Anti-hunting editorial in paper today

jwbharper · October 04, 2010, 02:58:00 PM

Hey all,
I wanted to present an editorial that was in the NY Times today.
A guy wrote in the following:

It is useful to dispel two myths. First, there is no "heritage" of hunting as it is practiced today. In the early days trappers and others hunted for survival. They would be appalled to see how their survival "heritage" has been transformed.

Second, hunting is not a "sport," since any true sport involves two or more competitors, either individuals or teams, similarly equipped, playing by the same rules, let the best individual or team win. There is no "sport" when one "competitor," the hunter, equipped with a high-powered weapon, camouflage clothing and other devices, pursues an unsuspecting animal.

The reason hunting has no future in this country is that the next generation of potential hunters will not accept these myths. The next generation understands that the slaughter of our precious wildlife is unethical and has no place in modern society.

Robert H. Aland
Winnetka, Ill., Sept. 29, 2010

I was drawn to trad bow hunting because you have to be a good hunter. When you can shoot an animal from 400 yards, you don't have to be that great a hunter. I disagree strongest with the above column when he writes that "the slaughter of precious wildlife is unethical and has no place in modern society." I think a much stronger argument can be made that corporations who stock the grocery stores with meat and poultery are more inhumane than hunters.
The writers lack of understanding in regards to hunting underscores that hunters should be ethical when hunting and good stewards of our resources. A few bad apples can ruin the lot.
What are your thoughts on this?

gobblegrunter · October 04, 2010, 03:15:00 PM

We all know about the vital role that hunters play in wildlife management. Aside from this, (along with many other aruments against this article that I'm sure will be presented by others in this thread), this guy obviously has no idea who my children are, who my family members' children are, or who any of my buddy's children are (let alone the rest of the upcoming generation) or what they will know or understand about hunting's role in society. Most every hunter I know that has chidren is highly active in every aspect of their children's lives, especially when it comes to sharing their love for hunting with their kids. He's misinformed on so many different levels here.

jwbharper · October 04, 2010, 03:20:00 PM

I agree, he does make very broad generalizations about a very diverse group of people. This is fed my misinformation.

Blaino · October 04, 2010, 03:30:00 PM

That writer is off his dag nabbed rocker. I used to work in a slauter house during the summer while i was in high school. I don't care what anyone says... There isn't anything "ethical" about how thoes hogs are killed! I'd take death by a hunter over that any day or time.

ron w · October 04, 2010, 03:33:00 PM

That guy has no Idea what sport is.........he's thinking games . He is also a moron!!!

centaur · October 04, 2010, 03:47:00 PM

It was in the NYT. What do you expect? They all think that meat somehow magically appears in grocery stores, never having a clue about how it got there. Mr. Aland wouldn't last a week if he was without his prepackaged food. He's probably enjoying a Big Mac right now without any understanding whatsoever about how that hamburger patty got there. You can't fix stupid!

fishone · October 04, 2010, 03:50:00 PM

"You can't Stupid"

Amen centaur!!!!!!!!!

McDave · October 04, 2010, 03:57:00 PM

I think he kind of brings in a red herring when he says hunting is not a "sport." Many of us would agree with that statement. Hunting is a way of life for us, a challenge, an important part of our lives. In fact, we feel cheapened when we hear of someone attempting to make it into a competitive sport. Hunting is like mountain climbing, cave exploring, backpacking, kayaking, scuba diving, and other activities that people engage in for intrinsic benefits other that winning or losing a game.

There have always been people like the writer of the editorial, and always will be. People like that can be dangerous if they influence very many people, but it is generally a mistake to react directly against a particular editorial; it just feeds fuel into their fire. It works better if we have influential people of our own who can speak out on the positive aspects of hunting.

NJWoodsman · October 04, 2010, 04:10:00 PM

+1 McDave on the "sport" point. I guess when I go bicycling that's not a sport either, because I'm not racing?

There's no way to "win" an argument with self-important people like this. He even claims to speak for a whole generation on why they aren't hunting.

Zog · October 04, 2010, 04:12:00 PM

Thanks for posting this. But I am not that concerned about anti-hunters because they will always be there and are quite in the minority. Arguing with them only energizes them.

I believe our energy is much better spent on non-hunters who don't care either way and who are the vast majority of Americans. Keep hunting in the respectable, wildlife preserving endeavor that it is.

I guess I'm saying what McDave just did in different words. Rather than argue, just keep speaking positively about hunting and respect for wildlife.

For me, the reason hunting seems to be losing the next generation has more to do with the perversion of basic values and the quick-fix, instant gratitude, mentality that grows year by year. Add to that the gradual but real loss of access, and you have a lot of trouble gaining new hunters' interest.

Jason R. Wesbrock · October 04, 2010, 04:13:00 PM

He's from Winnetka...why am I not surprised?

ron w · October 04, 2010, 04:18:00 PM

People think the only sports are the one that they see on TV, baseball,basketball, soccer,football and so on. They are games........Hunting, fishing, cycling, mountain climbing, sailing and so on are sports. Remember when Wide World of Sports was on ABC years ago.......I rest my case!

Cory Mattson · October 04, 2010, 04:26:00 PM

The New York times is "tanking" now. They WILL go out of business and cease to exist. Hunting on the other hand will continue as long as wildlife is abundant.
<><
<------------------<<<<<<

bornagainbowhunter · October 04, 2010, 04:27:00 PM

This fella is probably just upset because he got sap on his shirt with all the tree huggin' he has been doing.

October 04, 2010, 04:28:00 PM

I talked to the head of PETC, people for the ethical treatment of carrots, and he said that a meal of venison is like eating the most absorb-able multivitamins that there is. We eat what we shoot with our bows, who cares if it is sport or not. Bow hunting is the most environmentally non brutish way to control game numbers that there is. Plus, it requires skill and finesse that most other hunters do not understand or appreciate.

gobblegrunter · October 04, 2010, 05:19:00 PM

QuoteOriginally posted by bornagainbowhunter:
This fella is probably just upset because he got sap on his shirt with all the tree huggin' he has been doing.

Dave Alaxanian · October 04, 2010, 05:25:00 PM

Another "rag" of an editorial, by a buffoon who is as ignorant about hunting as he is about it's future!!

Mitch-In-NJ · October 04, 2010, 05:27:00 PM

Sport as defined by Websters:

a : a source of diversion : recreation b : sexual play c (1) : physical activity engaged in for pleasure (2) : a particular activity (as an athletic game) so engaged in

So... hunting is a sport. But not sexual.

Keefer · October 04, 2010, 05:29:00 PM

It's a Sport...If the animal out runs me and survives then it won But if I stick him and have food to fill my freezer then I won...

YORNOC · October 04, 2010, 05:43:00 PM

I kinda feel bad for him. He's in for a rude awakening one day when he has to face up to reality. Just an uneducated (in life) simpleton who preaches what he was taught, without doing real research.