Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
The greatest enemies of rational management of wildlife have been Walt Disney and Felix Salter (author of "Bambi"). Their anthropomorphizing of animals has created much of this "hugging".
I absolutely agree. There is a huge disconnect with your average "dweller" and the stark realities of wildlife management.The greatest enemies of rational management of wildlife have been Walt Disney and Felix Salter (author of "Bambi"). Their anthropomorphizing of animals has created much of this "hugging".
The greatest enemies of rational management of wildlife have been Walt Disney and Felix Salter (author of "Bambi"). Their anthropomorphizing of animals has created much of this "hugging".
buck,We hunters like to illustrate the non-hunters feelings and opinions as being foolish or stupid. But it is not that simple. I doubt very much if the most active Animal Rights folks are stupid, nor do I think they really believe that Bambi talks, his mom is monogamous with his dad, and that all of the other forest creatures also talk. Probably no more than pro-hunters. Probably no more than fans of "The Walking Dead" actually believe in Zombies. I think those pictures of men killing defenseless baby seals by smashing their head in with a club and the videos of the chained up dog, starved and frozen to the ground outside his dog house probably have a greater affect on their opinions than any or all of the Disney animated movies. We need a better argument than anthropomorphism to make them understand the values of hunting. JMHO.
Bravo art...Buck, those created an atmosphere around wildlife that ignores the benefits of management in a country such as ours, as well as creating some degree of anti-hunting. Beginnings, if you will, from which "hugging" grew.
It's part of civilization's "magic": Milk and meat come from a grocery. Electricity from a switch. Water from a faucet. A little handle on the white porcelain throne makes yucky stuff go away. You don't need farms and ranches. Or power plants. Dams and reservoirs exist only to either mess up a natural stream or allow for water-skiing. Waste treatment plants smell bad.
High emotion and abysmal ignorance. For all too many people, the less they know, the stronger their opinions.
We hunters like to illustrate the non-hunters feelings and opinions as being foolish or stupid. But it is not that simple. I doubt very much if the most active Animal Rights folks are stupid, nor do I think they really believe that Bambi talks, his mom is monogamous with his dad, and that all of the other forest creatures also talk. Probably no more than pro-hunters. Probably no more than fans of "The Walking Dead" actually believe in Zombies. I think those pictures of men killing defenseless baby seals by smashing their head in with a club and the videos of the chained up dog, starved and frozen to the ground outside his dog house probably have a greater affect on their opinions than any or all of the Disney animated movies. We need a better argument than anthropomorphism to make them understand the values of hunting. JMHO.
buck,
I'm pretty sure I posted one in the OP......................
Buck, those created an atmosphere around wildlife that ignores the benefits of management in a country such as ours, as well as creating some degree of anti-hunting. Beginnings, if you will, from which "hugging" grew.
It's part of civilization's "magic": Milk and meat come from a grocery. Electricity from a switch. Water from a faucet. A little handle on the white porcelain throne makes yucky stuff go away. You don't need farms and ranches. Or power plants. Dams and reservoirs exist only to either mess up a natural stream or allow for water-skiing. Waste treatment plants smell bad.
High emotion and abysmal ignorance. For all too many people, the less they know, the stronger their opinions.
buck460XVR said:You boast that animals have no rights. I don't agree. The good Lord put them here for a purpose and that purpose gives them rights.
And for everyone not Christian on the forum? Is it the animals that disappear or their rights? Neither. Rights aren't created or endowed by a divine being any more than they are from a government. Rights are the creation of a mutually agreed upon social contract that arises in any human society in order to promote peace and civility. Animals don't normally have rights because they can't understand the ramifications of long term social organization and thus can't form a social contract. Animals can only be conferred rights by other creatures capable of understanding such. Humans.
How about a legalistic view. If animals do indeed have the right to life, then hunting is not only illegal but unethical and immoral because we are depriving them of their rights without due process.
Don't accidentally create rights where they don't exist instead of simply saying that as humans we have a responsibility to act ethically in all regards.
buck460XVR said:..and what are those inalienable rights that pro 2nd Amendment folks so often refer to and insist they cannot be infringed?
buck460XVR said:Many of the most ardent Animal Rights folks are atheist.
buck460XVR said:Look at the beliefs of our Native Americans. They had great respect for the land and the animals that thrived on it, and they were not Christians at the time
buck460XVR said:As for humans not having the responsibility to act ethically...
You do know that the Constitution doesn't grant rights, but protects them from infringement by the government? Right?
I hope after saying that. you have given up the claim of rights being god given... because then... how would atheists believe in them?
Again, do not confuse acting ethically towards something with that thing having a right. If you believe animals have the right to live, you must by default also admit that hunting the, thus depriving them of life without due process is wrong.
This is modern America, where perceptions outweigh facts.
buck460XVR said:I never said anything about the Constitution giving us rights. Only that Pro 2nd Amendment folks talk about inalienable rights all the time.
buck460XVR said:Again, inalienable rights are believed to be birth rights or natural rights. Folks that believe in God then assume they are God given. Being "natural" rights or "birth" rights, one does not have to believe in God to believe in them.
buck460XVR said:Most inalienable rights deal with ethics. "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", the three most well know inalienable rights here in America, basically come down to the ethics of our government and our culture.
buck460XVR said:Using your rationale, if you believe in "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as a inalienable right, then you must, by default admit that war and the sending of soldiers into battle is wrong, regardless of the circumstances.
buck460XVR said:Same with Animals. No where did I say they had the right to live forever
buck460XVR said:... that while they are alive, we treat them ethically and with respect
Good start. I want to see them back in my AO in the Northeast section of the State.http://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/20151208/wvdnr-prepares-for-return-of-elk-after-140-year-absence
Pushrod,
Looks like West Virginia is about to have an official elk population once again.
The point is quite simply. As stated in the video. Without hunting, wildlife suffers. There are only two geographic area on the planet where wildlife has not only recovered but striven and grown exponentially in numbers during the last century. Those two areas are North America and Southern Africa, the only two continents which use wide spread hunting based conservation model on vast tracks of open land, the proof is in the pudding.
It matters not that the sins of our forefathers nearly wiped out wildlife for good. What mater is that they also established the most viable wildlife conservation model in the history of mankind. What matters is if the Animal Rights fringe is allowed to destroy this incredibly successful model here or in Africa wildlife will disappear at exponential rates.