search
top

Another Go at Preserve Hunting Ban in North Dakota

Looks like this group North Dakotans for Fair Chase is having another go at trying to ban preserve hunting in North Dakota.  As best I can tell, this group isn’t necessarily a front for HSUS, but is a group of hunters who are helping push the HSUS agenda.

This would be like if a group of shooters, and I don’t mean a front group like AHSA, but actual shooters, got together and worked with the Brady Campaign to try to ban handguns.

Hunting has been on the decline for a while, and while many of the factors involved are fundamental, one big reason is the attitude of hunters themselves, and I can think of no better example than this.

UPDATE: I wonder if the Mule Deer Foundation will get behind the effort like they did last time.  I sometimes have to wonder if Wayne Pacelle sometimes looks in bewildered amazement at the readiness that hunters stick their necks out in order that he may take the blade to their sport in order to slaughter it.  If groups like the mule deer foundation don’t think HSUS will push a mule deer ban once they’ve picked off all the unpopular groups, they are naive beyond belief.

23 Responses to “Another Go at Preserve Hunting Ban in North Dakota”

  1. Ian Argent says:

    Another legacy of 1994? For Fudds, paying the Danegeld of the AWB worked for them, and is still working. Their deerguns and over-unders aren’t under serious threat today; the “deal” from 1994 “worked”. Of course, it only worked for the fudds because other members of the gun community drew the line and have been pushing back hard.

  2. Bitter says:

    I can think of no better example than this.

    I can. Michigan’s dove hunting ban. But rather than hunters being sold on something to restrict their sport by another group of hunters, they actually jumped on board with HSUS directly. Many hunters put up a helluva fight. Unfortunately, there were some of who poked their heads out of the woodwork on election day and turned against us. I don’t have the stats right in front of me, but I recall that ban winning in counties that are heavily rural and pro-hunting.

    But that’s done, and you would think hunters would have learned. The fact that they even got close to the number of signatures in North Dakota last time around is disturbing. Let’s make sure they don’t ever get this on the ballot this time around.

  3. JD says:

    I know a lot of hunters here in ND and I haven’t heard one of them tell me they’re for banning “canned hunting”. Most say “I wouldn’t do it but if someone else wants to, go for it”.

  4. JD says:

    “Most say “I wouldn’t do it but if someone else wants to, go for it”.

    I should clarify that. Most wouldn’t do a “canned hunt”, but don’t care if someone else does it.

  5. FatWhiteMan says:

    Maybe they would be happy if they just banned AR’s and Crossbows on Hunting Preserves.

  6. JD says:

    FatWhiteMan Said,
    August 24th, 2009 at 10:54 am
    Maybe they would be happy if they just banned AR’s and Crossbows on Hunting Preserves.

    Yeah, I’m sure that would solve everyone’s problems.
    Damn AR’s & crossbows, nobody needs those weapons anyhow.

  7. Will says:

    Any real hunter wouldn’t have an issue with this – hunting is supposed to be a sport, what sport or skill is it, to kill an animal that is raised for you to kill? Growing up I remember the thrill of the chase. The chase mind you, that doesn’t involved fences. Anyone who thinks this will snowball is an idiot – it’s practices like this that give hunters a bad name.

  8. Sebastian says:

    So go ahead, join with the animal rights wakos, in the hopes that you will be eaten last. It’s because of folks like Will that I think the sport of hunting is doomed over the long run. Shooters learned the “no one gets thrown off the life boat” early, because our opponents revealed their hand, and we got wise. Hunters seem intent on sticking their heads in the sand and pretending there’s not a very well financed, and well organized group trying to destroy their sport.

  9. Sebastian says:

    And really, I pity hunters. HSUS is far far more astute than any of the opponents gun rights has faced. They are a formidable enemy. And hunters, as a whole, don’t seem to be the least bit serious about opposing them with ever fiber of their being.

  10. Will says:

    Sebastian I like your blog, but in general feel that hunters are getting so caught up in the “US vs THEM” fight, it’s a lot easier to defend hunting wild game then explain why one would rather hunt elk in a fenced in area – what kind of sport is that?

  11. Sebastian says:

    Will,

    It might not be your particular cup of tea, but should it be illegal? A lot of folks said the same thing about high-power shooting — that it made the sport look bad, and we’d be better off not having to defend people using those kinds of rifles. But we knew what the end game was, and those people were silenced.

    To me, as long as it’s a clean shot, and the animal isn’t wasted, it’s an ethical killing of the animal. Might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but that doesn’t mean it ought to be illegal.

  12. Will says:

    it’s one thing to oppose them on issues that makes sense – but I nearly canceled my NRA membership when I saw them fighting a puppy mill bill – we could be more effective by not opposing every single thing with their logo on it, and only that which actually effects us!

  13. Sebastian says:

    You know the puppy mill bill was designed to put small time breeders out of existence don’t you? Did you look at the punishment and licensing structure of it? Violations were high misdemeanors, and you lost your license permanently for a single violation. No one would have bothered with that kind of liability risk.

  14. Sebastian says:

    I don’t think this issue makes sense though… I think it diminishes hunting opportunities for some hunters. It reduces your numbers and reduces your political constituency, and you know what HSUS’s end game is. I don’t see any reason to concede anything to them.

  15. Will says:

    Personally I don’t support the ‘puppy mill’ bill, but what did it have to do with hunting – my sporting dogs come from a small breeder who is reputable, and functions perfectly fine within the law. But regardless, my point was more why the NRA was getting involved – I’d rather have them focus on gun leg!

  16. Sebastian says:

    I think everyone should know that Will’s address comes from the Humane Society of the United States. So I think it’s safe to assume that he is in no way, shape or form a hunter.

