.

But the non-hunting public doesn’t usually see this stuff unless it is on the news or social media and unfortunately the press loves to stir, so naturally the pics get the widest distribution when coupled by the spin and outright misinformation from the antis. Where she really caused harm was noting that it was done to taunt.

She also picked a doozy of an animal to show off. Nothing gets a bigger emotional reaction than Giraffes, Elephants, and Big Cats.

If she wanted to help she should have shown all of the locals showing up for free meat, because that’s the way it really happens. And most of the meat the locals get is provided via hunting operations.

It isn’t just hunting pics either, the uninitiated public would likely be even more outraged if they saw a video tour of the average livestock processing facility. The majority urban and suburban population is often far removed from any concept of reality in how meat gets to the table, or anything in the natural world. When they see a nature show it is usually highly edited footage.

I get what some of you are saying. I wouldn’t post a pic like that, but also don’t kind she did it. Been hunting over 40 years in multiple states, and have never ran across an anti. Wish I could sometime. I’m not very tolerant of that.

My thoughts are, f*ckem! I’m not here to appease the anti wackos. Again, don’t go out of my way to antagonize, but sure as hell won’t go out of my way to please them.

Wanting to be able to eat free range, organic meat isn't merely “Normal”, it’s relatively Virtuous. Being willing to take personal responsibility for the death of the animals you eat takes it to a level that 90+ percent of people can’t/won’t go to, and the reasonable ones have no choice but to acknowledge that they can’t honestly make that statement. Respect ensues.

Beating your chest over P&Y inches and big trophy rooms are not “relatable” to non-hunters; and what this Ditz pulled is just destructive to everything that’s good about hunting...

Posting a picture with a dead deer compared to a dead giraffe is very different to the non-hunting public.

Even after explaining all the facts, they still argue the "Yeah, but..." logic because they can't grasp how much this benefits the people and the animals. Instead, "They're so BEAUTIFUL! "

Funny how much less beautiful they are when they’re eating your hedges or coming through the windshield....

Funny to me how many plain, heavy-set people are OK with eating cows, but deer are “too pretty” to eat....

To HERSELF, fine. But the consequences to the rest of us?

if anyone cares to actually look into what the lady is all about, you will see that she is a tireless promotor of hunting and conservation in Africa (her home) and anti poaching causes. even the giraffe heart that everyone is so upset about was made into an education video for an African school project in order to teach African children more about the wildlife around them. check it out for yourself...

https://www.facebook.com/825866377497112/posts/3647016045382117/?d=n%3Cbr

and while youre at it, scroll through her entire facebook page and you will see that she isn't anything like the blood thirsty self promoter that she is made out to be by some here.

this young woman should be applauded by hunters, not degraded by people jumping on hit pieces done to disparage her in publications with an anti hunting agenda.

I agree with this completely. There's a HUGE difference between hiding something and showing it off. If I'm having a conversation with someone who isn't anti hunting but doesn't hunt, it's a much easier and smoother conversation to talk about a picture of a dead animal then it is a picture of someone holding a bloody heart of an animal.

I will say this - if strutting your attitude means more to you than doing the work of educating the public, suit yourself. But don't tell me you're *helping*, cause you dam' sure ain't.

It seems obvious that we should walk on eggshells around non hunters and non hunters and try to appease them to “allow” us to hunt a little longer.

The flip side is that appeasement has never worked in any area of life. To think by us hiding, that hunting will survive in today’s society where soon it will be outlawed to declare what gender your children are is being naive.

Nobody on this site is offended by the image. But she didn’t post it on Bowsite, she posted it on Facebook where algorithms controlled by a platform that is not friendly to hunters made sure that image went viral.

Social media is not our friend.

But I disagree that in the long run it matters much.

Society is moving to a softer, phony existence and they will not put any bans up to a vote.

They will ban certain gun ownership and hunting without a vote . Non hunters will never get a chance to vote yes or no.

So you could argue. And some are

We may as well go down with conviction and stand up for our beliefs instead of hiding and appeasing.

What a sad state we are moving towards.

Many of us Remember the Sunday hunting shows on network TV with Kurt Gowdy. where a large portion of U.S. families watched. Now we are pushed into hiding.

Can they find pics here and copy them to Facebook? Yes. But do you notice we have no “share” hooks into Facebook like our competitors use?

There’s two reasons this: first, those hooks give Facebook access to our data (your data). Most importantly it makes it a chore to share our content on Facebook. If it does get shared, they violate our copyright which allows me to submit a violation to Facebook and demand it’s removal.

This has limited our reach into the hunters on Facebook no doubt, but it gives me and my visitors some level of protection from the viral mob that thrives on platforms like Facebook.

I also have no desire to add content to a platform that does not support or respect free speech and is partial to one political party.

Which is the opposite of what happened here....

I don't even look at my girlfriend's FB posts, so why would I look at hers? I don't care if she buys the entire country of Tanzania and turns it into a wildlife sanctuary - if you post a dead African animal on FB while holding its heart in your hands, you're going to irk a ton of people who do not hunt, but hold the power to vote against hunting rights here in North America.

Doctors still go to prison for murder even if they've saved countless lives.

I've been through hunter education with a couple of my boys. One of the first things they talk about is maintaining a positive image for hunters and that the 80+/-% of non-hunters are who we need to worry about. I agree with that.

Or I can simply say ‘you are right’ if it makes you feel better.

You must really not want this website to be defined as Social Media for some reason to play this kind of gymnastics with the definition.

By any reasonable definition of the term, this website clearly is social media.

While the variety of evolving stand-alone and built-in social media services makes it challenging to define them,[2] marketing and social media experts broadly agree that social media include the following 13 types of social media:[34] blogs, business networks, collaborative projects, enterprise social networking, forums, microblogs, photo sharing, products/services review, social bookmarking, social gaming, social networks, video sharing, and virtual worlds.

the 90% Kevin is referring to is not going to look at it either. It's in bad taste because of how the content will be consumed and spread and thus, judged.

