So my girlfriend calls me & says "I have the cutest pic..."

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: MichaelD
That's awesome. Your GF is obviously a bit of a "country girl", raised by Dad on Hunting, Fixing Leaking Cars and Hanging Drywall.

I wouldn't say the pic is cute, b/c killing things for food isn't cute, it's life. BUT, the pic is good to go in my book.

Sounds like your GF is a keeper.

You question my rationale, do you? Oooooh, no....don't do that.

Your GF --> approves of killing things --> subsequently likes anything automotive --> likes NASCAR/NHRA/anything having to do w/internal combustion engines --> subsquently likes beer --> which makes her like to get buzzed, give you the Good Thang and rubs your shoulders while you watch The Man Show on TV.


I don't see the problem.

How do you know the two deer were killed for food? And usually liking beer + nascar mean 200 pounds by 40.

The location of the cut on the hide is a good indication that they were killed for food. If it was someone cutting them for the heads to be mounted, they should have left a larger cape. My taxidermist would have a fit if I brought heads in like that. "not enough to work with!" he'd exclaim.


I agree: cute picture!

But, since you don't find the picture cute... it's time to find a different girlfriend. She's obviously too good for you

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Mandos

Originally posted by: MichaelD
That's awesome. Your GF is obviously a bit of a "country girl", raised by Dad on Hunting, Fixing Leaking Cars and Hanging Drywall.

I wouldn't say the pic is cute, b/c killing things for food isn't cute, it's life. BUT, the pic is good to go in my book.

Sounds like your GF is a keeper.

You question my rationale, do you? Oooooh, no....don't do that.

Your GF --> approves of killing things --> subsequently likes anything automotive --> likes NASCAR/NHRA/anything having to do w/internal combustion engines --> subsquently likes beer --> which makes her like to get buzzed, give you the Good Thang and rubs your shoulders while you watch The Man Show on TV.


I don't see the problem.

Thats totally screwed man. Now I get the reason why you are indeed the forum ass. Wow.

Oddly, in recent weeks, I've been thinking more and more positively of MichaelD... this adds to the positive side

 

[kalster]

pretty disturbing

 

[Deleted member 139972]

LOL. I'd be proud by son would have the grapes to do that. LOL. Just becuase you don't see the slaughter doesn't mean it doesn't exist! At least the boy is okay with it..

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: nCred
The deer population would get too big just becouse the hunters killed most of the predators so that they would´nt kill the deers that they want to shoot.. Then they say: "uhh the deer population would be huge if we did´nt keep it under contol", well don´t fcking kill the predators, problem solved.

Newsflash!
It wasn't the hunters who killed off the predators..

It was the farmers: you know, the ones whose cows and other animals were being killed by the predators? Dead calf? Solution: set out poison. Kill the coyotes and wolves.

Dead cow? Solution: find the cougar and kill it.

Dead horse: Solution: find the cougar and kill it.

Newsflash #2: Bears don't hunt deer. Yes, they'll eat them, given the opportunity... but if a bear relied on venison, it'd be a very skinny bear.

So, why are the predators of deer gone? So you lazy Americans can buy beef at a lower price at the supermarket.

*sigh* I wish I didn't have another paper to write or I'd be out hiking several miles with only about a 15% chance of getting a deer. I could spare 4 or 5 hours to hunt, but if I got a deer, that's dragging 150-200 pounds of deer a mile or more out of the woods.... hanging the deer, skinning the deer (guts would have been removed after legally filling out the tag that says I shot a deer), etc. Not to mention the process of butchering the deer after its hung a few days. Unfortunately, it's not cold enough to hang the deer, so I'd have to butcher it immediately. There's a few more hours of work.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: Supercharged
You're gf is sick.

 

[SLCentral]

Originally posted by: Fingers

Originally posted by: eigen
When I killed my first deer when I was 13 I had the blood poured on me.So this pic aint that bad as the little kid could be covered head to toe in blood.

your lucky, I got the deers cock thrown at my face. Still pissed to this day at my brother for that.

