How do we want the world to view us?

[imported_Randy]

Hey gents,

Just a suggestion, we all have to follow our own path. Even though this may be the political board this site was created for hunter/outdoorsmen and as such it allows a window for non-hunting types to peek through on occasion and see what makes us tick. Most of the participants from the non-hunters that engage in discussion with us appear to often be the fringe element of the non-hunting public, if we are ever visited by the core group of the non-hunting public they come away with an insight to our mindset.

With that said, I have had to do a personal self-check to keep from ridiculing our last visitor (who certainly seems to qualify as being the very fringe of non-hunters). It reminds me of being in Elemntary School we use to tease a boy named Vernon who was obviously mentally slow and not quite right, he was a target it seemed for most all of the schoolboys and the girls naturally shunned him. When word got back to my Grandfather of my participation in helping to make a difficult life more difficult, by my taunts, I was taken to the verbal woodshed by Grandfather, I can remember that conversation as if it was last week and my Grandpa passed away in 1987 and the conversation took place in the 60's. He made me feel small, and I deserved to feel small, it seems Vernon's dad turned the gas on in the house and left the two boys and their mother in the house, it killed the wife but only brain damaged the two boys. Clifton the older brother was already in adult prison for killing someone with a pipe (I guess anyone can only stand so much teasing and the rage builds) Vernon was left in the care of his destitute maternal Grandmother to carve out whatever life he could with a damaged brain, an old worn out old woman on 3-4 hardscrabble acres. I look back and truly wonder how they survived. What my Grandfather made crystal clear to me as a young boy was this in a nutshell "if I couldn't find the decency of character to improve a tortured hellish life, I had damned sure better be able to find the decency not to add to the torture." Through this board we probably don't have much opportunity to help those obviously in need of help, but we do have the ability to leave them alone. Just a thought from far up north. Randy

Randy,

Well put, your grandfather was a wise man. I've been trying to piece together a simialr post in my mind ... you said it better than I could have.

boone

[Davey]

Randy,

very well put..

Keeping in mind that i'm very new to this forum, i think that as outdoorspeople we need to keep a couple things in mind..

that at one time in our lives we've all probably teased a "vernon" or have had the pleasure of being a "vernon" for one reason or another, and on reflection it wasn't a moment to be proud of..

and it's painfully obvious that this guy has killed a bunch of brain cells while watching walt disney movies..these fringe elements thrive on confrontation, and as much as we want to reply to them, it bothers them far more to not dignify them with a response...

hard to do though...

[VernAK]

Randy,
Well said!
I've avoided some of this forum .....if I don't read it, I don't feel compelled to answer and add another link of drivel to an already monotonous chain.

VERNON

[razorsharp]

Randy,

Excellent!! And I might add....We could help them by accepting them as humans.

[Sundles]

Randy,

You are correct. However I beieve it is good for all to see the agneda that these wolf fans have for us. Never forget that they intned to take away as many human rights as they can. They will use wolves, snail darters or spotted owls to do this. They vote, raise money and decieve the public. That said, you are correct aobut our conduct concerning them. Why lower ourselves to thier level? THis is something I intend to work harder on.

[Tim in Nevada]

Randy well said.
Tim, Well said as well.
I doubt that wolfie has a low IQ, just read his writings, and notice how few words are mispelled (sp?). I think if we truly want to help him, maybe we should contact the proper authorities so he can be treated.(and seperated from society). I related well to your story about Vernon. I got myself in a few fights standing-up for people like him, and did some teasing of my own as well. Tim

Lumping all wolf supporters with psychological extremists is like lumping you folks in with those rectally challenged elk poachers in the Blue's or the goat-f'ers that shot all those pelicans up in the Hanford Reach last Thursday.

Don't make that generalization.

Maybe I have found a use for my AT&T rifle and 12X scope.

And I hope those clowns up in the Reach see this post.

[Tim in Nevada]

David, what do you mean by "you folks?"

By "you folks" I mean all the people here who have hunted, and are concerned about the wolf re-intro. From what I've read, I see no indication that "you folks" are the type to waste elk or shoot pelicans (so you can have more fish?). Consequently, it would be wrong to lump you in with such folks.

