# More anti hunting bull s**t



## Paulie69 (Dec 14, 2008)

I saw this on another hunting site and had to pass it on. This is what's being taught in our schools.


the stalking and killing of animals, has been an American tradition most likely since the Ice Age when plant food became scarce. Today it exists as a "sport"; even when the animals' flesh is eaten, there is no excuse or justification for stalking and killing an animal in his or her habitat. Nevertheless, people not only engage in hunting but strongly defend it as their right to do so. With an arsenal of rifles, shotguns, muzzleloaders, handguns, bows and arrows, hunters kill more than 200 million animals yearly - crippling, orphaning, and harassing millions more. The annual death toll in the U.S. includes 42 million mourning doves, 30 million squirrels, 28 million quail, 25 million rabbits, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, 6 million deer, and thousands of geese, bears, moose, elk, antelope, swans, cougars, turkeys, wolves, foxes, coyotes, bobcats, boars, and other woodland creatures. (Compiled by The Fund for Animals with data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.) 

Less than seven percent of the U.S. population hunts. Hunting is permitted on 60 percent of U.S. wildlife refuges and in many national forests and state parks. On federal land alone (more than half a billion acres), more than 200 million animals are killed every year.

Hunting by humans operates perversely. The kill ratio at a couple hundred feet with a semi-automatic weapon and scope is virtually 100 percent. The animal, no matter how well-adapted to escape natural predation, has virtually no way to escape death once he/she is in the cross hairs of a scope mounted on a rifle. Nature's adaptive structures and behaviors that have evolved during millions of years simply count for naught when a human is the hunter. Most deer, for example, would not perceive anything that is within the effective range of a big game rifle (up to 400 yards) as a predator or a source of danger. A wolf at that distance, even though detected, would be totally ignored. Even the much smaller range of bow-hunter (about 50-75 feet) is barely of concern to deer. Deer may start to keep an eye on a hunter at that distance, but the evasion instinct doesn't kick in until it's too late.

The stress that hunting inflicts on animals--the noise, the fear, and the constant chase--severely restricts their ability to eat adequately and store the fat and energy they need to survive the winter. Hunting also disrupts migration and hibernation, and the campfires, recreational vehicles, trash, and other hunting side effects endanger both wildlife and the environment. For animals like wolves who mate for life and have close-knit family units, hunting can severely harm entire communities.

Hunters and hunting organizations, including state and federally funded sponsors like Fish and Wildlife Services and departments of environmental conservation, promote supposed justifications as to why hunting is necessary. One of these justifications is that if certain animals were not hunted, they would slowly die of starvation and thus the lesser of the two evils is to humanely kill them. There are problems with this logic.

When hunters talk about shooting overpopulated animals, they are usually referring to white-tailed deer, representing only 3 percent of all the animals killed by hunters. Sport hunters shoot millions of mourning doves, squirrels, rabbits, and waterfowl, and thousands of predators, none of whom any wildlife biologist would claim are overpopulated or need to be hunted. Even with deer, hunters do not search for starving animals. They either shoot animals at random, or they seek out the strongest and healthiest animals in order to bring home the biggest trophies or largest antlers. Hunters and wildlife agencies are not concerned about reducing deer herds, but rather with increasing the number of targets for hunters and the number of potential hunting license dollars. Thus, they use deer overpopulation as a smokescreen to justify their sport. The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife states that "the deer resource has been managed primarily for the purpose of sport hunting," (New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife, An Assessment of Deer Hunting in New Jersey, 1990).

Hunters also shoot nonnative species such as ring-necked pheasants who are hand-fed and raised in pens and then released into the wild just before hunting season. Even if the pheasants - native to China - survive the hunters' onslaught, they are certain to die of exposure or starvation in the nonnative environment. While hunters claim they save overpopulated animals from starvation, they intentionally breed some species and let them starve to death.

Hunters and hunting organizations also promote the idea that hunting is necessary for "wildlife management" and "conservation." "Wildlife management" and "conservation" are euphemisms used to describe programs that ensure that there are always enough animals for hunters to hunt. Because they make their money primarily from the sale of hunting licenses, the major function of wildlife agencies is not to protect individual animals or biological diversity, but to propagate "game" species for hunters to shoot. 
State agencies build roads through our wild lands to facilitate hunter access, they pour millions of tax dollars into law enforcement of hunting regulations and hunter education, and into manipulating habitat by burning and clear-cutting forests to increase the food supply for "game" species such as deer. More food means a larger herd and more animals available as targets. Hunting programs also cause wildlife overpopulation by stimulating breeding by conducting "buck only" hunts, which can leave as many as six does per buck; pen-raising quail, grouse, and pheasants for use as hunters' targets; transporting raccoons, antelopes, martens, wild turkeys, and other animals from one state to another to bolster populations for hunters; and exterminating predators like wolves and mountain lions in order to throw prey populations off balance, thereby "justifying" the killing of both "dangerous" and "surplus" animals.