Laughed for about 5 minutes thanks to that one .

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: Mookow
Yeah, I mean, what's more important: not having people hunt deer, or not having wolves/cougars/bears eat children (and pets). I suppose we should try to clone sabre-toothed tigers, too, because mankind killed them off, and I'm sure they'd do a great job of controlling the deer population.

News flash: most of the natural predators of the deer around me were killed off at least 150 years ago (though some were taken to reservations). This is not a recent development. Your idea of reintroducing wolves/cougars to suburbs and urban areas makes me think you are a future Darwin award winner.

Yeah, becouse there are many documented cases were wolfs have eaten children, right, you´re really showing your ignorence here..
There are different types of predators you know, bears are dangerous but wolfs and lynxes are not dangerous to people.

How often do you see wolves living in cities/suburbs? You really think that close interaction between wolves and people is going to be "peaceful", so to speak? Because they are going to have to be in urban areas, too, as that is where a lot of the deer are. Besides which, ANY predator big enough to take down a deer is going to be dangerous to people in a developed area, simply because people will end up getting near its young. This doesnt happen (often) in the wild. In the cities/suburbs, it is unavoidable. And before you start throwing accusations of ignorance, I'm not the one who said hunters killed off the natural predators of deer just to be able to hunt more often. The people who did most of that are split into two groups: settlers and the US Army.

Now, go hug a deer and then warm up a lava lamp on your stove.

 

[Robor]

I think a young child posing with a kill is sorta sadistic but I don't have a problem with hunting as long as the kill is actually for food and eaten.

IMO it's the trophy hunters who are the asshats. You know, the kind who use dogs to chase an animal up a tree then shoot it out only to stuff it for thier collection. And the biggest asshats are poachers who hunt endangered or threatened species - when caught they should be hunted themselves or turned loose with no weapons to fight their prey on even ground.

 

[FreshPrince]

lol...that's probably one of those game ranches...where they round up all the deer inside a fence and let people feel like hunters :roll:

that's what happens when rednecks get bored

poor kid...

 

[nCred]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: Mookow
Yeah, I mean, what's more important: not having people hunt deer, or not having wolves/cougars/bears eat children (and pets). I suppose we should try to clone sabre-toothed tigers, too, because mankind killed them off, and I'm sure they'd do a great job of controlling the deer population.

News flash: most of the natural predators of the deer around me were killed off at least 150 years ago (though some were taken to reservations). This is not a recent development. Your idea of reintroducing wolves/cougars to suburbs and urban areas makes me think you are a future Darwin award winner.

Yeah, becouse there are many documented cases were wolfs have eaten children, right, you´re really showing your ignorence here..
There are different types of predators you know, bears are dangerous but wolfs and lynxes are not dangerous to people.

How often do you see wolves living in cities/suburbs? You really think that close interaction between wolves and people is going to be "peaceful", so to speak? Because they are going to have to be in urban areas, too, as that is where a lot of the deer are. Besides which, ANY predator big enough to take down a deer is going to be dangerous to people in a developed area, simply because people will end up getting near its young. This doesnt happen (often) in the wild. In the cities/suburbs, it is unavoidable. And before you start throwing accusations of ignorance, I'm not the one who said hunters killed off the natural predators of deer just to be able to hunt more often. The people who did most of that are split into two groups: settlers and the US Army.

ok, maybe they did´nt kill them from the begining, but I´m saying they are keeping down the population nowadays, you see, the predator population increases fast when there´s enough pray, like there are now.
Text Yes, not a single person has been killed by wolves in North America during the 20th century. How many has been killed by pitbulls?

Now, go hug a deer and then warm up a lava lamp on your stove.

Very mature, but what can I expect from a guy who believes child stories about evil human-eating wolves?

