|
|
| That wasn't my initial idea, just came to me on the last post. I did start this thread purely for the sake of an argument and getting some fires lit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 336
Location: Lino Lakes, MN | I know that this is off topic a bit, but someone mentioned hunting with tranquilizer darts I figured that I'd chime in with my worthless 2 cents. I know that deer hunting needs to be done to cull the booming populations and I have absolutely no problem with hunters. Its just something that I cannot bring myself to do and as a result I catch a lot of crap from my family because the majority of them are die-hard deer hunters. I love the idea of being in deer camp and the camaraderie that goes with it...its just the killing that gets me. There are a few places here in Colorado and I believe New Mexico that offer "tranquilizer hunts". Its somewhat expensive but its something that I really want to do this coming fall. From what the owner told me, its beneficial to the DNR because they can take blood samples, tag, and do other research on the animals while still being able to release them back into the population. I love to shoot and I'm actually pretty good at it so this gives me a chance to test my skill against something else other than a paper target. Some may call me a wuss for not having it in me to kill a deer/elk/mule deer/etc but thats OK with me...I'm just looking forward to being able to hunt without having to actually kill anything(is it still considered hunting if I'm not actually killing?). Has anyone else had any experience with "tranquilizer hunting"? Was it worth the relatively high cost involved? It looks like it will be an elk hunt because the guy said that its next to impossible to get close enough and to put down a mule deer with a tranquilizer. Sorry to hijack your thread...it just got me thinking about alternatives to traditional hunting. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Here's what I use to tranquilize the deer..
7MM Remington Mag
7.62X54R Russian (M44 Mosin Nagant)
.270
Gets the job done.
Attachments
----------------
 DSCN0020.JPG (55KB - 152 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 434
Location: Omaha, Nebraska | Steve, I bet that gets the job done and then some. I use a Tikka T3 Hunter 270 WIN. |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Those T3's are slick guns, love that .270 short mag.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 408
Location: Omaha, Nebraska | The best thing is all those tranquilizers knock them out pretty well and for along time with minimal tracking required.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | esoxlazer - 1/29/2008 7:26 PM
Some may call me a wuss for not having it in me to kill a deer/elk/mule deer/etc but thats OK with me...
Nah...knowing your propensity to fall and hurt yourself, perhaps it's best for everyone in the great outdoors that you're armed only with tranquilizers.
Maybe you should try hunting the bars with a handful of Valiums and a twelver of Hamms. Wait, that probably works best in the bars of Northern WI and MN.
Out there in granola land, you probably need a couple dozen Xanax and some wine, or at the least, that fancy CO microbrew everybody out there drinks.
Kevin
McCain vs Romney
\ Super
/ Tuesday
Clinton vs Obama
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
| To be perfectly honest, the only differences between the two are contrived by those who want to maintain a fishable tophy population.
There is no difference between the two, no matter how you slice it.
I get a little burnt when I hear all the rhetoric of the CPR "elites". There's always something that could have been done different, no matter the circumstance. No matter what...It gets old. So a guy keeps a fish, I wish he would have made the choice to release it, but it is his legal right, and it is perfectly fine with me. I'll congratulate him on his catch, HELL, I may even buy him a beer. One thing I will not do is downgrade the aspect of him as a person, a fisherman, or any other thing, because he chose to keep a fish. Not in a million years would I hide under anonymous, or Nameless one, and post crap talking about it, or how he could have saved the fish, or how he should have released it, or how he's a terrible person that should burn in the deepest dpeths of Hades for keeping a 'ski.
I don't understand it, not one bit. I know for a fact that there is a pretty good mortality rate on "safely released" fish. I'd venture to guess that every single person who has ever fished for, and caught muskies, has killed one. Directly or indirectly, doesn't matter. I've seen 45+ fish gill hooked and bleeding only to be released to float in a matter of minutes. I've seen people that damage gills and rakers from the way they hold, claiming to release the fish unharmed. Twenty says that fish is dead in an hour. I've taken pictures of it, and know it happens. Anyone tells you otherwise it's a crock and they are trying to make themselves feel better about it, plain and simple.
