HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hjel@midway.uchicago.edu (Death-PartyCentral)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Wolves! They're back?
Date: 4 Jan 93 14:41:08 GMT
Organization: University of Chicago
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1992Dec22.090444.5273@doug.cae.wisc.edu> bws20@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Brian W Simmons) writes:
>
>In article: <1992Dec21.102613.3466@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
>
>Steve White notes
>
>
>	People are moving into this area in droves (mostly from CA) 'cuz they
>	"like it here. It's so much more pleasant here." And I'm sure that it
>	is. But everytime someone else moves here it becomes more like where
>	they came from. (I am a hypocrite. I moved here 10 years ago from 
>
>You are absolutely right.  Of course if you were lived in this cesspool of
>a state you would want to move, too.  Trust me on this.
>The _only_ thing saving the rest of the nation at this point is that there
>are still a lot of native Californians (I'm a Georgia boy, so don't tar
>me with *that* brush) have never been anywhere and honestly don't
>know they are living in a slime pit.  In a smooth move of enlightened
>self-interest, I don't tell them anything different...
>
>bws, waiting to make a break for it
>
>
>--
>**************************************************************************
>bws20@amail.amdahl.com      the human heart holds hidden treasures,
>brian wesley simmons          in secret kept, in silence sealed
>**************************************************************************
>
>
	hey calif ain't THAT bad...move to northern california. at least they
have weather up there.  maybe in 10 more years after everyone moves OUT
of california it will get better.  but i still don't plan on going back.
						-jh


-- 
hjel@ellis.uchicago.edu        aka  Death Cmeptb jefe jefito
"...just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you...."
Disclaimer: the devil made me do it.               -Nirvana
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: young@alw.nih.gov
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Vizsla
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:40:45 GMT
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1993Jan5.102402.737@doug.cae.wisc.edu> you write:
|> In article <1993Jan4.083710.26189@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
|>    andre.trudel@acadiau.ca (Andre Trudel) writes:
|> >I'm thinking of getting a vizsla for pheasant hunting.
|> >Anybody have any experience hunting with them?
|> >Would this be a wise choice for a pheasant dog?
|> >Anybody know where I could purchase one on the American
|> >or Canadian east coast?
|> >
|> >Any advice on the breed would be greatly appreciated.`
|> >I've never hunted with one. I just love the looks of them.
|>  
|>  
|> My opinion is very biased, but the breed of choice is:
|>    Labrador Retriever
|>  
|> I'm pretty sure that Richard Wolters (the guy that wrote _Water Dog_,
|> _Gun Dog_, _Game Dog_, and _Family Dog_ lives in that area.
|>  
|>       -----------------------------------------------------
|> Chris Barnes            |   President - Bryan/College Station
|> cbarnes@tamvm1.tamu.edu |         Retriever Club.
|> (409) 846-3273 (home)   |   "Dedicated to the betterment of
|> (409) 845-4437 (work)   |               the retrieving breeds"

My opinion is less biased, but the breed of choice for pheasants is
one of the spaniels.  For phesants and pheasants only, get a good
flushing dog.  If your going to mix in some duck hunting a retriever
is a good choice especially if you plan to hunt over cold water.  
Retrievers can be taught to quarter like a spaniel (with less zip).

I've had a good bit of experience with Visla's.  A friend ran a kennel
with them.

If you insist on a pointer, the Viszla isn't bad, he's a more close-
working dog, perhaps more methodical and biddable than the rest of
the pointers but be forewarned, wild pheasants will drive an unseasoned
pointing dog absolutely nuts.  They run, they bunch up, they do every-
thing that a gentleman game bird wouldn't do to a dog.  I take my
brittany to South Dakota every year to hunt with my family.  We do
wonderfully along the roadsides but get into the corn, sorghum, or 
etc. and he's lost.  Too many birds all of them running around on him -
it drives him crazy.
-- 
___________	
	jy
	young@heart.dcrt.nih.gov
From: motto@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (mary.rita.otto)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Wilderness and Wolves
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:24:59 GMT
Organization: AT&T
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


Happy New Year to one and all!

