Top

“Sport” Hunting And Conservation – Yeah, That Old Saw

March 23, 2016

This piece from the UK Independent has been bouncing around for a week or two now.  It’s not really news, nor is it particularly revolutionary thinking.  But then, since it references statements from Prince William, it carries a certain panache that it would probably lack if it came from some bourgeois layman like… say… me.

That’s a hell of a long way around to the point.

Oh, and that point…  African trophy hunting, despite social media outrage, provides significant benefits to conservation.  Stepping around the sensational stories of “Cecil” and endangered white rhino hunts, the fact remains that properly regulated and managed sport hunting more than pays for the animals it removes from the habitat.

Did we really need to hear that from the second-in-line for the crown of Great Britain?

It’s hardly news.  Hell, every time trophy hunting comes up on the Interwebz or in the major media, a swarm of folks from SCI to wildlife management experts chime in with the numbers and statistics that show how important the revenue from hunters funds everything from habitat protection to anti-poaching patrols.  But when all is said and done, public opinion generally sides against the bloodshed… against logic.

It’s an interesting conundrum, but I’m not sure it needs to be so enigmatic.  In fact, I’d go so far as to say it’s pretty simple.  People who don’t hunt really don’t understand those of us who kill animals for “fun”.

To be sure, there are things they grudgingly accept, such as when some of us claim to hunt for food.  There are also things they reject, such as the notion of hunting animals merely to collect the trophies (antlers, horns, mounts, etc.).  And, nowhere more than in the case of African hunting, do hunters appear to be out for nothing more than the experience of killing exotic (insert other adjectives here, such as majestic, regal, proud, etc.) animals in order to bring home the trophies.  That will never sit well with non-hunters.  Truthfully, it even makes many hunters uneasy.

Here’s where this dovetails into another perennial debate (discussion, argument, donnybrook).  Hunting ethics and “fair chase” have become hugely divisive topics in the hunting community.  While many of these differences have existed all along, social media has created a platform where individuals can criticize without the direct accountability of face-to-face communication.  In this virtual environment, it is becoming more common to see people embrace unrealistically idealistic stances on ethical behavior, and then to hold others to that same standard.

At the same time, the Internet, along with the rapidly growing outdoors television industry, have exposed hunters to practices and traditions they have never experienced and do not understand or appreciate.  For example, western hunters accustomed to hunting large expanses of public land see the east coast treestand hunters, sitting over feeders, bait, or food plots.  It’s a very different set of tactics, and on first glance, may not seem like a very rewarding way to hunt.   In fact, it may even seem to be “unfair”.  Rather than embrace the differences or educate themselves, many folks choose to judge and denigrate the others.  The most common justification for the criticism is that the behavior, “makes hunters look bad.”

These issues come together when we see something like the recent fiasco with “Cecil” the lion, or the auction of a hunt for an endangered species.  Emotional and uneducated responses flood both the traditional and non-traditional media.  While it’s no surprise that anti-hunters and non-hunters would jump on that bandwagon, I’m a little nonplussed to see the number of hunters who rush to judgement as well.  To be clear, the circumstances surrounding the killing of “Cecil” are suspect, and it appears that laws were broken.  No one, hunter or otherwise, should condone that.  But over and above that, the outright indictment of African hunting is not justifiable, and I was a little ashamed to see the number of hunters who were right there with the antis, calling for abolition without a clear understanding of what it is that they want to abolish… or of the real effects that shutting down the industry would have.

I realize as I’m writing this, that I may have bitten off more than I can necessarily chew in one meal.  Because here comes another tangent…

I can’t help thinking, as I watch things like this unfold… the ongoing posturing of, “my ethics are better than your ethics,” or, “my way of hunting is right and yours is wrong,” has a lot in common with this whole thing that seems to be taking place on college campuses (and in some communities), wherein the emotional security of the individual supposedly supersedes a free and open exchange of ideas and opinions.  At risk of over-simplifying a complex situation, what I see here is a whole new level of selfishness, regardless of the potential cost to the bigger picture.  “I am personally offended by something you are saying or doing, therefore, I am in my rights to tell you, and everyone like you, to stop.”

From the academic perspective, I think the logical progression of this argument is obvious.  At the very least, it throws a wet, burlap sack over much of history, art, and literature.  It’s tearing down Civil War monuments because they remind people of slavery.  It’s throwing away great works of literature because they include racist, sexist, or hateful themes and language.  It’s chipping the genitalia off of the statue of David because, well, genitalia.  Over time, if this were allowed to become the norm (I honestly doubt it), the scope and value of education would be so diluted as to be pretty much worthless.  Universities would become technical schools, and instead of scholars, graduates would be technicians.

For hunters, it’s sort of the same thing.  If we continue to ostracize other hunters and squelch their traditions based on nothing more substantial than that they offend our sensibilities, what can we say when non-hunters do the same to us?  And then, what happens when hunting goes away?  Maybe we can use what we know of Africa as a guide there.

 

Comments

5 Responses to ““Sport” Hunting And Conservation – Yeah, That Old Saw”

  1. “Sport” Hunting And Conservation – Yeah, That Old Saw | AllHunt.com on March 23rd, 2016 16:02

    […] “Sport” Hunting And Conservation – Yeah, That Old Saw […]

  2. robb on April 17th, 2016 10:36

    Great position paper from the IUCN

    http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iu…yhuntingv1.pdf

  3. robb on April 17th, 2016 10:37
  4. robb on April 17th, 2016 10:37

    I give up, it’s out there somewhere

  5. Phillip on April 17th, 2016 11:30
Bottom