Pond Boss Forums GENERAL QUESTIONS Pond Boss Hunting/Trapping 2014-2015

Getting to the catch vs. harvest vs. take vs. shoot vs. kill. The neighbor across the street hunts, and has 3 little girls. They are going through that same thing with the girls. I had a deer hanging after I washed it out and the girls saw it. Their comment? Oh look, Scott caught a deer! Mom & Dad are trying to explain that while “caught” might be appropriate, it’d be hard to let it go again. It’s all because of the PC crowd that the different terms are around. To me, “take”, “harvest”, “kill” is the same. “Shoot” to me doesn’t necessarily mean that I could put my hands on it – I could have wounded it and not recovered it.

Tony, let me go back to the experience thing, and how it relates to having something on the wall. For me (at least) having something on the wall is a daily reminder of the experiences I had while getting that animal (or fish or bird). I’ve been on many trips (fishing and hunting) where there is nothing but pictures and memories. If I don’t dig up the pictures, or if something doesn’t jog my memory, then those trips and experiences are forgotten. I’ve been on fishing trips on the ocean where I’ve seen some amazing things, but it takes something like writing this post to jog the memory of those trips. Being out far enough away from land in clean air to see the green flash the sun makes the instant it dips below the horizon as it sets, (try seeing that from land here in the Midwest!). Having a 1,000#+ Ocean Sunfish (mola) next to the boat basking in the sun, seeing a nuclear submarine come to the surface right behind the boat as you are pulling into the channel going to port, being out in a storm up in the wheelhouse with the captain, 15' above the ocean looking UP at a wave coming at you, those are some of the things that I’ve seen but not thought about recently.

I can look at the Mule Deer antlers and think about the 1,000 foot vertical climb up the mountain every day in the dark, (in some places on all 4’s because it’s so steep), trying to beat the sunrise. Watching the rising sun cast its red glow on the mountains and having a bald eagle soaring beneath me as I looked at the valley where the tent is in the campsite. Sitting overlooking a bowl at almost 10,000’ in elevation that’s over a mile in diameter with your feet dangling off a rock where one more step will take you on a ½ mile flight to the bottom. Taking a nap on a rock at mid day in 85°F temps when that morning you were scraping the frost off the 4-wheeler and had to melt ice to make coffee before leaving camp on the climb. Then rolling over and seeing a pile of dried bear poop that you didn’t realize was there earlier. (What, you mean there are BEARS up here??????)

The Pronghorn on the wall reminding me of the rock that I picked up, and noticed that the bottom was colored completely different than the top, then realizing that the rock was probably there in that spot, not having moved for thousands of years before I touched it. (Yes, I put it back exactly as I found it).

To me, that’s what having the thing on the wall means to me. Not the horns per se, but the memories that are associated with them. I don’t know if a picture would do the same thing for me.

Scott I agree on the PC issue. Killed is killed, irregardless of the terminology. So why use taken in the first place? It appears to be a way of making an unpleasant circumstance sound better...If we recognize that it's unpleasant, then why do we do it? Like when the govt. appropriates private property for public use... no matter what wording they use, they still took the land against someone's will. No getting around that.

Would a replica deer/horns mount invoke the same memories?

In the end I've gone about as far as I can with this subject, and I do appreciate everyone's input. I will never understand how removing the best genetics from a population of anything can be deemed beneficial, or admirable, but that's just one confused Hoosier's take on it. I agree with what RAH stated earlier. Hunt as you will, and be glad we are afforded the privilege. My apologies for sidetracking this thread.

Peace.

With deer hunting, "take" = "kill". I did use "take" in my post to be PC. I have answered coworkers when they ask me if I caught a deer yet, that I have never caught a deer, but perhaps I could start using a lasso. I do not pressure anyone that does not want to hunt, to take up the sport, and neither of my kids have the bug. to each his (or her) own.

Here's the nice 7 point my son got during the black powder season, his biggest by far.

I never thought about that, but to me, if they matched what I saw and had the opportuntiy to kill, I believe so. Now, getting the replica to match what I saw would be the hard part. How would that be accomplished if it was a skin mount vs. a european mount, and how to match the uniqueness of that particular set of headgear?

re: the best genetics. For me, if I had the opportunity to kill a deer/elk/pronghorn with a weird set of headgear vs. a perfectly symmetrical specimen, I'd go for the weird one every time.

For instance, this:


vs this:

If you ask most of my friends that know me they would say I am a trophy hunter.. IMHO I am the furthest from it, for I have passed many would be considered trophies and use what I shoot... I hunt for my own satisfaction and the memories that are made... I have hunted most of my life in Illinois, which used to be the premier whitetail deer state.. I have been asked many times what my dream hunt would be and the answer is always the same, "I live it every November"!

