# What is happening to our state?



## Vanilla

https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2020/01/11/utah-cities-counties/

I never thought I'd live long enough to see the day where these agendas were being strongly pushed in Utah. Things have changed so much in the last 15-20 years.

When talking about who to vote for and who is protecting vs taking away hunting opportunities, hopefully this topic is not glossed over.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

Oh, I could write a freaking essay on what I think is happening, but it's all too political, and I'll rant like you've never seen before.


Edit: Article mentions Park city, and links articles that also occured near park city.
Park city is a liberal ivory tower. I think that explains some things perfectly.


----------



## Bowhunter50

Sad to see this is happening.. my favorite quote in the article is:

"A rifle round can travel a lot farther [600 feet]. Just look at a box of American Eagle high-velocity .22-caliber rounds. It reads "dangerous within 1½ miles.""

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 35whelen

wasnt there a guy a few years back that wanted all hunting on utah lake banned because his house was by the lake?


----------



## 3arabians

It is disturbing. Sadly this stuff isn’t new. How long has the archery only zone up emigration canyon been around? At least 10 years to my knowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla

It’s not new, but to see this level, and it expand this way? Castle Valley for heck’s sake! 

And while the Weber County commissioner in the article claims his concerns aren’t “anti-hunting,” as he put it, he also was one that worked very hard to kill stream access when he was a member of the legislature. Anti-sportsman seems to be a pattern for him.


----------



## middlefork

My ad blocker won't let me open the link. Anybody got a short synapses?


----------



## Critter

The article is on the Salt Lake Tribune site. 

It's about a dead elk that was found on one of their trails. No idea if it was poached or shot and left

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


----------



## Lone_Hunter

middlefork said:


> My ad blocker won't let me open the link. Anybody got a short synapses?


How to bypass the "disable the adblocker" popup window.

If your running firefox, open a new tap, and within that tab, go to the address bar and type in "about:config"
then type in "javascript.enabled", Default is "True".
double click on it to disable javascript, it will then say "false".

Reload whatever article your reading, and 90% of the time, you can still read, AND have their stinking ads blocked. You just might not get the pictures to go with the article, but oh well.

When your done, renable javascript. Back in the day, it used to be a checkbox in the options menu. These days, browsers like to hide it.


----------



## 3arabians

Critter said:


> The article is on the Salt Lake Tribune site.
> 
> It's about a dead elk that was found on one of their trails. No idea if it was poached or shot and left
> 
> Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


My thought was that this just had to be a poacher! I sure wish my late cow this year would have died on the trail. Hunter or poacher - that type of behavior doesn't play well for us in these battles. What a shame...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla

So the article is much less about a single poaching incident and more about local cities and even a county trying to take away hunting opportunities. The potential poaching incident is just thrown in there to sensationalize the issue and make us feel bad for all those Park City folk that had to see a dead elk and to illustrate just how “dangerous” hunting is to everyone else.


----------



## Finnegan

3arabians said:


> It is disturbing. Sadly this stuff isn't new. How long has the archery only zone up emigration canyon been around? At least 10 years to my knowledge.


Great example. I was directly involved with that situation, worked with Gallegos, spoke with several residents. Heard numerous accounts of bullets flying overhead in town. Saw the bullet holes in a shed and in the hood of a car. Like it or not, the restriction was made necessary by the irresponsible behavior of hunters.

Ever tried to encourage a hunter to correct his behavior? Only a good idea if you're looking to get a bloody nose.

But the fact is, Utah's population continues to grow and a big percentage of those new residents aren't hunters. Our actions have consequences for all hunters and unethical or irresponsible behavior easily converts non-hunters into anti-hunters.


----------



## High Desert Elk

As long as the laws already on the books are followed, there shouldn't be an issue. Ever. The chance a wounded animal can wander into a high traffic use area and expire happens and will continue to happen.

I find it "funny" that some see no issue with their habits and hobbies that also can create public danger, but are very vocal about yours...


----------



## backcountry

I've long thought we need a hunter advocacy group whose primary purpose is the education of the general public and consistently calling out illegal hunters. As our population continues to grow this issue is simply going to get more contentious. Social science has shown that most people will only change their minds if you speak to their values, which in these cases means public safety, wanton waste of wildlife, etc. 

I find the shock about Castle Valley in Grand County odd. It's long been the haven of wealthy or reclusive liberals. It was bound to be at odds with hunting as much of that population values wildlife for non-consumptive purposes. I know of at least one author who has lived there for a long time who regularly writes from a place of spiritual connection with wild animals. I disagree with them wanting to ban muzzleloaders and shotguns but understand how disconcerting it must be for them to see those weapons nearby. 

But if we don't find ways for new outreach and narratives then I don't see this calming down. I think we can find a way to speak to shared values while respecting difference but it's not going to come from old political techniques. But we definitely have to take a vocal, consistent stand against any and all poaching (which means zero support of SSS) if we want to stand a chance of fostering cooperation with the general public.


----------



## middlefork

Most people in Park City have no clue when in comes to wild animals.

A few years ago I had to listen to a lady who had something to do with save the deer on HYW 248. She couldn't understand why deer were being killed because of traffic.

Unfortunately myself and a couple of other people made some comments to the fact if she and her friends didn't live there along with the resort traffic that comes with it, maybe those deer wouldn't die.

Sorry but a bunch of them live in LA LA land. You will never change their minds.


----------



## backcountry

There are definitely people who are unable to change when it comes to issues. I dare say all of us fall into that category at some point. 

But there are clearly many fellow citizens who just don't know the history and current policies of hunting well enough. They are reachable with outreach. I was. Most of my life I took a fairly strict non-consumptive stance on anything other than fish. I was shaped by experiences in the wild that highly influenced that stance. But I was also largely unaware of of the actual roles hunters have played in conserving wildlife. It only took a few good educators and mentors to change my mind.

I don't see many PETA types changing their minds but I would put good money on the fact that the vast majority of citizens and voters aren't aligned with such polarized views. And the more of them we ally with the more we can buffer anti-hunting citizens and lobbyist. 

Focusing primarily on recruitment only goes so far as most (vast majority) of Americans have shown a tangible disinterest in hunting. But why not stem the tide at disinterest and foster allies with them instead of writing them off. If we don't, they are likely targets for anti-hunting campaigns.


----------



## middlefork

People who don't like hunting humanize the animals.

Can you tell me why it is more noble for an animal to be killed by starvation or traffic than a hunter?

My guess is any more most people do not associate meat in any form with what it takes to bring it to their local shelves. 

I may not be the best representative out there, but I will call BS on the hypocrites that believe they are going to save every animal out there.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

middlefork said:


> People who don't like hunting humanize the animals.


Or people who haven't hunted. This humanization of animals has been ongoing for a decade or two now. You can see it in media, in specific documentaries. I loved watching nature documentaries as a kid. They were more factual in their telling and presentation. They were informative and educational. Nowdays, you'll see stuff like "The life of Black wolf" or something like that on national geographic. Documenting animals isn't enough now, they have to put a dramatic life spin on it that humanizes the animal in how it's being presented.

It's mindnumbing and stupid how people project humanity on something that isn't human. The animals do not care. Heck, you can fiind videos on youtube of a black bear eating a live fawn. Show that to some of these people!

Another thing that gets me is how everyone has to apologize for killing an animal on whatever TV show your watching. I need to get a big ass bumper sticker that says, "Hunt hard, waste nothing, and offer no apologies".


----------



## Vanilla

I humanize the heck out of my dogs. Always have, always will. 

Did you guys see the story about “Coal” down in Moab? I think that would fit into the discussion here. Man, it’s a good thing that wasn’t killed by a hunter!


----------



## Iron Bear

It may have been better if Coal died from a hunter. CWD is suspected. 

I cant even say “dog” around mine. He’s pretty sure he’s human. 

Anthropomorphism I blame Disney. 

And I saw a black deer like coal when I was a young man archery hunting on Monroe. Everyone at camp thought I was lying. A black deer huh? Sure!


----------



## BigT

I read through most of this article and thought to myself if there was anything to justify the reasoning behind wanting changes other than anti-hunting. There are no statistics of non-hunters being shot or hurt by others. Just some libs wanting to close any hunting in the area. Then in a few short years, when the deer are eating all their plants, and pooping in their driveways, they'll complain to the state that they need to come in and take care of the problem deer. 

In the case in Castle Valley, I have experience hunting there. Years ago, it was primitive only. Hunting in the valley (I attached a snip of the valley below) was actually pretty fun in October. The deer migrate into that area. It was muzzle load, shotgun, or archery only due to the proximity of the homes. But you would hear gun fire there that you knew were high powered rifles. I happened to be out there one morning and heard some rapid gun shots. Shortly after, I could hear a home owner yelling that his house was hit by gun fire. Followed by additional gun fire. The following year it was archery only. This last year, I noticed that they again opened it to primitive weapon after 7-8 years of archery only. I hope it stays as primitive in this area. It's a cool place at the right time. But being that I was there when an incident occurred, it's hard to argue. We've all hunted around people willing to take extreme risks. Those people paint a bad picture for the rest of us. 

Hopefully this goes away. I think for the most part there's nothing backing any of the claims. 

Looking at the picture, the area the article is speaking to is the open space between Round Mountain, and the homes on the other side of the open space. 

My .02 anyways!


----------



## olibooger

Lone_Hunter said:


> I need to get a big ass bumper sticker that says, "Hunt hard, waste nothing, and offer no apologies".


Do it! I would buy it


----------



## High Desert Elk

middlefork said:


> People who don't like hunting humanize the animals.
> 
> Can you tell me why it is more noble for an animal to be killed by starvation or traffic than a hunter?


Or it's windpipe crushed and suffocated by a lion, or headquarters eaten while still alive like coyotes do?


----------



## Vanilla

Iron Bear said:


> It may have been better if Coal died from a hunter. CWD is suspected.


That's the thing that fascinates me about this whole discussion. There are many people, particularly some of these people in the article here, that would disagree. They'd way rather see deer die from disease than from a hunter.


----------



## RandomElk16

I love glassing deer and having uppity rich folk tell me I can't kill their deer. It's always strange to them when I inform them that they kill far more deer than I ever will by impacting their wintering grounds. 

Apparently they think because they see some deer running around the neighborhood they don't cause any harm building on their habitat.


As for "dangerous" - people die at each sky resort every year, and they mention Pineview which has multiple deaths each year. 

I am not sure you can really point at hunting because you think a gun=death.


There also was a cow elk carcass over the holiday on the side of I-84 going up Weber Canyon. It was hit by a car. Not a rush for innocent motorist who had to witness that to ban roads and cars now is there.


----------



## RandomElk16

Vanilla said:


> I humanize the heck out of my dogs. Always have, always will.
> 
> Did you guys see the story about "Coal" down in Moab? I think that would fit into the discussion here. Man, it's a good thing that wasn't killed by a hunter!


I gladly would have put that deer above the fire.

Albino deer don't live long, not sure how "Coal" deer fare with predators and disease.


----------



## johnnycake

RandomElk16 said:


> I gladly would have put that deer above the fire.
> 
> Albino deer don't live long, not sure how "Coal" deer fare with predators and disease.


Probably not well in the more open environments like you see throughout Utah. There's a reason certain physiological traits evolve and are carried forward.

That being said, there was a yearling doe that lived near the mouth of AF canyon that I saw a handful of times during the winter of 2013-14 who wasn't as dark as "Coal" but was about in between his coloring and a normal muley's coloring. She always looked like she was standing in a shadow compared to any of the deer around her. Probably got hit by a car on Canyon Road.


