55 replies to this topic

[chilli]

Well Doug Drapers latest ARA attack on hunting has me baffled. How did this peice of crap get published and what do we do about it?
http://www.niagarathisweek.com/opinion/col...-animal-cruelty
I honestly don't know what to say
Doug has suggested that all killing of animals lays squarely on the shoulders of Hunters! . People need a mass culling and after a day of not killing enough ducks I'm likely to hit my kids .

I'm thinking that perhaps Doug has had a nervous breakdown and its time for him to leave the media for good. At first I was infuriated by his article and planned a letter of response but you don't do that when someone is mentally distraught like Doug because Doug Draper just made himself look like a total whacko to the 165,800 residents the Niagara This Week just sent his article to last week.

So what do we do? I was thinking something along the line of calling Metroland Community Newspapers and Mike Williscraft and suggesting a retraction and dismissal of Doug Draper. Culling of People . Mike; you actually allowed that to print?

I also think I will pick a few random advertisers in that addition and suggest they drop their spot or lose the hunting community as potential customers. The real estate industry has allot to do with the NTW making it to your roadside ditch at no cost to you and they seem like a more likely target for Doug's rant. Yes we are crowding out the wildlife but I doubt Realtors would suggest thinning out people or blaming hunting on the stupid act of animal cruelty at Happy Ralph's.

Doug if your reading this know that I am not mad in the least now that I've had a day to think about your article. I feel bad for you because you obviously have the weight of the world on your shoulders and your having a breakdown. I'd be hard pressed to find a hunter who wasn't disgusted by the acts committed at the petting zoo and when you jump from that to the extinction of tigers, blue fin tuna or child abuse and mass murder of human beings your obviously ready for a visit to the little room lined with rubber where we can protect you from yourself.

Get better soon Doug Draper
Dan Andrews

[M K]

sounds like that guy has some daddy issues he need to work out, maybe a trip to the shrink will help.
how about sending him up to a shack in northern ontario, and see how long he can last.

[little cleo]

He's just wrong on so many levels..


Many Hunters are women.

As a child, I was never shielded from the fact that my dad was going hunting.. He would clean his gun during the days before, we would play with the antlers and hides he'd bring home, I was always excited to see the photos of him with dead animals.



Doug Draper is confused and possibly bored of writing about local politics.

[ninepointer]

On Friday I left a message on Mike Williscraft's voicemail, saying that if Draper had said such false and hateful things about any other group in society, he'd be in big trouble by now. I asked for a full and un-diluted retraction, and I meant that sincerely. This is beyond editorial opinion, its unethical journalism worthy of a formal complaint (but who to complain to?)

[chilli]

How about Neil Oliver over at Metroland They own the publication. Hey on a brighter note when you Google Doug Draper we are on the first page of results. Hopefully anyone searching for his writings will see this one and the other opinion

[smerchly]

Mr.Draper must be a veggie eater , he wouldn't eat a big mac or a hot dog or steak that was obtained by paying someone to kill (slaughter) these animals & neatly wrap the flesh in a styrofoam /cellophane pkg.....would he ?? Because of the simple fact that the human pop. is exploding and more land is needed for shopping plazas & houses , the animals must be managed by humans . If we do not manage the animals properly , then some species can get out of hand ...e.g. , the spring bear hunt . Send Mr.Draper some footage of a bear savagely taking the new born moose or deer calf away from the mother and watching the bear eat the calf while still alive......Would he say that's just nature at work ? And the cormorants .......he needs to see the destruction of trees and watch them clean out an entire marina of fish . Ask a farmer why he needs to spend thousands on netting because black birds will eat every grape they can get to .......I see the birds eating every single cherry from a back yard tree and it was loaded with berries a few days ago . People like Draper should confer with hunters/farmers etc. before writing such nonsense . He is obviously using this episode at Happy Rolfs to get people on his side playing on their emotions ,which , to me is pretty damn low ........I do not call this good journalism , it's propaganda and it reflects badly on the newspapers that print it .

[Coachman]

The incident at Happy Rolph’s has nothing to to do with anglers or hunters. It was a crime committed by a person or persons who clearly has no respect for life or for the property of others. There isn't a hunter or angler that I know of who would do something of this sort. To lay the blame for this on the most important conservation stewards in our society is not only ludicrous, it is quite frankly slanderous.

