# Recent hawk poachings?



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

What's everyone's thoughts on the recent hawk poachings? It was brought up in another thread sometimes as sportsmen we favor some animals over others.


----------



## pelican (Mar 29, 2012)

Poaching is poaching, regardless of the animal...elk, wolf, deer, hawk. That said, I am not losing a bit of sleep over it I wish someone would come thin them out in the Sanpete/ Sevier valley.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

pelican said:


> Poaching is poaching, regardless of the animal...elk, wolf, deer, hawk. That said, I am not losing a bit of sleep over it I wish someone would come thin them out in the Sanpete/ Sevier valley.


I'll echo that poaching is poaching, but I won't loose any sleep over it . Management must be said of all species not just some. Sage grouse have been close to the endangered list many times, pheasants are all but gone in the state, but many will continue to say you can continue to hunt them with no large effects, yet a hawk and an eagle which all of us have seen more of in the last year than we have wild pheasants in the last decade strikes a cord with everyone. Yes it's illegal and I don't agree with that, but management has it's place with any species that is left uncontrolled.


----------



## outdoorser (Jan 14, 2013)

Both of you hit the nail on el heado.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

I wish there were more hawks and eagles to thin out the turkeys and pheasants.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

martymcfly73 said:


> I wish there were more hawks and eagles to thin out the turkeys and pheasants.


I'm sure you do Marty


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

martymcfly73 said:


> I wish there were more hawks and eagles to thin out the turkeys and pheasants.


I'm sorry but I had to laugh at this. You have a sick sense of humor and I like it.


----------



## Rspeters (Apr 4, 2013)

People say poaching is poaching and it shouldn't be done. I agree that laws shouldn't be broken, but I'm a lot more ok with hawks (that need to be managed just like other animals) being killed than something like a trophy buck.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Rspeters said:


> People say poaching is poaching and it shouldn't be done. I agree that laws shouldn't be broken, but I'm a lot more ok with hawks (that need to be managed just like other animals) being killed than something like a trophy buck.


Agreed laws should be obeyed , but I agree with what you said. Very few of us hold a hawk as close to our heart as a big buck or even a duck getting poached. The news paints the picture of a bird that should never be killed, that is so majestic and beautiful. Hawks and eagles are trash birds, scavengers, and killing machines. Road kill, rodents, and game birds are there specialties . They really aren't that neat . A pheasant or sage grouse is much more beautiful, majestic, and fun to watch than any crow, eagle, hawk, owl, or other freaking predator bird I've ever seen . Yet they are all protected, un-managed, and the thought of ever being able to kill any is looked down upon. Eventually you have to manage things. Can't manage the prey to your liking unless you manage the predators as well. I don't support eradicating them but I do support management of them.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

martymcfly73 said:


> I wish there were more hawks and eagles to thin out the turkeys and pheasants.


I wish we had Pterodactyl's to thin out some of the population on this site!!

This has to be the dumbest poll of all time.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> I wish we had Pterodactyl's to thin out some of the population on this site!!
> 
> This has to be the dumbest poll of all time.


Looks pretty neck and neck meaning there's different feelings. It's a valid discussion, and the poll being so close shows how dumb that observation is. Plus a pole's a way to be honest, without actually revealing yourself.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Agreed!


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Looks pretty neck and neck meaning there's different feelings. It's a valid discussion, and the poll being so close shows how dumb that observation is. Plus a pole's a way to be honest, without actually revealing yourself.


No that just shows a bunch of ignorant people are voting. Poaching is poaching period!!

p.s Poll = Voting Pole = Gentlemen's Club Good to know the difference


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Agreed. Poaching is poaching. There is no place for it in any way shape or form.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Poles can be misleading. Some poles aren't accurate. Most poles have a margain of error.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

One pole is now the Pope and could be considered the Polish Pillar of Hope.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

Let's change it up a little, you know, for arguments sake.

Let's say there are as many elk & deer as there are pheasants, and there are as many wolves as there are hawks. Is poaching still poaching with absolutely no room for it whatsoever?


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

I'm not finished.

OK, let's say you're growing a garden. It's just a hobby for your. You're not making a living at it and you don't need it to keep your family alive. It's just a fun thing for you to do. You work and amend the soil. Man, that soil is looking good. You've got a hankerin' for lettuce...succulent, crisp, romaine lettuce. You see the first plants break the soil and you're so excited for harvest time. Unfortunately, the cottontail rabbits take notice of the succulent & crisp lettuce. They're eating it all up. You put up fences & barriers, but those wascally wabbits still make it through to your lettuce crop.

The neighbor kid next door has a birthday in late July and he gets an old Sheridan pellet rifle. Not the new piece of crap put out by Crossman, but an old school Sheridan Blue Streak in .20 caliber. The neighbor boy loves that gun and is shooting all the feral pigeons and collared doves he sees. He's shooting ground squirrels and rockchucks too. He's having a ball. The neighbor boy then notices there are cottontails in your garden. By this time, it's early August which is well before the cottontail season opens up the first of September. Even though the neighbor boy knows the rules, he decides to wipe out every single cottontail in your garden. He does it safely, no skyline shots or shots with your house in the background.

