“...we shed light on the scale of the role we play in killing...”
February 8, 2016 6:07 AM Subscribe
Hard Numbers Reveal Scale of America’s Trophy-Hunting Habit by Rachael Bale [National Geographic]
Related:
- Activists condemn trophy-hunting club for 'turning wildlife into commodities'. [The Guardian]
Sport hunters, those who kill animals for recreation rather than out of necessity, imported more than 1.26 million trophies to the U.S. in the decade from 2005 through 2014, according to a new analysis of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s import data by Humane Society International and the Humane Society of United States. That’s an average of 126,000 trophy imports a year, or 345 a day.
Related:
- Activists condemn trophy-hunting club for 'turning wildlife into commodities'. [The Guardian]
The world’s largest trophy hunting club was on the defensive at its giant annual auction in Las Vegas as animal rights advocates and conservation experts traveled from across the globe to condemn the industry that killed Cecil, one of Africa’s most famous lions. The Safari Club International on Wednesday kicked off its elaborate four-day convention and “Ultimate Hunters’ Market” inside the Mandalay Bay luxury hotel and casino – drawing 25,000 people to the members-only show. In ballrooms and convention halls with signs describing the event as the “THE BIGGEST THE BEST”, hunters mingled with outfitters, gun makers, booking agents, taxidermists and other industry representatives and enthusiasts.- Can trophy hunting actually help conservation? by Jason G. Goldman [Conservation Magazine]
One of the problems with hunting as a topic is that it’s a complex issue. People are by and large lazy, so little research is done outside of a narrow range of personal interests. There are so many types of hunting, such as subsistence hunting by communities on their own land; hunting on fenced private farms that choose wildlife over sheep; trophy hunting in unfenced areas near national parks; canned hunting and so on, and each has it’s own set of implications. And there are the moral/ethical considerations to weigh with the conservation implications. In my view you shouldn’t lump all hunting debate into one pot and stir, you should rather try to understand each situation and then debate based on its merits. In that way you avoid generalising and insulting large groups of people (on both sides of the debate).- The Thing About Hunting: Why the hunting Conversation Hurts Conservation by Simon Espley [Africa Geographic]
We humans tend to silo information to suit our personal requirements, and make enemies out of those who feel differently. We might agree on 99% of things, but the 1% apparently makes us enemies. Lets face it, we either hate Kendall Jones or we adore her – there is no middle ground. So the chatter around her tends to be angry, emotional, defensive and meaningless in the greater scheme of things – which is of course what she wants: the more attention she can generate the higher she ranks in the race for social media fame. And while we bolster her fame, the process of turning Africa’s incredible biodiversity into trophies, trinkets, medicine and lifestyle products continues apace. The enemies of conservation are well-resourced, focussed and not distracted by the chatter about who has the moral high ground.- In defense of Texas huntress and conservationist Kendall Jones by Charlotte Allen [Los Angeles Times]
After Jones gave an interview to TMZ titled “Why Does Facebook Want Me Dead?,” a commenter wrote: “People don’t want kendall dead — just to use her as target practice, feel a lot of pain, bleed some, get stitches — repeat. It’s that simple.” And then there was this, as reported by CBC: “A [100,000-signature] petition circulated on the White House’s Change.org website demands that Jones be banned from Africa. Anonymous commenters said Jones should be hunted down like the animals she targeted. Rape threats followed. Some called her a ‘slut’ and ‘bimbo.’ Misdirected rage assailed other blond women who shared the name Kendall Jones.” Yet, when Katniss Everdeen of “The Hunger Games” wields her bow and arrow, she’s hailed by feminists as “feisty” and “independent.” When Kendall Jones wields hers, she’s denounced as a shameless self-promoter who wears short shorts and makeup (horrors!) and posts mean memes about vegetarians.- In Defence of the Trophy Hunt by Michael Petrou [Maclean's Magazine]
Cecil, like all lions, was magnificent to behold. But let us acknowledge that is a subjective appraisal. He was less intelligent than the pigs we raise in cramped factory farms and kill in industrial slaughterhouses. He was a rare animal, but not an endangered one. There are more than 30,000 lions in Africa. He had a black mane and was said to be friendly—a clear case of anthropomorphism, which likely means he had simply grown used to safari jeeps. So why the outrage over his death? Much has to do with how we perceive lions. They are evocative and iconic, which is why they have adorned heraldry for millennia. Much also has to do with why he was killed: for the perceived sport in it, and for the “trophy” pelt and head.- In Zimbabwe, We Don’t Cry for Lions by Goodwell Nzou [The New York Times]
MY mind was absorbed by the biochemistry of gene editing when the text messages and Facebook posts distracted me. So sorry about Cecil. Did Cecil live near your place in Zimbabwe? Cecil who? I wondered. When I turned on the news and discovered that the messages were about a lion killed by an American dentist, the village boy inside me instinctively cheered: One lion fewer to menace families like mine. My excitement was doused when I realized that the lion killer was being painted as the villain. I faced the starkest cultural contradiction I’d experienced during my five years studying in the United States. Did all those Americans signing petitions understand that lions actually kill people? That all the talk about Cecil being “beloved” or a “local favorite” was media hype? Did Jimmy Kimmel choke up because Cecil was murdered or because he confused him with Simba from “The Lion King”? In my village in Zimbabwe, surrounded by wildlife conservation areas, no lion has ever been beloved, or granted an affectionate nickname. They are objects of terror.- A Hunting Ban Saps a Village’s Livelihood by Normitsu Onishi [The New York Times]
Lions have been coming out of the surrounding bush, prowling around homes and a small health clinic, to snatch goats and donkeys from the heart of this village on the edge of one of Africa’s great inland deltas. Elephants, too, are becoming frequent, unwelcome visitors, gobbling up the beans, maize and watermelons that took farmers months to grow. Since Botswana banned trophy hunting two years ago, remote communities like Sankuyo have been at the mercy of growing numbers of wild animals that are hurting livelihoods and driving terrified villagers into their homes at dusk. The hunting ban has also meant a precipitous drop in income. Over the years, villagers had used money from trophy hunters, mostly Americans, to install toilets and water pipes, build houses for the poorest, and give scholarships to the young and pensions to the old.- Jane Goodall Asks Tough Question About Cecil The Lion [The Dodo] After expressing her initial mourning, Goodall asks questions that put Cecil's death in the context of trophy hunting as a whole.
