Here we go

[AZAV8ER]

5 hours ago, 452b264 said:

Their real goal is to stop all predator hunting. 

True this is the first step.

 

4 hours ago, photofool said:

Photos of a hundred dead coyotes in a pile, displayed on social media and all over the internet really helps their cause.

Not very bright in my opinion .

This is also true, it gives the first step to banning awesome traction.

 

[Flatlander]

I care, because it impacts me. You can beat your chest and be as proud as you want but the facts are what they are. It doesn’t matter what the biology says about these contests if the general public find them grotesque then the chances are they won’t last long. Predator hunters could do all of us and especially themselves a huge favor by being more conscientious about what they post and where. A great next step would be to go on the offensive by highlighting the necessity of predator hunting and working with AZGFD to identify areas where their efforts could most benefit wildlife.

Like it or not, hunting lives or dies on its public image. Take care of it or lose it. Your choice.

[Delw]

1 minute ago, Flatlander said:

I care, because it impacts me. You can beat your chest and be as proud as you want but the facts are what they are. It doesn’t matter what the biology says about these contests if the general public find them grotesque then the chances are they won’t last long. Predator hunters could do all of us and especially themselves a huge favor by being more conscientious about what they post and where. A great next step would be to go on the offensive by highlighting the necessity of predator hunting and working with AZGFD to identify areas where their efforts could most benefit wildlife.

Like it or not, hunting lives or dies on its public image. Take care of it or lose it. Your choice.

Then youd better shut down the hundreds of hunting websites for picture posting . we can start with yote's fox's lions and bobcats. as they are on the hit list right now, then after that we can start with no more pics of deer elk lopes bighorns etc etc. as long as its on the internet someone will get there panties in a wad.

The facts are really simple has nothing to do with biology and everything to do with cry babies(city people mainly) not liking hunting or predator control.

it just takes one cry baby in the media to post something they dont like, then a ton of people who never even thought about it will all of a sudden not like it.

Fagbook and twatter have done wonders for this country.

[Flatlander]

1 hour ago, Delw said:

Then youd better shut down the hundreds of hunting websites for picture posting . we can start with yote's fox's lions and bobcats. as they are on the hit list right now, then after that we can start with no more pics of deer elk lopes bighorns etc etc. as long as its on the internet someone will get there panties in a wad.

The facts are really simple has nothing to do with biology and everything to do with cry babies(city people mainly) not liking hunting or predator control.

it just takes one cry baby in the media to post something they dont like, then a ton of people who never even thought about it will all of a sudden not like it.

Fagbook and twatter have done wonders for this country.

1. As little meaningful content as you manage to provide here somehow you manage to take away from it with your pathetic crass language. 

2. Posting distasteful and grotesque pictures exponentiates the claims made by the anti’s and frankly many of them directly oppose our claims as conservationists. If we are to claim a position of conservation and love for wildlife, what sense does it make to post videos of “Misting”  gophers or head shot coyotes. The same is true of pictures of decapitated deer and elk carcasses. How do these types of pictures differ from those taken by turn of the century trade hunters who nearly wiped out wildlife populations? If we care so much about these animals and are truly conservationists then our pictures, language and attitudes should reflect as much.

Any other attitude will ultimately be rejected by the general public. 

[Delw]

1 hour ago, Flatlander said:

1. As little meaningful content as you manage to provide here somehow you manage to take away from it with your pathetic crass language. 

2. Posting distasteful and grotesque pictures exponentiates the claims made by the anti’s and frankly many of them directly oppose our claims as conservationists. If we are to claim a position of conservation and love for wildlife, what sense does it make to post videos of “Misting”  gophers or head shot coyotes. The same is true of pictures of decapitated deer and elk carcasses. How do these types of pictures differ from those taken by turn of the century trade hunters who nearly wiped out wildlife populations? If we care so much about these animals and are truly conservationists then our pictures, language and attitudes should reflect as much.

Any other attitude will ultimately be rejected by the general public. 

1. Ok if you say so cupcake

2. Never said a word about grotesque pics. distasteful is in the eye of the person looking at the pic people will find anything distasteful or offensive. people will always find an excuse to cry about something they dont like. Most people dont post pics like that.  in the case of varmits like P-dogs well red mist just cant be helped, as far as yotes shot in the head good shooting still dont see many pics posted like that. but then again if I do I dont worry about nor tell someone to clean it up. me myself I wouldnt post it, but then again it depends what forum I am on and what were discussing in that topic. but thanks to the search engines all the pics posted everywhere are easily found.

so basically what your saying is that hunters should back down, hide and be Politically correct in everything they do. dont post pictures  of your kills unless they been photo shopped, or properly groomed and cleaned so its looks alive, dont pose for a picture of your Animal with a firearm / Bow or knife not to mention a tag on it, otherwise someone will think you killed it and criticize you. this way when people start crying about these pics, then you could say no I didnt kill it, it was laying down and I asked permission to take a selfe with it.

I know your aware its a hunting site , your going to find stuff like this. why well because its a hunting sight.

Fishermen are just as bad, someone holds a fish wrong(ie not to there likeling) and all heck breaks loose, show pictures of the fish you are taking home in a blue cooler and you'd think the end of the world is happening.

too many people get into everyone's shoot anymore about everything especially hunters and fishermen.

oh yeah explain the GENERAL public,, the general hunting public the general anti hunting public or the general I find everything offensive public

 

 

[Coach]

I think Flatlander is spot on. This is kind of a "keep it in the family" subject, IMO. We who hunt know what's really going on. We know what needs to happen in regards to keeping predator levels in check.

