What would your aswer be

B

Bullrub

New member
Aug 4, 2017
75
After reading an article in the Sept. 2014 edition of Petersen\'s Bow Hunting magazine by Zeke Pipher titled Violent and Uncivilized, with an illustration of a bloody broadhead and a sign saying bow hunting is murder. So I just had to read the article and see what it was all about. It was, what type of a response do we give to a non-hunters criticisms about hunting and killing animals.
I myself have never been confronted with that question. But the article got me to thinking, as a hunter it is my responsibly to have an intelligent and non-confrontational answer to their criticisms. (WHAT WOULD YOUR ANSWER BE)?
 
Well, being an \"animal lover\" myself, I sort of understand how it looks to someone who has never been exposed to hunting, or farming, or living outdoors.

There\'re two ways to answer this question, and either is acceptable ... or, I should say, some people deserve answer #1, some answer #2.

Answer #1 is to just be a jerk. Some people deserve this, and when they do, I\'m glad to oblige, if I think it\'s worth my time at all.

Answer #2 is to help the person see that what they thought was true is not. I have found that many non-hunters who are initially put-off are open to arguments along the lines of hunting being \"green\". This, of course, really only applies to food, and sometimes trophy hunting. Not to just shooting to shoot, or killing to kill.

For instance, Son #1 is now dating a girl who is a vegetarian. She hasn\'t visited town yet, but when she does, she\'ll see the heads and skulls of various critters that I\'ve killed and eaten ... they\'re in my living room! Now, I may disagree with her about this or that, but the bottom line is that I want to have a friendly conversation about it with her -- I\'m NOT going to give her Answer #1 ... Son #1 deserves to have me on my best behavior regardless. After all, she\'s HIS girlfriend, not mine!

So, I point out that the meat we consume is \"natural\", \"organic\" and rooted in ancestry or all humans, vegetarians and omnivores both. It\'s important to use those terms, even though they might seem a little silly. \"Pesticide-free\" and \"free-range\" help, too.

Dr. Foote of the University of Alberta published what he called his wild game \"disclaimer\" and I like to pull it out for these conversations. I think it\'s the best way to frame \"Answer #2\".

It goes like this:

\"This animal, like its ancestors and progeny, was produced
locally. The meat herein was produced as a result of free genetic
exchange (no artificial insemination). The animal was not castrated,
or forced onto a synchronized breeding schedule. She lived to maturity
(4 1/2 years) and reproduced at least once, but most likely had three
sets of twins. The meat contains no antibiotics, synthetic steroids,
artificial growth hormones or insecticide residues. Its production
required no landclearing, fencing, fertilizing or feedlots. Her life
did not contribute to the destruction of associated fauna and
flora. No manure was collected or spread on erosion-prone pastures to
produce (or as a result of) its growth. This animal was not confined,
transported or kept in crowded conditions at any point in its
life. The lean, unmarbled meat was not wrapped in plastic and
Styrofoam packaging. No nitrates or sulfites were applied to prevent
discolouration. No fossil fuels were used for specialized refrigerator
transport or cold-storage ageing. Associated inedible parts were not
reconstituted into cattle meal or dog food. Inedible parts were fed to
indigenous fauna (most likely coyotes, magpies and ravens). Her bones
provided calcium to the aspen grove where she was feeding. Substantial
calories were metabolized by the hunter over several days to secure
this meat. She died quickly, and honourably. Before, as well as after,
her death she was treated with reverence and respect. Allowing my
participation in a natural cycle was this animal\'s gift to me. The
energy that flowed from sun to plant to deer now also flows through
me. This meal does offer reflection, natural continuity, appreciation,
health, hope, and tangible renewal of life. Let us prey.\"
 
\"Deertick\" said:
Well, being an \"animal lover\" myself, I sort of understand how it looks to someone who has never been exposed to hunting, or farming, or living outdoors.

There\'re two ways to answer this question, and either is acceptable ... or, I should say, some people deserve answer #1, some answer #2.

Answer #1 is to just be a jerk. Some people deserve this, and when they do, I\'m glad to oblige, if I think it\'s worth my time at all.

Answer #2 is to help the person see that what they thought was true is not. I have found that many non-hunters who are initially put-off are open to arguments along the lines of hunting being \"green\". This, of course, really only applies to food, and sometimes trophy hunting. Not to just shooting to shoot, or killing to kill.

For instance, Son #1 is now dating a girl who is a vegetarian. She hasn\'t visited town yet, but when she does, she\'ll see the heads and skulls of various critters that I\'ve killed and eaten ... they\'re in my living room! Now, I may disagree with her about this or that, but the bottom line is that I want to have a friendly conversation about it with her -- I\'m NOT going to give her Answer #1 ... Son #1 deserves to have me on my best behavior regardless. After all, she\'s HIS girlfriend, not mine!

So, I point out that the meat we consume is \"natural\", \"organic\" and rooted in ancestry or all humans, vegetarians and omnivores both. It\'s important to use those terms, even though they might seem a little silly. \"Pesticide-free\" and \"free-range\" help, too.

Dr. Foote of the University of Alberta published what he called his wild game \"disclaimer\" and I like to pull it out for these conversations. I think it\'s the best way to frame \"Answer #2\".

