First- Who is making the case to shoot a dove just as it flushes from the line? You seem to be putting words in peoples mouths.

Second- The Karankawa were hunting to survive, so I would imagine that they utilized any advantage they had available. Sport hunting is a modern development.

Third- You seem to only equate hunting with killing, thus my bloodlust comment. Quail hunters are not out there for the meat, it is certainly not wasted, but Quail Hunters are out there for the whole experience. That experience revolves around the dogs, I(and most every other real quail hunter) have spent thousands of hours, dollars and miles working with my dogs. We want them to succeed and hunt hard and find birds, shooting one is just a part of this experience. I do not have to kill a limit to be fulfilled, but it appears that you do and that is fine. In the end this is the root of our disagreement, I like the experience of it all and you are out there to get some killing done, and it does not matter how you do it as long as it is legal.

There sure are some condescending motherf***ers 'round here...

quote:

---

Third- You seem to only equate hunting with killing, thus my bloodlust comment

---

Something about your comment of putting words in people's mouths seems to make me laugh with this one. Not sure why, but it does.

quote:

---

Second- The Karankawa were hunting to survive, so I would imagine that they utilized any advantage they had available. Sport hunting is a modern development.

---

Something about a "blood lust" comment you made, combined with this one above, again makes me laugh. Not sure why, but it does.

quote:

---

Quail hunters are not out there for the meat, it is certainly not wasted, but Quail Hunters are out there for the whole experience. That experience revolves around the dogs, I(and most every other real quail hunter)

---

You sure do have a pretty high opinion of yourself.

In all honesty, the gung ho "purists" in any sport seem to come off as the biggest d-bags out there at times, especially when discussing the "proper" way to do something, and especially when the reasoning they argue is high on the double standard scale.

Look, I'm not sitting here saying that using dogs or flushing with a shotgun is a bad method - it is a hell of a lot of fun (if not a workout from hell). What I am saying is that the attitude of "there is only ONE PROPER way to hunt quail" makes you look like an uppity, condescending d-bag that generally does more to push people away from hunting than draw them into it.

If a guy is deer hunting and having a slow morning and decides to pick a few quail off at the feeder so he has some outstanding breakfast, and does so in a perfectly legal manner without exceeding his limit, how exactly is that unsporting, wrong, immoral (or any other derogatory term you choose to use)? I'm saying it is not, because your definition of the "proper" or "sporting" or "correct" or whatever method of hunting is purely subjective and little more than an opinion on how it should be done.

It really is not hard to grasp the concept.

I've heard of Arkansawing a bird but shooting quail with a .22 is a new one.

"Texasing"

quote:

---

In all honesty, the gung ho "purists" in any sport seem to come off as the biggest d-bags out there at times, especially when discussing the "proper" way to do something, and especially when the reasoning they argue is high on the double standard scale.

---

You seem to be a little down on the people that are the only shot at saving quail. The average guys out there to shoot them under a feeder (Which is illegal if you do not have an upland bird stamp) does not care about the population enough to do anything about it.

The "gung ho purist" are literally investing millions of dollars into saving Quail. Just as the "gung ho" waterfowlers invested millions in DU to bring back duck populations.

And dont act like you have to be a purist or a professional field trialer to look down on this practice as a lot of people on this board have commented that it was "pretty low"

Also, if it is on leased property it is probably a violation of the hunting lease agreement, because ranchers generally lease the quail rights separately from the deer rights.

quote:

---

Spotlighting a game animal such as a deer is illegal for a number of reasons, with "unsporting" being pretty far down the list.

---

How far down are we talking? The only reasons I have ever heard are ethics based arguments.

quote:

---

Well, sunchaser, I'm not sure that there is a complete and concise list of reasons why spotlighting is illegal. I could give you a couple of common sense reasons why, but I'm not sure that would suffice for you.

---

It might suffice, give it a try. You were the one that spouted off "sporting" was way down the list. I figured that it must be a long list.

I would think sporting would be right at the top.

Enlighten us...

Shooting quail legally at a feeder with a .22 might be a great sport to someone but common sense tells me most true hunters are not going to deem that "sporting" with a species in decline.

I don't know the "official" reason but I would find it kinda hard to believe that spotlighting deer is against state wildlife regs bc of "ethical concerns". If you told me it was due to safety concerns, I could readily stomach that. I realize people shoot coyotes and wild hogs with a spotlight, but night hunting is a very small % of all hunting experiences. I can't even imagine the chaos if spotlighting for deer was legal.

quote:

---

You seem to be a little down on the people that are the only shot at saving quail.

---

Not even close, but hey - nice try.

quote:

---

Not even close, but hey - nice try.

---

I'm glad we can still count on you for for just negating facts.