Let’s say you have a co-worker who’s gone Vegan. Do you want him to get in your face about The Evils of Meat every chance he gets, or do you want him to eat his damn tofu and get back to work?

Attention seeking people. Social media platforms like Facebook are infested with them. And about half of our youth is being wired for that behavior. It’s gonna be a weird world when these college kids are running the country.

THEY. The question is, which 'they' are you referring to? I don't give a fig about the militant antis, you ain't gonna budge *their* opinions with dynamite. It's the majority, the 'fence sitters', that are in play here.

Maybe it makes some people happy to be all in-your-face towards the antis, but that doesn't play well to much larger group of voters who might have been our allies. Hard to make a case that we are 'respectful' when just one hunter acts like a jackass. Just one.

Let me ask the opposite question - what has outrageous, or even unintentional, accidental 'bad' behavior cost us? A lot of people have labored long and hard to present gun owners and hunters as safe and responsible. (Remember the 'Eddie the Eagle' campaign?) Then someone has an accident, a child is hurt, and the antis push for more regulations etc. *and get them.*

I could give you a couple examples from this area that would make you want to cry. Cost a lot of time and money and effort for 'damage control' that would have been better spent on *expanding* our influence and *improving* our image.

Bad publicity comes at too high a price, in my experience.

someone who has been attacked for being a hunter since she was a child...someone who has had physical threats against herself and her family...someone who actually cares about the animals she hunts and knows that hunters are the only reason they even exist in huntable numbers...someone who has been forced to fight back. its not like the giraffe was the first thing she ever posted about just to get in the face of the anti hunters...it is the culmination of years of abuse by groups and individuals that only read about wildlife conservation from their mothers basement. context matters. i admire her for standing her ground and not backing down or attempting to appease the bullies that want to cancel her and every other hunter. thats been tried...it doesnt work.

So I'm on the (yeah) Facebook page of a broadhead manufacturer and they have pictures of guys with their deer, and they have big red look-at-the-awesome-damage-our-heads-do bloodstains. Great publicity *for their product*. Probably sells some heads.

20/20 Vision A&M Records AlleyCorp Alphabet, Inc. Amalgamated Bank Ambition AMC Theatres AOL / Time Warner Ariel Investments LLC Artsy Ascend.io Aspiration AT&T Aura AutoZone Backpack Bad Robot Bain Capital Bank of America Beeswax Begin Betaworks Beyond Meat Bloomberg LP Bonusly Brat Brookfield Property Brud Bumble Burger King Cambly Catch & Release Cerebras Systems Chipotle Circle Medical ClassPass Clearbit Clever Clockwise CNN Color Genomics Comcast Conde Nast Costco Credit Karma Crunchbase Curalate Curtsy Dannon Delta Airlines DICK’S Sporting Goods Disney Company DoorDash Doxel, Inc. Ebay Ecolab Edelman Elektra Labs Emerson Collective Enterprise Eventbrite Farmstead Full Picture Fundera Gap Inc. Gateway Computers GE GEICO Goat Group Golden Graphic Packaging Group Nine Media Gucci Guru Hallmark Cards Hard Rock Cafe Havas Group HBO Hint, Inc. HipDot Hooked Horizon Media Humbition Impossible Foods Interpublic Intuit JOOR Jumbo Privacy Kabbage Inc. Kadena Kanga Knowable Lattice Levi Strauss & Co. Lucent Technologies Lyft MetaProp.vc MetLife Microsoft Modern Fertility MongoDB Inc. MSNBC MTV Navient NBC Universal NCR Corp. Neighborland NewsCred Nextdoor NowThis Nurx Oaktree Capital Oberndorf Enterprises Oceans OfferUp Okta Omnicom Group Openpath Panera Bread Parabol Paravision Paypal Pinterest Plato Design Postmates Presto Prima Progressive Insurance Prologis Publicis Groupe Quartzy Reddit Ribbon Health Ro Roofstock Royal Caribbean Cruises RXR Realty Sara Lee SelfMade Shoptiques Inc. Showtime Cable Network Shutterstock Inc. Sidewalk Labs Sift Skillshare SkySafe Small Door SmartAsset Snapdocs, Inc. Solve.io Sonic Southwestern Bell Splash Square and Twitter Squarespace Standard Bots Subway Sundia Corporation Sunlight Health Superplastic SurveyMonkey SV Angel Symantec ThirdLove Thisopenspace inc. Thrive Capital Thrive Global ThunderCore Inc. Tillable Tinder TOMS Twilio Uber Uniform Teeth Viosera Therapeutics Virtual Kitchen Voxer Voyage Watsi WayUp Whalar Wizeline WPP X.ai, inc. Y Combinator Yelp Yum Brands Zola

I never cared to much about LGBTQ issues tell they starting mandating confused boys can use the same dam bathroom as my daughter, and take her spot on sports teams. Now I am pissed off and offended, they crossed the line for me.

There really is no benefit in offending people to to the point they are just screaming mad and ready for a fight. That is not wise, and that is the reaction she is creating by crossing the line for whomever has a standard that crosses.

https://www.facebook.com/Merelizevdm/posts/3639026542847734

it didnt turn negative in later posts until she was attacked, personally threatened and lied about. she didn't throw the first punch but she has no problem punching back. reminds me of someone else...good for her.

I’m pretty sure there’s even a favorite post on blood trails.

If we think that if we hide in the shadows. And none ever sees our reality. That they will leave us alone. Well that’s debatable

Remember none of our hunting rights that slowly erode will be voted on.

