COOSEFAN Report post Posted August 3, 2007 Thanks Stan for sharin' your insight on the matter. I don't personally know the individuals involved but have respected and looked up to who they are and what they do for alot of years now. I'm sure whatever happened that was deemed illegal was a surprise to them as much as it was for us who only heard about it! I'm also sure there is no way they would have knowingly done anything illegal with a high profile tag such as that and with such a high profile bull! I would bet there are things that happened that were out of their control and for those things it's not right to criticize. Also, there are aspects about this hunt that I, and others, don't agree with but, in all fairness, it's not our place to criticize either. You touched on the subject about the Anti-hunters........All this talk, negative and false accusations, about this topic may only be on these hunting websites, but the bad part is that it's not just hunters veiwing these websites! I've commented before about this and it's all the arguing and false accusations flying around that make us look bad to the other veiwers of these sites. That's what I hate, especially over on the Muley site.....things usually get ugly over there, and that IS "fuel" for their fire! Everyone is entitled to their opinions and everyone is entitled to post their thoughts here, but we should at least give the individuals involved in this matter the benefit of the doubt. JIM> Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
El Fuego Report post Posted August 3, 2007 Well said Jim. Prior to posting, more people need to really think about what they post and choose to take the high road. As sportsmen, we need to support one another through disagreement and adversity. I personally wish all involved, only the best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redline410 Report post Posted August 3, 2007 Mr. Arnold- I respectfully disagree. There are a lot of things I don't get- like how I can sit in front of a computer, grab the entire Beatles White album out of thin air and stuff it into a machine the size of a quarter to listen to anytime I want. That right there is witch craft I also don't get how individuals can pass judgment on someone they've never met or on a situation they've never been in them selves. I don't think you can speak for anyone other than yourself either but I commend you for taking the stance that you have- All I'm saying is, let it work its self out before defacing anyone. like I said- it's sounds more like an unfortunate incident than it does a raging band of blood thirsty mercenaries............ And what's all this talk that "other" people look at this site?!?!? Jim you's talking crazy- Peace boys- Dave Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Noel Arnold Report post Posted August 3, 2007 Dave, Like I have said many times before,I have no problem with the shooter.I was just responding to your comment about not having enough money or being jealous.I do not judge the guy.I was just telling you a lot of people would not even want to hunt this way.This whole thread for me has been about whether the auction tags in all states are worth it. Noel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatfootdoc Report post Posted August 3, 2007 I think the whole idea of the auction tag being year round is appealing and that is why people bid on them. I for one would buy one in a second if I could afford it, if I killed a humongous animal the day before the hunts started for everyone else, well yay for me, that is why I bought the tag in the first place!!! Hey there are those of us who would not be happy doing that, well more power to you. If I am going to spend that kind of money, I am going to hunt whenever I want regardless of anyone else. Look at our forum, all of us go out and do things to maximize our potential for getting a shot at a big whitetail buck, how is this different? When I hunt does not affect my respect for what I am hunting! How much I paid for my tag does not affect it either! What other people think about what I spent for my tag and how I got it has no bearing either! I am there for the thrill of the hunt and to take a nice animal if possible! ag Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KB-AZ Report post Posted August 3, 2007 The pic on the front page of wmicentral.com doesn't look too good Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Outdoor Writer Report post Posted August 3, 2007 The pic on the front page of wmicentral.com doesn't look too good The article ain't too hot either. -TONY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Rabbit Report post Posted August 3, 2007 http://www.wmicentral.com/site/news.cfm?ne...05965&rfi=6 Save y'all some looking time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rembrant Report post Posted August 3, 2007 Have we really gotten that relevant? My truth is not the same as your truth? Or, there is no truth? An "unfortunate incident" means what? Nobody knew an occupied residence was there? Or no one knew the law? Or is it just unfortunate that someone complained? What really is the most important thing? To kill a 400"+ bull no matter what? Or... obey the law no matter what? The consenses on this site has always been that what is LEGAL is ethical. Shall we bend that a bit now for a great guide? Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
COOSEFAN Report post Posted August 4, 2007 Hey Redline....I am referring to the non-hunting and anti-hunting veiwers. I have heard before that there are alot more of these veiwers watching these sites then we would think. They search for any negative junk they can find to use against us........and that article in that paper is not a good thing! Truth or not....that's ugly! JIM> BTW.....I hope those other veiwers are on this site checkin' out all my dead critter pic's and readin' about how I killed em'! I just don't think it's a good thing for them to see hunters bashing each other and arguing.......we should all stick together even if we don't agree on how the other hunts.......as long as it is legal of course! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tinman111 Report post Posted August 4, 2007 I'm afraid greed, money, and the quest for fame are going to be the end of the sport we all love so much. Theres a right and a wrong way to do things. Makes me wonder if the guide (locally famous) has participated in other shady acts to achieve his status. Is there something I'm missing? Looks like the bull is in someones front yard from the pic. How is that hunting? This whole situation reflects negatively on hunters and guides alike, of which I am both. I have been with clients that have an itchy trigger finger, but with ALL clients I discuss THE RULES before ever going afield and do not accept them as a client if our ideas on the law differ. I'm sure some of the guides buddies and or co-workers are on here and may take offense to what I have said, thats fine, I'm just offering my opinion on the subject that has given an obvious black eye to the hunting community. Lets try to keep it legal out there. If your hunting for the love of the sport, it's not that hard to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Outdoor Writer Report post Posted August 4, 2007 For discussion purposes: Although I've fully supported both auction and raffle tags for that past 20 years, mostly because of what the money does, that doesn't mean I wouldn't be against getting rid of both and looking at alternative ways to raise the same amount of revenue. For example, let's look at elk for 2007. The various special auction and raffle tags brought in $335,000. Also in 2007, 102,325 hunters applied for a tag. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do the math and find out that an additional surcharge for applying of $3-plus would generate the same total. The caveat would be that money would be earmarked toward the same projects as the auction/raffle funds are used for. This same surcharge concept could be used for every species, with the amount determined by the average number of applicants and total revenue required to make up the shortfall lost from the special tags. Another alternative would be a flat surcharge on licenses -- not apps or tags -- across the board with the total funds split on a percentage basis between species. Obviously this single surcharge would have to be quite a bit higher because a hunter buys only one license yet applies for one or many species. In either case, it's known as the "everybody pays" concept. -TONY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CouesWhitetail Report post Posted August 4, 2007 Neat idea Tony. Why not do both and double the money raised for wildlife? Amanda Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muskrat Report post Posted August 4, 2007 Hmmm - how about tag applicants have the option to pay a $5 surcharge for each species. After the draw, all of the 5$ "donators" that didn't draw a tag, go into a drawing for a "super raffle" type tag.... Anyway, as usual Tony offers food for thought. I think maybe the time has come to think out of the box when it comes to raising extra money... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Outdoor Writer Report post Posted August 4, 2007 After the draw, all of the 5$ "donators" that didn't draw a tag, go into a drawing for a "super raffle" type tag.... That won't rid the onus of the special tags that have seemingly become perverted by egos and greed. What we wind up with is possibly another incident like the one that just happened. Plus, I'm not keen on any sort of voluntary contribution because that gets away from the "everybody pays" concept and will make the total revenue for each species an unknown commodity from year to year. In contrast, the number of applicants usually stays within a predictable range. -TONY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
