Comments on: Hunting for a reason

By: aos

aos — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 05:50:03 +0000

A thoughtful comment even if it is hard to read (really should lose the capitals). A couple of historical points though: as I understand it, the bison were slaughtered for more than one reason, though I’m sure that some saw it as something that would weaken the native cultures’ strength, it was more seen as clearing the land of a vermin that interfered with plant and animal farming and ranching. And though I don’t doubt your sincerity and that you conduct your life this way, if history has taught us anything, it is that all peoples act essentially the same, and the differences arise more out of technology than anything. First nations also participated in mass slaughter of buffalo by driving them over cliffs leaving mounds of unused meat to rot at the bottom. New arrivals were primarily responsible for destroying the bison but other mammals had been hunted to extinction before any Europeans arrived. As nations or tribes, we are all equally bad in how we treat the land; its just that some of us have more of the means to carry out the destruction.

By: STACY AARON

STACY AARON — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:48:37 +0000

HAVING BEEN A HUNTER IN MY YOUTH, I CAN RELATE TO THE WHOLE RELATING TO THE PREY PHILOSOPHY. IT IS ABOUT SO MUCH MORE THAN THAT, IT’S ABOUT THE RESPECT YOU DEVELOP SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY FOR THE GAME YOU ARE HUNTING. IF, HOWEVER, YOU DO NOT DEVELOP THIS RESPECT; YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS IN THE WOODS. THERE IS ALSO THE WHOLE “SPORTSMAN HUNTER” POINT OF VIEW, LISTEN CAREFULLY HERE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN; HUNTING IS NOT A SPORT, SPORTS ARE GAMES MEANT TO BE FUN, HUNTING IS ABOUT SURVIVAL. EATING WHAT YOU KILL, NOT HANGING IT ON A WALL TO SHOW YOUR FRIENDS AND ALLOWING THE MEAT TO GO TO WASTE. I HAVE NEVER AND WOULD NEVER KILL ANYTHING I DID NOT INTEND TO EAT, AND TO DO SO SHOULD BE A CRIME. THE BUFFALO ARE GONE DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE WHITE MAN, IN THE 1800′S, DECIDED HE NEEDED THE HIDES AND THAT BY KILLING THEM AND LEAVING THE CARCASSES TO ROT ON THE PLAINS, HE WOULD BE KILLING THE NATIVE AMERICANS PRIMARY SOURCE OF MEAT THUS KILLING HIM. I SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY HERE, AND BELIEVE EACH SIDE HAS A VALID ARGUMENT. TO HUNT IS A TRADITION HANDED DOWN FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION FOR AS LONG AS MAN HAS ROAMED THE EARTH AND IT SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE SO. KILLING OFF WOLVES OR ANY OTHER PREDATORS JUST TO KEEP THE POPULATION OF ANOTHER SPECIES HIGH FOR HUNTINGS’ SAKE IS ASSININE. HUNT LIKE THE NATIVE AMERICAN USED TO, MOVE WITH THE HERDS, TRACK YOUR QUARRY, THE BEST WAY TO LEARN ABOUT HIM IS TO LEARN FROM HIM. THIS IS HOW YOU DEVELOP THE RESPECT FOR THE HUNT. ITS THE WORK YOU PUT INTO GETTING THE MEAT HOME AND ON THE TABLE THAT MAKES ALL THE WORK WORTH WHILE. IF YOU CAN’T DO THE WORK, YOU SHOULD NOT REAP THE REWARDS. AND PARENTS, TEACH YOUR CHILDREN THE TRUE MEANINGS OF THE HUNT. THE RESPECT, NOT ONLY FOR THE ANIMAL THEY HUNT, BUT FOR THE EARTH THEY TAKE IT FROM. TEACH THEM THAT THE LIFE THEY HAVE TAKEN FROM THIS ANIMAL WAS PRECIOUS, THAT THEY SHOULD OFFER THANKS TO THE EARTH AND TO THE ANIMAL FOR ALLOWING THE KILL. THIS IS HOW MY ANCESTORS (THE CHEROKEE) DID IT, AND WE SURVIVED FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM ANYONE. I HOPE AT LEAST ONE PERSON WILL HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING FROM THIS, IF THEY HAVE THEN I HAVE DONE WHAT I SET OUT TO DO. FOR IT WAS NOT MY INTENTION TO CONDEMN EITHER SIDE. I FEEL YOU ARE BOTH RIGHT, IN YOUR OWN WAY.

