More antihunting propaganda

The latest news from Deer & Deer Hunting magazine!
paulie
 
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 7:41 am

More antihunting propaganda

Postby paulie » Thu Dec 25, 2008 5:15 pm

I saw this on another hunting site and had to pass it on. This is what's being taught in our schools.

[font="verdana, arial, helvetica"]Hunting, the stalking and killing of animals, has been an American tradition most likely since the Ice Age when plant food became scarce. Today it exists as a "sport";  even when the animals' flesh is eaten, there is no excuse or justification for stalking and killing an animal in his or her habitat. Nevertheless, people not only engage in hunting but strongly defend it as their right to do so. With an arsenal of rifles, shotguns, muzzleloaders, handguns, bows and arrows, hunters kill more than 200 million animals yearly - crippling, orphaning, and harassing millions more. The annual death toll in the U.S. includes 42 million mourning doves, 30 million squirrels, 28 million quail, 25 million rabbits, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, 6 million deer, and thousands of geese, bears, moose, elk, antelope, swans, cougars, turkeys, wolves, foxes, coyotes, bobcats, boars, and other woodland creatures. (Compiled by The Fund for Animals with data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.)

Less than seven percent of the U.S. population hunts. Hunting is permitted on 60 percent of U.S. wildlife refuges and in many national forests and state parks. On federal land alone (more than half a billion acres), more than 200 million animals are killed every year.

Hunting by humans operates perversely. The kill ratio at a couple hundred feet with a semi-automatic weapon and scope is virtually 100 percent. The animal, no matter how well-adapted to escape natural predation, has virtually no way to escape death once he/she is in the cross hairs of a scope mounted on a rifle. Nature's adaptive structures and behaviors that have evolved during millions of years simply count for naught when a human is the hunter. Most deer, for example, would not perceive anything that is within the effective range of a big game rifle (up to 400 yards) as a predator or a source of danger. A wolf at that distance, even though detected, would be totally ignored. Even the much smaller range of bow-hunter (about 50-75 feet) is barely of concern to deer. Deer may start to keep an eye on a hunter at that distance, but the evasion instinct doesn't kick in until it's too late.

The stress that hunting inflicts on animals--the noise, the fear, and the constant chase--severely restricts their ability to eat adequately and store the fat and energy they need to survive the winter. Hunting also disrupts migration and hibernation, and the campfires, recreational vehicles, trash, and other hunting side effects endanger both wildlife and the environment. For animals like wolves who mate for life and have close-knit family units, hunting can severely harm entire communities.

Hunters and hunting organizations, including state and federally funded sponsors like Fish and Wildlife Services and departments of environmental conservation, promote supposed justifications as to why hunting is necessary.  One of these justifications is that if certain animals were not hunted, they would slowly die of starvation and thus the lesser of the two evils is to humanely kill them. There are problems with this logic.

When hunters talk about shooting overpopulated animals, they are usually referring to white-tailed deer, representing only 3 percent of all the animals killed by hunters. Sport hunters shoot millions of mourning doves, squirrels, rabbits, and waterfowl, and thousands of predators, none of whom any wildlife biologist would claim are overpopulated or need to be hunted.  Even with deer, hunters do not search for starving animals. They either shoot animals at random, or they seek out the strongest and healthiest animals in order to bring home the biggest trophies or largest antlers. Hunters and wildlife agencies are not concerned about reducing deer herds, but rather with increasing the number of targets for hunters and the number of potential hunting license dollars. Thus, they use deer overpopulation as a smokescreen to justify their sport. The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife states that "the deer resource has been managed primarily for the purpose of sport hunting," (New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife, An Assessment of Deer Hunting in New Jersey, 1990).

Hunters also shoot nonnative species such as ring-necked pheasants who are hand-fed and raised in pens and then released into the wild just before hunting season. Even if the pheasants - native to China - survive the hunters' onslaught, they are certain to die of exposure or starvation in the nonnative environment. While hunters claim they save overpopulated animals from starvation, they intentionally breed some species and let them starve to death.

