View Full Version : Hunting dog incedent in Maine
I wanted to bring this to the attention of everyone here on WhiteBlaze. We had an incident over the weekend here in Maine with a hunting dog and a hiker.
The hunting dog strayed away from its party and somehow made his way to a lean-to. There was a female hiker that removed the dogs tracking collar and threw it under the lean-to. When the dog did not return they tracked it down to the lean-to and then put out a massive search party to track down the dog.
I am not condoning hunting with dogs here and am not sticking up for either party involved. You have to keep in mind that the owner of the dog was very attached to his dogs as would a person be attached to a child. They care very much about their pets. When one does not return home just as if a child would not then they start to worry also. If you found a lost child in the woods with an ID would you remove it and throw it under the lean-to? I hope you question would be NO.
Anyways, what I am trying to point out is, to please be courteous when you are hiking on the Trail through Maine and any other state. We are all representing the hiking community. I do not agree with using dogs to hunt myself, but I also do not think this was called for as I stated.
I am not going to let this thread turn into a bashing thread about dogs and hunting. This is just a statement about an incedent that happened and I am asking everyone to please be courteous whether you agree with hunting with dogs or not.
Lone Wolf
09-18-2006, 13:31
She was probably one of those PETA whack jobs.:rolleyes:
I had a hunting dog with tracking collar follow me from Pierce Pond almost all the way to the Kennebec River in 2000. It's unfortunate to hear that some hiker's would take this dog's collar off and throw it under a shelter. That's just plain dumb - on several levels. I hope the dog is OK.
Brrrb Oregon
09-18-2006, 13:55
She was probably one of those PETA whack jobs.:rolleyes:
Or something like it. That is very dangerous for the dog.
Someone might have stolen the dog.
To be fair, the assumption here, at least from what I've read in this thread, is that someone took the collar off the dog, and the dog didn't just manage to squirm it's way out of the collar itself. I've seen dogs, the ones I grew up with, get out of collars that I didn't they could have by themselves. Unless someone actually witnessed the event (did someone?), I think it's unfair to create any possible stories as to how it happened.
If someone actually witnessed the event however, that's a different story altogether.
But yes, there's no call to be removing a dog's collar, regardless of personal views on hunting with dogs. I assume it's legal?
max patch
09-18-2006, 14:29
Dumbazz hiker.
I hereby sentence her to finish up her hike as Minnesota Smith's servant.
TJ aka Teej
09-18-2006, 14:39
A lost hunting dog will either die or run deer. What was she thinking?
*assuming that she really did it, that is.
generoll
09-18-2006, 14:42
never assign to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance.
those collars have an antenna which can be a nuisance if the dog is try to snuggle up to you. some years ago my cousins daughter went car camping at Whiggs Meadow. a hunting dog came into their camp and she felt sorry for it because it was cold and when they decided to sleep in the car she let the dog in the car with them. the antenna on the collar was poking them when the dog moved so they took the collar off. the next morning assuming that the dog was lost they decided to take the dog out to the road whereupon they met the dogs armed and very irate owner. it took a sheriffs deputy to finally defuse the situation.
best to leave dogs alone if they aren't yours, especially if they have signs of obvious ownership. hunting dogs are frequently kept hungry for a few days prior to a hunt and can be great beggars and oh so appealing to someone sympathetic to their plight.
QHShowoman
09-18-2006, 14:44
What would be the point of removing a dog's collar, other than to cause the dog to never be located again and most likely die of exposure?
I don't condone hunting for sport, but it's disheartening to think that someone had the opportunity to potentially return a lost dog to its owners and instead took an action that may result in its needless death.
I hope we only know one side of the story here.
Attroll, how did you learn of this? Was this reported in a local newspaper, by word of mouth, on some website?
I'm concerned with the idea that perhaps the hiking community is being "set up" in some way to give it a bad name or to portray hikers as non-law abiding citizens (which, no doubt some us may be). Some questions that come to mind are: Was the collar found unbuckled or could the dog have slipped it off with its paws? Was the female hiker ever found? Did she "confess" to removing the collar? If so, did she state a reason? Did she state where the dog went after she removed the collar?
Years ago I did some upland bird hunting with dogs and they ALWAYS returned to my whistle. I never used, nor felt the need to use a tracking collar. Dogs (hunting dogs especially), through an excellent sense of smell usually find their way back to their owner... unless of course someone placed a leash on it and walked off with it. Again, if I whistled, my dog always came running to me no matter what, even if he was on point.
To be fair, the assumption here, at least from what I've read in this thread, is that someone took the collar off the dog, and the dog didn't just manage to squirm it's way out of the collar itself. I've seen dogs, the ones I grew up with, get out of collars that I didn't they could have by themselves. Unless someone actually witnessed the event (did someone?), I think it's unfair to create any possible stories as to how it happened.
If someone actually witnessed the event however, that's a different story altogether.
But yes, there's no call to be removing a dog's collar, regardless of personal views on hunting with dogs. I assume it's legal?
It's unlikely the dog removed it's own collar and threw it under a leanto. If the dog was in strange country, it most likely will starve to death or be killed by a coyote.
Whoever removed the collar should be arrested and proscecuted, if a law can be found that covers the incident.
Weary
boarstone
09-18-2006, 15:22
Regardless of your views of hunting( of any kind ) removing that dogs collar was a sentece of death...the dog doesn't know it's not suppose to be where it's at, you are...with an antenna on it's neck was a sure give away... the removal was was done on purpose by someone who thought it "cute" or thought it would give the owner a "run for his money" . Let me clue you in...these dogs are not family pets so to speak, they can cost upwards of thousands of dollars and are taken care of as well if not before a family member would be...vet,food, housing, etc. Now this animal has no recourse but to revert to it's natural instincts...I'm hungry, it's running/moving, it's mine! It doesn't know that no gun will fire to take it down, only to feed itself, and this will not take very long to kick in!:(
Ramble~On
09-18-2006, 15:34
Some people confuse the radio collars for "shock collars" and think that they are a way for the owner to shock the dog....they feel that by removing the collar they are saving the dog pain and agony....which is the opposite of what they are actually doing.
It is sad that there are people who know what the collars are and remove them in support of their opinion about hunting or the use of hunting dogs. This was a very poor move on the part of whoever removed this collar. It did the dog no good, brought the AT hiking community into the spotlight in a negative way and more than likely has made for a hunter who now views hikers with malice.
boarstone
09-18-2006, 15:47
Some people confuse the radio collars for "shock collars" and think that they are a way for the owner to shock the dog....they feel that by removing the collar they are saving the dog pain and agony....which is the opposite of what they are actually doing.
It is sad that there are people who know what the collars are and remove them in support of their opinion about hunting or the use of hunting dogs. This was a very poor move on the part of whoever removed this collar. It did the dog no good, brought the AT hiking community into the spotlight in a negative way and more than likely has made for a hunter who now views hikers with malice.
Let's hope during this hunting season (currently bear w/ dogs/over bait) here in Maine that hunters who come across hikers don't retailiate...a story like this doesn't take long to circumvent the hunter community...and they have been known to do so...with a vengence....hiker/non-hiker alike...does anyone know? where this took place? Attroll? where on the At?,,,,
Ramble~On
09-18-2006, 15:53
On the other hand....
I wasn't there and for all I know this person could have returned to the shelter from getting water or whatever to find a muddy, wet or otherwise dog digging through her gear, carrying off stuff sacks....or a food bag...
While the food bag strings in most shelters will keep mice out of them a hungry dog probably wouldn't have much trouble getting a bag down.
Imagine returning to a shelter from filtering water and seeing a stray, ownerless dog tearing into your gear.
That collar could have been removed because the hiker suffered a monetary loss or had their gear trashed in some way....
By removing the collar perhaps the hiker felt they were "getting even"
I'm not saying this would be right either....I wasn't there and don't know the motive behind removing the collar.
I think that North Carolina has a law making it a criminal act to remove a collar from a hunting dog. Either way and regardless of the circumstances whoever removed the collar probably knew it was wrong when they did it.
Ramble~On
09-18-2006, 15:55
Don't forget that hunters are hikers too...
The outdoors and the trails aren't limited to backapcking.
Tramper Al
09-18-2006, 15:55
I've encountered radio-collared bear-hunting dogs on hiking trails before. One time, the dog was "lost" from it's hunter, and the word we got was that he "didn't care" and had gone home and left the dog behind for good. That's just one story, and I would think that most dog-running hunters do care about their dogs.
I wonder, though, why would anyone hunt bears, with or without dogs, on a hiking trail?