It will be deemed so by the pious politicians

Also I wonder how many here that are so hurt and Disturbed by the post. Have actually read it.

yep. most people only read the fake coverage that the antihunters put out there and then its off to the races to see who can one up the next guy with their ethical virtue signaling.

We absolutely know what the benign nonhunters thought when they saw videos of bear bait piles on TV. They told us so on election day.

Matt

Now that cancer is spreading to Montana, Idaho and Az.

I think liberals will take from us in every area of life. If we stand up for conservative values or not.

But I agree, many people don’t want to see blood and guts.

unless its human, then its their choice.

Now today we hunters are putting stuff in their faces that polls show are distasteful. CO will never return to what it was, but social media has made hunting a nationwide issue, and no matter how much macho "fight to the death" rhetoric we spit out there, our fate lies with our neighbors who don't care what we do as long as it doesn't make them cringe.

Agreed! If we don’t want others’ alternative life styles shoved down our throats, we need to act accordingly IMO.

This ^^^

multiple heart pictures in this one...not one negative comment about posting them or the anits using them as ammo against hunters.

I'm tired of posting this but in case you missed it, the antis used our own video clips in the TV ads during the bear hunting election campaign here in CO. The EVP of HSUS told me they have a large library of horrifying video clips and still photos from bowhunters to use when they start putting bowhunting on the ballot. He was giggling when he told me this.

And what will be our defense?

Maybe she has been a positive ambassador for hunting rights and has done things that put hunters in a good light. Hopefully she’ll continue to do positive things, but we as hunters can certainly do without the intentional negative crap. We had a saying in the military... “It only takes one “Oh Sh!t” to wipe out a whole bunch of atta boys.” In this case I’d say it’s equally fitting in the civilian world.

In Colorado we will soon be voting on trophy hunting (for lions and bobcats). That is how it will be framed and the media will be 100% on board. "Trophy hunting" will be their next battle narrative in the U.S.

I am so sick of educators all being lumped together. Christ, the left doesn’t have a monopoly on stereotyping I see.

Last year, one of our most popular educators on campus asked me why we hunters felt the need to post pictures sitting next to a dead animal with a smile on our face. He understands hunting, gladly accepts a package of venison summer sausage i gift him each year, but thinks the smile is disrespectful. He is part of the 80%, why piss him off?

Dana,

I agree tasteful pictures are OK, my point is if a smile is discomforting to some of the 80%, imagine what a bloody heart does to their thinking.

However, as it is now, hunting in general is standing in judgement of all non hunters. Because It’s getting ever easier by the day to paint all hunting as “trophy hunting” I the eyes of the public. In awe you’ve missed it, that’s how they intend to beat us. As hunters use social media to improperly represent what we do. Making the job of Villianizing it to the non hunting public, by anti hunters, as easy as breathing.

It’s a shame the hunters doing this do so with intent to not apologize for hunting. Well, that’s easy if you don’t paint hunting as an in your face cruel endeavor. If we would just be smart about it we’d never loose a battle.

I’m as prideful concerning hunting as anyone. I’ll give not an inch of my hunting rights for compromise short of the anti’s doing their thing and leaving us to do ours. And, I refuse to apologize or make excuses for hunting. But, I can’t see making hunters the bad guys in doing this. It’s so simple to get right if we’d get our heads in the game.

if that's the case, its only a matter of time till the antis start throwing around sayings like let em go let em grow, hes not a shooter yet, hes on my hit list, and buck inventory around. those should play well with the non hunters who are ok with those who hunt for food but don't like hunting for trophies.

What they are doing is taking our own statements, pics, and actions and twisting it. Labeling it to the non public. And, when the knife is deep enough, hunting in itself will be considered taboo by most non hunters. And, we keep loading their guns for them.

I understand your sentiments. And, as I stated earlier, I’m forced to defend her because she’s in the hunting tent. But, it’d be nice if I could talk with a non hunter about the good her hunt did for the community and the welfare for hunting giraffes in the future. Versus defending her as a hunter. That’s a winnable discussion every single time. Period.

When we get good enough at communication to non hunters that we can stop segmenting hunters into groups, we’ve won the war. As it is now, we are losing enough battles to make that hard. Simply because we don’t think how our actions come across to those who have no desire to hunt.

Posting a story with pics is fine as long as you post the STORY. You can’t leave out the good or mask it with something most will fail to see a benefit too. Post pics of the villagers smiling while gathering their share of the meat. Post pics of them preparing the meat. Post pics of her helping them with their harvest. Heck, post a pic of her with sone villagers holding the heart. Tell everyone the story. And, then smile at the idiot anti’s who’d be throwing lob bombs trying to smear you. Because that’s what’s it’d look like in the eyes of a non hunters looking on.

Humans are very emotional. And visual stimulation is the first key to getting the emotion you want from them. If hunters would give the on looking world an acceptable look into what we do we cannot loose.

We can holler about the need to "educate" them until our faces turn blue, but without the help of the MSM, it ain't going to happen. Colorado Parks and Wildlife ran an extensive "Hug a Hunter" TV and media campaign which looked nice but didnt change anyone's mind about "trophy hunting".

if you cant find anything positive to talk to a non hunter about regarding what this young lady has done for hunting, conservation, stopping poaching, community involvement, work on her own farm etc, you are either ignoring it or you are just unwilling to see it. its all there for anyone willing to look but it takes going past the headlines. even the focus on the giraffe heart was mischaracterized. the focus on the heart was done to help school children understand the workings of the giraffe heart and hence the reason for the video.

https://fb.watch/3YBDLshtZ_/

in my opinion hunters actually help the anti hunting movement by allowing what we do to be mischaracterized by them and their willing friends in the media and allowing themselves to be used as useful idiots.

I don't know anybody, not a single soul, who does that. Not sure how things shake out in your neighborhood, tho'.

