# Should we be concerned ???



## Pinefarm

Dire,

Part of the job of moderator is to keep an eye on questionable posts and members. E. Fairbanks has made the derogatory comment of the "mighty hunters" in 22 threads.

One can use terms and phrases to define a subset of the hunting community, but in some of these cases, the person in question seems to have painted all hunters in a bad light with the term "mighty hunters". 

After having several other M-S members over the years who did not have good intentions, that term, which is E. Fairbanks signature term, sends up a red flag for me, especially when hunters seem to be the focus of scorn and dislike by the poster and rarely, if ever, praise or respect. If it was one case, that's understandable. After 22 cases, one begins to wonder the posters true impression of hunters.

It's not paranoid when you've seen it several times before. I hope it's not the case and it likely isn't, but it sure puts me on the defensive.

If you didn't know, here's what "mighty hunter" means...

The character of the mighty hunter is the epitome of the braggart--full of tall tales and self glorification. His hunts are often violent and always exaggerated--wrestling alligators or hunting bees...


----------



## 6inchtrack

Darn it[/COLOR]
I swatted a bee today, couple skeeters too.
 
There are a lot of bees around my place, but I do not know the difference between any two bees, they all look alike to me. (and I'm not a bee racist either, just dont know the difference)


----------



## Direwolfe

Didn't mean any offense to anyone. I'll just back away .... slowly....keeping one hand on the grip...

(I'll forego commenting on a potential typo:"wrestling alligators or hunting bees...")


----------



## swampbuck

Direwolfe said:


> "The article does not mention "mighty" hunters planting food plots as being a cause, however."
> 
> Pinefarm,
> 
> I didn't understand anyone in this thread accusing food plots of being the problem (rather e. fairbanks seemed to suggest this may affect food plots). So calm down. You have plenty of things to be paranoid about when it comes to attacks on food plotting but this isn't one of them.


 YEA....Like maybe the Ag Dept will add some more varietys of brassica to the banned list


----------



## CHASINEYES

No doubt that honey bee's are in short supply in my area. I kept a close eye on some wild apple trees this spring that I had pruned late winter. Lots of blossoms and not a honey bee in sight, only bumble bees did the pollinating. Last year the first flowers on our buckwheat didnt get pollinated. Honey bees have not been showing up until mid summer here.


----------



## traditional

Pinefarm said:


> Dire,
> 
> Part of the job of moderator is to keep an eye on questionable posts and members. E. Fairbanks has made the derogatory comment of the "mighty hunters" in 22 threads
> 
> After having several other M-S members over the years who did not have good intentions, that term, which is E. Fairbanks signature term, sends up a red flag for me, especially when hunters seem to be the focus of scorn and dislike by the poster and rarely, if ever, praise or respect. If it was one case, that's understandable. After 22 cases, one begins to wonder the posters true impression of hunters.
> 
> It's not paranoid when you've seen it several times before. I hope it's not the case and it likely isn't, but it sure puts me on the defensive.
> 
> If you didn't know, here's what "mighty hunter" means...
> 
> The character of the mighty hunter is the epitome of the braggart--full of tall tales and self glorification. His hunts are often violent and always exaggerated--wrestling alligators or hunting bees...


To the "Mighty Hunter" could we add "Proto" , "Casual" , "Weekend warrior" ? These terms seem to be used in a derogatory way. Rarely do you see any praise and respect for that segment of the hunting community.


----------



## Pinefarm

I've never seen "proto". What is that? Casual hunters is not meant to be derogatory in any sense. It merely defines what MDNR licensing considers the 50% plus of the people that buys their deer tag the night before opener and rarely, if ever hunts past Nov.18. When discussing how to make rule changes and the effect that it will have on certain large segments, if not majority segments of the deer hunting community, it realizes them and makes sure rules are simple for the masses who don't pay attention to deer regulations 365 days a year, like the few of us here do. 

Now, should the typically least informed be granted the loudest input on changes? To me, that's a worthy debate.