Likewise, I wouldn't compare certain psychologically questionable pro-wolf extremists with, say, Ralph Maughan.

[Tim in Nevada]

David, thanks for the reply. I thought you hunted as well?

You bet, Tim.

but I am in favor of some wolves around in lower 48, and that puts me on the side of wolf supporters whose psychological state has been questioned. I don't appreciate being generalized in that way.

I have quite valid scientific reasons for my support, as well as spiritual. The latter are not up for debate as it is useless to do so, IMO.

Sorry I was not clear on all this at first.

[Tim in Nevada]

David, I just wasn't sure which post did the generalization. Tim

Oh heck, you're gonna make me do my homework?

There were some posts that read to the effect "If you could only see what kind of people are on your side, you'd change your mind or at least seriously question your support of wolves".

I don't buy that argument, because its like lumping unethical hunters with ethical hunters.

I'm sorry I don't have time to scrutinize the board for the specific passages.

[Sundles]

David,

Your point about lumping wolf supporters is well taken, but remember (whether you knew this before or not) at the heart and soul of wolf revovery through government force, is the principle of taking away human rights. Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, et al, are all anti hunting and they were the folks who worked for over 30 years to get wolves reintroduced. They lied to the public and got government appointees (especialy under Klinton) to break the laws.

The loss of human rights is their goal.

[Tim in Nevada]

David, you don't have to go back through the old posts. I guess I wasn't on the same page, but it's nothing. You gentlemen have a great day. Tim

[shu]

R&R-

As usual, you are the voice of reason on this board. And as always you manage to do it in a way that reaches most while insulting no one.

The problem, though, is that many of these folks don't visit our board for an intelligent debate. They have already decided we are the "Great white trophy hunters" and "wolf-haters" they believe us to be and so are closed to new ideas and points-of-view. They bring nothing but antagonism to the mix and, in view of this, it can be quite difficult not to reply in kind.

But you are right, we can all benefit from listening more and thinking before we reply.

shu

[Patrick]

Hello all--

I return from a Ramble and find...I don't know how to describe it. A "visitation" from a "being" that defies description. Wow. What did our poor little old Board do to merit this?

Perhaps another discussion about the ground rules for this Board is in order. Yep, I've noticed a steady deterioration in civility. This, even before the very recent onslaught of "alertees" from the Animal Rights legions, who's track record for manners is, unfortunately, not good. But even before that there has been a trammeling of those good old there-for-a-reason Robert's Rules. "Liar" has been flung frequently. Personal abuse and denigration has been all too evident. Tim Sundles is the target of choice. Tim can assuredly take care of himself, but as the only person here who's actually spent time with the man I think it's time to say some things I know that might help stave off me having to do this "tune up" so often.

Some folks just don't seem to be willing to give the guy any benefit of the doubt. Tim is a lighting rod, no doubt. He is passionate in his beliefs and his politics. Fine. But he also is attacked for personal things like, well just as an example, whether he can really shoot well enough to kill a charging wolf in x seconds. OK, since I spent a week in the wilderness with him I can address that. As there were no elk in the drainage we packed into (the wolves had killed them all, which is simply a fact folks) we did some recreational shooting. And I can tell you Mr. Sundles is a phenomenal shooter. I really don't doubt he can, and did, what he said re dropping the wolf that started all this. Whether it took 2 seconds or 4 seconds is useless speculation. To get personally abusive about it--is that really necessary? Those of you who refuse to believe his prowess are operating with inadequate information. And again, why the need for not extending any benefit of doubt? I met Diana Sundles too. I watched them interact. Tim is one of those real men who would defend his wife at all cost. And he's quite a formidible character, a real physical specimen, in addition to being quite a shootist, and by the way totally at home in the wilderness. Such men are gentle with their womenfolk, which is what I witnessed. It's beside the point anyway; as we all know the assault on Diana was from a disturbed son, not Tim. Getting at Tim's politics by besmirching his immense misfortune with his son ("chip off the old block") is wholly unfair and out of line. Disturbed, rebellious children occur in families of all political stripe.