Is it a poaching is still poaching incident, or are you not going to lose any sleep at night? Please explain your reasoning.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

royta said:


> I'm not finished.
> 
> OK, let's say you're growing a garden. It's just a hobby for your. You're not making a living at it and you don't need it to keep your family alive. It's just a fun thing for you to do. You work and amend the soil. Man, that soil is looking good. You've got a hankerin' for lettuce...succulent, crisp, romaine lettuce. You see the first plants break the soil and you're so excited for harvest time. Unfortunately, the cottontail rabbits take notice of the succulent & crisp lettuce. They're eating it all up. You put up fences & barriers, but those wascally wabbits still make it through to your lettuce crop.
> 
> ...


Is your question directed at the cottontail? Without a license its illegal to shoot the birds isn't it?

You might lose sleep if the dead animals that were poached are in your yard and someone reports it.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Is your question directed at the cottontail? Without a license its illegal to shoot the birds isn't it?
> 
> You might lose sleep if the dead animals that were poached are in your yard and someone reports it.


Why are you avoiding the question? The boy has his hunting license and nobody finds the dead cottontails.

The hawk situation has nothing to do with licenses or whether somebody finds the birds.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

For the record, I'm not losing any sleep over dead hawks. Yes, I understand it is poaching and it is against the law, but I am for the game bird and not the trash bird. I am for the deer and not the wolf. If somebody feels like gut shooting a wolf so it runs off and dies in a hole which makes it virtually impossible for the shooter to get caught, then I'm cool with that.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

royta said:


> The neighbor kid next door has a birthday in late July and he gets an old Sheridan pellet rifle. Not the new piece of crap put out by Crossman, but an old school Sheridan Blue Streak in .20 caliber. The neighbor boy loves that gun and is shooting all the feral pigeons and collared doves he sees. He's shooting ground squirrels and rockchucks too. He's having a ball. The neighbor boy then notices there are cottontails in your garden. By this time, it's early August which is well before the cottontail season opens up the first of September. Even though the neighbor boy knows the rules, he decides to wipe out every single cottontail in your garden. He does it safely, no skyline shots or shots with your house in the background..





royta said:


> Why are you avoiding the question? The boy has his hunting license and nobody finds the dead cottontails.
> 
> The hawk situation has nothing to do with licenses or whether somebody finds the birds.


I wasn't talking about hawks. The boy in your story kills feral pigeons, collared doves, ground squirrels, rockchucks, and cottontails. So he poached 5 different species. In city limits.

To answer your question, yes it is poaching. No I didn't lose sleep. How is this possible? I don't lose sleep when someone poaches a 350 bull either. Why? Cuz I work all week so even when something is poached I am incredibly tired and the animal is dead. No reason for me to lose sleep unless I am a game warden or in a position that needs to be involved. Before anyone goes and says that if I am not willing to do something about I can't have an opinion, reread what I said.

Something does need to be done, we can all be involved, and we can all still sleep at night.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

royta said:


> I'm not finished.
> 
> OK, let's say you're growing a garden. It's just a hobby for your. You're not making a living at it and you don't need it to keep your family alive. It's just a fun thing for you to do. You work and amend the soil. Man, that soil is looking good. You've got a hankerin' for lettuce...succulent, crisp, romaine lettuce. You see the first plants break the soil and you're so excited for harvest time. Unfortunately, the cottontail rabbits take notice of the succulent & crisp lettuce. They're eating it all up. You put up fences & barriers, but those wascally wabbits still make it through to your lettuce crop.
> 
> ...


Rationalize it all you want but it is still poaching. You, Royta, do not get to decide what is and is not poaching. You don't get to pick which laws you are going to follow. You follow them all or you don't. If you don't, in this case, you are a poacher.

No one needs to explain to you why your hypothetical is poaching. Intentionally shooting wildlife out of season without a license is poaching. Period. It doesn't matter if the kid is 2 feet tall or 6 feet tall. Shooting protected wildlife at any time is poaching. It's not a difficult concept but you seem to struggle understanding that you don't get to pick what animals you get to shoot out of season without a license, like hawks.

If you have animals chewing up your garden, call DWR. Do it the right way. If you have a neighbor kid killing protected wildlife out of season, do what you think is right. I wouldn't necessarily turn the kid in; I'd probably use it as a teaching opportunity. But, that would probably depend on the kid.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

Dodger said:


> Rationalize it all you want but it is still poaching. You, Royta, do not get to decide what is and is not poaching. You don't get to pick which laws you are going to follow. You follow them all or you don't. If you don't, in this case, you are a poacher.
> 
> No one needs to explain to you why your hypothetical is poaching. Intentionally shooting wildlife out of season without a license is poaching. Period. It doesn't matter if the kid is 2 feet tall or 6 feet tall. Shooting protected wildlife at any time is poaching. It's not a difficult concept but you seem to struggle understanding that you don't get to pick what animals you get to shoot out of season without a license, like hawks.
> 
> If you have animals chewing up your garden, call DWR. Do it the right way. If you have a neighbor kid killing protected wildlife out of season, do what you think is right. I wouldn't necessarily turn the kid in; I'd probably use it as a teaching opportunity. But, that would probably depend on the kid.