There's not one bit of difference, regardless of the resource, where or how it is grown, nor the length of time. It is what it is. Killing a trophy is killing a trophy. There is no other way to equate it, though many will contrive some sort of faulty logic... |
|
| |
|
| I may be disliked for this, but the truth is that there is no difference between taking deer for food or trophy, and taking muskie for food or trophy.
Those of you who practice catch, photo, and release of muskie, could likewise practice find, photo, and let go with deer. You don't have to kill them to enjoy them.
Yet there is nothing wrong with taking deer--within the law--for food or to grace the space above the fireplace. Morally, it would be wrong to waste the creature, but if you use the meat, only vegens can criticize.
Nor is there anything wrong with taking a fish--within the law--to grace your table or your wall. I don't advocate killing muskie (nor pike either for that matter), but if an angler has obeyed the rules and done the work to catch the fish, then no one should have a fit if he takes the fish home. (In fact there are probably intelligent folks who would say it is insane to spend the kind of money and time it takes to become a proficient esox angler; and then release every catch.)
We can all argue and preach, but each angler should be left to his (or her) own decision on taking legal fish. If we want to protect more muskies, we should adjust the size and creel limits. That should be obvious.
One thing to bear in mind, if there is too much killing of muskies, and they become too scarce, we can all save a lot of money by buying a couple of Shakespere combos, some six pound test, some small hooks and bobbers, and go out and fish for gills. |
|
| |
|
|
Killing is killing, I don't think anyone claims there is a difference in the end result.
The reasons why I would kill a trophy buck, are very different than why I would kill a muskie.
First and foremost, I kill mammals to eat. If it's a trophy, great, I've got horns on the wall, they look nice and are an added bonus.
I don't fish to eat, at least not very often.
While I like to hunt, I much prefer to fish.
For me, hunting is for table fare. Deer, grouse, pheasants, etc. I prefer to eat them over fish.
If you look at hunters, many of them are conservationists who belong to Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants forever MDHA etc.
They do there part to make their passion better.
So do fishermen, by practicing C&R.
Not killing Muskies is the way we keep our fishery healthy, much like DU guys buying habitat.
Of course these things are very different, and people have different reasons for what they do.
The reasons why a muskie fishermen would release a muskie, and then turn around and kill a deer are actually quite obvious, and sensical.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | You know if you want to compare these two creature then all things must be equal.
What I am saying that if they were the same the scenario would be like the angler fishing for gills could not harvest a muskie, why? Because he would need a different license to do so. A small game hunter can not, repeat can not harvest a big buck (or any deer) that comes his way. Unlike fishing where the license is for all fish species. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr. Skarie is spot on again, with the exception for me being I DO like to eat fish. Our family lives basically on fish and game, with very little store bought meat. Not because of some conspiracy theory or to save money, just because we prefer wild game and fish to the store bought stuff.
I really like pike fillets. We have literally dozens o f lakes in the area that are LOADED with Pike, so I have no problem tasking a couple for the table. We never have anything near our limit either in the boat OR the freezer. No point of keeping a bunch of fish in the freezer when I can go get a fresh meal in a couple hours soft or hard water season.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| I gotta admit, a paintball hunt sounds fun. But that's just cruel. If you're going to eat it, or it's threatening you or your family? By all means shoot it, and don't let anyone tell you you shouldn't. But shooting it with a paintball gun, just to shoot it? I just don't think that's right. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| Isn't shooting it just to shoot it the same as catching it just to catch it. Seems the real argument regarding the difference has already been made and it boils down to scarcity. I will add that I personally don't hunt anymore, but that's only because I prefer to trout fish during deer season. |
|
| |
|
| as a self-proclaimed elitist, I am getting tired of the, it was a "legal" fish excuse.
by no means am I advocating turtle food. but the legal fish claim is nothing but cherry picking the DNR regs for whatever serves our immediate interest. I highly doubt somebody who actively fishes muskies and owns musky gear, a computer and pays monthly internet access bills is fishing for muskies to put food on the table.
