sepiareverb
genius and moron
d-lux3/raw
sjw617
Panoramist
Needed or fashion statement?
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
d-lux3/raw
This feels like an online version of 'What's My Line?'
First question: Is she wearing this so she doesn't get shot by a hunter? (y/n)
/
Bill58
Native Texan
Sarah Palin going Moose hunting?
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
I was going to guess....Dick Cheney's niece.
I think the photo is a pretty accurate rendition of that color, seriously. I have the LX3 and it renders very natural colors even in jpeg.
/
I think the photo is a pretty accurate rendition of that color, seriously. I have the LX3 and it renders very natural colors even in jpeg.
/
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Living in VT blaze orange is a fact of life for all of November.
Exactly- quite a good match I thought.
Exactly- quite a good match I thought.
oftheherd
Veteran
LOL. Comments along that line was my first thought too.
Avotius
Some guy
What was the point of this photo/thread?
sepiareverb
genius and moron
The blaze orange color.
BillBingham2
Registered User
That's what I say for the reason I always wear Orange Crocs, being prepared for the chance I might get asked to go hunting with Dick. Got lots of laughs at Gander Mountain last few times!
B2 (;->
eli griggs
Well-known
If you don't like Blaze Orange, take up bow hunting, it's not required, at least in NC.
I'm actually rather fond of this colour, besides the sheer intensity that demands the eye, whenever I see outdoors men and women wearing it, without LEO supervision, I tend to think of them as 'good shepherds' of the environment.
Most hunters I've known are very involved in keeping wildlife populations in check, healthy and protected and have found more than a few toxic problems that's needed cleaning up, stuff that would have otherwise gone unnoticed by the mall-crawl coffee house crowd, unless, of course, it gets a mention on The Daily Show or similar.
As far as Dick Cheney, Blaze Orange is no protection so keep low and run away..
I'm actually rather fond of this colour, besides the sheer intensity that demands the eye, whenever I see outdoors men and women wearing it, without LEO supervision, I tend to think of them as 'good shepherds' of the environment.
Most hunters I've known are very involved in keeping wildlife populations in check, healthy and protected and have found more than a few toxic problems that's needed cleaning up, stuff that would have otherwise gone unnoticed by the mall-crawl coffee house crowd, unless, of course, it gets a mention on The Daily Show or similar.
As far as Dick Cheney, Blaze Orange is no protection so keep low and run away..
literiter
Well-known
Wildlife biologists will tell you that the gene pool of hunted animals is not improved by the activities of these "good shepherds" as they tend to reward themselves by taking only the best, leaving the less fit, less worthy behind.
On the other hand, wearing Blaze Orange, doesn't always insure a "good shepherd" won't get his or her head shot off, thus improving the human gene pool.
There are lots of Dick Cheneys out there.
On the other hand, wearing Blaze Orange, doesn't always insure a "good shepherd" won't get his or her head shot off, thus improving the human gene pool.
There are lots of Dick Cheneys out there.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Just to put it out there, We wear blaze orange to avoid being shot while out walking or cutting firewood, not out hunting.
I'm certainly not opposed to hunting, with family living in NJ for years I have firsthand experience with what happens when deer live without predators. It isn't pretty.
I'm certainly not opposed to hunting, with family living in NJ for years I have firsthand experience with what happens when deer live without predators. It isn't pretty.
eli griggs
Well-known
Literiter, I would find it impossible to take seriously the word of any wildlife biologist that would spout such nonsense. Hunters have and continue to fulfill many critical and beneficial roles in keeping wildlife health and this includes attendant non-game populations and the habitats they share with game animals.
Hunters have certainly more successfully preserved and brought back to viable numbers more species in this country than any group of biologists working on their own and the number of gainfully employed wildlife biologists would certainly be much lower if not for more than a centuries work on both the private and public levels by hunters who continue to contribute, what, about 80-90 percent of the monies in the U.S. that have been use to fund state wildlife programs, including habitat acquisition and restoration.
Hunters do aspire to take the healthiest game they can, so they are, as a group, very invested in making sure that, for example, the Whitetail deer population stays healthy and viable for future generations, with unpolluted habitat in which to grow, the majority which are never harvested.
While many hunters do hunt for trophy game, they also have another vested interest in seeing that these animals are healthy and fit, they and their families eat them or share the bounty with food banks in need of meats.
