Trad Gang
Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: FerretWYO on November 26, 2013, 12:11:00 AM
-
If you think only hunters visit this site you are most definatlly wrong. Remember we are not alone here and need to maintain the respectful posture we are known for.
Please everyone post with that in mind.
-
This should always be kept in mind, not just here.
I'm actually less worried about "anti's" and more concerned about the inexperienced, curious, uninitiated, or undecided -a much larger group.
There is currently an increasing trend of people interested in local, sustainable, and healthy food, and hunting is getting looked at more and more by people, often urban, who never would have considered it before. This growing group has come directly from such popular ideas as the Paleo diet concept and best-selling books such as Michael Pollan's "Omnivores Dilemma" and Tovar Cerulli's "The Mindful Carnivore".
It sure does help to have more people on our side, a little better informed or, at very least, appreciative of the idea that some people are still willing and able to collect their own meat.
It's pretty likely that there's a new breed of lurker here now. From what I know of this new influx of potential supporters is that some semblance of respect for nature and wildlife is expected.
-
There are non hunters that are members . They don't hunt but just enjoy shooting traditional bows .
-
I am a not -hunter. That is because I live in The Netherlands, where bow hunting is forbidden by law, as it is in most west-European countries. But I have nothing against hunting and I love shooting traditional.
So I comfort myself with shooting 3d only and training as much as I can. We also see lots of people who are firmly against hunting.
-
Originally posted by PaulRoberts:
This should always be kept in mind, not just here.
I'm actually less worried about "anti's" and more concerned about the inexperienced, curious, uninitiated, or undecided -a much larger group.
There is currently an increasing trend of people interested in local, sustainable, and healthy food, and hunting is getting looked at more and more by people, often urban, who never would have considered it before. This growing group has come directly from such popular ideas as the Paleo diet concept and best-selling books such as Michael Pollan's "Omnivores Dilemma" and Tovar Cerulli's "The Mindful Carnivore".
It sure does help to have more people on our side, a little better informed or, at very least, appreciative of the idea that some people are still willing and able to collect their own meat.
It's pretty likely that there's a new breed of lurker here now. From what I know of this new influx of potential supporters is that some semblance of respect for nature and wildlife is expected.
Very keen observation and I don't think it can be said any better.
-
True true.
Thanks to the Admins that monitor and keep things clean here.
-
I don't post vulgar things anywhere, but it is a good reminder. How we act matters. Not so much to "Anti's".....they are usually beyond reason. But the "Neutrals" are the ones that we should care about. They won't often jump in with both feet and become hunters, but they need to understand we are honorable folks pursuing something decent.
I despise the Bubba type hunter, we all look bad because of a few.
-
We all do a fine job with the admin's help of keeping it clean and honorable.
This is the last site I would think needs to worry.
Try browsing the wheelie sites like AT or huntingnet and see what kinda of stuff you find, plenty of "YEEHAW I GOT ONE! with the deer's tongue hanging out strapped to the ATV with big grins and man hugs" and "thank the lord god for my 6,000 FPS Matt$%$ XLRJQ4000 Decimator" or some other such nonsense.
This place is a refuge for the ethical hunter IMHO. It just kinda goes with the territory.
Some great observations on this post. Thanks for the heads up.
-
It's hard to beat good taste and common sense.....we all need to be aware of the agenda of the anti hunter.
-
I immediately thought of my friend Butch Speer's tag line....."Nothing is ever lost by courtesy. It is the cheapest of pleasures, costs nothing, and conveys much.
- Erastus Wiman"
The perceptions of what we actually stand for and believe is largely under our control by the words and pictures we use...choose wisely!!!!
God bless,Mudd
PS: There are those whom we will never have a positive impact on, it's not that group that concerns me but those that haven't made up their minds about hunting but vote on our rights to do so.
-
Originally posted by PaulRoberts:
This should always be kept in mind, not just here.
I'm actually less worried about "anti's" and more concerned about the inexperienced, curious, uninitiated, or undecided -a much larger group.