Hunters claim that they pay for "conservation" by buying hunting licenses, duck stamps, etc. But the relatively small amount each hunter pays does not cover the cost of hunting programs or game warden salaries. The public lands many hunters use are supported by taxpayers. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, which benefit hunters, get most of their funds from general tax revenues, not hunting fees. Funds benefiting "non-game" species are scarce. Hunters kill more animals than recorded tallies indicate. It is estimated that, for every animal a hunter kills and recovers, at least two wounded but unrecovered animals die slowly and painfully of blood loss, infection, or starvation. Those who don't die often suffer from disabling injuries. Because of carelessness or the effects of alcohol, scores of horses, cows, dogs, cats, hikers, and others are wounded or killed each year by hunters. In 1988, 177 people were killed and 1,719 injured by hunters while walking through the woods or on their own property.

Hunters say that they are "ethical" and follow the concept of "fair chase." What is fair about a chase in which the hunter uses a powerful weapon from ambush and the victim has no defense except luck? Furthermore, despite the hunting community's repeated rhetoric of "hunting ethics," many hunting groups have refused to end repugnant practices that go above and beyond the cruelty inherent in all sport hunting. There is clearly no "fair chase" in many of the activities sanctioned by the hunting community, such as: "canned hunts," in which tame, exotic animals - from African lions to European boars - are unfair game for fee-paying hunters at private fenced-in shooting preserves; "contest kills," in which shooters use live animals as targets while competing for money and prizes in front of a cheering crowd; "wing shooting," in which hunters lure gentle mourning doves to sunflower fields and blast the birds into pieces for nothing more than target practice, leaving more than 20 percent of the birds they shoot crippled and un-retrieved; "baiting," in which trophy hunters litter public lands with piles of rotten food so they can attract unwitting bears or deer and shoot the feeding animals at point-blank range; 'hounding," in which trophy hunters unleash packs of radio-collared dogs to chase and tree bears, cougars, raccoons, foxes, bobcats, lynx, and other animals in a high-tech search and destroy mission, and then follow the radio signal on a handheld receptor and shoot the trapped animal off the tree branch. 

Some hunters say hunting with a bow and arrow avoids using high tech equipment that might make it an unfair chase. Bow hunting is one of the cruelest forms of hunting because primitive archery equipment wounds more animals than it kills. Dozens of scientific studies indicate that bow hunting yields more than a 50 percent crippling rate. For every animal dragged from the woods, at least one animal is left wounded to suffer - either to bleed to death or to become infested with parasites and diseases. 

Hunting is not the cure but the cause of overpopulation and starvation. Luke Dommer, the founder of the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting, had proposed to several state wildlife agencies that if they are serious about using hunting as a population control tool in areas where the sex ratio is already badly distorted, they should institute a doe season (taking no bucks but only does until the ratio is again stabilized at 50:50). All agencies have rejected that proposal thereby giving up any pretense of ecologically motivated sound wildlife management. They quite consciously and openly state that they are in business to provide the maximum number of live targets to hunters each year.

Powerful hunting lobbies in 35 states have persuaded lawmakers to enact "hunter harassment" laws that make it illegal for non-hunters to interfere in behalf of animals targeted by hunters, but these laws are being challenged on constitutional grounds.
Connecticut's law was found to impact on freedom of speech without a compelling state interest and was struck down by a U.S. appeals court.

*WHAT CAN BE DONE:*
Before you support a "wildlife" or "conservation" group, ask if it supports hunting. Such groups as the National Wildlife Federation, the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Izaak Walton League, the Wilderness Society, World Wildlife Fund, and many others are pro-hunting. 

*To combat hunting in your area:*
Post "No Hunting" signs on your land
Join or form a local anti-hunting organization
protest organized hunts
Play loud radios and spread deer repellent or human hair (from barber shops) near hunting areas. 
Report poachers in national parks to the National Parks and Conservation Association at 1-800-448-NPCA.


----------



## ih772 (Jan 28, 2003)

What are the names of the schools teaching this?


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Ef them, they will never stop hunting. I also would like to know what schools teach this crap.


----------



## Islander26 (Feb 23, 2004)

Let me guess California......


----------



## eddiejohn4 (Dec 23, 2005)

Some more from the fruits and nuts. apparently they have not been in formed that all animals and insects hunt. maybe if they could just find their own planet they would be happy, as nature is alittle too much for them to take.

I love reading the twisted way they think. they do not mention how many animals are killed each year clearing land to plant crops to feed these idiots. or how many died using toilet paper to wipe thier sorry excuse of a behind. or how many they kill each year using thier cell phones as the material to have this technology leaves a print on the biosphere.I could go on and on, but they do not have the common sense to understand what I would be talking about.


----------



## Little Roober (Jun 17, 2004)

Paulie69 said:


> *To combat hunting in your area:*
> Post "No Hunting" signs on your land
> Join or form a local anti-hunting organization
> protest organized hunts
> ...


The first one...Sure, go ahead. 
Second..It's your right..
Third...I dont even know what that is?
Fourth is harassment and they get fined.
Fifth helps real hunters by getting poachers busted. 

I say go for it.

Edit: What do they want us to use for a weapon? A rifle isn't fair game because it can "shoot several hundred feet and it's a sure kill" but bows arent deadly enough for them. Make up your mind. Sheesh.