[chilli]

Actually Draper is in tight with the vegan agenda but promote vegan on its own merits! Draper really is that emotional when it comes to animals. He almost cried when I talked to him on the phone a couple years ago. He didn't hear a word I said either. The publisher should recognize Doug Draper has gone off the deep end and release the guy. He has no business in the editorial department anymore. One should have a grip on their emotions to work in there or the humane society for that matter.

Doug flipped out a few years back over environment issues and delivered a rant on the general public and disappeared from print for a bit. He worked across the road at the Region for a bit before returning. I actually called the paper back then and asked that if he was fired that he be returned. His columns before that rant were really good but after he returned I suspected a nervous breakdown because his personality had changed and so did his columns.

Here's the thing to keep in mind about Doug Drapers Column. Doug has been in the business for a long time. He knows how to provoke a response. If you complain the standard answer is a suggestion that you write a letter to the editor. This adds fuel to the fire that sells their paper. I don't plan on selling papers for the NTW and I won't be responsible for getting Doug Draper a bonus either. Remember Doug turned an ugly indecent at a petting zoo into a world wide commercial for animal rights.

I seriously suggest a new way to deal with Doug Draper. I suggest calling some of the newspapers sponsors and suggest we won't support their businesses until they either pull their adds out of the NTW or Doug Draper is asked to leave again and for good. Really no hard feelings Doug. I understand what your going through. It's called the change and it can be a bit like an identity crisis. Buy yourself a nice cottage and a lap dog and knit a sweater and you will feel the peace creeping in like Jack Daniels.

[Coachman]

I do have to wonder why we don't see more ads from TU, DU. OFAH and the like? These organizations are made up predominately of hunters and anglers, and are inarguably the most successful and effective conservation organizations out there. Perhaps one of these organizations could invite Mr. Draper into the field with them during one of their habitat restoration efforts. I don't know if that would change his mind, but it would maybe give him food for thought.

[bigugli]

Metroland has always thrived on this kind of sensationalist dribble. It harkens back to the days when some of the earliest publications, many decades back, were on the fringe, or part of the underground, beyond respectable media.

Yes the best tactic is to voice displeasure with the advertisers. Papers sell advertising. Good or objective reporting is not important.

[chilli]

Coachman; Doug Draper was once very conservation minded and did cover local stories of stocking game. Then after his first episode (possible breakdown) he met Daniel K Wilson a local animal hugger and I believe Doug set a local club from Thorold up. Doug did a story on the Thorold club who were releasing pheasants in a newer sanctuary. The idea was to release them in an area where they wouldn't be hunted to give them a better chance of reproducing. They had been planting habitat there for that reason. They also released several more birds in the hunting areas as these birds are put and take and don't really have much of a chance without the habitat and as our local Bio says "with the current rate of development".

Well along come Daniel K and writes a guest column on how these murderers can release and kill birds in a sanctuary. Dougy for some reason latched right on to Daniel and defended him. When I called Doug on the phone and asked how that letter was allowed to be used to promote legislation for animal cruelty laws that had a hidden agenda that would be used to end hunting on the backs of these conservation minded people, Doug went on a rant and gave me the whole animal abusers beat their family crap.

[Coachman]

It does sound as if he's made a major break from he previous positions. Perhaps it is time to fight back. Perhaps some adverts of our own? I don't know what it would cost, but perhaps some ads promoting NFN activities (like the Queenston Clean-up Chilli spearheaded) and the like. I'd pitch in a few bucks for something like that if it came to it.

Maybe have NFN partner up with DU or TU for some habitat restoration efforts and promote that with a few ads too. In the long run you might even see a return on the investment through increased traffic on the site.

The bottom line is that anglers and hunters are the ones who tend to get out there in waders to clean up streams or plant trees and brush along stream banks. Anglers and hunters also are more likely to get out there to participate in stocking, animal rescues, disaster recovery and more. The problem is that the public doesn't see those aspects. Unfortunately, people respond instead to photos of "cute" animals.

It is beyond me how a professional journalist can equate a wanton act of violence and vandalism with responsible resource use by hunters and anglers. There seems to be a serious flaw in Mr. Draper's logic. The only valid response to a flawed argument (even a convincing one) is a flawless counter-argument. Unfortunately, getting that counter-argument into the papers will not happen when it runs counter to the status-quo in the editorial department. So any effective response will have to be an "end-run" around that editorial establishment.