Years ago I kept my son home from school for one morning so he could go with me to duck hunt on opening day. According to his teacher and principle you would have thought I had committed child abuse. Not because he missed a morning in school but because I was going to teach him about firearm safety and responsible hunting.

When he was older in middle school I was at a parent teacher conference and was browsing around in the student library. They had zero books on hunting or outdoor skills but multiple books concerning animal rights issues (and other leftwing subjects).

I agree that posting this heart picture on social media so that it's picked up by national news outlets is not good for the hunting community. But even without this, we have educators, from kindergarten through college indoctrinating our kids everyday. That to me is a bigger problem.

We don 't need it. But we also don't need the 'turn a blind eye' attitude when a fellow hunter acts in a way that puts us in a bad light. If we don't police our own ranks, the antis will be happy to a) point that out and b) push to do it for us.

Bottom line, I'll continue to call slobs out for slob behavior.

(And yeah, we should continue to call out the antis for their emotion-driven, anti-scientific approach to wildlife management.)

anyone that would describe the young lady who is the topic of this thread that way has obviously not done their homework, is virtue signaling, or is just content to believe what certain agenda driven media outlets feed them. simply scrolling through her facebook page for 5 minutes would show that she is nothing like the way she is being portrayed, even by some here...especially by some here...hunters should know better than to buy into that garbage.

It won’t matter to any non hunters what she’s done. They’ll remember the self gloating though.

Our lifestyle "hunting " is dying a slow death, some just seem to want to quickly put us out of our misery by posting these types of photos.

We are truly our own worst enemies, it is sad to see so many don't have the common sense to see what the effects really are.

There it is!

i didn't post it for those who don't hunt. i posted it for those that do hunt, and in my opinion shouldn't be throwing other hunters under the bus. hunters should know better than to side with those who wish to drive a wedge between us by mischaracterizing what we do and why we do it.

It's certainly a more difficult argument to make justifying hunting when meat is not consumed. But saying a bear is taken for its hide doesn't help our argument with an anti-hunter or a non-hunter more than saying that it's hunted for the sake of hunting. People don't like to hear that a large animal is taken for its hide. It comes off as fickle.

People just don't understand hunting as an instinctual part of who we are and if they did, they'd be more accepting of it.

Nonetheless, I would guess that the majority of bears that are killed via hunting in North America are consumed because they are black bears that do not live off of largely carnivorous diets. But that differs by location.

I've unsuccessfully gone after a couple grizzlies while hunting other animals, but at no time was I thinking, "ooo, I'm gonna get me some grizzly meat (or hide)." I just wanted to hunt it.

A grizzly hide is certainly an amazing thing to have (I imagine), but I'd still try to kill a bald grizzly. Because I'm a hunter and that's who I am and what I do. I hunt animals.

did you even read her facebook posts about the giraffe hunt...all of them, starting from the first one? how about the thousands of posts by people who attacked her and threatened her for hunting legally...before she ever posted anything about the heart? what specifically did she post that taunted non hunters?

You’re arguing with someone who thinks it’s a good idea to piss off 80% of the voting population in order to Get Even with about 2% who will never, ever, ever, ever agree with Hunting just on what they see as some kind of a principle.

I have the very good fortune to be well acquainted with a man who very quietly brokered the Good Friday peace accords in Ireland. It was no small task.

Suffice to say.... He would agree with you and Lou and the approach that you are taking/advocating in this matter.

you can slam me all you want but the simple fact remains. that is exactly they way the antis will portray every one of us next, no matter how much we try to camouflage the fact that we kill animals for sport. the fact that we try our best for a clean kill, eat everything we kill, or we don't post a hero pic is completely irrelevant to these people. they will not stop until all hunting is gone. if someone isn't posting a picture of a heart, they'll use any picture of a dead animal they can find. if they run out of those, they'll use a beautiful taxidermy mount that they will portray as just another mean hunter shooting a beautiful animal just so we can hang the trophy on the wall. if we stop sharing pictures all together, they will insist that we are so embarrassed by what we do that we are ashamed to even talk about and we must hide it. if that doesnt work, they will show how we try to let their antlers get big enough, even pass laws to require that they get big enough, before we murder them so we can enter them in a record book somewhere, or brag to other hunters about we passed on them and kept them in our inventory until they reach shooter status...and actually get mad at our neighbors who are only concerned about meat and kill bucks before their antlers are big enough. or how about all the outfitters, guides and landowners and taxidermists that profit off the murder of wild animals...etc...etc...etc. we all know those things arent accurate or complete, just like the story about the giraffe, but apparently that doesn't matter now. accuracy better start mattering because we all know the antis have already used them and will use them again. no matter how much we try to sterilize what we do, we will not appease them...ever. hunters are welcome to throw this young lady, who hunts legally and works tirelessly for conservation efforts, under the bus for pushing back against thousands of attacks and threats...which came long before the heart pic was ever posted, but as far as im concerned, hunters who do that are part of the problem not part of the solution. like i said before, if this young woman was my daughter, id be damn proud of her and have no problem saying it.

Sometimes you have to play the game not to win, but to avoid losing.

Okay, this young lady got tired of the attacks, and 'fought back'. It's emotionally satisfying, but it doesn't really help. When you're playing to 'maintain', you work to maintain calm, to let the opposition make mistakes, rant and rave, go to extremes, to let them be the crazy ones.

If the young lady is going to continue doing good things for hunting, fine. BUT, she's in the public eye, and that's a tricky place to be. There will always be antis looking to get under her skin, to get an emotional, not-well-thought-out response from her. I hope she can maintain her cool under 'fire'.

(And if I've come across previously as too harsh and judgemental, I apologize.)

1...nobody ever wins by trying not to lose. they just lose a little slower. you might not be trying to win but they sure as hell are and they are on the offense and we are on the defense. the sooner we realize that the better off we are going to be.

