Do coyote and crow contests tarnish hunters' image?

[Curmudgeon]

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.

 

[Mr VJP]

I don't think non-hunters are as concerned about these contests as animal rights fanatics and the anti-lead crowd are.  

 

People who live in areas where coyotes and crows have gotten way out of hand certainly aren't against the contests.  People who live in urban areas might have issues with them, but then again, when are they not trying to tell everyone else what to do?

 

People really should be more concerned about the perceived image of Americans around the world than the image of hunters here.  With a clown like Obama as President making America look stupid and weak, and his entire lawless, corrupt administration, I think this country's non-hunters have a lot more to be concerned about at this moment in time.

 

[wmig2]

Mr VJP pretty much summed it up.

[Curmudgeon]

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.

[Mr VJP]

I think non-hunter's opinions can be swayed with wildlife biologists giving them facts and data from scientific research.  I think it's the Div of Fish & Wildlife's job to worry about the opinion of non-hunters.  They need hunters, and they know it.  They're employed, at our expense, to manage the state's wildlife.  We only need to make sure they are doing their job.

 

 

[jjb4900]

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.

should we care what non-hunters think? yeah, I think so, a non-hunter is different than an anti-hunter....I've seen some photos from some of these hunts, and to the person who doesn't know the purpose behind them and the animal or bird being killed, it could be a big turn off and could reflect badly on the hunting crowd.......much like the bloody deer hanging off the roof of a car, can we do it? sure, but why would you when there are other less offensive ways of transporting it?

[nyantler]

I'm guessing that no matter what it is... there will always be a portion of the non-hunting people that won't like what's going on... unless a good explanation can be given for why it's being done... and even then some won't accept it. You can make some of the people happy some of the time, never all the people all the time.

 

I'll bet there are hunters that don't like it

Edited December 10, 2014 by nyantler

[Pygmy]

I'm just glad I'm getting OLD....<<sigh>>....

Not gonna have to listen to this anti-hunter BS much longer.

[Jennifer]

Yes- it does. I have a moderate online following of people from all walks of life and I sometimes discuss hunting. Nearly all of them are non-hunters (which is different from an anti-hunter). They do not hunt but are not against it. But time and time again when contests (where the objective is to shoot the most of ____) come up, they are all pretty universally against contests and find them very off-putting. Including some of the professional biologists and ecologists I know. A few of them (biologists/ecologists) even hunt and live rurally.

 

Leaving it up to the FWS to create and/or maintain an 'image' for hunters is very short-sighted. I am not suggesting that everyone worry about what others think, but taking a moment or two to think about image when doing something hunting-related in the public eye can, in fact, impact the future of hunting for all of us.

[Five Seasons]

there is an annual squirrel hunt contest near Rochester held by a fire dept. prizes, food etc. big family event too. They've been protesting it each year. so irritating.

[Mr VJP]

Leaving it up to the FWS to create and/or maintain an 'image' for hunters is very short-sighted. I am not suggesting that everyone worry about what others think, but taking a moment or two to think about image when doing something hunting-related in the public eye can, in fact, impact the future of hunting for all of us.

 

 

If people won't listen to experts on the subject, they are not going to change their uninformed, misguided opinions no matter what facts they are presented with.  I also do not think it is a good idea for hunters to tell other hunters what they can do when they are not doing anything illegal.

 

We need to present a united front at all times if we expect to keep our hunting traditions.

 

There was a time when Americans worried more about people and their problems then they did about animals that cause problems.  These days, many sanctimonious animal lovers hate people!

[Jennifer]

Respectfully, that's not quite what I meant. Hunters are much more likely to interact with non-hunters on a daily basis than FWS staff are. in my experience, that is where opinions of non-hunters are swayed. Most non-hunters have very little idea what the FWS is or what they do, sadly. But they do know someone that hunts-- their uncle, a friend-of-a-friend, etc. Those interactions change opinions, for better or worse.