I've been reading the (uncharacteristically emotional for this group)
discussion about wolves and just have a brief comment.

*Let's not let our affections for our canine companions affect our judgement
in dealing with wolves as a conservation and wildlife management issue.
If we open ourselves up to using emotions to make decisions, we are in
a weak position when confronted by animal rights activists.  They exploit
this to their advantage and to our detriment.*


Now, on the subject of "wilderness".  There is no real wilderness anymore.
Wilderness has no boundaries.  What we have are "wilderness preserves"
where we can pretend that there is a wilderness, but it will be affected
by everything outside of it anyway.  The polution of the sky and the
acid rain and the diseases carried in by animals and people and polution
of the waters all make the "boundaries" meaningless.  There are no true
wildernesses anymore.  There is no place on earth that we have not affected.
We must view the "wilderness" areas as part of a larger management scheme
and view them in the harse light of reality.  They are not isolated;  they
are not apart.  They are integrated into the environment and need to be
managed because of it.  We have got to stop pretending that it is otherwise.

In August of 1973, I heard a talk given by a member of the Forest Service about
a plan to handle the "pine beetle problem" in the Yellowstone and
Grand Teton National Parks by letting lightning strike fires burn out
naturally.  In May of 1974, I wrote a paper which refuted the arguments
for letting fires burn, based mostly on the fact that the parks could be
extensively damaged and the fact that the intense use of the areas made
them unsuitable for the proposed "natural" management plan.  Sadly, the
devastation of Yellowstone's forest land was the result of this misguided
plan, and my warnings, and those of countless others concerned with
conservation could not avert the tragedy.

The point is, these parks and preserves are not truly wilderness.  Our
concepts of them as wilderness do the land and the animal inhabitants
a disservice.  We've got to stop pretending and face the facts that we
have to take responsibility for managing these lands for what they are;
parks.  They are people-created areas with people-defined boundaries
-- boundaries which are not recognized by nature.  They may be as close
as we can come to a real wilderness, but they do have unique non-wilderness
characteristics which must be accepted and managed.

Mary Otto
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: CBARNES@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Chris Barnes)
Subject: Re: Vizsla:Or better
Organization: Texas A&M University
Date: 12 Jan 93 07:16:24 CST
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1993Jan8.114058.7348@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
   DENNIS_@ncsu.edu (DGA) writes:
 
>>My opinion is very biased, but the breed of choice is:
>>   Labrador Retriever
>
>Chris,
>
>I trust that you intended to throw down the gauntlet.
 
Well.....it's not unexpected.
 
 
>It is obvious that your opinion is very biased, as you state.
>Everyone knows that Labs are all wet.  A German Shorthair Pointer is
>clearly superior.  While Labs are very nice pets, I have never seen
>one that was much of a pointer.
 
Actaully, there are quite a few Labs around that are remote decendants of
an experiment that took place back in the '30s (i believe).  It seems
that some Lab people wanted to improve the nose abilities of their
breed, so they bred some of their top-o-the-line Labs with some type
of breed of pointer (and lied on their registration to the AKC as
to the parantage - but of course this would *never* happen today ;-) ).
They kept very tight control over the pups, and only bred those
pups that still looked like a Lab (no word on what they did with
the others).  As a result, today you can find some Labs that will
on occastion point at a bird while in the field (mine has done this
exactly twice).
 
 
>Anyone who has ever had the pleasure
>of hunting with a GSP knows that in all but the worst climates they
>will retrieve well on both land and in water, and find and point birds
>with style.
 
Sure, but you had better be on an ATV in order to keep up with them!
(written tongue-in-cheek to get a "rise" outta you and Charlie.)   ;-)
 
 
>The only complaints that I have with mine is that he insist on reading
>my magazines first and always beats me to the TV remote.  I am really
>tired of those nature shows. Oh, and he drives too fast.
 
What I hate is that Dixie gets all the attention and praise for bringing
home something for dinner when we get home from hunting.  Just because
she's a better shot than I am, doesn't mean that she did *ALL* the
work - after all, I did have to pour my own coffee!
 
