Jump to content

Deer hunting vs. deer shooting


Recommended Posts

This is a very good article and I am sure that some will not agree with it but he speaks the truth

Dick Pinney's Guidelines: Deer hunting vs. deer shooting

 

WE'RE sure this column is going to cause a lot of heated arguments and much consternation among deer hunters, but the mutation of what is now called deer "hunting" is nothing like the deer hunting that we knew as youngsters in New Hampshire. In our estimation, it should be called "deer shooting" instead of hunting.

The definition of hunt in my dictionary is: to chase (game) for food or sport, to try to find: search, seek. To chase; harry; a search.

When we were introduced to hunting by a neighbor, it was for hunting game birds and we were being rewarded for feeding a neighbor's hunting dog while he and his family were away on vacation by his promise to take me hunting with him and that dog.

As we remember, we scrambled through the thickets trying to keep up with that dog with never a shot fired at anything. But we were hooked.

Our deer hunting was just done after my best buddy and lifelong hunting partner Tom Connors and I had been hunting our wild pheasant population and other small game with a neighbor's chow dog that would hunt anything alive.

We hunted deer like any other person did then - on foot with gun in hand. If there was snow, you tried to track the deer. If there was no snow, you just walked and walked and walked - carefully scanning your surroundings and trying to be as stealthy as you could be.

And then, when we were introduced to the act of hunting with a couple or more other hunters, we'd place hunters on a stand and we'd stealthily walk toward the deer, hoping the deer we spooked would give the hunters a shot.

When only Tom and I were together we'd spread out and walk parallel with each other, surveying our surroundings and hoping that if we did spook a deer that it would give either one of us a crack as it.

Back then, there were no such things in New Hampshire as a bucks-only limit, so if it was brown and a deer, it was open season. Because one of the most pressing issues was the deer meat that would be harvested, our motto was: "If it's brown, it's down."

We can't count the number of times we walked into a bunch of deer and were surprised to see how many white tails were waving good bye to us. And because of some skill at hitting these moving targets, there often was some deer dragging out to reward our stealthy approach.

And when we didn't jump a herd of deer it was quite amusing just sitting on a stump for a cigarette or just to rest. We'd spot a deer pulling moss off a dead tree or a few times, we saw a small sapling doing the "hokey-pokey" dance when a buck was rubbing its antlers on it.

During those times, we also mentored several youngsters in the act of "hunting."

Now you tell me why that sitting or standing in a tree stand, watching over a pile of apples (often illegally placed there) and shooting a deer that is attracted to them, is hunting?

And we have to ask that question because as it goes right now, almost 100 percent of the deer that are shot are taken from a tree stand and do not have a clue that they are being "hunted." And believe me, there are plenty of deer shot that are being taken by illegal baiting.

We have no issues with using other means of hunting, such as rubbing antlers (called rattling), using mouth calls or hand-held calls, as this is a matter of fooling the deer. It takes some skill and lots of patience. And we really don't want to see hunting from deer stands abandoned.

But we do have issues with baiting, whether legal or not. And we do have issues with people that shoot deer from camp-like structures erected over planted gardens called "food plots."

If you shoot a deer, call it deer shooting. If you hunt for your deer, you should have the distinction of being a "deer hunter."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Brad Eden

    7

  • MAArcher

    7

  • garyRI

    5

  • Pinecobleguy

    4

Read it this morning in the Useless Reader. I wonder what was under Dick's skin when he wrote this? In the brotherhood of the blood it is best to support what is legal.

His son Spudz was one of the seacoasts best deer hunters before his untimely death. I'm sure a majority of those deer were shot out of stands.

Wow he really slammed the deer baiters, but when done legally there isn't very much difference than baiting bear.

Dick might be up to Hootin' Hollow this week, his camp in northern Maine in preparation of his annual goose hunt.

I'm interested to know what ticked him off.

Will advise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont know where he comes up with this statement

we have to ask that question because as it goes right now, almost 100 percent of the deer that are shot are taken from a tree stand

I know a lot of guys that gun hunt and never climb into a tree that take plenty of deer.  I also know a lot of guys that bow hunt and only hunt out of tree stands they also get a fair share of deer.  But to say almost 100% of deer taken are from hunters in trees is way over board.

Dick clearly had a hair across his backside in this article  ???

Link to post
Share on other sites
northern_hunting_mom

We have never used a stand. Still, I wonder if we are deer shooting and not hunting. We have a stupid number of deer here. Its easy to find a fool in that kind of population. We don't bait, it is illegal here. The only kind of bait that might work here is a salt block, we are surrounded by food for deer. That is still not going to greatly increase our chances. There are a lot of cows around and the ranchers are allowed to put out salt blocks for their cows.

