As a general rule I try not to editorialize often - but I thought I would throw this out there. I have seen here, and on other sites, several threads debating various issues such as QDM, trophy hunting, party hunting, technology and the like. In many cases you hear the someone say something to the effect, "why do we even go down this path, everyone has there own opinion, this is dumb we shouldn't be debating among ourselves we need to show a united front to the anti-hunting crowd"
I would say these debates (if carried out respectfully) are good for the sport. If these issues are on our minds, I'll guarantee they are on the minds of the non-hunting group - and they are discussing them. Some time ago I was with a long time hunting buddy of mine when he got sucked into a debate with an Anti about hunting. He fell back on the old standard arguments - Hunting controls the populations, I hunt for the food, I hunt for the challenge and for the outdoor experience, I have a deep respect for the animals. Basically he got thrashed in the argument - the Anti fired back something like, "there's been hunting for years and the populations are more out of control today and if that was your interest why do you shoot bucks; in all, it costs more for your family to eat venison than the finest beef; if you were hunting for the challenge why do you use all the latest in gear; if it's for the outdoor experience why don't you go out with a camera - or is it you simply want to kill something; if you respect them why do you destroy them.
Their arguments are getting much more sophisticated, we can't expect the same old defense to work, because they are discussing and debating the same issues that keep popping up in forums. For example, if we are trying to sort out our thoughts on the Lovstuen buck I'm sure they are as well. When it becomes completely public I bet there'll be plenty of debate. These threads are a great way to listen to the opinions of some of the most experienced, passionate and intelligent outdoorsman. That's the best way for us to strengthen our forces.
Take it for what it's worth.
I would say these debates (if carried out respectfully) are good for the sport. If these issues are on our minds, I'll guarantee they are on the minds of the non-hunting group - and they are discussing them. Some time ago I was with a long time hunting buddy of mine when he got sucked into a debate with an Anti about hunting. He fell back on the old standard arguments - Hunting controls the populations, I hunt for the food, I hunt for the challenge and for the outdoor experience, I have a deep respect for the animals. Basically he got thrashed in the argument - the Anti fired back something like, "there's been hunting for years and the populations are more out of control today and if that was your interest why do you shoot bucks; in all, it costs more for your family to eat venison than the finest beef; if you were hunting for the challenge why do you use all the latest in gear; if it's for the outdoor experience why don't you go out with a camera - or is it you simply want to kill something; if you respect them why do you destroy them.
Their arguments are getting much more sophisticated, we can't expect the same old defense to work, because they are discussing and debating the same issues that keep popping up in forums. For example, if we are trying to sort out our thoughts on the Lovstuen buck I'm sure they are as well. When it becomes completely public I bet there'll be plenty of debate. These threads are a great way to listen to the opinions of some of the most experienced, passionate and intelligent outdoorsman. That's the best way for us to strengthen our forces.
Take it for what it's worth.
