bcolglazier03
New member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2012
- Messages
- 13
This was Written By Glenn St. Charles
Hunting is under attack by animal rights folks. They would make us all vegetarians. The public is not going to buy their weird philosophy. But these people have managed to get the attention of the non-hunters_The Voters_ enough to eliminate spring bear hunting in some states We anguish, we wring our hands and cry for somebody to do something. The "stuff it down your throat" and the " don't let them get their foot in the door" advocates cry: "They can't do this to us!" The fact is, anti- hunters already have their foot in the door and we aren't stuffing it down anyone's throat. Why? In my view, we hunters don't have to look any further than our own mirrors. We are the problem. We don't look or act like we belong out there anymore.
In the old days, we looked like people, acted like people, and smelled like people. Hunting was accepted- a heritage handed down from ancestors, an age-old thing: low profile. Today, through what we called progress, hunting has become high profile. Hunting has been brought into our living rooms via television. Any Sunday morning you can turn on your TV and see a program put on by equipment manufacturers showing camo clad, face masked fellows in tree stands, looking over unsuspecting animals foraging on the ground below. sure, this sells merchandise, but at the same time, it sells us hunters short. We don't look like the sportsman we have portrayed ourselves to be. These scenarios portray us as killers-the gangster look of camo, paramilitary, the look of violence in the streets.
The more observing viewers may ask, where does the hunting come in? hunting by definition is the pursuit of animals in their native haunts. Sitting on your butt in a treestand over a bear with his head in a barrel full of pastries doesn't exactly look like fair chase or good sportsmanship. we can't gain the support of the voters with that kind of behavior. In my view, the voting public does not mind that we hunt animals, they relate that to our ancestral roots. It's how we hunt that has created the problem.
Progress is supposed to be good for civilization. However, I question its value as it relates to the natural environment and hunting. Through the years, without really noticing, we have gone from hunting defined by "a walk in the woods" in pursuit of animals to accepting, under the heading of "progress," every conceivable gadget and method that the shooting sports industry can devise to kill animals faster and farther. What we have done is redefine the word hunting to compromise our sport by accommodating all of the new stuff on the market. Not because we need it, but because an industry says we do. It's time Hunters take back their sport and do what they have to do to save it. If we don't buy the stuff we don't need, the industry won't make it.
In terms of "progress," bow hunting has advanced perhaps the most. bowhunters have practically reinvented the gun. taking all factors into consideration, the range, the velocity, and the percent of animal harvest, the high tech bow has altered the level of bowhunting to that of an entirely different sport, as compared to the longbow and recurve. If bowhunting equipment shoots like a rifle and harvests animals like a rifle, at some point state game and fish departments may have no choice but to invite the high tech compound shooters to hunt with the rifle hunters and leave the bow seasons to traditional shooters.
There are those that are constantly preaching science into hunting, that we must worry about every detail. when the overdraw on a compound was perfected, short fast arrows were the way to go. time after time in our archery shop, we would have bow hunters come in specifically to get their arrows shortened " last year i passed on an 80-yard shot, not this year!"
It's time to get back to common sense. Hunting should be kept simple and low profile. there aren't enough spokesman to elect anyone to public office or win referendum or initiatives presented to our state legislators without outside help. We need the votes of the public, the non-hunters. Likewise, the anti hunting people find they can do nothing without the same outside help. we are in competition for the votes of those who can make or break us. It's unthinkable for us to give up anything, but the point is, we already have lost some and we will lose more if we don't start an offense instead of relying on defense only.
It will take a grass-roots effort from all user groups to win this battle. We need to focus on the survival of hunting. lets not spend too much energy, time and money trying to save the things we don't need. As a start, Lets change our add-on methods and add on equipment to turn back the clock and present an acceptable look to those who can help us win this battle. Let's show them once again that hunting is our priority rather than killing.
If the camo folks join us, they can make hunting clothes in a softer, kinder look. let them put their fabrics to use in fall colors without the camo pattern.
Tree stands help fill the freezer, put trophies on the wall, and bear rugs on the floor, but what do they do for the true meaning of hunting? and we don't need baiting if fair chase is to be a factor. Just because the fish and game department says its OK, doesn't mean its fair chase.
I have no illusions that this dissertation will make much sense to all of you. This is my assessment of our situation. Perhaps a thread or two will catch on and take shape. What about the hunters out there who don't belong to any conservation or hunting organization-those who don't have a clue as to whats going on and furthermore dont want to hear about it? Let's continue to provide for our future. Support organizations that can buy, beg or steal wildlife habitat even if it means nothing more than keep it out of the hands of those who would pave the Earth.
Glenn St. Charles' interest in bow hunting stretches back to 1928, when he shot nail-tipped arrows at sand sharks in Washington's Puget Sound, using a hazelnut stick strung with meat wrapped twine for a bow. Not long afterword, he was making and selling whalebone backed yew bows, competing in field archery competitions and hunting elk, deer and other wildlife. In 1961, he founded the Pope and Young Club from his home in Seattle, and served as president of the club from 1967-1972. His dedication to promoting and defending bowhunting earned him the first Ishi Award in 1991, the Pope and Young Club's highest honor for service.