You called purist d bags, Purist are the people actively trying to save the Quail population.

quote:

---

It might suffice, give it a try. You were the one that spouted off "sporting" was way down the list. I figured that it must be a long list.

---

The top couple of items would be safety related, the next one would be antler restriction related (depending on county), then you get into sporting or ethical reasons.

You are a smart guy, pretty sure you could figure it out.

sidenote..... Even though its perfectly legal to spotlight hogs on private ground , the same is not allowed on public... at least I know its not at Granger wma, specifically.

That in and of itself implies to me that the reason is safety... according to the gov defn.

At any rate, can we all just agree that the hardcore quail hunter is better than the rest of us and move on?

quote:

---

I'm glad we can still count on you for for just negating facts.

You called purist d bags, Purist are the people actively trying to save the Quail population.

---

Reading is apparently hard for you, isn't it?

A) I am not negating a fact of any kind, because your statement was pure conjecture and honestly full of crap.

B) I said purists can come off as d-bags at times because of their condescending attitudes that there is supposedly only one proper way to hunt or take game and any other method is borderline illegal in their eyes. Case in point - your thoughts on this OP. "Can" is a descriptive term for "sometimes". "Sometimes" does not mean "all the time". Simple concept really.

I honestly don't make a practice of skillet shooting quail, but at the same time I'm not going to snub my nose at somebody for doing nothing illegal or call them out for doing so, because what is "sporting" is so subjective that you will have a hard time getting any respective group of people to 100% agree on what is and what is not. It is simply an opinion - some of those opinions are shared through larger groups, but not always.

If the quail population is in such dire straits, limit reductions will be imposed just like they were for pintails not too terribly long ago. Nobody will be a fan of it, but ultimately that may be what is necessary for numbers to stabilize and grow.

Bahh, I'm failing at the board codes.

[This message has been edited by schmellba99 (edited 3/20/2013 3:38p).]

I like to shoot quail off the gut pile at night, with a 22.

Well my thread spun out of control quickly.

In my opinion the top reason for banning spotlighting deer is the sporting factor. I really don't see a close second reason. My guess for number 2 reason is the money factor/poaching concern. There is minimal safety concern or else night hunting for hog and varmints would be banned as well. It is clearly the sporting factor being the top issue.

People put more worth in different hunting methods and different game animals. That's just he way it is. There is a reason many states ban feeders, running deer dogs and shooting quail/pheasants and turkeys with a rifle, Mean while it's an all out war on feral hogs, snow geese, coyotes etc.

The bottomline is TPWD puts laws on the books that support the majority of the hunters while still supporting an overarching game management plan. I think shooting quail with a rimfire is an overlooked area (especially in line with the quail's demise), but because so few folks hunt them that way it isn't even worth their time to acknowledge the area.

What's funny is deer feeders will probably be banned or at least considered for a ban in Texas within 50 years especially if CWD ever gets firmly established.

Then we will have this debate times a million on the pros and cons of plinking game under feeders.

quote:

---

the next one would be antler restriction related (depending on county)

---

Don't see anywhere online that says spotlighting is a problem for antler restriction counties. If anything it would make it easier to see the size of a rack from up close with a spotlight and 200 yards from a scope.

And every night people are spotlighting, hogs, coyotes, rabbits, and bob cats. If it were that unsafe then the state would regulate that as well, regardless of public or private property.

Its foolish to say that ethical reasons are not high on the list of why spotlighting deer is illegal.

quote:

---

Its foolish to say that ethical reasons are not high on the list of why spotlighting deer is illegal.

---

It's no less unethical or non-sporting than shooting a deer over corn.

quote:

---

B) I said purists can come off as d-bags at times because of their condescending attitudes that there is supposedly only one proper way to hunt or take game and any other method is borderline illegal in their eyes. Case in point - your thoughts on this OP. "Can" is a descriptive term for "sometimes". "Sometimes" does not mean "all the time". Simple concept really.

---

It seemed clear you were referring to English Elhew when you said that. Which prompted my response because he is widely respected conservationist in both the circles of the Dallas quail hunters and the Brazos Valley DU during his time at A&M. I doubt anyone on this board has done as much for conservation as he has and you are the guy calling him a d bag.

Perhaps manners arent your thing.

Or at least not online.


[This message has been edited by birddogman (edited 3/20/2013 3:58p).]

[This message has been edited by birddogman (edited 3/20/2013 5:25p).]

Again, what is important is that we all become conservationists where we can and give back to the resource rather that be ethically, monetarily, through habitat improvement or teaching the next generation. This can be done regardless of your method of harvest or hunting technique.

Those who feel the desire can work with our government to pass laws for things you don't like (they love making new laws) and in the mean-time just try to get out in nature, enjoy it and take a kid.