Federal Court-wolf hunting ends now

[bigG]

Good man!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEzTdBJUHO8

Always loved that song.

[bigG]

Ram. I was joking. I don't think you'd boot me for disagreeing with me.

nudge, nudge. Joking, right? Take it easy.

"Yes, you did degrade my opinion by posting lies. Nice to see you boasting about it. Odd that you would be proud about posting lies."
-84

I believe I admitted my inaccuracy regarding your opinion. I admitted it. You apparently don't read the bilge you wrote about me. Number one you were wrong about me. Number two, you even contradicted yourself when you said I wanted the end the hunt; then you said that you never said that I wanted to ban the hunt; then I said that you were the one who said that I wanted to ban the hunt and you said I said I never did, then I said what you said  back to you, then you said nothing about what you said about me. If I'm a liar, so are you. I'm rubber, you're glue...

Glad you see nothing wrong with your own lying. Or could we both see we didn't quite understand each others' opinions fully? Naw, that would be too adult.

You can twist it however you want to save face, the truth is you argued for 28 pages in favor of the relisting because the state jumped the gun on a season in your opinion. So yes, you did argue against a hunt.

I sure don't recall arguing in favor of relisting. You like to fill in those gaps with your own emotions. Felt, and still feel, the relisting is as political as the way the hunt itself passed. Liar. Just said it was a natural result of weak-butt politics from the Ram side (which I feel I've argued logically and respectfully). Notice the personal attacks only came after you started slinging crap. I'm cool with Ram and enjoy his forum company. It is you who appears to be attempting to save face, my friend. Maybe if you read all 28 pages, you'd see I actually agree the hunt should happen. I only perpetually refer to the plan, as it's our best source for wolf information to date. Goat's admission to poaching sure made me think I was wrong for favoring the hunt/trap. Just hoping he's part of a tiny minority of folks who do such things. I also hope he's doesn't really poach; but I'll take him for his word.

Ooo. Now you've lied about me twice as much as I lied about you. No face to save here, pal. No need to feel salty, either.

The thing will be overturned; and rightfully so.

Keep dreaming up my position; or read what I really said. Never favored delisting; just that it was more tit-for-tat politics; and that we should look at the "tit" and the "tat." You're just looking at the "tit"; check out the "tat." I don't like the "tit" nor the "tat."

I've also been adamant that people should be able to defend their livestock and human life; whether they're delisted, relisted, etc. You're, I'm afraid, the twister, here.

I admitted to my mistake. So, the only twisting I've done, apparently, has been your tail. Seems the more I agree with the trap/hunt, the more angry you get. I think the Rams of this world should be bale to hunt/trap them. Just want it done right. Both sides have brushed aside the science and evidence; thus, they deserve one another, while normal folks have to wait for another season.

[wrestle84]

I can see why they'd be protected in pockets (like Ft. McCoy by me), but if I'm a farmer and one tries taking out a young heifer , I'm goin' to get the 270, 30/30, whatever.

Wouldn't that make you a poacher?

[bigG]

Maybe, if I did it. I live in a "wolf" area and have yet to hear for the need for such action. My neighbors all have considerable livestock. Never heard them say the wolves are killing their calves/dogs/chickens/etc.  Compare that to what Goat admitted to. Yup, I defend the ability to protect my people and critters.

Still won't admit you totally lied about me...again?

I'm sure there are more straws for you to grasp at. Keep grasping.

What you don't seem to grasp is simple logic. Can't fix illogical.

I'll confess to poaching eggs. Nice try.

So, why do you insist I'm against the hunt? I argues against the politics. Not the hunt.

[wrestle84]

So you chastise Goat for making a statement about poaching, you accuse me of rationalizing poaching, yet you admit in your very first post on this thread that you would take the law into your own hands. Seems pretty hypocritical. So would you really shoot a wolf, or was that another post where you were not being truthful?

[bigG]

If my kid was in harm's way, I'd shoot a wolf, man, chicken, whatever.

