Anybody listen to ep 35? Do you only kill what you eat? Do hunters need to pick there battles and give up on predator hunting in this anti hunting climate? Does BHA have an official stance on predator hunting?
I have shot a coyote and didnt eat it.
Anybody listen to ep 35? Do you only kill what you eat? Do hunters need to pick there battles and give up on predator hunting in this anti hunting climate? Does BHA have an official stance on predator hunting?
I have shot a coyote and didnt eat it.
"Our arrows will block out the sun!" "Then we shall fight in the dark!" K.L. Government is not the solution to our problem, it is the problem. R.R. One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results. M.F. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClJ...fYFveARiWyqjQA
Site Sponsor
You need to go to church and repent.
Or whatever bullshit it's called.
1. Human over population
2. Government burden and overreach
I listened to the podcast last night and I have some issues with it for sure. Lumping Chris Darimont into the hunting community is a stretch. Late onset hunter, another bs. Darimont choked on few direct questios that were put forward to him. For example how he would manage wolves.
He is not a hunter, he is an imposter.
Public social license? Why does public most of whom have no link or interest in hunting have to issue me a license to hunt?
Darimont clearly doesn't hunt wolves and therefore he believes no one should. Garbage attitude.
He kept referring to data, but no data was given. Either of them.
Alltogether wishy washy.
The only good thing said there was that if there was only one elk left that he would stop hunting them.
All I care about is science and evidence in the field.
We must have good science and good data.
Last edited by adriaticum; 03-18-2021 at 06:46 AM.
1. Human over population
2. Government burden and overreach
I'm not going to get into any of the background noise on this and just focus on what I heard during the podcast.
- Complete lack of preparation on the host's part. Haven't listened to any of his other stuff so can't comment any further.
- Lack of willingness to engage the guest in a hugely important conversation on the host's part. To the point that I am left questioning the host's intentions.
- Host giggling throughout the interview while knowingly being lied to. Again, I just don't get it.
I would have turned it off within 5 minutes because of the lack of professionalism but stayed the duration because I wanted to hear what was being said by the guest.
To the many people who do know a thing or two about conservation in this province and dedicate incredible amounts of their time and resources to it, and I will lump myself into this, this was seen as a massive slap in the face and really just made the host look like a complete fool. Hopefully, most of the hunting community sees this for what it is and gives it the minimal amount of attention it deserves.
To the followers of this podcast, many of whom are newer hunters, I can only hope that they are looking at other information as well and can put the pieces together to realize what's really going on and see this episode for what it is, a steaming pile of shit.
I am not opposed to listening to Chris Darimont on a podcast, but whoever is on the other side of that conversation better know what they are doing and better be doing it for something bigger than their ego.
WSSBC Monarch Silver Member
WSF Summit Life Member
RMGA Life Member
The mountains are calling and I must go - John Muir
Geeeezzzz. I can’t see myself eating coyote or wolf or cats for that matter . If I harvest any of the mentioned species your welcome to the meat .
Arctic Lake
Member of CCFR Would encourage you all to join today !
Read Teddy Roosevelt The Man In The Arena !
The guest was a condescending asshole and the host was a spineless cuck.
A few of these 'Hunting' podcasts have the same kind of mentality. Some have justified the grizzly hunt ban for the reason that we don't use the meat. It is frustrating that this kind of thinking is being spread around within our community and outside of it via these podcasts.
WSSBC
CCFR
I do not understand this podcast. It was embarrassing. For such an important topic he was enormously unprepared. It seemed in fact zero preparation. I dont know what his intents were because he clearly isn't an anti hunter but it seemed to me that he just wanted to hear his own voice and/or get followers. He did hunting as a whole an extreme disservice if it was the best of times. I still can't wrap my head around it. Had so many opportunities to call darimont out on his BS and lies and narrative and was just completely asleep at the switch or completely not knowledgeable on the topics he was on about.
I know its small things, but ive unfollowed on all his platforms and will not be renewing with BHA if he has a role with it. Its my opinion others do the same. I have half a mind to phone seek outside and vortex to b!tch about his sponsorship.
The hunting community just can't catch a break from itself.
Chris Darimont and the Raincoast Machine are tricky guys to deal with. I've talked to Chris several times. I like him, but like many of you, I think he and Raincoast are a complex challenge. There is more going on than they will allow. I'm not sure if that's because they're not very self-aware or because they're really clear on what the mission is and how what they say in public impacts the achievement of the mission.
I also know that an outraged aggressive reponse to Raincoast seems to play to their strengths. They like it.
I know the host, Chris Pryn a bit. Criticism of the podcast is warranted, I think, but I wouldn't be too quick to cast Chris Pryn into the darkness and say "you're dead to me!" Probably better to give him rational (not emotional) input and challenge him to re-address this issue.
A lot of us see a long term anti-hunting social engineering campaign on the part of Raincoast. I certainly do, despite Raincoast's claims to the contrary (which I frankly don't find convincing).
Sometimes our response to that is to immediately say "We're in a fight" and to respond. We've seen that recently and there is a good place for that.
However....not everyone likes to see a fight and they don't all like lots of overt aggression. It's possible that our drive to get 50,000 signatories between two letter writing campaigns is...under-achieiving as a result of this. That is what it is, and like I say, sometimes a fight is exactly what's called for (I've got 3 big brothers, so a little friendly violence makes me feel a bit warm and fuzzy).
But...maybe rather than hammering Chris Pryn real hard it might be better to educate him a bit and encourage him to raise the level of the convo. Podcast fans have seen that happen with Ben O'Brian's podcast and I'm are we can all name a few others that didn't exactly hit all the notes we would have liked.
Just a thought.
Rob Chipman
"The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders" - Ed Abbey
"Grown men do not need leaders" - also Ed Abbey