There is currently an increasing trend of people interested in local, sustainable, and healthy food, and hunting is getting looked at more and more by people, often urban, who never would have considered it before. This growing group has come directly from such popular ideas as the Paleo diet concept and best-selling books such as Michael Pollan's "Omnivores Dilemma" and Tovar Cerulli's "The Mindful Carnivore".
It sure does help to have more people on our side, a little better informed or, at very least, appreciative of the idea that some people are still willing and able to collect their own meat.
It's pretty likely that there's a new breed of lurker here now. From what I know of this new influx of potential supporters is that some semblance of respect for nature and wildlife is expected.
Very good thoughts here.
-
I get on here solely for the ability to connect with similar minded archers/bowhunters. I don't doubt that anti-hunting advocates may visit the site to find remarks that would support their claims of wrong doing by outdoorsmen. My response is crude but simple. To the brother bowhunters I extend the hand of friendship, but the others can get a running start and kiss my a$$! No, I am not politically correct.
-
Originally posted by PaulRoberts:
This should always be kept in mind, not just here.
I'm actually less worried about "anti's" and more concerned about the inexperienced, curious, uninitiated, or undecided -a much larger group.
There is currently an increasing trend of people interested in local, sustainable, and healthy food, and hunting is getting looked at more and more by people, often urban, who never would have considered it before. This growing group has come directly from such popular ideas as the Paleo diet concept and best-selling books such as Michael Pollan's "Omnivores Dilemma" and Tovar Cerulli's "The Mindful Carnivore".
It sure does help to have more people on our side, a little better informed or, at very least, appreciative of the idea that some people are still willing and able to collect their own meat.
It's pretty likely that there's a new breed of lurker here now. From what I know of this new influx of potential supporters is that some semblance of respect for nature and wildlife is expected.
You've nailed it, here. I live in a town that is growing a tourism economy around the trends you mentioned. The average person is reasonable and realizes the PETA types are whackos. However, the average person is likely to get fed the modern version of a bowhunter by flipping channels on the TV. They'll see rock music and fist pumping after the same kill shot sequence over and over and over. The average person is the majority and the majority decides the future of our past time. Scary thoughts for me.
Quick story...
I was at a party hosted by some of the local food celebrities and had just gotten back from my WY elk hunt. I brought some elk steaks and everybody was whooping it up about my loin cloths and such. Later that evening, I couldn't count the number of folks that had come up to me and commented that they sure wish everybody hunted like I did. One of the most extreme gals in this "cult" even said to me... "my son doesn't know anything about hunting, but if he ever wants to try it, I want you to take him." I consider it one of the biggest compliments I've ever gotten.
My sense is that the average Tradganger shows such a reverence for our natural world and past time that I don't think we have much to worry about when it comes to the fair judgement from the majority that matters most.
My 2c
-
Good thread here. Many have had excellent comments PaulRoberts in particular. I was a non-hunter at one time but always loved the outdoors. This site has done much to confirm my decision to start hunting. Especially bowhunting with a longbow.
-
Originally posted by Sam McMichael:
I get on here solely for the ability to connect with similar minded archers/bowhunters. I don't doubt that anti-hunting advocates may visit the site to find remarks that would support their claims of wrong doing by outdoorsmen. My response is crude but simple. To the brother bowhunters I extend the hand of friendship, but the others can get a running start and kiss my a$$! No, I am not politically correct.
Ditto
-
Thanks Randy for the reminder. What drew me to this site yrs ago was the respect for nature and missing "chest thumping" that is so prevalent on other sites and in our outdoor industries, as a whole. This whole love of traditional archery, for me, is about a connection with the past and nature, as God intended it to be. Others, wether traditional bowhunters or not, are looking for the same sort of things.
-
If people are informed that PETA's goal is to prevent all animal ownership, pets and livestock. Then PETA will loose its strength. I live in a state where we can't hunt bears over bait, this was not a DNR or game department decision it was passed into law by our legislature and we can do nothing about it. The antis need exposed for who they truly are. The following is from PETA's website.