----------



## paddler

Seems to me that housing density should play into hunting restrictions. A single dwelling is different from a town or larger city. I don't mind reasonable primitive weapons only restrictions in some areas. This will become a larger discussion as growth increases and hunter participation decreases. The times they are a changin....






Clearly, we cannot trust all hunters to behave responsibly. The incident in the article was at least wanton waste, possibly flat out poaching.


----------



## Vanilla

paddler said:


> Clearly, we cannot trust all hunters to behave responsibly. The incident in the article was at least wanton waste, possibly flat out poaching.


You're probably right. But why assume automatically it was a hunter?


----------



## backcountry

Do people really not understand why it's easier for some citizens to accept wildlife dying from "natural" causes like disease rather than a hunter's bullet? Or for that matter why it's easier to accept indirect death from fragmented habitat or migration corridors? 

It's odd to me that we expect fellow citizens to get outside their comfort zones to understand and hopefully protect our pursuits but "we" won't take the time to understand how their own are well formulated and/or backed by sincere values. Situations in which stakeholders assume the worst of each other don't tend to end well for those holding minority views in the long run.


----------



## Vanilla

Yes, I really don’t understand it. And even if you act incredulous, the logic makes no sense. 

There is no logic in being okay with watching a deer die a long, painful, agonizing death versus the idea of a hunter killing an animal quickly in a way they don’t even observe. 

Yes, I REALLY don’t understand that way of thinking. If you’d like to explain how that process is well-reasoned and thought out, I will listen.


----------



## backcountry

Because it's subjective and based on personal values. Plain and simple. There aren't any more objective facts to any of the beliefs you just stated than what an average citizen who anthropomorphizes wildlife thinks. The notion we try sell that we have some sort of empirical, objective, universal benefit to our sport largely falls flat when you dive into modern hunting.

How many hunters seek out sick or weak big game to shoot each year?

How many of our herds are managed for "natural" cycles versus hunter demand (whether that be maximum yield, trophy potential, etc)?

We have a ton of facts to stand on that our dollars go to wildlife conservation, more than any other user group I can think of. We put our money were our mouth is, even if by state or federal decree. But let's be honest, those are largely self-serving at the moment. And self-serving is fine as long as we don't act like somehow our cause is somehow objectively better than other stakeholders'. (PS...I ultimately make the same case to anti-hunters and the like. Converted a few in the process)

I think when most people are honest they know this. They know we hunt because we enjoy it and serves our needs, desires and values. We know there is nothing empirically better from shooting an animal compared to it dying of "natural causes" than the fact that it serves those desires and our values (and the preservation of those values). 

Now apply that to non-hunters, anti-hunters and the large portion of the American populace that doesn't give a crap.

This game of us vs them is what got us here. "We" play it as poorly as "them". We occasionally win some battles but according to your own assessment things are changing for the worse, ie we are slowly losing in this state. So how does sticking to a tired out strategy, including "othering" large swaths of Americans, change the course? 

If it's not obvious, I think we need new strategies and narratives. I think the same thing about land management (ie what leads others to try to gatekeep hunters off public lands). But hunters are in the unique and unfortunate situation that we are becoming a smaller minority of the population every year (outside Utah). As a minority group fighting for a tradition that isn't recognized as a fundamental right (except in a few states) we have to recognize those realities if we want to sway policy and public opinion. 

Or we can see where continuing to get into power struggles with "them" (choose your favorite enemy) gets "us" (choose your favorite ally).


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla said:


> There is no logic in being okay with watching a deer die a long, painful, agonizing death versus the idea of a hunter killing an animal quickly in a way they don't even observe.


*PS....the irony is you started a thread about a case in which the public did observe the unfortunate outcome of what you even agreed was likely wanton waste or poaching. While I don't know of many examples of people intentionally watching animals die that are relevant to the situation at hand.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

backcountry said:


> Do people really not understand why it's easier for some citizens to accept wildlife dying from "natural" causes like disease rather than a hunter's bullet?Or for that matter why it's easier to accept indirect death from fragmented habitat or migration corridors?
> .


It's a reflection of the political landscape in today's society. Left wing views, vs right wing views. There isn't much middle or common ground anymore.


----------



## Vanilla

I hope I die a quick, mostly painless death myself rather than a long drawn out painful demise. 

My opinion on what type of death seems better has absolutely nothing to do with self serving interests in hunting. 

We can disagree on this one. I’m comfortable with that. And you can lecture me like I’m some idiot that doesn’t know how to spell my own name all you want. You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect or understanding because I don’t understand why someone would want to see a deer suffer long term and die a painful death. It won’t make me believe that perspective is logical in any way, shape, or form.


----------



## Iron Bear

https://fox13now.com/2020/01/14/violent-threats-made-against-dwr-officer-who-shot-domestic-deer/

Seems the good folks of Antimony will want to kill a human that kills their town pet. I never took Antimony for a liberals hideaway.


----------



## backcountry

You critiquing anyone's tone is laughable, Vanilla. Your posts reek of the exact same issues you critique me of. I have no problem with it but I don't presume the same unknowables you do. In fact, my default guess is people hold their values sincerely and have thought them out, including you. I don't presume you believe you are superior to the people you are criticizing, even if I disagree with your posts and their lack of empathy. Doesn't make me better or on a different plane. It just means I have a different perspective than yours and I willing to share it as passionately as you. 

We've definitely been down this road a few times, no doubt we will again. Hell, it's winter, it's probably just the start.

In this case non-hunters saw dead and abandoned wildlife in an area that is increasingly populated by people who seem to prefer non-consumptive recreation. Given their diverse values, it's not a shock that some of them are disappointed or concerned by that reality. I don't agree with them trying to limit hunting on historically accessible land but can put myself in their shoes to understand their perspective. That actually helps me as a hunter. In fact it gives me a better chance to protect my interests.

Others here have explained their own ability to understand these perspectives and concerns. Most homeowners and recreationist don't enjoy hearing gun fire in close proximity to them. Some involve actual shots hitting homes. 

I'll support you as a hunter choosing to live your values. I share many similar ones. But I also choose to respect fellow citizens who have non-consumptive values and their concerns when they see cases like this that they feel jeopardize those values and experiences. There is immense irony in folks like you "lecturing" about the woes of modern society and it's ills while expressing the exact same rigidity you so clearly despise.


----------



## Vanilla

You’re arguing a complete straw man. My comments are 100% talking about the “Coal” situation and the comment about would it have been better to die from a hunter or CWD. You know that, but keep making it about something else. Why? 

You can keep making up arguments or points I never made to try and prove how “right” you are and how wrong I am all you want. But that’s exactly what you’re doing...making it up. No doubt we’ll go down this road again, because no doubt you’ll continue to annoy me by riding in on your faux high horse.


----------



## PBH

Iron Bear said:


> https://fox13now.com/2020/01/14/violent-threats-made-against-dwr-officer-who-shot-domestic-deer/
> 
> Seems the good folks of Antimony will want to kill a human that kills their town pet. I never took Antimony for a liberals hideaway.


The interesting thing about the Antimony issue is this is the location where multiple multi-elk killings have taken place by the residents because, in their minds, the DWR didn't show up soon enough to take care of the problem elk.

But when the DWR shows up to take care of a deer to quickly, they are up in arms.

That truly is a "no win" area. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's not a liberal hideway - it's an anti-government hideaway.


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla,

Who has said they want to "watch" an animal die slowly? That's the only strawman, and also a false dichotomy. It's your standard MO to fabricate and/or exaggerate to defend your stance. And yes, I'll keep calling it out. I'll even call it out as the bad faith argument it is, another one of your pet peeves.

The irony is at this point the only illogical stance is your own.

PS... you've brought up 3 different cases, might want to state which one you are discussing as you jump around on your bandwagon against your perceived enemies. Hard to keep track of the windmills you are fighting while on your trusty steed. Because comparing how wildlife dies has been used for more than just the "Coal" example you are referencing now. It seems to be a central theme against anti-hunters in general in this thread. But I think you know this.

Oops, even caught you contradicting yourself in this thread. Seems you might be the one unaware of your own illogical and/or dishonest rhetoric.



Vanilla said:


> You're arguing a complete straw man. My comments are 100% talking about the "Coal" situation and the comment about would it have been better to die from a hunter or CWD. You know that, but keep making it about something else. Why?
> 
> You can keep making up arguments or points I never made to try and prove how "right" you are and how wrong I am all you want. But that's exactly what you're doing...making it up. No doubt we'll go down this road again, because no doubt you'll continue to annoy me by riding in on your faux high horse.





Vanilla said:


> That's the thing that fascinates me about this whole discussion. There are many people, particularly some of these people in the article here, that would disagree. They'd way rather see deer die from disease than from a hunter.


Who is making up stuff again?


----------



## Iron Bear

PBH said:


> The interesting thing about the Antimony issue is this is the location where multiple multi-elk killings have taken place by the residents because, in their minds, the DWR didn't show up soon enough to take care of the problem elk.
> 
> But when the DWR shows up to take care of a deer to quickly, they are up in arms.
> 
> That truly is a "no win" area. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's not a liberal hideway - it's an anti-government hideaway.


^^^ Right! So it's not just liberals making a fuss about a wild animal dying.

I believe in today's society its popular to be a victim. Doesn't matter whether your liberal or conservative it's quite ok these days to b!tch at the top of your lungs. Put it on social media and try to rabble rouse as many people to your cause as you can to your cause. Activism is cool.

I'm guilty of this kind of behavior myself.


----------



## Critter

What I have found with Antimony is that there are enough liberals moving there to get away from the rest of the liberals down in California. I have ran into a few of them while down there hunting.


----------



## Vanilla

Backcountry, you are trying so hard to pick a fight here. You have conflated this issue so much. I’m 100% confident you are the only one who has an issue with what I’ve been saying and haven’t followed the discussion here. 

I don’t mind diving into the slop with pigs for entertainment every now and then. It can be fun. But I do it on my own terms. Troll away, big guy. Troll away.


----------



## backcountry

It's funny that when called out, with quotes of your own words, your only response is to go personal.

Continue to lie, exaggerate and/or engage in obvious illogical rhetoric and I'll call it out.

I'll let others speak for themselves. Which is the root of our disagreement; I actually engage people's shared ideas (yours in this case) while you fabricate the worst possible motives to defend your personal stance, ie the heart of a strawman.

That sort of dishonesty deserves to be called out. And I bring the receipts when I do it. It's not trolling, it's why we protect a "market place of ideas", ie unsupported bad ideas like yours get shown for the illogical farce they are.

So let's bring it back to your claim that these people you are railing against are okay "watching a deer die a long, painful, agonizing death". Here is your chance to finally justify that stance, one at this point that stands as a complete fabrication (ie the strawman you ironically accussed me of using). One I have shown in your own words is specifically about the original article, despite your false allegation that I made it up. 

Someone who cares about logical ideas, rationality and is against trolling would actually step up to defend their public, vitriolic claims.


----------



## middlefork

Critter said:


> What I have found with Antimony is that there are enough liberals moving there to get away from the rest of the liberals down in California. I have ran into a few of them while down there hunting.


The keeper of the deer definitely comes across more like a Bundy than a liberal.


----------



## PBH

middlefork said:


> The keeper of the deer definitely comes across more like a Bundy than a liberal.


Well....when you invite Bundy to speak at Stake Conference on Sunday, what do you expect? This is Antimony. And while Antimony is technically in Garfield County (ie: Garfield Count Sheriff involvement), it is much more closely associated with Piute County. I'm surprised that we haven't had the Piute County Sheriff weigh in with his opinion of what the DWR LEO did wrong...


----------



## backcountry

PBH,

I just read the story. Do DWR LEOs or conservation officers have the legal authority to go onto private land unannounced? Tough situation. 

