Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Wed Mar 26, 2014, 09:19 AM Mar 2014

A Caretaker and a Killer: How Hunters Can Save the Wilderness

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/03/a-caretaker-and-a-killer-how-hunters-can-save-the-wilderness/284416/

?n2fjn2

Fourteen years ago, I stood in the snow, struggling to digest what I had heard. A group of us, gathered to learn about monitoring and protecting wildlife habitat, had just discovered that our instructor—Sue Morse, founder of Keeping Track—was a deer hunter. I found the news disturbing. How could she work to safeguard the homes of animals she described as “neighbors” and then turn around and shoot one of them? I found it inconceivable that someone could be both an environmentalist and a hunter, a caretaker and a killer.

Today, I, too, am both. I understand that caring for animals and their ecosystems is not incompatible with participating in those systems as a predator. I recall how extreme the contradiction once seemed, but I now see how vital it is to bridge the gap.

Wildlife conservation faces serious challenges these days. Among other things, the climate is changing, development continues to fragment habitat, and many state wildlife agencies depend on antiquated funding models. The best way to meet these challenges is for hunter conservationists and non-hunter environmentalists to join forces—overcoming the mutual stereotypes and suspicions that obscure their common ground.

For many environmentalists, the word “hunter” suggests a mindless brute, an enemy of nature who loves guns, kills for fun, and cares nothing for biodiversity or ecological integrity. For many hunters, the word “environmentalist” suggests a self-righteous tree-hugger, an enemy of freedom who hates guns, has no respect for hunting, and imagines nature as a Disney-like fantasyland where humans should not tread.
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Caretaker and a Killer: How Hunters Can Save the Wilderness (Original Post) xchrom Mar 2014 OP
"...to join forces." We are past-time to unite, but it's happening. Eleanors38 Mar 2014 #1
I think it depends on the kind of hunting. hunter Mar 2014 #2
And *that* is the crux of the issue: "it depends on the kind of hunting" Nihil Mar 2014 #3
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
1. "...to join forces." We are past-time to unite, but it's happening.
Wed Mar 26, 2014, 10:54 AM
Mar 2014

According to Petersen's Hunting (magazine), celebrity chefs and the locavore movement are both fueling an upsurge in hunting numbers, and more positive views of hunting. A rather conservative publication, Petersen's sees the same trends which Atlantic sees, even acknowledging in its latest issue increased liberal participation in the hunt.

Atlantic continues to be a reasonable voice in liberal thought and criticism.

hunter

(38,316 posts)
2. I think it depends on the kind of hunting.
Wed Mar 26, 2014, 12:45 PM
Mar 2014

Hunting random wolves or bears or cougars is scummy.

Hunting invasive species like pigs, pigeons, ring-necked doves, etc., is better than buying "factory farm" meat in the grocery store.

I'm mostly vegetarian but that's for environmental reasons. We have dogs in our family and we feed them no-grain foods so I'd be a hypocrite if I claimed to be a vegetarian for ethical reasons. I don't think it's ethical to impose a vegetarian diet on dogs.

Some people in my family are avid hunters and fisherman. I've participated but I don't really care for it. I'd rather garden. I don't hunt at all, not for decades (I don't like guns), but I can occasionally be persuaded to fish. Few foods are better than mackerel for dinner or trout for breakfast.

Many, maybe most, hunters respect the environment and their prey but there are still far too many gun-loving yahoos who don't; jerks who simply like to shoot animals or anything else, who are littering the landscape with poisonous lead bullets.

I consider myself an environmentalist (so far as a "first world" U.S. American can be) and I've never felt at odds with respectful hunters or fishing people.

It's the idiot gun-humpers and wolf killers who are bad for our environment.

 

Nihil

(13,508 posts)
3. And *that* is the crux of the issue: "it depends on the kind of hunting"
Fri Mar 28, 2014, 07:58 AM
Mar 2014

Excellent post there!

> Hunting random wolves or bears or cougars is scummy.
> Hunting invasive species like pigs, pigeons, ring-necked doves, etc., is better than
> buying "factory farm" meat in the grocery store.

> Many, maybe most, hunters respect the environment and their prey but there are still
> far too many gun-loving yahoos who don't; jerks who simply like to shoot animals or
> anything else, who are littering the landscape with poisonous lead bullets.




Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»A Caretaker and a Killer:...