I'm not struggling with the concept at all. I know the definition of poaching. I know that it is against the law. I can, however, decide for myself which laws I'm going to be upset about the breaking of.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> I wasn't talking about hawks. The boy in your story kills feral pigeons, collared doves, ground squirrels, rockchucks, and cottontails. So he poached 5 different species. In city limits.
> 
> To answer your question, yes it is poaching. No I didn't lose sleep. How is this possible? I don't lose sleep when someone poaches a 350 bull either. Why? Cuz I work all week so even when something is poached I am incredibly tired and the animal is dead. No reason for me to lose sleep unless I am a game warden or in a position that needs to be involved. Before anyone goes and says that if I am not willing to do something about I can't have an opinion, reread what I said.
> 
> Something does need to be done, we can all be involved, and we can all still sleep at night.


You're adding fluff that does not pertain to the issue. Besides, euro collared doves, ground squirrels, rock chucks are not controlled; and who said anything about a city. And if it makes you feel any better, the gardener gave written permission to the boy to shoot within 600 feet. of his house.

My examples are an exact comparison to one eyes original question/poll. Don't bring nonsense into it.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

What about my wolf example? What are everybody's feelings about that? Are you bothered if someone poaches a wolf?


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

Look, I'm not upset about people's answers. I'm just curious, like one eye, about people's opinions on the subject, and whether they change their opinion depending on the species and circumstance of the animal/bird being poached.

Quit yelling at me.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Yes I am bothered is people poach wolves. Poaching is poaching. I am also bothered when people decide to take the law into their own hands.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

royta said:


> You're adding fluff that does not pertain to the issue. Besides, euro collared doves, ground squirrels, rock chucks are not controlled; and who said anything about a city. And if it makes you feel any better, the gardener gave written permission to the boy to shoot within 600 feet. of his house.
> 
> My examples are an exact comparison to one eyes original question/poll. Don't bring nonsense into it.


How is it fluff. Nongame animals usually require a certificate of registration and doves and pigeons have seasons and pigeons aren't huntable in every county. It has everything to do with it. He poached multiple animals in your scenario. That is my point. It isn't nonsense. It is just saying more than cottontails were illegally killed.

Who said anything about a city? No matter where your house is located it is a city. I never mentioned populous, but it is still a city.

I.E. Morgan is a city. Enterprise, peterson, taggert, mountain green.. All cities. Doesn't matter how dense the population is. I apologize if I misspelled any.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> How is it fluff. Nongame animals usually require a certificate of registration and doves and pigeons have seasons and pigeons aren't huntable in every county. It has everything to do with it. He poached multiple animals in your scenario. That is my point. It isn't nonsense. It is just saying more than cottontails were illegally killed.
> 
> Who said anything about a city? No matter where your house is located it is a city. I never mentioned populous, but it is still a city.
> 
> I.E. Morgan is a city. Enterprise, peterson, taggert, mountain green.. All cities. Doesn't matter how dense the population is. I apologize if I misspelled any.


Let's beat the dead horse and change the scenario that all critters were field mice and were legal to shoot all year round without a license.

Let's also beat the horse some more and say eveybody's home is smack dab in the middle of a 1/4 mile x 1/4 mile 40 acre parcel. This is not in a city, and again, the boy had written permission to hunt on the property and shoot within 600 feet of the gardeners home.

Let's change my scenario so that it is perfect with no reason to add any whatifs.
Why am I even replying.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

Some laws are prudent and well founded in logic. Other laws are inane and I would probably turn a blind eye toward seeing somebody break them. However, deciding which laws we get to obey and enforce and which laws we don't is a very slippery slope.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> How is it fluff. Nongame animals usually require a certificate of registration and doves and pigeons have seasons and pigeons aren't huntable in every county. It has everything to do with it. He poached multiple animals in your scenario. That is my point. It isn't nonsense. It is just saying more than cottontails were illegally killed.
> 
> Who said anything about a city? No matter where your house is located it is a city. I never mentioned populous, but it is still a city.
> 
> I.E. Morgan is a city. Enterprise, peterson, taggert, mountain green.. All cities. Doesn't matter how dense the population is. I apologize if I misspelled any.


Eurasian collared doves can be hunted year round without a license. They do not have a restricted season .


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

colorcountrygunner said:


> Some laws are prudent and well founded in logic. Other laws are inane and I would probably turn a blind eye toward seeing somebody break them. However, deciding which laws we get to obey and enforce and which laws we don't is a very slippery slope.


I believe many who have the power to enforce the laws also have this logic, problem is they took an oath to protect the law, even if they do not agree with it. I'm sure a blind eye or two happen though.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Yes I am bothered is people poach wolves. Poaching is poaching. I am also bothered when people decide to take the law into their own hands.