I realize that many muskies are kept by other species anglers, because they do not participate in these boards, I am not directing this post toward them. I am directing this to the musky fishermen who visit these boards, kill fish and fall back on the legal fish claim.
plain and simple. these fish take way too long to grow to trophy size. additional pressure with the growth of fisherman requires us to take our conservation of these fish to the next level. If not, trophy waters will only become less productive and we will end up thousands of dollars of fishing gear and too few of fish to go after.
for the record, the CEO's of the largest banks are all walking away from this mortgage crisis with as much as $160,000,000 golden parachutes. They did this without breaking a single law. It was LEGAL.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| momuskies - 1/30/2008 12:41 PM
Isn't shooting it just to shoot it the same as catching it just to catch it.... .
No. If you were talking about two creatures with similar nervous systems and similar capacities to experience fear and/or pain, than it would be. But comparing a fish to a deer or an elk? Other than the fact that they are both living and they both have teeth, there's not a whole lot of similarities.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | killer deer are out there, they all must die! and they taste good too!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=59AEqNPpYzY |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Fall back on? Cherry picking? So if the DNR regs on a lake in my area say I can take 1 walleye over 14", and 1 under, if I do that, am I 'cherry picking'? If the law states I can keep 25 in aggregate for my panfish limit, and I do THAT, am I 'cherry picking'? If I am allowed one buck archery and one rifle, and I fill my tags, am I 'cherry picking'? Am I less a conservationist if I take ONLY my limit when I can consume same because I TOOK that limit?
I see your point, but there's a TON of debatable ground there if one chooses to take that track, Hoop.
Don't like the current limits on the waters you fish? Educate yourself as to WHY the fisheries managers have set the limit there, see if there's any hope of wiggle room based on the realities of where those waters are and where YOU would like them to be, and if there IS any...go for it, and get something done.
If you can get your DNR to set a 100% cpr limit on your favorite Muskie water, there won't be any harvest. Good luck with that...
As far as I can tell, 'these boards' and those who visit them have never claimed to be 100% CPR. That's why we have this debate so often. Fact is, there are those out there who abide by the law, are basically conservationists, but feel it's OK to harvest a Muskie that is special to them. there are those who won't ever harvest one, for any reason. And then, there's a few who could care less what you or I think, and will do whatever they like within the law with no worries one way or the other.
Democracy at it's finest. |
|
| |
|
| Steve,
are you equating a walleye or panfish with a musky?
I don't know what the growth rate and spawn success rate for walleyes and panfish are, but with some confidence I'd argue they are nothing remotely close to muskys.
..also, like I stated in my post, I doubt muskys are being kept for the table, unlike why people fish for panfish or walleyes.
as for cherry picking, you bet. I would never bash anybody for keeping a fish if they needed it for their table. But killing it for the skin at this day and age is awefully selfish.
just curious, how well is the stocking effort going in WI? the DNR sat back and permitted the taking of fish until they ultimately needed restock the fish. I think they were legally taken fish.
The word "legal" caters to a slipperly slope. First you hear that its a legal fish, then you hear that if fish are takent the entire stock are runted, then you hear about delayed mortality and you should keep them. For god's sake, the growth of the industry cannot be denied. They are excuses for every fish.
Maybe the delayed mortality of released fish will propperly regulate the number of fish. See, 100% CPR advocates can cherry pick the regs and science as well.
I'm not a deer hunter, but I'm pretty sure cutting the head off a dear for a trophy and leaving the carcass in the field is illegal. Isn't that conceptually the same idea as killing a fish for its skin and throwing away the meat? Hence cherry picking.
|
|
| |
|
| Please forgive my type o's, I'm in need of an edit option. |
|
| |