    Go astroturf somewhere else.

  17. K-Romulus says:

    “Sporting dogs”??? LOL… better luck next time!!!

  18. Oakenheart says:

    Figures. HSUS is full of crap.

  19. mikeb302000 says:

    I never really understood hunting. Last year I wrote a post about it suggesting that shooting at animals is an acceptable way of acting out the fantasy of shooting at other humans. It didn’t go over very well as you might expect. Not one commenter admitted that’s why he hunts.

    There is something violent and bloody about it though isn’t there? It is about dealing out death, isn’t it? Are they good things?

  20. Guav says:

    Mike, I’m not a hunter—I’ve actually been vegan for 18 years—but even I understand that hunting is not about “acting out the fantasy of shooting at other humans”—that’s just plainly ridiculous.

  21. Linoge says:

    Wow, MikeB, that comment has to be a new record for you concerning logical fallacies. In such a short space, you managed to exhibit characteristics of the “burden of proof fallacy”, the “bare assertion fallacy”, the “straw man fallacy”, the “question-begging analogy fallacy”, and the “false cause fallacy”.

    For someone who routinely throws cute little fits over us gunnies supposedly not listening to “logic” or “reason”, you surely do a wonderful job abusing both of those concepts on your lonesome.

    There is something violent and bloody about it though isn’t there?

    Yes… and? There is something violent and bloody about hockey, about football, and about countless other activities and past-times we humans enjoy partaking in or observing. I am sure a psychologist could say something interesting about that, but you are not a psychologist, now, are you, MikeB?

    It is about dealing out death, isn’t it?

    Your grasp of the obvious is amazing. At the risk of sounding like a broken record… and? Or are you trying to draw some sort of specious and inherently flawed connection between animal deaths and human deaths? You might as well pull a full-on Jack Thompson and claim video games are an outlet for people to act out their murderous fantasies. Because, you know, pixels and people are equivalent, just like deer and people are…

    Are they good things?

    “They” what? Is blood a good thing? I tend to think so. Is violence a good thing? Depends on the context. A man using violence to coerce or threaten a woman is not a good thing. That woman using violence to keep the man from raping her is a good thing. The same goes for death – a scumbag killing a man over his wallet is not a good thing, but that same man killing the same scumbag in self-defense is a good thing.

    Has traffic to your little corner of the cortext been decreasing, MikeB? One does not often see you commenting on this many pro-rights weblogs in such a short time…

    In other news, good on you for outing the not-quite-honest commenter, Sebastian. It is, of course, interesting how “Will” disappeared so suddenly after the revelation… In the interests of full honestly, though, I guess I should disclose that I am writing this comment from a stainless steel, Winchester-branded computer that was funded by the fine folks at the NRA, while I am sitting in the sold-gold wheelbarrow full of cash they also provided me. I like the way the stacks of Benjamins cushion my narrow little tushie…

  22. JD says:

    Will Said,
    August 24th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
    Any real hunter wouldn’t have an issue with this – hunting is supposed to be a sport, what sport or skill is it, to kill an animal that is raised for you to kill? Growing up I remember the thrill of the chase. The chase mind you, that doesn’t involved fences. Anyone who thinks this will snowball is an idiot – it’s practices like this that give hunters a bad name.

    LMAO :-O. Will, also posted the exact same thing in the Bismarck Tribune.
    http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2009/08/22/news/local/192737.txt

    Uh-oh Will, I think you been busted you “real hunter” you.
    Will =Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » Caught HSUS Astroturfing

  23. I do not see what the argument is. If it is ok to kill an animal then it is ok to choose how and where you wish to do it as long as it is not cruel or inhumane.

    If a guy wants to go hunt on a ranch or preserve so what. I have seen this my whole life, some bow hunters say gun hunters are not real hunters because they use guns, some deer hunters think duck hunters are not real because they sit in cozy blinds, it is endless. This type of attitude coming from guys hunting private land where yes the game is wild but is as good as tame. You can almost reach out and touch them year round and they feed on the corn or whatever else was planted in the area.

    The fact is we kill animals both wild and raised all of the time in different situations sometimes hard sometimes easy. We do not give give cows, pigs chickens and ducks turkeys a chance before killing them and putting them in the supermarket. How unsportsmanlike like they are raised to be killed for the pleasure of eating without so much as a chance to run free. You should be ashamed at the thought of this animal that you consume is being farm raised and killed in this manner.

    If a deer walks up close enough to touch during the season we do not say boo you are to close for it to be a sport. Run Bambi Run! I am to much of a sportsmen to end your life this way not enough of a challenge.

    All I care about is the kill is clean, that the meat is not wasted and it is not left to rot. If it is eaten or given to someone who will eat it that is all that matters. How you chose to get it, gun, bow, on private land, public property, or a game ranch is totally your choice.

    It is just arrogance and trying to feel superior when you think that you have the answer or that your way is the best way, or your way is the only sporting way.

    I have never hunted a reserve, but for the guy who does I say more power to him, that guy is, creating jobs and adding to the local economy. Just like the guys who hunt private property or are members of hunt clubs etc. Which is just about as easy to take game if not as easy as a game ranch. The only difference is one guy raises the animals the others fence off the property so they have no competition from other hunters, and feed or plant to draw animals in.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » Caught HSUS Astroturfing - [...] In my previous thread on the ban on preserve hunting they are pushing in North Dakota, I got engaged…
  2. Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » More HSUS Astroturfing - [...] JD in the comments points out that HSUS are also astroturfing in the comment section of the Bismark Tribune. …
  3. Hunting Groups Climb On Board with Cap and Trade | Snowflakes in Hell - [...] of hunters. I can tell you in at least one of the cases, the Mule Deer Foundation, they are…
top