There are already people doing the electronic shoot and release deer hunting, I saw a show on TV and thought to myself, Hmmmmm?..

As for the PC crowd I walked into church just the other weekend and a lady asked if I had "caught a deer yet' and my reply in front of several of the ladies cleaning up after fellowship was "you kill deer, you catch fish"...

As for killing the biggest deer in the woods from a management stand point is they have already done there job if they have lived to maturity, those genes are in the herd or area.. Just a couple of years ago I killed a very large deer that was probably past his prime... He dressed over 250 lbs and rack was on the down slide.. This deer had been running in the area for years and did everything to elude cameras and hunters.. With his body size and experience in the field he ran deer off the property that would score a lot higher..



I stand 6'4" and weigh 225 for reference..


So back to the would you hunt if killing wasn't involved? I do it all the time.. I have pictures of hundreds of deer that I easily could have killed.. Do I feel I am hurting the deer herd by removing maybe the biggest deer in an area?. No, the genes are already there and might be better if a buck moved in from another area and bred with the best doe in the area..

So good luck to all, shoot straight and set the hook before it's too deep!!!

I trophy hunt on Craigs list, garage sales and auctions. I bought a HUGE Caribou a few yrs ago and have told a different lie as to how hard the hunt was to each person that's dumb enough ta ask. Man, I had ta crawl a half mile through the thickest swamp in the Tundra.
I've got a small 8 point that has one point broken off and a boar that looks like a domestic pig. Tell some good lies about that one also. My granddaughter got mad at me when I said it was the neighbors pet but sure did taste good.

Bob, I recently got stuck by some Barbed wire(bob wahr). It made 2 punctures about an inch apart that scabbed over. About a week later 2 of my Granddaughters, 12 and 16, came over. One noticed it and asked what happened. I told them "Aw, I got rattler bit again.". One asked what happened. I told them that it made me mad so I broke its damn neck. It took about a minute for them to wise up when one told the other that Grandpa was lying again and that snakes didn't have necks. I told them that they do have necks, just not shoulders.

They're both blondes so I'll get them again.

BRAVO DD

I have two blonde daughters so I totally understand

Hey, lets not pick on blondes !!! I have grey hair and am easily fooled. I think it's an age issue.

Well, shoot.

I had intended to be done with this thread, but now another angle has presented itself. I will be the first to admit that I know next to nothing about genetics, but something mentioned earlier has really stuck with me. That being the notion that trophy deer genetics are "already in the herd" if nature has run her course, thereby eliminating the need to keep the biggest and best trophy deer alive.

I'm not always real clear at trying to explain what I'm thinking, so I often tend to use an example to illustrate where I'm going with a topic. Please bear with me.

Let's say you raise racehorses. And you get the chance to utilize the stud of all studs in your breeding program....this guy is a proven champion, multiple winner. Obviously you want those genetics, if at all possible.

So you show up at the farm, and are given a choice: You can have Mr. perfect, with his established track record, OR, you can utilize one of his offspring, a young horse, new to the racing circuit, unproven but hey, he's got those genetics, right? The costs are the same for either one.

Which one do you choose? I'm pretty sure I know where I want my money spent. On the horse who obviously has good genetics, and has proven that on the track. Maybe junior would work just as well, but why chance it? The big boy is standing right here, why would I choose to eliminate him from the picture? I KNOW he has the right stuff.

So using that line of admittedly, possibly flawed logic, how is removing a trophy deer with excellent genetics deemed acceptable? Sure, it might open the door for another buck to come in, but how do you know his genetics aren't worse than the ones from the animal you now have on the wall?

I'm not arguing, simply questioning.

If entering that great horse in a race to test his skill resulted in that horse never breeding again, when would you race him? At his prime? After his prime? Never?

I don't follow you?

In the scenario that I constructed, the evolutionary results of racing the "champion" horse is like shooting a big buck.

Okay, I was operating under the notion that the champion horse had been retired from his racing career, and his remaining value lied in his stud service? In other words, his further contributions were to be made in passing along those trophy, or champion genetics to another generation....just like that trophy deer is doing.

I wouldn't put that horse down simply because he was done racing, anymore than I would kill that trophy deer...do they not still have value, and much to offer, by way of sharing their trophy genetics?

Simpler answer to the scenario posed by RAH? Never. I wouldn't race the horse. Too much value in those genetics.

I have read a lot about managing deer even though as Scott explained earlier that in some areas like his and mine it's a waste of time to an extent... And what you are saying works in a controlled environment like a horse farm, pond, or high fence area... The problem with free range deer is they don't read the same books or use the same logic we do...

Inevitably that deer no matter if its the largest or smallest in the woods it is going to do its best to live, reproduce and eventually die... Left to go unchecked we all know where that goes... Is shooting the biggest buck in the woods right or wrong?.. I'll leave that up to you, that's what nice about this county...

