Why doesn't society recognize the good we do? Non-hunters find it difficult to believe that we care about wildlife in any emotional sense. If we wish to convince the general public that we care for something more and pursue something greater than the animals death, we must emphasize the experience and the living animal most. We care for animals in a fundamental way. Yes we may take the life. And thereby take possession of one wild creature during our hunt. But that does not mean that we do not admire them in life, and wish to see their future secured. Even if that future does not include hunting. Let's diminish the focus on our achievements and on us. Let's start honoring what truly matters.
-------------------------------------------------
We have all asked ourselves the question: Why do I hunt? And many nonhunters or antihunters ask the same thing.
I thought I'd try to start a different sort of discussion ...
Many non-hunters do see us as we are. The problem is, the "WE" they see is not the "WE" we would like to present. Here is an experiment you might try. Next hunting season, carry a notebook and pen with you. Write down every time you see a hunter promoting a favorable image. And...write down every time you see a hunter presenting a less than favorable image. Include television in that survey.
A quote from Julius Caesar pretty well sums it up. "The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones." Ole Bill Snakespear wrote that.
It's not AP, in fact, I think that what we do is much more natural. Maybe we are more in touch with the way we were created. Every animal eats something that used to be alive.
When you watch a hunting show and the guy has killed 4 bucks and going on to his next hunt and he states that he doesn't eat any of the deer but donates it to the hungry well !!
They don't recognize the good that we do (conservation, habitat control, herd management, etc.) because they don't look at things as a whole. They see the tree but not the forest. They don't associate the farm animal with killing because it's all around them, McDonald's, KFC and the like. It's all they know. Some can be educated, while others turn a deaf ear. We have to be diligent and continue to get our message out.
Television Hunting has done hunting a huge injustice and I feel has really harmed hunter vs. non hunter relations . I encourage all young hunters to turn off the tv........ find a copy of Ortega y Gasset's "Meditations on Hunting ".........and read it . It's not a long read.
also, I'd suggest reading Jim Posewitz's " Beyond Fair Chase "The Ethic and Tradition of hunting...another short read.
Kudo's as usual to RMEF for a thoughtful presentation
It's a basic lack of understanding. Denizens of the concrete jungles aren't faulty humans or evil, they just don't understand and really have no business meddling in that which is wild and natural. We as hunters haven't been proactive enough in either asserting a positive narrative or denouncing the fools who don't represent our collective accurately.
I actually think most people have changed over the last 10 years and most have no issues with hunting.
The people I do encounter who are "normal" people have usually had a bad experience with a hunter - like trespassing, recovering deer without asking, running across land with guns, etc.
Another great read is "A Hunter's Heart" by David Petersen.
We as hunters don't do ourselves any favors. What used to be a somewhat private pursuit with friends and relatives has become a sort of in-your-face, "happiness is a warm gutpile" thing that is magnified in a bad way by Hollywood and all types of media. They love it when hunters behave badly. The more people become urbanized and detached from where food comes from, the less accepting they will be.
And as MB accurately notes, hunting for food is generally acceptable. Trophy and "sport" hunting is definitely not.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of idiot 'hunters' out there on the news and social media who are much more visible than the rest of the group who would make a more wholesome presentation...and idiots drive ratings up
Go to youtube and type in "deer hunting" and watch some of those videos and you will see that we can be our own worst enemy promoting hunting, ethics, and respect for the animals that we kill. You will find some good videos out there, but more often than not they are bad for our cause in one way or another.
EDIT: Surfbow, we must have typed at the same time.
We hunters by and large do a horrible job of educating nonhunters. For the most part we just want to be left alone. That worked several decades ago but now it seems that more people want to tell others what to do. This will only worsen our situation in the future.
Most non hunters (at least in my office in Norfolk, VA) think that hunters cut off an animals head and leave the rest of the body. Most non hunters also think that their tax dollars are going to protect endangered species, when in fact, it is hunting and fishing dollars that help endangered species.
About twice a year I will bring in a huge pot of venison chili to my office. This has opened a lot of people's minds who were previously teetering on the edge of anti-hunting.
The RMEF is the most effective organization that I'm aware of that is working to improving the image of hunters nationwide.
Every non-hunter I know has zero issues with hunting when done with respect to the hunted and the natural world, they understand it but, what they don't understand and what they do not condone is trophy hunting where a hunter utilizes only the head gear and unfortunately that's what is blasted into their eyes and ears.