How can anyone with an ounce of compassion be proud of killing these magnificent creatures? Lions, leopards, sable antelopes, giraffes and all the other sport or trophy animals are beautiful – but only in life. In death they represent the sad victims of a sadistic desire to attract praise from their friends at the expense of innocent creatures. And when they claim they respect their victims and experience emotions of happiness at the time of the killing, then surely this must be the joy of a diseased mind? There are many ethical issues, which we seldom face up to, whenever an animal is killed. For example, is it "worse" to shoot a wild boar for food than to slaughter an imprisoned factory farmed hog? Does the life of a wild turkey matter more than the life of a free range domestic turkey? Is the person who grants a license to the hunter, or the one who authorizes that person, or the one who drafts the laws that make it legal to do this, as guilty as the person who pulls the trigger (or fires the crossbow)? These and many other such questions are seldom asked. And when they are, they sometimes seem impossible to answer. But trophy hunting is hard to defend. And the outpouring of anger and hatred occasioned by the killing of Cecil shows how many people feel that the days of the great White Hunter should be brought to a close. It is excellent news that many airlines have now refused to carry trophies. Cecil has become, albeit unknowingly, a martyr for a cause. [Excerpt from her full statement, released by The Jane Goodall Institute.]
Yet, when Katniss Everdeen of “The Hunger Games” wields her bow and arrow, she’s hailed by feminists as “feisty” and “independent.” When Kendall Jones wields hers, she’s denounced as a shameless self-promoter who wears short shorts and makeup (horrors!) and posts mean memes about vegetarians.
Charlotte Allen, once again having less than nothing to contribute to the national conversation.
posted by Halloween Jack at 6:23 AM on February 8, 2016 [10 favorites]
Charlotte Allen, once again having less than nothing to contribute to the national conversation.
posted by Halloween Jack at 6:23 AM on February 8, 2016 [10 favorites]
Charlotte Allen genuinely doesn't realize that Katniss Everdeen is the lion in that story, does she.
posted by Etrigan at 6:26 AM on February 8, 2016 [33 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 6:26 AM on February 8, 2016 [33 favorites]
I applaud this post for the even-handed approach in the related links. Hunters want to continue hunting, and the preservation of habitats are essential for that purpose. Pheasants Forever, to take an example, spends lots of time, effort, and money building, improving, and preserving upland habitats. Typical hunters are conservation allies.
Are the big game hunters off-putting to many? Sure, but they're a sideshow, representing a tiny fraction of the hunting population. They're visible because they provide an easy opportunity for moral outrage by folks who, for the most part, have done nothing to further the preservation of the species they're kvetching about. It's all about structuring incentives. If killing apex predators is bad, price it so high that the benefits accrued by pouring that money into conservation outweigh it. Most folks don't want to shoot coyote; you can't eat it.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:26 AM on February 8, 2016 [7 favorites]
Are the big game hunters off-putting to many? Sure, but they're a sideshow, representing a tiny fraction of the hunting population. They're visible because they provide an easy opportunity for moral outrage by folks who, for the most part, have done nothing to further the preservation of the species they're kvetching about. It's all about structuring incentives. If killing apex predators is bad, price it so high that the benefits accrued by pouring that money into conservation outweigh it. Most folks don't want to shoot coyote; you can't eat it.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:26 AM on February 8, 2016 [7 favorites]
They're visible because they provide an easy opportunity for moral outrage by folks who, for the most part, have done nothing to further the preservation of the species they're kvetching about.
Other than, y'know, not killing them.
posted by Etrigan at 6:29 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
Other than, y'know, not killing them.
posted by Etrigan at 6:29 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
Other than, y'know, not killing them.
That's funny, but it's also a cheap shot that misses the point. Big game hunters are spending up to hundreds of thousands of dollars for permits to hunt these animals. They usually are killing older, non-breeding males. They pour money back into local communities and support conservation efforts in those countries. And they do it all legally. These assholes, tacky as they are, are not the problem. Their impact is minuscule. We're talking ~1 rhino vs hundreds lost to poachers.
Poachers and destruction of habitat are the problem. Big game hunters are the sideshow.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:38 AM on February 8, 2016 [20 favorites]
That's funny, but it's also a cheap shot that misses the point. Big game hunters are spending up to hundreds of thousands of dollars for permits to hunt these animals. They usually are killing older, non-breeding males. They pour money back into local communities and support conservation efforts in those countries. And they do it all legally. These assholes, tacky as they are, are not the problem. Their impact is minuscule. We're talking ~1 rhino vs hundreds lost to poachers.
Poachers and destruction of habitat are the problem. Big game hunters are the sideshow.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:38 AM on February 8, 2016 [20 favorites]
Looking at the map, what are they hunting in New Zealand? Possums? Weasels/Stoats? Rats? None of those is going to make a good trophy, but I can't think of what else you'd want to shoot there that isn't an endangered bird.
posted by Hactar at 6:52 AM on February 8, 2016
posted by Hactar at 6:52 AM on February 8, 2016
"I can't think of what else you'd want to shoot there that isn't an endangered bird."
Long pig. I hear it's the most dangerous game.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:54 AM on February 8, 2016 [6 favorites]
Long pig. I hear it's the most dangerous game.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:54 AM on February 8, 2016 [6 favorites]
Hobbitses.
posted by biffa at 6:55 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by biffa at 6:55 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
A bit of googling suggests its elk, boar, deer type stuff.
posted by biffa at 6:58 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by biffa at 6:58 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
Looking at the map, what are they hunting in New Zealand? Possums? Weasels/Stoats? Rats? None of those is going to make a good trophy, but I can't think of what else you'd want to shoot there that isn't an endangered bird.
They should sell Moa and Haast's Eagle permits. What harm could it do?
posted by leotrotsky at 7:02 AM on February 8, 2016
They should sell Moa and Haast's Eagle permits. What harm could it do?
posted by leotrotsky at 7:02 AM on February 8, 2016
And they do it all legally.
All?
Yes, there are a lot of hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. There are also a lot of non-hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. Similarly, there are hunters who aren't and don't, just as there are non-hunters who aren't and don't. Your casting of it as hunters being uniformly great for the environment and all non-hunters being uniformly dilettantes looking to get offended at something is silly.
Hunting can be a part of and support legitimate conservation efforts. It isn't always, and it's also a part of the more industrialized killing of game animals and wiping out of habitats, because it glamorizes the possession of parts of these animals. Saying it's only a sideshow is like saying that models having eating disorders isn't really a problem, because there aren't really that many models compared to all the other people with eating disorders.
posted by Etrigan at 7:03 AM on February 8, 2016 [12 favorites]
All?
Yes, there are a lot of hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. There are also a lot of non-hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. Similarly, there are hunters who aren't and don't, just as there are non-hunters who aren't and don't. Your casting of it as hunters being uniformly great for the environment and all non-hunters being uniformly dilettantes looking to get offended at something is silly.
