Trophy Hunting, Revisited

[taylorce1]

I do not at all approve of hunting wolves, bears, elephants, lions, cougars, or other predators...mainly for two reasons.

I sincerely disagree with that statement for a few reasons. I think hunting predators has to take place to keep the balance or the tags out there for deer, elk, and moose will severely decrease as the numbers decrease. This will bring a lack of revenue to the States and will increase the cost of tags, thus making hunting a rich mans game even more. This will give more reason to seek hunting on game ranches and more incidents of canned hunting and thus giving more ammunition to the anti-hunting crowd.

What happens when there isn't enough game for the amount of predators? By hunting only the traditional game animals and not the predators we are upseting the natural balance even more. If we allow hunting of small game, pronghorn, deer, elk, and moose we have to approve and allow hunting of predators.

Livestock owners have the right to protect their herds. Predators are opportunistic and will take out the easier prey; domesticated animals will always be easier to kill for them than wild game. Hunting of predators gives the Ranchers and Farmers a tool to protect their investments.

As far as hunting elephants, lions and other dangerous game in Africa it has saved some animals from extinction in various regions. Making the animal a profitable one for the villages instead of a nuisance has stopped poaching in a lot of areas. It has been proven that countries in Africa that allow hunting have more animals than the ones that don’t. The hunter gets his trophy; a percentage of the trophy fee goes to help local villages as well as most of the meat harvested from said animals. This way the villages see the animals as an asset and will protect them.

I don’t think any true hunter wants to see an animal species become extinct from what he/she is doing. But by being selective by taking animal past prime or only mature animals they are doing their part to maintain a healthy balance in the herds. This means taking wounded or sick animals as well to maintain the herd’s health and end the suffering of the injured animal.

As long as the person who is trophy hunting and being ethical about it I see no problem in hunting for trophies. For me being ethical is hurry up take your pictures then take care of the animal, harvest all edible meat before taking the trophy from the field. Show the animal the respect and care that it deserves, and if you don’t eat it donate it to someone who can use the meat. If we as hunters will do this then there is nothing wrong with enjoying a nice trophy on the wall.

 

[Playboypenguin]

taylorce1

Show me some numbers to back up any of those theories you just gave. That is all just bull. Elephant huning and making it profitable has not stopped poaching. Armed govt troops have done that. Shooting poachers on sight have done that.

As far as a lack of prey, that has just not been a problem except where human intervention has destroyed habitat. Seems like the way to solve that problem is to stop destroying habitat, not just kill all the displaced animals.

 

[FirstFreedom]

taylorce, to expand a little bit on your thoughts there, with which I agree:

I think we have to draw a distiction between areas where there ARE apex predators such as cougars, wolves, & bears, and areas where there are NOT any predators capable of taking down full-grown healthy ungulates (in the mideast and southeast parts of the US).

In those areas where there are no apex predators (which is of course due to humans over-hunting them in decades past, deer can and do become a nuisance, in need of population control. In those areas, I would definitely be against apex predator hunting.

 

[Art Eatman]

FF, what we have here is a difference in word meanings. I think you're using "trophy-hunting" for what I'd call (to be polite) criminal behavior. Certainly, IMO, immoral and/or unethical behavior. I don't want to even be acquainted with anybody who'd focus solely on the size of the head and ignore any and all other considerations.

Again, I see trophy hunting in the context of the B&C rules and within the law.

Again, I think there is a difference between what we call game animals, and the pestiferous non-game animals such as predators and prairie dogs.

People are as much a part of ecosystems as are non-human animals. To pretend otherwise is, IMO, irrational. We compete with coyotes, for instance, if we're concerned about quail. Our goats compete with deer for browse. We modify land for our farming and our cattle, so people in cities merely by their existence are affecting ecosystems--indirect though it may be.

Hunters--with today's systems of controls--generally affect only individual animals, not entire species. As with all people's varied wants and wishes, some hunt primarily for the meat. Others hunt for trophy-sized animals in order that they are more challenged as to the difficulty.

We regularly talk of the positive value of meeting and overcoming various challenges. Why not in hunting?

, Art

 

[Playboypenguin]

FF, what we have here is a difference in word meanings. I think you're using "trophy-hunting" for what I'd call (to be polite) criminal behavior. Certainly, IMO, immoral and/or unethical behavior. I don't want to even be acquainted with anybody who'd focus solely on the size of the head and ignore any and all other considerations.

I think I agree with you to an extent. I personally do not care if a guy decides he is only going to shoot the biggest deer he can find and let all others pass when he goes hunting so that he will have a keepsake after the deer has been consumed. I do have a problem with people that go out exclusively to come back with a trophy.