Why wouldn't a dog return to the hunter whether he had a collar on or not? Is there not some mechanism for "calling in the dogs", or do they get "lost" like this quite routinely?
Wouldn't bear hunting be more challenging if the hunter tracked the bear himself, rather than having to rely on a pack of dogs to do it for him? If he had these skills, wouldn't he be able to track the lost dog too? Maybe the bears should have radio collars too.
I know I see bears in the woods once in a while, and I see a whole lot of fresh tracks and other signs that I do not typically try to follow very far. The, I'm just a hiker.
These things I'm just curious about.
I certainly feel sorry for this unfortunate dog, but I would have before his collar was removed too.
We are all expressing opinions without any cold hard facts that undeniably supports the premise that the collar was removed. Is it possible a human removed the collar and threw it under a lean-to? Absolutely. But is it not plausible that the dog slipped out of its collar after is crawled under the lean-to? I certainly think that is a possibility.
The point is that we have very little information to go on. Attroll's original message did not contain the facts necessary to make an informed conclusion on what actually took place. However, I strongly agree with his underlying message: be courteous to others in the woods, whether they are hikers, hunters, two legged or four legged, or whatever sets them apart from you or me. Or, in other words, do unto others and you would like those to do unto you.
....I wonder, though, why would anyone hunt bears, with or without dogs, on a hiking trail? .....
The publicly owned trail corridor in most of Maine is only a few hundred feet wide. The hunter wasn'f hunting on the trail. He was hunting in the surrounding forest land.
BTW. hunting with dogs is far better than the alternative bearing hunting method in Maine -- sitting in a tree stand a few yards from buckets of stale donuts and bread in hopes a hungry bear will walk up to be shot.
Weary
Weary - considering the way politics has been going in Maine these days - is it possible the collar was put under the shelter just to make hikers look bad for political / election influencing reasons?
boarstone
09-18-2006, 16:22
Spiritwind: If this dog had been..like days...out in the wild..it would NOT have allowed ANYONE to get near enough to remove said collar, unless RECENTLY strayed/lost... as you should know the Carolina's are a bear/coon hunting mecca.... if it was recently lost/strayed...most hunter's lay down blankets with scent ( at last known spotting..hence...AT hiker shelter..) that a lost dog will pick up and come to...even w/o collars...as a last resort...
albeit, the alleged collar removal was unwise.
hunting with or without dogs is not permitted on the trail. the owners shouldn't have been too far away to know their dog was illegally hunting on the AT.
boarstone
09-18-2006, 16:37
.....so when/how does the poor DOG know where the boundry lines are? Give me a break! These dogs can go for MILES...before they run into/find people/owners...when those who find them seem to think they are LOST...
if it's collared...it's not LOST/it's still HUNTING...leave it alone...
Brrrb Oregon
09-18-2006, 16:46
Spiritwind: If this dog had been..like days...out in the wild..it would NOT have allowed ANYONE to get near enough to remove said collar, unless RECENTLY strayed/lost... as you should know the Carolina's are a bear/coon hunting mecca.... if it was recently lost/strayed...most hunter's lay down blankets with scent ( at last known spotting..hence...AT hiker shelter..) that a lost dog will pick up and come to...even w/o collars...as a last resort...
I grew up out in the sticks and we occasionally had stray hunting dogs come through. A few were skin and bones, and boy, were they looking for a friend. Still, there is no way Dad would have let us play with a strange dog. Even if they seem friendly, a scared and possibly hurt animal is too unpredictable.
If a lost dog had tags (which most did), my dad would sometimes put some food out far from our own dog, catch the stray, tie it up, and call the owner. If not, he'd shoo it off.....a hungry dog is more likely to find home on its own than we are to find its home for it. If it had bothered our livestock, I expect he would have shot it, but I don't remember that ever happening.
albeit, the alleged collar removal was unwise.
hunting with or without dogs is not permitted on the trail. the owners shouldn't have been too far away to know their dog was illegally hunting on the AT.
A dog can go an awfully long ways in a few hours, particularly if gets loose when it's far from home.
Shutterbug
09-18-2006, 16:51
Or something like it. That is very dangerous for the dog.
Messing with hunters is dangerous business. They carry guns. In Maine, it wouldn't be hard for a hiker to "disappear" and never be heard of again.
SGT Rock
09-18-2006, 16:58
In Wisconsin they had a hunter kill multiple other hunters over a fight about the murderer trespassing on their land. In my experience such a thing is way out of the norm.
Anyway. I would love to hear more details. I assume since Troll knew enough to say it was a woman that did this that there are people that saw her do it. I doubt a hunter needed to fabricate a reason to blame backpackers for his dog's collar being removed.
Another thing to think about - it has been my experience that a lot of people that hunt are also very concerned about conservation of wild lands, game protection, and their sport puts lots of money and political clout into these endeavor through fees, licenses, etc. Hunters and fishermen are our partners in keeping wild places wild whether you believe it or not. It may not be the thing the average hiker would want to see, but it doesn't make it right to start a fight with them.
Spiritwind: If this dog had been..like days...out in the wild..it would NOT have allowed ANYONE to get near enough to remove said collar..
The collared hunting dog I saw north of Pierce Pond was a skittish female. She wouldn't let me get within 15' of her - much less allow me to touch her.
Alligator
09-18-2006, 17:12
I took a hungry radio collared dog down once. The dog let me nab it and the owner was called.
Sometimes they run between access points. We ran into three guys who had been tracking their dog for several days. The dog kept going back and forth and the owners had to keep going around to get it. The collars are expensive, they are going to get them back. The dogs too are often expensive.
SGT Rock
09-18-2006, 17:13
The collared hunting dog I saw north of Pierce Pond was a skittish female. She wouldn't let me get within 15' of her - much less allow me to touch her.
I guess it depends on each dog. When I was down in Louisiana it seemed the preferred method of hunting was by dog. And I saw the same thing in Mississippi. It would not be my sport I can tell you. But on many occasions we had hunting dogs that have gotten separated from the pack and/or owner. Most of these dogs look VERY hungry. Now about half the time they were skittish and didn't want people around them, and the other half they allowed the hunger to overcome any fear and they would come to the soldier with the MRE. Hunters in these areas do not normally have radio collars in my experience, they normally have a phone number on a tag. We would call and usually an owner would show up fairly quickly and police up their animal and be very thankful we did.
[quote=Tramper Al]
Wouldn't bear hunting be more challenging if the hunter tracked the bear himself, rather than having to rely on a pack of dogs to do it for him? If he had these skills, wouldn't he be able to track the lost dog too? Maybe the bears should have radio collars too.
I once encountered two radio collared dogs on a trail in the Catskills. They were very friendly, though the black one running up the trail toward me was a bit of a shock initially. They were also by themselves miles from anywhere. I expected them to be followed closely by hunters.
When I returned to the parking lot several hours later I met two men in a DEC truck who asked me about the dogs. They explained to me that they can determine bear habits and locate dens using tracking data transmitted by GPS to their computers from the dogs. They told me that they had seen that the dogs had stopped running for several minutes directly on the trail and assumed that they had introduced themselves to me.
Neat Stuff!!
saimyoji
09-18-2006, 17:21
That's nothing. The navy has been training dolphin, turtles, sharks and jelly fish to search for sea mines, underwater silos and sunken treaure for decades. :D
boarstone
09-18-2006, 17:32
[quote=Tramper Al]
Wouldn't bear hunting be more challenging if the hunter tracked the bear himself, rather than having to rely on a pack of dogs to do it for him? If he had these skills, wouldn't he be able to track the lost dog too? Maybe the bears should have radio collars too.
I once encountered two radio collared dogs on a trail in the Catskills. They were very friendly, though the black one running up the trail toward me was a bit of a shock initially. They were also by themselves miles from anywhere. I expected them to be followed closely by hunters.
When I returned to the parking lot several hours later I met two men in a DEC truck who asked me about the dogs. They explained to me that they can determine bear habits and locate dens using tracking data transmitted by GPS to their computers from the dogs. They told me that they had seen that the dogs had stopped running for several minutes directly on the trail and assumed that they had introduced themselves to me.
Neat Stuff!!
Not all dogs incoutered on trail belong to hunters.....! depends on the time of year...
boarstone
09-18-2006, 17:39
Be aware...DIF&W(Department of Inland Fisheries and Game of Maine) have very similar dogs/equipment in the field as well...boundries don't mean a thing to a dog regardless of where YOU see it at or what IT"S doing...it's still HUNTING !....:mad:
SawnieRobertson
09-18-2006, 18:24
Did you know that Standard Poodles make excellent hunting dogs? Now, I'm not talking about hunting bears though--just waterfowl and such as that.--KInnickinic
Brrrb Oregon
09-18-2006, 18:41
I took a hungry radio collared dog down once. The dog let me nab it and the owner was called.