That doesn't mean we shove it in the face of those who are on the fence, or know little to nothing about real conservation. If the battle is about who is right and who is wrong, we must conduct ourselves as stewards. Because, as we all know, there are countless so-called activists that will use emotions over logic to combat us. Let's not give them ammo.  

 

 

[Allforelk]

I agree with a few things posted here. The world is changing and we owe it to our hunting community to police ourselves. Social media is now the norm. These “over the top” pictures of kills and piles of dogs are just fuel for the fire. These people that oppose us are uninformed yet highly opinionated. I don’t feel at all that discretion is “backing down” in the least. Just my 2 pennies. 

[muledeerarea33?]

It’s 100% backing down and it’s horrible that we have to hide certain parts of what we do. BUT! It’s 100% neccessry to do so.

[CatfishKev]

11 minutes ago, muledeerarea33? said:

It’s 100% backing down and it’s horrible that we have to hide certain parts of what we do. BUT! It’s 100% neccessry to do so.

This pretty much sums it up. I dont quite see it as 100% back down but still, it is necessary to be smart about the pics we post.

Posting pictures of deer or even bloody pics is one thing, a "pile" of dead animals is a whole other story.  A pile of dead animals depicts us as bloodthirsty not as conservationists.  Think of it like this, we're all debating about ways to educate the public and increase hunter recruitment. Taking tasteful pics rather than distasteful ones is a small FREE way we can do that.  

 

[Delw]

but the thing is whats tasteful and whats not?  I remember a guy on the old azod board he got drawn for buff and shot one, posted a pic of him sitting on the back of it with his cowboy hat. was a pretty cool pic and you could see how big the buff was plus he was extremely happy about his buff. two do gooder hunters destroyed this guy on the forum the owner took the pic down because it was offensive to some. I mean seriously????

what about a coyote thread, where everyone posts a yote they kill. Same could be for a yearly deer hunting thread

then you have the kill VS Harvested debate cause that's offensive to some

where does one draw the line on whats ok to post and whats not.

according to flatlander from how I read the post( I maybe wrong). the guy who posted some pic in NM a while back with 4 coues deer heads on a cooler is wrong, or a group of elk hunters with there elk hanging from a pole skinned. Camp pics are cool to see..

hunters just cant win and never will especially with fagbook and twatter and the politically correct hunters. 

the complainers are the minoirty however the minority gets there voices heard if it doesnt then they get a news sites to print it and start posting on social media because thats just the way it is now in the media.

Instead of pandering to the complainers just tell them to GFY or FO its worked for me for the last 50+ years

on a side note the only one I know it didnt work for was my wife. who told a bunch of anti hunting queers that, up in kaibab when they were yelling at her sitting in the truck reading a book, they drove down the road and shot at me( they were probably trying to scare the deer away and didnt see me.) the deer and I were over 1000 yards away form the truck.

 

[Flatlander]

I didn’t say we should censor every offensive photo, I said our photo’s should reflect conservation.

But it’s more than just our photo’s, we should actually prioritize conservation in what we do.

[AZAV8ER]

19 minutes ago, Flatlander said:

I didn’t say we should censor every offensive photo, I said our photo’s should reflect conservation.

But it’s more than just our photo’s, we should actually prioritize conservation in what we do.

A very good point and should be every hunter/outdoorsman's touchstone. My own personal perspective is that i am a outdoorsman and conservationist as much as a hunter. I dislike the term "sport hunting". Hunting is the fall outdoor ritual, a ritual passed down from my father and uncle and goes back several millennium. We play a part as the Apex Predator, Fish and Game monitors the big picture with the goal to balance heard size to habitat to hunting pressure. The poor predator has low priority, the goal for now is manage the pressure so we don't wipe them out (otherwise they become endangered species).  Yes I still get that "Thrill of the Hunt" feeling but feel that we are more than takers. We have a synergistic relationship with game, wildlife and the outdoors. Many hunters are involved with conservation as in the many groups along the lines of Ducks Unlimited and the different Elk Societies. Not every hunter is involved to that level but their Pittman Robertson taxes and political support help keep conservation and FG Dept. healthy and viable. Habitat enhancement and habitat protections supported by hunters helps all, that is ALL wildlife not just the game species. There has been attempts to tax other outdoor equipment ala Pittman Robertson act, you could hear the cries of no from coast to coast. Without the hunting constituency Politicians would take money out of conservation and use it in other ways to buy more votes. Without hunters Audubon Society, Sierra Club would not have enough boots on the ground or as big a voice to support habitat enhancement or protection.  Habitat out west is so chopped up by cities, highways and other development that without a FG Dept. to monitor it all and unchecked predators would eat out these isolated island of habitat and the resulting level of wildlife would be much lower. 

 

       DO NOT EVER EVER GIVE YOUR ENEMIES EASY WAYS TO ATTACH OR HARM YOU

[Non-Typical Solutions]

So on behalf of the PC touchy feel good community does this pass the test or is it just too horrific?

[muledeerarea33?]

35 minutes ago, Non-Typical Solutions said:

So on behalf of the PC touchy feel good community does this pass the test or is it just too horrific?

Those poor fish

[Saguaro]

The problem is social media all around.  Every offense is a hanging offense now.  That's why I have never had a facebook or twitter account.  If I did I'm sure I will have offended tons of people by now just by posting photos, videos, questions or retweets.  If it's political, forget about it.  Every one out there is so trigger happy that they can post their disgust and slowly build up a few thousand likes and now there's a newsworthy headline.  Take a look here in the church thread about how divisive our social media is.  I want bad to reply to it but if I did, some would think I'm a horse's  butt, I'm not saying which side, It's better I don't post and have everyone believe I don't care about it.  

I think society is slowly wising up about outrage.  I think in a few years it will take a lot to shock us.