2...nothing this lady did was anything that hundreds of thousands of hunters havent done, and continue to do. it was not illegal, immoral or unethical. worse yet, she is being forced to fight back against inaccurate reporting and mischaracterizations, not only by the antis but by other hunters who havent even bothered to actually see what she is all about.

3...the only way we can protect what we do is to push back strongly against the misinformation (like the original article posted here). every time other hunters buy into the misinformation, the antis win.

4...every hunter is in the public eye, including everyone posting here. if you think the antis dont visit this site daily, you are naïve. so unless we are all willing to stop posting pictures and telling stories we are all next on the chopping block.

"every time other hunters buy into the misinformation, the antis win. " And every time they egg us on and we make fools of ourselves *in the public's eye*, they win.

" 3. every hunter is in the public eye, including everyone posting here. "

On that, we agree.

I also found this out over 20 years ago when I used a deer heart I collected while bowhunting for a college physciology project. The Professor and other students couldn't believe I had shot it right thought the heart( that explained the weird cuts on the disection). Yeah I got an A. Only one classmate out of about 120 or so who mubled something about it not being fair...

We get it. We really do. I'm actually with you on defending hunting. My only question is this: When will people get that it makes no sense to help turn non-hunters into anti-hunters? When will people get that you don't fight your adversaries by adding more fuel to their fire...and helping them swing the weight of public opinion in their direction?

We're not against this hunter. We're against flagrant inflammatory displays which are too easy to weaponize against us.

her attackers are our attackers whether we like to admit it or not. killing animals is never pretty. it always involves blood, organs, and carcasses. that is the reality. some hunters seem content to virtue signal themselves out of existence, not me.

I agree with that, I really do. BUT, I've decided to focus my attention, not on the antis, but on the 'silent' 80%. THEY are the ones who will decide our fate. That's where the antis are focused, trying to sway those folks with emotional 'tugs to the heartstrings.' Showing things in the worse possible light.

How do we fight that? By showing ourselves in the BEST way possible. NOT by responding to shrillness with more shrillness. WE are the quiet conservators of land and tradition. We are the ones spending millions to conserve the forests, open space, access to the outdoors for all. We are the ones who push for healthy wildlife populations, kept in balance with the habitat. We are the ones who press for proper habitat management, so wildlife , all wildlife, remains at healthy, sustainable levels.

No, this doesn't appeal to emotions like the poor puppy with its foot in a trap. But I believe there are far more reasonable people out there who WILL hear and understand a positive message if we send it.

And if that gets me labeled as naive, so be it. I'll die trying.

If that same group had continually confronted the general public with explicit pornographic photos and videos of what most normal people consider to be their unnnatural, deviant acts, their fight for acceptance wouldn't have gone so well. We could learn something from them. We want those 150 million voters to say, "I don't care what they do, so long as they don't rub my nose in it".

Ricky, your passion is admirable. We're on the same team. But the tactics must change in today's society. Your approach was tried by leaders of hunting organizations, and even the Wildlife Commission themselves here in Colorado, and we lost the election 70-30%. And that was before Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.

This is a battle for the minds and votes of people who ordinarily wouldn't care what we do until it is shoved down their throats. That's why nobody straps a dead deer on the roof anymore.

im not the only one that thinks this way, my pms prove that. most people are just sick and tired of dealing with the "woke hunters" that think they can gain favor with the antis by showing their moral and ethical superiority. sorry charlie, it aint going to work. yep, if you think it will you are being naïve. even the mildest mannered dog will bite when cornered. she has been poked, prodded, attacked, physically threatened, had her family threatened, and everything else up to and including death threats. this has been going on since she was a child hunting with her dad. if he was anything like mine, he would have told her to never throw the first punch but if someone punches you, hit back and hit back hard. this woman is in the hit back hard stage and I respect her for it.

For the 5000th time, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE ANTIS THINK OF US! They are only a tiny subset of the voting public.

Question for Ricky - have you ever been involved in a campaign to vote on or against hunting in some manner?

im not sure what you mean by involved in a campaign, but I have been involved in a number of hunting issues and I am no stranger to anti hunting groups and their attacks on hunting in my state. from bear hunting with dogs, to bear hunting over bait, to dove hunting, to wolf hunting, etc.

my experience has been that hunters can be and often are our own worst enemies. one group doesn't seem to have any problem throwing another group under the bus in an attempt to protect themselves. you can only offer up so many sacrificial lambs before you are the only one left and they come gunning for you but there will be nobody left to fight. the only way to defeat these people is to stick together and never give them an inch. whether we provide ammo for them or not, they will lie, steal, and distort or fabricate whatever they need to in order to win.

It’s like we are discussing different things.

i agree. but then again i also know she's already done that. she's made many posts like that many months and many death threats before posting the giraffe heart pic. so can she count on your support now?

I have been engaged in two of them. It was ugly, and we got slaughtered on election day despite running campaigns the best we could by arguing science, wildlife management, and heritage. Those are losing arguments when fighting raw emotion. Someone could personally be responsible for saving hundreds of baby bears, but show a video clip of the same person sitting in a tree laughing while a bear is eating donuts from a barrel, then shooting the bear in the ass, and that's all the voters remember.

Here's a challenge for you - show that bloody giraffe heart pic to a nonhunting couple in your neighborhood and ask them what they think. That is the ONLY thing that matters.

No disrespect meant here please understand.

I guess I don't understand why she has been harassed and experiencing threats since she was a kid? Not trying to compare, I am a nobody and understand that. But I have been teaching at a community college for 30 years, granted in a conservative state. I don't hide that I am a hunter...pictures and racks in my school office...my zoom background includes two whitetail shoulder mounts...I share a log of summer sausage with students on the last day of class, in every class. They hear me present conservation and PR excise taxes etc, etc.