But threatening "street justice" in retaliation is a dangerous escalation. Definitely seems more "Bundy" than liberal to me; don't know too many liberals that like "street justice".

Hope the conservation officer remains safe and it all blows over without anyone getting hurt. Makes me think I should release all the pet deer out of my backyard.


----------



## PBH

backcountry said:


> Do DWR LEOs or conservation officers have the legal authority to go onto private land unannounced?


A DWR LEO's enforcement powers would be no different than any other POST certified law enforcement agency in Utah.


----------



## backcountry

PBH said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do DWR LEOs or conservation officers have the legal authority to go onto private land unannounced?
> 
> 
> 
> A DWR LEO's enforcement powers would be no different than any other POST certified law enforcement agency in Utah.
Click to expand...

Which means what exactly when it comes to this situation? I ask as this is outside my basic knowledge. Can a peace officer just show up on your property without permission or announcement in situations like this?

I don't have any experience with wildlife entering my land in such a fashion so I've never had to consider this scenario.


----------



## PBH

My understanding is that the Garfield County Sheriff dispatched the DWR LEO due to an issue with a deer (it supposedly killed a dog).

I'm no law exper -- maybe someone else can chime in -- but I would guess once the Sheriff's office requested the DWR to take action, then that's all the DWR would need to enter private property to take care of the wild game under which the DWR has jurisdiction.

It was a wild animal. It's against the law in Utah to keep protected game (mule deer) as pets. This would also give the DWR cause to enter private property.

Just my opinion.




....now, whether or not shooting the animal was justified or not could be another discussion. But he certainly would have that authority if he deemed it necessary.


----------



## Critter

From the story it says that the DOW was investigating that the deer had killed a dog. 

"The DWR argued she’s too domesticated, a public danger and claims she killed a dog."

Perhaps the family that lost the dog if it was indeed killed by the deer filed a complaint. 

There is a lot of unanswered questions. Perhaps the DOW officer should of just wrote a ticket out to the folks who owned the property and were quite likely feeding the deer.


----------



## PBH

Critter -- knowing the area, and the history, and also knowing the LEO involved, I do not believe this has anything to do with a deer being shot. This has to do with an area that dislikes the DWR (or, rather, any law enforcement agency outside of Piute County), and an officer with a past history of poor public relations. 

This is a case of a local community that has been waiting for an opportunity to make a fuss, and an officer that provided it. 

O*--:llama:



*Disclaimer*
I'm assuming who the officer is. I really don't know for sure...


----------



## backcountry

Definitely agree that the deer is state property and no real argument to be made about it being a town pet. 

Just have no clue on how the law works for peace officers entering private property in these cases. Seems like a problematic practice either way to not attempt to get "permission" or communicate intent before discharging a firearm at wildlife while on private property. Especially given there didn't seem to be an emergency or imminent threat to rush the situation. At a minimum it's horrible optics for the agency. 

But at the end of the day there isn't an excuse for the town's citizens to threaten the life of an officer. But from what you describe it sounds like a perfect storm that's been brewing for a while.


----------



## PBH

I can see your point on entering private property, and discharging a firearm. But, at the same time, we are talking about an area of the world where discharging a firearm from the back porch might not be very uncommon. This isn't Bountiful, or Alpine.

....like I said before, this is the same area that has a history of killing elk the minute they show up on their property...


----------



## backcountry

Yeah, definitely not comparable to even my situation in Cedar. 

From your description it just sounds like a lose-lose situation for any agency employee. Feel for officer you know. It sounds like he was trying to do his best even if there might, not certain at all, be problems with optics in hindsight. I can't imagine what it's like to be in the midst of such ridiculous blowback.

The cultural aspect sucks even worse as that area in general is a critical migration corridor, correct?


----------



## Critter

PBH said:


> Critter -- knowing the area, and the history, and also knowing the LEO involved, I do not believe this has anything to do with a deer being shot. This has to do with an area that dislikes the DWR (or, rather, any law enforcement agency outside of Piute County), and an officer with a past history of poor public relations.
> 
> This is a case of a local community that has been waiting for an opportunity to make a fuss, and an officer that provided it.
> 
> O*--:llama:
> 
> *Disclaimer*
> I'm assuming who the officer is. I really don't know for sure...


Oh how I know how they feel down in that area. I have hunted it quite often.


----------



## Iron Bear

PBH said:


> Critter -- knowing the area, and the history, and also knowing the LEO involved, I do not believe this has anything to do with a deer being shot. This has to do with an area that dislikes the DWR (or, rather, any law enforcement agency outside of Piute County), and an officer with a past history of poor public relations.
> 
> This is a case of a local community that has been waiting for an opportunity to make a fuss, and an officer that provided it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Disclaimer*
> I'm assuming who the officer is. I really don't know for sure...


Spot on.


----------



## Vanilla

I’d answer the law question, but then I’d just get accused of being a liar, being dishonest, operating in bad faith, Having nefarious intent with malfeasance, murdering kittens, and then be accused of attacking someone personally. We don’t want that, now do we???? Ha! What a joke... 

There are too many unknowns to answer the legality question. But in general, law enforcement needs either consent, an exigent circumstance, or a warrant to enter and remain on private property.


----------



## CPAjeff

Vanilla said:


> I'd answer the law question, but then I'd just get accused of being a liar, being dishonest, operating in bad faith, Having nefarious intent with malfeasance, murdering kittens, and then be accused of attacking someone personally. We don't want that, now do we????


It doesn't seem to have stopped you before ...


----------



## middlefork

Vanilla said:


> I'd answer the law question, but then I'd just get accused of being a liar, being dishonest, operating in bad faith, Having nefarious intent with malfeasance, murdering kittens, and then be accused of attacking someone personally. We don't want that, now do we???? Ha! What a joke...
> 
> There are too many unknowns to answer the legality question. But in general, law enforcement needs either consent, an exigent circumstance, or a warrant to enter and remain on private property.


So as I understand it "exigent circumstance" was the reason to enter.

I have had the unpleasant experience of multiple DWR LEO enter private property and detain everyone for the (unfounded) suspicion of illegally shooting a protected species. No warrant or consent.

Does the fact that there was a game animal involved provide exigent circumstance?

Trying not to criticize. I'm sure he was just trying to do his job.


----------



## Vanilla

A game animal being involved is not an exigent circumstance on its own. Exigency usually involves the need to enter immediately without a warrant to protect the officer or someone else, to prevent escape of a suspect, to prevent the destruction of evidence, etc. 

There absolutely could have been an exigency here. There may not have been. We don’t know the answer to that based upon the limited information presented here.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

Alright, grab your coffeee and buckle up boys, I'll tell you EXACTLY what I think is happening to our state, because I've been there, done that, seen it, and I'm, not blind to it.


I got into ANOTHER argument with my wife about it last night. I think one day, she's gonna have enough of my BS and leave. But what I see, I see it everyday, and I hate it with every fiber of my being, because I've seen it all before.


In a word: Californication.


Some background on myself, so you understand where I'm coming from with this. I first moved to Utah, back in 2010. I moved here, from, I am ASHAMED to say, California. My family is originally from northern California. My fathers hometown had all but 50 people in it. He took me upland game hunting all the time as a kid. (I had to learn big game on my own after moving here). At some point, we moved to Chino in southern California ... back when it still had cows and corn fields. I got used to the smell of manure in the morning and got pretty good at swatting flies. I'm the highschool kid that took a midnight ride offroading into someones alphalpha field. (Yeah I know, it's not something I'm proud of) I Shot archery in my backyard for 2 or 3 hours every day after school. If I had a choice between the beach and the mountains, I took the mountains every time. When I moved here, i got back to my roots, Utah was a natural transition for me.

Chino today, is NOTHING like it was when I moved there. Full of strip malls, the farmers are gone, the cows are gone, people packed in like sardines, horse properties gave way to McMansions, I can't shoot a bow in my folks backyard anymore. Roads and drainage's plowed through the woods I used to play in. I remember trying to hunt coyotes with a bow in high school, not that I was successful, but I tried. In short, the place I grew up in during high school is NOTHING like it is now.

When I first moved to where I live now, it reminded me a lot like Chino back in the 90s. I knew things would change here too, I just didn't realize HOW FAST.

The problem is, the word got out about Utah. I always kept this place under my hat because I didn't want other people moving here. The trouble is the powers that be, where silicon slopes is concerned, got the word out. Maybe I'm wrong, but I blame Herbert. If it was his policy to encourage tech companies to move to Utah to generate more jobs for Utahs, then he is freaking stupid. IT is an inheritanly liberal industry. I ought to know, I worked for an IT company for 14 years before they offshored my entire department to poland! 

So Sure the companies came to silicon slopes, and they took many of their liberal employees with them. 1 out of very 5 car tags is from California, and it pisses me off EVERY STINKING DAY. Most of the Californians coming here, are NOT like myself. At least I don't think they are, but I hope I'm wrong in that. Californians in general tend to think they're all that and a bag of chips. They won't adapt to Utah ways and integrate themselves. They'll say things like "well back in cali we did it this way..." , or "back in cali..." 

They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs. They won't reflect on why the job they are working is in Utah, they'll be mad that the job is in Utah and not California, and be made at Utah for having the job instead of the stupid liberal policies that brought the job here to begin with. I feel I know how these people think, because I grew up there, and I loath them more then any born and bread Utahn ever would, because of incrementalism.

I think most Utahns have no idea what is happening, (my wife is born and raised here) because many changes happen in small steps. Things are easier to take in small doses. My problem is, ive seen it all before, so I know what the end result is going to be. I can already tell you that SLC is a carbon copy of California. Orem and Provo, are now like how SLC used to be. Spanish fork is now how like Orem and Provo used to be. Salem is kinda how Spanish fork used to be, and I think it's all happened in the span of the last 3 or 4 years. Every time I leave the house, I see it.


One thing that I've learned from moving here when I did, is that people are not meant to live in an enviorment where they are packed together like sardines. As the population density increases, I think you will find people will be less kind, and more high strung. Your going to see more road rage incidents. On that note, I'm already seeing things in Spanish fork, that I have not seen since I lived in California.

It's only going to get worse. Gridlock traffic. Angry people. Road rage. Unaffordable housing, liberal politicians in power, it's all coming. KSL posted an article afew months back on how Utah will be purple in 10 years. I hate KSL because it's a liberal rag, but I know their right about Utah turning purple.

It pisses me off every day, because I love this place, and I hate seeing what is happening to it. If we hadn't sunk some roots that are kind of hard to pull up at this moment in time, I'd already have the moving truck packed.

I love my wife, I'd do anything for her, but the one thing I won't do, is live a California lifestyle again. I won't do it.


----------



## 3arabians

Good read Lone hunter. I had 2 cups of coffee and now putting myself on suicide watch. Thanks. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## middlefork

3arabians said:


> Good read Lone hunter. I had 2 cups of coffee and now putting myself on suicide watch. Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL

Lone Hunter, I remember when the only highway between Boise and St. George was two lanes wide.

But I agree there are a lot more people now. A lot of them are home grown and yes alot are from other states. It is too bad your little slice of Happy Valley is so happy anymore.

Any number of people are out there trying to find the next frontier. I wish them luck but I believe the old adage, you can run, but you can't hide.


----------



## backcountry

Lone Hunter,

If you are pointing fingers at 'dem libruls moving from California than I assume you are also pointing fingers at the local land owners (normally ranchers, farmers or fruit growers) who sell their land to be subdivided to these Invaders? It takes two to tango.

Back to the issue at hand....sounds like hunters need to either start buying up land around municipalities or work with those owners selling them off as open space to preserve hunting rights. Stakeholder groups across the West have been doing that for decades when it comes to key parcels. Expensive but feasible if people are truly concerned about losing access (added benefit of preserving winter range).

