History & Future of Hunting
12-16-2015, 01:00 PM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 349
History & Future of Hunting
I highly suggest everyone to listen to Shane Mahoney talk about the history and future of hunting in North America on WiredToHunt podcast. This is the way I wish I would have explained hunting to non-hunters and hunters in the past. Shane does a great job. Here are some important things I took from the podcast that Shane talked about.
Quotes:
Hundreds of millions of people around the world still eat wild creatures (fish & wildlife). The more domesticated animals we as humans eat the more land is taken away from wild animals to be developed for our domesticated animals. Billions of people rely on the pursuit, killing, and consuming of wild creatures to eat even if they are not the ones who engage in the activity of pursuing and killing themselves. If the pursuit and killing of fish and wildlife was stopped today then we would see a cataclysm starvation in this world. In North America alone there are 40-50 million people engaging in fish and/or hunting harvesting 100’s of species that add up to hundreds of millions of tons of wild protein that is organic, coming from wild places, with no environmental impact. This is the highest quality animal protein that is available on this planet that is acquired in a way that is environmentally friendly.
The idea that hunting has been unimportant in the past that is just undermined by so much anthropologic and archeological evidence. The idea that it is frivolous and should be done away with in modern time flies in the face of the desire of people to find food production mechanisms that keep wildlife and landscapes healthy while at the same time allowing human beings to acquire the healthiest food possible. This has all been distorted that the idea of angling and hunting are cruel frivolous and that there is only a small percentage of people who engage in these activities.
No other food is so widely shared in a way with others like wild creatures (fish & wildlife) to family, friends and neighbors. Most people who hunt and fish will share their wild protein. Wild protein is shared with 1-in-10 people in this country! How many times do or would people go to the store and buy several packages of roast, steaks, burger or whatever and start going around to family, friends and neighbors houses handing it all out? The answer is probably never because that would just seem strange to go out and do for no reason at all. Now this is the completely opposite when it comes to wild protein caught or harvested by an angler or hunter who has spent the time to pursue wild creatures and wanting to share with family and friends. This is not only true in our country but every culture around the planet.
Hunters and anglers lobby for the acquiring and protecting wild land, fund research projects, help support state natural resource agencies through hunting and fishing license and tags, volunteer on habitat projects that help not just species people eat but also non-game, threatened and endangered species.
The wild creatures taken by hunters and anglers have lived in their wild environments as they should live for their entire existence up until the time they are killed and hopefully they die quickly with as little pain as possible. There is no comparison with the lives of these wild animals to many domesticated animals we eat. 99.9% of the people out there would never allow their dog or cat to live in the way domesticated animals/livestock we eat live. Ending hunting and fishing to convert everyone over to domesticated animal consumption would lead to large scale environmental changes. Wild species habitat would be converted to agricultural and livestock habitat that would require the removal native tree, shrub and grass species and the use of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and gas that would leave a huge carbon footprint. This would severely affect the integrity of ecosystems. This then would take away the majority of conservation that comes from hunters and anglers. This does not mean that there aren’t people or groups out there that do not hunt or fish that contribute to conservation. Hunters and anglers just make up the majority of conservationist, add to the financial part of conservation and volunteer.
Hunting literature- Two things are emphasized in the writing. One is the experience such as landscape, sense of freedom, the challenges, ruggedness of terrain, storms, the unexpected problems, the slowdown of time, loss of problems, the sense of exhilaration of being in pursuit and being in those places. The second thing is the animals themselves that are being hunted. Their beauty, capacity to evade or power up a mountain or through thick brush, run, swim, to exist in those conditions year-round without shelter. Today the emphasis has shifted to the hunter. We are the hero now and focus of the story that also includes focus on the kill which should not be the case. This is not acceptable to non-hunters and puts hunting in a bad light. The public has a dislike for anything that seems like trophy/sport hunting or focus on the hunter. The public is ok or even likes the focus on the experience of the hunt and the hunted (wildlife).
