Excuse me VBM, but me one of PETA's greatest allies? You start from so far out in left field that I don't think you can even see the game. Do you honestly think that a few thousand radicals are going to stop a whole society from eating meat?

I will agree with you about one thing. The unwashed masses - your characterizations, not mine - are who will decide the future of our sport. I would also agree that we do a poor job of communicating with non-hunters. Part of that poor representation of our sport is typified by the existence of these canned hunts.

There is another thread in this forum where one of our long time board members has voiced his distaste concerning some of the shows he has seen on the Outdoor Channel. I too find myself cringing when I see celebrity hunters shooting half-tame animals from box blinds over bait piles on high-fenced preserves, and then later in the conclusion segment of the show talking about what a tough hunt they had today. Give me a break, a couple of hours in a Lazy-Boy parked next to a corn feeder constitutes a tough hunt? If hunters find these types of hunts distasteful and unsporting, then can you imagine how they look through the eyes of the non-hunting public?

If you look at surveys of the non-hunting public support for hunting is relatively strong. That is as long as hunters use the meat from the animals that they harvest, and that the hunt is accomplished in a fair chase manner without undue suffering to the animal. When non-hunters are asked specific questions concerning baiting, hunting high-fenced enclosures, hunting animals specifically introduced for the purpose of hunting, hunting big game with dogs, or trophy hunting their support universally drops. Why? Simple, because the non-hunting majority in this country views these hunting activities as being all about the killing of the animal, not about the participation in the activity.

There are basically two ways to improve our image concerning these areas with the non-hunting public.

The first is education. Through an education effort hunters could make the case to the non-hunting public as to why these activities are ethical pursuits and should be supported. Obviously it would be a lot easier to make that case for some activities then others. For example it is relatively simple to explain the benefits to the animal population that are resultant from trophy hunting, and to debunk the dark-side associated with the practice. Do you think an effective case can be made to the non-hunting public for the existence of preserves and the sporting qualities of canned hunts?

The second method of improving our image, and I believe the appropriate thing to do in the case of canned hunts, is to police ourselves internally and eliminate the questionable practice.

If you wish to debate this topic I am more than willing to do so, but if you are please answer my questions and refrain from slandering me by calling me PETA’s best friend. Can you make a case for why we should allow the continued existence of preserves and canned hunts?


"If you can't change your circumstances then you need to change your perspective."