I don't buy into the doomsday scenario. The old saying "the only constant in life is change" rings as true now as it did in the deep past.


----------



## paddler

Lone_Hunter said:


> Alright, grab your coffeee and buckle up boys, I'll tell you EXACTLY what I think is happening to our state, because I've been there, done that, seen it, and I'm, not blind to it.
> 
> I got into ANOTHER argument with my wife about it last night. I think one day, she's gonna have enough of my BS and leave. But what I see, I see it everyday, and I hate it with every fiber of my being, because I've seen it all before.
> 
> In a word: Californication.
> 
> Some background on myself, so you understand where I'm coming from with this. I first moved to Utah, back in 2010. I moved here, from, I am ASHAMED to say, California. My family is originally from northern California. My fathers hometown had all but 50 people in it. He took me upland game hunting all the time as a kid. (I had to learn big game on my own after moving here). At some point, we moved to Chino in southern California ... back when it still had cows and corn fields. I got used to the smell of manure in the morning and got pretty good at swatting flies. I'm the highschool kid that took a midnight ride offroading into someones alphalpha field. (Yeah I know, it's not something I'm proud of) I Shot archery in my backyard for 2 or 3 hours every day after school. If I had a choice between the beach and the mountains, I took the mountains every time. When I moved here, i got back to my roots, Utah was a natural transition for me.
> 
> Chino today, is NOTHING like it was when I moved there. Full of strip malls, the farmers are gone, the cows are gone, people packed in like sardines, horse properties gave way to McMansions, I can't shoot a bow in my folks backyard anymore. Roads and drainage's plowed through the woods I used to play in. I remember trying to hunt coyotes with a bow in high school, not that I was successful, but I tried. In short, the place I grew up in during high school is NOTHING like it is now.
> 
> When I first moved to where I live now, it reminded me a lot like Chino back in the 90s. I knew things would change here too, I just didn't realize HOW FAST.
> 
> The problem is, the word got out about Utah. I always kept this place under my hat because I didn't want other people moving here. The trouble is the powers that be, where silicon slopes is concerned, got the word out. Maybe I'm wrong, but I blame Herbert. If it was his policy to encourage tech companies to move to Utah to generate more jobs for Utahs, then he is freaking stupid. IT is an inheritanly liberal industry. I ought to know, I worked for an IT company for 14 years before they offshored my entire department to poland!
> 
> So Sure the companies came to silicon slopes, and they took many of their liberal employees with them. 1 out of very 5 car tags is from California, and it pisses me off EVERY STINKING DAY. Most of the Californians coming here, are NOT like myself. At least I don't think they are, but I hope I'm wrong in that. Californians in general tend to think they're all that and a bag of chips. They won't adapt to Utah ways and integrate themselves. They'll say things like "well back in cali we did it this way..." , or "back in cali..."
> 
> They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs. They won't reflect on why the job they are working is in Utah, they'll be mad that the job is in Utah and not California, and be made at Utah for having the job instead of the stupid liberal policies that brought the job here to begin with. I feel I know how these people think, because I grew up there, and I loath them more then any born and bread Utahn ever would, because of incrementalism.
> 
> I think most Utahns have no idea what is happening, (my wife is born and raised here) because many changes happen in small steps. Things are easier to take in small doses. My problem is, ive seen it all before, so I know what the end result is going to be. I can already tell you that SLC is a carbon copy of California. Orem and Provo, are now like how SLC used to be. Spanish fork is now how like Orem and Provo used to be. Salem is kinda how Spanish fork used to be, and I think it's all happened in the span of the last 3 or 4 years. Every time I leave the house, I see it.
> 
> One thing that I've learned from moving here when I did, is that people are not meant to live in an enviorment where they are packed together like sardines. As the population density increases, I think you will find people will be less kind, and more high strung. Your going to see more road rage incidents. On that note, I'm already seeing things in Spanish fork, that I have not seen since I lived in California.
> 
> It's only going to get worse. Gridlock traffic. Angry people. Road rage. Unaffordable housing, liberal politicians in power, it's all coming. KSL posted an article afew months back on how Utah will be purple in 10 years. I hate KSL because it's a liberal rag, but I know their right about Utah turning purple.
> 
> It pisses me off every day, because I love this place, and I hate seeing what is happening to it. If we hadn't sunk some roots that are kind of hard to pull up at this moment in time, I'd already have the moving truck packed.
> 
> I love my wife, I'd do anything for her, but the one thing I won't do, is live a California lifestyle again. I won't do it.


To heck with purple, this state needs to turn blue. A very deep, solid blue.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

paddler said:


> To heck with purple, this state needs to turn blue. A very deep, solid blue.


Now your just getting nasty. But hey if you want human waste on the streets, poverty, homeless camps, mind boggling taxes on everything, high crime, rampant drug use, and everything else that goes along with living in a deep blue state, that is your prerogative. I on the other hand, would sooner take a flying leap off squaw peak before I lived in that again. You'd probably be happy if i did. Yeah, you would. I know you would.

As an aside, I used to live a couple miles away, and worked 2 blocks from where this video was taken:





I know EXACTLY where this is. You can have blue. Been there, done that. No thanks. I'll live in a red. deep deep red state any day of the year. I've lived in both, you'll never convince me otherwise. It is because of my experiences is why I'm so staunchly conservative now.


----------



## paddler

Lone_Hunter said:


> Now your just getting nasty. But hey if you want human waste on the streets, poverty, homeless camps, mind boggling taxes on everything, high crime, rampant drug use, and everything else that goes along with living in a deep blue state, that is your prerogative. I on the other hand, would sooner take a flying leap off squaw peak before I lived in that again. You'd probably be happy if i did. Yeah, you would. I know you would.
> 
> As an aside, I used to live a couple miles away, and worked 2 blocks from where this video was taken:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know EXACTLY where this is. You can have blue. Been there, done that. No thanks. I'll live in a red. deep deep red state any day of the year. I've lived in both, you'll never convince me otherwise. It is because of my experiences is why I'm so staunchly conservative now.


Yep, wealth inequality is a huge problem, and only getting worse. I read an article today that said a $1/hr raise decreases suicide and other "deaths of despair" by 3.5%. I say raise it more.


----------



## Lone_Hunter




----------



## backcountry

Lone_Hunter said:


> They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs.


After all of the back and forth, this to me is the scariest, most outright undemocratic thing I've read so far. This is what negative partisanship breeds. No longer are we just fellow citizens with differing worldviews but instead we are mortal enemies and our opposition is no longer legitimate.

And all of that over a generic sentiment like "the people living in a community should have a say about firearms around residential areas," one that was actually expressed in the original article, not one created out of whole cloth.


----------



## Vanilla

I don't think "undemocratic" was what you were going for there. Or at least if you were, you're way off. 

He isn't saying they shouldn't have a say. He's saying he strongly disagrees with their say and he doesn't want to see their say become his way of life. That's not "undemocratic." He's just sharing his opinion based upon his experiences. We may not like it or agree with it, but it would be "undemocratic" to suggest he shouldn't be able to do so. 

Quite frankly, I don't want Utah to become like California either. There is a reason people are flocking here from there, and it isn't because California is an awesome place to live. We're somewhat off topic, but at least Lone Hunter is trying to answer the question of "what has happened to our state?" (which was the original question of the OP...which was me)


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla,

Definitely not way off. You may interpret his comment differently but his comments are fairly analyzed as undemocratic. Such comments are:

"They won't adapt to Utah ways and integrate themselves"

"They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs"

You don't seem to understand the range of what democratic and therefor undemocratic means. Let's look at it's definition since your response is ill-informed:

Undemocratic: not relating or according to democratic principles

Basic democratic principles that are often cited include citizen involvement in decision making and equality amongst citizens, including to be involved in decision making. It also speaks, directly and indirectly, to social norms in which democracies thrive. It's a fair term to use in regards to citizen behavior as well as qualities of actual governments. 

Hence comments about failing to "adapt" or "integrate" into existing ways can be validly judged as undemocratic. Those expectations and the belief that "they'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for" is inconsistent with the fact that they are fellow citizens and therefore have every right and ability to define a need for change and "ask" and/or "call" for it.

Sorry mate, it's basic civics. I could go further and say it is also illiberal but I didn't feel that argument was necessary as they often go hand in hand.

And I agree he has every right to express opinions even if I find them abhorrent. I clearly am fine with disagreement nor did I call for him not to. Were you intentionally throwing in a red herring? As no one here is advocating what you stated.

Not once did Lone mention specific ideas and values he disagrees with. Instead he scapegoated them for having the audacity to participate and influence our state. Those are very different approaches and one is problematic and outright inconsistent with a country being a healthy democracy. It strikes at the core of why I find your and his comments in this thread so insidious.


----------



## Vanilla

It is highly entertaining to watch you spin yourself in circles trying to sound educated while attacking me personally. 

Here are a couple things to consider. 

It is possible for someone to disagree with you without being wrong. You keep operating from a position of supremacy, for some absolutely unintelligible reason. It’s interesting to watch you on this forum. On 80% of the threads you are rational and logical. There are, however, a couple topics that you lose your mind and despite your best efforts to appear objective, you just sound like a preachy butt hole. This one of liberalization of Utah is one of them. Sorry, not sorry. 

I know what “democratic” means. It means that while some people think changes should be made, some think they shouldn’t. And criticizing one perspective while celebrating the other does not make one democratic, it makes one a partisan honk. If the shoe fits, wear it my friend. 

Proceed...attack me all you want. Continue to talk in circles and avoid the topic at hand. Maybe I should talk about how disingenuous OR is again to watch you REALLY freak out? That’s where this all started anyway, right?


----------



## backcountry

It's beyond ironic to hear comments about "preachy buttholes" from a user who started a thread titled "what's happening to our state" about an article dealing with what you agree is likely poaching and involves gun shots near personal residences. Dear Vanilla, I think in this case you might be projecting. 

And once again you fabricate lies and ignore another's actual perspective. I didn't celebrate anyone political perspective over another in this thread, as you seem to not so subtly imply. Definitely not a "partisan honk", whatever the hell that is. I'm about as centrist and moderate as they come. You fail to account for the fact that I had been one of the harshest critics of Paddler when he made gross generalizations of all things potentially republican. I don't call for random civility on the internet but I do expect people to actually engage the ideas shared and not oddly battle imaginary windmills. 

And it's ridiculous for you of all people to claim someone uses "personal attacks". You have to be one of the worst offenders on this site for going personal. I mean just look at how many insults and names you used in the above post about me. The irony is of you go back and actually read my words you'll find I criticize your posts and shared ideas. I may use strong adjectives against them or your choices but I don't dare assume to know you well enough to call you names. And if I do I'll apologize. There is a fundamental and clear distinction between highlighting a bold lie and calling someone a liar. 

And once again this is were your comments are insidious. They rarely account for what people actually say and instead insert lies, innuendos and something that exists even outside the boundaries of exaggeration. I've highlighted those issues here, with your actual quotes, multiple times and the common response is deflection and/or name calling.


----------



## backcountry

Missed this one:



Vanilla said:


> Maybe I should talk about how disingenuous OR is again to watch you REALLY freak out? That's where this all started anyway, right?


Are you re-litigating an almost three year old thread? I think you are the only one making something out of that dinosaur.

"This started" when you chose to create the strawman about your perceived political enemy. I will link your hyperbolic allegation again:



Vanilla said:


> There is no logic in being okay with watching a deer die a long, painful, agonizing death versus the idea of a hunter killing an animal quickly in a way they don't even observe.