By: Bisons buffaloed « Revenge of the Castanets

Bisons buffaloed « Revenge of the Castanets — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 03:10:12 +0000

[...] few months ago I wrote about the absurd justification for hunting in that it taught you a respect for life. In the latest Harpers‘, Christopher Ketcham writes [...]

By: marissa

marissa — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:16:07 +0000

wolves are amazing animals i just love them that for the info on wolves

By: Stevo

Stevo — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:55:22 +0000

I have hunted. I found it boring. That and I don’t really like the idea of killing things, unless it’s on paper. I do like shooting, because it is about self-control and concentration. My interest in hunting was an extension of that. The idea of harvesting (hunter-speak, in reality: killing) a deer and dragging through the frozen landscape when I could have easily purchased meat at the supermarket seems like a lot of work, and a little barbaric

Culls, etc. wouldn’t be necessary if our ancestors hadn’t messed up the environment, no? Kill all the wolves, too many deer.

By: aos

aos — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:40:31 +0000

You are right Seb, I haven’t hunted and though this comes off as anti-hunting it is more a post against humans using hunting in this manner. I can’t be too upset about hunting as long as my meat consumption continues, as long as my dinner choices lead to many many more deaths (and in many cases inhumane conditions for the creatures that will be killed to adorn my plate) than even avid hunting ever would. Still don’t like hunting but my moral outrage doesn’t really hold up in light of my other behaviors.

And I do agree that there are cases in where hunting can be part of keeping a species alive. Sometimes the only way you can “protect” a species, is by controlled hunting (partly to undermine poaching and partly because these things take money, and hunting brings in money). And of course hunters have a vested interest in keeping a species viable or else the hunt will cease.

I will never however buy the argument about the only way to understand nature is to kill it. As true as it might be, that that is a kind of special knowledge, it can never outweigh the loss of a wild animal’s life. There’s enough out there for them to worry about. Other creatures, disease, natural disasters -why add big brains plus high powered rifles into the mix. (Don’t have any problem with people hunting with what they were born with; or how about giving the prey vehicles or armor or some sort of fair compensation).

I’ve heard of the knowing death up close argument used by serial killers and there too it makes some sense but I don’t think that means we want to encourage those sorts of voyages of self discovery.

By: Seb

Seb — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:21:35 +0000

Your comments are understandable, especially seeing as you have obviously never hunted. I am not a hunter now, but it is true, something about the experience changes you uniquely for the better. You develop an appreciation for your prey, and in turn that relationship between all animals that is impossible to articulate.
To truly appreciate the life-death cycle Ms Semple describes, it must be experienced first hand. There is something so terrifyingly surreal about hunting an animal you intend to eat. After you have harvested the animal your mentality and opinion are changed forever. Most claim to understand this cycle and I could see why they would, it seem obvious. To me however this akin to an 18 year old boy believing he know how to drive a car perfectly before he even gets behind the wheel. He might know how it works, but driving is certainly different to his expectations.
You are right in saying nature tends to sort these things out, it does. The problem is it may sort them out in a way that is inconsistent with how we desire. As arrogant as that sounds, letting nature sort itself out would likely lead to the extinction of thousands of different species we love and take for granted. In some cases, the survival of a species can depend entirely on the economic interest hunters have in them. Many of the African game animals spring to mind.

By: ginzu98

ginzu98 — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:44:08 +0000

humans are well armed arrogant SOBs, I think Dr. Crichton illustrates quite well- we suck at wildlife management, and shooting them, well…Cheney comes to mind “duck!”

“They eliminated the wolf and cougar and were well on their way to getting rid of the coyote. Then a national scandal broke out; studies showed that it wasn’t predators that were killing the other animals. It was overgrazing from too many elk. The management policy of killing predators had only made things worse.

Meanwhile the environment continued to change. Aspen trees, once plentiful in the park, where virtually destroyed by the enormous herds of hungry elk.

With the aspen gone, the beaver had no trees to make dams, so they disappeared. Beaver were essential to the water management of the park; without dams, the meadows dried hard in summer, and still more animals vanished. Situation worsened. It became increasingly inconvenient that all the predators had been killed off by 1930. So in the 1960s, there was a sigh of relief when new sightings by rangers suggested that wolves were returning.” source: http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speech-complexity.html