A Rant About Hunting

I know there’s a lot of this going on right now anyway, and I’m sure you’re tired of reading about it, but I’m to narcissistic to not want to put my $0.02 out there.  I’m not going to address the current event so much as a word I’ve seen used too much in several of the big game hunting stories from the last couple of years. That word is conservation.

Now, realize I’m coming at this from the background of someone who graduated with a degree in music, has been ghost hunting for the last 15 years and still plays video games and collects comics. I guess you could say I’m sort of an expert on conservation. (Sh’yeah, right) For real, I’m not and I welcome any challenges to my viewpoint here, I’m all about meaningful debate and discussion. Otherwise, how else will I ever force you to admit that I’m right and best.

I have friends who are conservationists, legit, no b.s. I’m not going to call any of them out just in case they decide to read this. I don’t want to make anyone uncomfortable in that sense. They may disagree with me, but it would surprise me, and if they do, I’d listen to their viewpoints because of how ingrained they are to the stewardship of our natural world.

I do come from a very rural area where we hunted, fished, trapped, etc. These things, at least the hunting and fishing, were done for recreation, but we ate whatever we caught or killed. It wasn’t a necessity like it used to be, but it wasn’t in vain. If we had too much for one family, we shared with our extended family and friends. I never trapped myself, I don’t agree with it personally, but I had some family members who did it for income. It to help buy their groceries, put gas in their cars, keep the lights on. These things were done in the sense of taking from the land and providing ourselves with physical and mental sustenance.

I just read an article titled “Can Trophy Hunting Actually Help Conservation?”. I’m not going to completely break down the article, you can find it for yourself online if you look for the online magazine, Conservation. The gist of the article is that these hunters will pay exorbitant amounts of money to get the license to hunt endangered species under the claim or belief that this money is going to the local community and help with conservation. There is very little proof that this is happening, though. Did they really believe that this was helping the area, or is this an excuse they spew when the media calls them out for their sick behavior? Essentially, the article answers the question by saying (and I’m paraphrasing here) “Trophy hunting CAN aid conservation, if all of the factors align correctly”. Or as an expert bull-shitter will read it, “No, it doesn’t.”

I may lose some friends over what I’m about to say, but I hope not. I don’t think I’m friends with the kind of people who do this, but you never know, so here goes. HUNTING FOR SPORT IS WRONG.  Hunting for sport is a sickness, it’s the compulsion to end life and take a trophy to prove it. It’s not killing for protection, it’s not killing for survival, it’s not killing for sustenance. It’s killing for the sake of killing. There should be a diagnosis for the kind of person who can look down the scope of a rifle, the sights of a bow, look into the eyes of an animal who isn’t threatening, who isn’t sick and in need of mercy, pull the trigger or loose the arrow, take a trophy like a head or horns or a hide and leave the rest for carrion. It is shameful. It is disgusting. It is wasteful. It is NOT, as so many of these trophy hunters claim, conservation.

Now, if you don’t mind, I need to go drop some lit dynamite off the side of the boat into Fort Loudon Lake. Excuse me.