Game meat is generally healthier than the stuff you get at the store, I know my primary medical care giver recommends it, being free of the antibiotics and hormones massively injected into farmed animals, as well as being lean, not grown for a targeted fat content, usually higher than natural. Just as any top predator consumes its' kill, so do most hunters. I am pretty confident when I write, no hunter wants to eat or feed diseased or toxin laced food to their family, would you?
It is a sad fact that, for example, deer populations, in many states are reaching a critical mass which threatens to send a plague of disease such as Chronic Wasting, CWD, racing across this country, wiping out entire populations animals and infecting many non-deer spices in the process
This same overabundance of deer also are in danger of overtaxing wildlife food resources, which can cause populations weakened by starvation to become more susceptible to diseases and starvation, not only within their own population but in other creatures that share the same habitat and beyond, as well as the severe and possibly irreparable damage they will cause to that habitat by overfeeding on local flora.
Think for a moment what impact the pestilence created by a massive die-off of hundreds of thousands of large animals in any Eastern state might mean in terms of the immediate health and future of the environment.
Much of this overpopulation can be lain at the feet at those whom demonized responsible hunters for years, a practice which has contributed to a shrinking population of hunters whom traditionally helped keep these populations in check. The loss of new hunters also meant a loss of revenue for wildlife populations and lands. In my state, deer populations are so large now, that a 6 plus expanded season is now the norm, the seasons expanded and still a large urban deer population continues to grow and suffer because of overpopulation. It is not uncommon for townships to hire companies with teams of professional hunters to stalk populated areas after dark with night-vision gear and silenced rifles, just to keep things marginally manageable, paid for, of course, by the citizens whom often know nothing of the practice.
I will also point out that most hunters know when to pull back if populations are threatened. In areas where, ie, wild turkeys are stressed, hunters will willingly accept closed seasons until the population is fit to support harvesting again. Hunters, by-the-way are pretty much the only reason healthy and huntable turkey populations exist in many states today, having done most of the early work to restore these animals to areas where they had ceased to exist and funded it out of their own pockets as well, forming critical wildlife clubs to support their efforts. Such well documented and ongoing actions more than qualify hunters to wear the label, "Good Shepherds".
Long before it became fashionable to talk about the environment and the creatures that share it, hunters were involved in the conservation and protection of the environment and the future of wildlife in this country, beyond the confines of Nation Parks, is dependent on them still.
This conservation, by-the-way, includes ending the despicable practices of so called "market hunters" whom butchered anything that moved on behalf of the meat demanding, non-hunting urban population, which did little and continues to contribute scant real work or bring forth meaningful monies on behalf of the environment as they sit around their TVs watching performing clowns like Jack Hanna or the late narcissistic poser, Timothy Dexter aka "Timothy Treadwell" on Animal Planet channel, oohing and ahhing as they stuff down another Hot Pocket.
It is true there are always going to be 'bad eggs' among the ranks of hunters, just as there are among so call 'animal rights' movements. PETA and the ASPCA for example have had and continue to embrace members that have emptied public animal shelters by 'adopting' large numbers of animals and been on occasion, found to have thrown dozens of the hapless dogs and cats off bridges or killed them minutes latter in the back of vans. Perhaps if a few more of these mall crawling 'activists' were shot while killing puppies and kittens, throwing blood, paint or whatever onto women wearing fur or doing dumb-ass stunts like putting blaze orange on deer during hunting season, more of the public would take a closer look at their semi-terrorist activities and see what kind of 'advocates' they really are. One thing for sure, compared to the hunting population, they have done nothing to improve the gene pool of any population, human or animal.
Eli
Hunters have certainly more successfully preserved and brought back to viable numbers more species in this country than any group of biologists working on their own and the number of gainfully employed wildlife biologists would certainly be much lower if not for more than a centuries work on both the private and public levels by hunters who continue to contribute, what, about 80-90 percent of the monies in the U.S. that have been use to fund state wildlife programs, including habitat acquisition and restoration.
Hunters do aspire to take the healthiest game they can, so they are, as a group, very invested in making sure that, for example, the Whitetail deer population stays healthy and viable for future generations, with unpolluted habitat in which to grow, the majority which are never harvested.
While many hunters do hunt for trophy game, they also have another vested interest in seeing that these animals are healthy and fit, they and their families eat them or share the bounty with food banks in need of meats.