Anti's on the other hand are just extremist disconnects that carry no valid opinion.
Because we are not preemptive, we are reactionary. We are not out there promoting ourselves to society we stay in the shadows. We only show ourselves to the public when Anti-hunters come after us. We are always trying to refute the LIE that is told about us to the public, through the media. WE KNOW what we do for wildlife because we preach to the choir, we don't PREACH out side of our own church. Sad part is our congregation over time has gotten smaller and smaller. How many billboards do you see promoting the conservation efforts of Hunters, radio adds, Television adds on a daily bases. They don't exist. Anti-hunters are Zealots in their beliefs/lies to convince the public how bad we are and they don't mind spending money to do it, even if they collect it through lies. Ever see a HSUS commercials about, donate to them because they save puppies and kitties. WE know that 99% of they money they collect goes to everything other than saving puppies and kitties, most of the public doesn't know that. The public has been told the lie long enough from them they think it is the truth and the media has propitiated it because it meet their agenda. There have been some that have shown that HSUS is a lie, but there are more propitiating the original lie. We the hunting community have to become Zealots for ourselves and start advertising to the public how WE are consevationalists and not what Anti-hunters make us out to be. DANNY
So question: Is there a market for a Hunting Organization with the sole purpose of creating "good Press" or education to the public about what hunters do? Would you donate?
All you have to do is watch Fox and then watch CNN or MSNBC to see that we are terribly tribalized (not a real word). Each side's perceptions are locked in and logic and reason are hard to get into the discussion.
"I don't believe that" seems to be the most common response when one side is shown something they don't like.
CO has had a multi-year PR program with regular TV ads, print ads, and billboards. The "Hug a Hunter" campaign that tries to explain how the contributions of hunters and fishermen benefit all outdoors people and wildlife watchers. It's well-done and the hunters don't look like fat slob TV hunters, but instead like respectable neighbors next door.
Like most people, they see what they want to see. We kill animals and they don't like it. What Lou, surfbow, keepemsharp, and tobywon said doesn't help our case. Imagine being a non-hunter and seeing Michael Waddell (or anyone else) acting like an idiot after running a sharp stick through a beautiful wild animal. You getting there yet ?
Because to most people personally killing stuff is considered a bad behavior. Violent. Aggressive. That is why only about 10% if the population does it. Excluding fishing
I deal with a lot of non-hunters on a daily basis. A year or so ago, one of my newspapers did a poll and 42% of my readers did not hunt or fish. In meeting and talking with them, I get a pretty good idea of how they feel. Maybe not most but many are turned off by trophyism and hunters who hunt for trophies only. A huge percentage have no problem with hunters who use the meat-either for themselves or to give to needy. Almost all are turned off by "blood and guts" display and pictures.
In my writings, I have never used the word harvest when I meant kill. Non-hunters know we kill animals. Usually, that does not bother them. It is how or why we kill them and then, what we do after the kill that bothers some.
In my general area, the deer and turkey populations are such that most people realize hunting is almost vital. Without high fences, gardens are impossible. Same for shrubs and deer/vehicle collisions are burgeoning. Most recognize hunting is the only effective means of control.
At present, there is little or no chance of losing hunting at the polls and I have to admit, I am seeing a change in some hunter attitudes. I no longer see trucks with broken tailgates during deer season. No more bucks hanging out of truck beds. No so many bloody camouflage clothing at WalMart. But television outdoor programming is killing us as we are all getting tarred with the same brush. As a result, collectively, our image suffers. I know of no way to effectively convey the good that hunters do to enough non-hunter to do any good. The "We pay for conservation," line has worn thin. It is one thing to say it...but how do we show it so that a non-hunter or anyone, understands it?
All of the reading material listed in above posts is great. What does that have to do with non-hunters? If every single outdoor writer in the country, on the same week, wrote about how much good hunters do, the impact on non-hunters would be minimal.
So, bottom line, clean up your own yard, encourage your neighbor to keep his clean and enjoy the day.