Weekend warrior could be I guess, but more often that not, it's to pay homage to the working man who works M-F.


From Websters...

weekend warrior: a person who participates in a usually physically strenuous activity only on weekends or part-time.

From Wiki...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekend_warrior

People who do recreational activities (such as golfing, skiing, snowboarding, or mountain biking) solely on the weekends since they work Monday through Friday.

I see nothing on Wiki that says it's a term to put sportsman in a bad light. 



From the Detroit Free Press...

We need to recruit more deer hunters
November 4, 2007

This spike buck is incredibly dumb and lucky. Only 10 yards away, he's staring intently at a mature doe that's toying with him.

Twice he has tried to cozy up to the doe. Once she pranced off coyly. The second time, she gave him a swift kick in the knee, which is why he's being cautious.

From my perch on a ladder stand 20 feet above, it would be easy to put an arrow through him. But I've set my sights on an 8-pointer that also has made regular visits to this stand, although never in a position where I could get a shot.

The 8-pointer has been photographed several times by an infrared camera after dark, but twice he came at dusk, so close that I could count the points on his antlers. His body was screened by a couple of small trees, so the angle wasn't right to get him.

So I sit halfway up a big oak waiting for his next appearance, and as I watch the deer below, my mind wanders to a conversation I had with Rebecca Humphries, the director of the Department of Natural Resources.

She mentioned a statistic that I knew but had forgotten: While about 750,000 people take part in Michigan's firearms deer season, 285,000 of them -- 38% -- don't hunt every season.

That means that about four deer hunters out of 10 will hunt for a year or two and then skip for a while. It's significant because anything that takes away from the hunting experience could cause many in that 38% to stop for good.

I've learned that many who do buy licenses every year are casual hunters.

They go more for the camaraderie and tradition than to shoot a deer. In most camps, by the third or fourth day many hunters don't bother to get up early to go out to a blind. My best guess is that during the firearms season we have about 250,000 dedicated hunters who hunt with skill and forethought for seven to 15 days, and 500,000 people who go out for two or three days with the hope that a deer might run in front of them.

By the way, I figure that at least 80% of the 400,000 bow hunters fit the serious-hunter category.

Now while some dedicated hunters complain about the less-dedicated masses, I'm no longer among the complainers. Yes, those people are the ones who come wandering past your stand at 7 a.m. after you've been in place for an hour. Yes, they're the ones you hear sighting in rifles in the field the day before the opener.

But they also buy 500,000 deer licenses, the money from which supports not just deer management but much of the other hunting we do in Michigan. The problem is that as we become more urbanized, the percentage of casual hunters will increase, because fewer people will have time to spend a week in deer camp.

Today, it's harder for people to get long blocks of time away from the job. And people with children have to be around to shuttle them to games and practices far from the schools.

So if you have any ideas that might help keep people motivated to buy deer licenses every year, let me know, because I can't think of anything that would make much difference.

But a tree stand is a good place to try to think of some.

Contact ERIC SHARP at 313-222-2511 or [email protected].


----------



## Ranger Ray

Your not alone on this "mighty hunter" issue. I have asked in a couple different threads for clarification. He seems to not want to clarify. His statements come across very condescending toward hunters in general. Hence the reason I asked for clarification.


----------



## onenationhere

Colony collapse disorder(ccd).From What I have read from people who have study this is that the disorder mainly happens in commercial bee colonies which have a large number of related insects living in high densitys.Some reaserchers are thinking that commercial honey bee stocks are based on too narrow a genetic base and this makes the bees more vunerable to disease.So yes you should be concerned to an extent.It seems that a lot of wild bee populations are being affected but they should bounce back because there are wild colonies that have the genetic diversity to fight the disorder.Colony collapse disorder(ccd)reminds me of another disorder,this disorder also has three words,hmmmmmmm.Allowed the time could this disorder also play itself out in the wild population and possibly make the species stronger?.Who knows, we will all be to busy building a *QUALITY* specimen to hunt.