We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals’ best interests if the institution of “pet keeping”—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as “pets”—never existed.
This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering
-
If anyone thinks only hunters come here, they got their head in the sand!
Bisch
-
Originally posted by ron w:
It's hard to beat good taste and common sense.....we all need to be aware of the agenda of the anti hunter.
Pure and simple, I agree whole heartedly.
-
Good reminder, we all havta' share the same planet and it is getting more populated and interconnected every day. No matter what side of the fence you may be on everyone needs to adapt and respect a different view.
-
I am a shooter not so much a hunter anymore but i think we need to be careful about how we discuss the hunt just to be on the safe side.
-
We should probably not care at all about the "others" that visit on the sly and just be nice and respectful to each other all the time as it is.
I think folks very quickly get the flavor of this group, what drives it and what irritates it. I am not so different in wants and needs from those other groups. I come here to feel at home with folks like me.
We all should slow down a bit and think before we hit send. (and maybe proof read a bit more :dunno: )
ChuckC
-
I've met a lot of hunters over the years and most are respectful people, as we all know, or at least they become so over time. (Kids, lacking guidance, can do a lot of senseless things.) However, I often cringe at what is available for the general public to see on the internet, especially on Youtube, and sometimes on national television.
My wife, who doesn’t hunt (but appreciates it), chooses not to watch a video kill shot. She leaves the room. Although I can look at such images forensically, I too find them troubling somehow. I’m far from squeamish, but there’s something inappropriate there in a nationally televised kill shot. The images that come out of the mix of technology and hunting have been troubling me for quite some time, and simply bubbled over as Youtube developed, where anyone can post an image for public consumption.
So, what’s wrong with such images? Or, what’s missing? I’ll offer my (current) thoughts…
There is something ... honorable ... about harvesting game yourself, taking it home, and sharing it with friends and family. Very much included in that is the hunting story that goes along with it. Through the story your audience relives the experience to some degree with you, your excitement, awe, respect, and gratitude, as well as your pride, glimpsed through your expressions, your gestures, and your immediate responses to your audience.
At the same time there is something … gratuitous … about publicly sharing a kill on HD video. For many receivers of those images, most often viewed by people who don’t know the hunter or haven’t any connection to the land that animal came from, it just becomes the horror of watching wildlife being killed. It’s not that a hunt video cannot be done well, but leaping ahead to the kill shots masks the reality of the hunt: the time, the effort, the thought processes, the emotions, and with these, the respect.
Typed words, images, video especially, can grossly misrepresent, or underreport, the respect and admiration for nature hunters gain in their efforts at living a life in closer connection to it. I agree with Randy that we should be aware of the potential breadth of our audience as we share our hunts. It can certainly be done well, and it has little to do with the spell-checker or what can be dumped onto Youtube with similar ease.
-
If I carry on daily in a Christ like manner I never need to worry about such things.
-
Some of the things we do on bowhunting sites we take for granted and get enjoyment from may be misconstrued to other who don't bowhunt or haven's started bowhunting yet.
For instance how many posts in the fall start off with a picture of a bloody arrow in the dirt followed by shouts of MORE, MORE from the members? Then the blood trail in the leaves followed by more shouts of OH BOY< THIS IS GOING TO BE GOOD! Finally the dead game and the hero shot.
I'm not against any of this and enjoy it as much as the next guy. The ones I don't like are threads requesting entry and exit hole pictures, blood trail threads and arrows sticking in deer where they fell, usually in a contorted pose. I don't know why but these types of pictures make me squirm a little. Perhaps it's the naked raw image of death I fear some woman or kid will view and that will be their lasting image of bowhunting.
Of course this is nothing compared to watching a bullfight on UTube. That will curl your hair.