 

[Tom]

weird pic, but more importantly..

you're posting this here could lead to it's being posted all over the internet, not something I'd want to happen to a friend/releative of mine, unless they ok'd it.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: Mookow
How often do you see wolves living in cities/suburbs? You really think that close interaction between wolves and people is going to be "peaceful", so to speak? Because they are going to have to be in urban areas, too, as that is where a lot of the deer are. Besides which, ANY predator big enough to take down a deer is going to be dangerous to people in a developed area, simply because people will end up getting near its young. This doesnt happen (often) in the wild. In the cities/suburbs, it is unavoidable. And before you start throwing accusations of ignorance, I'm not the one who said hunters killed off the natural predators of deer just to be able to hunt more often. The people who did most of that are split into two groups: settlers and the US Army.

ok, maybe they did´nt kill them from the begining, but I´m saying they are keeping down the population nowadays, you see, the predator population increases fast when there´s enough pray, like there are now.
Text Yes, not a single person has been killed by wolves in North America during the 20th century. How many has been killed by pitbulls?

Now, go hug a deer and then warm up a lava lamp on your stove.

Very mature, but what can I expect from a guy who believes child stories about evil human-eating wolves?

During the entire 20th century, how many wolves have been running wild in North American cities/suburbs for extended periods? You really think increasing that number wont affect anything? BTW, if you had bothered to even read your link:

The report also documents four factors that are associated with wolf attacks. These are rabies (a majority of attacks involved rabid wolves), habituation (many attacks involved wolves that had lost their fear of humans), provocation (wolves were provoked into attack when humans cornered or trapped them or entered their den), and highly modified environments (many attacks occurred in areas where humans have greatly altered the environment)

Hmmm, looks like three of the four factors would be routinely occurring if wolves were reintroduced and allowed to range through developed areas. Also:

Most of the unprovoked attacks by healthy wild wolves that have occurred were caused by wolves that became fearless of humans due to habituation. Nonetheless, like bears and cougars, wolves are instinctive, wild predators better kept at a respectful distance.

Looks like even the wolf lovers would reject your idea of curbing deer populations across the US solely via increased predatory presence, since that would require them to be in urbanized areas, as well. Face it, people do not mix well with large predators in cose proximity. Thank you for playing, though.

As a side note, prior to Columbus landing in America, guess what? In addition to the various four legged predators controlling deer populations, deer populations were are curbed by... HUNTING. Maybe the Indians werent using modern rifles, but they sure as hell were getting themselves some venison. Human hunting has been curbing the deer population in North America since long before the invention of gun powder.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Fingers

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: nCred
The deer population would get too big just becouse the hunters killed most of the predators so that they would´nt kill the deers that they want to shoot.. Then they say: "uhh the deer population would be huge if we did´nt keep it under contol", well don´t fcking kill the predators, problem solved.

Yeah, I mean, what's more important: not having people hunt deer, or not having wolves/cougars/bears eat children (and pets). I suppose we should try to clone sabre-toothed tigers, too, because mankind killed them off, and I'm sure they'd do a great job of controlling the deer population.

News flash: most of the natural predators of the deer around me were killed off at least 150 years ago (though some were taken to reservations). This is not a recent development. Your idea of reintroducing wolves/cougars to suburbs and urban areas makes me think you are a future Darwin award winner.

Yeah, becouse there are many documented cases were wolfs have eaten children, right, you´re really showing your ignorence here..
There are different types of predators you know, bears are dangerous but wolfs and lynxes are not dangerous to people.

It's not like bears are that dangerous either. Just like with wolves, if people mind their own #$!@ing business there's not MUCH to worry about. I'm not saying some people don't get attacked, but the key word there is "some" with a lowercase 's'.

The deer population has been rising ever since columbus arrived and we got rid of the indians who were the deers biggest preditor. We just started offing the domesticated cows instead and found a meat with a much higher fat content that would help make us americans fatter so some people can sit on their asses and complain about people who enjoy hunting and like to eat lean venison.

