Thanks for the info and I feel the same. It is a shame when we waste what little we have.

gators will get revenge. watch it

clickit

Bass fro
Similar posts at about the same time. Sorry not trying to copy your congrats.

I really loved that dern gator.

Comments like that first sentence is the kind of thing that led to my comment. Way too much death might be of value when describing others behavior in the killing of humans. In animals the question becomes is the species managed properly or endangered by the killing, not the individual speciman. Used in the manner you have used it may be of value to you, but to try to prescribe your standards on others is to give the animals that mystical value of a soul the same as a human.

What gave McCathern the right? The law. If he did the kill legally then fine, if not then let him face the prosecution by the appropriate officials.

With the many versions that are out there none of us know the real story. To condemn him could easily be to smear an innocent man.

His words? Are not fishermen and hunters well known to stretching the tale of some great catch or kill? I would say legendary. I would condemn him on his word when he makes that statement under oath.

The justification? If done in accordance with the law the justification need be known only by him to him while owing neither you, I or anyone else an explanation.

Someone earlier made the comment that old gator was too tough to eat and meat wasted. I have heard the same about old hogs, old bucks, etc. yet hundreds and thousands are eaten every year. To be gator specific anyone who watches "Swamp People" long knows better with special cookouts occurring when many of the really big gators are taken. A few of the articles on this specific case do mention the meat was recovered as well as the skin.

We would not be in this great discussion if the gator was a 6 footer. The size and age is what generated it. Whether big bucks, heavy hogs, large bears or whatever the game the large and old specimen have always been the animals that drew special awe and comment. They are also animals reaching the end of their lifespan soon to die and rot if not taken. In my book at least better taken, consumed if possible and the trophy saved to be honored in memory and in fact into the future providing someone special memories.

Passing on the genes? The animals did not start passing on its genes when it reached 10' or 12' or 13'. It has been passing its genes on since reaching sexual maturity. Its days as a breeder are also reaching the end, if they have not yet.

I think that addresses most of the issues raised so far so let me get to the meat of where I stand.

It is pretty simple. As sportsmen we owe your fellow sportsmen the respect of refraining from distasteful and wrongful allegations when we do not have the facts. If we have knowledge of legal wrong doing then we owe the sport and the animal the responsibility of reporting it to legal authorities. If we do not have those facts we owe the sport the need to refrain from the public smearing of our sport in view of the the non sporting, but decisive public.

If we do not like the taking of mature, aging trophies we should address changing the law or regulation (usually poor biological management). We may even choose not to make those who do not think differently than we do as our personal companions. But if their actions were within the law we owe fellow sportsmen the respect of refraining from public criticism.

If we are traditional archers we can prohibit the crossbow and wheel and cable crowd from our lease. If dry fly purist we can bar the bait caster and spin fisherman, or even the wet fly advocate from our private pond. It does not give us the right to publicly demean others who pursue their sport lawfully on other venues.

In the end if you have specific knowledge of wrong doing report it, if you don't then criticism is little more than being the neighborhood gossip smearing others reputations. If the actions are legal then work on changing the laws if you can, but refrain from attacking our fellow sportmen.

I am not prescribing my standards on others.

As I suspected, you would not understand my perspective of death. I have seen men take mens lives, I have seen animals take mens lives, and men take animals lives. I have seen it for no reason and for the reason to sustain ones own life. I have had my hand in the loss of life.

The man in question when interviewed stated he shot the gator in public waters which is illegal. As I have already stated. The legality was not the question I posed to you. I know that you are smart enough to relise that that there is a difference from what is legal and what is right.

Once again I said nothing about the soul. Is this your argument?

Why do you believe that life, other than human, is not valuable?

You avoided the question, once again, by mischaracterizing what I said.

I someday hope you do at least understand what I am asking, even If you don't have the answer.

Hirsch,
Are you a politician or lawyer by chance?

Barrblues & hirsch,

Thanks for the good read guys! Both of you have made good points. I think Barr is looking for the answer of " No one has a right to take a life" and hirsch is saying "Don't judge until you get all the facts". I'm pretty much still in the middle, but that's just ignorant me Again, thanks for the good read

I am saying you are prescribing your standards to others when you try to prescribe what is right, vs. what is the law. For the criticizing of others in public forums as far as I am concerned there is one standard; was it legal. To go beyond that you undoubtedly are prescribing standards in my view.

On your assertation that you have seen men take mens lives, men take animals, animals take men I am inclined to call BS but won't. There is the rare individual, rare like 14' alligators, who has seen all this. I spent a career as a soldier preparing for war, but because of the time frame never saw battle. Most police officers never have to draw their service weapon let alone fire it in a career. Emergency room Doctors may see the aftermath, but seldom the deed. But you may be that extremely rare individual; or you may be like that hunter or fisher who stretches the story a bit. Which sounds more exciting? "I killed that fat old lazy gator as he slept in the sun on bank" or "I waited nerves on edge just searching time my eyes burned when he popped just his eyes above the surface and guessing where the brain was I threaded the bullet right through that walnut size organ"? Sometimes stories get stretched and misrepresented to the sake of the glory or standing perceived to be gained.

Your own words show you seem to place animal lives near that of human life, or at least worthy of equal consideration in the taking of it. That approaches a "Soul Like" quality in my book.

What makes you say that I give no value to an animal life? I simply do not give them moral consideration as an individual. I as a sportsman and a conservationist (not preservationist) place great value on the husbandry and stewardship of herd management, but like mother nature my concern is not the individual, but the species. Elevating the individual animal again begins approaching giving more of a human like value.

LOL, no. Are you are wild eyed and reckless liberal by chance?

LOL, hope you are happier now Ren. I think you have the essence. The rest is details.

hirsch---

Very well put sir.

Impressive.

There are just too many people that if we don't live by their standards demean others for it.

Your words were well thought out and fair.

Happier, not sure, but very content Always like to hear/read a good debate/discussion.

Think now we should just and enjoy our freedom of speech

I quit drinking 20 years ago, but would easily sit down for coffee with anyone in this discussion.