portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

community building

new to the area

i'm new to the portland area and i am looking for a good outdoor place to go recreational shooting.
I am new to Portland (I moved down from Seattle-area) and I am looking for some information about a good place to target practice. The weather here is so nice and I would like to get outdoors to shoot instead of being confined to an indoor range but unfortunatly, I do not know the area.

Does anyone know of a place that is not too far of a drive from Portland? I own several firearms, although I am primarily interested in shooting handguns and shotguns. The handguns are a medium caliber and the shotguns are all 12 gague. I would like to find a nice gravel quarry on a federal forest (or something like that). Any suggestions?

Try the... 22.Mar.2004 15:02

Grace's dad

Try the English Pit between Camas and Vancouver.


Gravel Pit 22.Mar.2004 15:32

vote with Yer pocketbook

Aside from the obvious "pun-ny," (i.e. City Hall - hope I don't get a visit over this one), the gravel pit out at Brown's Camp (Tillamook forest) is a popular spot.

Those that use the area often engage in a clean-up of the site, too. Jus' so you know...

plese pick up 22.Mar.2004 16:43

after yourself

I hate it when I get out in the woods, look down and see shotgun shells everywhere. Its bad enough knowing that I wont be able to see an wildlife in the near vicinity, but I shouldnt have to look at the trash left behind by gun owners.
I grew up with guns ( now recovering) and the first thing that I learned was how to be a responsible gun handler (sp?). This includes cleaning up after oneself. Hopefully Richard you know this as well and will pass this info onto other target practicers. thank you.
PS Dont forget to fight for the right to bear legs as well

fbi 22.Mar.2004 17:13


I'm surprised nobody has considered what this post is actually asking and why. duh

Just don't bother, please. 22.Mar.2004 17:29


First, thank you for not shooting animals. If you must shoot anything, i much prefer that it not be alive, and i respect your choice not to kill for your sport.

However... bullets are dangerous, dude. Don't shoot anything in "a nice gravel quarry on a federal forest." Please don't accidentally kill me, and please don't accidentally kill any of the creatures whose home you'll wildly be shooting into. It doesn't matter that you don't like indoor ranges. If you go to an indoor range, you can only accidentally kill other humans who, by their presence, have consented to take that risk. You can put up with your dislike of indoor ranges, i should hope, in order to prevent random death.

Thank you for soliciting opinions from locals. You're at least from the Northwest, so i'm not as offended as i would be if a *total* stranger to our land wanted to shoot it. i hope you can listen to what i've said; i don't mean to attack you or provoke defensiveness at all.

hunter-caused collisions 23.Mar.2004 07:58


{Deer hunting leads to increases in auto accidents. Frightened, normally cautious deer rush onto the roadways...resulting in increases in auto/deer crashes...resulting in increased bloody animal and human deaths...}

Deer/Auto Collisions and Hunting: The Figures Don't Lie

There are about a half-million reported collisions between deer and automobiles in the United States every year. The deer are killed in nearly all of these accidents, and more than one hundred people die as well. Another 10,000 persons suffer injuries.

Insurance companies pay out about $1 billion in claims each year to cover these accidents. The figures all agree, deer/auto collisions are very expensive - in terms of suffering and in terms of money.

Despite the enormous weight of tragedy and sadness associated with deer/auto collisions, cynical hunters are increasingly exploiting such misfortunes as a way to justify their blood-sport. They are misrepresenting the causative factors of these accidents in a vulgar ruse to acquire greater public and political support for their own style of violence. The figures don't lie, but the liars have begun to figure.

As autumn approaches, apologists for blood sports have been touting the need to "control" deer numbers as a method for reducing the incidence of deer/auto collisions on the nation's highways. At face value, their deceit seems plausible - fewer deer should result in fewer accidents - and thus they dupe many innocent persons into believing their argument. But Friends of Animals has probed beneath some of the hunters' guile and found that, contrary to the hunters' propaganda, there is very strong indication that hunting itself is an important cause of many deer/auto collisions.

