"Hunter" kills pony in Stoney Creek

Would imagine you shelter your live stock in adverse weather to protect them. Do what you want I feel everyone should do what they can too reduce risk not depend on someone else. This is not a "Hunter" or "Hunting" problem. Its a criminal problem so you may want too protect your livestock from a criminal element.

I have owned quarter horses most of my life. NEVER have I had one shot, or saw/heard of one shot accidentally.

Likely more to the story.

Punch Bowl is on the non hunting side of boundary designating hunting/no hunting (2.6 kilometers off), horses impacting deer movement etc is a non issue. This is a criminal act, not a hunting incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oaknut

Wow! That article burnt my azz worse than last weeks chilli. That is about as anti hunter as you can get. The better part of the article is focused on hunters and not a dead horse. The idiocy behind these people drives me nuts. We don't have the arrow but it was a crossbow! How did they figure this out? I wouldn't doubt this comes back as an anti hunters way of creating some waves. If someone breaks into an enclosure and shoots a horse he is not a hunter, he's just a guy who killed a horse.

---

My sentiments,exactly! The Hamilton Spec editors need to be taken to task for this inflammatory,yellow attempt at journalism. An editor with one shred of credibility should have ordered a complete re-write,removing the word "hunter". This was not done by a hunter,at all. It was done by an armed criminal and should be regarded as such.....period!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pijetro

I live within earshot of this story...Seeing a grown man (and woman cry on CHCH news) for his horse was a bit unsettling.
Judging by his tears, it was like he lost his child..
However, it was assumed hunters or somebody with a bow, only because the animal was cut up the length to have an arrow and all evidence removed.
It's very hard to find a hunting spot in this area without landowners permission..Therefore, it had to be a trespasser, or somebody with total disregard. The owner was correct in claiming that mistaken identity is not and excuse..If you can't tell the difference between horse and deer, then you've got issues.

I felt for him. He deserves justice.

---

That was no mistake! Check out the wacko neighbour in behind him that happens to own a crossbow (allegedly). Hunters don't hunt until 11;00 pm but annoyed neighbours sure do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGM999

Punch Bowl is on the non hunting side of boundary designating hunting/no hunting (2.6 kilometers off), horses impacting deer movement etc is a non issue. This is a criminal act, not a hunting incident.

---

I agree. Saw the story on the news as well, something didn't seem right to me about a 'hunting incident'. There is more to this story I suspect....

RB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher

I think that means bringing them in the barn every night. And no, a livestock owner should not have to do this.

---

Agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandwagon

This article is not anti-hunter in my opinion it is simply quoting one person's opinion.

Pretty disgusting who ever did this, I hope they find who is responsible.

---

The Anti-Hunter part of this article is clearly the use of the word hunter IN the land owners opinion you mentioned.


In the first article it says:

"Stoltzfus believes the shooter may have been a disgruntled hunter who was concerned that his horses were scaring off deer in the area."

in the follow up article the headline is

"Search on for hunter who killed Hamilton pony with arrow"

It further goes on to say:

"Jukes is shocked and angry, saying the hunter had to know what he was doing because the area requires some knowledge of the "lay of the land" and how to get in and out quickly."There are some sick people out there … a murder has happened."

The article is not anti hunter the opinion of the land owner is, and then by printing the "opinion" the article hops on the band wagon.

I agree I hope whoever did this comes to justice as it is sick, but to "ASSume" it was a hunter because you "identified" a xbow wound or even a gunshot wound is largely anti hunter.

There are tons of people (no license required) who own bows of all kinds, also tons of people who (license required) own guns, and can get mad at trespassing or any sort of confrontation.

Some people are sick and twisted, doesn't mean you need to automatically blame hunters.

-Steve

Oops,

Missed a few GEMS at the end......

"Stoltzfus says other hunters identified the wound as an arrow wound. The arrow itself is gone because the hunter cut it out of the pony's body so he couldn't be traced, Stoltzfus believes.
Moonpie "didn't have a chance. He's so friendly. He thinks humans are his best friends. He's nosy anyway. He'd go over (to the hunter) to investigate his presence, thinking 'hey, do you have an apple for me?'""

He didn't have a chance..... no , did he happen to leave his armor and sword in the barn?

Also of course he would go over (to the hunter) and see if he had any apples.

I can't say how disgusted I am by the act as horses like dogs are pets and I would be out for blood if someone killed my dog, but this has spun out of control.

-Steve

I read a lot of detective stories when I was a kid - I got this one all figured out - see this Stoltzfus fellow got someone real mad and since the guy couldn't shoot Stoltzfus he shot his pony - so all you got to do is find out who hates Stoltzfus - but it could be a problem if everybody hates Stoltzfus - case almost closed!