I've asked you to justify your claims multiple times but instead you state things like:



Vanilla said:


> You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect or understanding


That retort was a "personal attack" and yet another example of how you deflect from the topic and fabricate the worst possible version of your perceived political opposition to defend your own views, ie a strawman and/or bad faith argument. You eventually double downed on that claim about my assumed superiority despite me clearly stating the opposite pages before (see post #37).

Do you want me to keep going?

I'll make it easier for you so you don't have to create lies about other's views: I am against the reduction in hunting access mentioned in the article (stated in one of my first replies). I offered solutions, multiple times, if people are really worried about this. I never once "celebrated" the perceived opponents views. In fact I stated I prefer to take their views and values in good faith as it allows me to better protect my own. I don't have any beef with you. I do think ideas you often express on this forum regarding general politics surrounding our sport are insidious to our shared hunting values. I am consistent about criticizing such techniques no matter the partisan affiliation of the person sharing the ideas.

I consider things like scapegoating (the core of Lone's comment), exaggeration or lies about others views, and generally bad faith claims to be harmful to my pursuits and will call them out in public when I see them. It just so happens the comments I am calling out right now are from hunters.


----------



## Vanilla

Everyone that disagrees with you lies and does so in bad faith. We get it. Move along.


----------



## backcountry

Nope, just another unsubstantiated lie and deflection. I do often call out your ideas as such when it's warranted. And I back up those criticisms with your own quotes, as I just did above.

For example, PBH and I had a very respectful disagreement about different perspectives in this very thread. 

I actually assume you are capable of keeping on topic and supporting your views.

*Edit:. There was a fact in your post, a lie by definition is a bad faith argument.


----------



## Vanilla

Whatever you say, sport. If I just say you’re right will you move on so people can actually discuss the topic at hand? Or do you have to continue hashing and re-hashing your BS? 

You’re right. I’m a liar. I’m nefarious in all I do. I hate babies and small kittens. We good to move on until the next time you get butt hurt?


----------



## Lone_Hunter

I'll right fine, ill explain what I mean when I said:


"They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs."

I'll admit, I packed alot in that. 

- I have also lived in Texas, and Mississippi. I have also visited Louisiana, Alabama, and Arkansas. Abroad, I have lived in Korea for 395 days , breifly visited Japan, and a few different central American countries for about a month. What I find is that each place has it's own flavor and it's own culture. It is their home.

- You don't go to someones home and start demanding changes. That isn't cool. Nobody asked you to come, nor did anyone put a gun to your head and make you come there. It is their home. You came, to their home, they didn't come to your home, you came to them. Their home, their culture, their way of doing things. I think one should respect the local ways, and only start questioning things until you've been there long enough to understand it all. 

- Intellectual honestly. If you move, because your home state went to crap, you should be asking yourself, why? Why did this happen? How did this happen. It may involve looking deep into yourself and re examining your core beleifs in poltiics or policy. They might just be wrong. Without examining the why, all your going to do is move to a new place, and trash it too, and the cycle repeats itself. It's insanity. The problem is a lot of people are ideologues who will stick to an ideology even if it's been shown to be a destructive one, and are incapable, or unwilling to reevaluate things.

Since backcountry jumped on me about "Utah ways"
Having a common culture, a common belief system, and shared values is what keeps a society together and peaceful Move to Arizona? Become an Arizonan. Move to Australia? Become an Australian. Multiculturalism doesn't work. It divides and separates a society, and creates strife. This isn't the same thing as multi-ethnic, since someone might think I'm making a racist comment.


Nothing wrong with multi-ethinic, that works, I'm proof of it, I'm the biggest example of a mixed breed mutt you'll ever see, but I'm ALL American, and i'm Utahn who happened to live in California at one time. I am not a German-Chinese-Misc-American who's a Californian that happens to be living in Utah. 

I dislike hyphens immensely.

Now that I've unpacked everything, do you understand now?


----------



## backcountry

LoneHunter,

I appreciate your honesty and clarification. And I fundamentally disagree with what you have stated and still believe the quote, and now your clarification, is highly undemocratic. This is especially true in relation to the topic at hand.

I'll defend your right to live in your home the way you desire. But when it comes to stakeholders using public resources, the topic at hand, then our fellow citizens, no matter where they migrated from, don't have some sort of arbitrary waiting period before using their voice and vote to affect change and their values. 

Per integration... I'm not going down that rabbit hole beyond stating that as long as people integrate into a liberal (not illiberal), democratic and pluralistic system than I'm not sure we can ever expect much more. Our country and therefore states have always been an experiment in people with different desires and values learning to interact with each other. And we are doing just fine as a culture.

And that includes citizens wanting to hunt as much as it includes homeowners not wanting to have gunfire near their homes or hikers having to stumble across poached elk on open space trails near towns.


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla said:


> Whatever you say, sport. If I just say you're right will you move on so people can actually discuss the topic at hand? Or do you have to continue hashing and re-hashing your BS?
> 
> You're right. I'm a liar. I'm nefarious in all I do. I hate babies and small kittens. We good to move on until the next time you get butt hurt?


You are the only one calling yourself names in this thread. I haven't done that and if I make that mistake I'll apologize. I assume you are a solid person; I believe are likely one of the many intelligent people on this forum given you have a JD; and I assume that you hold your values sincerely. I however will continue to criticize the ideas you share on the forum when I believe they harm our shared hobby and it's preservation. I'll also continue to call out the rhetorical strategies you regularly employ that are highly problematic.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

backcountry said:


> highly undemocratic.


I haven't followed every iota on this back and forth, but I have seen you use this word "undemocratic" a couple times.

You seem to value "democracy" highly. Though I wonder if your aware of it's failings. Ancient Athen's is a study of how a pure democracy can go awry. As I'm sure you've heard (though probably don't believe), the United States has never been a democracy, pure or otherwise. It's been a constitutional republic with democratic tendencies.

What is sad is the very definition of what this country is, has been hijacked by partisan politics. Democrats say Democracy. Republicans say Republic. I'm an independent, I say Constitutional Republic, it always has been that. The word "Democracy" has been used and twisted so much, I at least, view it as a jingoistic term used by a political faction.

As an side, I'm an independent because I do not forgive, nor forget transgressions by either party against the Constitution. Either in words, or deeds. Now, that im running out into the weeds again, and down another rabbit hole, I'll shut up now.


----------



## backcountry

If you value our republic than you understand the democratic component I'm discussing; I've given a definition and outlined the relevant principles. Everything else is a giant, stinky red herring as no one is talking about a pure democracy.

Scapegoating an entire group, one that isn't nearly as cohesive as you claim, because they have the audacity to use the systems protected by our state and federal constitutions is highly undemocratic. They aren't bound by your arbitrary timelines and sociopolitical restraints. Especially in regards to the issue at hand....a poaching incident in open space near municipalities and/or gunfire near residences (one Vanilla spun into some grander narrative that was never expressed by those interviewed in the article)

As an aside, if you are truly concerned about hyper-partisanship and/or negative partisanship than your arguments would benefit from not dealing in the gross stereotypes you've employed about 'dem Californian libruls.


----------



## Vanilla

I was going to be done with you, then you go spewing crap again. Oy...

I’m the OP. I didn’t take this thread in any other direction. The article is not about poaching in the least, and you know it. Even if the prissy Patagonia crew doesn’t like seeing a dead elk on “their” trail. The only specific person I’ve called out from the article is a republican elected official that has a track record of limiting hunting and fishing in Utah. The general statement of dismay watching communities where hunting used to not only be acceptable, but encouraged turn against it is sobering. That’s the whole point of the thread. I started it. You don’t get to decide unilaterally that it’s about something different, no matter how important you think you are. 

You can continue with claiming anyone that doesn’t agree with you is laying out “big stinky red herrings” all you want, but you’re kind of the only one who has done that. I do laugh that you straight up admit that you think anyone that doesn’t agree with your definition is throwing red herrings. That’s a classic “backcountry not hiding his politics very well” post. One I’ll laugh about for a long time. 

“ I've given a definition and outlined the relevant principles. Everything else is a giant, stinky red herring as no one is talking about a pure democracy.”

Good to know only your definition of a term is acceptable on UWN and only your perspective is acceptable as a good faith argument. That’s quite democratic of you. Yeah, I know I’m not being honest, I have operated with malfeasance, and am not commenting in good faith. I’ll save you typing your tired same old rhetoric you give anyone that disagrees with you. 

Back to the topic at hand, which I started. Times are changing. Our way of life that has been a part of our very heritage and culture in Utah are slowly fading away. (Remember when UEA coincided with the deer hunt so people had off and we had “deer hunt” dances at school?) It’s sad to see it. You can blame it on whatever you choose to blame it, but you can’t deny it’s happening. And in my opinion, that ain’t a good thing. I agree with Lone Hunter, I don’t want Utah to turn into California for about 10,000 reasons.


----------



## middlefork

You left off a few zeros


----------



## Lone_Hunter

My apologies for derailing your thread Vanilla. In my initial response to this thread, I held back, because I knew it would draw out into a political discussion. However, this last Saturday, I was so frustrated, that I decided to vent and let it all out. 

The wife and I decided to go to Tucanno's in Provo for dinner. We hadn't been there in years. I was to meet her there since she was pulling an extra shift.

Just getting out of my neighborhood, trying to make a right hand turn, I was so focused on the stack of 20 cars coming down the road, that I didn't notice the jogger coming up on my right, that I almost hit as I started to go when I saw a break in the traffic. Cat like reflex's are the only reason I didn't hit the poor women. From there, it took me 20 minutes just to drive accross town to get to I-15. Two years ago, I could get to orem/provo in 20 minutes and it only took me 5 to get accross town.

When I finally get to orem/provo, the traffic was .... A LOT. Then I find Tucannos moved from the backside of provo, to the university mall. Traffic, Traiffic, traffic. We finally there there, the parking lots are full, it's 5 PM, and there is already an hour wait. After an argument with the wife, she and my daughter when their way, I ended up going to little acorn at the mouth of the canyon where at least things were still quiet and sane. I seriously was considering driving to fairview or Nephi just to have a quiet evening dinner out. In the end, I sat down at little acorn and ate a country sandwich combo by myself.

After sleeping in the basement , after an evening like that, angry and frustrated, I just let it out.


----------



## backcountry

I can see how you interpreted my comment about red herrings differently then I intended, Vanilla. Despite wording my response directly to him I could have added the phrase "in your post" before accurately calling his response a red herring. I will do better in the future and regret not editing that properly. Sincere apologies for that error.

That said, you don't have a leg to stand on claiming "the article is not about poaching in the least". Hell, the article even states "the Division of Wildlife Resources is investigating the elk shootings as possible poaching." Multiple people on this thread have highlighted how poorly that sort of behavior reflects on hunters. So yes, the article is most definitely about poaching.

I also never said I got to "decide unilaterally that it’s about something different" nor that I remotely think I'm "important" in any fashion. You keep fabricating BS and don't even try to hide it. I do keep bringing it back to...wait for it...the article you linked in your first post and before your actual comments. So yes, the article is very much part of your original post and I'm more than willing to make it about what was actually said there instead of some boogey man you keep creating. I'll change that approach when you can actually substantiate your ridiculous claims with statements by those interviewed. I've offered that challenge multiple times and you always resort to pretty name calling, strawmen that aren't supported by the article, false allegations about my supposed intent or an odd type of performative self-flagellation like this:

"You’re right. I’m a liar. I’m nefarious in all I do. I hate babies and small kittens."

I've never said anything remotely like that, in fact I just said almost the exact opposite:

"I assume you are a solid person; I believe are likely one of the many intelligent people on this forum given you have a JD; and I assume that you hold your values sincerely."