      -----------------------------------------------------
Chris Barnes            |   President - Bryan/College Station
cbarnes@tamvm1.tamu.edu |         Retriever Club.
(409) 846-3273 (home)   |   "Dedicated to the betterment of
(409) 845-4437 (work)   |               the retrieving breeds"
From: ketchum@gandalf.network.com (Bret Ketchum)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Wolves! They're back?
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:24:50 GMT
Organization: Network Systems Corp.
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

Steve White writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.101142.3056@doug.cae.wisc.edu> ketchum@gandalf.network.com (Bret Ketchum) writes:
>>cvacura@uswat.uswest.com (V) writes:
>>>Matt Rein writes:
>>>>BTW, we hunt deer in and out of wolf country here in MN.  The hunting is
>>>>the same in both places as far as I can tell.  

>bunch of stuff deleted

>>The carcass was an old doe with
>>virtually nothing left of her teeth and was ripped up by all the
>>little critters that run in the woods - including loose dogs.  There
>>wasn't a wolf print for 50 yards (thats as far as we bothered to
>>look). And before anyone asks, these dogs were hunters as in the deep
>>snow you could just make out the web between the toes.

>Brett, what do you mean by the last sentence or two? I kind of read it
>that you think wolves have webbed toes or something and I don't think that
>is what you mean. Could you explain please?

>Thanks,


	My previous little tirade was shuffled off a little to quickly. I
was simply responding to what I assumed would be questions on whether the
prints where wolf or dog. It just so happened that the tracks we saw 
where from a lab, chessie, or some other hunting dog.

	Bret
From: jheath@fieldofdreams.npirs.purdue.edu (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Shooting Sports programs
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:41:16 GMT
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

There is a hunting program on one (?) of the Chicago PBS (11, WTTW?)
stations.  It is on Saturday during the day.  I don't know if any other
PBS stations carry it ;-{).  On reflection, I think it may also include
fishing.
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: slv4b@cc.usu.edu
Subject: Re: Raising and Releasing Game Birds... Advice Needed
Organization: Utah State University
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:35:16 CST
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

>>The best advice is: DON'T DO IT.  If you release pen-raised birds into
>>the area, you'll probably lose the native populations you've already
>>got to the increased predator population that the pen-raised birds
>>will attract.
> 
> I guess this doesn't surprise me, but I would like to suggest an 
> alternative: alter the environment.  Either find a way to make it less
> friendly for the coyotes and hawks, or more friendly with better cover 
> for the game birds you want.  

     I too have considered raising and releasing game birds, but have
also been discouraged by the poor success others have had.  I believe
habitat and some degree of predator control is the key to
reestablishing diminishing bird populations, but how?  My main
interest lies in upping the local pheasant numbers on a moderately
sized piece of private farm land which myself and others have hunted
in the past.  There seems to be ample cover, but I'm not so sure that
the feed is adequate.  If we were to plant small parcels of land with
some type of grain or other feed, what would be the best type?  Also,
there is an abundance of hawks and skunks in the area, as well as a
few foxes and coyotes.  Aside from declaring open war on them ( for
the most part illegal), what is the best way to rid an area of
predators.
     I'd love to do what I can to bolster the bird population on this
particular tract of ground, but I need ideas.  The farmer who owns it
is one the few still left around here who specifically leaves part of
his ground untilled for the benefit of wildlife, and he too is open
for suggestion.  I invite anyone who has experience in this area to
share your ideas and opinions with us.
 
Thanks,

Lance Robinson
Utah State University
From: Art.Hebert@EBay.Sun.COM (Sudshead)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Reloading 22-250 ??
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:42:18 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


Does anyone reload for the .22-250? If you have a hot load that you
like I'd appreciate getting it.

Thanks

art 
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: adams@pyramid.cs.unr.edu (Brian Adams)
Subject: Idaho Grizzly Plan
Organization: University of Nevada, Reno  Department of Computer Science
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:37:56 CST
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

My Audubon magazine ran a piece about the "wilderness heart of Idaho" and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Dept.'s contemplating re-introducing Grizzly
Bears into the Selway Bitteroot/Frank Church River of No Return areas,
"perhaps the biggest unbroken piece of roadless land in the lower 48
states." (Perhaps? Name a larger one!)