Hunting can be a part of and support legitimate conservation efforts. It isn't always, and it's also a part of the more industrialized killing of game animals and wiping out of habitats, because it glamorizes the possession of parts of these animals. Saying it's only a sideshow is like saying that models having eating disorders isn't really a problem, because there aren't really that many models compared to all the other people with eating disorders.
posted by Etrigan at 7:03 AM on February 8, 2016 [12 favorites]
Was thinking the same about Mexico -- mountain lions ? big horn sheep ? (Canada I get, but Mexico as a hunting destination ? Never knew .. )
posted by k5.user at 7:04 AM on February 8, 2016
posted by k5.user at 7:04 AM on February 8, 2016
Can we invent some kind of alternative pursuit for people who seem to need a hobby that gets them outside and rewards successful participants with something thrilling and beautiful? The drive to do this kind of thing is understandable -- can we invent another way to focus that drive?
posted by amtho at 7:05 AM on February 8, 2016
posted by amtho at 7:05 AM on February 8, 2016
Genuinely surprised at how much of this style of hunting takes place in Canada. Too often the focus on trophy hunting is from game from Africa. But it does make sense, so much of Canada is populated around the edges and the rest, huge swathes of plains, forests, lakes, rivers, mountains, tundra, etc. There's a lot of nature out there. For many of us, it's just something we don't focus on.
From the first National Geographic link:
From the first National Geographic link:
It may surprise some that the biggest source of trophy imports is Canada. But it’s close and easy to get to for Americans, and it offers iconic North American species such as black bears, grizzly bears, moose, and wolves. For similar reasons, Mexico is also a big destination for sport hunters. Its hunting industry is valued at about $200 million, according to the Humane Society, with nearly 4,000 hunting ranches in operation.posted by Fizz at 7:06 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
A month ago, I was in Dallas for work, and I was sharing a hotel with a big game hunting convention. Just sharing a hotel elevator with the vendors made me feel dirty. The promotional materials mentioned conservation a lot, but most of the vendors seemed to be selling big guns.
posted by lownote at 7:06 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by lownote at 7:06 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
All?
That's a bad example
Theo Bronkhorst, a professional hunter who served as Palmer’s Zimbabwean guide, is accused of breaching hunting rules. The other, a Zimbabwean game park owner, is also charged with allowing an illegal hunt to take place.How many people need to be charged with crimes for it not to be "legally"?
posted by Etrigan at 7:07 AM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
Can we invent some kind of alternative pursuit for people who seem to need a hobby that gets them outside and rewards successful participants with something thrilling and beautiful? The drive to do this kind of thing is understandable -- can we invent another way to focus that drive?
Sadly, we already have it. It's called golf.
Our foursome started at a tee on high ground, looking down a tree-lined swath of grass at the basket nearly 400 feet away. After we flung our discs, as we headed down the fairway, I felt a strange surge of satisfaction. I couldn't figure out why until it occurred to me what we were: a bunch of guys converging on a target and hurling projectiles at it.
Was golf the modern version of Pleistocene hunting on the savanna? The notion had already occurred to devotees of evolutionary psychology, as I discovered from reading Edward O. Wilson and Steve Sailer. They point to surveys and other research showing that people in widely different places and cultures have a common vision of what makes a beautiful landscape -- and it looks a lot like the view from golfers' favorite tees.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:07 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Sadly, we already have it. It's called golf.
Our foursome started at a tee on high ground, looking down a tree-lined swath of grass at the basket nearly 400 feet away. After we flung our discs, as we headed down the fairway, I felt a strange surge of satisfaction. I couldn't figure out why until it occurred to me what we were: a bunch of guys converging on a target and hurling projectiles at it.
Was golf the modern version of Pleistocene hunting on the savanna? The notion had already occurred to devotees of evolutionary psychology, as I discovered from reading Edward O. Wilson and Steve Sailer. They point to surveys and other research showing that people in widely different places and cultures have a common vision of what makes a beautiful landscape -- and it looks a lot like the view from golfers' favorite tees.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:07 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Can we invent some kind of alternative pursuit for people who seem to need a hobby that gets them outside and rewards successful participants with something thrilling and beautiful? The drive to do this kind of thing is understandable -- can we invent another way to focus that drive?
It's already been invented, it's called photography. I have no problem with people who shoot animals, as long as they're using a camera.
posted by Fizz at 7:07 AM on February 8, 2016 [4 favorites]
It's already been invented, it's called photography. I have no problem with people who shoot animals, as long as they're using a camera.
posted by Fizz at 7:07 AM on February 8, 2016 [4 favorites]
You may also want to listen to this piece on Radio Lab.
posted by humanfont at 7:08 AM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 7:08 AM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
Yes, there are a lot of hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. There are also a lot of non-hunters who are genuinely interested in conservation and do a lot to promote it. Similarly, there are hunters who aren't and don't, just as there are non-hunters who aren't and don't.
Of course this is true. I just suspect that if a person is a hunter they are more likely to have 1. spent time in the wilderness in the past year 2. done something to help preserve it (permits, tags, stamps, and the federal excise tax on hunting equipment count, btw. The federal excise tax alone contributes over 200 million to conservation efforts every year). Painting them as villains helps no one and alienates potential allies when it comes to conservation. Responsible hunters are a great resource when it comes to preserving habitats, that's all I'm saying.
...and it's also a part of the more industrialized killing of game animals and wiping out of habitats, because it glamorizes the possession of parts of these animals.
I don't see how that follows from the rest of your comment and I see no evidence for it. The 'industrialized' killing of game animals is by the poachers, and it's not because of 'glamour,' it's because the traditional Chinese medicine thinks eating big animals gives men erections.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:19 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
Of course this is true. I just suspect that if a person is a hunter they are more likely to have 1. spent time in the wilderness in the past year 2. done something to help preserve it (permits, tags, stamps, and the federal excise tax on hunting equipment count, btw. The federal excise tax alone contributes over 200 million to conservation efforts every year). Painting them as villains helps no one and alienates potential allies when it comes to conservation. Responsible hunters are a great resource when it comes to preserving habitats, that's all I'm saying.
...and it's also a part of the more industrialized killing of game animals and wiping out of habitats, because it glamorizes the possession of parts of these animals.
I don't see how that follows from the rest of your comment and I see no evidence for it. The 'industrialized' killing of game animals is by the poachers, and it's not because of 'glamour,' it's because the traditional Chinese medicine thinks eating big animals gives men erections.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:19 AM on February 8, 2016 [8 favorites]
Hactar: Looking at the map, what are they hunting in New Zealand? Possums? Weasels/Stoats? Rats?
The surviving members of Crowded House.
posted by dr_dank at 7:23 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
The surviving members of Crowded House.
posted by dr_dank at 7:23 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Metafilter: they do it all legally.
posted by sneebler at 7:39 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by sneebler at 7:39 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
> Genuinely surprised at how much of this style of hunting takes place in Canada
… and how many of them are for snow goose. If there was even a suggestion of snow geese on wind farm sites I was developing, it could be a show stopper. Wildfowl conservation groups protecting birds that they're going to shoot later seems a little ... odd.
posted by scruss at 7:49 AM on February 8, 2016
… and how many of them are for snow goose. If there was even a suggestion of snow geese on wind farm sites I was developing, it could be a show stopper. Wildfowl conservation groups protecting birds that they're going to shoot later seems a little ... odd.
posted by scruss at 7:49 AM on February 8, 2016
"Can we invent some kind of alternative pursuit for people who seem to need a hobby that gets them outside and rewards successful participants with something thrilling and beautiful? "
That's how we got birdwatching! "Hey, guys, maybe instead of shooting all the birds, you could COUNT them, and we can even make it competitive ..."