----------



## solohunter

Pinefarm said:


> Ironically, honey bee's are not native. They're an exotic, brought from Europe in the 1600's.
> 
> One theory I found on several sites is that the radiation from cell phones throws off their "radar" and they can't get back to the hive. One study showed that if a cell phone was placed by the hive, the bee's didn't return, for whatever reason.


maybe its the cell phone towers that are causing issues with the bee,s along with all the cell phones jamming the air???

I am allergic to honey bee,s and carry an epi-pen !!! so i am kinda nuetral on the decline


----------



## Pinefarm

Who knows, in 20 years we may find out that what we thought was benign, like cell phone towers, may have an effect on us!


----------



## Munsterlndr

I think that Fairbanks uses the term "mighty hunter" in a mildly sarcastic way, kind of poking fun at those individuals that get so swept up in the "importance" of using the latest scent and camo or QDM or food plots, whatever the fad of the moment may be, without really being cognizant of the bigger picture such as the impact of over-population or disease, issues that pose substantive threats to the sport. Some people take things and themselves a little too seriously sometimes.


----------



## Gina Fox

e. fairbanks said:


> SIMPLY TYPE HONEY BEES DISAPPEARING- PRESS SEARCH- READ ALL ABOUT IT
> 
> Then pretend "it will never happen" THEN TYPE BUMBLEBEES DISAPPEARING- PRESS SEARCH= READ ALL ABOUT IT THEN PRETEND "IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN"


 
Wild TV. Endangered Honeybees | PBS


I heard that in California that the bees were being 'africanized' and that they have been pretty agressive, stinging one old man over 1,000 times...I can see that natural causes might be responsible, but I will have to do more research before I can blame the humans for their slow demise...


----------



## e. fairbanks

Being a 90 year "Mighty Old Hunter and a 90 year "Mighty Old RETIRED VETERINARIAN" (note the proper spelling) I have tried to limit my threads and responses to Wildlife Diseases. am willing to make an exception
Perhaps it is relative that I GO BACK TO 1936, when we had the first open deer season.
Deer were creatures of the forest and that is where we went to actually hunt them
Nov. 15 to 30 inc. License cost $2.25, good for 1 male deer, w/antlers extending at least 3 inches above the skull. We actually hunted public land, state and national forest land.
We had no 4 wdpickups. We had no ATV's or snomobiles. There were no hunting shacks w/2 way radios, girlie magazines, or 6 packs. We had never heard of baiting deer or food plots.We had none of the modern high powered artillery,light gathering telescopic sights, range finders, camo clothing, deoderants, scents, etc. Us farm boys went to the woods in our overhalls and jackets smelling of the cowbarn. 
It was illegal to hunt from an elevated stand or from a tree. When we locked our metal tag on a buck we could no longer hunt.
The Conservation Dept. of that era considered all hunters to be violaters. They set up illegal road blocks on major highways and illegally searched vehicles driven by hunters wearing the red/black checkered hunting clothes. (one old boy who hunted with us put his hunting chlothes in the trunk w/the doe venison ;wore a suit on the way downstate, the wardens would wave him on through)
Today us "MIGHTY HUNTERS" COULD LEGALLY KILL EVERY DEER IN THE STATE, WE HAVE THE POWER, THE MIGHTY ARM OF THE DNR NRC HAS MADE IT POSSIBLE
Hope this helps to explain


----------



## Pinefarm

No girlie magazines! :lol: Those are as necessary at camp as a pot of chili and a deck of cards.

Mr. Fairbanks,

I don't want you to be upset with me. I respect the work you've done. And I totally understand your perspective and I respect you for still getting out there. I should only hope that I make it to 90, let alone still have "get up and go". I applaud you for your passion.

But some of us see things a bit differently on the "good old days" compared to today. That's why I get defensive when people mock today's hunter, even the generation younger than mine. I can make the case that it's today's hunter who does things more right than was done in the past.