Unlike most wild land in the West, the average elevation is low -
4,000 to 5,000 feet, with much winter moisture. Immense wildfires keep
the vegetation "remarkably diverse." 100,000 elk thrive in this 3.5
million acre paradise, as do deer, moose, and wolves. But, the last
confirmed Grizzly was killed by a ranger in 1956, in spite of the
apparently ideal habitat. They have monitored bait stations with trip
cameras for many years and have yet to find one.

Estimates are that the area could support between 200 and 400 Grizzlys
(they obviously need a lot of elbow room.) There's already some
resistance from wilderness users who appreciate the relative safety of
this tract for backpackers. And of course, the nearby ranchers and
timbermen will scream.

I backpacked this area last summer and, although we saw plenty of bear
scat, it was comforting to know that a hungry Grizzly would not be
making a play for camp food. (I did have a leather belt destroyed by
a porcupine, though!)

There was also much discussion about genetic diversity and the need for
a bridge between the isolated Yellowstone population and the bears of
Alaska and S.W. Canada.

Although this is not about hunting per se, any thoughts about the
merits of introducing Grizzlys into this well known elk habitat?

Brian Adams.
From: pm3b+@andrew.cmu.edu ("Pam J. McAllister")
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Wolves!
Date: 4 Jan 93 14:40:35 GMT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

I don't know if wolves are behaviorally much different from coyotes,
but where I'm from, there were some places where wildlife and housing
developments co-existed peacefully. Outside Tulsa, near Bixby, in
Oklahoma I remember listening to their howls at night. There was
enough undisturbed land between them and the houses to keep them
happy, and I never heard any stories of them attacking any dogs or
other domestic animals. Unfortunately, since I left I've heard that
the coyotes have been killed as the area has continued to expand.
Sometime soon it would be nice, and I think its absolutely necessary,
for someone would think about what the land means to something other
than their own pocketbook.

Pam
From: scot@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Scot Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: 7x30 Waters loads?
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:42:08 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

[ Article crossposted from rec.guns ]
[ Author was Scot Heath (scot@hpfcla.fc.hp.com) ]
[ Posted on 6 Jan 93 22:25:50 GMT ]

Anybody out there have any pet loads for the TC in 16" 7x30 Waters?  Any
pointers to a good source of infor for this cartridge?

Thanks in advance,

-Scot
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: jessie@iastate.edu (Brent Danielson)
Subject: Re: fox
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: 12 Jan 93 07:16:43 CST
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu
Keywords: Rabies

In article <1993Jan11.074302.20262@doug.cae.wisc.edu> tcs@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (theodore.c.seed) writes:
>In 3351, From: cower@SSD.intel.com (Rich Cower) asks:
>
>> Are foxes primarily nocturnal? I've had one poking around my yard for
>> about a week (eating grapes). Yesterday it came into the yard when three
>> of my Irish Wolfhounds were out - which seemed pretty foolish. Rather
>> than risking the dogs getting bit by this small, sneaky creature (I
>> suspect it killed a number of my chickens earlier this year) - I shot
>> it. 
>> 
>> I'm wondering if it could have been rabid? I live in an area where
>> rabies is very active in skunks. I've never seen a fox so active during
>> the day - I shot it just after noon. 
>> 
>> I didn't skin it, but did save the tail. 
>> 
>> thanks...rich 
>
>Rich:
>
>I am not an expert, but I do know that fox, skunk, racoon, coyote, 
>and opossum are primarily nocturnal. Having grown up in the country,
>it has been my experience that anytime you see nocturnal creatures 
>wandering around in the daylight, apparently oblivious to people and 
>dogs, it's a safe bet they are rabid.
>

This is completely fallacious.  You cannot predict any disease, and
especially not rabies, by simply observing a animal at a time of day
that you don't think that they should be out and about.  I saw 4 foxes
last tuesday while deer hunting well after sunup.  Am I to conclude
that they are probably rabid?