In 30 years I have endured one negative nasty note slipped under my door, never a bad word to my face. I get it, she is more in the public eye. She fails to get if you are going to accept being in the public eye you have to carry yourself that much better. We agree you shouldn't have to, but the reality is you do. We teach in our HR class that people can judge one another in as little as 8 seconds, and you really expect the 80% to read her FB page before making a judgment? They are not going to, and to think otherwise is a pure pipe dream IMHO.

A lot here will not like this next thought, but we wouldn't have an individual in the Oval Office right now whose cognitive function is questionable at best if another individual would have accepted that most Americans grow tired of in your face behavior. That behavior turned off enough women and college educated folks to throw an election that should have been a slam dunk for the incumbent. I get it, in your face feels good, but is also causes one to lose. I like winning more, and if that means accepting others will vote emotionally and decide emotionally, I will try and let only my good side show. The same people that turned their backs on DJT will decide hunting's future.

I applaud everything this lady does positively for our passion, but right now a lot of folks who probably never even heard of her think her "heart shot" represents what most hunters are, blood thirsty Neanderthals.

yes, ive taken part in a number of such ballot proposals and the antis lied, distorted, and played on emotions regardless. its what they do no matter what.

We all know giraffes aren’t benevolent. We kill, and we know what it’s like to take the heart from an animal. We know it is real life and not the zoo. The non-hunting public does NOT get past the pictures. They don’t care about her history, her Facebook page, or her deepest thoughts. They lock on the photos and are repulsed. And there goes a couple of shiny new anti-hunters. So we can either insist it’s fine for her to show those images....defend them as good and normal....and directly help perpetuate the propaganda that this is how we all are. Or we can actually try to understand how our public actions are received by non-hunters and try not to alienate them. Done incorrectly, we are unwittingly recruiting for our enemy.

Edited to add: I don't consider this to be appeasement or backing down. I consider it to be an intelligent, logical approach to hold the ground we occupy. I wouldn't waste a calorie trying to appease an anti-hunter. It's the non-hunting majority of Americans who I believe will play a huge role in the future of hunting. as well as species management.

I dunno. I’ve been telling my sons their whole lives that there’s no point in winning a Stupid contest just because you can figure out how.

three separate initiatives come to mind here in michigan. one was to eliminate hunting bears with bait or dogs...it failed about 2-1. the other two were to actually add seasons for dove and wolf and they both failed by the same amount. i still remember the anti dove hunting ads about what kind of monster would kill "songbirds" and the "bird of peace." just goes to show you, the antis don't need bloody pictures to pull on uneducated heart strings. they are very well funded, very well organized, very focused and very creative. we are none of those things.

with all respect, when it comes to anti hunters thats the dumbest thing ive heard so far. anyone who knows these loony lefties knows that their strategy is to chip away one animal one method one weapon and one season at a time. you will think you are holding your ground or appeasing them with little sacrificial lambs and before you know it its all gone. they never play for ties...they know better.

Maybe not terminal yet, but definitely shriveling up like a sick old woman. A pursuit doesn't lose as many participants as ours for as many years and still stay healthy. If every hunter could positively influence 10 ambivalent nonhunting voters, we will stay one step ahead of the antis.

you got that right. i know someone else who gets it too.

Lou, I agree that demographics are causing hunter participation to decline, yet Covid has caused an increase in recent participation. Will it continue? None of us know for sure, but with tasteful and defensible behaviors on our part the likelihood of hunting continuing to survive has much better odds IMHO.

When I was a Park Ranger leading interpretive programs and hikes for school kids it was amazing and alarming how many have absolutely no clue, and whose parents never took them anywhere outdoors besides a city park.

How influential are the state orgs? I can't speak for others but a high ranking official in the CO DOW told me once (he knew I was a hunter but didn't know I bowhunted) that they really wanted to lump archery and muzzleloading into one 9 day season because we are such a pain in the ass. He then said "If it wasn't for the damned CBA, we could make that happen."

just wait until you see an ad somewhere that says "even the owner of one of the largest and most respected bowhunting sites on the web says XYZ..." or "research shows that even many avid hunters find XYZ hunter to be unethical..." whether its accurate or in context doesn't matter. the antis have proven that those things don't matter. once its out there, the damage is done.

Exactly! Like a tasteless picture the antis have gone viral with to use against us. You are finally getting it!

For perspective, I looked at the giraffe heart picture and thought to myself "wow, that's a lot of fine meals." My wife, who is a non-hunter but fully supports hunting, looked at the heart picture and was disgusted. She said, "why would anyone post that on social media?"

It's not a matter of "hiding" or "cowering" in the shadows. It's about being cognizant and respectful to the vast majority of our society who will ultimately dictate the future of hunting.

i did ask my wife who does not hunt but fully supports me hunting and she was not offended at all. her actual response was "i see that stuff every year." i also showed her the video that was taken for the school kids and her response was "pretty interesting...wow that thing is huge." i will show both to non hunting neighbors later today.

him: (picture of heart) "damn that is huge." (picture if giraffe) "what is she going to do with that?" (video) "reminds me of when we dissected a cow heart in biology class"

her: (picture of heart) "that's gross" (picture of giraffe) "that would make a pretty rug" (video) "can you forward me that video, Lukey (grandson) would love to see it"

question: does either the picture or the video make you think any less of hunters in general.

him: "no"

her: "not really."

him: "hell yes"

her: "you better eat that stinky stuff outside."

Do you think anyone has done a study to determine how many positive exposures it takes to turn a non-hunter into someone who will vote in favor of hunting and how many negatives it takes to turn them into a reliable Anti.

Because you know it’s not 1:1; we are hard-wired to reject the unfamiliar.... I’ll bet 5:1 doesn’t even scratch the surface....