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 7:55 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
That's how we got birdwatching! "Hey, guys, maybe instead of shooting all the birds, you could COUNT them, and we can even make it competitive ..."
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 7:55 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Send all these scumbugs who hunt endangered animals to an island and let them hunt each other.
posted by entropicamericana at 7:59 AM on February 8, 2016
posted by entropicamericana at 7:59 AM on February 8, 2016
Please take some time to listen to the RadioLab episode linked above by humanfont. I haven't even finished it, but was left speechless from what I heard the other day. It's one of those moments that can totally change your opinions about something.
It's not enough to convince me that there aren't better options to big game hunting and hunting endangered species, but it made me realize how much I didn't know and understand.
posted by evilangela at 8:03 AM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
It's not enough to convince me that there aren't better options to big game hunting and hunting endangered species, but it made me realize how much I didn't know and understand.
posted by evilangela at 8:03 AM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
I applaud this post for the even-handed approach in the related links. Hunters want to continue hunting, and the preservation of habitats are essential for that purpose. Pheasants Forever, to take an example, spends lots of time, effort, and money building, improving, and preserving upland habitats. Typical hunters are conservation allies.
Are the big game hunters off-putting to many?
Big game hunters are off putting because the ones that make the news are ones who are not part of Ducks Unlimited or Pheasants Unlimited, who have never put in the time to preserve wild habitat for any species let alone what they want to mount on their walls. They appear to have nothing in common with America's dominant hunter demographic, that is, working class people who eat what they kill. This is a big problem, because for big game hunting to be part of the solution, the hunters have to understand they should only kill animals they've been permitted to kill by game wardens, as part of a system that protects both the animals and the people living alongside them. When those same hunters willingly pay money to corrupt the process and introduce poaching and thuggery, they become part of the problem.
I have no solution to offer here.
posted by ocschwar at 8:28 AM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
Can we invent some kind of alternative pursuit for people who seem to need a hobby that gets them outside and rewards successful participants with something thrilling and beautiful? The drive to do this kind of thing is understandable -- can we invent another way to focus that drive?
Lots of people enjoy stalking wildlife with cameras. I'd do it too if I had the time and money.
posted by ocschwar at 8:30 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
This thread brought to mind an ancient poem attributed to Omar Khayyam
They say the Lion and the Lizard keepposted by humanfont at 8:48 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
The Courts where Jamshyd gloried and drank deep:
And Bahram, that great Hunter--the Wild Ass
Stamps o'er his Head, and he lies fast asleep.
So I, too, used to be very against trophy hunting. But as I've begun hunting, and talking to other hunters, I realize it's actually not that simple. Some of the animals that are "trophy animals" are actually also meat animals. Just because someone take a bear head for a trophy, it doesn't mean they're not also eating the bear meat. The same with moose and elk. And while we here in America don't generally eat the more exotic animals, it's actually quite common for trophy hunters in Africa to donate the meat from the kill to a local village.
I still think it's completely irresponsible to kill an animal and waste its meat. This is why am very skeptical of, for example, wolf hunting, which I don't believe people actually eat. But on animals that are also meat animals, I'm not sure how you would tell whether or not they wasted it.
posted by corb at 8:53 AM on February 8, 2016
I still think it's completely irresponsible to kill an animal and waste its meat. This is why am very skeptical of, for example, wolf hunting, which I don't believe people actually eat. But on animals that are also meat animals, I'm not sure how you would tell whether or not they wasted it.
posted by corb at 8:53 AM on February 8, 2016
"From a personal perspective, and ecologically, I wish hunting predators was banned except in cases where a farmer is protecting livestock or there is a threat to humans."
But what will limit the predator population sizes?
posted by I-baLL at 8:54 AM on February 8, 2016
But what will limit the predator population sizes?
posted by I-baLL at 8:54 AM on February 8, 2016
Genuinely surprised at how much of this style of hunting takes place in Canada.
I imagine there's more trophy hunting out West (especially in Alberta) then up in Northern Ontario, but the remote Northern Ontario town I grew up in, during the summer & winter, had loads of Americans who came up to hunt moose, bear and the like. It was a major source of income for the town. You could always tell them apart from the local hunters because they'd usually tied the head of whatever they were hunting on the front of their trucks (or in one case, hilariously, on their snowmobile) when they came back from the bush. Most of locals hunted, including us, but most weren't really trophy hunters - we ate & shared what we killed. Usually the only thing people kept was the antlers of a moose, maybe a bear's teeth but even then rarely.
posted by Ashwagandha at 9:06 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
I imagine there's more trophy hunting out West (especially in Alberta) then up in Northern Ontario, but the remote Northern Ontario town I grew up in, during the summer & winter, had loads of Americans who came up to hunt moose, bear and the like. It was a major source of income for the town. You could always tell them apart from the local hunters because they'd usually tied the head of whatever they were hunting on the front of their trucks (or in one case, hilariously, on their snowmobile) when they came back from the bush. Most of locals hunted, including us, but most weren't really trophy hunters - we ate & shared what we killed. Usually the only thing people kept was the antlers of a moose, maybe a bear's teeth but even then rarely.
posted by Ashwagandha at 9:06 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
I recently read this GQ article in a sports writing anthology, which talks about many of the same issues. Fizz, thank you for a very interesting post.
posted by cheapskatebay at 9:34 AM on February 8, 2016
posted by cheapskatebay at 9:34 AM on February 8, 2016
All the cute hoppy things we have in Australia are going extinct because they're being displaced by rabbits. That's just the beginning. So many incredibly unwise species were deliberately introduced for the sole purpose of hunting. Come over and kill as many as you want. Difficulty level: good luck getting your hands on a gun.
posted by adept256 at 9:50 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by adept256 at 9:50 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
I still think it's completely irresponsible to kill an animal and waste its meat.
Why? I mean, for animals that are common or pests because we've eliminated their predators, anyway.
I mean, we want something to kill the excess deer because we mostly don't want to live next to mountain lions and wolves. Why should it matter that Ms. A eats a bunch of the deer but Ms. B just wants a head for the wall and Mr. C just really hates deer for some odd personal reason and leaves the carcass for crows and bugs out of spite? I mean, assuming they don't leave the carcass fouling a pond or something like that. At a policy level, I just want there to be enough-but-not-too-many dead deer. Why people kill them and what they do with the carcasses I don't care about within pretty wide bounds.
This one time when I lived out in the just-barely-country in NC something brought a deer head onto the yard of the house I was renting, so I had to pick up the starting-to-get stinky head by an ear and throw it away into the woods across the street. And then whatever had brought it brought it back, presumably as a mating gift because I am that sexy, so this process repeated like three times and it was pretty fucking ripe before I finally got rid of it.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:01 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
Why? I mean, for animals that are common or pests because we've eliminated their predators, anyway.