I'm shifting gears to address the more recent arrivals from the dedicated Animal Rights ranks, who if past experience is an indicator, seem to be avid practitioners of personal abuse as a prime tactic of "debate". The Board has seen it several times now. I'll address you first by saying that hunting has been a way of life to humankind since our very beginning. All predators hunt, and always have. It's "Natural". Humans are predators too. Therefor we hunt. It's a spiritual thing. A great many of you pro-wolf visitors are anti-hunters. Hunters, even politically active ones, are NOT de-facto "evil". Down through the long ages legions of honorable men (and women) have been hunters. Your characterization of hunters as evil, stupid, and all the rest gives offense. It is also ludicrous. Suddenly, in an epiphany of New Age arrogance, of over-civilized softness, you demonize, in your dis-connectedness, that which you know nothing about. Nothing, zip, nada. You are babes. With very bad manners. Manners matter here. Clean up your performance or you will be asked to leave. You may NOT come into our home and behave like barbarians.

Back to our Special Visitor. I suspect children read here. I know at least one Mom does. Ebonlupus writes material that is not appropriate for their eyes. In fact, it's not appropriate for my eyes. I have now witnessed, right here on this Board, a prime example of the "moral relativism" that is seen as destructive to cohesive society. I've also seen an example of what "marginal human being" means. And it makes me and my family feel creepy. Defiled, in point of fact. Friend Randy, with the utmost of respect, I submit that this is not an issue of intellectual inadequacy, but one of moral inadequacy. Such extremes of "whatever floats your boat" are banned from this harbor. Wives and kids shelter here.

As I said at the begining of this epistle, I have just returned from backpacking. I was unable (unwilling?) to read the multitudinous posts of the last few days. I could only scan and get a feel for the action. If I'm off the mark anywhere I would hope you folks will set me straight. If not...where do we go from here? Personal abusers and name callers stop it. Now, what do we do about the degenerate material laid down here in this latest spasm of Animal Rights zealotry. Let me soften that...I do not believe that this extreme is representative of all Animal Rights advocates. Nevertheless, there is solid anti-people Truth embedded in this that I believe does apply. To that end, should we leave it in place (for just a while) as instructive to we hunters and to middle-roaders (which would include some pro-wolfers, by the way)? My gut tells me to excise it immediately, but as I've said before--beyond Robert's Rules this is your Board. Give me some input, please.

Oh, and how's everybody doing?! It's good to be back. I'm having a grand old time wandering around out there in God's Great Wilds playing (uh, make that working, please) with gear-under-development. Prototypes, etc. Life is good!

Patrick

[Bruce in Spokane]

Patrick - Better late than never, excise it! Thanks. Bruce.

Patrick,
I'd vote to excise the post as well, it's not a matter of free speech, let people with such extremism in their views right a letter to the editor of their local paper. Won't argue about the moral vs. intellectual thing, but I do believe there's a sickness there somewhere and I was just encouraging our folks to walk away and leave it alone, I don't have the right to ask people to leave, you do and I am glad that when it's appropriate you exercise that right. Glad your back, it's good to have the sherrif in town. /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif I need meat baggies will call the office tomorrow. Randy

[me]

Patrick

At the risk of offense, here is my two cents. The issue with Ebon goes beyond Ebon. His aproach has been as fierce and irreverent as the material that has been found about him. His first post I found quite acceptable, but after reading further and finding his other websites, I must agree with most that he is to say the least very confused. But the reaction to much of what he wrote, no matter how much I disagreed with the things he said, just plain sickened me, and others too I might add. You speak of civility, morals, and more interestingly babes, And then you turn around and support the biggest defiler of such things on this board. The response that the two Tims gave Ebon was one of the most childish things that I have ever seen, And even worse thats what Ebon was looking for.