So I try to keep it positive. I don’t know what the typical conception of a “hunter” is , but I’m always amused when people say they’re surprised to learn that I hunt. People around here just cannot seem to get it into their heads that hunting is any kind of thing that a “normal” person would do... just because they don’t know anybody who does. It’s a really stupid leap of logic, but there it is.

That’s what we’re up against.

did i ask the wrongs questions...or did i not get the answers you wanted?

I side with hunters who dedicate themselves to portraying hunting in a positive light to the nonhunting public.

I fully support her hunting and being proud just wish she had been a little more tactful.

No, that isn’t the whole point. Ironically, you’re one of the very few that doesn’t get the whole point. Nobody’s arguing the fact that the anti’s mind’s won’t be changed. It’s not the anti’s we’re concerned about. It’s those non hunters that can be swayed either way. Senseless pics will not sway them to our way of thinking, but they may certainly push them to the dark side. How you can’t grasp this concept is mind boggling.

Maybe not, but we can clean it up enough that *most* people won't understand why the nut-cases are making such a fuss.

you obviously dont know how the left works. a very good example would be cops shooting unarmed black men. in the last 5 years alone...that has been cleaned up by 63% but youd never know it. the left and the media would have you believe it is far worse than it has ever been. all based on lies, and exaggeration. what makes you think the way hunters are treated is going to be any different? the left only knows one way...scorched earth. you are welcome to buy into the lie that if we just play nice, theyll leave us alone. it never works. you cant reason with extremists.

"you are welcome to buy into the lie that if we just play nice, theyll leave us alone." I don't expect _the antis_ to leave us alone. I want the MAJORITY to leave us alone.

The antis are living rent-free in your head. Not mine. I can ignore them and focus on the rest of the voters.

And ‘twould appear that in your mind, the binary is Hunters and Antis with zero population undecided.

Yes or No question, Ricky....

In your estimation, are there ANY voters left out there who have not yet made up their minds to be hard-core Pro or Anti?

yes

But wouldn’t we be able to help ourselves more by sharing stories of interactions with REASONABLE people which DID go well?

She had a student a couple years ago that was a really nice guy. I ate lunch with them quite a bit and he was really interested in the hunting stuff. I got to telling him about rhino and elephant hunts, and how they actually help with conservation because of the dollars.

He was very receptive to that, because it makes sense. Older, past prime males targeted, for big dollars, which goes into conservation.

By the time he was done with semester I had him convinced.

I'm confident he would vote for hunters.

The state DNR and G&F officials I interviewed for my article on shrinking hunter numbers would be thrilled to maintain status quo for the next 20 years. And they accept that it won't be possible. They could give away free resident licenses and it wouldn't stem the tide.

there are two answers to that question. 1. that is exactly what the subject of this thread has done...not to mention ethical, moral, and lawful. 2. regardless of how we think we portray ourselves, the antis will portray us otherwise.

i agree...infighting, ethics shaming, and virtue signaling within the hunting community will only speed the process up.

true.

anyone that thinks the antis need gross pictures to convince the uneducated is very naïve. bleeding heart pictures are just as effective as bloody heart pictures.

First, 'legal' is the bare MINIMUM of 'ethical conduct', not the optimum. Second, I don't buy that that is my only hope, or choice. I believe that we have the option to 'clean up our back yard', and I accept it as MY duty. You want to play 'big tent' and never criticize behavior you don't approve, fine. I'll speak my mind and let the chips fall.

As for 'useful idiots', we could argue who that best applies to, those who rubber-stamp questionable behavior, or those who QUESTiON it?

“Legal” is the lowest standard of conduct which society will tolerate before responding by imposing fines or jail time.

It’s 100% legal for people to sleep around with whomever they wish, but I don’t imagine many of us guys would want to see our wife/sister/daughter/mother doing it and boasting about it or putting up explicit images of them in the act on their social media accounts...

But you know, that’s all legal and protected under the first amendment, so I guess we should all rally behind it.....

I’ve seen plenty of legal behaviors which I consider openly wrong and abhorrent. Are they (the behaviors) legal and should they be defended for being legal? Probably in most cases. Does that make them (the person) ambassadors?.....ethical?....defensible on their ethics? Often not. Like it or not, there are plenty of hunters who do legal things we disagree vehemently with and get called out for it. That’s how it’s been for a long time, and you can bet it’s not going to change. If you doubt me, just watch what happens when someone gut-shoots a bull elk with a triple-digit bowshot. Of course a coyote killed that way garners kudos and high fives. See the dichotomy?

and based on the legal vs ethical standard some employ here, what leg will bowhunters have to stand on? let's hope the gun only hunters don't decide to throw us poke and hope bowhunters under the bus. you know, superior ethics and all.

sigh...

Hunters who didn't hunt bears voted to end baiting, hounds and spring hunting. Same with trapping. We have trad hunters on this site asking for trad-only seasons, who would gladly throw compound hunters under the bus if it benefitted them. Your idealistic view of "everyone sticking together is admirable", but will never happen. Never has, never will. Human nature.

Ah, but as I asked before, what have you actively done to postpone our inevitable demise? Do you speak at public hearings, call and write emails to congressional representatives, write articles, give seminars, write guest Op-Eds and point-counterpoint essays presenting the positive side of hunting in your local and metro newspapers, anything to bring your message to large swaths of the nonhunting voting general public? Because I do all those things. Please give us some examples of what you have done to preserve hunting opportunities and bring nonhunting voters to our side.

1. Is it legal?

2. Is it balanced to all parties?

3. How will you feel about your decision later?

The picture and hunt were legal. For some, including me, the picture does not achieve balance because it ignores the reactions of many we no doubt want to keep in our camp. I would not feel good about it immediately or down the road, so for me it does not equate to an ethical act. Obviously others can conclude something different.

The sad and sorry truth is that our ranks have ALWAYS included archers who had no (deleted) business launching arrows at live animals. They're 'legal' but they sure as (deleted) didn't/don't have an _ethical_ leg to stand on.