I mean, we want something to kill the excess deer because we mostly don't want to live next to mountain lions and wolves. Why should it matter that Ms. A eats a bunch of the deer but Ms. B just wants a head for the wall and Mr. C just really hates deer for some odd personal reason and leaves the carcass for crows and bugs out of spite? I mean, assuming they don't leave the carcass fouling a pond or something like that. At a policy level, I just want there to be enough-but-not-too-many dead deer. Why people kill them and what they do with the carcasses I don't care about within pretty wide bounds.
This one time when I lived out in the just-barely-country in NC something brought a deer head onto the yard of the house I was renting, so I had to pick up the starting-to-get stinky head by an ear and throw it away into the woods across the street. And then whatever had brought it brought it back, presumably as a mating gift because I am that sexy, so this process repeated like three times and it was pretty fucking ripe before I finally got rid of it.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:01 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
Why should it matter that Ms. A eats a bunch of the deer but Ms. B just wants a head for the wall and Mr. C just really hates deer for some odd personal reason and leaves the carcass for crows and bugs out of spite?
I mean, I guess there's no reason to change things from a policy perspective, but I am definitely going to think Ms. B and Mr. C are just shitty human beings. It just seems like those grocery stores that pour acid on the food they throw out so that no one can eat it. Like, if you hate deer, no problem, I'm sure you've got poor friends that would love 25 pounds of meat given to them for free. To just waste meat because you can, perfectly good meat that people would desperately love to have and you aren't even going to use..it just seems like an asshole move to me. I don't think it should be made illegal, I'm just personally going to think those guys are jerks.
posted by corb at 10:14 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
I mean, I guess there's no reason to change things from a policy perspective, but I am definitely going to think Ms. B and Mr. C are just shitty human beings. It just seems like those grocery stores that pour acid on the food they throw out so that no one can eat it. Like, if you hate deer, no problem, I'm sure you've got poor friends that would love 25 pounds of meat given to them for free. To just waste meat because you can, perfectly good meat that people would desperately love to have and you aren't even going to use..it just seems like an asshole move to me. I don't think it should be made illegal, I'm just personally going to think those guys are jerks.
posted by corb at 10:14 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
The whole argument for "we need trophy hunters to protect wildlife" is kind of weird, in that it points out that it's impossible for us to just not kill too many animals and destroy their habitats. We are simply incapable of that. That world, where people who need to kill for meat, or occasionally to take care of a dangerous predator that is causing problems, is not a possible one for us. We just can't stop ourselves from extincting whole species for fun and/or profit.
So we instead have to make a bargain with the nice responsible killers to help protect wildlife from the not-nice, irresponsible killers.
And maybe that's all we can do. But it's still fucked up.
posted by emjaybee at 10:25 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
So we instead have to make a bargain with the nice responsible killers to help protect wildlife from the not-nice, irresponsible killers.
And maybe that's all we can do. But it's still fucked up.
posted by emjaybee at 10:25 AM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
It is illegal in BC to to kill wildlife (with the exception of grizzly bear, cougar or a fur bearing animal other than a black bear) and fail to remove from the carcass the edible portions of the four quarters and loins to the person’s normal dwelling place or to a meat cutter or the owner or operator of a cold storage plant.
I think it is the same in Alberta.
scruss: "Wildfowl conservation groups protecting birds that they're going to shoot later seems a little ... odd."
This kind of thing goes back to at least the 400s with the hunting reserves of the Frankish Merovingian and Carolingian monarchs.
Ducks Unlimited has made a huge impact on available habitat in some areas which benefits not only the birds they plan to shoot but everything else that lives in wetlands.
posted by Mitheral at 10:28 AM on February 8, 2016 [7 favorites]
I think it is the same in Alberta.
scruss: "Wildfowl conservation groups protecting birds that they're going to shoot later seems a little ... odd."
This kind of thing goes back to at least the 400s with the hunting reserves of the Frankish Merovingian and Carolingian monarchs.
Ducks Unlimited has made a huge impact on available habitat in some areas which benefits not only the birds they plan to shoot but everything else that lives in wetlands.
posted by Mitheral at 10:28 AM on February 8, 2016 [7 favorites]
Canada goose is a trophy animal?
Huh.
I probably could've bagged a few with a net or a lasso on my old bike route. Or maybe I could've just run them down with my bike, if I was feeling especially Trophy Hunting Manly.
posted by clawsoon at 10:46 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Huh.
I probably could've bagged a few with a net or a lasso on my old bike route. Or maybe I could've just run them down with my bike, if I was feeling especially Trophy Hunting Manly.
posted by clawsoon at 10:46 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think it is hard to have a substantive discussion of this because it is hard to not have a visceral dislike for trophy hunting (for me, and many others, I think). In terms of actual conservation outcomes, however, they are clearly a big net plus. Thanks, leotrotsky, for bringing the actual facts to the table.
posted by snofoam at 11:21 AM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by snofoam at 11:21 AM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
We have one cardinal rule on 99% Invisible: No cardinals. Meaning, we deal with the built world, not the natural world.
So, when I read Jon Mooallem’s brilliant book, Wild Ones: A Sometimes Dismaying, Weirdly Reassuring Story About Looking at People Looking at Animals in America, I didn’t think we’d ever do an episode of 99% Invisible about it. I just read it for fun.
But then I saw Jon perform stories from the book live with musical accompaniment from the band Black Prairie. And that changed everything. I accosted Jon and the band in the dressing room and told them they had to let me share it with the 99% Invisible audience.
What you need to know about Wild Ones is that it’s not a book about nature. It’s a book about how we value nature and try fit it into our modern lives. Wild Ones is about the cutesy stuffed animals, the eco-tours, and the byzantine methods of conservation that evolve when our experience with wild life goes from something natural to something designed. Human-animal interaction has become a designed experience and the story of that transition, as the title of the book suggests, is sometimes dismaying and weirdly reassuring.
"Dear Sir..."
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 11:25 AM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
> it's because the traditional Chinese medicine thinks eating big animals gives men erections.
Don't have a source yet, but I heard the other day that this is a western myth*. Traditional chinese medicine used rhino horn to treat inflammation or some such. Unfortunately, the myth has spread to the east, and now there are folks there that heard the same thing you did.
posted by Sunburnt at 12:10 PM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Don't have a source yet, but I heard the other day that this is a western myth*. Traditional chinese medicine used rhino horn to treat inflammation or some such. Unfortunately, the myth has spread to the east, and now there are folks there that heard the same thing you did.
posted by Sunburnt at 12:10 PM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
> Canada goose is a trophy animal?
I think Canada goose shit should be explored as a next-generation lubricant. Anyone can tell you that the stuff completely nullifies any friction between shoe and ground when applied at random by a goose. It's just not safe to walk in a park around Seattle without spike-shoes, at least during migration.
posted by Sunburnt at 12:16 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think Canada goose shit should be explored as a next-generation lubricant. Anyone can tell you that the stuff completely nullifies any friction between shoe and ground when applied at random by a goose. It's just not safe to walk in a park around Seattle without spike-shoes, at least during migration.
posted by Sunburnt at 12:16 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think Canada goose shit should be explored as a next-generation lubricant.
