![[Deleted]](https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/iconimages/whitetail-deer-hunting/deleted_ltr.gif)
[Deleted]
10-13-2002, 06:29 PM
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
So as not to type a textbook, I'll give you my short answer:
Pro-hunting: The first reason is because hunting is an exciting past-time that allows one to get out and enjoy the great open spaces and be close to nature and participate directly in the predator-prey relationship. The second, and no less important reason is that responsible hunting is a vital part of proper game management and conservation effort. Hunting controls the game population in the most natural way possible while allowing man and nature to co-exist. By keeping the deer herd, for example, large but well below the maximum that the land can naturally sustain ensures that there are sufficient deer to maintain genetic diversity, that the land provides sufficient food resources to allow deer to flourish. All while trying to keep the deer herd out of suburbs and in the country where they belong, keep them from destroying farm crops and off the grille of everyones car. Oh, and deer (and other game) taste good.
Anti-hunting: For the most part the anti-hunting animal rights groups tend to base most of their objection on the emotional and philosophical premise that animals have the same right to live that humans do. They also project human qualities onto animals where they don't exist. When pain is inflicted on a human, we not only feel the physical pain, but also the emotional pain because someone has wronged us. The animal rights groups seem to believe that animals are capable of both feeling and SUFFERING. They also claim that any human interaction with wild animals is bad for the environment, and that humans have no business interacting with, much less trying to manage, the environment and the animals within it. They feel that the animals would be better off left to try to strike a balance with nature without humans in the picture. This position is not supported by any evidence (at least not any derived to credible sources). The fact is, since humans exist within nature, we MUST be part of it. As long as we're around we will influence nature and wild animals, no matter how hard we try not to. And by not taking an active roll in conservation and game management, wild animals (like deer) would continue to do what they instinctively do until their overpopulation overwhelms the natural food supply and drives them into contact with man, whether we like it or not. Once the ecosystem is overwhelmed, the result will be that the excess population will starve and die (couldn't be any worse than a bullet through the heart, eh?), and because of overcrouding, diseases like Chronic Wasting Disease will spread like wildfire and possibly kill millions of animals and, in the case of zoonotic diseases such as Bovine Tuberculosis, spread disease to humans (much like the bubonic plague, only worse).
Oh, and one more reason hunting, specifically, is good for the environment. Hunters spend billions of dollars annually on guns, ammunition, bows, licenses, and other hunting gear. Licensing fees go directly to the state DNR to support conservation, wildlife and game management efforts. In most states there is also a surcharge (tax) for the above items that also goes toward conservation efforts. So every hunter contributes indirectly a great deal to conservation efforts when we spend money to do the environment a favor anyway. Most hunters are also conservationists and environmentalists, both in principle and practice, since our pass-time depends on us NOT destroying the environment and wildlife. Anti-hunting and/or animal rights groups spend millions of dollars toward advertising their misguided beliefs, but only a token amount, if any at all, is spend toward conservation efforts. Most of the anti-hunting animal rights people I've met are urban dwellers by choice and by nature, who actually spend very little time in the woods or have any real knowledge of how ecosystems function and how conservation works. They are just gripped by the feel-good emotional cause of not "hurting" the animals. Those who actually know a thing or two about nature, when pressed, acknowledge that game management is necessary and/or revert back to a strictly emotional argument that hunting is violent and causes pain and "suffering", and violence, pain and suffering is bad.
Hope this answers your question,
Mike
Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
Muzzleloading- Once you go black, you'll never go back!!
Edited by - driftrider on 10/16/2002 22:20:10
Pro-hunting: The first reason is because hunting is an exciting past-time that allows one to get out and enjoy the great open spaces and be close to nature and participate directly in the predator-prey relationship. The second, and no less important reason is that responsible hunting is a vital part of proper game management and conservation effort. Hunting controls the game population in the most natural way possible while allowing man and nature to co-exist. By keeping the deer herd, for example, large but well below the maximum that the land can naturally sustain ensures that there are sufficient deer to maintain genetic diversity, that the land provides sufficient food resources to allow deer to flourish. All while trying to keep the deer herd out of suburbs and in the country where they belong, keep them from destroying farm crops and off the grille of everyones car. Oh, and deer (and other game) taste good.