But yes, your posts are a textbook example of bad faith arguments. You rarely deal with what was said, by me or those in this article; instead you fabricate strawmen that you galliantly beat down with zeal. When asked to substantiate your claims you deflect, go ad hominem or outright lie. Those are just a few examples of how your posts are bad faith arguments (see your quotes above or in previous posts). 

Keep doing the same thing and I'll keep calling it out. I've made that plain as day. I don't tire of this type of interaction nor do I feign your level of supposed hesitation in participating in it.


----------



## paddler

Lone_Hunter said:


> My apologies for derailing your thread Vanilla. In my initial response to this thread, I held back, because I knew it would draw out into a political discussion. However, this last Saturday, I was so frustrated, that I decided to vent and let it all out.
> 
> The wife and I decided to go to Tucanno's in Provo for dinner. We hadn't been there in years. I was to meet her there since she was pulling an extra shift.
> 
> Just getting out of my neighborhood, trying to make a right hand turn, I was so focused on the stack of 20 cars coming down the road, that I didn't notice the jogger coming up on my right, that I almost hit as I started to go when I saw a break in the traffic. Cat like reflex's are the only reason I didn't hit the poor women. From there, it took me 20 minutes just to drive accross town to get to I-15. Two years ago, I could get to orem/provo in 20 minutes and it only took me 5 to get accross town.
> 
> When I finally get to orem/provo, the traffic was .... A LOT. Then I find Tucannos moved from the backside of provo, to the university mall. Traffic, Traiffic, traffic. We finally there there, the parking lots are full, it's 5 PM, and there is already an hour wait. After an argument with the wife, she and my daughter when their way, I ended up going to little acorn at the mouth of the canyon where at least things were still quiet and sane. I seriously was considering driving to fairview or Nephi just to have a quiet evening dinner out. In the end, I sat down at little acorn and ate a country sandwich combo by myself.
> 
> After sleeping in the basement , after an evening like that, angry and frustrated, I just let it out.


The frustrations you expressed are a result of population growth, which is not purely the result of immigration from California. Nor will it stop. I used to hunt doves just off 21st South between 36th W and 56th W. Don't try that today. Quiver full of arrows, anybody?

backcountry, V just isn't worth it. Complete waste of time.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

As soon as I can pull up roots, I'm going to a place that is larger then Texas, and a population less then 1/3rd that of Utah. 

North to the future.


----------



## 3arabians

Man, reading backcountry and vanilla go at it is cheap entertainment. I just can’t quit you two. 

What are we talking about again anyway?? I think it’s about how our hunting opportunities are slowly being taken away from us? 

Throw in a dead elk for propaganda that was left to waste by a poacher or illegal tag holder and whoosh! 

This sucks, what to do? I don’t have any answers. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla

backcountry said:


> When asked to substantiate your claims you deflect, go ad hominem or outright lie. Those are just a few examples of how your posts are bad faith arguments (see your quotes above or in previous posts).


Is this going to precede another post about you not attacking people in your posts? Just so we are clear: I have never "outright lied" a single time on this forum, ever. Not one single time. This is what bothers me so badly about you. You feign (I'll borrow your word) such objectivity and innocence, but simply because you don't agree with someone you call them a liar. It isn't every topic, but there are a few that no matter what, this will be your response to people on the other side of the debate. Saying they are dishonest. Saying they post in bad faith. You do this regularly, and not only to me. (While I seem to take the brunt of your disdain, I'm okay with that.) You don't have to agree with me. We can argue until we're blue in the face, but that doesn't mean I'm lying. There was a time in my life where those would have been fighting words, but now they're just words. However, impugning ones integrity because you don't agree or don't like what they say is bush league. That is your choice. But to be clear, I have not lied one single time.

Now, to the article. Yes, poaching is mentioned in the article. It is, however, not the point of the article. Heck man, go back and just read the title! The point of the article is not to report a poaching incident. The poaching incident is the boogey man the Trib used to solicit an emotional response to support their agenda on the issue. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a tool they used to make a point. Poaching is ugly. Very few will defend it or condone it, whether it was a "hunter" or not. But that isn't the point. The point is communities in Utah that are changing in their demographics are trying to close down hunting near them. That is the point of the article, and that is the point of the thread I started. And I'll reiterate, I never thought I'd see the day where that happened in our great state.

But then again, I probably ought to not be surprised by this. It isn't my first rodeo. I have fought against people trying to close entire units at public marshes to hunters that didn't happen to hunt the way they did. I fought against people that closed off 2000+ miles of public water to fishermen, hunters, and other outdoor recreation lovers. I'll fight against these people too, and maybe one day I will stop being surprised about how many people want to take away my way of life simply because they don't like it. That day will probably suck, because that's the day I probably stop caring.

TOTP!!!!


----------



## paddler

Vanilla said:


> Just so we are clear: I have never "outright lied" a single time on this forum, ever. Not one single time.


That's a lie.


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla said:


> Just so we are clear: I have never "outright lied" a single time on this forum, ever. Not one single time. This is what bothers me so badly about you. You feign (I'll borrow your word) such objectivity and innocence, but simply because you don't agree with someone you call them a liar. It isn't every topic, but there are a few that no matter what, this will be your response to people on the other side of the debate. Saying they are dishonest. Saying they post in bad faith. You do this regularly, and not only to me. (While I seem to take the brunt of your disdain, I'm okay with that.) You don't have to agree with me. We can argue until we're blue in the face, but that doesn't mean I'm lying. There was a time in my life where those would have been fighting words, but now they're just words. However, impugning ones integrity because you don't agree or don't like what they say is bush league. That is your choice. But to be clear, I have not lied one single time.


Lie (def): to create a false or misleading impression; to express what is false; convey a false impression;

Your own quotes that "create a false or misleading impression", etc:

"You're right. I'm a liar. I'm nefarious in all I do."

"Everyone that disagrees with you lies and does so in bad faith. We get it. "

"And criticizing one perspective while celebrating the other does not make one democratic, it makes one a partisan honk. If the shoe fits, wear it my friend."

"My comments are 100% talking about the "Coal" situation and the comment about would it have been better to die from a hunter or CWD" despite saying this just a few posts before "That's the thing that fascinates me about this whole discussion. There are many people, particularly some of these people in the article here, that would disagree. They'd way rather see deer die from disease than from a hunter."

"You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect or understanding because I don't understand why someone would want to see a deer suffer long term and die a painful death."

"I'll save you typing your tired same old rhetoric you give anyone that disagrees with you"

"You can continue with claiming anyone that doesn't agree with you is laying out "big stinky red herrings" all you want"

Heck in your last response you just said:
"Now, to the article. Yes, poaching is mentioned in the article" after claiming in a post before that "the article is not about poaching in the least, and you know it."

Should I go on? You said not "a single time on this forum" and that's just 8 times in this thread.

And a sincere bravo for fighting the good fight. I can only imagine that would be tiring and inform your worldview. And I'll say it again, I assume it's honestly held and you are a good man. If you spoke to your experiences, like you just did, more often than my response would be different. But instead you fill threads like this with the quotes I highlighted above or manufacture the worst possible view of your perceived opposition, like I highlighted earlier. That Vanilla is why I consistently criticize the content of your posts (not your person or character).


----------



## Vanilla

Wow....just wow. 

Here is my take, and it will be the last one that addresses you here and I will continue to revert back to the original topic of the article and thread. (The article also mentions .22 bullets traveling a mile and a half, but I hate to break it to you, that is not the TOPIC of or what the article is about “in the least.”) As mentioned above, you have a couple topics that are hot button personal issues for you. Anytime one comes up you come around and act just like you are in this thread, intentionally derailing and distracting from the thread to get people sick of the topic (which you’re no longer discussing anyway) and effectively kill the thread. 

I’ve seen you do this probably close to a dozen times on this forum, and that is what you’re doing here. You’ll continue to re-engage in the ridiculous until everyone just stops reading the thread. It’s actually probably already happened. We might as well be sending PMs at this point. And your mission is accomplished because nobody is discussing the topic any longer that for whatever reason is so personally offensive to you. That, by very definition, is a troll. I told you before I don’t mind rolling around in the mud with pigs, it can sometimes be fun. This is no longer fun, so I’m done with it. I’m sure we’ll dance this dance again. Until then...

Lone Hunter, thanks for the reminder on getting there early for Tucanos!


----------



## backcountry

Another lie

"And your mission is accomplished because nobody is discussing the topic any longer"

I've made my mission clear, you just seem to ignore it. I guarantee you that my goal is not to provoke you or distract. Remember, "this started" not with the 3 year old thread you referenced but when I had the audacity to challenge you to substantiate, with evidence from the article you voluntarily linked, the allegation you made:

"There is no logic in being okay with watching a deer die a long, painful, agonizing death versus the idea of a hunter killing an animal quickly in a way they don’t even observe."

That's when your posts starting getting highly inflammatory and unrelated to the topic at hand:

"And you can lecture me like I’m some idiot that doesn’t know how to spell my own name all you want. You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect or understanding "

You immediately assumed the worst possible intent of a genuine engagement of someone who had the audacity to disagree with you. You didn't make it about the topic, you made it about the falsehood you created about my motives. You did so again in the post above:

"intentionally derailing and distracting from the thread to get people sick of the topic (which you’re no longer discussing anyway) and effectively kill the thread."

You have nothing to stand on regarding trolling, mud and pigs or distraction when you own words and rhetoric meet that criteria sooner and more thoroughly.

Feel free to ignore me, that is your perogative. I think there is even an "ignore" button on most forums to make that easier for you.

Or you can actually substantiate, with actual words from the article, your allegationss in posts #24 and #31. As I showed above, that is the first time you derailed the conversation with bad faith rhetoric. Both those issues are on topic as they are your own words and claims.

PS...you used the phrase not "in the least" which means not "at all" or in "any way". The claim is an objectively false statement. The article is about a likely poaching incident, or wanton waste, that led to citizens expressing views that you, and I, disagree with. You emphasize the politics, which is clearly fine, but the poaching incident is most definitely part of the content and context of this issue.


----------



## paddler

Kinda fun watching you two go at it. I've called out V for his bad faith arguments many times, but have come to the conclusion that doing so is a waste of time. I now just ignore him, as in, don't feed the troll.:smile:


----------



## backcountry

I don't expect to change his mind. On a good day that's hard even for people who engage in good faith with an interest in learning. If I were to guess I would say we all have pretty firm beliefs we like to hold dear to.

On the other had, I do engage his comments because I can no longer sit by passively while such fabrications go untested. Definitely lots of evidence to support the notion that my approach with him won't change his mind. But there is also evidence that unsubstantiated falsehoods that go uncontested become accepted as fact pretty quick. I care too much about hunting to let claims like his, that I have quoted multiple times, go uncontested.

And the falsehoods in his posts are pretty legion. My favorite from a recent interaction from him was (given his claim he has never lied on the forum):



Vanilla said:


> Remember when someone mentioned abortion and the week long hissy fit you threw, refusing to let it go?
> 
> This is the same crap you pull any time someone mentions something that touches your tender political leanings.


I can admit the thread and interactions he is referring to don't make me look great and that I could have applied different strategy. But the lie about a "week long hissy fit" is quantifiable. The interaction went on for less than 8 hours. So 5% of the time he stated or roughly 21 times the length of the actual interaction. Its a prime example of the rhetoric employed in his posts that so easily meet the terms/definitions I've used. It's a perfect example of how his posts "create a false impression" or "express what is false".