----------



## BarryPatch (Jul 21, 2004)

Just some crap from a crappy little website.

http://www.idausa.org/facts/hunting.html


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Yep, wing nuts. http://www.idausa.org/ir.html


----------



## Paulie69 (Dec 14, 2008)

CHASINEYES said:


> Yep, wing nuts. http://www.idausa.org/ir.html


 
That must be where these idiots get their info. And here I thought they just pulled it out of their ass!!


----------



## ih772 (Jan 28, 2003)

So what are the names of the schools where they are teaching this?


----------



## Paulie69 (Dec 14, 2008)

As for what schools,or where, I dont know. What I know, is what I posted. I just copied the post from a "NAHC"(North American Hunting Club) forum. I would have to think, that a call or visit to your local school board would tell you if this garbage is being fed to your kids. Like I said, I just copied the post, I read it, and thought I would share it to help expose these morons!


----------



## Bellyup (Nov 13, 2007)

They are posting bogus facts and should be exposed. I don't mind them expressing their opinions, they are entitled to it. I simply don't have to listen, as it is my entitlement. 

If I read the posts correct, they said that there is no waterfowl over population, and no wildlife biologist would state they are. How about Snow Geese ? There are a lot of bioligists whom would confirm that Snow Geese are over populated. They have already destroyed countless tundras that can't recover from the damage in a hundred years naturally. 

Perhaps these people need to become more educated in the schools it is proclaimed they are posting this bogus and infactual information. 

We all have a right to our opinion. If you are going to go public with your opinions, you better have correct facts to substantiate (sp) it with.


----------



## CHASINEYES (Jun 3, 2007)

Bellyup said:


> They are posting bogus facts and should be exposed. I don't mind them expressing their opinions, they are entitled to it. I simply don't have to listen, as it is my entitlement.
> 
> If I read the posts correct, they said that there is no waterfowl over population, and no wildlife biologist would state they are. How about Snow Geese ? There are a lot of bioligists whom would confirm that Snow Geese are over populated. They have already destroyed countless tundras that can't recover from the damage in a hundred years naturally.
> 
> ...


Babe Winckleman aired a show on the snow geese overpoulation. The numbers are still climbing. Looked like alot of fun hunting those geese. and, as you stated the geese are destroying parts of the tundra.

As for them (anti's) having a right to ther own opinion, yes they do, but they have no right to ''teach'' this (puke) in our schools.:SHOCKED:


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

Little Roober said:


> Edit: What do they want us to use for a weapon? A rifle isn't fair game because it can "shoot several hundred feet and it's a sure kill" but bows arent deadly enough for them. Make up your mind. Sheesh.


I thought the same thing.


----------



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

Where do they propose all those millions of critters live if not killed let alone their offspring. They just dont realize you cant 'stockpile' animals.

Those bird lovers cats kill as many as hunters.


----------



## Hart (Jan 27, 2008)

They like to say "look what's being taught in our schools!" as an indictment against:

1. Public schools;
2. Public school teachers; and;
3. Anti-hunters.

Then, when level-headed folks such as ih772 and myself say "what schools are teaching this?"...........there's no answer. 

They put this utter hor$e$** out there only to have some of the more gullible among us spread their "message" for them (no offense intended to the author of this thread). This is a textbook example of the way conservative media in general operates so much of the time. It's been called the "Mighty Wurlitzer".......

This is why I personally will never subscribe to these organizations, PETA, or any other political affiliation that has such little regard for the truth while at the same time holding no reservations whatsoever about insulting my intelligence. 

I find it very hard to believe that there is a public school in America that has the stones to even entertain the notion of "teaching" the stuff alleged here. I'd write a scorching fireball to any such teacher *myself *and post it here for all to read if we were to discover that a public school in this country was preaching this garbage.

I could maybe see a lone holdout pinhead in the badlands of *Vermont *talking this trash, but they'd be the exception to the rule.......


----------



## chinamigarden (Oct 21, 2005)

I don't know about your schools but in Marine City the kids in Middle School and High School can enter a big buck contest.


----------



## anonymous7242016 (Aug 16, 2008)

I guess the anti hunting groups would rather see animals die of starvation when they all become over populated. Or better yet what are the vegans going to eat when the critters of the world over take all the vegetable gardens. What are they going to say when they hit a deer with their car? Are they going to take care of all the starving diseased over populated animals? 
I guess the best thing to do is keep hunting and doing what we have been for generations until they come up with a humain way to control populations. Oh wait they will bring back natural predators to the point of where they can control the populations. And they won't be bothered one bit while they watch a pack of wolves take down a fawn. Or wake up one morning to find their horse eaten, or dog killed,or cat murdered, or a family of geese slaughtered, or a bunch of ducks torn to pieces, or every possible species of plant eaten, or all the worlds forests destroyed buy too many animals. At least the hunting will be gone.


----------



## casscityalum (Aug 27, 2007)

I did my best to try and educate people at MSU....heres a link to my letter


http://www.statenews.com/index.php/article/2008/12/letter_mittlestat_120508

if you follow the blue link in text you can see a view that a student has and Im sure many more do also


----------