To be honest I would think that the Sportsmen's Alliance would have one, they DEFEND our hunting privileges across the country, but I don't believe they do though. The majority of their money goes to fighting against the frivolous law suites brought on by Anti-Hunting organizations, or counter bills presented to voters supported by Anti-Hunting groups. Again all defensive. Yes I would be willing to donate to a preemptive program, to educate the public on our conservation efforts as hunters . To educated the NON-Hunting public where our money goes and what our money does for wildlife, the Pitman-Robertson Act, State game license money, migratory water fowl stamp money. RMEF, Ducks Unlimited, and other organization which would also need to participate in this effort to show what they have done as organization for wildlife conservation. What we take for granted as hunters, but the NON-Hunting public has no clue about. This lack of information is what the ANTI-Hunters depend on to spread their propaganda. People have a tendency to believe the things they hear first, than a secondary defensive response. Basically we as hunters are always trying to dig ourselves out of a hole. Personally I believe it is time we as hunters start promoting ourselves and making the Anti-Hunters dig themselves out of the holes we make for them. Keep putting it the public's faces what Anti-Hunting organizations are really about and do with their money, it isn't what the public believes it is donating for. DANNY
I'd say that every article online or on social media about wolves followed by comments that say "Shoot them in the guts and let them run" doesn't help our cause.
One area I hunt is a famous bird migration stop over point. Every year in May when I am turkey hunting hundreds of bird watchers descend on the area . I talk to a lot of them. Most start off with oh your one of those hunters running around killing stuff. I reply yes I kill a couple wild turkeys but you should really see all the migrating birds I see and mark every year while in the woods . I tell them I have been bird watching since I was a kid. Most of them it blows their mind that I can be a hunter but also be just like them !!
An interesting and thoughtful article by Ron Spomer (at link), apropos to this thread.
"After 50+ years as a hunter, I understand humans’ atavistic impetus to hunt as akin to the same urge in wolves, lions, eagles and orcas. It is a genetic impulse tempered in humans by awe, honor, respect, love and a burning desire to interact with Nature, to be a player, an integral part of Nature’s functioning system of carnivores controlling herbivores so that time-tested systems of checks and balances function. Most of us don’t think of it that way. We just know that we are thrilled with the idea of getting involved, getting out there looking, seeking, sniffing, sneaking, shivering, hunting. We don’t want to stand on the outside looking in. We don’t pretend we are isolated from Nature because we realize we are not. Whether we hunt or not, we all kill animals.
Carnivores aren’t evil and predation isn’t wrong: it’s essential. Nature (God if you prefer,) not humans, invented hunting and meat eating. Homo sapiens are as much a product of nature as is any other predator; we have an equal right to hunt and eat meat. Happily, unlike other carnivores, we’ve developed a conscience and the understanding that we can and must limit our predation to sustainable levels. We are the only predator that does this, the only one that limits hunting and harvest. Unlike male bears, we do not attack and eat cubs. Unlike wolves and coyotes, we do not hunt newborn fawns and calves or pregnant cows about to give birth. We also are the only species that intentionally modifies habitats to benefit wildlife; transplants and restores species to former ranges; rescues threatened populations; provides disease control and abatement; willingly taxes itself in order to pay for helping wildlife (game wardens, biologists.) And the vast majority of this money comes from hunters, as it always has. Regulated hunting is a pay-as-you-go activity, and in most cases we pay it forward. "
There are definitely slob hunters amongst us. I was just out scouting on public land. I just can't believe the trash that is discarded. Mostly beverage containers. It doesn't necessarily mean they were left by a hunter, but when you notice on the snowmobile trail that most signs have bullet or pellet holes in them, its hard to remove hunters from the equation. Some actions by these few will be evident for years. And people trend to remember the bad more that the good.
This is a hard thing to say to a group of fellow hunters. But the biggest enemy (at least in my little North Eastern neck of the woods) is a stereotype originated by the "hunters" who came before us.
Guys who hunted drunk. Who had zero respect for property lines or posted signs. who shot street signs. Who routinely got lost and had to be driven to their cars. Who shot goats/cows/etc they "thought were deer" (remember, many were drunk... I guess those critters are easier to mistake in that situation) etc, etc, etc.
Most of the people I speak to, who are non hunters, upon learning I hunt, they are surprised. If I ask why, they go down the laundry list of reasons (like those I noted above)...
While those things are not likely how anyone on a site like this hunts or has hunted... Those were real folks hunting the woods here. If that's what you grow up seeing, you get an image in mind, fair or not, which you likely carry and share with others.
So, while there are many reasons non hunters may view us in different ways, at least here, it's what many of those who came before us did that torqued it for those of us today. Frustrating.
Especially since it's unlikely any "group" has done more for game and non game wildlife conservation than hunters and fishermen.
Yup. Many stereotypes have roots in reality. They're generally unfair when referring to the group, but they often times originate in a visible minority.
