Don’t you think that people have learned from the Carolina parakeet? Don’t you think there are restrictions on the number of birds a single hunter can take in? You remind me of the people back in Central New York who used to complain around the crow hunts. Nevermind that you can’t shake a tree in Syracuse without a crow falling out. Nevermind that the crows’ pooped everywhere and posed a health and environmental risk. Get off your high horse.
I’ve never hunted before and I’m not sure that I would ever want to, but they do serve a vital roll in culling animal populations.
If they’re indeed pests, why not? Certainly they’re not an endangered species. I don’t see this as a whole lot different than a farmer killing a thousand rats in his barn. I doubt very much it’s enjoyable, but if it needs to be done then so be it.
My high horse? For agreeing that 1000 birds a day isn’t the best ideal of hunting? Is it a good idea or not, I don’t know and I didn’t make any claims one way or the other. Given that the goal seems to be the extinction of the species, why is the suggestion of taking a couple to be stuffed and mounted so bad?
In part because you are dealing with an idiot. I misspelled “chuckar” in my entire other thread. But a search for chucker worked.
Not sure why I spaced that out so badly in that thread, and spelled it right first time here. Oh yeah, I’m an idiot. And beware, raising chuckars in your garage isn’t sporting. Probably not legal, moral, ethical, or anything else.
I just hope with all that shooting up in the air we get a side benefit of the culling of the foulest, most dangerous to our health, most overpopulated animal on earth…humans. It is funny when someone who is normally opposed to environmental or animal welfare causes suddenly finds a use for them.
I have hunted before. I can tell you that hunters think killing is fun, I used to. I target practiced on little birds. Now, I know better. I developed morals.
Eh, we’re talking about a non-native invasive pest species. Yeah, if you were killing thousands of native animals even if they were very abundant, then I’d question it, but thinning the population of non-native species allows the native ones a chance to survive.
This hunt at least has the potential for preserving biodiversity, not reducing it. And if it wasn’t hunters practicing skeet shooting, it would be cropdusters spreading poison gas, or some other industrial method of killing the birds.
Given that these birds are a non-native pest, given that the birds are going to be killed for agricultural reasons anyway, given that this way people can eat at least some of the birds, given that this means some tourism money for the local economy, it seems to me this isn’t such a big deal.
Although I really have no idea why it would be fun to kill so many birds. I’ve got no problem with killing birds, I’ve killed plenty, but it wasn’t fun to do so, it was a chore.
I’m the type of hunter that doesn’t mind killing 1000 pests a day regardless, be they dove in South America, fire ants in Texas, or rats in New York.
But I’m also the type of hunter that would find 1000 shots a day very boring. I have no problem with others that would enjoy it, but for me that definitely crosses the line from fun leisure activity back into work. I would play for an hour, then be back at the hotel sipping a cocktail.
As for the question “is it really fun to kill 1,000 doves a day?”. I wouldn’t know because I’ve never done it. However, it is fun to kill 15 a day, much more fun than killing none. From that, I’d guess that killing 1,000 would be a super happy fun day!
Unless you have some form of rocket launched or flame thrower, I’m guessing that killing 1,000 per day would start to feel like being stuck in hell. If you are using a shotgun, 12 or 20 gauge, your shoulder is going to be turned into a bruised mess after the first couple of hundred shots or so. my brothers single shot 12 gauge broke blood vessels after 2 or 3 shots. A good heavy auto or pump still has a heavy kick to it.
Well since you have a “genuine question” in addition to flaming hunters, I’ll try to address the genuine question before I address your flames.
First of all, my reading of it is that 1000 doves a day is the bag limit, not the “quota”. That means each hunter is permitted to take 1000 per day (although I doubt if many tourists do so). Perhaps it will help you to understand how bag limits are established - they are always based upon the sustainability and carrying capacity of the species’ habitat in relation to the number of hunters. The game commission (or whatever the equivalent may be in Argentina) determines how many animals there are and will be based on breeding patterns versus how many the habitat can support. That gives them an idea of whether a population is endangered (and thus not suitable game) or needs to be reduced, and by how much in order to sustain a stable carrying capacity for the habitat. The surplus is then divided by the number of people likely to hunt them and voila - you have a bag limit. If the bag limit is set at 1000 birds per day, you definitely have a pest species which has gotten out of control.