Sometimes they run between access points. We ran into three guys who had been tracking their dog for several days. The dog kept going back and forth and the owners had to keep going around to get it. The collars are expensive, they are going to get them back. The dogs too are often expensive.
The dogs, too, can rank right behind the kids and ahead of the wife! :D
Seriously, though, in my experience a dog owner that hunts is still a dog lover and had certainly invested a good bit of their life in the dog's care and training. I'm sure there are exceptions, but that is the way to bet.
As for hunting, most hunters I know learned it from their dad, who learned it from his dad, and so on and so on. It can be as much religion as hobby. Something as upsetting as losing a dog is likely to make the hunter a bit unpredictable, too. Having said that, hunters normally do not shoot at other people. Once you have a felony on your record, you lose your guns.
TJ aka Teej
09-18-2006, 18:49
I wonder, though, why would anyone hunt bears, with or without dogs, on a hiking trail?
You gotta hunt them where they is at. Hunter's can use the trail to get places, and of course there's almost unlimited access to the land near the Trail in Maine. Buddy at Shaws was telling me about about some bait sets that were very close to the AT just outside Monson (they had just got a 350 pounder), Linda at Abol Bridge was a tagging a small bear back on the 9th, and you can hunt bear with dogs (not bait) inside Baxter Park's southern boundry.
TJ aka Teej
09-18-2006, 18:51
Be aware...DIF&W(Department of Inland Fisheries and Game of Maine) have very similar dogs/equipment in the field as well...boundries don't mean a thing to a dog regardless of where YOU see it at or what IT"S doing...it's still HUNTING !....:mad:
There is a law in Maine about harrassing/interfering with legal hunts, too.
Brrrb Oregon
09-18-2006, 18:58
There is a law in Maine about harrassing/interfering with legal hunts, too.
I hear they allow setting out bear bait 30 days before the bear hunting season starts....so does that include thruhikers who snarf the bait chocolate? :D
It wouldn't be as bad as messing with a guy's dog, but it might attract some buckshot, all the same!
I wish all of you could have seen the letter the hunter in question wrote the the Farmington Newspaper, The Franklin Journal. What the hiker did was stupid but the letter was a riot. The hunter seems to have an IQ pushing 55 or 60 at best and his attempt to write a serious letter defending hunting bears with dogs and damning hikers in general was a classic. I don't know if The Franklin Journal can be read on line but it was a letter to be remembered.:sun :sun
Skidsteer
09-18-2006, 20:58
I wish all of you could have seen the letter the hunter in question wrote the the Farmington Newspaper, The Franklin Journal. What the hiker did was stupid but the letter was a riot. The hunter seems to have an IQ pushing 55 or 60 at best and his attempt to write a serious letter defending hunting bears with dogs and damning hikers in general was a classic. I don't know if The Franklin Journal can be read on line but it was a letter to be remembered.:sun :sun
Unfortunately, it cannot.
Got a scanner?
Just my 2 cents on this. Maine has a Bear population estimated to be near 20,000. That's alot of Bear. Imagine how many there would be without population control measures in place. I have mixed feelings about the hunt and especially the baiting part. To hunt Bear without dogs would be like hunting rabbit without a Beagle, not very effective.
The person removing the collar from the dog obviously does not realize that she would be wallowing in Bears on the AT were it not for the hunt, and may even become Bear bait herself. I personally enjoy being able to roam the countryside without wallowing through Bear living in an overcrowded habitat. Nuff said.
Appalachian Tater
09-18-2006, 22:18
Maine has a Bear population estimated to be near 20,000. That's alot of Bear. Imagine how many there would be without population control measures in place.
Maine has a Human population estimated to be near 1,275,000. That's a lot of Humans. Imagine how many there would be without population control measures in place.
RITBlake
09-18-2006, 22:33
If the dogs are so valuable, and the collars so expensive, you would think that these cowardss would consider feeding these dogs before sending them out. Every single radio dog we saw (and we saw many in N.C.) was gaunt and sickly looking. Nice sport.
Rain Man
09-18-2006, 22:51
I wish all of you could have seen the letter the hunter in question wrote the the Farmington Newspaper, The Franklin Journal.
We can, if'n you'll type it in fer us, real slow, like.
Rain:sunMan
.
If the dogs are so valuable, and the collars so expensive, you would think that these cowardss would consider feeding these dogs before sending them out. Every single radio dog we saw (and we saw many in N.C.) was gaunt and sickly looking. Nice sport.
These are working dogs. Not fat house pets. Hunting dogs are fed regularly and are healthy -- sort of like long time joggers and marathoners. Like most Americans would be if they would get off their butts, do some hiking, and stay away from fast food french fries.
RITBlake
09-19-2006, 00:11
These are working dogs. Not fat house pets. Hunting dogs are fed regularly and are healthy -- sort of like long time joggers and marathoners. Like most Americans would be if they would get off their butts, do some hiking, and stay away from fast food french fries.
Please, there is a difference between a lean, in shape dog and a dog whose ribs are poking through his flesh and looks SICK.
The way they treat the dogs ain't nothing compared to what happens to the "game" that the dogs are trained to find. Sorry, but the supermarket's filled with way too much meat to claim that they're "hunting for food".. Can't afford food? There's always food closets willing to give food away or *gasp* food stamps.. By Crikey, didn't you learn anything from Steve Irwin?
Maine has a Human population estimated to be near 1,275,000. That's a lot of Humans. Imagine how many there would be without population control measures in place.
When does the hunting season for humans open? :confused: Is baiting with donuts allowed? :rolleyes:
Troll's post states that the collar was removed by a female hiker.
Was that just a guess, or were there reports to the police or what?
Lone Wolf
09-19-2006, 09:22
Let's go huntin'!
www.blackbearhunting.us/bearhunt.html
When does the .... season for humans open? :confused: Is baiting with donuts allowed?
Yup. And there is no restricted season. Other baits: french fries. fatty hamburgers, junk foods. one in eight Americans has diabetes, mostly from the food we bait ourselves with.
My nearest small city (pop. 9,000) dialysis center runs three shifts to alleviate "end stage" kidney disease. The cure is death.
Weary
So far, I've seen no one point to any proof that:
1. The collar was removed by a person
2. The collar was removed by a hiker
3. The collar was removed by a female
4. The dog didn't just get out of the collar himself
5. The collar was removed at all
To date everything said has been based on hearsay, and is not even anecdotal. Does anyone have any actual evidence that things happened as claimed? The only thing I've heard about is an article from a newspaper that doesn't have a website written by the hunter with the missing dog, who apparently has a low IQ... and even that is hearsay.
If the collar was removed, that's bad. If it's just some hunter making up a story to place blame on someone, that's retarded. Can anyone point to any evidence?
MDSHiker
09-19-2006, 10:40
North of Hot Springs at Jerry Cabin Shelter I found a hunting dog with a radio collar. It was very cold that night so I took an old jacket left in the shelter and put it over the dog for the night. The dog didn't move a muscle all night. There was a name and address on the collar so I figured that I'd call the person asap. The next day the dog followed me for several miles until I reached a spot where there was some climbing involved. I was standing there wondering how in the world I was gonna get this dog up those rocks when a man came walking up asking if I'd seen a hunting dog. LOL I was relieved to run into the hunter looking for his dog. He was happy to see the dog and put a leash on it and walked off. That made my day!
Can anyone point to any evidence?
Bill Clinton, whilest Prez, created the electronic 'dog collar', which he presented to Hillary as the latest jewelry fashion statement. Hillary thought it looked "hip", so she took the bait. Bill was ecstatic. Now, he could know Hillary's exact location at all times, giving him free-roam for all the b**ches in the dog-lot.
Meanwhile, and unknown to Bill, Al Gore was having a secret thing with Hillary. After the Lewinsky scandal, he and Hillary put their heads together and invented the shock collar, originally modeled for a weiner dog. Hillary then presented Bill with the weiner-dog shock collar and told him that it was a...er.....uh.....well, a "ring".
The rest, as they say, is history.
(Ok, not evidence, just hearsay...)
To date everything said has been based on hearsay, and is not even anecdotal.
Ender, I fully agree. See #11, 19 & 20. Enough with conjecture, lets see some cold, hard facts.