People are as much a part of ecosystems as are non-human animals. To pretend otherwise is, IMO, irrational. We compete with coyotes, for instance, if we're concerned about quail. Our goats compete with deer for browse. We modify land for our farming and our cattle, so people in cities merely by their existence are affecting ecosystems--indirect though it may be.

Enviroments, such as the world we live in, are not constant. People seem to ignore that fact. All biological/geological models will eventually show a "reboot phase." Enviroments usually find a balance that exists for the majority of their existence but eventually a "catostophic element" is introduced or evolved into the enviroment. This catostophic element usually destroys the enviroment very quickly. It can either be by killing the flora or fauna of the enviroment's food source, killing them outright through predation or disease, or simply altering the enviroment in a negative way and decreasing it's ability to repopulate itself.

The question is..do we as humans want to be a beneficial part of our enviroment or do we want to be that catastrophic element?

 

[ibfestus]

I am afraid hunting is an endangered sport...

There are fewer hunters every year while more rich guys are doing the canned hunt thing. One possible reason for that is here in the midwest and southeast there seems to be less and less private landowners that will allow non family members to hunt. Personally, I solved that problem 11 years ago when I got out of Dodge and moved to the country.

Regretfully, the hunting I do now is very similar to the canned hunt in that I know exactly where the animals are going to be and when. For example I can take you to a spot about 6' in diameter where the biggest buck in the area will have a scrape next November. On one side of me there is a 300 acre row crop farm, on the other is a 240 acre cattle operation. I own the 60 acres of timber and brush in between where all the game sleeps. One year my family members killed 14 deer in the 10 day season and I still counted 21 in my yard the next day.

There are way too many deer in the midwest and they need to be thinned. In fact there is NO LIMIT on how many antlerless you can legally shoot. Everybody in Missouri knows somebody who was killed in a car/deer collision.

 

[taylorce1]

Playboypenguin, I’ll agree with you that having a UN ban on the trade of Ivory and having armed soldiers protecting the elephants did increase their numbers more than trophy hunting has. But I will still say that trophy hunting used properly as a conservation tool will increase the quality of game animals in a given region. Adult elephants have no natural predators other than man; I doubt any predator in Africa can bring down a full grown healthy elephant.

I did read where herd size is now becoming a problem in areas because the land can no longer support the herds. I’d rather see a trophy hunters pay there fees and hunt these animals than to see them die of starvation and disease. Disease will wipe out the elephants faster than man can in most cases.

I did the research that you asked and I can’t come up with any hard numbers that say hunting increases herd size. I couldn’t find any facts that said controlled trophy hunting of elephants was detrimental to herd size either. I feel strongly that if the money from the trophy fees is distributed properly to the people of the local villages then the elephant has more worth to the locals as a manageable resource rather than the illegal ivory trade. Like most governments around the world Africa has it share of corruption and I’ll not say all the money gets distributed equally in practice.

Farmers and Ranchers make common practice of culling herds of livestock to improve genetics, age, and fertility. This allows the animals that they produce to be of better quality than what they had before. As hunters why can’t we do the same if we practice good herd management on game animals?

I never said that a person had to like to hunt any of the animals that you mentioned. I just said as hunters we can’t disapprove of hunting these animals. Hunting is a privilege not a right that we have in our country. To say it is ok to stop all hunting of a certain species because you don’t approve of it, then you are opening the door to stop the ones you do approve of.

I don’t like hunting birds, but I wouldn’t go as far to say I don’t approve of it. I just choose to let the people who do enjoy bird hunting to have my share. I do predator hunt but mainly to protect my family’s livelihood, as they still own a working cattle ranch. Granted the impact on our cattle herd from predators is minimal, but I’m not going to let it become a major problem by not trying to control them.

FF as far as Apex Predators, well I feel that is man in any environment. Ever since man first started using tools we have figured out how to adapt to pretty much all environments. Since man figured out how to fashion a spear and knife we pretty much haven’t found anything we can’t kill, so I figure that puts us at the top of the food chain. The only difference between us and the predators that hunt is we rarely have to do it for the food. Sure I like to eat deer and elk as much as the next guy but I don’t need it for survival.

 

[Art Eatman]

For some info of the deal with elephants, go to http://www.thehighroad.org and check the stickies at the top of the Hunting forum page.

For game animals, hunting increases herd size, but indirectly: If a game animal has some monetary value to residents of an area, it will be protected by these people as well as by laws.