Anti-hunting: For the most part the anti-hunting animal rights groups tend to base most of their objection on the emotional and philosophical premise that animals have the same right to live that humans do. They also project human qualities onto animals where they don't exist. When pain is inflicted on a human, we not only feel the physical pain, but also the emotional pain because someone has wronged us. The animal rights groups seem to believe that animals are capable of both feeling and SUFFERING. They also claim that any human interaction with wild animals is bad for the environment, and that humans have no business interacting with, much less trying to manage, the environment and the animals within it. They feel that the animals would be better off left to try to strike a balance with nature without humans in the picture. This position is not supported by any evidence (at least not any derived to credible sources). The fact is, since humans exist within nature, we MUST be part of it. As long as we're around we will influence nature and wild animals, no matter how hard we try not to. And by not taking an active roll in conservation and game management, wild animals (like deer) would continue to do what they instinctively do until their overpopulation overwhelms the natural food supply and drives them into contact with man, whether we like it or not. Once the ecosystem is overwhelmed, the result will be that the excess population will starve and die (couldn't be any worse than a bullet through the heart, eh?), and because of overcrouding, diseases like Chronic Wasting Disease will spread like wildfire and possibly kill millions of animals and, in the case of zoonotic diseases such as Bovine Tuberculosis, spread disease to humans (much like the bubonic plague, only worse).
Oh, and one more reason hunting, specifically, is good for the environment. Hunters spend billions of dollars annually on guns, ammunition, bows, licenses, and other hunting gear. Licensing fees go directly to the state DNR to support conservation, wildlife and game management efforts. In most states there is also a surcharge (tax) for the above items that also goes toward conservation efforts. So every hunter contributes indirectly a great deal to conservation efforts when we spend money to do the environment a favor anyway. Most hunters are also conservationists and environmentalists, both in principle and practice, since our pass-time depends on us NOT destroying the environment and wildlife. Anti-hunting and/or animal rights groups spend millions of dollars toward advertising their misguided beliefs, but only a token amount, if any at all, is spend toward conservation efforts. Most of the anti-hunting animal rights people I've met are urban dwellers by choice and by nature, who actually spend very little time in the woods or have any real knowledge of how ecosystems function and how conservation works. They are just gripped by the feel-good emotional cause of not "hurting" the animals. Those who actually know a thing or two about nature, when pressed, acknowledge that game management is necessary and/or revert back to a strictly emotional argument that hunting is violent and causes pain and "suffering", and violence, pain and suffering is bad.
Hope this answers your question,
Mike
Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
Muzzleloading- Once you go black, you'll never go back!!
Edited by - driftrider on 10/16/2002 22:20:10
10-13-2002, 07:21 PM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,059
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
I believe that the vast majority would be for hunting if they had to depend on it for survival. Unfortunately in our sanitized world people are upset at the thought of creatures dieing. These same people use the byproducts of animals but have others do the killing and completely separate themselves the actual act. Hunting to the vast majority is no longer looked at as a necessary function. This is mainly due to the urban nature of society. Fishermen have been lucky to this point.
Dan O.
Edited by - dan o. on 10/13/2002 20:23:47
Dan O.
Edited by - dan o. on 10/13/2002 20:23:47
10-14-2002, 09:16 AM
#4
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 1,168
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
drift rider, i would encourage you to copy that statement to a file on your computer, so then when these questions come along we have an answer ready made.
propmahn
you can never have too many guns
propmahn
you can never have too many guns
10-16-2002, 09:49 PM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
Saved.
I think it's very important that all of us hunters not only know why hunting is so vital to the environment, but to also be able to articulate our reasons when we are challenged by those who oppose us.
That's why I like forums like this one, because it allows us to share our thoughts with each other, and helps us hone our position through discussion and debate.