So far, I've seen no one point to any proof that:
1. The collar was removed by a person
2. The collar was removed by a hiker
3. The collar was removed by a female
4. The dog didn't just get out of the collar himself
5. The collar was removed at all
To date everything said has been based on hearsay, and is not even anecdotal. Does anyone have any actual evidence that things happened as claimed? The only thing I've heard about is an article from a newspaper that doesn't have a website written by the hunter with the missing dog, who apparently has a low IQ... and even that is hearsay.
If the collar was removed, that's bad. If it's just some hunter making up a story to place blame on someone, that's retarded. Can anyone point to any evidence?
As I said I am not going to get involved in this to to much, but I will elaborate this one more time.
I do not now anything about the article that Moxie00 is referring to or if is even the same incident.
I talked directly to someone that was involved in this search, This person who's name I will not mention told me all these facts and they can be backed up.
Nothing I posted was hearsay. As I said I knew this thread would get off track and get distorted just like every other thread on this web site seems to by everyone that wants to say there two cents for there 15 minutes of glory. I was just simply posting to let everyone know and to ask that anyone that runs into a hunting dog to please leave there collars alone.
Toolshed
09-19-2006, 12:56
I agree ATTroll. As a one time hunter and (still a) fisherman as well as an avid hiker, I would like to point out that there are:
Foolish male hunters
Foolsih female hunters
Foolish female hikers
Foolish male hikers
There are also people who aren't foolsih who will do mean or spiteful things out of malice or injustice, whether perceived or real. The pool includes females and males.
I think it is important to keep in mind that the backcountry is never dominated only by those who participate in the same sport we participate in, and we should keep an open mind and respect others, even if we disagree with their legal rights to carry out an activity.. :-?
.
I talked directly to someone that was involved in this search, This person who's name I will not mention told me all these facts and they can be backed up. Nothing I posted was hearsay.
As I said I knew this thread would get off track and get distorted just like every other thread on this web site seems to by everyone that wants to say there two cents for there 15 minutes of glory.
Troll:
Actually, legally speaking of course, everything you wrote that you claim is fact is nothing but hearsay unless it comes directly from the witness, not through a third party, such as yourself. Black's Law Dictionary defines Hearsay as: "Testimony that is given by a witness who relates not what he or she knows personally, but what others have said ...."
I am so sorry for offending you and for previously offering my two cents on this subject and other subjects as well and for being so busy seeking my "15 minutes of glory [fame]." I guess I won't bother posting any further on WB, since all I seem to do is "get off track," distort the original message, and seek my "15 minutes of glory." Apparently, this goes for most of us who post here on WB. It appears that Trolls two cents is really worth a lot more than mine or anyone elses.:(
Lone Wolf
09-19-2006, 13:25
Dontcha think you're being a little too sensitive?:)
SGT Rock
09-19-2006, 13:57
Naw, speculate is what we do. That is called discussion. It is why it is a forum instead of just a bulletin board where someone posts a note and nothing else is said.
Your OK Brick, otherwise we would all have to leave LOL.
Troll:
Actually, legally speaking of course, everything you wrote that you claim is fact is nothing but hearsay unless it comes directly from the witness, not through a third party, such as yourself. Black's Law Dictionary defines Hearsay as: "Testimony that is given by a witness who relates not what he or she knows personally, but what others have said ...."
I am so sorry for offending you and for previously offering my two cents on this subject and other subjects as well and for being so busy seeking my "15 minutes of glory [fame]." I guess I won't bother posting any further on WB, since all I seem to do is "get off track," distort the original message, and seek my "15 minutes of glory." Apparently, this goes for most of us who post here on WB. It appears that Trolls two cents is really worth a lot more than mine or anyone elses.:(
Sorry if you took offense to the last post. I was not referring to you when I was talking about the 15 minutes of glory. Everything I said is fact and not third hand information. I am not going to keep trying to defend what I know. If I did that I would have to reply to everyones post in this thread. I was simply trying to post and ask nicely that everyone please leave hunting dogs collars on. This is a very good example at how threads get blown out of proportion and users misunderstand things.
Midway Sam
09-19-2006, 14:06
Reminds me of kickball on the playgroud of PS142. "I'll take my ball and go home!" :rolleyes:
Alligator
09-19-2006, 14:08
You just needed the right smilie.
This one is on a nice hot cup...:D
Don't worry Brick. I think he was refering to me, as he quoted me. Though I don't see how asking for some (heck, any) evidence to back up all the various accusations that were around could be seen as looking for 15 minutes of glory.
ATTroll, I'll take your word for it, of course, because you seem a stand up sort. And I understand about not wanting to reveal names. And about not wanting it to turn into a blown up thread (though really, what did you expect... this is White Blaze we're talking about here :p ). I was just looking for someone to say where the information had come from, and give at least some idea of how valid it could be. As Brick correctly states, still hearsay, but heck... this is the internet... what do I care.
Sorry if you took offense to the last post. I was not referring to you when I was talking about the 15 minutes of glory. Everything I said is fact and not third hand information. I am not going to keep trying to defend what I know. If I did that I would have to reply to everyones post in this thread. I was simply trying to post and ask nicely that everyone please leave hunting dogs collars on. This is a very good example at how threads get blown out of proportion and users misunderstand things.
The only "facts" we know are those reported by AT Troll. What we should be debating is the hiking community's response to this set of facts -- the removal of a radio collar from a hunting dog by a hiker.
We can imagine, of course, alternative facts, and discuss our response to these alternatives, if anyone wants to.
However, since we are unlikely to ever know for sure, it serves no purpose to debate what really happened, while offering no response to the facts AT Troll has reported.
All we have is the allegation as outlined by AT Troll. It would be useful to hear what people think of the actions alleged.
If you think no hiker is capable with meddling with a hunting dog's collar, say so. Otherwise the possibility, even the strong probability, exists that at least one hiker did so.
It's my opinion that if a hiker did what is being alleged, s/he should be told that the action was destructive to the hiking community, and probably destructive to the dog.
We can only speculate about what was going on in the mind of the hiker allegedly involved. But among the possibilities are that s/he was viciously destructive, foolishly and ignorantly destructive, or maybe something in between these extremes.
Weary
However, since we are unlikely to ever know for sure, it serves no purpose to debate what really happened, while offering no response to the facts AT Troll has reported.
All we have is the allegation as outlined by AT Troll. It would be useful to hear what people think of the actions alleged.
WearyThat's the jist of attrolls initial post. Sometimes these threads begin to get the feel of judge and jury, when simple discussion is all that is needed.
mweinstone
09-19-2006, 17:17
i hereby sentence her to stand before a tribunal at trail days and if found guilty to go blindfolded before a firing squad of 100 armed with super shooters water guns.
Whenever I get second hand stories, and wonder about their validity, I always take into consideration the source of the story. In this case, ATTroll, imho, is a very reliable source, so I have very little doubt that what he has related, is true.
i hereby sentence her to stand before a tribunal at trail days and if found guilty to go blindfolded before a firing squad of 100 armed with super shooters water guns.
I say that if she deliberately and maliciously did it, knowing the likely consequences, she should go to jail.
Jack Tarlin
09-19-2006, 17:31
On this issue I am in complete agreement with what Weary just said.
I say that if she deliberately and maliciously did it, knowing the likely consequences, she should go to jail.
What would the charge be?
Jack Tarlin
09-19-2006, 17:45
It could be any number of things, Sly. Theft, for starters. Removing a radio collar and discarding it could certainly be viewed as the theft and/or destruction of private property. Also, in most states, there are statutes regarding intentionally interfering with hunters or people actively engaged in hunting. Whether or not this would apply in this case, I'm not sure. Also, all states have laws regarding endangering animals; this, too, might apply, if one could prove that in intentionally removing the collar, the animal was put at risk as a result.
Skidsteer
09-19-2006, 17:46
What would the charge be?
Witchcraft. Burn her! Burn her! ;)
http://wuzzle.org/cave/mpwit.html
What would the charge be?
I said she SHOULD go to jail. Whether the Maine Legislature was wise enough to anticipate this crime and pass a law, is something I don't know for sure.
There is a law preventing people from deliberately interfering with people engaged in hunting, which may apply. There may also be laws dealing with dogs that apply. I suspect it is unlawful to unchain a neighbors dog. Whether a radio collar would fit such a law depends on how it is written, which I haven't researched.
I'm not a great fan of hunters, though I continue to hunt from time to time. Too many hunters are slobs, though I know this is a charge than can be levied against some hikers also.
But if it isn't unlawful to deliberated cause a hunter to lose an expensive dog, and likely cause that dog a painful and slow death, it should be.