In the U.S., most poachers are caught because some local resident either called a game warden to report an event, or provided information leading to the warden's being "at the right place at the right time" to catch a poacher. This reporting would not occur without the animals having some particular value to the person doing the calling.

So, for an elephant as a trophy, the $30,000 license fee is split between the government and the local area villagers. This has worked so well in some areas that the herds are growing beyond the carrying capacity of the available land, much as our whitetail deer have in some parts of the U.S.

I've kept the horns from a fair number of the bucks I've killed. I can still tell you the story of the days that I shot most of them. In that sense, they're immortal so long as I'm alive. Similarly, elephant tusks as trophies would be the same deal.

But somebody and I ate my Bambis, or would have eaten whatever Mr. Great Big that I'd kill. No waste. All I've done was target a particular type of buck, and I guess that's part of why "trophy hunting" in an ethical manner doesn't upset me.

, Art

 

[FirstFreedom]

ibfestus, where are you now that you're "in the country"?

 

[Selfdfenz]

Interetsing thread. Every duck I ever brought to bag, every quail, all the doves and all the deer and all the rest I've hauled home during my journey were trophies to me.

S-

 

[ZeroJunk]

Those who seem to have some disdain for people who trophy hunt in the wild consider this.Here in NC we have a season a little over 3 1/2 months long.I like to hunt and will hunt a few hours most of those days.I like to kill 2 deer to eat and have wonderful places to do it.If I just wanted to meat hunt, my season would last less than a week if I did it during bow season.Or,if I waited until gun season it would last about 30 minutes just before dark on the first day of the season.Wouldn't that be fun.

 

[phil mcwilliam]

I meat hunt, trophy hunt & have participated in pest control shooting.When specifically meat hunting you tend to select a young smaller animal as these are by far the tastiest & tenderest, and you still get a lot of meat as you tend to take all & use all. In trophy hunting you don't have to take an animal every time you go out- thats the whole point of "Trophy Hunting".I hunt in my favorite trophy hunting area & have only taken 1 animal in the last 5 years, passing up many inferior heads,& not shooting at any hinds.The last Trophy stag i shot I did take the back straps & hind quarters, but as it was in full rut, the meat wasn't the greatest.I hunt with a friend that owns a cattle ranch of 2,000 acres.The manager of the property himself shot over 60 wild pigs over the last 12 months- hardly any meat used, just a few hind quarters for dog food.Same fate for deer caught feeding on oats paddocks, although backstraps are usually taken.During times of drought many ranches have to cull game animals just to remain viable.A lot of the game animals culled on my friends ranch would not be economically viable to ship to the needy due to the remoteness of the property.No sense in offering the meat to the neighbours as they have the same problem, and besides these are cattle ranch's where the freezer is already full of meat.Hard to make a stand on Trophy Hunting meat use when pest culling is a legitament activity.

 

[Playboypenguin]

I especially have no problem with trophy hunting if the hunter says to me "I just want the head so I butcher the meat and give it to a lower income family down the holler from us" or if they donate it to a shelter or school lunch program.

That is what my grandfather, uncles, and I did growing up. They enjoyed hunting and we always took more meat than we could ever possibly eat.

Luckily we lived in a rural part of Apalachia and there was always a poor family happy to take the meat. We even knew a butcher that would butcher them for free if he knew you were giving it away and had payed him to butcher your own meat.

When I was in grade school our local school would even accept meat from hunters. Alot of the kids were on the free lunch program and it provided a very good source of food for them and the rest of us. Meatball day happened alot during deer season.

 

[454c]

I have no problem with trophy hunting so long as one person/groups idea of a trophy is not pushed on others by way of game laws.

 

[srtrax]

I for one am not a trophy hunter per say. I'll talk deer, because at the moment that is about all the time i have in a years time to big game hunt. Now i use to wait plum up to the last day waiting on Mr, big and went home empty handed. Well, my family likes deer meat in everything we eat. That said, i kind of droped the horn issue and went with the idea of bringing home meat. Funny now because of this reasoning i have shot better and bigger deer because of this. I guess i have taken the presure of horn hunting and put it in the back of my mind, and for some reason i've become a better hunter or just damn lucky!
What i do have a problem with is going to the check station and seeing spikes and fork horns by the hand loads being checked in, if let be for a few years there would be better hunting,and game with horns to hunt. With in the 5 mile radius that i hunt the pressure on the deer is light, and the guys on the other side of the fence also dont shoot bambies, so our bucks are getting better ever year. So i take more of an issue of to small of game being taken! If a 150 class deer comes into my cross hairs hes going down, and if it's a spike it gets to walk.