Posted 30 April 2010 - 05:04 PM
I have never hunted. I think the reason I have never hunted is because my father never hunted hence, I was never taught to hunt and the sport never took root within me.
But I have always respected the hunter’s important role in the conservation and population control of wildlife. I am not sure I could ever pull the trigger of a rifle aimed at a deer, or a moose or a bear or any other mammal. I have come to appreciate photographing them instead and as strange as this may sound I would almost feel like I was betraying the animal if I used my 'stalking techniques' honed for taking pictures to actually kill one instead. Regardless, I am glad others hunt since someone has to do it.
That said, the one and only thing about hunting that rubs me the wrong way is Trophy hunting. I wholeheartedly agree with hunting as a means to cull the animal’s numbers and keep them under control; while at the same time providing valuable revenue that can be directed at conservation and additional revenue to our tourism industry. But some hunters seem to seek out only the biggest and strongest since these animals make the best photos and garner the best bragging rights. I just don't think that a true hunter should care how many points the buck's antlers have, or how much the animal weighs. In my perfect world the hunter would take down the weak, the inferior, and the slow; leaving the largest and strongest to pass on their genes to the next generation. When we fish we love to catch the largest, the strongest, and the most visually stunning specimens...but more and more we are coming to understand that it is better for the species and the industry if we let these ones go after a few photos; in favour of keeping the smaller more common sized fish to eat. But of course with a rifle as the tool there's not much of an opportunity for catch and release now is there?
Just my 2 cents. (With respect)
Good things come to those who bait.