A lot of hunter's worst stereotypes come from drunks and stupid kids that give us all a bad name by littering, shooting at things other than game, and generally acting like idiots. It's difficult to marginalize this type of person because they really don't get a crap.
To be honest....I could careless what they think. Ignoring them is what is best. You will NEVER change the anti-hunting mindset and you`re fooling yourself if you think you will. I don`t need to be conscious of my behavior as I don`t do anything in bad taste or unethical. I also don`t raise any commotion about my hunting either....it`s personal to me and me alone and needs no explanation.
I would say the average hunter has zero idea, and may not actually care, about the good hunters do for conservation, they care "can I hunt this year". Why? Simple, hunters do not typically DIRECTLY do squat for conservation, the PR act gets money from everything we do, but overall, the average hunter does nothing.
Check your local state's archery org: - how many are in it? - how many of them are actually involved ? then again the average non-hunter doesn't care either, they have no issue with hunting becuase it's not something they care about.
It's the fringe on both sides that are the issue, the fringe non-hunters are anti-hunters and the fringe hunters are either bad examples on one extreme, or like many on this site, do deeply care and act on it.
1) Because half the population " thinks" with their emotions and the other half reasons with their brains. 2) Because the communistic left wants us disarmed so that they can further their goals... activating a monsterous prolaganda machine compiled of celebrities, politicians and news/social media... and the sheeple half of the people believe them.
Great post. Everyone I work with is a non-hunter. These are smart, hard working, down to earth folks. Their view of hunters starts with the NRA. Which they see as a an unreasonable barrier to sensible gun control. The next thing they say is it’s unfair to hunt with a gun. How hard can that be? When they find out I’m a bow hunter they express respect. When they find out I butcher my own deer and my family eats it they are impressed. And when I bring them jerky they are fully on board and hoping for more. I think most reasonable folks who have things adequately explained to them support hunting. The NRA is a huge problem for hunters. Most reasonable Americans hate the NRA because of their inflexibility on gun control.
Arrowone, your anti-gun rants add nothing to the discussion. Your holier than thou attitude and Blaming the NRA mark you as part of the problem, not the solution.
You know what the best way is to help people like hunting?
Share positive stories and educate people when they have questions.
99% of non-hunters and even some hunters have no idea that "Trophy" hunting was done away with in America over 100 years ago. Sure some guys hunt for horns but they don't just take the horns nor can they legally hunt for just horns. They have to recover the animal and meat needs to be used or donated. Just this paragraph alone has changed many minds. Many still think we can go out and shoot an animal and leave the carcass.
I try and not go over-board as well. I will tell stories but the kids version. Most people can't take the blow-for-blow details.
It's all pretty simple yet complicated. The simple part is, anti hunters simply can't understand what we do. They don't have the capacity to understand. Anti hunters can't understand the need to hunt and kill anymore than I can understand why a man would want to have sex with another man. I can't understand why a woman would want to grow a foreign life form in her body, gain dozens of pounds and then push it out. The fact that I don't get it is pretty simple. I'm not genetically designed to relate to it. We will never relate to the anti's and they will never relate to us. Remember that not that long ago 87% of Americans approved of hunting as long as the meat was utilized. These are the people we need to relate to . They can almost understand us and it's not a hard sell. Remember that the anti's have to lie to take us down. That's why they created the whole Cecil incident. We were winning so they had to hyperbolize a crisis. Every part of that narrative was a lie except for the fact that there was a lion hunt. He have to be ready to attack every time they create a crisis. Not only attack but demean them. Show that they are liars and have no ground to stand on. So let's quit worrying about the rabid anti's. They are so anti human that they don't even care about animal rights. The only time they matter is when they lie about us. When they do that we should attack. The actual non hunters are on our side as long as we act in a responsibly. We have to remember that we own the science, we own the facts and all we need to do is perfect the narrative. Someone already said, everyone kills. You either kill animals our you pay someone to do it. I don't care if you are the most meticulous vegan, you pay someone to kill animals for you. Hundreds of Billions of animals are killed each year in the process of agriculture alone. The best thing we can do is stay educated on the most effective way to sell our side. We shouldn't have to defend common sense but sadly, we do.
Commercialism became a huge positive for hunting, then a negative???? I am not sure how to define it, or when it actually started in mass. Likely, shortly after World War 2. What happened in everyone's opinion? I think at first commercialism helped expand bowhunting, then it expanded bowhunting for horn porn and that became the negative. Commercialism is too broad of a term to blame, has to be defined.