I'm not. To roytas question, would your opinion change if there were as few of elk left as there are pheasants, and as many wolves as there are eagles, hawks, and falcons ? Yet you were not allowed to touch a wolf or mountain lion again. Protect predators and continue to kill prey, something that makes little sense, would your opinion change. And everyone be honest don't hide behind fake ethics you want to show , how would you honestly feel? I wouldn't every do it, but I'd probably turn the other way if someone else did .


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> No that just shows a bunch of ignorant people are voting.


Well that's just like...your opinion, man.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

If you hunt, and you aren't angry about any poaching, you need to reevaluate. Poaching is stealing, plain and simple.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> No that just shows a bunch of ignorant people are voting. Poaching is poaching period!!
> 
> p.s Poll = Voting Pole = Gentlemen's Club Good to know the difference


The ignorant people are the ones that think everything there told to do is right. There's nothing wrong with questioning laws there is a problem with breaking them.


----------



## royta (Sep 26, 2007)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Eurasian collared doves can be hunted year round without a license. They do not have a restricted season .


That's just bullcrap. What's next, a couple houses sitting in the middle of the desert makes the area a city?

Just funning with RandomElk16.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dodger said:


> If you hunt, and you aren't angry about any poaching, you need to reevaluate. Poaching is stealing, plain and simple.


So is stealing a jackrabbit or coyote something to be upset about? Just because a man made law says man likes this animal or bird more than that animal or bird, or because something has more sentimental value to man that it should go unmanaged and be free to grow to too large of numbers, just because we as people say so. I don't consider killing a hawk stealing from me, I am told by state and federal law I have no right to a trash animal and that it's too pretty to manage, that it has more of a right than any other wildlife. It's not stealing from me if I can never possess the opportunity to hunt them.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

royta said:


> That's just bullcrap. What's next, a couple houses sitting in the middle of the desert makes the area a city?
> 
> Just funning with RandomElk16.


Isn't that how Egypt, the city, began?

And as to my earlier posts, as of recent I have learned that as long as the boy was shooting a specific dove, he was only poaching the other animals. My apologies.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> So is stealing a jackrabbit or coyote something to be upset about? Just because a man made law says man likes this animal or bird more than that animal or bird, or because something has more sentimental value to man that it should go unmanaged and be free to grow to too large of numbers, just because we as people say so. I don't consider killing a hawk stealing from me, I am told by state and federal law I have no right to a trash animal and that it's too pretty to manage, that it has more of a right than any other wildlife. It's not stealing from me if I can never possess the opportunity to hunt them.


Jackrabbits and coyotes are not illegal to shoot. Big difference.

Who is the law to tell me I can't kill, steal, trespass, and hunt as much as I want. What do them darn a holes know anyway??

So who are you to tell me I can't go down to the monroe and kill all the spikes I want??????

If I wasn't already signed up, I am exchanging my kids disneyland tickets for a trip to the Spike-O-Rama


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Jackrabbits and coyotes are not illegal to shoot. Big difference.
> 
> Who is the law to tell me I can't kill, steal, trespass, and hunt as much as I want. What do them darn a holes know anyway??
> 
> ...


You're missing my point. The only reason an eagle can't be touched is because they are our countries bird, not because there is no room for managing hawks eagles and falcons. We sit certain animals aside from management because we feel different. We sit others such as coyotes out to be wiped out. Wolves are too majestic to kill yet they tear other animals to shreds. Eagles eat road kill, rodents, and small game, yet we hold them to close to our sentimental values to manage them . But the deer, pheasants and sage grouse that eat grass and do nothing any harm must be managed. You can't pick and choose what management is. If you believe hunting is a management tool then you can't sit back and say certain animals can go unmanaged with no bad effects . Your killing the prey so why is the predator left to be out of balance.

My point is something like an eagle, wolf, or hawk has no less reason to be managed than the coyote and deer. Balance has to be in check , or the prey will always be the one losing.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> So is stealing a jackrabbit or coyote something to be upset about? Just because a man made law says man likes this animal or bird more than that animal or bird, or because something has more sentimental value to man that it should go unmanaged and be free to grow to too large of numbers, just because we as people say so. I don't consider killing a hawk stealing from me, I am told by state and federal law I have no right to a trash animal and that it's too pretty to manage, that it has more of a right than any other wildlife. It's not stealing from me if I can never possess the opportunity to hunt them.


Come on 1I, you are smarter than that.

We the people are the ones who make the laws via our legislatures. A man made law duly passed and signed says hawks are migratory birds and therefore protected under Federal law. They aren't unmanaged, they are managed in a way you don't like. And, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can go shoot them. We as a people have a way of managing them that YOU as 1I don't like. Maybe they are protected because they are pretty but that doesn't change the fact that they are protected.

And, I'm pretty surprised that you, of all people, don't recognize that animals have value separate and apart from killing them. You don't have to have an opportunity to hunt hawks to appreciate them. Can't you just look at an animal and appreciate it for what it is? Can't you appreciate that it adds value to your outdoor experience without killing it?