It goes like this:

\"This animal, like its ancestors and progeny, was produced
locally. The meat herein was produced as a result of free genetic
exchange (no artificial insemination). The animal was not castrated,
or forced onto a synchronized breeding schedule. She lived to maturity
(4 1/2 years) and reproduced at least once, but most likely had three
sets of twins. The meat contains no antibiotics, synthetic steroids,
artificial growth hormones or insecticide residues. Its production
required no landclearing, fencing, fertilizing or feedlots. Her life
did not contribute to the destruction of associated fauna and
flora. No manure was collected or spread on erosion-prone pastures to
produce (or as a result of) its growth. This animal was not confined,
transported or kept in crowded conditions at any point in its
life. The lean, unmarbled meat was not wrapped in plastic and
Styrofoam packaging. No nitrates or sulfites were applied to prevent
discolouration. No fossil fuels were used for specialized refrigerator
transport or cold-storage ageing. Associated inedible parts were not
reconstituted into cattle meal or dog food. Inedible parts were fed to
indigenous fauna (most likely coyotes, magpies and ravens). Her bones
provided calcium to the aspen grove where she was feeding. Substantial
calories were metabolized by the hunter over several days to secure
this meat. She died quickly, and honourably. Before, as well as after,
her death she was treated with reverence and respect. Allowing my
participation in a natural cycle was this animal\'s gift to me. The
energy that flowed from sun to plant to deer now also flows through
me. This meal does offer reflection, natural continuity, appreciation,
health, hope, and tangible renewal of life. Let us prey.\"
Click to expand...

Answer#2 would do quite well Deertick. As for answer#1 those type of people don\'t really care to hear your answer anyway.
 
All game animals die a violent death. Some succumb to a broad head, some to a bullet, some to another animal, disease or weather conditions. Animal populations are limited one way or another. The State regulates game animal numbers to maintain herds, habitat and to limit damage. Hunting is a tool, that when done well, will preserve more animals in good condition that if left up to nature. When you consider the alternatives, death from a broad head or bullet is the most humane way we have to maintain a healthy populations.
 
I\'ve had this said to me. I said........................We\'re born, and then we die. In between we have to eat. We don\'t all want to be vegetarians.
 
its hard to have a rational conversation with irrational people. my mother in law is anti hunting. but she eats meat. the older i get the less tolerant of people i become. i woulda use to talk to them, but im getting tired of having to defend myself while they run rampant on my rights. so my answer now, for better or worse, is bite me.
 
Swede, I feel you hit the nail on the head, although I have to admit that more and more I feel like you Scott. Why should I even have to defend myself? Honestly, the one thing I love to bring up is how the elk population has begun to move down into the flatlands. I have seen more and more elk killed on I-25 and C-470 here in town over the last few years than I care to remember. So, an easy argument is without hunters, elk would overpopulate causing many to die of starvation. It will also cause more and more to move into new areas, including down in the flatlands. How would someone feel if they slammed their car into an elk going 70 MPH down the highway? Maybe the accident hurts them or someone close to them? Wouldn\'t it have been easier if a hunter would have taken care of that elk in a natural way where the population is controlled?
 
I would never try to change a non-hunters opinion and would respect their rights. And I would expect them to return the favor.

It does no good to converse and try to change there opinion. Instead, we as bow hunters need to make sure that every time we release an arrow it\'s going to be a quick and ethical kill. It\'s also very important to make sure that we don\'t push the undecided over to other side(ie don\'t tie the heads to your bumper).

I live by, you leave me alone and I\'ll leave you alone. Try and take away my rights and you\'ll get my bad side. :mg:

Just my 2-cents.
 
I would attempt to educate the person on facts how much money hunters fund the state coffers so non-hunters can enjoy seeing elk/deer/etc. when they want to go on a \'hike\' on that nice maintained trail
I would also tell them that without herd management practices, there wouldnt be any elk/deer/etc in some natural environments.

About this time of the conversation, the glazed look comes over them and I know that they are listening, but not comprehending.
But I can honestly say that I tried
 
I don\'t see what\'s wrong with just saying you hunt for your meat? If you go back in time far enough. Everybody did. People have gotten lazy, and prefer to go to the market for meat. Sometimes i\'ll turn it around on them, and ask them why they don\'t hunt for their meat. That usually ends the conversation.

Trying to convince them about conservation is a lost cause. They won\'t accept that. Tell them you want to eat lean, drug free meat, and you don\'t get that where they buy their meat.
 
\"Still Hunter\" said:
Tell them you want to eat lean, drug free meat, and you don\'t get that where they buy their meat.
Click to expand...

+1

I know quite a few would accept homegrown chickens, or at least their eggs. Gardens are \"normal\", too. Really, I don\'t think it\'s too hard to address it this way. I\'ve had decent results.
 
I grew up in Boulder, CO, so I have had this conversation many times haha! I usually ask if they eat meat and if they don\'t well then there is really no arguing with them on the fact, they don\'t believe in meat eating period. Still I try to explain what many of you said already (to both meat eaters and not). Natural food, hunters preserve nature, all that good stuff.

I couldn\'t find the video of the Nuge talking about this argument that I saw on his show on Outdoor Channel, but this one I thought was pretty good, minus the irrelevant Sarah Palin aspect : <!-- m --><a class=\"postlink\" href=\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnDABaxYINI\" onclick=\"window.open(this.href);return false;\">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnDABaxYINI</a><!-- m -->
Like him or not, I always enjoy watching him argue about guns and hunting.
 
\"Natural\" death is cruel. Being eaten alive is horrific.

Death by broadhead is truly merciful by comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 22 (members: 0, guests: 22)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top