Austin American Statesman, Deer rancher &breeder

Interesting article in Austin Sunday paper. Extensive write up in the paper on this subject.


KELLY WEST / AMERICAN-STATESMAN Dr. Scott Bugai breeds white tail deer on his ranch in Seguin, Texas for hunting. Lawmakers will tangle over the issue of deer breeding this session, as The Texas Deer Association, which represents the breeders, is again pitted against the Texas Wildlife Association, which has a membership opposed to breeding.

Do you have a Link Sir

here you go

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state...erations/nkrrm/

Thanks... tlk

The article in the paper took what seemed to be a much harder view on breeding deer than the video. The paper indicates many wealthy ranch owners and others feel Mother Nature should take care of deer breeding. In 1996 there were approximately 275 with deer breeder permits. Today the number is 1,326.
Interesting reading.

The article in the paper took what seemed to be a much harder view on breeding deer than the video. The paper indicates many wealthy ranch owners and others feel Mother Nature should take care of deer breeding. In 1996 there were approximately 275 with deer breeder permits. Today the number is 1,326.
Interesting reading.

Interesting since 2 of the 3 founders of the TWA were/are deer breeders.

Don't confuse them with facts... It's hurts their agenda

Then I won't mention that one of their current leadership used to book hunters to shoot released deer either.

I know someone on here that will get REAL quite

Interesting read

Interesting indeed. Sure appears to be a pretty big dustup among some pretty powerful folks. I guess not everyone feels there is only one view on the subject. Maybe they're just idiots too.

Since upper management of AAS retired a few years back, the stories see to dismiss actual facts.. Last few years they had an article stating most gun dog trainers beat dogs, a story that condoned shooting hogs in traps and bayed with 22 Cals, and my personal favorite allowing javillinas a MLD season would cause their extinction..

I no longer read anything published by AAS. It's said that Cox has allowed them to be so one side in opinion

Thats just Crazy Talk

The only use I have for that paper is when I run out of toilet paper.

Ahhh, the ol' "attack the source" gambit. Is the story untrue? Are the interviews fabricated? Everything just made up?

Lol.

Don't know and don't care what that liberal rag reports on.

Of course not...one person that is a member of TWA could disagree with HF and breeders, thus making it true

Like saying since you're an SCI member...SCI membership is against HF's and breeders...

Slanted reporting that's all. Picked and chooses what it wanted to report.


Lets state facts..such as TWA has never stated any thing against Deer breeders or HF infact many of thier statements are Infact improvement to breeding laws, again they have never condemned legal breeders, legal deer transportation and HF's

I don't have much to say about the deal. First I've heard of it. But if even the basic facts are true, it does show there are powerful folks fighting about the issue. Even here in Texas.

So all the laughter and dismissiveness about it as a non-issue is obviously misplaced.

Define powerful folks?

Then tell us what is being actually argued...

Read the article.

So you have no connection to a breeder at all NP

Like I said "what's actually being agrued?"

Off course you wont state it.. Because once again it doesn't support your agenda.

TWA does not oppose breeders or HF...period. They would like to see change to some regulations, which I support one and think the other is a waste of time.

On both sides of this issue it is the voice of a few speaking for many(members). What is being said by the few in power may not be what the many(members) want sometimes. It is like 2 male dogs and one fire hydrant.

According to the paper, the Texas Deer Association is spending as much as $250,000. on lobbyists while The Texas Wildlife Association is spending as much as $230,000.

No, I have no "connection". My partner's family owns a breeding/HF operation. Not me. Not my family. I have no interest or affiliation with it. I have never shot anything out there and never will. We have discussed our positions on the subject. We are big boys who can discuss things and understand big boys can think for themselves and are allowed to have their own opinions. That's what big boys do. Just the other day, one of my partners was saying how his best friend refuses to even cull does on the place. Guess what? They are still best friends.

So you have no point, no "Gotcha!", no nothing. You never have.

I've never wished financial lose on a friend. Nor fought for it to happen.

Nor have I. I'm not fighting anyone. But I don't hide like a scared child or compromise my beliefs because I'm afraid my opinions would upset someone either. No man of conviction does.

All y'all have left apparently are ridiculous attempts at low blows.

No low blow from me. Just a simple truth about myself.

I did laugh at your "anymore" statement though

Maybe you should slow down and read it again.

I did... And You're still posting on a HF/breeder thread

To work for someone involved in something that one is vehemently opposed to, yet continuously belittle others online for something they enjoy is hypocritical at best, and in my eyes a form of cowardice. It's not about having a "big boy" discussion, because "big boys" don't resort to the type of petty attacks I have seen here on the forum at times. I suppose it's because if "big boys" showed that lack of respect while discussing things face to face, things wouldn't go so swimmingly. Every time I read some of the nonsense belittling another's way of hunting, I think of my son, and can imagine if one of these keyboard warriors would spout that to him, and what my response would be.

Nogalas - As an outsider on this thread, this topic, and whatever is going on here...jmo... you came into the conversation with nothing relevant to the topic, or at the very least a reluctance to say exactly what it is, just "read the article" and, while there must be some past history, if I were an "outsider" to the history, and I am, you come off rather harsh.

Now, that being said.. I am not trying to be mean or rude to you.. just pointing out that I opened the thread to see what was going on and got totally side-tracked by your anger and hatred towards whatever you are angry towards or hating on and am still confused as to whatever you are angry towards or hating on.

So, you seem to be highly opinionated towards whatever it is, and I am all for hearing about it and learning of it, so rather than stating "read the article", maybe you could expound upon your ideas a little more so we can move the topic along vs just jumping in and being angry?

Again.. not slamming you in the slightest, just a little constructive ideas here... looking forward to seeing what all the fuss is about.

Russ

Well said Sir

I will never understand what encourages someone to belittle someone's way of hunting if it's moral and ethical...
I am happy that someone enjoys the outdoors

Well, I re-read every post I made in this thread. I see no anger. I certainly see no hatred. I have no anger. I certainly have no hatred. IMO you are wrong to accuse me of this. I actually have said very little other than respond to a few jabs made in my direction. My only intial reaction was that the article was new to me and shows some powerful folks in Texas are apparently fussing over the issue. Which appears to be an obvious and straightforward observation.

Just goes to show folks see what they want to see I guess.

One of the interesting things about an internet forum.

Wow. Do you read these things? You accuse ME of being "petty"? Cowardice is not discussing an issue. Cowardice is refusing to discuss it and resorting to name-calling instead. Or personal attacks on one you don't know the first thing about.

For the record, I don't work for anyone. Neither do my other partners. I get you don't like my opinion and will say anything to make that clear. There are many in that boat.

I will edit and say I do work for someone: my clients. None of whom have shown the least bit of interest in where I stand on these issues.

Ok let's start over...even though you are still posting on a Breeder and HF post....even though you have no clue about the discussion since the author of the article clearly decided to make it seem that one side hates and wants the demise of the other(even though you tried to defend the author, and not even know what the article is about)I highly doubt some of the board memebers on TWA(also THF members) want their fences torn down and loose the ability to transport deer in or out of their Properties...



What are the facts NP?

Again the author is exploiting and greatly missed on the actual disagreement which are hunting regulations. Neither side hates each other. Although in your book both TWA/TBA are the same anyway.


You are posting on the thread for no reason other then to poke because you neither seek information or what to give an opinion on the actual disagreement that TWA and TBA are having on regulations

Thanks for projecting. Lots of that going on here.

I agree with TWA chop the horns if under 6 months.

Someone was obviously picked on quite a bit in his younger years and now exhibits classical transference of aggression towards individuals which remind him of those who once held him down. The resulting warped sense of reality has probably contributed greatly to the narcissistic behavior frequently displayed.

I will give you one thing NP. You sure know how to stir folks up.

Someone obviously has no ability to discuss the subject of the OP and now engages the classic behavior of the ignorant participant in any discussion-the personal attack with zero basis.

He will never see it

I run across 3-4 people a week that I talk up THF to...
Met a very nice young Man at the Gym the other day that had a Cinnamon Creek Hat on, we struck up a conversation (very nice guy) and I said hey bud do you ever get on THF and his exact words were I jumped on a few times with some guys from the office but if you say anything about how you hunt or what you hunt with you get belittled and degraded...

Just walked off shaking my head

That's a new one. Did you finally read the article?

It's a gift I guess Mr. Don. Didn't really know I had it until I came on here.

Really, it all just boils down to this simple fact: some folks simply cannot be disagreed with without getting pi**ed off. Then the personal attacks and deflection come out. There are many folks who don't agree with me on this issue with whom I maintain a great relationship. It's not like it's an issue that will decide the fate of mankind.

The only observation I have made on this thread is that others must feel pretty strongly about it too. Which is a point I have made repeatedly in the past to the hoots and catcalls of some-even with the evidence staring them in the face. This is just one more example of that evidence.

I guess you were talking about NP since he responded?

Once again gentleman we all have our opinions. Even if we only share the love of the outdoors and the pursuit of wildlife in one legal form or another let's support each other.

You are one to talk about someone belittling or degrading others. You stalk my every move with your laughing emoticons, "Hank Hill" and "Elmer Fudd" comments, discussing non-existent "connections", dissing my hunting experience when you know zero about it, and on and on and on..... ad infinitum. You act like every bully in Jr. High. It doesn't mean squat to me because it speaks for itself. But you are the last person on this forum with any right to get up on your high horse about someone "belittling and degrading" others. It's your life's work.

Man you did get picked on

And the point is proven once again. You are way too easy.

There are a number of specific things mentioned in this article, such as:
Landowners who want pharmaceutical free deer
Some wealthy owners also breed deer
Out of control deer breeding practice and canned hunting which threatens the publics perception of hunting.
Breeders release deer pumped full of antibiotics and other drugs which may be a health threat.
Some have racks so heavy they can barely lift their head.
Breeders can offer a hunt near a city for $3,000.
Big ranches like the King Ranch many miles from a city sometimes charge around $20,000.for a trophy buck.
TWA wants a rule to make sure a bred deer is released into the wild in the spring, leaving plenty of time for antibiotics and other drugs to was out of their systems before the fall hunting season.

And there is a bit more.......

Way to easy

Keep playing the victim card

I have no problem with the way someone Hunts

I

You couldn't be more wrong about an individual. One of the kindest most respectful members I've ever had the pleasure of meeting in person. One of the few members who reached out to me with a friendly pm welcoming me to this forum.

And I promise you if he met you in person he would shake your hand and give you the utmost respect. It just has got to the point that you need to be called out for your behavior. You constantly belittle others about how they chose to hunt in the form of expressing your "opinion". You describe with your ridiculous lack of facts opinions on how they hunted when you've never met them or shared or observed their hunting experience.

And then when members call you out to present the facts to support your opinion you cop out with: go read them for yourself.
Your opinions have lost credibility because of these facts. Then you resort to being attacked personally for expressing your opinions on a public forum.

I have no doubt of that. But you couldn't prove it by me. I take folks as I find them and respond with to them as their approach warrants. No more, no less. I do not get personal or hateful as a rule. I do slip on occasion. But I'll put my behavior up with anyone else's on the forum. And way above many. Do you actually read these things? And you say MY behavior needs "calling out"? Give me a break.

The "not supporting my opinion" rap is pure . No one on this forum has discussed, explained, and supported their position on these issues more than me. No one. My posts explaining my position on these threads could fill a dang encyclopedia.

Like I said, people see what they want to see.

Still waiting.......

Yeah, YOU see what YOU want to see.

This is not my thread. I don't particularly care what's being argued. My only point in this thread is that they are arguing. I said in the very first post I made this is the first I had heard of it.

But, if you want a list, the OP just posted one. It's the same issues that are always discussed when HF/breeding is the subject.

I wasn't being flippant. If you want to know what's being argued in the article and who is arguing, then read it.

Video was interesting....little extreme on the "trying to keep the ranch" bit though. Rest seemed pretty honest and straightforward.

Article is about two things and two things only via the true legislation debate between the two associations.

1)Release date vs hunt date
2)Marked release deer.
The rest is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the legislature


The marked released deer is irrelevant... landowners aren't getting pharmaceutical deer that don't want them, think about the nature of the agruement. Second most antibiotic withdraw times are 21days(that's the max, half life is actually much shorter) current law pretty much covers this.

I agree with the first one saw off the horns if it's with in that hunt year, if this passes marked issues means nothing anyway

I have not read the article nor have any interest in doing so. I think when they started the captive breeding of WT it did more to downgrade hunting than anything else in the last 50 years.

Only you would troll to be a victim.

Well, OK then.

wish I hadn't started to read this

Painful at times

You know it is a shame three or four guys on here could not get together and have a beer. Chances are that if you actually met face to face you would discover the other is not as bad as you imagine. In my experience, preconceived perceptions usually turn out to be totally out of line once I actually meet and talk to someone. Certainly a level of common respect with words comes to the forefront when folks are face to face.

Forums and keyboards sure create an environment for misunderstandings - just sayin'

No misunderstanding a man that admitted he was on the thread just to troll....5 hours after his first post he was still posting with out actually knowing what the thread was about.

And That is the GODS HONEST Truth BoBo...
Mr. Kennedy that would be nice and in most cases you are correct Sir, and as you and I have discussed it is hard to keep emotions in check. But when one individual continually stirs the Pot and is Combative on every subject matter that does not appeal to there personal agenda they will be held accountable..

I terminated a individual recently and when he said what is wrong ...
I suggested that he purchase a mirror and look into it because that would show him the problem.

When several different individuals from different backgrounds, ages, races, religions, beliefs and creeds all have the same problem with one individual...What does that tell you..
Simple concept, be respectful and courteous and you don't draw fire correct

Probably argue on what kind of beer to drink. Argue about sitting on a high chair or low chair. Now me I get along with everybody.

Your a retired Piolt Amigo..
Your gonna tell me you never had a argument with Pay Comp over a "Junior Man" and Seniority

Actually I was a Flight engineer on a Privately owned 727. About the only ones I argued with was the FA's.

After a while it becomes more about personalities than about the subject. Who is posting rather than what is said. Mr. Don posted the most direct statement made on the subject on this thread.

No dustups. No problems. No argument. No discussion.

You're right. It's just the nature of the internet.

You never read the article nor did you even know the context after 6 hours of running your mouth on here.

Yet still point fingers?

I did not think it was possible to be dense. My mistake

Mr. Don said he didn't read the article and wasn't going to read it. Followed up by his very definitive opinion on the subject. Much more direct than anything I have said on this thread. Not a peep from you on that.

Like I said, after a while it becomes all about personalities.

OH, sorry I forgot your the victim

Talk about projection

Everybody always said I had a nice smile and personality. You should try it sometime NP.

Working on it Mr. Don.

Always reminds me of a Snake in the Grass...

Come on guys, we all know that to settle this we are going to need the intellectual insight and always on topic thoughts of REALKILLER. So until he speaks truth into this, I will just sit back and watch.

Watch out scooter, I'm right behind you!

The statement must have hit close to home, huh? I bet you still watch Revenge of the Nerds and wish that could have been your frat!

X-2... that and so called canned hunts.