Let me add, I hunt with a longbow and recurve, my muzzleloader is a flintlock and my go to rifle is a 1940's Winchester M70. The only reason I've used a radio is after my dad had his 2nd heart attack and then later a by-pass, to check in on him. Now that he's passed on, I have no use for radio's. Did we occasionally chat if things got slow? Sure. But there was nothing beneficial about a radio, other than I could go over to my dad if either he shot something or wasn't feeling well.

Sure, there are plenty of things I don't care for that hunters do today.
But there are things in the past that do not put the past into a good light either.

Another huge difference is, depression era folks DID hunt for meat. But in today's world of plenty, and frankly with some 30% being obese and some 65% being overweight, todays hunter typically hunts for recreation. When you're hungry, you don't care what a rack looks like. When you're fat and hunt for recreation , rack size does carry some weight, no pun intended.

Did you know that our old retired CO told us why they did away with the metal tags is that so many of the older generation figured out how to press it down a certain way and then you could pull it off and re-use it on multiple bucks? All of my old relatives knew how to rig it and joked how they missed that old tag because you could use it on multiple deer.

The reason the Conservation Dept considered most "hunters" to be violators back then is because, IMHO, most were. My personal experience with all those of that generation is that every one of them violated. My grandpa's, uncle's and neighbors too. And not small stuff like putting down a bag of carrots with a 2 gallon rule, I mean jacklighting 3-4 deer in a night, snares, etc.
Correct me if my experience is off. You yourself mentioned your friend who had to change clothing to try hide from his trunkfull of poached doe venison. 

Have you noticed the steep decline in hunter accidents from the 1920's to today? Sure, there's hunter education and orange, but just as drunk driving is no longer widely acceptable now compared to the past, drunk hunting isn't either. Hunters going out intoxicated in the past was common place. My dad told me stories of big 20 man drives that he walked away from because pretty much the whole party was drunk. And on more than one occasion. He said it's amazing more guys didn't get shot back then.

People still hunt public land, lots of them. What's different now is that everything is posted. But why is that? Why is permission so hard to get today? Frankly, it's because the generations before us ruined it for us. They left trash all over the place, they cut tree's down when they weren't supposed to, left cattle gates open, cut fences, poached, and did all kinds of things to where landowners finally collectively said enough. 

Maybe if there was 4wd's back then, hunters could get off road and road hunting wouldn't have been the norm back then. Even in my time as a kid in the 1970's, we used to have to put a guy from our camp up by the road in rifle season as a determent because road hunting was so popular. Roadhunting today has almost all but vanished.

So you see, there are 2 sides of the coin. Granted, there are lots of gadgets today. That's why I opt for a longbow and a flintlock. But the gadgets weren't used in the past simply because they were unavailable and many couldn't have afforded them if they were and the companies would have closed.

When the plastic hull shotgun shell came out, that all but killed the paper shells. Nobody wants paper wads to come back either. Nobody of your generation demanded that paper shells remain the norm. 

Did you or your friends ever own a Jon-E handwarmer? They were state of the art gadgets in your era. 

And who was it that first made Jeep's, International Harvester's Scout's, Bronco's and Blazers popular for outdoorsmen? I was riding a tricycle when they came out. So it wasn't my generation.

Leather boots smeared with bear grease aren't popular for deer hunting anymore for a reason. Frozen feet and odor. 

The reason scopes were not popular in those days was because, in the pre-war days few could afford one anyway and second because of the poor quality and fogging. The problems in the older scopes was leakage of the inert air or gas in the scope that was replaced by moist air. Leupold changed everything in 1947 when they invented the first weather proof rifle scope. Leupold had engineers from the WWII U.S. Merchant Marine that began figuring out weatherproofing optics. After that, sales took off right away.
It wasn't that hunters shunned optics, most could not afford them and those available were junk.

The "one male deer" tag system has also set a mindset that we're still saddled with today and I'd argue most of our problems today stem from that being ingrained as good, just as you still seem to hold in belief, otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it.


One can argue that today's hunter in the USA has more knowledge, is more skilled, has more respect for nature, litters less, makes cleaner kills and is more ethical than anyone since the native peoples. Sure, they do have lots of gadgets, but many of these gadgets had their infancy in prior generations. 

As far as blinds, tactics have been honed over time. My dad's last surviving hunting buddy started rifle hunting right after WWII and bowhunting in the late 1940's. He always joked about how dumb they used to be to sit on a stump and "freeze their ***" off. It was guys like him that started building heated blinds, not younger guys. 

But you see, even with all these gadgets, tactics and tags galore, the deer herd still thrives and is overpopulated in the zone with the most hunters who also have the most money for gadgets. The deer have not been killed off, nor will they ever be, other than maybe from some disease or complete habitat loss.

So Mr. Fairbanks, there are 2 sides to every coin. IMHO, the era of "the mighty hunters" ended around 1995 and a new perspective is taking hold. 

Again, I don't mention these things to disrespect you or "your era". To do so would disrespect my now passed relatives and own father. I list them to show why I get frustrated when so many fight change with the notion that the past or present is always best. 

Nostalgia has a tendency to recall the best things and to sugarcoat them at that. I contend that the "good old days" of deer hunting are now. The last 2 seasons were the best archery seasons at our place and I've been bowhunting since 1978. 

Having seen both worlds from observing my elders, I'm convinced that, pound for pound, the top 10% of deer hunters today would run rings around the top 10% of hunters from even the 1980's, let alone the 1930's-50's. In fact, when discussing things like thermals and bleats, I'm not even sure past generations would have a clue what was being discussed.

I also bet deer hunters in another 15 years will be even that much better.

Just my opinion, no disrespect is meant and I hope you understand my position.


----------



## Cherokee

very well stated and convincing Bob. Brought back some "memories" for this nearly 48yo. Vividly remember the Jon E warmer doused with Deer Coy scent.


----------



## Ranger Ray

e. fairbanks said:


> Being a 90 year "Mighty Old Hunter and a 90 year "Mighty Old RETIRED VETERINARIAN" (Today us "MIGHTY HUNTERS" COULD LEGALLY KILL EVERY DEER IN THE STATE, WE HAVE THE POWER, THE MIGHTY ARM OF THE DNR NRC HAS MADE IT POSSIBLE
> *Hope this helps to explain*


Yes it does, thank you.


----------



## Pinefarm

I frankly thought they were kind of dangerous. Remember when goose down was the rage? Those Jon-e's would melt right thru them if they slid out of that felt bag they came in. :lol:


----------



## Pinefarm

Cherokee,
You bowhunt right? Come on over and shoot in the yard one day. I have a decent little range in the back. I'm heading out for a few minutes after the rain stops. Looks like I won't be mowing the lawn.


----------



## swampbuck

Pinefarm said:


> Having seen both worlds from observing my elders, I'm convinced that, pound for pound, the top 10% of deer hunters today would run rings around the top 10% of hunters from even the 1980's, let alone the 1930's-50's. In fact, when discussing things like thermals and bleats, I'm not even sure past generations would have a clue what was being discussed.


If you could pry them out of their heated shacks:lol:............

I think that past and current hunters certainly are different. But you paint with a pretty wide brush in trying to prove that todays hunters are better. For instance, Your modern hunter (manager) plants food plots, creates bedding areas, travel corridors, etc.etc. for the purpose of controlling the herd....to put a specific deer in a specific spot at a specific time. Does that make him a better hunter, or a better farmer/rancher.(consider that guy that does the boot camps as an example)......The past hunters used their knowledge of sign and deer habits to attempt to put themselves in position in a natrural habitat not manipulated to control the deer movement.....(lets use Mr. Bear as an example or for a current one J. Eberhart)

If you are talking about raising/conditioning deer to improve/make easier the chance of success certainly the management guys are better at that. But If you are refering to putting the top 10% of each group in the woods (not managed property) to HUNT, I will take the old guys.