So be it. Sounds like he will be happier to ignore me. More power to him if he uses the tools available and the restraint he seems to desire. At the end of the day his record will speak for itself in regards to the number of falsehoods, unsubstantiated claims, and/or name calling and ad hominem attacks in his posts. I'll keep calling them out, even if he can't see my responses, when warranted as the misinformation in his comments impact people's perception of facts.


----------



## paddler

backcountry said:


> At the end of the day his record will speak for itself in regards to the number of falsehoods, unsubstantiated claims, and/or name calling and ad hominem attacks in his posts. I'll keep calling them out when warranted as his type of comments impact people's perception of facts.


My approach has evolved. It occurred to me that calling out his BS to such a limited audience really has no significant impact. I have participated on another forum called the 24 Hour Campfire. It is populated by Far Right conspiracy theorists who are quite rude, foul-mouthed guys who get their news from Fox, Drudge, Brietbart, etc. I had the same epiphany over there, nothing I could say, no facts I could post would move the needle. I prefer to spend time on other forums, the Waterfowl page here, DP Review, which is about photography, ifish, which deals with saltwater fishing, etc. I don't have the time or desire to engage V. I occasional skim his posts, but responding is pointless.


----------



## backcountry

I hope that continue to works out to your benefit; I could end up in the same boat, we'll see.


----------



## Lone_Hunter

You know, I just have to point out how you guys sound authoritative, and so sure of your views, positions, and probably news sources. CNN or MSNBC much? I'm sure you do. I'll leave you with one nugget of wisdom I learned back when wore a uniform:

Nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy. 



My words. You can quote me on that.


----------



## backcountry

Lone_Hunter said:


> You know, I just have to point out how you guys sound authoritative, and so sure of your views, positions, and probably news sources. CNN or MSNBC much? I'm sure you do. I'll leave you with one nugget of wisdom I learned back when wore a uniform:
> 
> Nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.
> 
> My words. You can quote me on that.


I'm fine with the compliment of being called authoritative:

Definition: able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable

If you want to know what news sources I use feel free to ask. Wildly guessing leads to wildly wrong answers. Manufacturing the worst (in this case allegations about assumed news sources) about the people you are engaging is a ridiculous fallacy. Critiquing ideas they voluntarily share in public is fair game.

To your specific allegation, no I don't watch CNN or MSNBC. I don't own a television or stream either source.

The news that matter from this thread is the news story Vanilla voluntarily linked in his original post. I've used actual information and quotes from it.


----------



## paddler

Lone_Hunter said:


> You know, I just have to point out how you guys sound authoritative, and so sure of your views, positions, and probably news sources. CNN or MSNBC much? I'm sure you do. I'll leave you with one nugget of wisdom I learned back when wore a uniform:
> 
> Nobody goes to war thinking their the bad guy.
> 
> My words. You can quote me on that.


Yep, MSNBC mostly. Watching the impeachment now. Fox is covering it, too. Schiff is speaking. You gotta admit, the House managers are presenting a strong case.


----------



## johnnycake

<full random draw>


----------



## Hunttilidrop

So is it just paddler, and backcountry that apparently have issues with vanilla on here? I mean the guy has almost 5000 post and nobody else has a problem!?


----------



## Vanilla

Hunttilidrop said:


> So is it just paddler, and backcountry that apparently have issues with vanilla on here? I mean the guy has almost 5000 post and nobody else has a problem!?


I've gone the rounds with quite a few folks on here over the years, there is no doubt about that. Most of the time we just battle it out here and at the end of the day, agree to disagree and move on, it's not personal. There does seem to be a couple that want it to be nothing but personal and are just bent on making it that way. No sweat off my back, it's only the internet. I don't take it too seriously. It does detract from otherwise important topics, but again, it's the internet. You've got to wade through some crap to get the good stuff anyway.

I need to go fishing.


----------



## Vanilla

johnnycake said:


> <full random draw>


Nobody asked you!!!!!


----------



## backcountry

Vanilla said:


> Hunttilidrop said:
> 
> 
> 
> So is it just paddler, and backcountry that apparently have issues with vanilla on here? I mean the guy has almost 5000 post and nobody else has a problem!?
> 
> 
> 
> There does seem to be a couple that want it to be nothing but personal and are just bent on making it that way. No sweat off my back, it's only the internet. I don't take it too seriously. It does detract from otherwise important topics, but again, it's the internet. You've got to wade through some crap to get the good stuff anyway.
Click to expand...

Those claims in Vanilla's post are funny given the first personal swipe and detraction in the thread was:

"You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect "

I have no problem with Vanilla. I have problems with components of his posts. At the end of the day, as I've stated before , I assume he's as good as the rest of us. I do find posts like the above problematic given the amount of personal attacks, all unrelated to the topic at hand, and how much "crap", "mud" and "pigs" his posts are filled with.

But at the end of the day I won't assume any less of him just because of the problems I highlight. That's true no matter how many insults his posts contain or how many times he misrepresents my ideas with statements like "you're right. I'm a liar." No doubt many people rightfully like him and that's completely understandable.


----------



## Hunttilidrop

Hmmmm.... I’m not buying it.


----------



## backcountry

Curious, what aren't you buying?


----------



## Hunttilidrop

I don’t have the quote function on my phone. But you just said that you don’t have a problem with him, you think he’s just as good as the rest of us. But what I’m not buying is I don’t see crap, mud and pigs in his posts. He’s just another hunter out there like me that would like to continue doing what he loves to do. And would probably like to see his sons and grandsons do the same.


----------



## johnnycake

Vanilla said:


> Nobody asked you!!!!!


That's it! I've had enough outta youse. Imma jump on the backcountry/paddler bandwagon. #NillerHatersUnite

#TOTP


----------



## backcountry

Hunttilidrop said:


> I don't have the quote function on my phone. But you just said that you don't have a problem with him, you think he's just as good as the rest of us. But what I'm not buying is I don't see crap, mud and pigs in his posts. He's just another hunter out there like me that would like to continue doing what he loves to do. And would probably like to see his sons and grandsons do the same.


Quoting from the phone is rough at times.

I agree that he's likely another hunter and fisherman trying to protect his sport and heritage. I've complimented him for the direct involvement in such battles in this very thread.

But that's not mutually exclusive from his posts using lots of "crap" and "mud" and "pigs". Those are references to quotes he's made like the one in his previous post regarding the alleged personal attacks, ie "you've got to wade through some crap to get the good stuff anyway." The type of crap and mud deployed in his posts include:

*the first personal attack and deflection of the thread


> You can even pretend that you are on some higher plane of intellect or understanding





> I don't mind diving into the slop with pigs for entertainment every now and then. It can be fun. But I do it on my own terms. Troll away, big guy. Troll away.





> you just sound like a preachy butt hole





> it makes one a partisan honk. If the shoe fits, wear it my friend





> everyone that disagrees with you lies and does so in bad faith. We get it. Move along.





> good to move on until the next time you get butt hurt?





> I was going to be done with you, then you go spewing crap again. Oy..


Those would be the primary ones from this thread, though the misinformation and falsehoods would also count as dirty fighting. His posts often have zero to do about the thread, ie a detraction from the topic, which he has also unironically condemned in posts.

He and I have gone around several times in the recent past. At the end of the day though I won't assume his motives or intent. I'll even try to bring it back to the topic at hand when he derails into personal attacks; I did multiple times in this thread. But when his posts become largely personal than I have no problem highlighting the dirty tricks, ie his claims about "crap", "mud" and "pigs", because they are now part of his argument. But I'll do so by highlighting his own words not making unsubstantiated allegations or falsehoods.

I hope you have different interactions with him.

Sincerely,

Partisan Honk


----------



## Hunttilidrop

Thanks for the quotes! I would of been lost without them! #nillerhatersunite


----------



## paddler

johnnycake said:


> That's it! I've had enough outta youse. Imma jump on the backcountry/paddler bandwagon. #NillerHatersUnite
> 
> #TOTP


It's about time. I always say more people should listen to me.;-)


----------



## backcountry

Hunttilidrop said:


> Thanks for the quotes! I would of been lost without them! #nillerhatersunite


Unfortunately I can't interpret the meaning of your post. The sentences that is, the hashtag joke seems a little more obvious. Sarcasm or sincere?

Getting too old for the internet.


----------



## paddler

backcountry said:


> Unfortunately I can't interpret the meaning of your post. The sentences that is, the hashtag joke seems a little more obvious. Sarcasm or sincere?
> 
> Getting too old for the internet.


I'm sure he was sincere. He sounds enlightened to me.


----------



## backcountry

My sarcasm meter is obviously broken. Hard to navigate the internet without it working. I assume sincerity but it has burnt me in the past. No matter, I ain't going down the road of judging another's enlightenment.


----------



## paddler

backcountry said:


> My sarcasm meter is obviously broken. Hard to navigate the internet without it working. I assume sincerity but it has burnt me in the past. No matter, I ain't going down the road of judging another's enlightenment.


I was joking.


----------



## johnnycake

paddler said:


> I was joking.


And now you're being sarcastic


----------



## stillhunterman

paddler said:


> Yep, MSNBC mostly. Watching the impeachment now. Fox is covering it, too. Schiff is speaking. You gotta admit, the House managers are presenting a strong case.


lmao


----------



## backcountry

Too much on my plate at home as is to keep this up. Wisdom in Vanilla bowing out and likely some in Paddler's statements about the worth of such disagreements. I've always got more to learn.

I'd like to reiterate that not once in this interaction did I call Vanilla a liar. That's not my jam. I think calling someone a liar requires knowing their intent and reaching a threshold well beyond what I can truly know from internet chatter. Calling into question someone's person or character is noticeably different than highlighting their posts or even behavior online. Our character and integrity is something much bigger than those things. I do my best to distinguish between that. I can fiercely disagree with his posts while honestly believing he's a sincere and intelligent man who does his best to live by his values and ethics. I can only hope those affirmations and distinctions are understood for their sincerity.

It's clear the two of us (and likely others) operate under vastly different concepts of what's fair rhetoric and even what is personal. Seems those differences flare up on occasion and may be insurmountable. I'm sure we'll cross paths again but in this one I bow out.


----------



## paddler

johnnycake said:


> And now you're being sarcastic


Fine line between sarcasm and humor. I'm hilarious.


----------



## RandomElk16

This thread is Corny.

Definition: trite, banal, or mawkishly sentimental.


It is also dramatic.

Definition: (of a person or their behavior) intending or intended to create an effect; theatrical.


Lastly, childish.

Definition: of, like, or appropriate to a child.



Am I doing this right?



BOOO to blue, taking away hunting rights, population growth... 


And umm...YAY to FULL RANDOM DRAW!!


----------



## RandomElk16

paddler said:


> Yep, MSNBC mostly. Watching the impeachment now. Fox is covering it, too. Schiff is speaking. You gotta admit, the House managers are presenting a strong case.


I don't think there is a ***facepalm*** big enough to respond to this.


----------



## paddler

RandomElk16 said:


> I don't think there is a ***facepalm*** big enough to respond to this.


Keep up the forceful facepalms. Who knows, you might pound some sense into your thick skull. Where there's life, there's hope.

I see by the paper this morning that the BLM wants to sell more leases:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2020/01/23/feds-propose-oil-gas/

The EPA is also up to no good:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/climate/trump-environment-water.html

At some point, you need to recognize who threatens our environment. And who is responsible for population growth.


----------



## johnnycake




----------



## RandomElk16

paddler said:


> Keep up the forceful facepalms. Who knows, you might pound some sense into your thick skull. Where there's life, there's hope.
> 
> I see by the paper this morning that the BLM wants to sell more leases:
> 
> https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2020/01/23/feds-propose-oil-gas/
> 
> The EPA is also up to no good:
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/climate/trump-environment-water.html
> 
> At some point, you need to recognize who threatens our environment. And who is responsible for population growth.