Maybe you can't but we, as a people, can and do place a value on hawks. So we protect them. Shooting one is stealing from us as a people because we as a people protect them. If you don't feel like stealing a hawk is stealing from you, then you can't complain about tax money that is wasted, ambassadors that are murdered, taxes that aren't really taxes until the Supreme Court says they are taxes, border patrol agents that are murdered with cooperation from our government, government shutdowns, access to government land, and etc because they aren't really yours anyway. If a hawk doesn't belong to you, then nothing public does and you should live that way.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

RandomElk16 said:


> Isn't that how Egypt, the city, began?
> 
> And as to my earlier posts, as of recent I have learned that as long as the boy was shooting a specific dove, he was only poaching the other animals. My apologies.


Egypt is a country.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> You can't pick and choose what management is.


Bull turds. How can you even say that with a straight face? Every form of management is picking and choosing.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I'm not. To roytas question, would your opinion change if there were as few of elk left as there are pheasants, and as many wolves as there are eagles, hawks, and falcons ? Yet you were not allowed to touch a wolf or mountain lion again. Protect predators and continue to kill prey, something that makes little sense, would your opinion change. And everyone be honest don't hide behind fake ethics you want to show , how would you honestly feel? I wouldn't every do it, but I'd probably turn the other way if someone else did .


No my opinion would not change. Poaching is poaching. Killing wolves is great as long as it done legally. If not guilty person if caught should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Same goes for those that kill falcons or others birds of prey. I am a stickler for the written law. Anybody that believes that they are above it has no place in my world.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Egypt is a country.


O|* humor does not work 'round here. I am sure it is a combination of my poor jokes mixed with the fact that people seriously say stuff like that around here.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

RandomElk16 said:


> O|* humor does not work 'round here. I am sure it is a combination of my poor jokes mixed with the fact that people seriously say stuff like that around here.


Humor works great when it is humorous I think. If you got a laugh out of it who care though right?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dodger said:


> Come on 1I, you are smarter than that.
> 
> We the people are the ones who make the laws via our legislatures. A man made law duly passed and signed says hawks are migratory birds and therefore protected under Federal law. They aren't unmanaged, they are managed in a way you don't like. And, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can go shoot them. We as a people have a way of managing them that YOU as 1I don't like. Maybe they are protected because they are pretty but that doesn't change the fact that they are protected.
> 
> ...


A duck, goose, swan , crane, and others are also migratory birds , they also have beauty and are majestic, why do they have a lesser value? And no I don't believe something should go unmanaged because it's pretty a deer or an elk is much more pleasing to watch and look at, yet we kill them. It's a double standard. Raccoons and foxes are blamed for a lot, and we have no problem killing them yet we protect there feathered friends who do exactly the same things. People don't always make the right decisions, and not managing something because it's sentimental doesn't have ground to stand on. Yes I do see the worth in wildlife that we have. The difference between me is I see the sage grouse, duck, deer, coyote, wolf, eagle, and hawk all have similar value . I see no reason to favor certain ones over the other. I don't want all the deer and elk dead, in the same respect I don't want all the coyotes, eagles and hawks dead. But the system has to be balanced not save the predator and trample the prey. A hawk has no more value to me than a sage grouse so why is one protected and the other not .

And in these days if you honestly think we the people make all the decisions, I suggest you take a look at how our country and the world we live in has changed.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> No my opinion would not change. Poaching is poaching. Killing wolves is great as long as it done legally. If not guilty person if caught should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Same goes for those that kill falcons or others birds of prey. I am a stickler for the written law. Anybody that believes that they are above it has no place in my world.


I don't think the law should be broken, sometimes the law needs to be changed though. People make laws for the here and now, most laws have to be modified as time changes, some principles don't last forever.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> I don't think the law should be broken, sometimes the law needs to be changed though. People make laws for the here and now, most laws have to be modified as time changes, some principles don't last forever.


I don't disagree that laws become outdated but until they are changed laws should be followed. Poaching is poaching.

Your comment referring to a bird of prey as a trash animal, and that you have no problem with poaching wolves, or however you put it, pretty clearly defines your perspective on the matter. With that type of logic it should be okay to kill another man, that kills an animal, that you personally find more beneficial to you than the man.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> I don't disagree that laws become outdated but until they are changed laws should be followed. Poaching is poaching.
> 
> Your comment referring to a bird of prey as a trash animal, and that you have no problem with poaching wolves, or however you put it, pretty clearly defines your perspective on the matter. With that type of logic it should be okay to kill another man, that kills an animal, that you personally find more beneficial to you than the man.


Not everything is as serious as another , we both know that. Personally no I would never break the law and kill a wolf or hawk because it's against the law. However if I came upon a shot one I would probably turn the other way. Right now it is against the law, but do you at least agree that there is room for management of species like hawks and eagles , or do you think they should not be controlled ? All predators should be controlled if it is needed, even if it goes outside our sentimental value of them IMO. I don't believe in eliminating any predator but I do believe control is neccassary.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Not everything is as serious as another , we both know that. Personally no I would never break the law and kill a wolf or hawk because it's against the law. However if I came upon a shot one I would probably turn the other way. Right now it is against the law, but do you at least agree that there is room for management of species like hawks and eagles , or do you think they should not be controlled ? All predators should be controlled if it is needed, even if it goes outside our sentimental value of them IMO. I don't believe in eliminating any predator but I do believe control is neccassary.


