Curmudgeon

As someone who speaks to hundreds of people each year about scavengers, I don't think you give the public enough credit. Actually, I think the general public very easily grasps the need to control certain populations, e.g. deer, sedentary geese, bears in NJ, etc. They understand these human wildlife conflicts. What they fail to understand is why "population control" is used as a rationale by hunters who are obviously self serving. I think Doc said he never thinks about controlling deer populations when he goes hunting. I do because it is a personal priority. In my youth, I heard it at the gun club all the time but it never motivated me. When you discuss coyotes and crows, the general public does not see conflict. They see persecution. And, with coyotes, all the science supports this public perception. Killing coyotes does nothing to reduce their numbers and may actually increase them. Much coyote killing is done out of ignorance and fear. (I'm not talking about those who are doing it for income, or a combination of income and sport.) Read the recent thread on someone killing his first yote. There are quotes like "another dog down" and "another fawn will live". These attitudes show me that much of the hunting public fails to grasp ecological concepts. Since the science shows that coyotes have little impact on deer outside the forest preserve, killing coyotes to improve deer numbers is folly. It may make some feel better but it doesn't help the deer.

I just did a search to see if DEC has any mentoring program for new hunters. They seem to only address youths. From my experience - and Jennifer's - it seems there is a need to fill. There may be an opportunity here for clubs across the state. Of course the good-old-boy mentality could be a problem in some places.

Belo - I wish my venison was organic. I can't keep the deer out of my neighbors corn. They wouldn't pass organic standards. I eat them anyway.

I think the woman I am mentoring (see thread Mentoring Young Women) falls into this category. Her experience at a gun club was to be treated as a child in a condescending manner. Gun clubs should open their arms to these people.

It's the nature of the news industry. Why we hunt is old news - very old.

This is for the most part good publicity from the NY Times - a liberal, urban newspaper - on the new hunters: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/books/new-breed-of-hunter-shoots-eats-and-writes.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/dining/25hunt.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/magazine/carnivore.html?pagewanted=all

I'm glad this stopped being about me (mostly). I am more than willing to be a lightning rod but it doesn't help the discussion. I agree with nyantler. Hunters need to be ambassadors. For those who raised questions how I interact with non-hunters, I could get someone who has heard me speak in public weigh in if you want. Re the quote above: Hunters had a reputation for preserving species and habitat. How did that get lost? I do have a fair amount of political experience. A skill I have found helpful is being able to (try to) think like those with whom you disagree. Understanding them gives you insight into how to craft a message. Granted, I am not doing that in this thread. I am talking to you like family - which you are. The reason I bring this up is to address VJP's question. Ted Nugent has also been a lightning rod - one that has promoted the "blood thirsty killer" persona. (Note: I have purchased Ted's non-lead ammo so let's not return to me). Think about what an educated, urban, non-hunting person knows. They can't understand wanting to kill anything - except maybe rats. They certainly don't understand the antler quest. They do understand economics and possibly ecology: food for the rural poor; car accidents; farm impacts; forest impacts; the loss of many species. This makes them receptive to deer hunting. For conservationists who are not hunters, controlling deer numbers is an important concern. Deer impact a host of other species. These people are our natural allies. They need us to control deer numbers. In a separate thread, I offered to help initiate an effort to open Harriman Park to bow hunting. (I do have a soft spot for quixotic ventures.) These urban dwellers and common non-hunters don't understand predator hunting - unless they can be convinced it impacts people, e.g. pets being eaten, farmers in trouble. They don't understand crow hunting - unless they live in a place with a massive winter roost. Advertising these things - sometimes tastelessly - does us no good. Some of you may not be aware that a whole new generation of hunters is coming. People who object to the industrial food industry. People who want to be connected to where their food comes from. People who are known as "foodies" - a somewhat ridiculous term. This includes a number of young women. These are educated people. This group was not raised like most of us. It would be valuable to understand their sensibilities and not offend them. It would be helpful if everyone read The Omnivore's Dilemma to understand where these new hunters are coming from.

My words are presenting an argument to consider: that these contests hurt the image of hunters. My motive is to get people to think, to consider how things might be done differently. Call it Devil's advocacy. Call it what you want. Apparently, some people agree with me. Do I have any credibility? That is for others to decide. Some people consider me an authority "on whatever it is that I do". This is not personal. It is not about you and me. It is about the image of hunters.

Not my perception. Mine doesn't matter. That is the point.

Perception vs. Reality. Perception wins every time.

VJP - I do not publicly criticize other hunters. This discussion is between hunters. I do not have conversations with "non-hunters that are not too happy about hunting". I had a conversation with a non-hunter who reacted to the coyote contest advertisement. It prompted this discussion. I do speak to a lot of non-hunters. How could I not? I hope to convince them that without hunting, my business would suffer greatly. This, they understand. My goal when speaking publicly to general audiences is to inform them that I am a hunter. No one has ever criticized me - no anti has ever spoken up and challenged me. I do this to give credibility to the use of lead-free ammo. I speak about lead-free ammo as a hunter who has used it for a decade. I ask those who have hunters in their family to buy a box of lead-free ammunition for that hunter to try. I am convinced that a well informed hunter would use lead-free bullets. You say "The more publicity these issues get, whether it's lead ammo or contests, the more attention brought to them, the more likely we will see a law banning them." That is exactly my point. I only brought attention to this on a hunting forum. I am not running ads all over the state as are the coyote contest sponsors. Am I an elitist because I care about the image of hunters? Am I an elitist because I want to protect eagles and children from lead impacts? If so, I guess I will have to live with the label.