We have walked slowly and quietly through the woods but that was rare. So even if we have only gone deer shooting, I'm not worried about being judged about it. We found the great area ourselves, we hunt legally and it is all on foot, even taking out the dead deer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Love the guys who think hunting is tracking/moving around. It is pretty easy to use them to push deer to me if I understand deer movement patterns in an area.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The definition of hunt in my dictionary is: to chase (game) for food or sport, to try to find: search, seek. To chase; harry; a search.

If you shoot a deer, call it deer shooting. If you hunt for your deer, you should have the distinction of being a "deer hunter."

He starts off by answering his own question, but not well.  And he is confusing the original definition of hunt, with the more modern definition that as grown to include "sport".  And it perplexes me that so many share a twisted logic that playing games, sporting, with your food, is somehow more moral than those that "shoot" their deer to fill a freezer in the most efficient manner they choose.  

Deer are food, not toys.  I don't mean that you can't enjoy a hunt.  But saying that someone hunting over a food plot isn't doing it right is like saying that because someone didn't make yummy noises after tasting an ice cream cone, is doing it wrong.  Its just absurd.  

"Sport" hunting and its disguise as "noble tradition" is what's grotesque, in that it has changed so much from its original origins, taking us away from our natural human roots as hunter gatherers that have to take our substance from what nature provides in order to survive.  

What logic can take you to the view that a "sport hunter" who goes home empty handed because he didn't use a bait pile, only to buy a beef steak that was brought to him through all manner of abominations to nature.  Is "hunting the right way"? And while he's eating that antibiotic laden steak, delivered to him via manure lagoons, animal abuse, diesel emissions, overgrazing, ecological destruction, etc., etc. he sits back and bad mouths they guy who shoots a deer over apples and naturally feeds his family for a couple months?  I see no logic in that.

Not to mention the fact that there are so many factors that have changed hunting in recent times that its just not possible to make a reasonable comparison between hunting 50 years ago and today.  Today, many people work longer hours than ever before.  Oddly enough, the people that can afford to hunt don't have the time to do it.  That makes taking every advantage to ensure success in a limited time very attractive and often a necessity.  

So I'd correct his final statement:  If you shoot a deer, call it hunting in the most traditional and noble sense of the word.  If you play with your food and call it "Sport Hunting", know it for what it is, a recent and distasteful invention of man.  

If the merits of a tradition is its longevity, has your "hunting tradition" been around as long as this?:

Genesis 27:3 - Now therefore take, I pray thee, thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me venison;

Notice it wasn't qualified with "But only if you kill it under the arbitrary rules set up by your ignorant brothers who forsake Gods grand design in favor of their own."

I'm not very religious and maybe this will get post holed for referencing the bible (which I haven't read).  But I think it serves to illustrate the hypocrisy of modern "Sport Hunting" and the outright lie that it is some how more moral than sustenance hunting.

Like I said, I think its great if you can enjoy your hunting, and the "sporting" aspect of it.  But I just can't see any argument to justify that all hunting has to be "sporting enough" to meet some arbitrary threshold.  Rather, I think its easier to spot the threshold where it becomes to sporting and less hunting.

I'm hard pressed to find one truthful sentence in the article.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not one or the other.  Pretty hard to put a stalk on deer today primarily because doing so inevitably involves public property and that means gawd knows how many hunters in the area and personal safety becomes a legitimate concern.

I see nothing wrong with hunting from a tree stand or ground blind, as at least a certain amount of skill is involved.  However, here in northern MI there are far too many "hunters" (slobs) who park a pop up, or more likely a shed, 50-yards off half a ton of sugar beets.  They arrive in the blind, often hung-over from the previous nights activities, fire up their propane heater, and open up on the first deer they see.  That is NOT hunting, that is shooting.  Now, if someone is elderly or disabled, that's one thing but when it's just a question of being too lazy to put the time let along effort, then that's not hunting.

How the hell did anyone ever shoot a deer without ScentLok, designer camp, a $300 pop-up blind, gortex, range finders, ozone machines or a 300 Win Mag, in a kevlar stock, topped with a 6-12x variable scope loaded with custom nylon tipped ammo and a big pile os sugar beets/corn/apples/carrots/acorn rage.

Far too many "hunters" don't have the first idea how to really hunt.  They go to the range, a couple of days before the opener, shoot a couple of rounds to make sure they are close-enough, and are pissed off if they don't kill a deer after a couple of days sitting on a chair in their heated blind.  Lazy slobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not one or the other.  Pretty hard to put a stalk on deer today primarily because doing so inevitably involves public property and that means gawd knows how many hunters in the area and personal safety becomes a legitimate concern.

I see nothing wrong with hunting from a tree stand or ground blind, as at least a certain amount of skill is involved.  However, here in northern MI there are far too many "hunters" (slobs) who park a pop up, or more likely a shed, 50-yards off half a ton of sugar beets.  They arrive in the blind, often hung-over from the previous nights activities, fire up their propane heater, and open up on the first deer they see.  That is NOT hunting, that is shooting.  Now, if someone is elderly or disabled, that's one thing but when it's just a question of being too lazy to put the time let along effort, then that's not hunting.