-
Hmmm. When I first read FerretWYO's starting post I took it as referring to those who come here mostly to discuss traditional hunting gear and techniques (for taking game with a bow under hunting conditions), vs. those who come mostly to discuss archery target shooting gear and techniques (i.e., bare bow target shooting for accuracy). There's often some 'interesting' exchanges between these groups, sometimes not very constructive and (may I say) not always fairly refereed. So, the twist that the thread took (hunting vs. anti-hunting) was a surprise. Probably it shouldn't have been, since I think both issues have merit as topics of concern.
I grew up being taught that a state of disagreement does not equate to a state of disrespect. If we agreed all the time then progress in 'good ways' would be stagnant and life quite boring. One approach is the seed for irrational bias and behavior, with no good coming of it. The other (through controlled discussion) is the basis for reaching a better understanding of why we collectively and individually believe and do what we do.
I hope that as occupiers, users and administrators we recognize the difference between one term and the other before making snap decisions, rules, or comments that do more harm than good. The world would be a much better place if we refused to tolerate disrespect in any form but still respected the right to disagree.
-
Militant anti-hunters aren't really the biggest problem. While well organized and now well funded, the militants are small in number and have their minds and agenda made up. Don't get me wrong, the militants are a big problem, but the bigger concern is the real target of the militants, that being the casual non-hunting public that still supports hunting.
Of real concern is how we act with the very large pool of otherwise indifferent non-hunters, but who still support hunting, but only if done with the highest ethical standards.
With the speed of internet travel, the actions of one idiot hunter or one poacher can undo the ethical actions of 1000's of legit sportsmen.
Hunting still has support of the majority, but that support is soft and can easily be swayed with a pretty simple emotional sales pitch. The Michigan dove season vote and now the wolf hunt are evidence of that. I suspect traditional archery has far more respect from the casual non-hunter who supports hunting, than say their support for general firearms hunting.
It's for these reasons that we need to support our DNR's, not fight them. If DNR's make decisions, they are still based on the management of the resource and hunters usually have imput. If we allow game management to be decided at the ballot box by the general non-hunting public, we'll lose almost every time.
-
Here is a very good blog entry that everyone here should read and pass along...
Hunters In The Cross-Hairs Anti-Hunting Groups Are Influenced and Well Funded
By David Hart
On a cool day in September 1991, a young man dressed in a blaze-orange vest led a throng of reporters through the woods of a public hunting area on the outskirts of Washington, D.C. A broadhead, encased in a plastic tube, dangled from a chain around his neck. It was a prop that played perfectly into the hands of the media, which hung on Wayne Pacelle’s every word. The brash young leader of the Fund for Animals, Pacelle looked more like a teen-ager on his way to a skateboard park than an activist for a radical cause. However, he was quickly becoming one of the most visible and articulate members of the anti-hunting movement. Pacelle showed up on nightly newscasts and was a regular voice in newspapers and magazines.
His purpose that day was not to disrupt the opening day bow-hunt — which he did — but to earn more media attention for his anti-hunting cause. He succeeded and eventually became the de facto leader of the animal-rights movement, a general overseeing an army of dedicated troops. He now serves as the chief executive officer of the Humane Society of the United States, acting and appearing more like a corporate officer than a rogue activist.
A Shift in Strategy
The days of vocal protests as a media stunt have virtually ended. Although anti-hunters still harass hunters or stage demonstrations at public hunting areas, mostly in urban or suburban areas, they don’t garner much media attention, at least not on a national level. They don’t have to.
“They pretty much accomplished what they wanted to do when they first started holding these staged demonstrations,” said Doug Jeanneret, vice president of marketing for the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance. “They let their presence and their mission be known through media exposure. Now, they push their agenda through other means.”
Instead of fighting their battles in the courts of public opinion, anti-hunters are now fighting in real courtrooms, challenging localities on the legalities of a planned hunt, and state and federal governments. Almost all of the largest anti-hunting organizations have a staff of lawyers at the ready. They have filed lawsuits to stop everything from urban deer hunts at the local level to ending all hunting on the federal National Wildlife Refuge system. In many instances, they lose, despite outspending pro-hunting groups such as the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance. However, they often win, even if they never set foot in a courtroom.