There are more legends and folk lore and fear surrounding rabies than
I had ever imagined.  In brief, however, behavioral symptoms of rabies
only become apparent at the very end, when the animal is on its last
legs, soon to die, and even then, the legendary foaming at the mouth,
etc. may not occur.

Finally, have you ever seen a nature show with a skunk, fox, racoon,
supposedly-nocturnal whatever, filmed entirely during the day?  Of
course you have.  Marty Stoufer's Wild Something or Other, the old
Mutual of Omha's Wild Kingdom, Disney Shows, Nature, National
Geographic Specials, all have shown foxes as well as many others
raising young, hunting, mating, and just cruising about all during the
day.  Many of these shows followed a family unit through a complete
annual cycle, yet none died of rabies although they spent a hell of a
lot of time out during the day light hours.

Brent J. Danielson

-- 
Jessie@iastate.edu                                           Brent J. Danielson
515-294-5248                                               Dept. Animal Ecology
                                                          Iowa State University
                                                            Ames, IA 50011-3221
From: ftarnol@nma.mnet.uswest.com (Fred Arnold (303) 896-8084)
Subject: Colorado Hunters under attack
Organization: U S WEST NMA Impl & Support
Date: 4 Jan 93 08:37:00 CST
Followup-To: talk.politics.animals 
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

[Moderator's note:  this is posted to rec.hunting (and rec.guns) for
informational purposes only.  Please send follow ups to
talk.politics.animals.  tjr ]

As many of you are aware, hunters in Colorado lost the spring bear
hunt to an ARM petition drive that placed a Constitutional amendment
banning the hunt on the November ballot.  Colorado, like many other
states, has a provision that allows citizen initiates to be voted on
by the electorate.

The late filing of this petition did not give sportsmen's groups the
opportunity to organize or finance an effective campaign to defeat
this initiative.  Since the initiative was narrowly worded and only
affected the spring bear hunt, a certain amount of apathy among
hunters was probably also responsible for its passage.  

I have recently heard, second-hand, that the same group that sponsored
the spring bear hunt initiative now plans to go after the archery bear
hunt.  If we begin now, we have time to organize and plan a campaign
to defeat this latest attack on our hunting heritage.  We cannot afford
to lose seasons or hunters to campaigns that ban us from the field.
While I am not personally a bow-hunter or a bear hunter for that matter,
the loss of any season lowers participation in hunting.  According to the
NRA, only 7-8% of Americans hunt today.  That makes us the most vulnerable
of minorities.  ARM groups can continue to chip away at the hunting
population until our hunting rights are gone.

Let me get off my soapbox for a minute.  My real purpose in writing
is to gather ideas for how we can defeat the coming initiatives.  How
do we explain hunting to others in a convincing manner?  I've had
some success one-on-one with non-hunters who are not closed-minded,
but our numbers are so small that one-one-one solutions don't seem to
be the answer.  If I could buy a 60 second commercial to run on radio
or TV, what should its content be?

I'll pass along any suggestions I get.
-- 
+******************************************************************************+
| Fred Arnold   NRA Life                                                       |
|    Voice (303) 896-8084                                                      |
|      FAX (303) 896-7644                                                      |
+******************************************************************************+
From: crs@beta.lanl.gov (Charlie Sorsby)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: ESPN Shooting Sports programs
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:24:11 GMT
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


Hi, All...

Hope your holidays were great...

During which I discovered that ESPN airs (or has begun to do) a
program about the shooting sports on Sunday mornings (10:30
Mountain Time in my area).  Thought you-all may like to know.

Last Sunday, it was about a black-powder meet and about the Grand
National trap shoot at Vandalia (OH).  Seems like the previous week
may have been about the Olympic shooting events.  Grits Gresham is
the host.  Check it out.

And, as infrequently as one is able to see any coverage, much less
decent coverage, of the shooting sports on TV, I'd like to write to
ESPN and thank them (perhaps we all should?).  Has anyone an
address for them?

Oh, yeah--I seem to recall seeing some program on shooting on the
Nashville Network not long ago, too.  Can't recall what or when,
though...


-- 
Best,

Charlie "Older than dirt" Sorsby				"I'm the NRA!"
	  crs@lanl.gov
Newsgroups: rec.hunting