[Dark_Edge]

Going with what Coachman said, I'd be willing to help out. I'm not a professional, but I've got some camera gear to help display efforts. And my wife's a graphic designer (as well as a web designer), so maybe she could help out with some print advertisement (I'll have to talk to her about it first). And the next clean-up project, someone keep me informed. I'll gladly get out and help, even though I don't have waders. I do have a heavy duty 33 foot long cattle rope. It'll pull just about anything out of the drink.

[smerchly]

Just to put this into perspective with a few guesstimates & a little logic , I would say that hunters kill about 1% of all animals consumed & the other 99% of animals are killed in the slaughter house . There are far more wild animals killed by vehicles than shot by hunters . Deer , bear , moose , fox,rabbits, possum , coons , etc etc ., plus thousands of birds of all sizes are killed by cars & trucks . So , hunters take a very miniscule portion compared to the other factors......Mr.Draper should be going after the grocery chains & Macdonalds etc. He will be very dismayed to see other countries like China who are just in the beginning of consuming meat , and they will be needing ship loads of it to feed their 3 billion people . That could cause prices to soar so high we may all turn into veggies one day......Would that make him feel better ?

[Coachman]

One of the largest contributors to the on-going deforestation of the Amazon Basin is the fast-food industry. Every year tens of thousands of acres are cleared and converted to pasture for cattle. Of course, rainforest soil is very poor, so the resulting pasture can only support cattle for 2-3 years before they have to move the herd to another area. By then, the soil is so depleted and eroded that it never recovers.

Consider also that if every human being on the planet suddenly became vegan, there would be the problem of finding sufficient farmland to grow crops to feed 6.5 billion people. And then we'd need some method of keeping the deer, rabbits, birds etcetera away from those crops. Does anyone know how many acres a single person requires to feed him/herself?

There are now more deer, rabbits, upland game birds and waterfowl in North America than there were a century ago. This is because there is more farmland, power line cuts, rail and highway right-of-ways and the like. These animals are not creatures of the deep woods. There is in fact very little forage in an old-growth forest. These creatures thrive near farmland, orchards and other areas where food is plentiful and easily accessed. Areas in other words, where human activity has left its mark.

Ever since some pre-historic human realized that he could kill his prey more efficiently with the use of a tool, humans have been the apex predator on the planet. For hundreds of mllennia it has been that way. If humans suddenly stopped hunting, what is going to replace them? Any biologist worth his salt will tell you that in an ecosystem where the apex predator is removed, prey animal populations will explode, out-stripping the ecosystem's capacity and leading to starvation and disease. How can starvation and disease be more humane than a bullet or an arrow?

[ninepointer]

The first time I read Doug Draper's article last week, I have to admit that I immediately saw red and the words all started to jumble together. This morning, I re-read the article in a cool-headed manner and could not believe my eyes!!! There is was in black and white; THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET OF THE ANIMAL RIGHTS AGENDA: HUMAN BEINGS SHOULD BE KILLED OFF!!! Its right there, in the last paragraph of the article, "Maybe other creatures on this planet would be better off if we humans had culling". This man is not right in the head.

[Perkuns]

This is what Doug wants, any news is good news for a writer. So you guys will all huff and puff, then next week it will be something else. I was still a guest watching the Property incident in Pt. Dalhousie on here and see it was just all a bunch of a hoopla that got swept under the rug now.

[ninepointer]

Perkuns, on Jun 14 2010, 10:53 AM, said:

This is what Doug wants, any news is good news for a writer. So you guys will all huff and puff, then next week it will be something else. I was still a guest watching the Property incident in Pt. Dalhousie on here and see it was just all a bunch of a hoopla that got swept under the rug now.

You have a point Perkuns. There are members here on this forum and volunteers in our communities who often go to bat for the rest of us. These folks generally understand that that there certain times when it is valuable to shed light on a issue, other times when it is better to address it behind the scenes, and sometimes best to ignore it altogether. Depending on the circumstances, there are different ways to "huff and puff" most effectively.

Be happy that folks do the occasional huffing and puffing so that you can continue to hunt and/or fish. Not everything ends with the desired outcome, but without the huffing and puffing there would be straight losses all across the board.

[Perkuns]

What I really meant is you shouldn't give the guy any attention, don't fuel his fire. I think it is best to act before talking, but not before thinking in a lot of situations. Why let them see it coming.

[ninepointer]

Perkuns, on Jun 14 2010, 01:07 PM, said:

What I really meant is you shouldn't give the guy any attention, don't fuel his fire. I think it is best to act before talking, but not before thinking in a lot of situations. Why let them see it coming.

Good advice.