Jeanneret said localities that once held or considered holding public hunts to control burgeoning deer numbers have resorted to hired guns to kill deer instead.
“They just don’t want to deal with the hassles of protestors or the threat of a lawsuit from animal-rights groups, so they just bring in sharpshooters who come in at night and shoot them in spotlights,” he said.
One of the most effective measures animal rights groups have used to stop some hunting activities has been through ballot initiatives. Instead of leaving wildlife management to professional biologists, they attempt to give the public the right to determine wildlife policy. In many states, almost any issue can be put up for a public vote, provided supporters of the measure gather a certain amount of signatures. Volunteers canvass neighborhoods, college campuses or anywhere they think support might be highest. For anti-hunters, the ripe areas are big cities and other places where hunting is not part of the culture, and a misunderstood and often-maligned pastime. Urban residents simply don’t know much about wildlife and sound management principles.
“A lot of people think bears are endangered," Jeanneret said. "They don’t see bears all over the place like they see deer, so they assume that bears are on the way to extinction."
Although the overwhelming majority of the country supports hunting, anti-hunters twist facts to garner support. Mostly, however, they appeal to emotion. That’s why mountain lion hunting was outlawed in California in 1990 with the passage of Proposition 117. Two years later, voters passed a proposal banning spring bear hunting in Colorado, and Oregon voters outlawed bear hunting with bait and hounds and chasing cougars with hounds. In Fall 2006, Michigan hunters were denied the opportunity to hunt doves by a large margin.
Equally effective, anti-hunters have recently tried several times to force state and federal wildlife agencies to undertake lengthy and costly environmental impact studies that examine the effects of basic management decisions. For example, when Michigan resource managers proposed a timber-management program on state-owned forests, the Sierra Club filed a suit that would have forced the Department of Natural Resources to implement an EIS. The USSA helped win that fight.
Are Deer Hunters Safe?
Jeanneret says anti-hunters know which groups of hunters are most vulnerable, which is one reason deer hunting, on a wide-scale basis, is at less risk than, say, black bear hunting. Don’t be fooled, however. As he pointed out, deer hunts have been cancelled or handed over to paid guns as a direct result of animal-rights activists. Any lost opportunity doesn’t bode well for deer hunters.
“Their efforts are really aimed at gradually eroding our ability to hunt," Jeanneret said. "Deer are on the hit list; they’re just further down the page. We see legislation to increase no-hunting buffer zones around dwellings, restrictions on the use of firearms in urban and suburban areas, restrictions on the age at which hunters can start as efforts to ban all deer hunting. They aren’t so intensively working on these issues, but you can be sure they are part of those efforts. They work to take away our freedoms a little at a time, and that loss of freedom simply makes it more difficult for hunters. They want us to just give up by imposing as many barriers as they can.”
Although most efforts have failed so far, those organizations are paying for studies to develop a birth-control vaccine that would control deer numbers through nonlethal means. Such efforts have proven expensive, tedious and ineffective, but studies are still underway in public parks in Ohio and New Jersey. Is it a threat to hunting as we know it? Perhaps not — at least not yet — but anti-hunters are a dedicated lot.
Know Thine Enemy
What was once considered a fringe element of the lunatic left has become a major player in politics and science. According to Jeanneret, HSUS surpassed Exxon/Mobil in campaign contributions during the 2006 elections.
“They have lots and lots of friends in very powerful places," he said. "They give money to many United States senators, they have many state and local politicians sympathetic to their causes and as we all know, there are lots of anti-hunters in Hollywood and the media."
Even an entire cable network, Comedy Central, donated $200,000 to PETA in 2005, according to the watch-dog Web site activistcash.com.