As for Tim and I, Ive never chalenged Tims shooting of the wolf. I asked him some questions on the matter, and congradulated him for doing what I saw as the right thing by reporting it, And followed that up by saying I would have done the same thing if faced with it. I have repeatedly said that I was not for reintroduction, even though he claims I am. In the stickers wars, I modified mine as to exclude him, or so I thought. And further more, I have never attacked his wife or children. I made it very clear that I was not going there, even though Tim took things I said the wrong way, even after clarifying. The last time you came in and and talked about being polite, I backed way off, what did Tim do? he thought it was open season with endless bag limits on civility. The endlessness and sheer distortion of the wolf issue is why I said I was leaving. There are many people, hunters to boot, that will not post on this board if wolves are brought up, But someone keeps slipping the subject in regardless of its relavence. This is my other reason for leaving, Im tainted in the minds of many people on this board, aside from my brute dirrectness many can not seperate me from wolves. I get along with many posters that are not prowolf, and I dont get along with many people that are prowolf. Much of this has nothing to do with wolves, it has got alot to do with extreme attitudes, agendas, and beliefs. There have been decent two sided discussions on the subject of wolves, they all lacked one person. In short Tim and Ebon are coming at each other at 180 dgrees, both as irreverent and extreme as the other.

And as for how we want to be viwed, Extremism can only hurt hunters as a whole. Just as the extremists do to those that are pro-wolf. Hunters do not need to brown nose, but we do need to be reasonable and responsible. No rhetoric!

[Sundles]

coruja,

As is usual between us, I will agree to disagree with your take on things in that last post.

Sundles,

Your agreeing to disagree a little late Tim. Prior to your last post you were on another thread doing exactly what Coruja said you do.

Patrick,

I think Coruja hit the nail on the head for a lot of us. And as sickened as I was at reading some of what has been posted here lately, I have issues with sensorship.

Are you talking about all or part?

boone

[Patrick]

Tim and Coruja--

I'm a tired grandpa just now. Please, both of you, know that my heartfelt request for civility applies to both of you. And note that I have not specified who is, was, challenging Tim's veracity as to shooting the dang wolf. I've just seen it challenged; don't really know who was harping on that. That's one reason why my remarks are in general terms. A very special old-guy request for beloved cub Coruja before I sleep: kill, pack out, and eat an elk before many more moons elapse. THEN talk to us. Good night, grasshopper. And Tim too.

[Sundles]

Patrick,

I was actualy glad to see ebon post here--even as unpleasant as he/his subject matter is. It is eye opening for many to find out about the anti human element behind animal rights and species reintroduction. We need to be educated about what we are up against--ebon did that. Additionaly, it is good to see what moral relativisim can lead to. Nearly all of the animal rights crowd involves varying degrees of anti humanisim and moral relativisim. We as gun owners and hunters ought to be aware and now we are, thanks to Alan, ebon and silver. For those of us who think that Alan or ebon are anomalies in the "animal rights" groups, think again!

As to sensorship. The first ammendment is a restriction against government interfering with free speach. This site is however, your private property and it is yours to do with as you please.
The first ammendment guarantees no one a free platform to speek on or that any one will even listen. Delete any post you deem unfit to be here. Im personaly glad that ebons "stuff" is here to read--at least for a while.

[Tim in Nevada]

Coruja, I'm sorry you felt my response to the alien visitor was childish. My intent was to do just that. If you will notice, I will not even attempt to have an intellectual debate with those who are not armed.(I guess I feel sorry for those particular individuals). If anyone has legitamate concerns and would like to discuss them rationally, that is what this site is designed for. For those with no ability to reason, I choose not to respond. For those that are from another planet or are just unable to accept reality, I get down to their rediculous level. Most times, they don't get the response they are accustomed too, and leave. Opening the forum to those with legitimate concerns and an ability to reason. Tim

[me]

Tim in Nevada

If you didn't notice, He was eating it up. Find a real weakness, it exists, And you will get real results. No harm intended.

[Tim in Nevada]

Coruja, I think he was more attached to your posts than mine. Seemed to respond with more emotion and heartfelt sentiment. Tim

[me]

Patrick

I dont intend on killing an Elk anytime soon, I do intend to hunt and kill many other animals in the near future. I hope you understand, and I think you do, that this Elk/Bear thing is quite insulting. All I can say is go read my other replys to such nonsense. Im sure that there are lots of things that many of us have not killed, that is our choice. The killing of an Elk does not bring one into the realm of being a hunter, Such rights of passage are not so easy.