A mount is a type of memento to remind us of the hunt and honor the animal. This is just like a picture or souvenir to show others as proof of our story and experience without the label of “Trophy”. The chase and not the kill is what propels us. Never use the term Trophy Hunter, Sport Hunter or even Meat Hunter. We all are just Hunters. This is all too hard to explain to the non-hunting public and for them to understand. We must show our passion and empathy for the animals.
All of our professional and elite athletes today with the strength, speed, hand-eye coordination are the type of people back thousands of years ago that were the great hunters. Humans would never have gotten to this level back then if we stayed leaf eaters. They were the ones who were responsible in the past to feed us and even protect us in battle or war.
We are all killing animals if we are releasing the arrow, pulling the trigger, setting the hook or even simply going to the grocery store. Hunters and anglers have decided to take the responsibility of taking a creatures life. We feel the responsible thing is to be as much a part of and witness the natural process that brings this food to us. It is not easy or enjoyable in the sense that non-hunters and anglers might think but we have discovered that taking responsibility for it that we feel better and have done the right thing. There are millions of animals that do not live their lives free, wild or full unlike the wild creature’s hunters and anglers pursue.
Quotes:
Hundreds of millions of people around the world still eat wild creatures (fish & wildlife). The more domesticated animals we as humans eat the more land is taken away from wild animals to be developed for our domesticated animals. Billions of people rely on the pursuit, killing, and consuming of wild creatures to eat even if they are not the ones who engage in the activity of pursuing and killing themselves. If the pursuit and killing of fish and wildlife was stopped today then we would see a cataclysm starvation in this world. In North America alone there are 40-50 million people engaging in fish and/or hunting harvesting 100’s of species that add up to hundreds of millions of tons of wild protein that is organic, coming from wild places, with no environmental impact. This is the highest quality animal protein that is available on this planet that is acquired in a way that is environmentally friendly.
The idea that hunting has been unimportant in the past that is just undermined by so much anthropologic and archeological evidence. The idea that it is frivolous and should be done away with in modern time flies in the face of the desire of people to find food production mechanisms that keep wildlife and landscapes healthy while at the same time allowing human beings to acquire the healthiest food possible. This has all been distorted that the idea of angling and hunting are cruel frivolous and that there is only a small percentage of people who engage in these activities.
No other food is so widely shared in a way with others like wild creatures (fish & wildlife) to family, friends and neighbors. Most people who hunt and fish will share their wild protein. Wild protein is shared with 1-in-10 people in this country! How many times do or would people go to the store and buy several packages of roast, steaks, burger or whatever and start going around to family, friends and neighbors houses handing it all out? The answer is probably never because that would just seem strange to go out and do for no reason at all. Now this is the completely opposite when it comes to wild protein caught or harvested by an angler or hunter who has spent the time to pursue wild creatures and wanting to share with family and friends. This is not only true in our country but every culture around the planet.
Hunters and anglers lobby for the acquiring and protecting wild land, fund research projects, help support state natural resource agencies through hunting and fishing license and tags, volunteer on habitat projects that help not just species people eat but also non-game, threatened and endangered species.
The wild creatures taken by hunters and anglers have lived in their wild environments as they should live for their entire existence up until the time they are killed and hopefully they die quickly with as little pain as possible. There is no comparison with the lives of these wild animals to many domesticated animals we eat. 99.9% of the people out there would never allow their dog or cat to live in the way domesticated animals/livestock we eat live. Ending hunting and fishing to convert everyone over to domesticated animal consumption would lead to large scale environmental changes. Wild species habitat would be converted to agricultural and livestock habitat that would require the removal native tree, shrub and grass species and the use of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and gas that would leave a huge carbon footprint. This would severely affect the integrity of ecosystems. This then would take away the majority of conservation that comes from hunters and anglers. This does not mean that there aren’t people or groups out there that do not hunt or fish that contribute to conservation. Hunters and anglers just make up the majority of conservationist, add to the financial part of conservation and volunteer.