Weary
Brrrb Oregon
09-19-2006, 17:54
I say that if she deliberately and maliciously did it, knowing the likely consequences, she should go to jail.
I don't disagree, but as it turns out, nobody asked us. I, as an example, have no authority and no idea how the law reads. Opinions are free and worth what you pay for them, but no less satisfying than any other useless habit.
For that reason, the exact veracity of every detail in this story isn't all that important. Meeting a skinny dog in a tracking collar isn't that unlikely. Anybody who thinks that what one female hiker may have done or what one hunter's dog may have looked like is some sort of reflection on everybody else in their demographic has a little over-extrapolation problem.
We can remind otherwise well-meaning and dog-loving people, including ourselves, that dogs lacking the barrel shape of your typical old family Lab are not necessarily starving, that taking off the collar off of a hunting dog is likely to be far worse for the dog than for its owner, and that hungry-looking dogs still bite sometimes.
If those reminders are in need of correction, it would be a good thing for correction to be offered. After that, IMHO, the speculation is purely for recreation....nobody should take it all that seriously.
I suppose, but if this person had no priors, I can't see throwing her in jail. Apparently the dog was reunited with it's owner and the collar found.
We found a radio collared dog wandering on the Black Mountain Crest Trail and it followed us for 6 miles to the trailhead at which time we put it in the car, called the owners from town and dropped it off.
I don't know if the owner ever would have caught up, or if the dog would have made it home, but the dog was obviously hungry and the lady that took him didn't appear to give a ****. Should we throw her in jail too?
Opinions are free and worth what you pay for them, but no less satisfying than any other useless habit.
IMHO, the speculation is purely for recreation....nobody should take it all that seriously.
Thank you for your wonderful words of wisdom. I didn't take Attroll too seriously, but I thought he did run amuk with his comments. I know they weren't directed at me per se, but my response was for all posters here at WB. I accept Attroll's apology without reservations. What I found interesting is the recent thread about rancor, http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17362 that I think ties in rather well with this thread.
Perhaps if we were all a little more tolerant of one another's shortcomings, we would all be better off!
[quote=Moxie00]I wish all of you could have seen the letter the hunter in question wrote the the Farmington Newspaper, The Franklin Journal. What the hiker did was stupid but the letter was a riot. The hunter seems to have an IQ pushing 55 or 60 at best and his attempt to write a serious letter defending hunting bears with dogs and damning hikers in general was a classic. I don't know if The Franklin Journal can be read on line but it was a letter to be remembered.:sun
I read possibly this same article in the Franklin Journal dated Sept 8, the only article about bear hunting in recent weeks. The writer is wanting to inform the public about the use of radio collared dogs being used for Bear hunting purposes and to not mess with them or get in their way, and the writer does mention something about hikers which I shall not reproduce here at WB, copyright laws etc....I think ATTROLL hit the nail on the head.
boarstone
09-19-2006, 20:50
[quote=weary]I said she SHOULD go to jail. Whether the Maine Legislature was wise enough to anticipate this crime and pass a law, is something I don't know for sure.
There is a law preventing people from deliberately interfering with people engaged in hunting, which may apply. There may also be laws dealing with dogs that apply. I suspect it is unlawful to unchain a neighbors dog. Whether a radio collar would fit such a law depends on how it is written, which I haven't researched.
I'm not a great fan of hunters, though I continue to hunt from time to time. Too many hunters are slobs, though I know this is a charge than can be levied against some hikers also.
But if it isn't unlawful to deliberated cause a hunter to lose an expensive dog, and likely cause that dog a painful and slow death, it should be.
Weary[/quot
It's called "harrassing hunters" and any of their equipment they use to do so...dogs included..
Lone Wolf
09-19-2006, 21:22
What would the charge be?
Being a liberal, vegetarian, anti-hunting, non-Mainer beotch for starters.:)
The Old Fhart
09-19-2006, 21:31
Originally Posted by Sly
What would the charge be?
Lone Wolf-"Being a liberal, vegetarian, anti-hunting, non-Mainer beotch for starters.:) "That's totally uncalled for. You don't know she's a vegetarian.:D
Lone Wolf
09-19-2006, 21:46
That's totally uncalled for. You don't know she's a vegetarian.:D
Alright. A VAGitarian.
Whenever I get second hand stories, and wonder about their validity, I always take into consideration the source of the story. In this case, ATTroll, imho, is a very reliable source, so I have very little doubt that what he has related, is true.But AT TROLL isn't the source, reliable or not. This IS a second hand story.
Someone told AT TROLL something, and AT TROLL repeated what he was told. Isn't that the definition of hearsay? Hearsay doesn't mean that it isn't true, just that you didn't see the event and have no evidence that the event occurred.
I believe that AT TROLL believed what he was told, but it's still hearsay.
It does not matter anymore what I said. Whether you want to call it hearsay or not, so be it. This has been blown out of proportion. If I could produce even some type of police report, someone would even find flaws in that.
I haven't kept up w/ this post but I knew if it stuck around I'd have to tell my story. :eek: As youens may or may not know I lived on the TN/NC border for awhile and the trail crossed my driveway.:) Many hikers I met and many dogs I sheltered and hunters I called. A Sobo last year came in w/ a collar on his pack. Nice young man, he hung out to thaw out for a few hours and this is the story he told me. He found this dog on top of the mountain and it was so far gone he was thinking of ways to put it out of his misery. He carried the dog down to the shelter and tried to warm the dog in his jacket (I think ) and took the collar which was a big piece of ice frozen to the dog at the time. Well after the dog ate his lunch, drank a couple of quarts of water and peed on the guys jacket, he was ok to walk. As they got down the mountain the dog went from following to leading and as the snow cleared a few hundred feet above our holler, the dog caught a scent and was gone. The hiker remembered the name of the owner from the dogs other collar, which he left on. Found the hunter in the phone book and he was very understanding and thankful. I don't know if he ever found his dog.:(
Shutterbug
09-20-2006, 01:10
[quote=weary]I said she SHOULD go to jail. Whether the Maine Legislature was wise enough to anticipate this crime and pass a law, is something I don't know for sure.
There is a law preventing people from deliberately interfering with people engaged in hunting, which may apply. There may also be laws dealing with dogs that apply. I suspect it is unlawful to unchain a neighbors dog. Whether a radio collar would fit such a law depends on how it is written, which I haven't researched.
I'm not a great fan of hunters, though I continue to hunt from time to time. Too many hunters are slobs, though I know this is a charge than can be levied against some hikers also.
But if it isn't unlawful to deliberated cause a hunter to lose an expensive dog, and likely cause that dog a painful and slow death, it should be.
Weary[/quot
It's called "harrassing hunters" and any of their equipment they use to do so...dogs included..
From my brief research, it appears that the law that would apply is Maine's statute against "Criminal Mischief." Here is the text of the law:
1. A person is guilty of criminal mischief if that person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=20> </TD><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=20> </TD><TD>
A. Damages or destroys the property of another, having no reasonable grounds to believe that the person has a right to do so; damages or destroys property to enable any person to collect insurance proceeds for the loss caused; or tampers with the property of another, having no reasonable grounds to believe that the person has the right to do so, and thereby impairs the use of that property; </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Both the dog and the radio collar would be considered "property." She tampered with the collar in a way that impaired the use of the collar.
Okay now that we've established she's a criminal.
Who here likes uncontrolled dogs on the trail?
I see no huge problem in taking someone's word regarding the passing along of a significant story pertaining to the A.T.
Normally, when the term "hearsay" is introduced into a conversation, one normally assumes there's some hidden agenda behind the spreading of hearsay. In this particular case, Rick simply shared information he received from someone who did have firsthand knowledge regarding said situation with the hope that it would cause all of us to act more responsibly as hikers, and to give non-hikers a better overall view/acceptance of us as a group.
When I hear a story regarding certain actions that've taken place along the trail, I file that in the "things to consider" section of my brain so that when I hike through that certain portion of the trail, I'll remember the allegation/situation, and be extra careful not to do, say, or act in any way that would be detrimental to others who follow behind me.
Troll's original post was to serve as a word of caution for those who follow.
Remember, folks, we're supposed to be the leaders here. The things we say and do, both positive and negative, will affect those who come along behind us. Let's all leave a good legacy so nothing negative can be said about us.
Both the dog and the radio collar would be considered "property." She tampered with the collar in a way that impaired the use of the collar.
My guess would be, since it sounds like the collar was only removed and not damaged, that this law wouldn't apply. Also, since the alleged person didn't keep the collar, a theft charge wouldn't apply either. The tampering with hunters law that people mentioned seems more likely to be applicable, and enforcable.