And no, that is NOT limited to 'traditional' shooters.

BUT, bring up shooting competency tests to qualify for an archery hunting license and listen to the fur fly!

And FWIW, this same discussion has been going on for at least 42 years I've been bow hunting. Plus ?a change...

The reason why antis can so easily portray us negatively to the general public is because some in our ranks behave badly in public. The stereotype of the half-drunk, sign-shooting, "Happiness is a warm gutpile" t-shirt wearing slob didn't come about by accident.

I didn't just fall off a beet truck. I studied this in college, and afterward when I was a Park Ranger. One senior-level course, called Natural Resources and Public Relations, dealt with this specific challenge on a broader scale.

The reason why antis can so easily portray us negatively to the general public is because some in our ranks behave badly in public. The stereotype of the half-drunk, sign-shooting, "Happiness is a warm gutpile" t-shirt wearing slob didn't come about by accident.

I didn't just fall off a beet truck. I studied this in college, and afterward when I was a Park Ranger. One senior-level course, called Natural Resources and Public Relations, dealt with this specific challenge on a broader scale.

A lot of times when people express an anti-hunting sentiment, I simply ask them if they eat meat. If they say “no” then I can tell them honestly that I respect the fact that their behavior is consistent with their convictions. If they say that they do eat meat, I ask them (in a non-confrontational way) whether they think it is reasonable to be OK with eating meat, but not with hunting. And then I tell them that I personally feel it’s hypocritical OF ME to eat meat, yet be unwilling to take personal responsibility for any of the deaths of the animals that end up on my plate.

Because if I point it out as a matter of addressing MY OWN hypocrisy... they have nowhere to go with that.

And if they ask me “why do [I] want to kill those poor animals“, I tell them that I really DON’T want to kill the animals, but I do want to EAT them, and it just seems more humane to not eat them while they are still alive (not that that that bothers wild canids any). And I mean, shellfish, yeah, I’ve pretty much made peace with that… But mammals, not so much. Besides, it’s really hard to get them to lie there calmly on the plate while you stick a fork in them.

Fact is, a LOT of people just haven’t ever thought about it. And I’m fine with that, and I don’t browbeat them for it. I’ve never wanted to or thought about kissing another man, but that doesn’t mean I think it should be illegal.... And I just choose not to live in a society where it is a given that something should be illegal just because some people are offended by it, even if they have a sincere belief that it’s “immoral” behavior; because we don’t all share the same set of morals because we don’t all share the same set of beliefs, because this country is the Great Melting Pot, and getting along with people who are different from us is what makes this country Great.

And Lou, I agree with you.

I believe this might work...except for the fact that hunters aren't the only ones vying for the non hunting voters attention. regardless of what hunters do, the anti hunting groups are actively and ruthlessly trying to convince non hunting voters to see it their way. their anti hunting campaign goes on 365 days a year, not just when there is a ballot proposal to fight against...and then it's often too late.

when was the last time you saw a pro hunting ad on tv or in a magazine? especially in a magazine or a tv show that wasn't already only being viewed by hunters? when was the last time you saw a heart wrenching ad showing deer starving to death because of overpopulation. when was the last time you saw an ad campaign with celebrities explaining why they hunt from a wildlife conservation standpoint, not just to sell a product? when was the last time you saw a national or multi national fundraising campaign for a group focused on such things. HSUS, PETA and other such groups do this every single day of the year. unless and until hunters develop effective national pro conservation, pro wildlife, pro habitat campaigns, we will continue to lose at the ballot box. no amount of virtue signaling, ethics shaming or self flagellation will help.

maybe even more important, when was the last time you saw one anti hunting group throw another anti hunting group under the bus? when was the last time you saw HSUS slamming PETA for activities that they feel are over the top? when was the last time you saw one anti hunting group virtue signaling or ethics shaming another anti hunting group for posting a picture, running an ad, or staging a protest that was just a little too offensive to the average voter? when was the last time you saw an anti hunting group adopt a "winning by not losing" strategy? anti hunters bring a .50 caliber machine gun to the fight while hunters bring a butter knife.

And I take it from your response that you, personally, have never done anything proactive besides bitch at other hunters on internet forums for not supporting YOUR viewpoint.

I think if I wanted to help the cause of Hunting by running a shocking ad campaign, I would expose the financial excesses of the people running the Anti groups.... Or expose their ties to outfits like the ALF, which is basically a domestic terrorist organization....

And in the meantime, let’s hope that any unpleasant encounters with suburbanized lions & bears get all of the attention that they deserve. I’m not going to wish any harm on anyone, but it’d be a shame to see the media sweep those incidents under the rug.

The Sierra Club used to be pro-hunting. Then they were virtue-shamed into dropping that position. BHA used to have a link on their home page to their "sister organization", Sierra Club. They were virtue-shamed by their own members into dropping that. RMEF leadership tried to eliminate "the hunt" from the Bugle masthead, and were forced to reverse that decision by members who didn't want RMEF to become the Sierra Club of Elk. It works both ways.

wrong. but it wouldn't matter anyway. i didnt answer your question because youve shown with the last few that you are only really looking for the answers you want and if you dont get them, you immediately dismiss them with a "sigh" or some other bs. it takes me a little while to catch on to what a persons MO is but i eventually figure it out. i could go on to explain what i do or what ive done but why waste my time. kind of like the title of the thread. seems that the only "thoughts" some people are looking for are the ones that match theirs. how about if i ask you a question now. how is your way working out for us? is the ethics shaming and virtue signaling gaining or losing us ground. reminds me of the old saying...if you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got. at the end of the day, all I've done is attempt to support another hunter for her legal harvest and what shes done for hunting in her area. the only real bitching ive seen is from the virtue signaling and ethics shaming group.