Hunting literature- Two things are emphasized in the writing. One is the experience such as landscape, sense of freedom, the challenges, ruggedness of terrain, storms, the unexpected problems, the slowdown of time, loss of problems, the sense of exhilaration of being in pursuit and being in those places. The second thing is the animals themselves that are being hunted. Their beauty, capacity to evade or power up a mountain or through thick brush, run, swim, to exist in those conditions year-round without shelter. Today the emphasis has shifted to the hunter. We are the hero now and focus of the story that also includes focus on the kill which should not be the case. This is not acceptable to non-hunters and puts hunting in a bad light. The public has a dislike for anything that seems like trophy/sport hunting or focus on the hunter. The public is ok or even likes the focus on the experience of the hunt and the hunted (wildlife).
A mount is a type of memento to remind us of the hunt and honor the animal. This is just like a picture or souvenir to show others as proof of our story and experience without the label of “Trophy”. The chase and not the kill is what propels us. Never use the term Trophy Hunter, Sport Hunter or even Meat Hunter. We all are just Hunters. This is all too hard to explain to the non-hunting public and for them to understand. We must show our passion and empathy for the animals.
All of our professional and elite athletes today with the strength, speed, hand-eye coordination are the type of people back thousands of years ago that were the great hunters. Humans would never have gotten to this level back then if we stayed leaf eaters. They were the ones who were responsible in the past to feed us and even protect us in battle or war.
We are all killing animals if we are releasing the arrow, pulling the trigger, setting the hook or even simply going to the grocery store. Hunters and anglers have decided to take the responsibility of taking a creatures life. We feel the responsible thing is to be as much a part of and witness the natural process that brings this food to us. It is not easy or enjoyable in the sense that non-hunters and anglers might think but we have discovered that taking responsibility for it that we feel better and have done the right thing. There are millions of animals that do not live their lives free, wild or full unlike the wild creature’s hunters and anglers pursue.
12-21-2015, 12:17 AM
#2
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 349
Another good read by shane Mahoney!
Meat Manifesto: The Future of Hunting Depends On Our Advocacy of Wild Protein
Article by Shane Mahoney
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/...src=SOC&dom=tw
Meat Manifesto: The Future of Hunting Depends On Our Advocacy of Wild Protein
Article by Shane Mahoney
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/...src=SOC&dom=tw
12-21-2015, 10:54 AM
#3
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 349
Shane has a couple of good articles about Trophy Hunters and how the term hurts us and should be dropped to HUNTERS only.
What is Trophy Hunting? By Shane Mahoney
http://conservationvisions.com/sites...hy_hunting.pdf
“Can we really define trophy hunting in such distinct terms that it truly stands apart from other forms of hunting, or are all of us, to one extent or another, pursuing the same thing when we hunt (or fish)? Indeed, has our use of the term “trophy” simply served to confuse both hunters and non-hunters alike about this issue?
Anyone who has hunted knows that hunting is more than lethal shopping. It is the pursuit of something that can only be gained in the wild chase, something far less tangible than the muscle and blood of the animal. Even for indigenous peoples, hunting has always meant more than the procurement of food, regardless of how critical this was to their survival.
Regardless of whether food is the primary or secondary motivation, hunting will always be about more than meat.
Hunters are not playing a sport and they only compete with themselves. These so-called trophies are really tokens of remembrance: the mount or horns or tusks are the touchstones by which the hunter returns to the experience of the hunt and through which they can communicate their experience to others. In this regard, they are no more “trophies” than a wedding picture or the bronzed boots of a child.
It is because of this desire for remembrance that so many hunters collect some tangible evidence of their days afield and particularly of hunts that end with the death of an animal. Just like hunters who keep some turkey feathers, or the rack of a spike bull, or the tooth or pelt of an animal they have killed, or for that matter, those who take photographs of their hunts- so many of us are collectors of trophies from our hunts.”