In practice, I doubt many tourists are shooting 1000 birds a day, but I’ll bet a lot of farmers are. Assuming you can hit a dove on the wing 50% of the time (and for most people, myself included, that would be extremely good shooting), you’re talking about 2000 rounds. That’s a heck of a lot of money and a heck of a lot of weight to carry into the field. I also can’t imaging field dressing 1000 birds in a single day. If other people are doing the dressing, cleaning and butchering then that (in addition to the cost of the permit) is why people are paying to go do it. On the other hand, I’m guessing that these birds flock pretty tightly and it would probably be entirely possible to take several birds with a single shot - handy if you are exterminating pests (the farmers point of view), but not very sporting if you are a hunter interested in taking fowl on the wing. I personally wouldn’t be interested in going to South America for the purpose of shooting as many doves as I can. I might have an interest in the mixed species package where I can take a few ducks and some partridge in addition to the doves. I personally am more interested in quality than quantity, so no, it is not “all a bloody blur”. It would also be a lot of fun to see Argentina and enjoy some hunting while there.
I don’t hunt as much for the sport (although hunting is challenging and fun) as much as for the sense of self-reliance I get from developing my skills and using them to get food for myself, my family and others who wish to share it with us. It’s a similar feeling to growing a successful vegetable garden. You don’t grow a crop of tomatoes just to have them rot on the vine, and if your crop produces more than you can use you share them, rather than letting them go to waste. Somehow the tomatoes you grew yourself just taste better than the ones at the store. Why? Because you have a relationship with your food. You prepared the soil, nurtured the seeds and kept the plants healthy and thriving, and you harvested the fruit yourself. Your tomatoes taste better because of your connection to them. If you took one of yours and one from the store and gave a blind taste test to a perfect stranger, I doubt he could find a difference. So too with hunting. Meat that I harvested simply tastes better. That relationship that I have with the animals I hunt extends to hunting responsibly and only taking what can be used, and making sure that enough game is available generations into the future. Every hunter I have ever known is committed to ensuring that habitats are preserved and sustainable. I admit, it hasn’t always been that way and overhunting has occured in the past, but modern hunters are committed to land management and wildlife preservation - they HAVE to be.
Which leads me to addressing your “incidental” flame.
Despite your claims to have a “genuine question” with an “incidental flame”, your post is really quite the opposite. It is clear that you oppose hunting in principle and aren’t really interested in a civil and informative discussion. I believe that the “rationale” that you have gleaned from hunters “in conversation” is from invented conversations and extrapolations of comments so that they fit into your derisive view of hunting and “stupid” hunters. Let’s face it - that’s the real reason you posted this in the Pit isn’t it? Come on, call me a Redneck and a murderer of poor defenseless critters and let’s see some of that “heat” you were predicting.
First, I haven’t read this thread, and I am posting trying not to lose sight of what I have to say, so with that in mind…
This mega hunt sound a bit obscene. I have nothing against hunting, but this kind of holiday massacree is decadent and perverse.
The nonchalance of the recomendations for shooting gloves, was a bit disturbing as well. The assumption being that he will be doing so much killing he runs the risk of blisters.
Shooting “little birds” for target practice is senseless killing. If you did it you are a senseless killer. If you enjoyed it, you are a debased senseless killer. If you learned from your mistakes, you are a debased former senseless killer.
Hunting, on the other hand, is the tracking, pursuit, and yes…killing, of a specific game species for the purpose of dressing, cleaning, butchering, preparation and cooking it so that it can be eaten by the hunter and his/her family and/or others. Yes, hunting is fun, but the actual killing is only part of it. If killing was what got me off I’d volunteer at a slaughterhouse on weekends.