Yes I agree. Everything should be managed as best as possible. Plants, animals, air, water, earth and especially mankind.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

> The only reason an eagle can't be touched is because they are our countries bird


Look up a few things for me and then revise your post: Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the effects and usages of DDT.

People could shoot raptors, until they became severely threatened and were issued protection in order to properly manage them. Has this been successful? Yes, do I think we need to revisit their protected status--depending on the species/geographical area. One of my favorite hunting stories is about Teddy Roosevelt in the Rocky Mountains shooting a Golden Eagle that was flying 200 yards away while hunting bighorn sheep.

And to those stating "I wouldn't do it, but I wouldn't report somebody", yeah, that can be construed as abetting with little difficulty and punishable just the same as if you pulled the trigger. You have an obligation to report crime, and are responsible if you don't.


----------



## riptheirlips (Jun 30, 2008)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Yes I am bothered is people poach wolves. Poaching is poaching. I am also bothered when people decide to take the law into their own hands.


If a wolf killed 5 or 6 calves you owned would you shoot that wolf first chance you had?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

johnnycake said:


> Look up a few things for me and then revise your post: Endangered Species Act of 1973 and the effects and usages of DDT.
> 
> People could shoot raptors, until they became severely threatened and were issued protection in order to properly manage them. Has this been successful? Yes, do I think we need to revisit their protected status--depending on the species/geographical area. One of my favorite hunting stories is about Teddy Roosevelt in the Rocky Mountains shooting a Golden Eagle that was flying 200 yards away while hunting bighorn sheep.
> 
> And to those stating "I wouldn't do it, but I wouldn't report somebody", yeah, that can be construed as abetting with little difficulty and punishable just the same as if you pulled the trigger. You have an obligation to report crime, and are responsible if you don't.


Sage Grouse are borderline on that list, yet hawks and eagles, their predators, go un-managed. I've seen far more eagles and hawks in the last year as I've said, than pheasants or sage grouse in a decade. DDT was a problem, and I don't want to see eagles or hawks gone, I do however think they have reached much higher numbers now, and different management tactics should be used to ensure they aren't well above in numbers what the prey they hunt can handle.

As for the reporting, if I didn't see anything I didn't see anything. I dare someone to try and prove they saw something with my eyes, I only see what I see.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

riptheirlips said:


> If a wolf killed 5 or 6 calves you owned would you shoot that wolf first chance you had?


Here is the answer to your question.

http://wildlife.utah.gov/wolf/pdf/wolves_livestock.pdf


----------



## riptheirlips (Jun 30, 2008)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Here is the answer to your question.
> 
> http://wildlife.utah.gov/wolf/pdf/wolves_livestock.pdf


Thanks I had not seen that map, but it leaves a lot of ranchers in Utah unable to protect their livestock. And if the wolves have seen that map they know where to go and they are safe.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

> Sage Grouse are borderline on that list, yet hawks and eagles, their predators, go un-managed. I've seen far more eagles and hawks in the last year as I've said, than pheasants or sage grouse in a decade. DDT was a problem, and I don't want to see eagles or hawks gone, I do however think they have reached much higher numbers now, and different management tactics should be used to ensure they aren't well above in numbers what the prey they hunt can handle.
> 
> As for the reporting, if I didn't see anything I didn't see anything. I dare someone to try and prove they saw something with my eyes, I only see what I see.


I agree that there is an imbalance, however, I feel that you still follow THE LAW. IF sagegrouse get wiped out---ouch, big black eye to failure of the law...but I would still turn you in for shooting a hawk.
the second part of your statemount is tantamount to saying "if a cop doesn't see it/I don't get caught/then it never happened." And you know something, this happens a lot and we lose trophy animals yearly to this mentality. I know, you don't see a hawk as valuable or "pretty" as a game animal, but value/prettiness is all subjective. Nearly everyone knows what a hawk is (might not recognize it) but if you say sage grouse, the majority of people won't even know if you are talking about a mammal, reptile, bird, or fish.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> I wish we had Pterodactyl's to thin out some of the population on this site!!
> 
> This has to be the dumbest poll of all time.


I know a guy named Chet who can hook you up with a Pterodactyl. PM me if you want his contact info.-----SS


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

riptheirlips said:


> Thanks I had not seen that map, but it leaves a lot of ranchers in Utah unable to protect their livestock. And if the wolves have seen that map they know where to go and they are safe.


I dunno if anyone has told you, but there aren't wolves in utah. 

I put a face. So people know its sarcasm. We can laugh. Ha.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Against my better judgement, a couple of comments.

1.


Mr Muleskinner said:


> One pole is now the Pope and could be considered the Polish Pillar of Hope.


