HUNTING Digest - 31 Aug 1997 to 1 Sep 1997 - Unfinished
Automatic digest processor
There are 4 messages totalling 139 lines in this issue.
Topics collected thus far:
1. Jewish? Hunting in the Mid-Atlantic States?
2. THREATENED PRIMATES
3. Zoom Binoculars Any Good?
4. testing please ignore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:
http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
To leave the Hunting listserv list, send a message with SIGNOFF HUNTING
in the *body* to list...@listserv.tamu.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:45:51 -0500
From: John Kelly <abqk...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Jewish? Hunting in the Mid-Atlantic States?
"Jews Anti-Hunting?"), and whie I am generally averse to
> expressions of unusual and unwarranted curiosity about any of the
> cultural, religous, or language groups that comprise the American
> multicultural mosaic, and especially sensitive to the placement of Jews
> under the microscope (or is it in the mirror?),
Whew! Prolix prose! What about your own "unwarrented curiosity," the
poseur practices you detail below?
I am going to float this
> simple request: if you are Jewish and you hunt in the mid-Atlantic
> region and feel that your hunting experience and Jewish cultural
> experience (however you define it), are entwined, I would enjoy hearing
> from you.
> As for me, raised in the 1960's on British rock-and-roll, German
> romanticism, and American literary impressionism, and now two-stepping
> through middle age at the local cowboy bar, I have no such perspective.
>
"As for me," a native to "cowboy bars," maybe I should also "be averse"
to dabblers in MY culture by outsider microscopists. If I aped your
practices, I'd be hanging out in dairy bars, studying old Woody Allen
videos for moves. Jews is jist as cute as cowboys, Pilgrim.
I suggest that you either buy into your stated prejudices wholeheartedly
(after some naval gazing about the implications for racism), or you buy
wholeheartedly into the higher egalitarian standards practiced daily and
historically by "average Americans."
You might even talk with a Rabbi, as there's no doubt among them as to
where hunting stands for religious Jews, per my conversations with them.
Or is actual query into the rabbinic law verboten (sorry, no Yiddish)?
Can it be that I'm more friendly to Judaism than you?
John Kelly: The goy who started that thread last year, evidently
inspiring your current "idea."
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 15:06:59 -0500
From: John Kelly <abqk...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: THREATENED PRIMATES
Jim B. Powlesland wrote:
>
> In article <primate-2...@news.mantra.com>,
> Dr. Jai Maharaj <j...@mantra.com> wrote:
>
> >hunting by itself threatens one-third of all primates.
>
> It is poaching, not hunting. There is NO hunting season on primates.
>
> Chris, What is this animal rights crap by one of Usenet's raving lunatics
> doing in r.h.?
>
>
Jim, I know where you're coming from, but it wouldn't hurt us to read
this for ourselves (your spin was off, I think), and I don't think your
hunting/poaching distinction is nearly as universally accepted as you
do. For example, when indians around here go hunting, they often do so
at the instruction of their religious leaders, and they often do it
without regard to land "ownership" or state "regulation." They are
technically "poachers," of course, but they're also doing what's "right"
according to their community leaders. They see it as "hunting," a
responsibility of manhood.
In Africa and elsewhere, monkey meat is a staple, and the human
population is exploding. This threatens monkey populations. Hell, we
humans are like locusts sometimes.
Humanity is a very powerful influence on nature, and this results
sometimes in destruction of entire biological systems, laying waste to
whole subcontinents (eg Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Grand Banks, the Amazon
soon).
I didn't read the posting in question as "animal rights crap," or the
words of a "raving lunatic." I do think such questions must be raised,
among us hunters, if we're to respond intelligently and powerfully to
threats to our activities.
However, rec.hunting probably isn't usefully the place for exploration
of such larger ideas, as it's generally focused on technical hunting
discussions rather than intellectual ones involving the environment, and
that's probably the way most of us want it. We can go elsewhere for
environmental/conservation discussion.
John Kelly
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 15:18:59 -0500
From: John Kelly <abqk...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Zoom Binoculars Any Good?
Zoom lenses on cameras are reliably inferior optically to prime lenses
of the same manufacture. The same is true for binoculars.
First, zooms are inherently unsharp and flarey, resulting from the fact
that they characteristically have at least three times the number of
optical elements as they would if they were only one "power." Every
extra element makes things worse. Inescapable, easy to prove by
comparing the best of modern zoom lenses with good quality prime lenses
going back to the sixties.
As importantly, zoom lenses are far less illumination-efficient, they
simply aren't nearly as bright as prime lenses. You can see this
quantified in the maximum f-stops of zoom vs prime camera lenses. Zooms
are always far "slower" than comparably-sized prime lenses, never better
than half or one quarter as bright.
Sometimes it's really important for binoculars to be sharp and bright.
Sometimes it isn't that critical.
John Kelly
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:31:04 CDT
From: HUN...@TAMVM1.tamu.edu
Subject: testing please ignore
This is a test, please ignore
------------------------------
End of HUNTING Digest - 31 Aug 1997 to 1 Sep 1997 - Unfinished
**************************************************************