Who here likes uncontrolled dogs on the trail?
No one, I suspect. But the question is beside the point. In this case as far as we know, the dog was pretty much in the control of the hunter. By removing the collar apparently a hiker eliminated all control and thus caused an uncontrolled dog to be on the trail or in the vicinity of the trail.
Weary
Tramper Al
09-20-2006, 10:02
In this case as far as we know, the dog was pretty much in the control of the hunter.
Geez, now THAT is a real stretch. It is my understanding that this radio collar is used by the hunter to LOCATE the dog, and this hunter was clearly far enough away from his dog that he couldn't even find it without the electronics. Do you honestly consider that situation a controlled dog on the trail?!? We're way beyond honest hearsay now.
icemanat95
09-20-2006, 10:17
Geez, now THAT is a real stretch. It is my understanding that this radio collar is used by the hunter to LOCATE the dog, and this hunter was clearly far enough away from his dog that he couldn't even find it without the electronics. Do you honestly consider that situation a controlled dog on the trail?!? We're way beyond honest hearsay now.
From a legal perspective, the dog was clearly NOT a stray and was out working. If the hiker had not interfered, the dog would have been tracked down and recovered via the radio collar.
It doesn't matter what your individual perspective might be on the issue. What matters is what the common understanding of the situation is as expressed within the law and local custom. Nothing ticks people off more than when an outsider comes in and tells them how they should be doing things.
Okay now that we've established she's a criminal.
Who here likes uncontrolled dogs on the trail?
OK, let's not start up that discussion AGAIN! It has nothing to do with this thread and has already been beat to death, dragged behind a car and burned to ashes!
SGT Rock
09-20-2006, 11:02
Just imagine if tables were turned. A hunter finds a hikers dog, throws it's pack and collar away and takes off with it.
Hmmmm...
sirbingo
09-20-2006, 11:06
How does anyone know that this was a famale hiker?
why isn't this thread over on the dogs forum? it looks like it will be soon going to the dogs anyways
Gray Blazer
09-20-2006, 11:19
why isn't this thread over on the dogs forum? it looks like it will be soon going to the dogs anyways
The dog was probably following the scent of that smelly sleeping bag.:eek:
Just imagine if tables were turned. A hunter finds a hikers dog, throws it's pack and collar away and takes off with it.
Hmmmm...
Point well taken. I wonder if some hunting forum would be beating this isse to the same death as we are on WB!:-?
Point well taken. I wonder if some hunting forum would be beating this isse to the same death as we are on WB!:-?
Woops! I need spellcheck... stat! that should read, ISSUE.
boarstone
09-20-2006, 14:14
They'd be in here justa' squawking for all they was worth, calling out every hiker in cyber space to hit the trail and hunt down that "so and so" @#!*# hunter who took their dog.....and what ought to happen to that hunter when he's found...
Darwin again
09-20-2006, 14:45
Maybe the lesson is not to touch things, including dogs, that don't belong to you.
Last year, a couple of beagle pups followed a couple of hikers into the last shelter before Sam's Gap (I think it was). The were obviously hungry and lost, without collars, thirsty and well-bred dogs (not that it matters). The seven or eight hikers at the shelter each did did various things to help them, gave them a little food, a little water, etc. A southbound hiker with a dog happened to be there and donated some kibble. Next morning, two hikers, Buddah and Leviathan, put the dogs on camp cord and walked with them down to the Gap, where they tried to find a phone to call someone to take the dogs to a humane society or something. Later, I heard they found a farm that agreed to take the dogs in. End of story from a hiker's point of view. I've found that hikers will usually try to do the right thing when they come across apparently lost animals.
But taking off a dog's collar is just dumb, not to mention dangerous for the animal, especially if there is identifying information on a tag or plate. Go figure. Maybe the dog was stolen? ...
If the hiker who took off the collar was doing it for "animal rights" reasons, it probably never dawned on her that she might be endangering the dog's life instead of "liberating" it.
How does anyone know that this was a famale hiker?
The person who observed or investigated the situation told AT Troll that it was a female. The sex of the perpetrator is just one of the facts or alleged facts -- a totally insignificant fact, by the way, in terms of the discussion we should be having. The important thing is whether the alleged act is a wise or unwise thing to do from the perspective of hikers and the trail community. The sex of the perpetrator strikes me as beside the point.
LIKE MY GRANNY ALWAYS SAID:
"IF IT'S NOT YOURS, DON'T TOUCH IT!!!!"
I take it to include:
DOGS
STOVES
BACKPACKS
TENTS (HAMMOCKS, TARPS, ETC.)
FOOD
ME
And anything else not yous.
If you are the type that thinks "if I see it & want it it's mine" If it isn't yours & is mine, I will hurt you if you touch it. NO SMILEY FACE HERE.
Doctari.
Just imagine if tables were turned. A hunter finds a hikers dog, throws it's pack and collar away and takes off with it.You mean, how will most hikers feel if someone removes an unaccompanied dog from a shelter? My guess is the the reactions will be strong but not unanimous. They may be a tad polarized (Hooray vs How Horrible).
Maybe we should start a thread to see how AT hikers feel about dogs on the trail and in shelters :D
The sex of the perpetrator is just one of the facts or alleged facts -- a totally insignificant fact, by the way, in terms of the discussion we should be having. The sex of the perpetrator strikes me as beside the point.
Exactly... The original post didn't state what sex the dog was either. It was only identified as a dog... A hiker's a hiker....
mweinstone
09-20-2006, 18:22
let it go man, let it go!
The sex of the perpetrator is just one of the facts or alleged facts -- a totally insignificant fact, by the way, in terms of the discussion we should be having. The sex of the perpetrator strikes me as beside the point.
It doesn't make you wonder how somone came to learn that, Weary?
A couple of years ago I led a hike for our club during October (hunting season). We were on the AT south of Hot Springs. Along the way we passed a couple who were section hiking with their dog. A few yards back followed a starving, limping Plot hound. The dog had a radio collar on that had part of the antenna missing. This dog was in poor shape and started following the section hikers a few miles back we were told. They tried to shoo the dog away but that did not work. I checked out the dogs collar and found a metal tag which was directly attached to the leather collar (not on a ring).
The tag gave the owners name and phone number and requested if dog was found to call them. We took the dog with us and once we arrived in Hot Springs I called the owner & told him that we had his dog. He was glad to get his dog back. The owner had lost him when the radio collar failed to work, it had been a couple of weeks that had past. Collars have a purpose !! This story proves the point !!! :)
Let's face it, some hikers here refuse to believe that one of their own would do such a thing as remove a radio collar from a bear hunting dog. I believe what ATTROLL posted and read the newspaper article concerning radio collared dogs (which likely was related to this incident) due to the writers contempt for granola eating hikers("the worst kind") as he wrote at the end of his letter to the editor. Too bad one bad apple makes the whole bushel rot.
Let's face it, some hikers here refuse to believe that one of their own would do such a thing as remove a radio collar from a bear hunting dog. Anyone who wants to believe that sweeping statements are true about hikers has either not been on the planet long enough or has not been a hiker long enough. Just like the late Robert Palmer sang: "Takes every kind of people to make what life's about":cool:
It doesn't make you wonder how somone came to learn that, Weary?
I assume that whoever told AT Troll about the incident had either been a part of the investigation or close to those who investigated.. Any way. I assume he told what he knew, whether significant or not.
i do know that hunting is allowed on my land by permission only. that includes running dogs on my land as well. the idea of someone nearby with a gun ready and loaded and will be coming into my backyard unknownst to me makes me nervous for my family's safety. there are too many hunting accidents every year here in maine to overlook that possibility. and those of us that live here and hear the stories know that a majority (almost all) of them were preventable.
the AT doesn't allow hunting in the corridor period. the idea bothers me that it's okay to allow uncontrolled hunting dogs on the trail. you can burn this girl at the stake if you choose. but that dog was never supposed to be there in the first place. the AT is a hiking trail that doesn't allow hunting. the rules don't say you can hunt but just don't shoot here.
the article to the paper is only trying to drum up support to fight conservation/preservation clubs like the AT that don't allow hunting. a battle that is not soon going to end here in maine.
SGT Rock
09-21-2006, 02:27
the AT doesn't allow hunting in the corridor period. the idea bothers me that it's okay to allow uncontrolled hunting dogs on the trail. you can burn this girl at the stake if you choose. but that dog was never supposed to be there in the first place. the AT is a hiking trail that doesn't allow hunting. the rules don't say you can hunt but just don't shoot here.