You did rationalize poaching. Try to take it back. You can't.

I chastised Goat for admitting to poaching.

I don't know if or not a farmer can protect his love stock ,or not, from wolves. I'm not a farmer. Maybe my way of saying I think farmers should be able to shoot if their livestock is threatened. I don't own own a .270. Goat said to take as many as you can; not against the law, if you don't get caught. He never has been caught. I guess you can't tell the difference between the two takes. Ever think I might fire off a few shots to scare the buggers. I bet they react to loud guns without having to kill them. In my reading of the actual plan (the one you haven't yet read) I learned they are very sensitive to noise and tend to inhabit areas with few, if any roads. I'm guessing a loud gun might be effective in scaring them. Sure works on pretty much every other animal with ears.

Maybe I should have revised the post to say 10 gauge w/bird shot. BLOO-EY! I didn't say I'd even shoot the wolf. Goat said he never got caught. That post indicating to me he had.

So, can you admit to rationalizing poaching, or are you going to stick by the lie that you didn't? You tried to explain poaching away with the illogical position that somehow government is the cause of it. Stick with the lie, or fess up. What's it gonna be 84? Do I need to quote your rationalization again, along with the definition of "rationalize" again? Not only was it a rationalization; but a dang weak one that group- like the Humane Society can use to further load their litigious guns.

[wrestle84]

I can see why they'd be protected in pockets (like Ft. McCoy by me), but if I'm a farmer and one tries taking out a young heifer , I'm goin' to get the 270, 30/30, whatever.

I guess it is my fault for assuming you were being truthful with this post.

[bigG]

I was truthful. I would shoot off a few rounds to scare off a wolf. I admit it. If it were my kid, I'd shoot it(the wolf, not the kid, since you're in a nit-picky mode). If it were my live stock, I think shooting a few rounds would do the trick. If it came at me, I'd shoot it. Our state doesn't have a recent history of superfluous prosecution due to wolf killings.

This stuff has happened many times in our state with very few cases where the "defender" was prosecuted and found guilty. This idea where anyone who defends themselves or their herd will spend life in prison is bull. Look at the facts. Like me to present them to you? Or, are you still trying to find ways to talk yourself out of the facts that you rationalized poaching and lied about my position? That way you can blame the government for all that ails you.

You do assume a lot. That's fer sher. Where was I untruthful in that post? Please point it out, so we can clarify.

[maggie]

84, I/We gave Goat every opportunity to come back here and recant his story, he didn't,  there for I have no other alternative to believe he's a well seasoned POACHER..you do understand the difference don't ya?.....Wisconsin Wolf Poacher Gets $2,500 Fine
by Dave Hurteau
       0
From UpNorthLive.com:
Green Bay, Wisconsin man who killed a wolf in Upper Michigan and was caught hunting without a license was sentenced Monday in Iron County Circuit Court.

Stephen Popp Jr. was sentenced to 20 days community service and ordered to pay more than $2,500 in fines.  He is also on six months probation and is banned from hunting for two years.

[ramjet]

84, I/We gave Goat every opportunity to come back here and recant his story, he didn't,  there for I have no other alternative to believe he's a well seasoned POACHER..you do understand the difference don't ya?.....Wisconsin Wolf Poacher Gets $2,500 Fine
by Dave Hurteau
       0
From UpNorthLive.com:
Green Bay, Wisconsin man who killed a wolf in Upper Michigan and was caught hunting without a license was sentenced Monday in Iron County Circuit Court.

Stephen Popp Jr. was sentenced to 20 days community service and ordered to pay more than $2,500 in fines.  He is also on six months probation and is banned from hunting for two years.

U talk like you know?

[Handles II]

So you admit that you don't keep and use the wolves you shoot. No need to try to excuse yourself for breaking federal laws.

[wrestle84]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaching

It is amazing that guys like Handles, Maggie, and G claiming they have done nothing wrong.  Never shot a minute before or a minute after legal shooting hours?  Right.  If you have ever killed an animal in that time frame you are a poacher.

Kept a 14-7/8" Walleye on a 15" size limit lake?  Poacher.

Poachers normally keep and use what they kill.  Thrill killers don't.  Big difference.

As far as incriminating myself you need evidence for a conviction.  The DNR is welcome at my house anytime.  They don't need a search warrant either.  I will let them right in.  Won't find anything.  Not that stupid. 

Bingo. I talk to guys all the time that hate anyone that breaks the game laws, yet they think nothing of hunting until they can't see. I'm betting Handles is one of them.

[bigG]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaching

It is amazing that guys like Handles, Maggie, and G claiming they have done nothing wrong.  Never shot a minute before or a minute after legal shooting hours?  Right.  If you have ever killed an animal in that time frame you are a poacher.

Kept a 14-7/8" Walleye on a 15" size limit lake?  Poacher.

Poachers normally keep and use what they kill.  Thrill killers don't.  Big difference.

As far as incriminating myself you need evidence for a conviction.  The DNR is welcome at my house anytime.  They don't need a search warrant either.  I will let them right in.  Won't find anything.  Not that stupid.  

Show me one place where I've said I have done nothing wrong. But shooting every one I see (of any game, above limit)never happened. But, if you want to hunt and trap them legally; why would you poach and give credence to the liberal, so-called, conservation groups? That's what I don't get. I kept a trout that was 1/4inch too small when I was 17 and got dinged. Yeah, I'm a bad boy. But I didn't keep every fish I caught knowing full-well many were illegal to keep.

I hope you were just stirring the turd by your admission. Honestly, you don't seem so irresponsible to me. I want you to be able to get a tag and hunt/trap them wolves legally. It's high time we show how responsible we are, so we can have such nice luxuries.

Sandhills become legal, and I'll be first in line to buy a tag. Never shot one before. Though I do froth at the mouth when I see them, as I know they are great eats.

Either way, if we can follow the rules and be sportsmen, I think we'll be rewarded with more opportunities.

To me, looking at the statistics of the years we had the hunt; those who participated acted like sportsmen, and are worthy to continue. It also appears that, from 2002 to 2006 (years they didn't even have the hunt) there were about 5-8 incidents per year brought to court, and less than 1 per year convicted of poaching wolves. DNR is set to addend the plan (sorry to use the word again, but that is what it's called) and I do hope they use those surveys and stats to justify a wolf hunt/trap. It does sound like the DNR and feds do respond to complaints and euthanize when necessary.

I'll say, though, if you were serious, Goat, then you do justify such extensive checks and balances by feds. Hope you were jiss joshin'. Like I say, I do think you're better than that.

Wish I had patience to hang in the woods until dark. If the squirrels are out and about , great; I haven't seen a ton in the dark. I'll say my duck huntin' buddies got me into it, and they are religious about the minute they can start. I can be patient, then, though, because when you make room for 20, another 200 see a safe place to hang. Then you roll.

[bigG]

Just saying. I hope you aren't a poacher. You know the difference. I trust that.

[maggie]

There it is, ..Thrill Killer!.....a few thoughts, why, if you know these people are pouching, (as you said you know MANY from "just north of Appleton") why aren't you turning them in?, after all it's only hurters like Me,G, Handles and the rest of Wisconsin's Honest Sportsmen.....we all know, birds of feather tend to flock together....Birds of a feather flock together
When people that act the same, hang out together. People that have the same morals often tend to group. It has nothing to do with jealousy, nor the amount of friends a person is allowed to hang out with. It is NOT pointed towards having a close friend neither. it simply means when people act the same, they normally hang out. Like a clique.
Wondalee told someone something Maria told her not to tell anyone about.

Taylor told a boy something and brought up Ella's name, when Ella wasnt supposed to tell anyone but trusted Taylor.

Wondalee and taylor hang out on a daily basis

THEREFORE, taylor & wondalee, are birds of a feather that flock together(they were doing the same thing).... thus an average person would describe what they did using the saying "birds of a feather flock together"