Sean, you hit it right on the head with your comment about logic. WE use logic, or like to claim that we do anyway. Yet after all of these well thought out posts by members far more knowledgeable than myself, I still don't believe we have discovered the logic in removing the best genetics from a horse farm, pond, high fence area, or my local deer herd. We advocate LEAVING the best genetics in our ponds, and culling the less desirable fish. And yes, fish may be a little different, or have other influential factors in play, but the core message is still the same. Leave the desirable traits in play.

RAH asked me when I would race that horse... at his prime, after his prime, never? If racing that horse equates to killing that trophy buck as he indicated, then my answer stands. Never. Why would I? it's not logical to remove those genes from the playing field.

We can manage the herd by removing inferior specimens, and we can use those same individuals to feed ourselves and the needy. And if we truly have established that removing trophy genes is not logical, what reasoning are we left with?

I think we're back to pride, once again. "That's the biggest, bestest buck I've seen all season, and I'm going to kill it before somebody else does"

I see a huge difference between hunting vs. trophy hunting, but both are legal, and the decision to participate or not is left to the individual. And I think that's how it should be. But I also think that we owe it to ourselves, and the game we hunt, to be honest with ourselves and to stop and examine our thought processes once in awhile.

This whole thread turn has been so civil, let me throw another scenario out.

Short version...

Dallas Safari Club auctioned off a Namibian hunt for an old endangered Black Rhino at the January Convention. A local guy won that hunt with a bid of $350,000. All that money goes directly back to Namibia for preservation and protection of the existing heard.

Is he a hunter, a trophy killer, or a conservationist? I have my thoughts, but nobody but the guy himself really knows for sure. Much like any hunting, the motives may be different, but the result is ultimately the same.

BTW, I am a deer hunter. The only problem is I haven't found a perfectly marbled ribeye on any of them, so I don't hunt a lot anymore.

My vote is on trophy hunter... this hunt provides him with a chance to say look what I've killed.

Al, I totally agree on the civility. This thread certainly had explosive potential, but good character doesn't mind if you're a hunter, trophy hunter, or not a hunter at all. It still comes through with positive results. Good people here.

I hear you on the deer. I'll be honest, until our weekend with the Herman Bros I had never eaten Deer that I thought was good. That stuff Nate was passing around was so good I wanted to roll around on the floor rubbing my belly. Course' Yolk was there, and I didn't want to seem uncouth in front of him so I refrained.

Tony I was posting that question yesterday when you said you were done. I pulled it until you ultimately came back to the topic, which I'm glad you did.

Yolk is trouble everywhere he goes. If I was you, I would have eaten until I exploded. Only problem was the guy that could save you would be standing over you laughing. On second thought, maybe one shouldn't screw with the only doctor around.

I hear that Al. Come to think of it, hanging with the PB crowd actually has me in a fairly secure, all inclusive environment, what with a dentist and a physician in close proximity.

Twenty five years ago a pond enthusiast/bail bondsman might've been a welcome addition, but these days I don't normally feel threatened by his/her absence.

Yolk Sac...I hope he appreciates the sacrifices I make just so he may feel at ease. Reining-in my uncouthiness and all.

Why are you worried about a guy that models himself as something that is yellow and runny? That's the raw material for scrambled eggs.

Tony, we all appreciate your effort and in no way do I find you condescending re the Yolk.

OK, tongue is firmly removed from my cheek and we can talk about deer genetics. Yep, that monster has been spreading his genes since about 2.5 YOA. That is, if he doesn't get his butt whupped by a larger deer. And that larger, older, buck may have very inferior genetics and rack. A Kid killed a 7.5 yoa spike on my place last year that didn't look like much more than a pretty good sized greyhound dog. However, the reality is that, just like race horses and cattle, that big buck needs to breed with a doe with superior genetics to produce quality offspring. Of course, that's not his goal. Same as horses and cattle. Breeders of every kind keep careful records of both male and female cattle, sheep, horses and deer. That's why they advertise with terms like "own son" and "own daughter".

Take a look at the web sites of the deer breeders. By keeping careful records, they produce both outstanding deer and some that look like freaks.

But, they all taste the same.

Good points Dave. And since that older buck has an inferior rack, would it be more likely he would be passed up by a trophy hunter, leaving him free to pass along those inferior genes? Perhaps he might be more inclined to meet his demise at the hands of a meat hunter, possibly enabling the younger, genetically superior buck to fill the void? Speaking hypothetically, in a best case scenario of course.

Also agree on the doe issue. Good genetics are certainly not confined only to bucks.

Genesis 1:29-31 ESV / 41 helpful votes
And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

I shoot whatever comes along, whether it is a trophy or a nice fat yearling because I have permission.