The anti-hunting movement is spearheaded primarily by Humane Society of the United States, which is the largest and most effective anti-hunting organization in the world. It claims more than 10 million members. The National Rifle Association has about 4 million members. People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals, perhaps known more widely than HSUS, has a fraction of HSUS’s membership and money, and spends little of its efforts on specific issues related to hunting. Make no mistake, however, PETA is a powerful organization that will do anything to end hunting as we know it. However, it focuses most of its efforts on issues related to pets, farming and medical research. HSUS is the biggest and most direct threat to hunting.
“Fund for Animals merged with HSUS, and HSUS also took in the Doris Day Animal League to become an even larger and more powerful organization,” Jeanneret said.
Jeanneret said when animal-rights groups moved from the fringe to mainstream acceptance about 20 years ago, their combined revenue was somewhere around $300 million. That’s changed. They became active and successful fund-raising machines. PETA took in more than $27 million in 2005 and spent nearly $3 million of that on fund-raising. The Humane Society’s revenue that year was almost $125 million.
“The top 10 animal-rights groups took in about $300 million last year," Jeanneret said. "That number could actually be quite a bit higher. They are using that money to fund ballot initiatives and lawsuits, and they also are giving more in campaign contributions to elect public officials sympathetic to animal rights.”
United We Stand
Of the many battles hunters lost to anti-hunting groups, Jeanneret said almost all could have been won. He is sometimes dismayed by the lack of unity among hunters, especially when an issue doesn’t directly affect certain core groups.
“Bear hunters have really been fighting some big battles, and in a few cases, losing those battles," he said. "I have no doubt that if deer hunters and bird hunters joined to help defend bear hunting, there might have been no defeats."
However, Jeanneret is convinced that many hunters don’t see the link between deer hunting and dove or bear hunting or trapping.
“These anti-hunting organizations succeed when they go after the less popular groups of hunters, like bear hunters or mountain lion hunters, because they know they are the most vulnerable and often have the least amount of support from the hunting community as a whole," he said. "They aren’t attacking bear hunters because they only hate bear hunters. If we want to protect the future of hunting that has to change. Hunters need to step up and speak out for one another, even if the antis are attacking something you don’t do.”
In other words, don’t wait until your freedom to hunt whitetails is directly at risk. Believe it or not, all forms of hunting are under attack, even if the anti-hunting crowd hasn’t set their sights on you yet.
USSA: Celebrating 30 Years
The United States Sportsmen’s Alliance sole purpose is to defend America’s hunters and trappers from the continued assault on our outdoors heritage.
Founded in 1978 as a state organization to fight a proposed statewide ban on trapping in Ohio, the USSA, previously known as the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America, soon became a national organization. The U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance and U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation have been working ever since to defend hunting, fishing, trapping and scientific wildlife management against lawsuits, legislation and ballot issues initiated by anti-hunters.
The USSA counts among its victories efforts to protect moose hunting in Maine, dove hunting in Ohio and many other local and national issues. It also helped shape legislation in all 50 states to protect hunters and anglers from harassment afield.
The group needs your help to continue fighting anti-hunting efforts. For information, visit www.ussportsmen.org, (http://www.ussportsmen.org,) or call (614) 888-4868.
-
Excellent stuff, Bob. :thumbsup:
-
I am a shooter only
and I must say I felt always welcome here even if my questions where beginners one
with this site I am learning more every day and loving more and more trad shooting.
thanks guys…
I never miss reading hunting stories they are interesting and you get to see the posters and a bit of the land where the hunt took place
-
I truly believe that most people on this site are respectful in their posts and pictures. But I also believe that we should be able to share our passion without worry of anti-hunters. There are images all over that they can grasp to- so maybe we shouldn't add to that. But honestly hunting is hunting, and we don't need to sugar coat what is actually happening.
All of us respect the animals and hunting truly is the best form of conservation. I don't understand the goals of the antis and don't believe that they understand the benefits that hunting provides either.
-
This was not meant to attack any one and I posted in response to an increasing number of pictures that don't exactly show respect. I don't think this need to go any farther.