Do coyote and crow contests tarnish hunters' image?

[Doc]

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.

And I would like to believe in Santa Claus and the Easter bunny but it probably will never happen. This past election showed me a lot about hunters and gun owners in terms of their political dedication and resolve.

 

Nobody is advocating placating anyone, but it is useful to recognize that hunters don't exist in a vacuum and before we go charging across the landscape acting like we are some kind of majority force here, a little consideration of how the public perceives us and our activities might be a prudent way to conduct ourselves.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

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.

Oh how true and i know many dont care about the high fence thing and thats their right but if you think for a second that there is no harm in one hunter telling another hunter what,where and when he can hunt, you are sadly mistaken.  This is just another win for the anti's because now you have two groups of sportsmen at war with each other. Just another nail in the casket.

 

And yes by having these contests does give hunting a black eye in the opinions of many, including hunters.  A person is better off taking care of an over population of something on their own property quietly and their way.  

[Five Seasons]

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

 

Doc,

 

All i see is words like "at risk" "target" "isn't over". Nothing new.

[Five Seasons]

I don't see what's wrong with getting rid of lead ammo. There are alternatives. Many years ago we used asbestos, we dumped waste into the hudson and onondaga. We learned and moved on.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I don't see what's wrong with getting rid of lead ammo. There are alternatives. Many years ago we used asbestos, we dumped waste into the hudson and onondaga. We learned and moved on.

If you choose not to, then don't

[Curmudgeon]

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.

 

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.

 

[virgil]

Curmudgeon, you'll find that any suggestion that we as hunters re-consider anything that we've always done, is typically met with this type of reaction. 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So how many hunter do you think are going out to hunt coyotes for this contest that wouldn't be anyway? Do you believe that it would be so easy to just pick up a gun, go out and bag a few yotes in an attempt to win that contest? Do you think the public does?

 

I know guys that do quite a bit of squirrel hunting and actually take part in the squirrel slam. This doesn't draw them out for the event. Quite differently, they don't hit areas they normally would and save those for the day of the event. So if as a hunter we take a dozen squirrels a year but choose to schedule one day afield to coincide with an social activity, I don't see the harm. Anyone that looks at these contests myopically and doesn't  understand that the hunting activity still takes place even without a contest do not understand what really happens.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Taylormike]

This fabulous past time is unfortunately declining tremendously...  I believe archery hunters have increased though.  I'm sure this percentage is because gun hunters have now taken archery up.  Either way, with more and more land being posted, with the school and county taxes absolutely devouring our wallets its pretty easy to see why hunting has declined.  Not to mention,  the baby boomers are approaching their 60's and 70's and feeling the effects of age. Many have begun putting any extra money towards retirement and the insane cost of pharmaceutacal meds.  The young generation isn't exposed to the sport as even I was 20 years ago.  With broken families, both Mom and Dad working, pressure of education we begin to lose this generation too.  I haven't even mentioned the world of electronics which is just astonishing.  I mean come on, I don't even see any snowmen after a fresh snowstorm.  Kids just don't go outside anymore.  Very sad!  When my son is ready I will do everything in my power to get him into the sport! 

[Curmudgeon]

So how many hunter do you think are going out to hunt coyotes for this contest that wouldn't be anyway? Do you believe that it would be so easy to just pick up a gun, go out and bag a few yotes in an attempt to win that contest? Do you think the public does? Yes I do.

 

I know guys that do quite a bit of squirrel hunting and actually take part in the squirrel slam. This doesn't draw them out for the event. Quite differently, they don't hit areas they normally would and save those for the day of the event. So if as a hunter we take a dozen squirrels a year but choose to schedule one day afield to coincide with an social activity, I don't see the harm. Anyone that looks at these contests myopically and doesn't  understand that the hunting activity still takes place even without a contest do not understand what really happens. That does not change the public perception.

 

Reality may not matter. Perception certainly does.

 

[virgil]

I think the point of the question is not the contests' impact on game populations, but the impact of the contests amongst the non-hunting public.  Non-hunters or anti-hunters may think that it sounds gratuitous and un-sporting and may see the participants as killing animals more for the purpose of winning the contest than controlling populations.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So continue our activities under the cloak of darkness to avoid those with no actual understanding from forming an opinion? I certainly hope that after our extinction the cockroaches learn from our mistakes. We don't even deserve to be here anymore with what we have allowed to happen to our society. unfreakingbelievable.

 

I have got a news flash for you. If a person can not (or does not choose) to see what I previously posted, they are not a NON hunter. they are anti. They may not admit it but they are. and the hunter you said that found it offensive, has she ever actually been to one of these events?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I think the point of the question is not the contests' impact on game populations, but the impact of the contests amongst the non-hunting public.  Non-hunters or anti-hunters may think that it sounds gratuitous and un-sporting and may see the participants as killing animals more for the purpose of winning the contest than controlling populations.

Controlling population aside, it is a legal activity. One that takes place with or without a contest. This isn't 500 people descending on one woods and shooting every squirrel in the place. Do we have any members that were at last years Slam? did they give out the number of squirrels entered?

[virgil]

I don't think anyone is debating the legality.  The question is about the perception of the contests by the uninformed and whether that perception is damaging to the public image of hunting.  It's a perfectly reasonable question. 

[mike rossi]

In post 23, Belo asks a good question. The pro-hunting legislation which successfully passes has the support of the DEC and broad-based public support, not just the support of the hunting community. Most of the regulations Belo listed function in reducing the deer herd. Although anti-hunters are not on board with lethal population control; the DEC, the conservation community and the hunting community were all together, so they passed.

 

However, not all pro-hunting measures have the support of the conservation community and/or the DEC. These proposals are less likely to pass. Also, the DEC and the conservation community are not likely to weigh in on most social issues. Those proposals may become hunter against anti hunter or hunter against hunter.

