Original Wild California Condor Shot Dead

[Ithaca 37]

I can't imagine why someone would do this!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030220/ap_on_re_us/dead_condor_2

"One of the original California condors brought from the wild into a captive breeding program during the 1980s has been shot...."

 

[Lostagain]

This hopefully will illustrate why I get so bent out of shape when people make blanket statements over and over again.

A HUNTER shot the condor.

 

[Lostagain]

All of us know it as sure as you're sitting there reading it. The media and the public will state it was a HUNTER.

We know a hunter doesn't do that crap, just some lowlife. Hunters is the label someone gets when they do something revolting to animals with a firearm or bow.
I guess if they say it enough then the general public will beleive it and have a revolting view of hunters.

 

[Ithaca 37]

I musta missed the part that said a hunter shot it. Where's it say that?

This is from another article about it:

"An endangered bird described as the ``matriarch'' of California condors was shot to death by a poacher last week..."

in fact, I checked all the "Related News Stories" links next to the article I quoted and they all said "Poacher".

 

[Washington Hunter]

Could that even be considered poaching? Doesn't it have to be a game animal or bird to be poaching?

 

[Lostagain]

But since it didn't say on this webnet, then IT is right.
edited to remove sharp edges

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 02-21-2003 19:57: Message edited by: Lostagain ]</font>

 

[MarlandS]

\Poach"er\, n. 1. One who poaches; one who kills or catches game or fish contrary to law.

I don't think poacher adequately describes the killer.. but which term would be technically correct?

 

[Washington Hunter]

murderer?

 

[Elkhunter]

Man, that really bites. I hope they find the guilty party and prosecute him/her/them to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Calif. Hunter]

I just posted a topic in the reloading section about the California Fish and Game Department and the US Forestry service asking hunters to either bury the gutpiles from the game they take or to use solid copper (or other non-lead) bullets, due to the sensitivity of the condors to lead poisoning. I saw this request in the papers I picked up at a Forest Service info center a couple of weekends ago.

 

[Ithaca 37]

That'll make the copper bullet manufacturers happy. Last time I tried Barnes I couldn't get them to shoot as well as I wanted so I gave up. Actually, I had the groups down to 1 1/4 inches. I suppose that would be good enough. I'm just a little particular about my handloading. I think copper bullets are just fine for hunting.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Hmm, I never thought about that. Do other birds get lead poisoning in other states from feeding on gut piles? Maybe I should try a Barnes bullet in my 270. I have been thinking of trying the 130 grain XLC anyway. I used to use 140 grain X bullets when I had my 264 Win. Mag. and they shot good enough, 1 inch groups, but the problem I had is they were almost like a solid. Almost no expansion whatsoever. I shot a bull elk at 35 yards with them. It took three shots before he went down. First two were right behind the shoulder and through the lungs. The third shot I put directly into his shoulder and that dropped him. But even that bullet that went through both shoulders didn't expand. The tip was slightly bent but that was it. And of course, the first 2 bullets went right through, but the exit hole was no bigger than the entrance hole. I sure thought they'd expand better than that at that range and with 264 Magnum velocities.