Starving animals act crazy for sure. Here though there is plenty of game nothing is starving and there isn't really much competition for prey. We will have wolves again in a few years but right now the only predators of deer are Bobcats ( which you could kick away as they are only like 30 pounds here) and mountain lions. The bears just eat berries, grubs and things like that. You wouldn't want to bump into one down in the canyon when the sammon are spawning though. That would be a recipe for trouble. I've seen lots of Bears hiking and you just yell at them and the run away. A mountain lion is the most dangerous animal in general as if it does attack it kills unlike a bear where you play dead and it leaves. What you don't want to do here is upset the balance to much. Kill the mountain lion, bobcats or foxes and then the coyote population skyrockets and coyotes are far more dangerous to kids and your animals as they do attack in the day. My street has almost no coyotes as the mountain lion kills them, it's one of its favorite prey. It's like the people who hate snakes here and kill gopher snakes and king snakes both of which kill rattlers as well as the prey rattlers eat so then all of a sudden you got 3 times the number of rattlers on your property. Killing the mom bear on our street wouldn't cause to much imbalance probably just a skunk and raccoon increase but another bear would take its place as the population pushes down the mountains. They are looking forward to wolves here again as they will control the population of coyotes as well as compete and lower the population of mountain lions. Currently they believe we have as many lions in Cali as existed before white settlers arrived and that really shouldn't be the case with the amount of cities etc.
Aye, that's a good Cali appraisal, although it is always best to remember that things are constantly changing for all manner of reasons and that important balance you speak of can change without you knowing it, so it could be prudent to treat a potential killer with due respect.
Does it ****. These programmes are entertainment, they may mirror reality, but they are nothing more than staged presentations of ways of life. Comments on Sons of Winter "We know these people & where they live…totally false. Everyone just remember this will be based solely on fiction. The odd fact here & there" "Not a lot of truth in the SONS OF WINTER run down. Hospital: maybe one hr . Not two days Sask. being a remote province not." Article on Fake Alaska http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0226-kizzia-alaska-reality-tv-20150226-story.html You are keen to try to prove your point, to do so you make the comment "is not as black and white as it is depicted on here" and then state that reality tv show the stark realities. On a recent show, a comment was made, that the hunters owed it to the animal that they had injured to put it out of its pain as soon as possible because that is the code by what they live. The reality is that trappers often leave traps out for days at a time and the animals are left to die a painful death. So what is the black and white reality that you base your statement on?
Besides coming across all angry, I don't really see what point you are trying to make; as you state you think I was keen to prove my point, I think you will find it was discussion, where I responded with detail and made some give and take - it's how it works where I come from. But let me respond to your points, if that's okay with you? I think it was you who used the terms reality and mirror - I simply used them as an example of where hunters shooting at moving targets can be seen (one of those few facts you've quoted, perhaps) - I never named any specific programme or said I thought they where accurate in their entirety, as only a fool would think they could be done without staging and only a fool would bother arguing about it. I seem to recall saying that not all wounded animals could be found and dealt with, so, in a way, I agree with your other quote, although decent hunters, who always deliberately or accidentally shoot at moving targets (despite your protestations), will try and finish a wounded animal - your programme quote seems to agree with me on that, too. Not everyone who hunts, traps; but, again, it simply emphasises my point that a sure kill from any form of hunting, whether so-called sport or for sustenance, whether by bullet, arrow or trap, is not guaranteed. Read back and instead of coming on with your irate bullshit, you will find it is me that has continuously argued that the whole point being discussed is far from black and white. Like I said, what's your point?
I'm not angry, why would I be? "just for clarity, reality television really does show the stark realities" It does not really show the stark realities. You got hung up on "moving" I simply have said that I do not know any one who hunts who would target a moving animal. That's a fact. It does happen, I have no doubt about it, but if you read back you will see that I do not consider it acceptable and nor do the friends I have who hunt with rifles.
You started with, "Does it ****", which is a strange beginning to a convivial conversation it seemed aggressive. But it does in respect to the issue we were discussing, I have agreed there is a lot of staging. You still miss the point: your acquaintances might not believe they aim at a moving target, but they cannot guarantee that by the time the bullet makes impact that the target will not have moved - so they either shoot realising that risk or maybe they don't fully understand what they are doing and what might be a consequence - or, perhaps, these know it, have experienced it and find it easier to give a bullshit excuse. I didn't get caught up on the 'moving', it is core to what you said.
As I said my friends would not shoot at a moving target. They all belong to BASC Taken from their web site. "A shot should be taken at a range that will ensure a humane kill. Shots should never be taken at a moving or badly positioned deer, in poor visibility, through cover, or at any time when your aim is not steady. After taking a shot, always assume that you have hit the deer until you have proved otherwise by thorough searching. Always follow up and humanely despatch a wounded deer, regardless of the time and effort involved." Do they always kill with a single shot, I doubt it. Do they sometimes wound and have to dispatch, yes I expect that they do. Do they shoot at a moving target, no. Would they leave a deer to suffer, no. Do they find it acceptable to wound a deer, no, they view it as failure. They want clean quick kills.
As a warning to dentists everywhere, Cecil has been beamed onto the side of the Empire State Building... please log in to view this image
Lion killer on the run. Guilty until proven innocent... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ation-home-vandalized-graffiti-pigs-feet.html
I don't know if this bloke's a dentist, but apparently he paid £6 to hunt gingers in their natural habitat (Wigan)... please log in to view this image
We were talking and I mentioned they expected wolves would be back in Cali in a few years. They had a bunch of sightings a bit ago and they put up remote cameras near the sightings and they have just announced that we have our first wolf pack again in California. There are 5 pups and 2 adults. We should end up with dozens of packs as they continue to expand back into their range. http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article31632431.html please log in to view this image
That's great! I didn't understand your link, but realised it was just a bump and not specific. These are clever and very territorial animals, you have oodles of space now, but I wonder how it will look in fifty years time - just fine I hope. I also wonder how long it will be before your gun culture makes them a bred for hunting commodity - big hairy grouse.
Cali is only really populated in the SF area and LA, the rest of the state is just empty space. Sacramento is probably the largest city not in either SF or LA and it's smaller than Hull. You are 20 min outside of it and it's just empty farm land. Our national and state park surface area in Cali is probably the size of the UK there is an insane amount of room as we are 3 times the size of the UK with 66% of the population that is in 2 tiny mega cities. They will be hunted just as soon as they are removed from the states endangered species list unless we ban hunting them in a proposition. Each state is different in the qty required to remove them, with our size it will probably take a population of at least a few hundred before there is limited hunting. There will be changes to regulations regarding protecting livestock that will be changed before that. There will be no hunting of them in any state or national park just like in Yellowstone. Wolves in Yosemite will be a massive tourist draw.
More bad news thanks to the crazed mutilator. Experts have given Cecil's pride just a five-per-cent chance of survival due to the threat of a rival male taking over the pride and killing all the cubs. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ead-killed-rival-male-adult-trying-pride.html
They've just come looking for a better life. If they get too persecuted I'm sure Polly will take them in