I also by no means was suggesting that we tell each other what to do. I only wanted to present the fact that what you, I, and all the hunters do in the public eye does indeed have an impact on hunting in the future. These days, sadly, the public eye includes social media. I actually am completely with you in that we should be more united, not less.

Kind regards.

[mike rossi]

As I said almost a year ago today; that next February and March the clubs from Greene NY and Holley NY with their respective "crow down" and "squirrel slam" will again bring attention to the media. These annual events enable the antis to organize better and engage more people  each year. These contests have also helped the antis win new friends, increase their donations and build the size of their memberships. Several politicians such as Tony Avella grandstand on this every year as well, as a matter of fact he sponsored a bill to ban hunting contests for the very same people who protest the Greene and Holley events. Ironically, organizers of these events have boasted that the negative attention has increased contest entrees. That boast is very narrow-minded and demonstrates lack of situational awareness and common sense.

 

The antis have raised a number of issues with these contests. The most compelling argument they have is the introduction of lead into the food chain if large numbers of carcasses are dumped and/or game is not retrieved or lost. Since that is 100% accurate and lead in the food chain is indeed an impact, the clubs should concede to the use of non toxic ammo. Any individual, club, or organization  who argues against this is further damaging the image of hunting and credibility of hunters.

 

There are a number of additional measures these clubs can and should take to make these events more palatable to the public majority. By now, they should also expect protests and be prepared to address them appropriately. If they do not have such a plan in place they are not being mindful of the rest of the sporting community.

Edited December 11, 2014 by mike rossi

[Doc]

In general, I am not real big on any kinds of hunting competitions......period. That is not any part of why I hunt. And I do believe that non hunters, right or wrong, generally have an equally dim view of them. It's not a real big deal with me, but with hunting under constant attack and some very real advances scored by anti-hunter groups I do become a little concerned about how we are perceived.

 

But all those negative attitudes may be blunted a bit depending on where you are. I watched on TV last night the annual crow problem in Rochester, where I would guess attitudes about crow contests might be different than other places .... ha-ha. They showed pictures of crow crap covering sidewalks and park benches. It happens every year, and the city has to hire some special crow removal outfits to drive them off with loud noises (explosions) and lasers and such ....lol.

 

In problem areas where the damage and difficulties are demonstrable to the general public, perhaps they serve a purpose and in terms of negative PR, perhaps the hunters don't take quite as bad a hit.

[mike rossi]

Doc,

 

HISTORICALLY Persuading people to accept contests or any form of hunting based on managing a nuisance or population ALWAYS fall backs on us. 1)The science is always debated. 2)The extent of the problem is always questioned. 3) Alternate non-lethal strategies are always proposed. (This angle has been the biggest promotion of non lethal control methods and the "demand" for it has accelerated development of non lethal strategies...

 

Since these contests are visible and proven to be effective in the anti-hunting cause, numbers 1,2,3 are brought to public scrutiny. Then hunting becomes ONLY about population management. There are more arguments that there are alternatives to lethal management, (if the reason for hunting is population control, they surmise, then if alternatives exist, that hunting is unnecessary) the door continues to revolve and every other reason we hunt gets obscured.

 

We are digging so many different holes for ourselves and there isn't an end to it in sight. Hunting contests don't feel right to you because they are very different than traditional hunting. We gauge hunting participation, but what we also need to figure out how to gauge is how hunting is evolving. If I had a good crow field, I would hunt it, not invite the public and charge entry fees for it. If its club property, then members can go out and hunt as they choose. If distributing hunting opportunity is an issue, then follow the controlled hunt regime of wildlife agencies as private duck clubs have done for decades, no need to make a contest out of it. A good crow field and you need a contest to get kids out there, no, sorry then those kids don't have it in them...  Not too many years ago most hunters would think the same way, were have we gone and how the heck did we get here? And how do we get back?

