Caribou Gear Tarp

Here's why elk ranches should be illegal in every state

Tom, sorry I need a translator for your drivel, so I'll just water it down for you better.

IMO most of Idaho's hunters today would love to see game farms go away completely in this state. The people within the state who seem to support game farms (as IW is) are those that have a vested interest in them; essentially those who own them, are family of the owners, or work at the farm. Thus since he seems to be a supporter of game farms and cannned hunting it would seem reasonable he is a member of one of these groups and I was curious if he'd let us know that.
 
I believe that Tom is really a Russian spy and he uses this forum to relay his gathered info back to the KGB in Moscow.

I think I broke his very elaborate and sophisticated code using a secret decoder ring and one of those pieces of card board with the little holes in it that when you hold it on your screen over his post and read the letters that show it spells out his secret message.







That or he is just plain confused
 
You know, I gave some truthful info I had, I started on here to clarify some things that were blatantly wrong.
 
ID Wapiti:

I will give you the benefit that your tidbit of new information/clarification can be verified from a third-party source, but don't expect others here to be so gracious.

Lets talk about "mass hysteria." The reason all Fish and Game Departments are against domestic shooting operations is because they understand the risks, all of which have been rehashed here to for. Maybe these fish and game departments have people that are too highly trained in the science of "mass hysteria" rather than biology.

Why has every state that approved shooting farms moved the adminstrative control and licensing from their fish and game departments to some other state department, such as commerce, livestock, etc? Could it be that the biologocal risks are too great, and the only way to disregard such facts is to put another department in charge of licensing, making sure it is a department where biological risks are secondary to economics, agricultural diversity, etc. I suspect so.

Funny how these departments who are newly assigned shooting farm licensing authority, leave enforcement with the fish and game departments. That allows F&G to be the sphinchters when the fertilizer hits the ventilator. F&G is damned by the shooting pen operators if they are too firm with enforcement and are yelled at by hunters when they are not firm enough. Just how these other departments like it. Pass shitty laws/administrative rules and leave the enforcement and consequences with someone else.

"Divide and conquer." Now that is the lamest excuse I have ever heard for a reason to protect these parasitic operations. If it weren't for these type of operations, how much time would we have to spend convincing the non-hunting public (not anti-hunter, but non-hunter) that hunting really is something of value, besides shooting Ol' Sal when he comes in for his morning oats.

This isn't hunter against hunter. It is hunter against deadbeat assholes who have so little appreciation for what hunting really is, that they are willing to give the anti's all the ammunition they need to attack us, just so these lazy bastards can go home and lie to their buddies about how difficult it was to shoot this big critter that now hangs on their wall. This is hunters against a bunch of counterfeits, both shooters and operators.

Are you qualified to dispell all these supposed "myths" of disease, hybridization, damage of hunters image to the public, on infinitim, which you are calling "mass hysteria?"

I hope you can provide us your training and background so that we can turn a deaf ear to the Val Geist's, Mike Miller's, Shane Mahoney's, and other highly trained disease experts of the world and follow you blindly toward the emancipation of the shooting pen operators from the bondage placed upon them by this "mass hysteria." And once and for all we could put this "mass hysteria" to rest.

Until such time, I am comfortable with the path of "mass hsyteria."

Happy Hunting!
 
He said he doesn't book hunts. I think he made an attempt at educating the public hunters here with a few facts and is not interested in bickering with public hunters.
 
Public hunter, you couldn't figure that out?

Public land hunter, does that help? He posted about a lot of private land facts, I thought, maybe the public land hunters can't even recognize them as facts to discuss. Kind of like a welfare rancher, but they hunt off the public land for a cheap price and don't take care of it much, instead of ranch it. As opposed to a private land hunter who takes care of the land or pays someone who does. Those who hunt private places or think about the issues from a private point of view may have more appreciation of his post. You couldn't figure that out, public hunter?

I was thinking when he posted the info. about the mixed test results on that cow that he was informing us about some facts not in the thread. His final post is about some facts he wants us to be aware of, it seems like. He was trying to get us some facts it seems like.
 
Public hunter, you couldn't figure that out?

Well, I THINK I could have figured it out if I'd of had more time to think about it, but really, I just was hoping to hear your explanation of what you meant, and I thought everybody else on the board would appreciate hearing it from you as well. :rolleyes:

Just kidding ya Tom. You're fun to mess with, although I usually leave that up to the others, who obviously don't need any help from me. :D
 
Tom, you're still arguing the 'facts' of an unsupportable premise. Put & take is simply NOT hunting.
 
Tom, you're still arguing the 'facts' of an unsupportable premise. Put & take is simply NOT hunting.

NHY, it's good to have a Texan on the "good guy's" side. :D

Not that Tom's "bad," in fact I really don't think he believes in his own arguments. He's only arguing on the game farmer's side because if he didn't, this thread, and other's like it, wouldn't go anywhere. Right Tom?
 
A fact doesn't need a premise to be a fact NHY. A fact is more like a premise and his facts about the cow test have nothing to do with hunting or no hunting. You guys make up all kinds of stuff it seems like and get messed up. I'd rather be hunting and discuss this stuff than do it on the internet, but this is where we post about it.

It seems important to me that the cow has been a legal elk for years and it only questionably been tested with mixed results recently and is not an escaped cow. The sky is not falling there, wild elk are safe and the guy is a legal elk farmer, Rammel.
 
Tom,

If Rammel is a legal elk farmer...why is he making court appearances and paying fines?

Whats your premise on that fact?
 
The first fines for the tags were thrown out by the legislature as I understand it.

I think he's paying fines for the escaped elk, because that's the only way Idaho has to manage a problem like that. Everybody has fences break once in a while and everybody knows its pretty natural. If that's as illegal as he gets, it seems a lot like a traffic ticket or a parking ticket. Its easy for most people to miss a sign and speed sometime or to get back to their parking meter and its expired and they have a ticket. We don't shut down people's driving for that type of violation, I don't see why we should shut down Rammel for something pretty darn trivial. His escaped elk, if its a recurring problem, something should be done about that.

It certainly doesn't mean every elk farmer has an escaping elk problem.

Most of the court appearances are a farce, it seems like, people railroading the guy more than anything illegal. That's the way I read it. Have I missed something?
 
Sigh....Don't know why I'm bothering (car wreck syndrome) but Tom
everybody knows its pretty natural
there is nothing natural about a 10-12' fence turing a game animal into a zoo animal :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top