Is it also not possible that the dog wandered in from adjacent lands to the AT. The AT passes through lots of wilderness areas where hunting is allowed. And usually the trail is required to follow the rules of the area it passes through - not the other way around. So for some places hunting is only limited so that is done more than 100 yards from any established road or trail. A dog can make a mile in no time, and 100 yards even less. The hunter and the dog may have done nothing wrong at all other than wandering into a shelter looking for food.
No, the problem is a hiker gave ammunition to the hunters, not the hunters trying to make up some story to make hikers look bad. And that is what Troll was warning us about by posting here. No one can really make this person out to be a victim or a hero - the hiker screwed up. But we as a community could make ourselves out to be a bunch of jerks by condoning this action.
Ramble~On
09-21-2006, 02:27
:banana Ice Cream.....
I like Ice Cream...
Ben & Jerry's has some pretty good stuff...
I am partial to "Everything But The...."
So what does everybody else think....what's your favorite ?
:D
Ramble~On
09-21-2006, 02:30
Okay now that we've established she's a criminal.
Who here likes uncontrolled dogs on the trail?
:eek:
Did I mention that I like ICE CREAM ?
Maine has a Human population estimated to be near 1,275,000. That's a lot of Humans. Imagine how many there would be without population control measures in place.
We do have seasonal human population control measures here in Maine. One is known as Black Fly season which is good for a couple months, the other is known as Dead OF Winter which lasts for several months.:)
We do have seasonal human population control measures here in Maine. One is known as Black Fly season which is good for a couple months, the other is known as Dead OF Winter which lasts for several months.:)but... What does that have to do with ICE CREAM?!! :D
but... What does that have to do with ICE CREAM?!! :D
Those black flies have gotta be good for somethin'!
Lone Wolf
09-21-2006, 11:32
:banana Ice Cream.....
I like Ice Cream...
Ben & Jerry's has some pretty good stuff...
I am partial to "Everything But The...."
So what does everybody else think....what's your favorite ?
:D
Ben & Jerry's is like Leki poles, overrated and overpriced. Breyers is much better.
Ben & Jerry's is like Leki poles, overrated and overpriced. Breyers is much better.
I don't think Breyers is better - flavor wise, but it is a better VALUE than B&J. Breyers is probably also better for you - although neither variety is heart healthy.
I am also fond of Mayfields ice cream. They have a flavor called Moose Droppings that is quite good.
I don't think Breyers is better - flavor wise, but it is a better VALUE than B&J. Breyers is probably also better for you - although neither variety is heart healthy.
I am also fond of Mayfields ice cream. They have a flavor called Moose Droppings that is quite good.
Jeff, you ought to try Mayfield's new Black Fly Cherry Vanilla!!!
Miss Janet
09-21-2006, 16:49
[QUOTE=the AT doesn't allow hunting in the corridor period. the idea bothers me that it's okay to allow uncontrolled hunting dogs on the trail. you can burn this girl at the stake if you choose. but that dog was never supposed to be there in the first place. the AT is a hiking trail that doesn't allow hunting. the rules don't say you can hunt but just don't shoot here./QUOTE]
I am not sure if this is true or not.
It may be different from state to state. But I have seen deer stands built directly on the trail and the remains of field dressing game right in the middle of the trail. When I asked a game warden here in East Tennessee he said that there was no law against hunting near or even on the AT if it ran through a designated hunting area.
Every year we end up with SoBo hikers in the area when bear season is in. One winter a group of SoBo's were on the trail all day with a large organized bear hunt with lots of dogs. Every year I end up with way too many hunting dogs brought into town and far away from radio signals and their home territory by well meaning hikers. We have no animal shelter or even a humane society. So if there is no telephone number or rabies tag we can't locate the owners.
The biggest problem with hikers rescuing hunting dogs and bringing them to town is that they then want to hand these dogs over to someone else and keep hiking. Consider if you rescue a dog on the trail that it is YOUR responsibility to take the time off the trail to find the owner. This can take several days and most hotels and hostels will not accept a hunting dog because there is no chance that it is housebroken or safe around people.
If the owner can not be located then it is your responsibility to find appropriate placement for the animal. This can be almost impossible in an area like ours that has no services for strays from out of the city. The city dog pound will not even take a hunting dog because they KNOW that someone brought it from outside of the city limits.
I have seen a few situations that have turned out well over the years. But for every good situation there has been a dozen heartbreaking and very frustrating outcomes. As hard as it may be leave a skinny, hungry hound in the woods... just think about what you are commiting yourself to if you "save" it!
TJ aka Teej
09-21-2006, 17:42
The biggest problem with hikers rescuing hunting dogs and bringing them to town is that they then want to hand these dogs over to someone else and keep hiking. Consider if you rescue a dog on the trail that it is YOUR responsibility to take the time off the trail to find the owner. This can take several days and most hotels and hostels will not accept a hunting dog because there is no chance that it is housebroken or safe around people.
If the owner can not be located then it is your responsibility to find appropriate placement for the animal. This can be almost impossible in an area like ours that has no services for strays from out of the city. The city dog pound will not even take a hunting dog because they KNOW that someone brought it from outside of the city limits.
I have seen a few situations that have turned out well over the years. But for every good situation there has been a dozen heartbreaking and very frustrating outcomes. As hard as it may be leave a skinny, hungry hound in the woods... just think about what you are commiting yourself to if you "save" it!
Excellent input, thanks Miss Janet!
Mother's Finest
09-21-2006, 17:54
1. Never remove a domesticated animals collar.
2. Never engage in blood sport.
Everyone is ok.....
How in the world are we going to advance as a species when our leaders kill for fun?
Anyone ever see the footage of Mr. Cheney and Mr. Scalia on their duck hunting trip to the Eastern Shore of md? That is our Vice President and a Supreme Court Justice. Killing for fun. Something about that bother me.
peace
mf
1. Never remove a domesticated animals collar.
2. Never engage in blood sport.
Everyone is ok.....
How in the world are we going to advance as a species when our leaders kill for fun?
Anyone ever see the footage of Mr. Cheney and Mr. Scalia on their duck hunting trip to the Eastern Shore of md? That is our Vice President and a Supreme Court Justice. Killing for fun. Something about that bother me.
peace
mf
It's far more complex than that. Humans over a couple of centuries have removed the natural predators and thus the balance of nature. Without hunters such wildlife as deer, geese and bear become nuicances that quickly outgrow the ability of what's left of the natural world to support them. With predators, human, or mountain lions, the fate of those cute deer and bears is starvation.
Weary
Jack Tarlin
09-21-2006, 18:32
In addition to what Weary just said, most of the folks who engage in "Blood Sports" are actually better and more ardent conservationists than most of the folks in the hiking community, i.e. they're politically active, they take part in land preservation and acquisition efforts; they know more about native wildlife and the needs of these animals; they're intimately familiar with the woods and mountains neer their homes; and they certainly (via licenses and fees) make more significant financial contributions to environmental and land management programs than most hikers do.
Slamming those that participate in "blood sports" is pretty ignorant. The average hunter or fisherman knows more about, and perhaps cares more about the environment than does the average backpacker.
Hunters who come to Maine to shoot bear that have been habituated to visit a pile of stale donuts, or follow a pack of dogs which chase a bear to exhuation until it is treed for an easy kill shot are hardly following in the tradition of Aldo Leopold.
Hikers should not remove collers from dogs. And no one should abandon animals in the woods.
I would add that it very illegal to tamper with any traps one encounters in the woods. QUestion for Weary: Is it still legal to harvest bear with leg-hold trap in Maine?
Darwin again
09-21-2006, 20:09
1. Never remove a domesticated animals collar.
2. Never engage in blood sport.
Everyone is ok.....
How in the world are we going to advance as a species when our leaders kill for fun?
Anyone ever see the footage of Mr. Cheney and Mr. Scalia on their duck hunting trip to the Eastern Shore of md? That is our Vice President and a Supreme Court Justice. Killing for fun. Something about that bother me.
peace
mf
I'm with you on that, Bro.
~Darwin
Darwin again
09-21-2006, 20:18
Slamming those that participate in "blood sports" is pretty ignorant. The average hunter or fisherman knows more about, and perhaps cares more about the environment than does the average backpacker.
Slamming someone for having a different opinon is pretty ignorant, too, IMO.
I've hunted birds and game. I've fished. I'm a shooter. blah, blah, blah.
The kind of "hunts" cheney and his gang go on would mortify the average hunter. The shoot farmed birds on the ground and those "ranches" in texas are nothing more than living shooting and drinking galleries for the rich.