Edited December 11, 2014 by mike rossi

[Doc]

I don't think there is a way back. The evolution of hunting has many drivers and most of them are a result of evolving culture. We live in an age of instant gratification, and expectations that are media driven. We have not gotten where we are for random unknown reasons, and those reasons truly are irreversible.

[mike rossi]

I don't think there is a way back. The evolution of hunting has many drivers and most of them are a result of evolving culture. We live in an age of instant gratification, and expectations that are media driven. We have not gotten where we are for random unknown reasons, and those reasons truly are irreversible.

 

And that wont work with hunting...

[Doc]

No it doesn't work with hunting. It is a downward decline and we have seen it. A miracle would be nice, but I really don't see one coming.

 

Contests are just another symptom of what is hunting has become. Simple hunting (man vs. critter) is not enough anymore. We have to supplement the experience with man vs. man competition now to get the satisfactions from the activity. Something has been lost or devalued in hunting and yes without some miracle to turn around attitudes and out-of-scale expectations we will continue to see the activity continue to lose popularity and acceptance.

[Curmudgeon]

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.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Curmudgeon

[Five Seasons]

Respectfully, that's not quite what I meant. Hunters are much more likely to interact with non-hunters on a daily basis than FWS staff are. in my experience, that is where opinions of non-hunters are swayed. Most non-hunters have very little idea what the FWS is or what they do, sadly. But they do know someone that hunts-- their uncle, a friend-of-a-friend, etc. Those interactions change opinions, for better or worse.

I also by no means was suggesting that we tell each other what to do. I only wanted to present the fact that what you, I, and all the hunters do in the public eye does indeed have an impact on hunting in the future. These days, sadly, the public eye includes social media. I actually am completely with you in that we should be more united, not less.

Kind regards.

 

couldn't agree more. I've mentioned this a few times and I think you said it better than I ever did. When we share pics with each other it doesn't matter, but pictures online should be tasteful, how you act in public with all your camo on, how the bloody deer is transported in your vehicle etc.

 

[Five Seasons]

but with hunting under constant attack and some very real advances scored by anti-hunter groups I do become a little concerned about how we are perceived.

 

like what? i hear this all the time and all I know is that we've had our seasons extended, our setback rules improved, rifles introduced in areas where they weren't allowed and a new weapon added to bow season.

 

[Curmudgeon]

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.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I don't get the whole "what hunting has become" comments. Hunting contests aren't some new invention by a new attitude hunter or new generation. They have been around for years. Longer than I have been hunting and that is 37 years. Every bar, Elks lodge and such, the area that I grew up had big buck contests. The Fish and Game club near me had events as well. I remember a rabbit contest. To me they are more social events than trying to win prizes on the back of the poor innocent game animals. What's next, we gonna start seeing protest of fishing contests?

[Doc]

like what? i hear this all the time and all I know is that we've had our seasons extended, our setback rules improved, rifles introduced in areas where they weren't allowed and a new weapon added to bow season.

 

A few minutes with Google answers this question.

 

http://www.guns.com/2014/10/30/anti-hunting-groups-target-maine-bear-laws/

 

https://firstforhunters.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/l-671-puts-nebraskas-hunting-heritage-at-risk/

 

http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/articles/3706-bill-to-end-nebraska-mountain-lion-season-advances#sthash.DepNsyAI.dpbs

 

http://bigcatrescue.org/20-yrs-after-californias-prop-117-the-fight-isnt-over/

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0616_030616_tvbearhunting_2.html

[Mr VJP]

If you are worried about the perception of hunters in the eyes of non-hunters, what you're advocating is banning contests and making laws that will control hunting more to placate the anti's.  Banning lead ammo and hunting contests are just two infringements.  What's to stop the momentum after it gets started?  Seems to me we are opening a door towards a total ban on hunting.

 

I'd rather see hunters unite to elect pro-hunting politicians that would be inclined to pass a law recognizing hunting as a traditional right that cannot be eliminated.  Other states have done it.  Why not NY?

 

If we do not push back against any and all attacks on hunting, we will soon find we have lost the war altogether.