aeroslinger

thesource, I've thought this same thing many times. While I am leery of the anti-hunting establishment and would do all in my power to defeat them as needed, I don't feel they will ever stop hunting. Too many people and too much money involved. They are more of a pest and any significant inroads they may make I'm convinced won't last long. I know many people who are not hunters but understand hunting is an acceptable past time as well as a conservation tool and also view the majority of the anti-hunting establishment as a radical fringe group. If we deter debate and differing opinions among ourselves they have already impacted and effected us. They should understand that while we may not agree on every issue, as a whole we are united and will fight tooth and nail as we are required. Of course, this is MY OPINION, which I'm entitled to.

apmaurosr

thesource and aeroslinger

I hope that you're right. Unfortunatly, in New Jersey where I live, the antis have done a good job of stifling hunting. By and large you can't even hunt with a rifle in NJ. The antis have been so effective in their campaigning that they stopped a bear hunt - that was overwhelming endorsed and authorized by the Fish and Game council - by taking it to the courts and the courts ruled that the commissioner of Department of Environmental Protection has the final authority - EVEN OVER FISH AND GAME. The DEP commissiner decision to override Fish and gme WAS NOT BASED ON ANY SCIENTIFIC WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT FINDINGS, IT WAS FOR PURELY POLITICAL REASONS.

Now we in NJ are faced with our politicians considering legislation to put 3 ANTI-HUNTERS on the Fish and Game council in exchange for some hunters on the coouncil.

So as you can see I am very concerned about hunters not becoming active and joining likeminded hunting organizations. I am very concerned that hunters might not educate themselves so that they may educate others about the importance of wildlife management and how large a part hunterts have played in our nation's conservation movement. If hunters don't educate the general public then it is evident that the antis will. They have done a great job of controlling the slant that the media reports on hunters and hunting- and it's the media (TV, newspapers, radios) that provides most EVERYONE in our country with news as well as selecting the "issues" that are covered and how the information is presented.

The more comfortable we are with the idea that the future of hunting is safe the more we should be concerned that it is in fact the opposite. If NJ it can be faced with the prospect of the antis having a large say in the future of hunting it can happen anywhere.

Ant

tocs

I believe as apmaurosr has stated with the experience or results that he has seen in New Jersey.I live in New York State 2 hours north of New york city.My home town is Woodstock NY,I am the third generation of my family that has lived here.I have hunted and fished my entire life,Myself and the friends that I have that hunt are way in the minority locally.60% of the homes that are owned in my community are owned by second homeowners from New York city.You probably don't have to think to hard to know what most of their views are about hunting.
I used to keep my hunting activity close to the vest because I didn't want to offend anyone.(I own a business locally)I didn't want the reason that someone didn't do business with me to be because of my hunting activity.In my advancing age I have become bolder about letting people know about my hunting activity(if it seemed appropriate to do so)You can't believe the kind of comments I have gotten,the most common one goes something like this"your a hunter,you don't seem like the type""your to nice a person to be a hunter" and the like.
My point with my long winded post is that I think our perception of how effective the Anti's are or could be is based on the attitudes within the area's where each of us live.
I have had the good fortune to hunt in a small town in Idaho the last eight years,I could walk town the center of that little town any time of day with a rifle slung on my shoulder and I wouldn't draw a bit of negative attention,it's part of their culture.If I did that through my home town of Woodstock every police agency in the area would be on their way to arrest the madman.Same person,no ill intent, way different culture.

Allseasonhunter7

i say we start something weither gun bow rifle x bow handgun knife.... maybe hunters stand united?
to much talk about xbows and saying if you shoot a recurve you can look down on compounds. if one falls we all do

ike1371

excellent article!

aeroslinger

Good point and one I was thinking, also. Right now, around here we at least hold our own and most likely outnumber them significantly. Things can change, though. I try to educate anyone I encounter who doesn't know too much of the truth, only snippets of news or hearsay. Seems like alot of the ammunition the anti hunters use are isolated events that the vast majority of hunters also would condemn. I've also seen some film of animal abuse that appeared to be from an Eastern European country that if you weren't paying attention could have been assumed to be in the States.

apmaurosr

aeroslinger

That's what we want to hear. Thanks.

Please consider joining the U.S. Sportsmens Alliance too if you have an extra $25.00 laying around.

Ant

00Hunter

This is a great article. I think this would be great for everyone visiting HuntingNet to read. Hunters need to have each others back, always. The more animals to hunt and hunters to hunt them, the better!!!

apmaurosr

Good point 00hunter.

Ant

Bob H in NH

I don't buy the entire unity or fall apart theory.

There are lots of "things" in hunting that are worth arguing over, there are several reasons to argue/debate/whatever among hunters;

- what you define as hunting I may not. Examples of this are canned hunts, some consider them hunting while other do not. Should they just be welcomed with open arms just because its a person with a weapon shooting an animal?

- tactics, seasons, limits, weapons etc. All worthy of debate. One of the best things about debate among other hunters is that it is practice for when the debate really counts. If you are not experienced in the arguments and explaining your view and the facts, you will be completely destroyed by an anti who is a good debater.

there are topics in hunting that are controversial among hunters, I see no reason to accept things I don't agree with just for the sake of unity. If some hunters feel its bad for hunting, they should not blindly accept it just to spite the antis.

--Bob