Hunting is under attack by animal rights folks. They would make us all vegetarians. The public is not going to buy their weird philosophy. But these people have managed to get the attention of the non-hunters_The Voters_ enough to eliminate spring bear hunting in some states We anguish, we wring our hands and cry for somebody to do something. The "stuff it down your throat" and the " don't let them get their foot in the door" advocates cry: "They can't do this to us!" The fact is, anti- hunters already have their foot in the door and we aren't stuffing it down anyone's throat. Why? In my view, we hunters don't have to look any further than our own mirrors. We are the problem. We don't look or act like we belong out there anymore.
In the old days, we looked like people, acted like people, and smelled like people. Hunting was accepted- a heritage handed down from ancestors, an age-old thing: low profile. Today, through what we called progress, hunting has become high profile. Hunting has been brought into our living rooms via television. Any Sunday morning you can turn on your TV and see a program put on by equipment manufacturers showing camo clad, face masked fellows in tree stands, looking over unsuspecting animals foraging on the ground below. sure, this sells merchandise, but at the same time, it sells us hunters short. We don't look like the sportsman we have portrayed ourselves to be. These scenarios portray us as killers-the gangster look of camo, paramilitary, the look of violence in the streets.
The more observing viewers may ask, where does the hunting come in? hunting by definition is the pursuit of animals in their native haunts. Sitting on your butt in a treestand over a bear with his head in a barrel full of pastries doesn't exactly look like fair chase or good sportsmanship. we can't gain the support of the voters with that kind of behavior. In my view, the voting public does not mind that we hunt animals, they relate that to our ancestral roots. It's how we hunt that has created the problem.
Progress is supposed to be good for civilization. However, I question its value as it relates to the natural environment and hunting. Through the years, without really noticing, we have gone from hunting defined by "a walk in the woods" in pursuit of animals to accepting, under the heading of "progress," every conceivable gadget and method that the shooting sports industry can devise to kill animals faster and farther. What we have done is redefine the word hunting to compromise our sport by accommodating all of the new stuff on the market. Not because we need it, but because an industry says we do. It's time Hunters take back their sport and do what they have to do to save it. If we don't buy the stuff we don't need, the industry won't make it.
In terms of "progress," bow hunting has advanced perhaps the most. bowhunters have practically reinvented the gun. taking all factors into consideration, the range, the velocity, and the percent of animal harvest, the high tech bow has altered the level of bowhunting to that of an entirely different sport, as compared to the longbow and recurve. If bowhunting equipment shoots like a rifle and harvests animals like a rifle, at some point state game and fish departments may have no choice but to invite the high tech compound shooters to hunt with the rifle hunters and leave the bow seasons to traditional shooters.
There are those that are constantly preaching science into hunting, that we must worry about every detail. when the overdraw on a compound was perfected, short fast arrows were the way to go. time after time in our archery shop, we would have bow hunters come in specifically to get their arrows shortened " last year i passed on an 80-yard shot, not this year!"
It's time to get back to common sense. Hunting should be kept simple and low profile. there aren't enough spokesman to elect anyone to public office or win referendum or initiatives presented to our state legislators without outside help. We need the votes of the public, the non-hunters. Likewise, the anti hunting people find they can do nothing without the same outside help. we are in competition for the votes of those who can make or break us. It's unthinkable for us to give up anything, but the point is, we already have lost some and we will lose more if we don't start an offense instead of relying on defense only.
It will take a grass-roots effort from all user groups to win this battle. We need to focus on the survival of hunting. lets not spend too much energy, time and money trying to save the things we don't need. As a start, Lets change our add-on methods and add on equipment to turn back the clock and present an acceptable look to those who can help us win this battle. Let's show them once again that hunting is our priority rather than killing.
If the camo folks join us, they can make hunting clothes in a softer, kinder look. let them put their fabrics to use in fall colors without the camo pattern.
Tree stands help fill the freezer, put trophies on the wall, and bear rugs on the floor, but what do they do for the true meaning of hunting? and we don't need baiting if fair chase is to be a factor. Just because the fish and game department says its OK, doesn't mean its fair chase.
I have no illusions that this dissertation will make much sense to all of you. This is my assessment of our situation. Perhaps a thread or two will catch on and take shape. What about the hunters out there who don't belong to any conservation or hunting organization-those who don't have a clue as to whats going on and furthermore dont want to hear about it? Let's continue to provide for our future. Support organizations that can buy, beg or steal wildlife habitat even if it means nothing more than keep it out of the hands of those who would pave the Earth.
Glenn St. Charles' interest in bow hunting stretches back to 1928, when he shot nail-tipped arrows at sand sharks in Washington's Puget Sound, using a hazelnut stick strung with meat wrapped twine for a bow. Not long afterword, he was making and selling whalebone backed yew bows, competing in field archery competitions and hunting elk, deer and other wildlife. In 1961, he founded the Pope and Young Club from his home in Seattle, and served as president of the club from 1967-1972. His dedication to promoting and defending bowhunting earned him the first Ishi Award in 1991, the Pope and Young Club's highest honor for service.
I'd personally love to be able to make a kill with a traditional bow, but I was raised by an anti-hunting father who loved to hike, and learned my hunting from my ex-marine of a brother, so i've never been handed the chance, or had the guts to do it myself. We, as indiviuals, taking steps to improve our influence on future outdoorsman, will help!
