M43 vrs Illegal Deer Stand

[DrThunder88]

Furthermore, there is no such thing as "firearm hunting" or "bow hunting" as there is no need for the "hunter" to close the gap between him or her and his or her quarry. If you can't sneak up to or run down your game to the point where you can put hands on, it's more like "mobile slaughter."

No, I'm just joking. Ever since humankind started chasing woolly mammoths over cliffs, all forms of hunting have involved technology and strategy. They are our fang and claw. So long as we hunt using technology and with strategy, who are we to arbitrarily assign value to those used by others?

Critter cams would be a good idea to capture some two-legged varmints. I imagine said critters would, unfortunately, be more cognizant of what they were looking at unless the cameras were really well camouflaged. Still, it might be worth looking into if this is a frequent occurrence.

Haha, I noticed an illegal stand on the public land I hunt last year. Now that I've got a GPS to give an exact location to the DNR officers, I can't remember where it was!

 

[Cpl Punishment]

No, I'm just joking. Ever since humankind started chasing woolly mammoths over cliffs, all forms of hunting have involved technology and strategy. They are our fang and claw. So long as we hunt using technology and with strategy, who are we to arbitrarily assign value to those used by others?

Mmm, but even there, some skill of the hunt was required. Stand "hunting" only requires shooting skill.
I didn't place a lesser value on what someone does, just saying it's a different activity. Kind of like saying running your bass boat down the river isn't kayaking. Doesn't make a value judgment on either activity, just points out they're different.

 

[Ramm9]

I still stand by what I said and I could care less what any "tree stand hunter" thinks

tedwca, Steely_Gunz, Yangdu

And I stand by what I said...and assumed you would "care less".

I only respond, because by posting originally, I bought into your intention to derail Mike's thread. Not to respond could be misconstrued as trolling.

Yep, Mike did the right thing. Whether you like tree stands or not, the guy was tresspassing, and likely knew it. He deserved to have his stand destroyed. He also deserves a tresspassing charge if Mike catches him in the act.

I say it isn't hunting because no hunting skills are used. Shooting skills are..... More like "tree stand ambushing" than "tree stand hunting."

Absolutely, Mike did the right thing. No doubt the trespasser knows it is private property and deserves to be charged. Taking action, however, to intentionally injure someone on your property, trespasser or not, would not be the right thing as tempting as it is. The trespasser or heirs would have a line of lawyers at their door begging to take the landowner to the courts. (Note, I'm not referring to vjb.knife's post, I appreciate the humor!)

Well, it is ambushing. The "hunting" part of the equation is where and how to place that stand and getting to it. Simply walking into the woods and climbing a tree isn't going to cut it 99.99% of the time (.01% - have to account for plain dumb luck). This is why Mike's trespasser continues to place a stand where he does. He is either is too lazy or too clueless to find a location on his own.

Stand "hunting" only requires shooting skill.
I didn't place a lesser value on what someone does, just saying it's a different activity. Kind of like saying running your bass boat down the river isn't kayaking. Doesn't make a value judgment on either activity, just points out they're different.

If someone (landowner, guide) places you in a stand then maybe only shooting skill is required...but the landowner or guide had to have the skill to determine where the stand was placed and that it would be used that day.

Agreed, to a degree. The bass boat is not kayaking and kayaking is not canoing but they are all boating. Sport fishing by fly casting, spin casting, bait casting, or hickory pole are different but still fishing.