LAST EDITED ON Sep-04-12 AT 01:19PM (MST)[p]>I'll explain my point a little
>more so you dont think
>its a blank statement...
>
>
>>You mean IMHO, right? You may
>>consider it unethical for you,
>>but please don't make a
>>blank statement implying that it's
>>unethical for others. You're willing
>>to trick their sense of
>>smell by using cover scents,
>>estrus scents, scent free clothing,
>>high treestands and playing the
>>wind.
>
>playing the wind is a necessity,
>their natural predators do it.
>Its only the smart thing
>to do....
>
>
>
> And you're willing to
>>trick their sense of hearing
>>by using calls, wearing quiet
>>clothing, silencing your bow, taking
>>off your boots during a
>>stalk, using hand signals and
>>whispering.
>
>once again being quiet is a
>necessity, their natural predators do
>it too..
>
> And you're willing to
>>trick their sense of sight
>>by using camo, moving very
>>slowly, using decoys, using makeup,
>>using binoculars. But you think
>>tricking their sense of taste
>>is another matter?
>
>Their natural predators also are camoflauged,
>they move slowly, and have
>better eye sight than I
>(hence the bino's).
>
>>
>>You can't outrun them, nor outsee
>>them, nor outhear them, nor
>>outsmell them. But you have
>>a big advantage in the
>>thinking department.
>
> All of the
>>above products and tactics (and
>>weapons, for that matter) are
>>just a matter of outthinking
>>them and taking advantage of
>>their habits. Since they have
>>a habit of looking for
>>and eating their prefered food,
>>baiting is just another way
>>of doing it, nothing more!
>>
>>
>>IMHO, of course!
>
>
>Everything mentioned above is playing their
>natural defenses in a match
>of wits on their turf.
>IMO baiting is taking advantage
>of a instict they cannot
>get around. everything in nature
>is about food, you throw
>something out that tastes good
>to them or has more
>nutritional value of course they
>are going to utilize it.
>You are concentrating the animals
>under your stand or in
>front of your blind on
>your term, not theirs. Not
>a challenge or match of
>wits.. Granted they still will
>beat you sometimes, but to
>me its not ethical to
>put them in that position.
>I have more respect to
>the guy that stalked, or
>scouted and sat by a
>trail and shot a 2
>point than someone sitting over
>the top of an apple
>or whatever pile and killing
>a 220 buck. The guy
>on the 2 point matched
>wits on his terms and
>beat him.
>
>In this pausagaunt case, he bought
>the tag (I would to
>if I had the money)
>and sat an apple pile.
>Not much skill involved for
>him. Kudos to the outfitter
>for finding him!
>
>
>
>
>
You talk in riddles! You want us to match wits with the animals on their terms, but since they see better than you, you use binoculars and blinds and treestands and since they have a sex instinct during the rut, which they can't get around, you use calls and estrus scents and decoys. Then you admit that playing the wind is the "smart" thing to do which means you are using your superior intelligence which isn't matching wits on their terms. We know things about them that they don't know we know and we are able to make plans and arrangements far ahead of time for a future event that they have no idea is coming and we are the ultimate predator because of it. And, of course that brings us back to weapons. Natural predators have to beat them hands on (claws, teeth). You get to do it as far away as 1000 yards without ever touching them.
In other words, we outthink them! We cannot, do not, will not and should not match "wits" with them. We would lose every time!
Now, where you want to draw a line to make it interesting and "ethical" is up to you, but I'm not like you and you can't draw the line for me!
Which brings me to a question about the point of bringing up this issue! What is your intent? Are you just trying to convert some of us? Do you think it should be outlawed by the state? Are you concerned about the P & Y fair chase issue and whether or not this animal should be considered for a place in the books? Or are you just venting? We'd like to know.