Game meat is generally healthier than the stuff you get at the store, I know my primary medical care giver recommends it, being free of the antibiotics and hormones massively injected into farmed animals, as well as being lean, not grown for a targeted fat content, usually higher than natural. Just as any top predator consumes its' kill, so do most hunters. I am pretty confident when I write, no hunter wants to eat or feed diseased or toxin laced food to their family, would you?
It is a sad fact that, for example, deer populations, in many states are reaching a critical mass which threatens to send a plague of disease such as Chronic Wasting, CWD, racing across this country, wiping out entire populations animals and infecting many non-deer spices in the process
This same overabundance of deer also are in danger of overtaxing wildlife food resources, which can cause populations weakened by starvation to become more susceptible to diseases and starvation, not only within their own population but in other creatures that share the same habitat and beyond, as well as the severe and possibly irreparable damage they will cause to that habitat by overfeeding on local flora.
Think for a moment what impact the pestilence created by a massive die-off of hundreds of thousands of large animals in any Eastern state might mean in terms of the immediate health and future of the environment.
Much of this overpopulation can be lain at the feet at those whom demonized responsible hunters for years, a practice which has contributed to a shrinking population of hunters whom traditionally helped keep these populations in check. The loss of new hunters also meant a loss of revenue for wildlife populations and lands. In my state, deer populations are so large now, that a 6 plus expanded season is now the norm, the seasons expanded and still a large urban deer population continues to grow and suffer because of overpopulation. It is not uncommon for townships to hire companies with teams of professional hunters to stalk populated areas after dark with night-vision gear and silenced rifles, just to keep things marginally manageable, paid for, of course, by the citizens whom often know nothing of the practice.
I will also point out that most hunters know when to pull back if populations are threatened. In areas where, ie, wild turkeys are stressed, hunters will willingly accept closed seasons until the population is fit to support harvesting again. Hunters, by-the-way are pretty much the only reason healthy and huntable turkey populations exist in many states today, having done most of the early work to restore these animals to areas where they had ceased to exist and funded it out of their own pockets as well, forming critical wildlife clubs to support their efforts. Such well documented and ongoing actions more than qualify hunters to wear the label, "Good Shepherds".
Long before it became fashionable to talk about the environment and the creatures that share it, hunters were involved in the conservation and protection of the environment and the future of wildlife in this country, beyond the confines of Nation Parks, is dependent on them still.
This conservation, by-the-way, includes ending the despicable practices of so called "market hunters" whom butchered anything that moved on behalf of the meat demanding, non-hunting urban population, which did little and continues to contribute scant real work or bring forth meaningful monies on behalf of the environment as they sit around their TVs watching performing clowns like Jack Hanna or the late narcissistic poser, Timothy Dexter aka "Timothy Treadwell" on Animal Planet channel, oohing and ahhing as they stuff down another Hot Pocket.
It is true there are always going to be 'bad eggs' among the ranks of hunters, just as there are among so call 'animal rights' movements. PETA and the ASPCA for example have had and continue to embrace members that have emptied public animal shelters by 'adopting' large numbers of animals and been on occasion, found to have thrown dozens of the hapless dogs and cats off bridges or killed them minutes latter in the back of vans. Perhaps if a few more of these mall crawling 'activists' were shot while killing puppies and kittens, throwing blood, paint or whatever onto women wearing fur or doing dumb-ass stunts like putting blaze orange on deer during hunting season, more of the public would take a closer look at their semi-terrorist activities and see what kind of 'advocates' they really are. One thing for sure, compared to the hunting population, they have done nothing to improve the gene pool of any population, human or animal.
Eli
Last edited:
literiter
Well-known
Whew!
I cannot reply to this as I'd like, because I would be (justifiably) banned from this site and I really like photography.
I will say that we've all heard this sort of evangelizing many times before and realize that it is an attempt to justify hunting for sport, not subsistence. There are many ways of managing animal populations besides taking the best buck etc.
As you apparently realize you are gradually loosing the argument and I won't pursue this any farther.......have fun. I'm outa here!
"Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything."
Robert A. Heinlein
Vincent
I cannot reply to this as I'd like, because I would be (justifiably) banned from this site and I really like photography.
I will say that we've all heard this sort of evangelizing many times before and realize that it is an attempt to justify hunting for sport, not subsistence. There are many ways of managing animal populations besides taking the best buck etc.
As you apparently realize you are gradually loosing the argument and I won't pursue this any farther.......have fun. I'm outa here!
"Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything."
Robert A. Heinlein
Vincent
Last edited: