Turkey Reaping

[BC]

No Mike, I am not dumb.


I am still waiting on that proof that gives validity to what you are saying though. Surely if it's as dangerous as you say it is, then there must be some sort of documented proof. All hunting accidents are investigated and reports are completed.

[mookyj]

Timberland, nice way to respond (not sarcastic comment) I am unaware of any hit list. Somewhere in the back of your mind you have to had the question that if your decoys look that real, could there be a problem? I know of people that had $15 decoys shot off their stakes much less something that is real looking that you produce. It's not the people who are careful and diligent. It's the wannabes, those with no patience, the poachers, the trespassers that will take any and all risks,and things such a reaping tactics, and ultra real looking decoys are mitigating circumstances.

[TauntoHawk]

Do you wear blaze orange??? you should! you said yourself you almost got shot although you weren't fanning which by your logic makes camo unsafe and unethical.

[mookyj]

BC apparently you think I have all day to query databases that I don't have access to. Most of them are paid subscription services for research/academia/news So in your mind, unless it is reported properly it doesn't occur or exist. It is my opinion and you have yours. However you seem more interested in playing devil's advocate.

So in all of your spare time, should you find comprehensive reports with incident details let me know. An excel or other database that can be queried would be prefered.

Do you wear blaze orange??? you should! you said yourself you almost got shot although you weren't fanning which by your logic makes camo unsafe and unethical.

TauntoHawk do you shoot at camo or just realistic decoys?  (obviously sarcastic)  seriously, that is your argument?

The thread is driveling down to foolishness  and I need to get work done

[VanHelden Game Calls]

mookJ

The argument you make is to assume we need protection for an activity we willing do and in doing so accept any risk.  In fact in WI its the law that while engaged in hunting we can hold no liability to landowners unless $ has been passed.

Anyways back to topic, you are trying to protect people from themselves, if hunters feel endangered let the hunter make the choice to engage in the activity or not.  If you are trying to protect those that may shoot a reaper, it would be better served giving them a lesson in gun safety and common sense.  As you showed its the lack of these last 2 items and not reaping that almost got you killed.

Start a gun safety reminder blog and you can use all these hunting styles as examples of why its so important to identify you target, treat every gun as it were loaded, keep muzzle pointed in a safe direction and keep the finger out of the trigger guard until ready to shoot.  And oh ya, respect others and their property as if it were yours.

[BC]

I will go ahead and answer what you already know Mike.


Zero deaths directly attributed to the method of "fanning".


You must live in a dangerous part of the country Mike. I've been turkey hunting for over 30 years and I don't know a single person who's ever been shot or shot at.

[GobbleNut]

First of all, who coined the term "reaping"?  What a crappy terminology for a hunting technique, whether you agree with using it or not.

Secondly, I agree with the assessment that until there is hard, factual evidence to support the supposition that the use of this technique is any more dangerous than any other method used in turkey hunting, the discussion about it is purely based on emotion,...which is exactly where this discussion has ended up. 

To flatly state that the use of this technique (the r-word), or fanning, or decoy use, or the use of any other visual representation of a turkey in turkey hunting is unsafe and should be frowned upon or banned outright without factual support for that position is questionable.

I had a very similar discussion with a good friend about using certain "visual stimuli" while hunting this spring.  He condemned it based upon potential safety implications.  My position was 1) anybody who uses any of these techniques assumes the risk associated with doing it, and they also must accept the consequences of not using good judgement in doing so,....and 2)  regardless of all else, a hunter holding a decoy, or fan, other any other turkey part, when all is said and done, still looks like a hunter holding a decoy, fan, or turkey part.  There is absolutely no excuse for anybody ever shooting someone in a mistaken-for-game hunting accident.  Anyone that cannot safely identify their target when hunting has no business hunting.

[spaightlabs]

 Mister Joyner:

Thank you very much for your concern regarding my safety.  However, I would like to request that both you and the state allow me to make my own decisions regarding my safety.  In turn, I promise to not shoot anyone's decoy, nor to shoot at tail fans, nor to shoot at movement or sound.

Be safe out there, and if you feel a practice is unsafe, by all means, do not engage in it.

Respectfully,

GS

[drenalinld]

First of all, who coined the term "reaping"?  What a crappy terminology for a hunting technique, whether you agree with using it or not.

Secondly, I agree with the assessment that until there is hard, factual evidence to support the supposition that the use of this technique is any more dangerous than any other method used in turkey hunting, the discussion about it is purely based on emotion,...which is exactly where this discussion has ended up. 

To flatly state that the use of this technique (the r-word), or fanning, or decoy use, or the use of any other visual representation of a turkey in turkey hunting is unsafe and should be frowned upon or banned outright without factual support for that position is questionable.

I had a very similar discussion with a good friend about using certain "visual stimuli" while hunting this spring.  He condemned it based upon potential safety implications.  My position was 1) anybody who uses any of these techniques assumes the risk associated with doing it, and they also must accept the consequences of not using good judgement in doing so,....and 2)  regardless of all else, a hunter holding a decoy, or fan, other any other turkey part, when all is said and done, still looks like a hunter holding a decoy, fan, or turkey part.  There is absolutely no excuse for anybody ever shooting someone in a mistaken-for-game hunting accident.  Anyone that cannot safely identify their target when hunting has no business hunting.

Well said Jim. Mistaken-for-game shootings are not accidents.

[TauntoHawk]

Do you wear blaze orange??? you should! you said yourself you almost got shot although you weren't fanning which by your logic makes camo unsafe and unethical.

TauntoHawk do you shoot at camo or just realistic decoys?  (obviously sarcastic)  seriously, that is your argument?

The thread is driveling down to foolishness  and I need to get work done

I don't know of anyone or even directly heard of anyone that has ever shot at either...  My point was to sound over top, because blaming camo, blaming decoys, blaming calls is all a bit silly and foolish.

[emptymag]

One question for mookyj. Did you vote for Obama?

[g8rvet]

My brother responded this past season (not this spring, last) to a call where a hunter had been shot (he was fine).  He was using a hen call, not a gobbler call. It was in a 575,000 acre National Forest. He did not have a decoy. I know of one other incidence, where a grandchild was shot on his granddad's lap.  Happened in my neck of the woods, maybe 25 years ago or so-pretty sure the child was killed.  I would bet a paycheck that dog hunting while carrying buckshot is statistically more likely to get someone killed, but that is just a hunch. 

I know of close to a dozen dove field shootings that I responded to in a 5 year career in volunteer fire service.  That was south of where I now live-no fatalities.  Did have one guy spitting 7.5 lead out of his mouth while at the scene though.

Shootings happen, but not very often. 

For the record, I think someone trying to ban a practice (that I think every person on this thread said they would NEVER personally try) has the burden of proof to show that said practice is unsafe.  Now, to be clear, Mooky is not trying to ban anything. Just expressing an opinion on a practice, as is his right.  Others disagree, as is their right. 

[g8rvet]

ultra real looking decoys are mitigating circumstances.

Wait a sec.  Are you now saying that using ultra real dekes is asking for it too?  Just trying to understand. 

[spaightlabs]

Mr. Joyner, can you please explain your allegation that any of the behaviors in your piece are unethical?

Just because you haven't or don't do it does not make it unethical.  No matter how bigtime you think you are.  Your soap box seems more like a high horse.

[Timberland Taxidermy]

Now, to be clear, Mooky is not trying to ban anything. Just expressing an opinion on a practice, as is his right.

That is not true at all. Here is what he says:

If you come to the same or similar conclusion as I, let your wildlife agencies know, and hopefully ban this practice...

ultra real looking decoys are mitigating circumstances.

Wait a sec.  Are you now saying that using ultra real dekes is asking for it too?  Just trying to understand. 

Yes he is.

I cannot go along with $100-$400 decoys made to be ultra realistic or done as production line taxidermy. Seriously, if you put out a taxidermy mount or one of these über expensive decoys, how is one going to explain that away at trial for a shooting incident in the turkey woods.