Actually, that particular Pope is no longer with us, although I don't doubt that many Poles still consider him a Pillar of Hope, a pole of strength.

2. What would you guys say about poaching these?

http://dwrcdc.nr.utah.gov/rsgis2/Search/Display.asp?FlNm=cardflam

3. Seriously, do you guys know how outraged the general public gets about crap like this hawk poaching? I can't think of too many things that hunters could do that would be worse for keeping good relations with the public than tacitly supporting this type of behavior. Remember, there are far more non hunters than hunters, even in Utah, and like it or not, they could really hurt us at the ballot box and in government if they don't like what they see from hunters. Good grief. :roll: I think I'll bang my head against a pole, or is it Pole, or poll? O|*


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Agreed. I forgot about the changing of the guards with Pope Francis.

I was talking with a couple people that are non hunters yesterday and one them brought up the hawk poachings. Them knowing how much I love hunting they wanted my view. Both of them are very active outdoorsy people. One of them is a political socialite that gets around a lot of political fund raisers. I can tell you first hand if a person like her were to get on this particular thread and read through the attitude of some of the people, she could do more damage than many of you might imagine. Personally, I am just disgusted about the whole thing.


----------



## pelican (Mar 29, 2012)

riptheirlips said:


> Thanks I had not seen that map, but it leaves a lot of ranchers in Utah unable to protect their livestock. And if the wolves have seen that map they know where to go and they are safe.


Wrong....... It leaves a lot of ranchers and hunters to think they just shot a fifty dollar bill:grin:


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Agreed. I forgot about the changing of the guards with Pope Francis.
> 
> I was talking with a couple people that are non hunters yesterday and one them brought up the hawk poachings. Them knowing how much I love hunting they wanted my view. Both of them are very active outdoorsy people. One of them is a political socialite that gets around a lot of political fund raisers. I can tell you first hand if a person like her were to get on this particular thread and read through the attitude of some of the people, she could do more damage than many of you might imagine. Personally, I am just disgusted about the whole thing.


An attitude of non-hunters against hunting is because they don't understand the simple concept of management. The idiots who bitch at hunters or try to paint a bad picture of them are people who have never put a dollar towards the wildlife we hunt. The only reason we still have good deer, elk, waterfowl , and other wildlife populations is because of the hunters who care about them. If we go there wildlife goes and they better get to understanding that. I put around $1000 a year into just tags and fees along with everyone on this forum in sure. Plus all the money pumped through the economy. Hunters would be a very valuable resource to lose. We all understand the hawk shootings are illegal , but just as non-hunters don't understand the above things, they won't be able to grasp the concept maybe one day hawks and eagles might need to be managed in order to secure, help, and prevent the loss of species like sage grouse and pheasants.


----------



## pelican (Mar 29, 2012)

You must buy and draw out on a awful lot of permits every year to have spent 1000 bucks on them just in Utah.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

pelican said:


> You must buy and draw out on a awful lot of permits every year to have spent 1000 bucks on them just in Utah.


I put in for every permit, that $10 application fee builds up especially on the sportsmens, big game, and anterless tags. Between permit fees and application fees this year I spent right at 1,000 about. Plus I'll throw a donation when applying depending on what it's going to .


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> An attitude of non-hunters against hunting is because they don't understand the simple concept of management. The idiots who bitch at hunters or try to paint a bad picture of them are people who have never put a dollar towards the wildlife we hunt. The only reason we still have good deer, elk, waterfowl , and other wildlife populations is because of the hunters who care about them. If we go there wildlife goes and they better get to understanding that. I put around $1000 a year into just tags and fees along with everyone on this forum in sure. Plus all the money pumped through the economy. Hunters would be a very valuable resource to lose. We all understand the hawk shootings are illegal , but just as non-hunters don't understand the above things, they won't be able to grasp the concept maybe one day hawks and eagles might need to be managed in order to secure, help, and prevent the loss of species like sage grouse and pheasants.


You do realize that there are many, many people that are not anti-hunting that do not partake in hunting right? A person doesn't have to actively hunt in order to be a benefit to wildlife or understand the benefits to wildlife management that hunting brings. There are also those that are on the fence about hunting that can be swayed one way or another. Stereotyping people and making assumptions about everybody that does not hunt is no better than the extreme anti-hunters stereotyping and making assumptions about those that do.

I am not going to downplay the role of hunting in wildlife management and the benefits that hunting and hunters bring. However I am not going to be so blind as to think that we are the only group that brings anything to the table.

Another note for the record. I would venture to say that those that make the decisions regarding wildlife management would laugh in your face if they heard you state that it was a simple concept. I don't see anything simple about it.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> You do realize that there are many, many people that are not anti-hunting that do not partake in hunting right? A person doesn't have to actively hunt in order to be a benefit to wildlife or understand the benefits to wildlife management that hunting brings. There are also those that are on the fence about hunting that can be swayed one way or another. Stereotyping people and making assumptions about everybody that does not hunt is no better than the extreme anti-hunters stereotyping and making assumptions about those that do.
> 
> I am not going to downplay the role of hunting in wildlife management and the benefits that hunting and hunters bring. However I am not going to be so blind as to think that we are the only group that brings anything to the table.
> 
> Another note for the record. I would venture to say that those that make the decisions regarding wildlife management would laugh in your face if they heard you state that it was a simple concept. I don't see anything simple about it.