Hold your right hand out, palm up, and look long and hard at whats there.

[me]

Tim in Nevada

Right, But how much fun was he having.

[me]

Patrick

What do you see?, NOTHING. Because this is not about tangibles or quantifiers.

If only the world were that simple, But all the black and white fades to grey.

[paonia coyote]

Patrick

I don't think you should edit, unless the board gets overwhelmed with it. Even though the recent posts just about made me lose my breakfast, I think it is useful to see it. Distressing as it was, it gave me a lot of food for thought. Any moms and kids that use the internet are going to see some garbage once in a while anyway.

I really appreciate your making this forum posible. Thank you.

[paonia coyote]

Patrick

I don't think you should edit, unless the board gets overwhelmed with it. Even though the recent posts just about made me lose my breakfast, I think it is useful to see it. Distressing as it was, it gave me a lot of food for thought. Any moms and kids that use the internet are going to see some garbage once in a while anyway.

I really appreciate your making this forum posible. Thank you.

[Patrick]

Hello All--

Well, Paonia, you are most welcome.

I just want to report that the yes votes in favor of removing the objectional material we have been speaking to are in the clear majority. Many came directly to the Shop. Maggie is editing the posts related to Mr. Greathouse (Ebon Lupus) wherein his advocacy, and practice, of beastiality is discussed. The rest of the text will remain. If she misses something please let her know.

This is done squarely in the face of the Age of Moral Relativism. I trust those of you who still believe that using our responsibility to JUDGE things is what makes us truly grown up human beings will appreciate this.

What remains of the Lupus text is replete with the familiar "world as a woeful place" viewpoint. Lest you sink under the tide of that negative verbiage, I have a wonderful antidote to recommend. Run, don't walk, to your library or bookstore and fetch P.J. O'Roark's "All The Trouble In The World". You'll find it humorous AND scholarly, and quite reasuring about how things REALLY are. Because I'm a hands-on outdoor gear builder I possibly spend more time "out there" than anybody and I can tell you that we are truly blessed with our landscape and it's contents.

I want this Board to be user-friendly and open. This is the very first time we have "edited" any contributions. You are aware of the reason, and I can only hope the overwhelming majority of you agree with it. Let us hope we NEVER have to do this again.

Respectfully,

Patrick

Or, if you think more heads are better than one, settle in with the two National Academy of Science studies, Biodiversity, Biodiversity II. Another credible source is Nobel Laureate Physicist Murray Gell-Mann's The Quark and the Jaguar. Both sources do not paint a healthy picture.

Good science writing without the recent reincarnal riders attached.

How credible is O'Rourke compared with these sources? Is O'Rourke a scientist? I've heard of Gell-Mann but never heard of O'Rourke. I've heard of all the accomplished scientists on the Academy panel.

Likewise, if you were to buy ammo, would you get it from Tim, or me?

David,

I, personally, would probably make a poor choice on the ammo. You know ... for personal reasons.

/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[imported_Randy]

I like getting my ammo from BBB, and I like to get my scientific evidence from the National Enquirer, but only when you are out mushing David /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif just kidding you are always informative and often stretch my thought process, for which I'm grateful. But no more grateful than I am to have 10-12 boxes of 350 gr. J.F.N. in my ammo chest. /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif Randy

[Sundles]

Randy,

Let me know what I owe you for the advertisement:-) That 350gr. 45-70 is truly good stuff. I find myself using the 430gr. hard cast around here, but the 350gr. is probably a better load for all around use on real big game.

I actualy keep one 45-70 sighted in for each of our loads, so I can use any load I wish without resighting in a gun.

[imported_Randy]

Sundles,
No bill for the truth in advertising, it's the only kind that works at the end of the day. You can get your name out there and toot your own horn all you want no matter what service or product you provide. Bottom line what do your customers think of your stuff? I have never had a misfire, failure to feed or failure to perform with BBB, yeah so you do owe me keep making good stuff! Actually some free advice from the master would be appreciated as well. I started out using the 405gr. or 8B as it was all that was locally available. After perusing your website decided 8C might better suit my needs, more penetration if I'm not mistaken, and perhaps a bit flatter shooting /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif like it matters much. Figure 350 gr. was plenty for ole fuzzy britches if I catch him in a bad mood. Am I on track or lost again? Had to talk the local handler into oredering me 10 boxes of the 350 gr. as no one here carried it at that time and I like to buy my ammo in lots, just figured it helps on consistency issues. I love the fact that I can carry a handful of .410 shotshells and use the rifle as a short range single shot shotgun, there's my small game load. I have a WWG guide model bored out to .457 w/ ghost ring sights and a scout scope with QD leupold mounts. Also picked up a .45/70 guide gun in SS I need to customize and tune it, would like to put synthetic stock on it and figure it for the ideal boat rifle or for snowmachining in winter. Steer me clear if my thinkings all fuddled up Tim. And thanks again for good ammo. Randy

[Patrick]

David--

OK Dr. Lowrey, you've pinned me to the mat due to my unfortunate, and for the sake of brevity, use of the word "scholarly" re O'Roark's book. He is NOT a scientist; rather the book is written most certainly for general readers, but he uses a whole bunch of data that WAS done by scientists in pursuit of his central message, which might be summed up as "things ain't nearly so bad as all that, folks, if you put them into perspective". And he gives the perspective. So. Read the book, my pointy headed friend, and tell us what you think. Book reports are welcome here, most welcome. Due next thursday. Warning: the author is a very funny, irreverant (as to things PC), so-and-so. You might have genuine fun reading him.

Patrick

Patrick

You just pushed one of my buttons, thats all!

Hey, I'll put the book on the list, right after one about pre-gold-rush Alaska that a Dog-driver recommended to me.

But check this out, is the esteemed Dr. Kay trying to limit where I can hike, consequently stealing my freedom for the sake of some silly ol' tree?

" Some ecologists suggest that restoring predators may be an important component of maintaining healthy aspen. In a four-level trophic model with humans, wolves, elk and aspen, humans and wolves keep ungulate populations low, which enables vegetation to flourish. By managing on the assumption that an ecosystem works on a bottom-up, food-limited principle, we ignore crucial top-down aspects, and allow ungulates to repress aspen sprouting. Besides restoring predators, the ecologists recommend using fire in areas with low elk density, and controlling human uses that displace carnivores--even basic activities like hiking can keep them away (White, Olmsted and Kay 1998) ."

Swiped from:

http://bss.sfsu.edu/geog/bholzman/courses/fall99projects/aspen.htm

[Tim in Nevada]

David, I'm not sure that humans keep ungulate populations low. I think we can manage herd numbers better than 1,000 wolves turned loose in a relatively small area over a ten year period. (Before the re-introduction of wolves) weren't the elk numbers increasing and doing very well (due mostly to money raised by sportsmen)? How do wolves study elk numbers and increase or lower their harvest of these animals due to more short-term local conditions? I also got from your post that by letting predators increase in numbers, elk numbers will increase because there are more aspen.(but only if there is no human encroachment)? Maybe I should re-read it, because I don't think that is what you meant, is it?

[Sundles]

Randy,

Yes the 350gr. loads penetrate much deeper than the 405gr. loads. The 405gr. bullet is pretty soft and mushrooms like crazy. This mushrooming makes for a lot bigger diameter hole, but the bullet just wont go very deep in muscle and bone because that big mushroom is pushing so much material ahead of it. Those 405gr. bullets at 2000FPS will usualy penetrate about 2.5 feet, maybe three feet.

The 350gr. bullets are real hard, therefore they dont mushroom much, which allows them to penetrate about 5 feet in muscle and bone. For real big animals, Ill take the penetration over the larger diameter hole any day--especialy for those bad angle shots.