Thirty-three states have responded to a nation-wide survey conducted by FoA's Outreach Coordinator, Ms. Megan Metzelaar. Regrettably, there is no national standard for reporting deer/auto collisions, and the reported statistics are presented in as many formats as there are states. Nevertheless, careful examination and analysis of the available statistics lead to an inescapable conclusion: Hunting is a major cause of deer/auto accidents.

Fourteen of the responding states presented statistics that provide a monthly break-down of deer/auto collisions. Of these, all 14 - without a single exception - agree that there is a sharp escalation of deer/auto collisions during October, November and December: Hunting Season. Typically, an average state may report about 10,000 deer/auto collisions a year. Of these, there are about 550 collisions a month through the year, except during hunting season when the average zooms up to about 1,700 collisions a month.

Several state game agencies have tried to shrug this important statistical spike off by saying October to December also coincides with the annual rut, the breeding season when male deer are very restless and bolt carelessly back and forth through the woodlands. They argue that testosterone-crazed bucks display less than their normal caution when crossing highways, and thus they are more susceptible to accidents.

That argument might be plausible if most of the deer killed on the highways were bucks. However, the statistics collected by FoA indicate that there is a tendency for slightly more does to be killed on the highways during hunting season.

Female deer come into estrus only for 24 hours once a month during the rut, while bucks have their hormone levels intensified continuously for about 60 days straight through the rut. Thus, from a biological standpoint, incaution due to hormonal distractions (as reflected in the accident rate) should be overwhelmingly noticed in males - by a factor of about 30 to 1. But that is not the case.

Some state game agencies tried another stratagem to divert criticism from their client hunters. They said that increased accidents are due to the dispersal of yearling deer. Each autumn many yearlings naturally separate from their mothers and wander away from the areas where they were born. The hunting apologists suggest that these dispersing deer are more likely to wander across unfamiliar roads and contribute to the terrible statistics. But once again, the dispersing phenomenon affects young bucks, almost exclusively. It is very rare for a young doe to disperse from her natal habitat. The dispersal of yearling bucks does not explain why at least an equal number of female deer are killed on the highways each autumn.

So what is the cause of intensified deer/auto accidents during October through December? Friends of Animals sees no alternative but to conclude the sharp increase in accidents is due to the presence of hunters in the deer habitats. Deer of both sexes know they are being hunted - they know there are people in their habitats who want to kill them - and thus deer of both sexes respond by fleeing in panic. Deer normally are very cautious when entering an open area, such as a road or highway. But when they are panicked because they know someone is trying to kill them, they abandon that natural caution, and will bolt across a road without even slowing down.

Friends of Animals isn't the only one to notice the change of deer behavior during hunting season. A few years ago, a Pennsylvania auto insurance group reported a five-fold increase in the number of deer/auto collision claims on the first day of deer hunting season.

The FoA study is far from over. There are a number of other statistics that appear to link hunting with increased numbers of deer/auto collisions. For example, some statistics indicate that most collisions occur during the hours around sunrise and sunset - a time when deer naturally are more active, but a time also when hunters are more frequently in the woods. Anecdotal evidence suggests there are more accidents on the weekend than on weekdays, even though vehicular traffic tends to be heavier on weekdays when people are rushing to get to work or go home. But hunting usually is more intense on the weekend, when hunters have days off from their regular jobs. FoA does not yet have statistically significant data to verify these hypotheses - but we're going after it.

Hunting is becoming less acceptable. More and more people are insisting that hunting is biologically and ethically wrong. As a consequence, the number of hunters in America is in steady and serious decline. Indeed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recently reported a seven percent decline in the number of American hunters over the past five years. In 1996, there were 13,975,000 licensed hunters in the United States. Today, there are 13,034,000. Through the past half-decade, an encouraging 941,000 persons have given up hunting.