It was only a month or so ago that I was challenged by a self-proclaimed environmentalist. This person overheard a conversation I was having with another person where I mentioned that I'd be gone for a week for deer season. She chimed in that while she likes eating meat (hypocrite), she felt that hunting was wrong and couldn't understand why someone would want to kill "harmless" creatures anyway. She basically accused me, and all hunters by generalization, of being of substandard moral character because I'd inflict pain on wild animals, with the inference that all hunters were reckless mass murderers of animals that held no regard for the environment.
Because I've spent a lot of time thinking about these positions, and because I'd prepared myself for just such an encounter, by the time our conversation/debate ended a half hour later I had her positions backed so far into a corner that she had little choice but to agree with most of what I said. But, being the tenacious creatures that most irrational liberal, she just wouldn't let go of the basic emotional argument she had based her position on. It's like a house build on sand, one can wipe out the house, but never get rid of all the sand.
Mike
Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
Muzzleloading- Once you go black, you'll never go back!!
I think it's very important that all of us hunters not only know why hunting is so vital to the environment, but to also be able to articulate our reasons when we are challenged by those who oppose us.
That's why I like forums like this one, because it allows us to share our thoughts with each other, and helps us hone our position through discussion and debate.
It was only a month or so ago that I was challenged by a self-proclaimed environmentalist. This person overheard a conversation I was having with another person where I mentioned that I'd be gone for a week for deer season. She chimed in that while she likes eating meat (hypocrite), she felt that hunting was wrong and couldn't understand why someone would want to kill "harmless" creatures anyway. She basically accused me, and all hunters by generalization, of being of substandard moral character because I'd inflict pain on wild animals, with the inference that all hunters were reckless mass murderers of animals that held no regard for the environment.
Because I've spent a lot of time thinking about these positions, and because I'd prepared myself for just such an encounter, by the time our conversation/debate ended a half hour later I had her positions backed so far into a corner that she had little choice but to agree with most of what I said. But, being the tenacious creatures that most irrational liberal, she just wouldn't let go of the basic emotional argument she had based her position on. It's like a house build on sand, one can wipe out the house, but never get rid of all the sand.
Mike
Gun control means putting the second bullet through the same hole as the first- Ted Nugent
NRA Member
Muzzleloading- Once you go black, you'll never go back!!
10-16-2002, 11:53 PM
#7
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hollidaysburg PA USA
Posts: 10
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
People that don't like hunting (and Hunters) have never been brought up in a family where it is traditional. They can't get it through their head that Man has always been a Hunter since prehistoric times (long before he was an agriculturalist). Also, they see the Walt Disney animations where the animals are "humanized." Many of them have little knowledge of biology, the food chain, and the way Nature works in general. They just don't get it,...and I doubt they ever will.
10-17-2002, 07:36 PM
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Jax beach Fl. usa
Posts: 4,031
RE: Why are people for and against hunting?
Good post Mike!
Another reason some people are against hunting is the fact that some hunters take marginal shots that don't result in a quick kill. I know of someone who shot a 9 point recently. He shot through a bush just for the chance he could bag the biggest buck he's ever had. He couldn't find the deer until the next day, after it had been chewed to the bones by coyotes. It reminded me of the Zaft controversy.
Unfortunately this is the only view of hunting some people see, which is why we need to watch ourselves. If we don't we could have more antis out there.
FOOLPROOF?
Never underestimate the power of a fool!
What if the "Hokey Pokey" really is what it's all about?
Another reason some people are against hunting is the fact that some hunters take marginal shots that don't result in a quick kill. I know of someone who shot a 9 point recently. He shot through a bush just for the chance he could bag the biggest buck he's ever had. He couldn't find the deer until the next day, after it had been chewed to the bones by coyotes. It reminded me of the Zaft controversy.
Unfortunately this is the only view of hunting some people see, which is why we need to watch ourselves. If we don't we could have more antis out there.
FOOLPROOF?
Never underestimate the power of a fool!
What if the "Hokey Pokey" really is what it's all about?