The culture of hunting has nothing to do with what those sociopaths do.
And Jack Daddy, what exactly do you mean by the "average" hunter or backpacker?:-? Who IS that? Me? You? Mother's Finest?
Darwin again
09-21-2006, 20:19
It's far more complex than that. Humans over a couple of centuries have removed the natural predators and thus the balance of nature. Without hunters such wildlife as deer, geese and bear become nuicances that quickly outgrow the ability of what's left of the natural world to support them. With predators, human, or mountain lions, the fate of those cute deer and bears is starvation.
Weary
And weary is right on the money, too. ;)
blindeye
09-21-2006, 20:19
hunting dogs are a part of rural life like it or not, you should respect the lifestyle. i myself owned a couple of blue tick hounds for you guessed it. hunting!
Internegator
09-21-2006, 20:25
And Jack Daddy...
Who's your daddy! LOL!
:D
Jack Tarlin
09-21-2006, 20:26
Killing God's little critters for fun?? :eek:
Ooh, the horror!
Bad Cheney!! Bad Scalia!!
Well, gee guys, I guess in other cases, it's perfectly OK, hmmmm?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3762770.stm
I guess when Dems do it, it suddenly becomes a non-issue, eh? :-?
[quote=Darwin again]
The kind of "hunts" cheney and his gang go on would mortify the average hunter.
You mean people still dare to go hunting with shotgun Dick? AKA The Rifleman
Lone Wolf
09-21-2006, 20:35
In addition to what Weary just said, most of the folks who engage in "Blood Sports" are actually better and more ardent conservationists than most of the folks in the hiking community, i.e. they're politically active, they take part in land preservation and acquisition efforts; they know more about native wildlife and the needs of these animals; they're intimately familiar with the woods and mountains neer their homes; and they certainly (via licenses and fees) make more significant financial contributions to environmental and land management programs than most hikers do.
Slamming those that participate in "blood sports" is pretty ignorant. The average hunter or fisherman knows more about, and perhaps cares more about the environment than does the average backpacker.
Jack speaks the truth.
Skidsteer
09-21-2006, 20:58
Jack speaks the truth.
Not only that but Jack and Weary essentially said the same thing from different perspectives.
Water is running uphill, hell is freezing over, and Jesus is fixin' to part the clouds! :D
Jack Tarlin
09-21-2006, 21:01
Yeah, but Weary didn't post the snap of Kerry being manly in the woods!!
We're still a bit different! :D
Skidsteer
09-21-2006, 21:02
Yeah, but Weary didn't post the snap of Kerry being manly in the woods!!
We're still a bit different! :D
No question of that!
Hunters who come to Maine to shoot bear that have been habituated to visit a pile of stale donuts, or follow a pack of dogs which chase a bear to exhuation until it is treed for an easy kill shot are hardly following in the tradition of Aldo Leopold.
Hikers should not remove collers from dogs. And no one should abandon animals in the woods.
I would add that it very illegal to tamper with any traps one encounters in the woods. QUestion for Weary: Is it still legal to harvest bear with leg-hold trap in Maine?
I believe so, though I wish it weren't. However, the most knowledgeable person about the wildlife in my town is a child of the 6os who never did get back into the habit of earning a living. He lives in a tiny house, works a variety of seasonal jobs, one of which is a trapper during trapping season.
He tells of an amazingly variety of creatures, that only he has seen. I talk to armchair wildlife experts also. Almost none have my friends expertise.
Weary
Darwin again
09-21-2006, 21:55
Looks like they both speak the truth!
Maybe there's a lesson in that. AND maybe we shold just respect each other's opinions.
But I'll tell you what....
The ruling elites of either party have very little in common with a dude who runs hounds in either Maine or North Carolina. Both the idiot dems and moron rethugs have just about wrecked the country. Just wait until we start dropping weapons on iran...you thought iraq was fun? You ain't seen nothing yet...
Let loose the dogs....
Yeah, but Weary didn't post the snap of Kerry being manly in the woods!!
We're still a bit different! :D
That's the difference. I'm the thinking liberal. Jack is that lockstep conservative. :)
Jack Tarlin
09-21-2006, 22:24
Sheesh! If thinking that John Kerry in camo pretending that he actually enjoys hunting in order to score a few votes makes for a pretty hysterical snapshot....well if that makes me a lockstep conservative, then so be it.
I remember during the last campaign when this picture came out. I was laughing my ass off in Five-Olde in Hanover, drinking with some friends who were working on the Wes Clark campaign. The Boston Herald, which didn't much care for Kerry, was having a field day with photos of The Great White Hunter. Lo and behold, the guy who was Kerry's regional office co-ordinator came in, and we started kidding him about Kerry's big day as An American Sportsman. I remember telling the guy that I was from Massachusetts, and had first met Kerry when I was around 17. I further told him that I'd read the Boston papers on a daily basis for years. Then I told him that if he could produce a news photo of Kerry hunting anywhere BEFORE he was running for President, well I told him if he could do this, I'd pay for his whole bar tab the next time he came in. Cuz to be perfectly frank, I thought the whole Kerry hunting thing was a contrived crock.
Needless to say, it was a safe bet.
Sheesh. The only thing Kerry's ever hunted in his life was heiresses and widows. :D
Skidsteer
09-21-2006, 22:38
That's the difference. I'm the thinking liberal. Jack is that lockstep conservative. :)
Sheesh! If thinking that John Kerry in camo pretending that he actually enjoys hunting in order to score a few votes makes for a pretty hysterical snapshot....well if that makes me a lockstep conservative, then so be it.
I remember during the last campaign when this picture came out. I was laughing my ass off in Five-Olde in Hanover, drinking with some friends who were working on the Wes Clark campaign. The Boston Herald, which didn't much care for Kerry, was having a field day with photos of The Great White Hunter. Lo and behold, the guy who was Kerry's regional office co-ordinator came in, and we started kidding him about Kerry's big day as An American Sportsman. I remember telling the guy that I was from Massachusetts, and had first met Kerry when I was around 17. I further told him that I'd read the Boston papers on a daily basis for years. Then I told him that if he could produce a news photo of Kerry hunting anywhere BEFORE he was running for President, well I told him if he could do this, I'd pay for his whole bar tab the next time he came in. Cuz to be perfectly frank, I thought the whole Kerry hunting thing was a contrived crock.
Needless to say, it was a safe bet.
Sheesh. The only thing Kerry's ever hunted in his life was heiresses and widows. :D
Note: After an unusual, disturbing and freakish four-hour respite, water has resumed running downhill. :p
SGT Rock
09-22-2006, 03:17
TIME OUT!!!!!!
No more politics on this thread please!
We have all gotten mad about people interjecting the politics of the day into threads. Cease fire and talk about the hunting dog thing again and leave left, right, republican, and democrat politics off it.
The thread is about a hiker that took a collar off a hunting dog she didn't own. Remember?:D
Alright. Back at it.
Ramble~On
09-22-2006, 04:15
Breyers is another good one...
I agree...B&J's is over priced but for some reason I still find those little containers call out to me....
Leki poles do not call out to me and that is good cause I don't want to eat them.
MayFields...Yes....Moose Droppings....MMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmm Yummy good...me like
"Turtle Tracks"
Ice Cream..... I like Ice Cream.
sherrill
09-22-2006, 07:17
I'm just surprised that nobody has complained about these hunting dogs not being on a leash....;)
I'm with ya, SpiritWind... love those B&J containers. Especially "Chubby Hubby," 'cause that's what I'm looking like these days. :eek:
Need to get myself back out on a trail somewhere, then maybe I'll switch to Mayfield's or Breyers.:rolleyes:
Mother's Finest
09-22-2006, 13:54
Jack,
You miss the point entirely. First, John Kerry in that Camo Suit was far worse than any real hunter. Pretending to be something you are not is never to be respected.
What does Politics have to do with gratuitous killing? Remember, I did not say anything about banning hunting, or taking away rights from anyone. I did not bring up politics. I simply chose language that describes the way I feel about hunting sports.
I appreciate your need to point out the conservation efforts of hunters. I do not take that away from them. I never did. Never implied it.
I am talking about a bigger picture. Talking about changing people's attitudes. Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Reactionary, Radical....I do not care what your affiliation is. I still think that to kill any living thing that you do not need for food or shelter is simply wrong.
Jack, I know that you are a good guy. One day we will sit down together for a beer.
Sorry Sgt Rock, I had to respond.
and thanks for the free speech back up Darwin...
peace
mf