Hunters and hunting organizations also promote the idea that hunting is necessary for "wildlife management" and "conservation." "Wildlife management" and "conservation" are euphemisms used to describe programs that ensure that there are always enough animals for hunters to hunt. Because they make their money primarily from the sale of hunting licenses, the major function of wildlife agencies is not to protect individual animals or biological diversity, but to propagate "game" species for hunters to shoot.
State agencies build roads through our wild lands to facilitate hunter access, they pour millions of tax dollars into law enforcement of hunting regulations and hunter education, and into manipulating habitat by burning and clear-cutting forests to increase the food supply for "game" species such as deer. More food means a larger herd and more animals available as targets.  Hunting programs also cause wildlife overpopulation by stimulating breeding by conducting "buck only" hunts, which can leave as many as six does per buck;  pen-raising quail, grouse, and pheasants for use as hunters' targets; transporting raccoons, antelopes, martens, wild turkeys, and other animals from one state to another to bolster populations for hunters; and exterminating predators like wolves and mountain lions in order to throw prey populations off balance, thereby "justifying" the killing of both "dangerous" and "surplus" animals.

Hunters claim that they pay for "conservation" by buying hunting licenses, duck stamps, etc. But the relatively small amount each hunter pays does not cover the cost of hunting programs or game warden salaries. The public lands many hunters use are supported by taxpayers. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, which benefit hunters, get most of their funds from general tax revenues, not hunting fees. Funds benefiting "non-game" species are scarce. Hunters kill more animals than recorded tallies indicate. It is estimated that, for every animal a hunter kills and recovers, at least two wounded but unrecovered animals die slowly and painfully of blood loss, infection, or starvation. Those who don't die often suffer from disabling injuries. Because of carelessness or the effects of alcohol, scores of horses, cows, dogs, cats, hikers, and others are wounded or killed each year by hunters. In 1988, 177 people were killed and 1,719 injured by hunters while walking through the woods or on their own property.

Hunters say that they are "ethical" and follow the concept of "fair chase." What is fair about a chase in which the hunter uses a powerful weapon from ambush and the victim has no defense except luck? Furthermore, despite the hunting community's repeated rhetoric of "hunting ethics," many hunting groups have refused to end repugnant practices that go above and beyond the cruelty inherent in all sport hunting. There is clearly no "fair chase" in many of the activities sanctioned by the hunting community, such as: "canned hunts," in which tame, exotic animals - from African lions to European boars - are unfair game for fee-paying hunters at private fenced-in shooting preserves; "contest kills," in which shooters use live animals as targets while competing for money and prizes in front of a cheering crowd;  "wing shooting," in which hunters lure gentle mourning doves to sunflower fields and blast the birds into pieces for nothing more than target practice, leaving more than 20 percent of the birds they shoot crippled and un-retrieved; "baiting," in which trophy hunters litter public lands with piles of rotten food so they can attract unwitting bears or deer and shoot the feeding animals at point-blank range;  'hounding," in which trophy hunters unleash packs of radio-collared dogs to chase and tree bears, cougars, raccoons, foxes, bobcats, lynx, and other animals in a high-tech search and destroy mission, and then follow the radio signal on a handheld receptor and shoot the trapped animal off the tree branch.

Some hunters say hunting with a bow and arrow avoids using high tech equipment that might make it an unfair chase. Bow hunting is one of the cruelest forms of hunting because primitive archery equipment wounds more animals than it kills. Dozens of scientific studies indicate that bow hunting yields more than a 50 percent crippling rate. For every animal dragged from the woods, at least one animal is left wounded to suffer - either to bleed to death or to become infested with parasites and diseases.

Hunting is not the cure but the cause of overpopulation and starvation. Luke Dommer, the founder of the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting, had proposed to several state wildlife agencies that if they are serious about using hunting as a population control tool in areas where the sex ratio is already badly distorted, they should institute a doe season (taking no bucks but only does until the ratio is again stabilized at 50:50). All agencies have rejected that proposal thereby giving up any pretense of ecologically motivated sound wildlife management. They quite consciously and openly state that they are in business to provide the maximum number of live targets to hunters each year.