My sister's puggle loves to eat Canada goose shit, puke it back up and eat it again. She also has a German Shepherd/Border Collie mix. Everyone wants to cuddle the puggle, thinking it's the cutest thing in the world. I prefer the other dog.
posted by dazed_one at 12:25 PM on February 8, 2016
My sister's puggle loves to eat Canada goose shit, puke it back up and eat it again. She also has a German Shepherd/Border Collie mix. Everyone wants to cuddle the puggle, thinking it's the cutest thing in the world. I prefer the other dog.
posted by dazed_one at 12:25 PM on February 8, 2016
I don't care what's going through somebody's head when they pull the trigger, as long as they stay with in the law. Say some dude religiously stops hunting 20 minutes after sunset because he doesn't want to risk losing his license to kill something every year and bragg about it. Then I shoot a yummy little buck at 40 minutes after sunset. Do I get a pass because I'm going to eat or use every bit except the bladder and gall bladder?
Selling animals that aren't going to contribute to the future population anymore to promote the continued existence of the species works for me. Big shots diverting the funds for their own use, not so much. Poachers and habitat loss are going to make it all theoretical anyway if they aren't got under control.
posted by ridgerunner at 2:36 PM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
Selling animals that aren't going to contribute to the future population anymore to promote the continued existence of the species works for me. Big shots diverting the funds for their own use, not so much. Poachers and habitat loss are going to make it all theoretical anyway if they aren't got under control.
posted by ridgerunner at 2:36 PM on February 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
I know quite a few trophy hunters and even some guides: ie people who travel nationally or abroad specifically to hunt various species, including African big game and get hides and mounts made. Despite assertions to the contrary in this thread, they absolutely are the same people that hunt deer for meat in rural US and belong to Ducks Unlimited. They scrimp and save to make these trips, none of them that I know are wealthy. Many of them work in the wildllife or conservation field and they all donate the meat and make a big effort to spend locally. They support zoo fundraisers and are the first to donate to conservation efforts. (Trout fishers being the second, then birders with recreational users like mtn bikers and hikers at the very, very bottom of the list.)
It's not my bag, but there is no question in my mind that without trophy hunting and sport fishing many of these species would be extinct or in far more dire straits and much habitat would have been lost irrevocably. Ask anyone who lives in an area popular with hunters how much cash they bring to the rural economy and how much political pressure, and I'm including Canadian and US rural economies too. Hunting and tourism is often what allows local subsistence communities to make it in the cash economy.
(I'm actually more opposed to catch and release fishing which I think of as torturing fish for no good reason. At least hunters generally kill older mature males with a single shot, which is a pretty nice way to go if you're an older wild animal to be honest. Better than slowly failing in strength then getting eaten semi-alive.)
posted by fshgrl at 4:03 PM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
It's not my bag, but there is no question in my mind that without trophy hunting and sport fishing many of these species would be extinct or in far more dire straits and much habitat would have been lost irrevocably. Ask anyone who lives in an area popular with hunters how much cash they bring to the rural economy and how much political pressure, and I'm including Canadian and US rural economies too. Hunting and tourism is often what allows local subsistence communities to make it in the cash economy.
(I'm actually more opposed to catch and release fishing which I think of as torturing fish for no good reason. At least hunters generally kill older mature males with a single shot, which is a pretty nice way to go if you're an older wild animal to be honest. Better than slowly failing in strength then getting eaten semi-alive.)
posted by fshgrl at 4:03 PM on February 8, 2016 [5 favorites]
The whole argument for "we need trophy hunters to protect wildlife" is kind of weird, in that it points out that it's impossible for us to just not kill too many animals and destroy their habitats. We are simply incapable of that.
This strikes me as a misunderstanding - at least in an African context. It's really important in an African context to remember that the vast majority of these animals - especially lions - are killed by locals, by villagers and farmers trying to protect their (generally hovering around subsistence) lifestyles. If, and when, big game hunters shoot a lion (often old, or raised just for that purpose), they spend vast sums of money. Seriously, so much money, like it's more than double, sometimes orders of magnitude more than "Regular" tourists like you or I might spend, that money can (doesn't always) end up back in the community, meaning those villagers don't need to rely on the maize or whatever their growing; the lions become their source of revenue.
What I described above is... like a best case scenario. I'm certainly not implying it always shakes out that way - or that it even does the majority of time. But it can. And it's equally important to acknowledge that the revenues villages get from regular or eco tourists are very low in comparison to what they get from the hunters. Here's a piece about one of the conservancies I spent some time in, in Kenya, highlighting the challenges.
I'm very reluctant to pass judgment on hunting in Africa as a generality - it defies generalisation, and covers a vast swathe of practice. I personally find it abhorrent, but this does not render it immoral or unethical.
It's also important to frame this conversation in context of the corruption, nepotism, imperial history, and inequality that plagues so many African countries. Also the historical and cultural attitudes to hunting and the animals. These socio-political factors exert tremendous force on policy, business and life over lots of places in Africa, and discussion of hunting can't be quarantined from them, either.
One thing I would note is that this discourse - both pro and con - has an unfortunate tendency to elide the voices of those most affected by this: another case of the West tacitly removing Africans from Africa. The continent is not a particularly large open range zoo; the presence of lions, especially, has a huge impact on the people living in these areas; they have rights and they should be heard. In many cases hunting is enthusiastically organised and championed by traditional owners of the land; in others its opposed; in others there is a mix of support and opposition.
Blanket rules and assumptions don't work when talking about big game hunting.
posted by smoke at 4:31 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
This strikes me as a misunderstanding - at least in an African context. It's really important in an African context to remember that the vast majority of these animals - especially lions - are killed by locals, by villagers and farmers trying to protect their (generally hovering around subsistence) lifestyles. If, and when, big game hunters shoot a lion (often old, or raised just for that purpose), they spend vast sums of money. Seriously, so much money, like it's more than double, sometimes orders of magnitude more than "Regular" tourists like you or I might spend, that money can (doesn't always) end up back in the community, meaning those villagers don't need to rely on the maize or whatever their growing; the lions become their source of revenue.
What I described above is... like a best case scenario. I'm certainly not implying it always shakes out that way - or that it even does the majority of time. But it can. And it's equally important to acknowledge that the revenues villages get from regular or eco tourists are very low in comparison to what they get from the hunters. Here's a piece about one of the conservancies I spent some time in, in Kenya, highlighting the challenges.
I'm very reluctant to pass judgment on hunting in Africa as a generality - it defies generalisation, and covers a vast swathe of practice. I personally find it abhorrent, but this does not render it immoral or unethical.
It's also important to frame this conversation in context of the corruption, nepotism, imperial history, and inequality that plagues so many African countries. Also the historical and cultural attitudes to hunting and the animals. These socio-political factors exert tremendous force on policy, business and life over lots of places in Africa, and discussion of hunting can't be quarantined from them, either.
One thing I would note is that this discourse - both pro and con - has an unfortunate tendency to elide the voices of those most affected by this: another case of the West tacitly removing Africans from Africa. The continent is not a particularly large open range zoo; the presence of lions, especially, has a huge impact on the people living in these areas; they have rights and they should be heard. In many cases hunting is enthusiastically organised and championed by traditional owners of the land; in others its opposed; in others there is a mix of support and opposition.
Blanket rules and assumptions don't work when talking about big game hunting.
posted by smoke at 4:31 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
I want to add, thank you for a really well curated post, Fizz. Excellent collection of links summarising this complex issue.
posted by smoke at 4:48 PM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by smoke at 4:48 PM on February 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
Just because someone take a bear head for a trophy, it doesn't mean they're not also eating the bear meat.
I know a lot of people who have eaten bear meat. I know very, very few people who have eaten bear twice. I haven't tried it and never will, but from what I am told it is not in line with modern tastes, as well as usually being full of worms. Everyone wants an elk steak or deer sausage, but good luck giving away bear.
I'm actually more opposed to catch and release fishing which I think of as torturing fish for no good reason.
It's an improvement over just plain decimating those populations, but there's no getting around that catch and release has a cost both at the individual and population levels. I won't do it myself and wish that some of those people would switch their attention to invasives or fish with robust populations.
It's really important in an African context to remember that the vast majority of these animals - especially lions - are killed by locals, by villagers and farmers trying to protect their (generally hovering around subsistence) lifestyles.
It also overlooks that the vast majority of impact to animals there, aside from habitat loss, is from meat hunting for bush meat, poaching, and people protecting their land, crops, and domesticated animals from predation. At this point in time, traditional trophy hunting is a drop in the bucket, ecologically.
posted by Dip Flash at 9:06 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
I know a lot of people who have eaten bear meat. I know very, very few people who have eaten bear twice. I haven't tried it and never will, but from what I am told it is not in line with modern tastes, as well as usually being full of worms. Everyone wants an elk steak or deer sausage, but good luck giving away bear.
I'm actually more opposed to catch and release fishing which I think of as torturing fish for no good reason.
It's an improvement over just plain decimating those populations, but there's no getting around that catch and release has a cost both at the individual and population levels. I won't do it myself and wish that some of those people would switch their attention to invasives or fish with robust populations.
It's really important in an African context to remember that the vast majority of these animals - especially lions - are killed by locals, by villagers and farmers trying to protect their (generally hovering around subsistence) lifestyles.
It also overlooks that the vast majority of impact to animals there, aside from habitat loss, is from meat hunting for bush meat, poaching, and people protecting their land, crops, and domesticated animals from predation. At this point in time, traditional trophy hunting is a drop in the bucket, ecologically.
posted by Dip Flash at 9:06 PM on February 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
Conversations that you must hear all the time in hunter's homes:
Partner: Off hunting this weekend?
Hunter: To be honest I'm not really in the mood but I have a responsibility to help maintain a sustainable population level.
posted by biffa at 11:13 PM on February 8, 2016
Partner: Off hunting this weekend?
Hunter: To be honest I'm not really in the mood but I have a responsibility to help maintain a sustainable population level.
posted by biffa at 11:13 PM on February 8, 2016
the person who pulls the trigger (or fires the crossbow)?
...crossbows have triggers.
posted by Dysk at 1:25 AM on February 9, 2016
...crossbows have triggers.
posted by Dysk at 1:25 AM on February 9, 2016
So, nominations for substitute pursuits are:
- golf;
- photography;
- bird watching.
You guys get that there might be room for another activity that's more thrilling/scary/powerful-feeling, right?
I am absolutely not a hunter, but I have felt the adrenaline rush that comes right before going out on stage to perform, not knowing for sure if I'd remember my lines or just look fatally stupid. I know that kind of thing is not for everyone, but I get that life can seem pointless if you don't have _something_ exciting to do that takes all your personal resources.
posted by amtho at 4:24 AM on February 9, 2016
- golf;
- photography;
- bird watching.
You guys get that there might be room for another activity that's more thrilling/scary/powerful-feeling, right?
I am absolutely not a hunter, but I have felt the adrenaline rush that comes right before going out on stage to perform, not knowing for sure if I'd remember my lines or just look fatally stupid. I know that kind of thing is not for everyone, but I get that life can seem pointless if you don't have _something_ exciting to do that takes all your personal resources.
posted by amtho at 4:24 AM on February 9, 2016
Hunting is sadly the opposite of exciting. In fact, I nearly posted an AskMe that was "how can I keep from being ridiculously bored while I sit perfectly still for hours as I await deer?"
That's crazy, about bear though. Where are you at? I hadn't heard of any particular increase in parasites, is it possibly regional?
posted by corb at 6:02 AM on February 9, 2016 [3 favorites]
That's crazy, about bear though. Where are you at? I hadn't heard of any particular increase in parasites, is it possibly regional?
posted by corb at 6:02 AM on February 9, 2016 [3 favorites]
"how can I keep from being ridiculously bored while I sit perfectly still for hours as I await deer?"
and not freeze my ass off
I haven't tried a ground blind or permanent stand (eg tree house) where you're more hidden/enclosed and have more room and freedom to move a bit.
posted by k5.user at 7:07 AM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
and not freeze my ass off
I haven't tried a ground blind or permanent stand (eg tree house) where you're more hidden/enclosed and have more room and freedom to move a bit.
posted by k5.user at 7:07 AM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
Hunting is sadly the opposite of exciting.
Then, and this is a serious question, why do _you_ do it?
posted by amtho at 7:25 AM on February 9, 2016
Then, and this is a serious question, why do _you_ do it?
posted by amtho at 7:25 AM on February 9, 2016
It ain't for the savings. Guns/archery tackle, supplies, hunting license, tree stands, processing tools+supplies etc sure don't make for cheap per-lb meat.
I like venison, and either you kill it yourself, or make friends with people who do, and hope they have some to spare. Where I live, it also helps control the deer population (rural to suburbs here, and deer devour pretty much all the landscaping). It's peaceful to sit in the woods for 2-3 hours, provided you don't get frostbite (or eaten by bugs in the early season).
posted by k5.user at 7:54 AM on February 9, 2016
I like venison, and either you kill it yourself, or make friends with people who do, and hope they have some to spare. Where I live, it also helps control the deer population (rural to suburbs here, and deer devour pretty much all the landscaping). It's peaceful to sit in the woods for 2-3 hours, provided you don't get frostbite (or eaten by bugs in the early season).
posted by k5.user at 7:54 AM on February 9, 2016
Venison is delicious, healthy, and insanely expensive. We already have rifles and clothing, and here the cost of a permit for me is what it would cost to buy enough meat for one stew. There's almost no fat on deer, and the only low fat "meat" equivalent is fish, which is also stupidly expensive and has low time-for-food yields. One deer can keep my whole family in meat for months. An elk could probably keep us in meat all winter, and while I know nothing about the cost of moose permits, one moose could keep my family and our extended families in meat for a year.
posted by corb at 8:54 AM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by corb at 8:54 AM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
I should add, around here you can get a butcher to process it for you for 1/4 the meat. Otherwise it might be expensive as I both suck at butchering and also have no facility for it.
posted by corb at 8:57 AM on February 9, 2016
posted by corb at 8:57 AM on February 9, 2016
I am absolutely not a hunter, but I have felt the adrenaline rush that comes right before going out on stage to perform, not knowing for sure if I'd remember my lines or just look fatally stupid.