Funny to assume I have a thick skull and no sense based on one single post of mine.

Pretty clear which people believe they are the all knowing on this thread, and want everyone to be just like them.

There is no forceful facepalm. Your comments bring them naturally.


----------



## paddler

RandomElk16 said:


> Funny to assume I have a thick skull and no sense based on one single post of mine.
> 
> Pretty clear which people believe they are the all knowing on this thread, and want everyone to be just like them.
> 
> There is no forceful facepalm. Your comments bring them naturally.


Although I quoted just one of your posts, I referenced two. That was enough.


----------



## RandomElk16

paddler said:


> Although I quoted just one of your posts, I referenced two. That was enough.


Oh my second one about blue and populations? Or making fun of the ridiculous child banter you few turned this thread into? I will defend both and it's my last post to you:

The top 7 states for population density? Democrat.

Largest population (By far) - California. Democrat.

Worst hunting and gun states? Democrat.

I don't have to read articles. The dems do "care" more about the environment - not what it provides sportsman though. Luckily when it comes to my "Blue" comment I don't need articles. We have use cases with California and New York to tell us all we need to know. Cali has a great climate and the darn ocean and is dead last in socioeconomic rank. Highest taxes in the entire nation too. There is an entire website dedicated to poop on the streets of Cali.

Virginia (Democrat) is literally taking a leak on one of my favorite constitutional rights as an American.

So call me a thick skull and have all the misguided hopes you want. For my family and their financial and "fun" future - I stand by what I said. That doesn't make me an idiot, but you implying it says a lot about you as a person.

I don't mind that you stand by blue. As a REAL American I believe that is your right and I won't call you names, even if I believe different. What I will judge is the way you critique others and push your beliefs. That's not tied to your political or wildlife views... that's tied to your behavior.


----------



## johnnycake




----------



## paddler

RandomElk16 said:


> Oh my second one about blue and populations? Or making fun of the ridiculous child banter you few turned this thread into? I will defend both and it's my last post to you:
> 
> The top 7 states for population density? Democrat.
> 
> Largest population (By far) - California. Democrat.
> 
> Worst hunting and gun states? Democrat.
> 
> I don't have to read articles. The dems do "care" more about the environment - not what it provides sportsman though. Luckily when it comes to my "Blue" comment I don't need articles. We have use cases with California and New York to tell us all we need to know. Cali has a great climate and the darn ocean and is dead last in socioeconomic rank. Highest taxes in the entire nation too. There is an entire website dedicated to poop on the streets of Cali.
> 
> Virginia (Democrat) is literally taking a leak on one of my favorite constitutional rights as an American.
> 
> So call me a thick skull and have all the misguided hopes you want. For my family and their financial and "fun" future - I stand by what I said. That doesn't make me an idiot, but you implying it says a lot about you as a person.
> 
> I don't mind that you stand by blue. As a REAL American I believe that is your right and I won't call you names, even if I believe different. What I will judge is the way you critique others and push your beliefs. That's not tied to your political or wildlife views... that's tied to your behavior.


Couple of points.

I didn't call you an idiot, that was your word.

You are correct that Democrats are far more interested in protecting the environment, clean air, clean water, unspoiled public lands, etc. Hard to see how that negatively impacts hunting or fishing opportunities.

Virginia's efforts to curb gun violence do not impact hunters. Period. Don't give me that lame "slippery slope" BS. The Republican response to mass shootings of "thoughts and prayers" has worn out its welcome.


----------



## middlefork

paddler said:


> .
> Virginia's efforts to curb gun violence do not impact hunters. Period. Don't give me that lame "slippery slope" BS. The Republican response to mass shootings of "thoughts and prayers" has worn out its welcome.


Cough cough, BS


----------



## 3arabians

Huh? This thread needs a lock. Where is Shaun when you need him?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CPAjeff

GEAUX TIGERS!

#IBTL


----------



## Vanilla

CPAjeff said:


> GEAUX TIGERS!
> 
> #IBTL


*GEAUX TIGERS!!!! *


----------



## wyogoob

I wanna get in before the lock:

This is my favorite thread.


.


----------



## paddler

middlefork said:


> Cough cough, BS


Please explain your reasoning. Go ahead. Feel free. The only stipulation is that it should be factual. No BS.


----------



## wyogoob

backcountry said:


> Too much on my plate at home as is to keep this up. Wisdom in Vanilla bowing out and likely some in Paddler's statements about the worth of such disagreements. I've always got more to learn.
> ...............................................................................................


 There's 13,254 members on the UWN. Only 7 use the word "too", as in "also". Hats off to backcountry!


----------



## paddler

wyogoob said:


> I wanna get in before the lock:
> 
> This is my favorite thread.
> 
> .


I like it, too. Pretty soon we'll solve all the world's problems. Global hunger, anthropogenic climate change, poverty, human rights, even why the 6.5 Creedmore is a thing.


----------



## gdog

https://www.parkcity.org/Home/Compo...mczXIl39KcMf3Xm_2uDEm9aQnVcUfu4QCpoKaJ8YfwrHk

For Immediate Release

Park City, Summit County, DWR clarify hunting restrictions in Round Valley area after recent elk shootings

PARK CITY - In light of the frustrations expressed by some members of the community when a licensed hunter harvested a cow elk (and may have accidentally shot another) in the Round Valley open space area, Park City, Summit County and Utah Division of Wildlife Resource (DWR) officials want to clarify the laws regarding hunting in this area.


----------



## Vanilla

And so it begins...

I really hate to see areas lost to hunting, regardless of why.


----------



## rtockstein

Lone_Hunter said:


> Alright, grab your coffeee and buckle up boys, I'll tell you EXACTLY what I think is happening to our state, because I've been there, done that, seen it, and I'm, not blind to it.
> 
> I got into ANOTHER argument with my wife about it last night. I think one day, she's gonna have enough of my BS and leave. But what I see, I see it everyday, and I hate it with every fiber of my being, because I've seen it all before.
> 
> In a word: Californication.
> 
> Some background on myself, so you understand where I'm coming from with this. I first moved to Utah, back in 2010. I moved here, from, I am ASHAMED to say, California. My family is originally from northern California. My fathers hometown had all but 50 people in it. He took me upland game hunting all the time as a kid. (I had to learn big game on my own after moving here). At some point, we moved to Chino in southern California ... back when it still had cows and corn fields. I got used to the smell of manure in the morning and got pretty good at swatting flies. I'm the highschool kid that took a midnight ride offroading into someones alphalpha field. (Yeah I know, it's not something I'm proud of) I Shot archery in my backyard for 2 or 3 hours every day after school. If I had a choice between the beach and the mountains, I took the mountains every time. When I moved here, i got back to my roots, Utah was a natural transition for me.
> 
> Chino today, is NOTHING like it was when I moved there. Full of strip malls, the farmers are gone, the cows are gone, people packed in like sardines, horse properties gave way to McMansions, I can't shoot a bow in my folks backyard anymore. Roads and drainage's plowed through the woods I used to play in. I remember trying to hunt coyotes with a bow in high school, not that I was successful, but I tried. In short, the place I grew up in during high school is NOTHING like it is now.
> 
> When I first moved to where I live now, it reminded me a lot like Chino back in the 90s. I knew things would change here too, I just didn't realize HOW FAST.
> 
> The problem is, the word got out about Utah. I always kept this place under my hat because I didn't want other people moving here. The trouble is the powers that be, where silicon slopes is concerned, got the word out. Maybe I'm wrong, but I blame Herbert. If it was his policy to encourage tech companies to move to Utah to generate more jobs for Utahs, then he is freaking stupid. IT is an inheritanly liberal industry. I ought to know, I worked for an IT company for 14 years before they offshored my entire department to poland!
> 
> So Sure the companies came to silicon slopes, and they took many of their liberal employees with them. 1 out of very 5 car tags is from California, and it pisses me off EVERY STINKING DAY. Most of the Californians coming here, are NOT like myself. At least I don't think they are, but I hope I'm wrong in that. Californians in general tend to think they're all that and a bag of chips. They won't adapt to Utah ways and integrate themselves. They'll say things like "well back in cali we did it this way..." , or "back in cali..."
> 
> They'll demand change when none was asked, nor called for. I do not think most of them have he capability to examine their core beliefs. They won't reflect on why the job they are working is in Utah, they'll be mad that the job is in Utah and not California, and be made at Utah for having the job instead of the stupid liberal policies that brought the job here to begin with. I feel I know how these people think, because I grew up there, and I loath them more then any born and bread Utahn ever would, because of incrementalism.
> 
> I think most Utahns have no idea what is happening, (my wife is born and raised here) because many changes happen in small steps. Things are easier to take in small doses. My problem is, ive seen it all before, so I know what the end result is going to be. I can already tell you that SLC is a carbon copy of California. Orem and Provo, are now like how SLC used to be. Spanish fork is now how like Orem and Provo used to be. Salem is kinda how Spanish fork used to be, and I think it's all happened in the span of the last 3 or 4 years. Every time I leave the house, I see it.
> 
> One thing that I've learned from moving here when I did, is that people are not meant to live in an enviorment where they are packed together like sardines. As the population density increases, I think you will find people will be less kind, and more high strung. Your going to see more road rage incidents. On that note, I'm already seeing things in Spanish fork, that I have not seen since I lived in California.
> 
> It's only going to get worse. Gridlock traffic. Angry people. Road rage. Unaffordable housing, liberal politicians in power, it's all coming. KSL posted an article afew months back on how Utah will be purple in 10 years. I hate KSL because it's a liberal rag, but I know their right about Utah turning purple.
> 
> It pisses me off every day, because I love this place, and I hate seeing what is happening to it. If we hadn't sunk some roots that are kind of hard to pull up at this moment in time, I'd already have the moving truck packed.
> 
> I love my wife, I'd do anything for her, but the one thing I won't do, is live a California lifestyle again. I won't do it.


We could probably get them to integrate into the Utah society if we pay some "tech hunters" to go kill as much as tech as possible, to the point of tech extinction. That way, we eliminate their current means to survival, forcing them to adapt to the Utah way of life. If that doesn't work, we can gift them some blankets laced with a deadly disease.

All jokes aside, there's over 7 billion people on the planet with no signs of the population going down. I don't want to live in an over crowded area with people that poo poo hunting, but regardless of how I or anyone else feels, more and more people of various backgrounds, upbringings, cultures, and ideals are going to be living together. So rather than talk about how horrified we are with the change, it would serve all hunters better to adapt and work toward an amiable relationship with others while educating non-hunters on our culture and also accepting theirs. Recognize the importance of their way of life to them, and maybe they'll recognize the importance of our way of life to us.

Even though I'd like to gun hunt right on the edge of town, there's more and more people using the public lands on the edge of town for non-hunting purposes and there's more and more houses in those areas. Even if everyone follows the laws, there's always accidents and hunters that get too excited to realize they might be shooting in a direction that could be dangerous if they miss the animal. It would be wise to occasionally reevaluate gun hunting in certain areas... as much as that hurts.


----------



## middlefork

It is not just gun hunting. It is all hunting.


----------



## backcountry

I got the sense from the article that the Park City prosecutor was actually highlighting current laws to better educate the citizens there. I'll have to reread the release.


----------



## stillhunterman

Utah will go the way of Colorado and other states that have been infected by the left's radical BS. It has already started and the infection is growing. Witness the crap spewed on this thread and others by certain leftist(s) that continually do what comes naturally to their infected ideologies. Sorry Vanilla, but there is little hope for Utah and other states unless these radical infections can be inoculated with an anti-idiot serum...
Lock this dang thing up, it has more than run it's course...-O,--O,--O,-


----------