Go on KSL and read the comments of the hunter who killed the lion and received death threats. Anyone who dosent understand hunting in those comments doesn't understand hunting is management they just can't understand why you'd shoot a lion. I guarantee they aren't a part of PETA or similar group, they just have no concept of management. As for it being simple, I'm not referring to acquiring balance and good management, I am referring to the fact that it isn't that hard to understand hunting is a management tool, most non hunters I've ever met or dealt with don't understand that. They don't understand killing something you don't eat, the simple part is hunting is used as a management tool . I don't mean to say management as a whole is simple, but with an open mind it's easy to see hunting as a tool involved.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

somebody that gives any death threat is an extremist. Period. Piss Poor Example. Furthermore you have no idea what group they were part of. Another Assumption.

Becoming educated requires an open mind. Educating those that need it does as well.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> somebody that gives any death threat is an extremist. Period. Piss Poor Example. Furthermore you have no idea what group they were part of. Another Assumption.
> 
> Becoming educated requires an open mind. Educating those that need it does as well.


I'm not talking about the people who made the death threats. Read my comments thoroughly I mean the people that are commenting on the article. It's a great example these are every day people of Utah.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

1-I there are times I read your comments 4-5 times just to attempt a response. Full effort is given. I assure you.

;-)


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> somebody that gives any death threat is an extremist. Period. Piss Poor Example. Furthermore you have no idea what group they were part of. Another Assumption.
> 
> Becoming educated requires an open mind. Educating those that need it does as well.


Well said.

Positive example is the best PR for hunters and any attempt to justify poaching defeats all the good work of many.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> Well said.
> 
> Positive example is the best PR for hunters and any attempt to justify poaching defeats all the good work of many.


It's not justification it's honesty, many on here try to act like perfect human beings. I don't hide my true self .


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> One pole is now the Pope and could be considered the Polish Pillar of Hope.


I made poles for years, mostly boat rods.

.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Dukes_Daddy View Post
> Well said.
> 
> ...


And now justification for the justification!


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

As I said it's not justification for poaching , I'm being honest in saying I don't like hawks. Just giving an honest thought .


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> I dunno if anyone has told you, but there aren't wolves in utah.
> 
> I put a face. So people know its sarcasm. We can laugh. Ha.


Looks like this thing could go 20 pages! So I'm gonna interject here. Don't get caught up in the moment and post wolf videos in this thread; put the videos here:
http://utahwildlife.net/forum/29-other-kinds-animals/36764-wolves-trail-cam-14.html

So far that's where all the Utah wolf trail camera videos are stored, all of them.

Thank you,
Goob
Utah Wolf Trail Camera Program Director of Advanced Archival Development (UWTCPDAAD)


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I don't care if someone poached a hawlk or eagle I hear they taste like swans


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I hear that if you broil them, they taste more like spotted owls. Goob, thoughts? Recipes?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

johnnycake said:


> I hear that if you broil them, they taste more like spotted owls. Goob, thoughts? Recipes?


I've never had Utah Hawk, but I'm sure you can prepare it just as you would Utah Duck, Utah Chukar, Utah Forest Grouse and Utah Pheasant: 

Sliced off 2 small pieces of breast meat the size of a cigar
Slobbered on 3 tablespoons of cream cheese
Attach 1/2 of a jalapeno with 5 toothpicks
Wrap with 2 slices of bacon, attach with 8 more toothpicks
Cook rare on the Barbie (anything more than rare the cream cheese will slide off and the toothpicks catch fire)
Discard the rest of the bird.
I don't recommend cooking Utah Hawk like you would cook Utah Dove or Utah Quail.

Seriously, any kind of poaching is illegal and I don't condone it.

TOP OF DA PAGE!!!

.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> It's not justification it's honesty, many on here try to act like perfect human beings. I don't hide my true self .


Well, if not poaching makes me a perfect human being then my wife needs to read this. I thought it was all the other shenanigans that I pull that make me imperfect.

Instead of "junior member" can I be a "perfect member" ??


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Good lord man poaching is poaching,its illegal, and in my humble opinion theres is nothing more majestic than an eagle soaring the skies.:usa:


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

#1DEER 1-I said:


> As I said it's not justification for poaching , I'm being honest in saying I don't like hawks. Just giving an honest thought .


Why?


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

All I can say is that it's a good thing I don't shoot everything I don't like!! Can't condone poaching even if it does make sense. Not even Mt. Lions in CA. If something needs to change.....which is entirely possible, one should use the system to change the rules. That being said, I still didn't lose any sleep over it.---------SS


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

I once found five dead hawks in a single day while hunting a piece of private Utah property. I suspected that they were poached, but they were a bit too decomposed to tell.

I'm sure plenty of under-the-table hawk management goes on.


----------