Is something dead by the time you're done? That's some extreme performance.
My family is full of hunters, most of which I don't mind except for dove hunting, because the birds are too small to eat (so I'm told) so it's just kind of pointless and bloody. They mostly concentrate on deer. My sister once took out a coyote going after her chickens from her back porch--she's a good shot. I'm actually pretty enthusiastic about hunting deer, or invasive species like feral pigs, because they stress the environment/other animals and aren't endangered.
I do understand that the situation in Africa is complicated, and like I said, maybe big game hunting is the best we can do to preserve those animals/help people living there. I am not entirely convinced that it's either inconsequential or 100% beneficial to those ecosystems. And the drive to kill, as a thrill to be experienced rather than as a thing you do to survive, is really foreign to me, and off-putting.
posted by emjaybee at 1:53 PM on February 9, 2016 [1 favorite]
Is something dead by the time you're done? That's some extreme performance.
My family is full of hunters, most of which I don't mind except for dove hunting, because the birds are too small to eat (so I'm told) so it's just kind of pointless and bloody. They mostly concentrate on deer. My sister once took out a coyote going after her chickens from her back porch--she's a good shot. I'm actually pretty enthusiastic about hunting deer, or invasive species like feral pigs, because they stress the environment/other animals and aren't endangered.
I do understand that the situation in Africa is complicated, and like I said, maybe big game hunting is the best we can do to preserve those animals/help people living there. I am not entirely convinced that it's either inconsequential or 100% beneficial to those ecosystems. And the drive to kill, as a thrill to be experienced rather than as a thing you do to survive, is really foreign to me, and off-putting.
posted by emjaybee at 1:53 PM on February 9, 2016 [1 favorite]
Hunting is sadly the opposite of exciting.
They should make all the hunters wear deer suits, with fuzzy antlers. That would add excitement and contribute to maintaining a sustainable population of predators.
posted by biffa at 2:10 PM on February 9, 2016
They should make all the hunters wear deer suits, with fuzzy antlers. That would add excitement and contribute to maintaining a sustainable population of predators.
posted by biffa at 2:10 PM on February 9, 2016
You can eat doves, it's just that it's really not worth it unless they're wrapped in bacon. (An opinion that long precedes the internet's bacon obsession.)
posted by rewil at 3:15 PM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by rewil at 3:15 PM on February 9, 2016 [2 favorites]
We just do the butchering ourselves. Our cuts aren't store perfect but they are serviceable and at worst bits end up as stew meat chunks or are ground up for sausage.
The biggest cost for us is gas (tags are $6, ammunition is $1 a shot at most) and we usually combine hunting with collecting firewood so even the cost of gas is minimized. The capital costs have been depreciated years ago; EG: I'm using my grandfather's rifle a lot of the time.
It's certainly possible to spend thousands on a hunt (which is why trophy hunting supports so many tiny communities in BC) buying quads, and rifles, and cameras, and tents, and special clothing and, and, and. But that is more a recreational thing IMO. When I go out we spend maybe a $100 a day and that is split three ways and we come back with a cord of wood to boot.
corb: "That's crazy, about bear though. Where are you at? I hadn't heard of any particular increase in parasites, is it possibly regional?"
Few people here in BC eat bear and it has to be well cooked because of trichinosis.
posted by Mitheral at 5:43 PM on February 9, 2016 [3 favorites]
The biggest cost for us is gas (tags are $6, ammunition is $1 a shot at most) and we usually combine hunting with collecting firewood so even the cost of gas is minimized. The capital costs have been depreciated years ago; EG: I'm using my grandfather's rifle a lot of the time.
It's certainly possible to spend thousands on a hunt (which is why trophy hunting supports so many tiny communities in BC) buying quads, and rifles, and cameras, and tents, and special clothing and, and, and. But that is more a recreational thing IMO. When I go out we spend maybe a $100 a day and that is split three ways and we come back with a cord of wood to boot.
corb: "That's crazy, about bear though. Where are you at? I hadn't heard of any particular increase in parasites, is it possibly regional?"
Few people here in BC eat bear and it has to be well cooked because of trichinosis.
posted by Mitheral at 5:43 PM on February 9, 2016 [3 favorites]
That's crazy, about bear though. Where are you at? I hadn't heard of any particular increase in parasites, is it possibly regional?
In addition to the trichinosis issue, I know several people who have had the experience of being horrified at the quantity of worms when field dressing bears. I have assumed it is because they are omnivores but that is just a guess.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:10 PM on February 9, 2016
In addition to the trichinosis issue, I know several people who have had the experience of being horrified at the quantity of worms when field dressing bears. I have assumed it is because they are omnivores but that is just a guess.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:10 PM on February 9, 2016
Huh! Bear tags are too rich for our blood, plus their resemblance to dogs and intelligence makes me have Feels. But that's still useful data!
posted by corb at 8:41 PM on February 9, 2016
posted by corb at 8:41 PM on February 9, 2016
Seems different strokes for folks. I don't have access to land (or $1200+ a year for a lease or to join a hunt club), so I do urban archery. Arrows/broadheads are good for at least 1, but rarely more than 2 shots, and the license is a bit over $60. So a lot more consumables for me. And we butcher ourselves as well.
On the plus side, I can wake up and in 20 minutes be in my stand ..
(Until this year, 1 bear tag was part of your license. Now it's a separate endorsement, but I have no desire to hunt one)
posted by k5.user at 7:08 AM on February 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
On the plus side, I can wake up and in 20 minutes be in my stand ..
(Until this year, 1 bear tag was part of your license. Now it's a separate endorsement, but I have no desire to hunt one)
posted by k5.user at 7:08 AM on February 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
« Older The Cuban Money Crisis | Ziphius, rumored to slice boats in half with its... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I occasionally shoot invasives and if my work schedule allows I might do a little meat hunting this fall (though I doubt it, I've been saying the same thing for the last ten years and each year I say "maybe next year"), so I have no moral credibility on these matters. But absolutely, if I were in charge, I would ban all trophy and sport hunting of predators -- though as the links above discuss, that needs to be done in ways that make sure the negative consequences don't accrue only to locals.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:22 AM on February 8, 2016 [12 favorites]