Thank you Virgil.

What I get from your earlier post is that you don't care what non-hunters think. There is a difference between hiding (your cloak of darkness) and being in someone's face - such are the coyote advertisements. They just banned these contests in CA. Why? Public perception. It could happen here. If they are not on the radar, no one will be looking to ban them.

Reality may not matter. Perception certainly does.

I AM NOT ADVOCATING BANNING ANYTHING! Why do I have to keep repeating myself in different threads? The point of initiating this discussion is to get people to think about how their actions affect the sport as a whole. The point of discussing lead ammo is to inform people about impacts of which many seem to be completely ignorant - the impacts to non-target wildlife and humans. What I am advocating is hunters deciding to present a good face to the public. The game management argument only goes so far. Beyond deer, sedentary geese and invasive species it comes across as a deception to anyone who is well informed. If you think the whole non-hunting public is ecologically illiterate, I have some news for you. Some of them know a lot more than many hunters. Yes, there have been contests for a long time. Big buck contests do not encourage people to do anything they wouldn't be doing anyway - unless they are inclined to cheat. Other local contests probably draw little attention. Contests that encourage killing copious amounts of animals are that are not consumed by humans give us a black eye. The Sullivan County coyote thing was brought to my attention 2 days ago by a non-hunter who saw the ad and found it offensive. I am sure she is not the only one. "Pushing back" is confrontational. Yes, we are losing but fighting the losing battle will only further alienate people. We need a new strategy. Hunters have always claimed to be the original "conservationists". I've seen little to suggest this is still true on a large scale. It's now about me, me, me. This includes everything 4 Seasons says, and the fear of a ban, on anything. It is all about me. Since some clubs are totally tone-deaf, I would like the Conservation Council to pass a resolution asking clubs to consider how any contest they sponsor will be perceived by the public. They could also provide some guidelines.

As far as DEC or FWS staff doing public relations on the benefits of hunting, these agencies are short-staffed. The dedicated people I know that work for these agencies are over-worked just trying to take care of their regular responsibilities. PR needs to be done by someone else. There is another thread about a hunter shooting himself in the foot. Metaphorically, these contests do the same thing.

I speak to groups of non-hunters regularly. I always state that I am a hunter because I am always talking about scavenging species and lead poisoning and non-lead ammunition always comes up. I was asked to speak at an Audubon Conference last spring - just before the "Crow Down". Given what I heard, I believe that these contests can actually turn non-hunters into anti-hunters. Thank you Jennifer, Mike, Doc and others. I could have said it nearly as well.

I wasn't wanting to discuss where we are going in a hand basket. I'm not talking about the animal rights crowd. In my experience, animal rights advocates care about individual animals, not about populations. I just want to know if we should care what non-hunters think? Hunters are a small minority.

Among the non-hunters I encounter, many are accepting of deer hunting as a management tool. They are often accepting of the hunting of other game for food. Among the most controversial hunting practices are contests that encourage killing of coyotes. Last spring, a contest to kill crows also created a lot of bad press. Since the carcasses of these animals are often scavenged, the people concern about lead poisoning of raptors and ravens also react to these contests. A spokesman for the club that held the crow contest last spring claimed they were creating a feast for scavengers by providing dead crows. A feast yes, a toxic one at that. Does anyone else see these contests as damaging to the image of hunting? This is an old article but the sentiments in the comments are still germane - http://blog.syracuse.com/outdoors/2013/11/statewide_coyote_hunting_conte.html.

I have good habitat. I work at it. I consider the whole place a food plot.

I like the argument that biologists should be making wildlife management decisions. Urge the Governor to continue to allow DEC biologists to manage invasive species. Mike - If you want more details on my experience with other groups and this issue, PM me.

Thanks Mike for your work on this. It has caused some deep divisions among environmental groups.

This article in the NYS Conservationist tells you how many: http://www.dec.ny.gov/pubs/98897.html 37.2%-more than a third-of the reported buck take during regular season occurred on opening day (Saturday) 48.4%-almost half-of the buck take occurred on the first two days (Saturday and Sunday) 20.5%-one-fifth-of the does and fawns reported taken during the regular season were taken on opening day (Saturday)

More Bone Yard photos including a flying squirrel - which is a scavenger.

They won't have the money to pay. Many poachers around here don't have payroll jobs. What do you do, lock them up? What's to keep them from doing it over and over? Confiscating their guns might help. While we are at it, why don't we start confiscating the ATVs of any found trespassing on the Forest Preserve?