 

The weight of the anti-hunting community acting ALONE  in NY was just seen when they overrode the hunting, the conservation, and the  science communities and stopped the DEC's mute swan plan in its tracks AND with lightning speed passed legislation which ensured the DEC would do it their way. How this happened is harder to understand then Belo's examples, but it probably had to do with conservation organizations getting flack from their own members and lack of engagement by the hunting community, leaving the DEC to fend for itself.

 

Hunters shouldn't expect the DEC to drive social issues; the reality is the DEC actually needs the hunting and the conservation communities to help them compel the legislature to pass sound legislation regarding biological issues. Another problem with the idea that biologists should defend hunting is the fact that people employed in the wildlife field, that includes DEC biologists, are increasingly people who do not have any first-hand experience with hunting or hunters. Not being hunters they may or may not be effective.

 

Hunters might consider creating spoke person training like the NY Farm Bureau does. However, for that to work everyone must start to agree what a science-based decision is. Science - based decisions do not always please hunters. In order to  build a stronger partnership with the conservation community the hunting community must begin to walk their talk about allowing science guiding policy, rather than pick and chose which science they like and dislike...

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I understand no one is debating the legality of it (At least for now since it may become illegal). My point is, and then I am out of this, if a person, hunter, non hunter or anti form an opinion without truly understanding this is a social activity that is not a promotion of slaughter and waste and is simply a social activity and fund raiser then they don't get it. And if it isn't this activity that we are pissing them off about , it will just be something else.

 

Bottom line, that antis and protesters get the press. The public sees the face of hunting that the anti's and press want them to see, squirrel slam, coyote event, crow event or what ever flavor of the day. If you enjoy bending over and grabbing your ankles, then by all means have at it. I won't be joining in the apology tours.

[Curmudgeon]

So continue our activities under the cloak of darkness to avoid those with no actual understanding from forming an opinion? I certainly hope that after our extinction the cockroaches learn from our mistakes. We don't even deserve to be here anymore with what we have allowed to happen to our society. unfreakingbelievable.

 

I have got a news flash for you. If a person can not (or does not choose) to see what I previously posted, they are not a NON hunter. they are anti. They may not admit it but they are. and the NON hunter you said that found it offensive, has she ever actually been to one of these events?

 

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.

 

 

[Merlot]

Announced contests such as these usually fire up the anti-hunt establishment. Rather see these contests go on under the radar, if possible, if people like to participate in this type of event.  

[virgil]

There was no apology tour.  Just an attempt at a thoughtful discussion.

[Curmudgeon]

Thank you Virgil.

[Mr VJP]

So, you have all of these negative things to say about the way hunters go about things these days, and you are having these conversations with non-hunters that are not too happy about hunting.  I have to assume you are not defending the things you don't agree with when you talk to non-hunters.  I also assume you put yourself above other hunters when you speak to non-hunters and position yourself as a hunter that wants to change what other hunters do, being so much purer an all.  What do you think you are accomplishing by doing that?

 

You say you don't want a ban on anything, you just want to get hunters to do things your way.  Do a reality check.  They are not going to just let you tell them they should be better ambassadors for hunting, they are not going to agree with your definition of what that is.  The only thing that will stop these things people keeping giving publicity to, anti's and elitist hunters alike, is a law that bans them.  So if you think you are not helping things move in that direction, you are not being honest with yourself.

 

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.  I would not like to see that happen, but I get the feeling elitists would be quite content with that, and possibly with much more infringement in the future, if it controls hunting the way they want it to be controlled.

 

In my book, anti's are the worst, non-hunters are just misinformed, but a hunter that cannot properly inform and educate a non-hunter about the complex issues involved with all facets of the pastime of hunting, regardless of the public's perception, might just as well cross the line to the anti side, because he is helping them and hurting the pastime of hunting.

 

Elitists have their view on the issue, and I have mine.  When all hunting is completely banned, I'm sure the elitists will believe they were doing the right thing and none of the blame is theirs.

[mike rossi]

So how many hunter do you think are going out to hunt coyotes for this contest that wouldn't be anyway? Do you believe that it would be so easy to just pick up a gun, go out and bag a few yotes in an attempt to win that contest? Do you think the public does?

 

I know guys that do quite a bit of squirrel hunting and actually take part in the squirrel slam. This doesn't draw them out for the event. Quite differently, they don't hit areas they normally would and save those for the day of the event. So if as a hunter we take a dozen squirrels a year but choose to schedule one day afield to coincide with an social activity, I don't see the harm. Anyone that looks at these contests myopically and doesn't  understand that the hunting activity still takes place even without a contest do not understand what really happens.

 

I get your point. Its not concentrating hunters and not very additive to the number of persons who would be out hunting anyway. But why cant this be carried out more quietly? Do you have to call it squirrel slam and crow down? Did you see the posters for the crow down, poor judgment and complete lack of regard for how others might (and did) perceive.

 

Clean it up a little and stop denying the impacts of lead ammo... That wont get the antis off your back but it will go along way...

[mike rossi]

Announced contests such as these usually fire up the anti-hunt establishment. Rather see these contests go on under the radar, if possible, if people like to participate in this type of event.  

 

Exactly. And even if not under the radar, make the names and the artwork on the advertisements non offensive... 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I get your point. Its not concentrating hunters and not very additive to the number of persons who would be out hunting anyway. But why cant this be carried out more quietly? Do you have to call it squirrel slam and crow down? Did you see the posters for the crow down, poor judgment and complete lack of regard for how others might (and did) perceive.

Clean it up a little and stop denying the impacts of lead ammo... That wont get the antis off your back but it will go along way...

Nothing like a fu d raiser that isn't advertised to bring in the funds.

[Curmudgeon]

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.