How the hell did anyone ever shoot a deer without ScentLok, designer camp, a $300 pop-up blind, gortex, range finders, ozone machines or a 300 Win Mag, in a kevlar stock, topped with a 6-12x variable scope loaded with custom nylon tipped ammo and a big pile os sugar beets/corn/apples/carrots/acorn rage.

Far too many "hunters" don't have the first idea how to really hunt.  They go to the range, a couple of days before the opener, shoot a couple of rounds to make sure they are close-enough, and are pissed off if they don't kill a deer after a couple of days sitting on a chair in their heated blind.  Lazy slobs.

What about the guy who breaks his back working 60 hours a week at two different jobs to stay off welfare and has a house, wife and kids to take care of?  What if he gets about 9 hours of hunting time during the season, split up into three 3 hour segments.   Is he a slob for putting out sugar beats on day one, getting skunked on day two and shooting a deer on day three and having a family feast on day 4?

Do you have the same contempt for someone who shoots a quail with a $10,000 shotgun as you do for someone who shoots a deer from a $300 pop up blind?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I see things differently than the numb nutz who wrote that article. More often than not I can slip down the edge of a corn or bean field and shoot a deer that qualifies under the "if it's brown, it's down" standards. I'd call that shooting, not hunting. I used to do the same thing every fall when I lived on the farm but then the prey was an Angus or Hereford steer.

Of course if I had done that past season I could have saved all those trips when I scouted out scrapes and rubs, set and checked trail cams, built blinds, factored in the direction of the sun and wind, and made 32 trips with a bow or gun before calling it a season.

To me (and YMMV) all that is part of the hunting experience. I don't shoot just any deer that happens along. I shoot a nice fat doe primarily for the freezer and I select one or two nice bucks and pass on a whole lot of lesser ones while I hunt (not necessarily shoot) them. But he's right in that I usually hunt from a stand and shoot when they least expect it. Maybe that's why nearly all my shots are clean kills. I wonder about his.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you shoot a deer, call it deer shooting. If you hunt for your deer, you should have the distinction of being a "deer hunter."

Fixed it:

If you kill a deer in any manner that limits unnecessary suffering of the animal and is in keeping with sound conservation practices, and then eat it, call it deer hunting.  

If you don't kill one because a deer didn't present itself under your relatively new and arbitrary set of rules mislabeled as traditional and ethical, call it playing/harassing/sporting with your food before you eat it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not one or the other.  Pretty hard to put a stalk on deer today primarily because doing so inevitably involves public property and that means gawd knows how many hunters in the area and personal safety becomes a legitimate concern.

I see nothing wrong with hunting from a tree stand or ground blind, as at least a certain amount of skill is involved.  However, here in northern MI there are far too many "hunters" (slobs) who park a pop up, or more likely a shed, 50-yards off half a ton of sugar beets.  They arrive in the blind, often hung-over from the previous nights activities, fire up their propane heater, and open up on the first deer they see.  That is NOT hunting, that is shooting.  Now, if someone is elderly or disabled, that's one thing but when it's just a question of being too lazy to put the time let along effort, then that's not hunting.

How the hell did anyone ever shoot a deer without ScentLok, designer camp, a $300 pop-up blind, gortex, range finders, ozone machines or a 300 Win Mag, in a kevlar stock, topped with a 6-12x variable scope loaded with custom nylon tipped ammo and a big pile os sugar beets/corn/apples/carrots/acorn rage.

Far too many "hunters" don't have the first idea how to really hunt.  They go to the range, a couple of days before the opener, shoot a couple of rounds to make sure they are close-enough, and are pissed off if they don't kill a deer after a couple of days sitting on a chair in their heated blind.  Lazy slobs.

What about the guy who breaks his back working 60 hours a week at two different jobs to stay off welfare and has a house, wife and kids to take care of?  What if he gets about 9 hours of hunting time during the season, split up into three 3 hour segments.   Is he a slob for putting out sugar beats on day one, getting skunked on day two and shooting a deer on day three and having a family feast on day 4?

Do you have the same contempt for someone who shoots a quail with a $10,000 shotgun as you do for someone who shoots a deer from a $300 pop up blind?

The guy you described isn't the guy I described.  As for the $10,000 quail hunt, not a lot of respect there either but there is a distinction: those quail are planted (or "liberated") not wild, like deer are.

It's called hunting, not killing.  If it's not about the hunt then people should stay home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the contempt many bird hunters have for deer hunters contemptible.

10pt2.jpg

Proud to be a deer hunter, and how I killed this buck isn't anyone's business but mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...