Wait, what? What the hell does that have to do with what I just said? As an aside, note that wolves are pack animals, and running into a starving pack would be considerably more dangerous than running into a starving bear.

 

[deerslayer]

That picture is awesome!

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: deerslayer
That picture is awesome!

:thumbsup: for the comment with that nic

 

[Andres3605]

poor animals

 

[Peetoeng]

The picture is your gf's hidden message of what would happen to you if you cheat on her!

Be afraid, very very afraid!

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Andres3605
poor animals

I fully agree with you. They were flat-out broke.

 

[piroroadkill]

No, your girlfriend really is wrong, just wrong.

It isn't cute.

Lets not waste time with opinions.

 

[JDub02]

I'm down with it ... then again, my neck is redder than most.

<- yanked out deer guts since the age of 12.

 

[IAteYourMother]

cute

 

[ZachMarius]

Dang!!! That is not a cute pic.

 

[nCred]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: nCred

Originally posted by: Mookow
How often do you see wolves living in cities/suburbs? You really think that close interaction between wolves and people is going to be "peaceful", so to speak? Because they are going to have to be in urban areas, too, as that is where a lot of the deer are. Besides which, ANY predator big enough to take down a deer is going to be dangerous to people in a developed area, simply because people will end up getting near its young. This doesnt happen (often) in the wild. In the cities/suburbs, it is unavoidable. And before you start throwing accusations of ignorance, I'm not the one who said hunters killed off the natural predators of deer just to be able to hunt more often. The people who did most of that are split into two groups: settlers and the US Army.

ok, maybe they did´nt kill them from the begining, but I´m saying they are keeping down the population nowadays, you see, the predator population increases fast when there´s enough pray, like there are now.
Text Yes, not a single person has been killed by wolves in North America during the 20th century. How many has been killed by pitbulls?

Now, go hug a deer and then warm up a lava lamp on your stove.

Very mature, but what can I expect from a guy who believes child stories about evil human-eating wolves?

During the entire 20th century, how many wolves have been running wild in North American cities/suburbs for extended periods? You really think increasing that number wont affect anything? BTW, if you had bothered to even read your link:

The report also documents four factors that are associated with wolf attacks. These are rabies (a majority of attacks involved rabid wolves), habituation (many attacks involved wolves that had lost their fear of humans), provocation (wolves were provoked into attack when humans cornered or trapped them or entered their den), and highly modified environments (many attacks occurred in areas where humans have greatly altered the environment)

Hmmm, looks like three of the four factors would be routinely occurring if wolves were reintroduced and allowed to range through developed areas. Also:

Most of the unprovoked attacks by healthy wild wolves that have occurred were caused by wolves that became fearless of humans due to habituation. Nonetheless, like bears and cougars, wolves are instinctive, wild predators better kept at a respectful distance.

Looks like even the wolf lovers would reject your idea of curbing deer populations across the US solely via increased predatory presence, since that would require them to be in urbanized areas, as well. Face it, people do not mix well with large predators in cose proximity. Thank you for playing, though.

As a side note, prior to Columbus landing in America, guess what? In addition to the various four legged predators controlling deer populations, deer populations were are curbed by... HUNTING. Maybe the Indians werent using modern rifles, but they sure as hell were getting themselves some venison. Human hunting has been curbing the deer population in North America since long before the invention of gun powder.

Well, 60 000 wolves and not a human killed in 100 years, that should tell you something about how dangerous they are.. Like I said pitbulls are a bigger threat. I don´t know why you´re talking about wolves running around in cities, if they are, then they should be removed from there. You think urbanized areas would be flooded with wolves if their number increased to 100 000?

My original point was this,
Hunters year 1: "OMFG the wolf population has increased and they are making a dent in the deer population, please let us shoot some of them!"

Hunters year 3: "OMFG the deer population has increased a lot for some reason, please increase the hunting quota!"

 

[PumpActionWalrus]

Originally posted by: AgentEL
wtf, indeed

Holy crap I just saw your room, that almost needs its own thread