As some hunters abandon their fraternity, those who remain sport-killers are increasingly pressed to justify their blood sport. It is no longer acceptable to call hunting a type of "recreation." So the hunters have to invent a myriad of social benefits to excuse their killings - they are "protecting" the deer from "over-population." They are helping to stamp out Lyme disease. They are helping to feed widows and orphans. They are protecting endangered woodland plants from over-browsing. And they have a dozen other excuses including, of course, protecting American drivers from collisions with the deer. All a pack of lies.

Autumnal chills are now starting to stir the more primitive instincts in the hearts of America's hunters. Hunting season is approaching, and it's time for the nimrods to oil their guns and conjure up some new excuses to explain why they just have to go out in the woods and kill a deer.

Friends of Animals opposes hunting. All hunting. The more we study the excuses offered by hunters, the more we see they are baseless. Friends of Animals holds that hunting is ethically wrong -- it imposes capital punishment on innocent animals essentially for the amusement or "recreation" of someone who enjoys killing. Friends of Animals has determined that hunting is ecologically disruptive, and the specious "wildlife science" presented to justify hunting is mere pretext for biological mayhem. Friends of Animals considers hunting to be sociologically disreputable. Putative social benefits, from control of infectious disease to reduction of deer/auto collisions, are obnoxious shams that shamefully divert society's search for real solutions to these serious problems.

The apologists for hunting are deceitful. Hunting itself is cruel.

is there any place in which they won't be attacked by humans? 23.Mar.2004 08:03


Hunting is cruel. It is deceitful. It is socially unjustifiable. It is ecologically disruptive. Friends of Animals opposes hunting in all its forms.

The cruelty of hunting involves the causing of gratuitous pain to wild animals.True, wild predators also hunt, but their killing is not gratuitous. Only humans kill for pleasure.

Hunting is deceitful because it claims to be something it isn't. Hunting tries to cover truth with an enormous glossary of euphemisms. Even scientific literature refers to "harvests" and "culls" and "bag limits." Hunters hardly ever like to acknowledge that they actually "kill." Beyond this, hunters are fond of portraying themselves as conservationists, benefactors of wilderness and practioners of "sustainable utilization of species." Hunters hardly ever acknowledge that they actually like to deprive an animal of life - although this is the whole intent of hunting. Anything else would just be a walk in the woods.

Hunters often portray themselves as "sportsmen" and the animals they kill as "game." But sportsmanship suggests an admirable conduct marked by generosity for fair play. Where is the fair play in a grown man or woman using a modern firearm to kill an inoffensive animal?

Hunting is socially unjustifiable because it is an unnecessary waste of life and of resources. In developed countries such as the United States, most of the land has already been taken from Nature. There is a question of social ethics involving the presumed "right" of hunters to turn what little wild areas are left into seasonal shooting galleries.

Hunting is ecologically disruptive. The hunter, carrying weapons with which his prey did not co-evolve, becomes a super-predator which disrupts natural ecological dynamics. The concept of "natural selection" becomes meaningless among heavily hunted wildlife populations, and hence evolution itself - the very foundation of life in all its diversity - is undermined.

This disruption is exacerbated by hunter-controlled governmental agencies which manipulate wild areas to stimulate ever-greater populations of hunted animals. The whole philosophy of deer management is a paradox: the more you hunt, the more deer you get.

Friends of Animals is unequivocally against hunting and the destructive methods of "wildlife management" that caters to, and fosters hunting. Hunting is an act against Nature on both moral and biological grounds.

Across the country, more and more wildlife specialists are coming to see that using hunting to manipulate an environment leads only to more distortion, larger populations, and ultimately a complete loss of all that's natural in the environment.

Hunting and habitat manipulation on public lands, in parks, sanctuaries and refuges, is a violation of public trust, and do not reflect the will of the majority.

Friends of Animals insists that our wildlife refuges be restored as inviolate sanctuaries which allow every species there to undergo the test of Nature to guarantee its survival over time.

Friends of Animals will work for an end to the decimation of wildlife and its habitat on public land to bring creative equal protection for wild animals. Their rights to life and safety must be protected.