And if the modern hunters are so great why cant they control the deer population, harvest number show a lack of effort/interest.


----------



## thanis

Thank you for the thread. Something to think about. When you consider the increase in cell phone and other wireless transmissions, it is an interesting correlation. 



Direwolfe said:


> ..Most guys on this forum don't seem to be concerned about whether CWD gets introduced into the free ranging herd....


What you might consider "non-concern" might be a feeling that the steps being taken are not the cause and are not going to be a solution (and actually could cause more problems). In no way do I suggest the rules should not be followed (for example, I don't bait). I don't want to hijack the thread, so I would leave the details in the difference to another thread.

You dead on about the transportation of firewood. People just did not care, but I'm not sure if that was the hunters / sportsman.


----------



## Cherokee

Pinefarm said:


> Cherokee,
> You bowhunt right? Come on over and shoot in the yard one day. I have a decent little range in the back. I'm heading out for a few minutes after the rain stops. Looks like I won't be mowing the lawn.


Sounds good - I need to pick up some more arrows in the next week or so. I've been shooting a little, but just starting to get a little fever going now that we're into August...


----------



## Pinefarm

Swamp,
The top 10% of deer hunters are all bowhunters. There's no heated shacks to pry them from. That's firearms hunters you speak of. Plus the bowhunter requires that they get themselves into very close range for a perfect shot. Firearms hunters do not have the same requirement, they only need to get within 200-300 yards. Big difference.


----------



## e. fairbanks

Fred Bear actually hunted. Recall seeing Fred in a short movie, w/his longbow and oldtime quiver, standing on his own two feet, put two arrows in the chest of a driven buck running past him.


----------



## swampbuck

Pinefarm said:


> Swamp,
> The top 10% of deer hunters are all bowhunters.


 :lol::lol:ROTFLMAO:lol::lol: THE WEAPON DOES NOT MAKE THE HUNTER :lol::lol:


----------



## Pinefarm

The weapon certainly dictates how you have to hunt and how many mistakes you can or can't get away with. With a rifle, about all I need it to see the deer and I can kill it. With a bow, you have to put yourself into unspooked bow range. Night and day.


----------



## Munsterlndr

Baloney. Using one weapon vs. another does not make you a "better" hunter at all, it merely makes you a different type of hunter. In my opinion, a "better" hunter is one who knows the limitations of his weapon, practices with it and limits his choice of shots to ones that are high percentage, to insure a quick death and an ethical harvest. I don't care whether he's using a rifle, pistol, crossbow, longbow, whatever, the weapon employed is immaterial. Processors find enough old broadheads in deer that they butcher to dispel the notion that bow hunters are somehow magically transformed into being "better" hunters then those who use firearms.


----------



## thanis

When you consider the increased competition during firearm season, with the deer being so spooked, some could argue it is easier to hunt during bow season. I know a few who only hunt bow because of this. Then consider all the compound bows, arrows, sights, etc. The modern bow hunter relies on a lot on gear. Gun or bow, almost all hunt over a food plot / source or lure.

Now I'm not taking sides, I'm only pointing out there many factors that counter the thought that bow hunters are better hunters than those who use firearms.

I would acknowledge your typical bow hunter might know more about deer behavior, but to equate that to being a better hunter fails to acknowledge the best point so far:



Munsterlndr said:


> ...I don't care whether he's using a rifle, pistol, crossbow, longbow, whatever, the weapon employed is immaterial. Processors find enough old broadheads in deer that they butcher to dispel the notion that bow hunters are somehow magically transformed into being "better" hunters then those who use firearms...


----------



## jackbob42

I thought this thread was about the decline of insects?


----------



## JohnD4980

We should think something is wrong when farmers pay thousands of dollars to bee keepers to rent their hives. Amazing what used to be the norm in nautre now we have to force. 

Bee keepers are losing hives at alarming rates. Not good.


----------