Powerful hunting lobbies in 35 states have persuaded lawmakers to enact "hunter harassment" laws that make it illegal for non-hunters to interfere in behalf of animals targeted by hunters, but these laws are being challenged on constitutional grounds.
Connecticut's law was found to impact on freedom of speech without a compelling state interest and was struck down by a U.S. appeals court.

[size=100]WHAT CAN BE DONE:

Before you support a "wildlife" or "conservation" group, ask if it supports hunting. Such groups as the National Wildlife Federation, the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Izaak Walton League, the Wilderness Society, World Wildlife Fund, and many others are pro-hunting.

To combat hunting in your area:
Post "No Hunting" signs on your land
Join or form a local anti-hunting organization
protest organized hunts
Play loud radios and spread deer repellent or human hair (from barber shops) near hunting areas.
Report poachers in national parks to the National Parks and Conservation Association at 1-800-448-NPCA. You, as a resident of your state, have a voice in how wildlife is treated. Become educated on the issue of hunting, contact your state wildlife agency, attend state wildlife meetings, and get involved in the decision making process.


Image Image [font="verdana, arial, helvetica"]Image In Defense of Animals[/font] [font="verdana, arial, helvetica"]  3010 Kerner Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901. Tel.: 415-388-9641
 www.idausa.org     email: ida@idausa.org
[/font] Image[/size]

Highlander Archery
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:29 pm

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby Highlander Archery » Thu Dec 25, 2008 5:20 pm

All I got to say is if you aren't fighting this stuff you are part of the problem. As is stated in the article [font="verdana, arial, helvetica"][size="2"][color="#dc143c"][size="3"]You, as a resident of your state, have a voice in how wildlife is treated. Become educated on the issue of hunting, contact your state wildlife agency, attend state wildlife meetings, and get involved in the decision making process.

[/size][/color]
[/size][/font]

hunter480
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:44 am

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby hunter480 » Fri Dec 26, 2008 1:48 am

Unbelievable, some of that garbage was nearly funny. The only lie they left unused was that we use machine guns to deer hunt.
 
This is a great example of what we`re up against, and some of these animal "rights" groups have been identified by the department of Homeland Security as domestic terrorist groups.
 
If you`re harrassed while hunting, even if "only", as this suggested, by them playing loud misic to disrupt your hunt, do contact law enforcement.

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4952
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby Woods Walker » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:08 am

This is only going to get worse, as these groups have been emboldened by the fact that they will now have a sympathetic ear in the White House. Obamarxist was given HSUS's endorsement for a reason, and it's NOT because he's pro-hunting.
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

User avatar
Sailfish
 
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 11:12 am

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby Sailfish » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:12 am

What school system?
What class?
 
Do you have more information?
 
 
"Go as far as you can see; when you get there, you'll be able to see farther."

paulie
 
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 7:41 am

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby paulie » Fri Dec 26, 2008 4:29 am

ORIGINAL: Sailfish

What school system?
What class?

Do you have more information?


  No, what I know, is what I posted.  I just copied the post from a "NAHC"(North American Hunting Club) forum. I would think, if you contact your local school board, you can find out if this garbage is being fed to your kids.

hunter480
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:44 am

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby hunter480 » Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:39 pm

There is much you can do, even at the school level.
 
My twins, (a boy and girl), were 10 when this happened, but my son brought a test to me, surprised at the grade he`d gotten. The question, (marked as wrong), that had pushed the grade down to the next lowest level went like this: "T or F- Hunting endangers wildlife." My son, God Bless him, having been raised in a hunting household, answered False. That answer was marked as incorrect. He was in disbelief, as was I. I contacted the school, and after a lot of chatting with many, many people, I had an appointment to meet with the school board for Wayne Township in western Indianapolis.
 