Trophy Hunting- Part 2 By: Shane Mahoney
http://conservationvisions.com/sites..._fall_2013.pdf
“The term TROPHY is only a convenience, its widespread use serves to undermine support for hunting by encouraging misconceptions about what motivates the hunter and by appearing to differentiate various forms of hunting, and therefore inevitably leading to the notion that some forms are more, or less, acceptable. We see clear evidence for this in every poll taken: trophy hunting is the least supported, behind so-called sport/recreational and meat hunting. Those opposed to hunting know this very well and exploit it. Those who do not understand hunting are easy converts to this position because such hunting is viewed as frivolous, wasteful and self-aggrandizing.
So let’s not suggest the terminology does not matter. It does, and we should drop it from our vocabulary. Why give the opponents of hunting an easy target that is merely a term of convenience? By focusing on one aspect of the hunting experience- taking of a memento or remembrance of the hunt- we fail to recognize that all hunters have always celebrated their success and wished to remember the experience.
Hunting has many gradations and varieties and, in the end, is a highly personal experience. What today must always separate the true from the false in hunting is fair chase and legality- not whether the tusks of a fallen elephant are taken home, or whether we hunt in a foreign country, pay a lot to do so, hunt relatively rare or unique beasts, or personally consume the meat.
There is not one of the true among us who does not hunt for the experience, and not one among these who does not wish to remember it. In this, there is no distinction among hunters. We should not dare to create one.”
Trophy Hunting????
http://conservationvisions.com/sites...hy_hunting.pdf
“Can we really define trophy hunting in such distinct terms that it truly stands apart from other forms of hunting, or are all of us, to one extent or another, pursuing the same thing when we hunt (or fish)? Indeed, has our use of the term “trophy” simply served to confuse both hunters and non-hunters alike about this issue?
Anyone who has hunted knows that hunting is more than lethal shopping. It is the pursuit of something that can only be gained in the wild chase, something far less tangible than the muscle and blood of the animal. Even for indigenous peoples, hunting has always meant more than the procurement of food, regardless of how critical this was to their survival.
Regardless of whether food is the primary or secondary motivation, hunting will always be about more than meat.
Hunters are not playing a sport and they only compete with themselves. These so-called trophies are really tokens of remembrance: the mount or horns or tusks are the touchstones by which the hunter returns to the experience of the hunt and through which they can communicate their experience to others. In this regard, they are no more “trophies” than a wedding picture or the bronzed boots of a child.
It is because of this desire for remembrance that so many hunters collect some tangible evidence of their days afield and particularly of hunts that end with the death of an animal. Just like hunters who keep some turkey feathers, or the rack of a spike bull, or the tooth or pelt of an animal they have killed, or for that matter, those who take photographs of their hunts- so many of us are collectors of trophies from our hunts.”
Trophy Hunting- Part 2 By: Shane Mahoney
http://conservationvisions.com/sites..._fall_2013.pdf
“The term TROPHY is only a convenience, its widespread use serves to undermine support for hunting by encouraging misconceptions about what motivates the hunter and by appearing to differentiate various forms of hunting, and therefore inevitably leading to the notion that some forms are more, or less, acceptable. We see clear evidence for this in every poll taken: trophy hunting is the least supported, behind so-called sport/recreational and meat hunting. Those opposed to hunting know this very well and exploit it. Those who do not understand hunting are easy converts to this position because such hunting is viewed as frivolous, wasteful and self-aggrandizing.
So let’s not suggest the terminology does not matter. It does, and we should drop it from our vocabulary. Why give the opponents of hunting an easy target that is merely a term of convenience? By focusing on one aspect of the hunting experience- taking of a memento or remembrance of the hunt- we fail to recognize that all hunters have always celebrated their success and wished to remember the experience.
Hunting has many gradations and varieties and, in the end, is a highly personal experience. What today must always separate the true from the false in hunting is fair chase and legality- not whether the tusks of a fallen elephant are taken home, or whether we hunt in a foreign country, pay a lot to do so, hunt relatively rare or unique beasts, or personally consume the meat.
There is not one of the true among us who does not hunt for the experience, and not one among these who does not wish to remember it. In this, there is no distinction among hunters. We should not dare to create one.”