One note of caution with our current 45-70 ammo. We use a very hard to ignite small rifle primer. We are the only makers of 45-70 ammo using a small primer. We do this to decrease the radious of the primer pocket so that magazine tube detonations under recoil are elliminated. So, if you had WWG do a trigger and action job on your rifle, they most likely reduced your main spring tension by clipping off one coil. Our tough little primer really needs to be whacked hard to ignite. IF you have earlier, large primer ammo, dont worry about your main spring. Magazine tube detonations are likely with large primers in VERY HARD RECOILING 45-70 loads. The original (we are talking around 1880's) military specs for 45-70 in a lever gun called called for a small primer, just for this reason. The 350gr. loads dont recoil enough to cause a mag. tube detonation with the large primers, but our 430gr. and 500gr. loads do, so we simply went to the small primer for all of our 45-70 loads in order to simply manufacturing.

If you are going to have your newer stainless 45-70 tuned, might I suggest Dave Clay. (817-465-7338) His work is much better than the folks that did the work on your other 45-70, in my opinion. IVe seen a lot of custom work by Clay and by WWG. Thanks agian for the compliments. Our 45-70 ammo is our most popular ammo.

[imported_Randy]

Tim,
Thanks for your reply, regarding .45/70 issues. I will certainly give Mr. Clay a call to discuss my options. Anchorage is much closer and I get there once in awhile. I got turned onto WWG long before they received press from, Guns & Ammo, Jeff Cooper (who just tickles me to death)American Rifleman, etc. the publicity has evidently been good and bad for their business, my experience is that they are not nearly as user friendly as they were b-4 becoming semi-famous. I have been happy with the work they have done for me to date, but I still believe their .457 proprietary round is much like pole vaulting over mouse feces! If you can't get it done with the premium .45/70 ammo available today I don't believe the .457 will save your bacon....something to do with an old backpacking goat and his theory of shot placement, shot placement, & hey shot placement. I'm a southpaw, both of my bolt actions are LH, so lever actions hold a place near and dear to my heart. My wife, daughter and sons and I can all use the same rifle in the .45/70 plus we have a couple of .30-.30's that we have received as gifts from potlatches. The .30 caliber is the next move up after instruction with a s/shot bolt .22 for the kids, then old or cowboy action loads in the .45/70, next thing you know they are ready for come what may that can be handled with a firearm. I will pay special attention from now on to primer size! Thanks for the heads up Tim, somehow magazine detonation seems to be one of those experiences I'd prefer not to try even one time. Randy

[Patrick]

Good morning folks--

Just musing here. As I've scanned this Board, off and on, these last few days I've been in town, I've run across the word "pleasure" often. It has been used to describe the emotional/psychlogical state associated with hunting and hunters. It is a subtle, or perhaps not so subtle, condemnation, I submit. Derogatory, insulting. And I don't think I'll let that slip by without comment, without challenge.

So. Whenever you see that word here, gentle reader, I suggest you suggest you substitute, or associate, the following words, phrases. You'll have the genuine picture if you do.

---...fulfilling of spiritual need
---...practice of self-sufficiency
---...providing for one's mate and offspring
---Connecting
---Participating
---Honoring
---Mystery
---Responsible

Fellow hunters, continue to Thank your prey and God whenever your hunt produces meat for the Table. I know you (we) do; just thought I'd mention it, as this ceremony is the Amen to the above characterizations.

Patrick

[Patrick]

Some more associative Words:

---hard
---skill
---manly
---sad
---physical
---complex

[Patrick]

Just a couple more:

---Acceptance
---Thankfulness

Nevada Tim, you're right, thats not my point. The only point was the irony I found in this reference to the esteemed Dr. Kay, who wrote an anti-wolf reintro piece for a political organization that folks here championed awhile back.

The irony is that the anti-reintro freedom lovers are championing a scientist who, according to this reference, suggests taking away the freedom to hike in certain places so as not to disturb the predators, all in order to save the Quaking Aspen!

This was just my poor, obscure attempt at humor!

[Tim in Nevada]

David, thanks for the clarification. It looks like the troops have rallied these past few days. Way to go men, kick butt and take names!!! Tim

[pointer]

Dr. Kay is an interesting man, who hunts more than most anyone I've met. He has an interesting book coming out next year, The Aboriginal Overkill Hypothesis. It states that the extremely large herds of ungulates witnessed by the early pioneers was un-natural. He contends that our (white man) diseases made it West much earlier, wiping out much of the Amerindians. The allowed the populations of their main prey animals to explode to un-before seen heights.