I wore my suit, so as not to look like the, expected, redneck in camo and jeans, and made my case. I patiently pointed out how much hunters pay for all wildlife, game, and non-game alike, setting up my final position. I explained how, hunting helps keep wildlife numbers in-line with the carrying capicity of the available habitat. So, I explaind, controlled hunting can`t, endander wildlife, but gladly pointed out that poaching does indeed endander wildlife.
 
After being questioned by members of the board, one member in particular grilled me extensively, they decided to contact the publisher of the material for that class, and in fact, chane the wording from, "hunting endangers wildlife", to, "poaching endangers wildlife".
 
Some will feel that this was a very small "victory", but for my son and I, it was huge. His correct grade was restored, he understood that hunting, in fact, is not a bad thing for wildlife, and maybe more importantly, he saw, firsthand, that taking a stand for something you feel to be important, can right a wrong.

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4952
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby Woods Walker » Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:48 pm

480: My hat is off to you for what you did. Plain and simple, if MORE of us did this, we wouldn't have problems we now have with the anti-hunting propaganda and attitude that's out there.
 
You did good! REAL good!
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

Highlander Archery
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:29 pm

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby Highlander Archery » Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:25 pm

ORIGINAL: hunter480

There is much you can do, even at the school level.

My twins, (a boy and girl), were 10 when this happened, but my son brought a test to me, surprised at the grade he`d gotten. The question, (marked as wrong), that had pushed the grade down to the next lowest level went like this: "T or F- Hunting endangers wildlife." My son, God Bless him, having been raised in a hunting household, answered False. That answer was marked as incorrect. He was in disbelief, as was I. I contacted the school, and after a lot of chatting with many, many people, I had an appointment to meet with the school board for Wayne Township in western Indianapolis.

I wore my suit, so as not to look like the, expected, redneck in camo and jeans, and made my case. I patiently pointed out how much hunters pay for all wildlife, game, and non-game alike, setting up my final position. I explained how, hunting helps keep wildlife numbers in-line with the carrying capicity of the available habitat. So, I explaind, controlled hunting can`t, endander wildlife, but gladly pointed out that poaching does indeed endander wildlife.

After being questioned by members of the board, one member in particular grilled me extensively, they decided to contact the publisher of the material for that class, and in fact, chane the wording from, "hunting endangers wildlife", to, "poaching endangers wildlife".

Some will feel that this was a very small "victory", but for my son and I, it was huge. His correct grade was restored, he understood that hunting, in fact, is not a bad thing for wildlife, and maybe more importantly, he saw, firsthand, that taking a stand for something you feel to be important, can right a wrong.


You Sir are 100% part of the SOLUTION. This is the perfect example of activism at its finest.
Articulate, factual, appearance, and humility will leave the antis with absolutely no wiggle room.

This applies at all levels whether dealing with local govt. or Federal.


PERFECT

User avatar
sticknstringer
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 6:22 pm

RE: More antihunting propaganda

Postby sticknstringer » Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:57 pm

My take... The anti's have no understanding of our hunting culture. They attempt to humanize the animals by trying to imagine what they go through when they are being hunted. Even though animals are certainly individuals and by all accounts magnificent creatures, they are not humans. They are not complex thinkers who can tie their shoes and drive a car. I have much respect for animals but since we as humans were given the abilities required to remain at the top of the food chain as the dominant species on the planet, it would imo defy nature for us not to hunt. I believe hunting is an excellent way to escape to the only true reality we have left.
It never ceases to amaze me how so many people will give money to organizations such as PETA and HSUS when those dollars could be given to needy people... the truth is, if we do not join together and deal with these people who have nothing better to do/spend their money on, we will soon find ourselves legislated right out of our way of life. Unfortunately, most of us hunters actually have lives to live and we find ourselves to be much too busy to deal with the hassle of shutting down the antis. I have attempted to raise awareness of the anti's activities on other hunting sights, only to be frustrated with the lack of participation by the other members…    

Next

Return to Breaking News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests