Since my post was one of those first two, I feel compelled to defend my position. I will try hard to do so with courtesy and respect, and would sincerely ask that any responses be presented the same way. I do not believe, nor did I say, that anyone who doesn't follow my way of life is "ridiculous." I do not think that people who don't hunt are ridiculous. I'm not that stupid. I just resent having to defend my position AND theirs at the same time. Frankly, I don't want someone out in the field with a weapon who doesn't truly understand why they are there and how serious a thing it is to hunt for the meat. I just don't understand why I have to accept and respect their position while they are yelling at me for mine.
I may have chosen my opening sentence badly, and while I'll apologize for the wording I won't apologize for the sentiment. It's been my personal experience, as a woman who has been hunting for the past 50+ years, that in general the name calling and insults come from those who don't understand, nor care to try to understand, why I do what I do, which is why I advised the OP that he didn't owe anyone any explanations and that further discussion with someone who was opposed was pointless. It is pointless - of that there is no doubt - even if you are not trying to talk them into hunting for themselves. As a hunter I'm not inclined to persuade a non-hunter to come out with me, but he/she feels perfectly justified in demanding that I give up what I love. So who is really being criticized for doing something that someone else feels is ridiculous? I have been called a "murderer", "cruel", "bloodthirsty", "addicted to violence against the weak", been told that I should be ashamed of myself, been labeled an "exploiter of innocent creatures", had eggs thrown at my hunting truck, and had two tires slashed while I was out in my hunting area - by myself, I might add, with no cell service or way to get help. You simply cannot reason with people like that, and I've found it detrimental and even dangerous to try. My reference to having a "battle of wits with an unarmed opponent" refers simply to trying to explain hunting for the table to someone who has no concept of the benefits to wildlife that hunters provide, and how satisfying it is to provide healthy food to those who depend upon it. As far as me "killing defenseless little creatures" as I've also been accused of doing, let me tell explain how "defenseless" those creatures are. They can see better than I can, hear better than I can, have a better sense of smell than I do, know their areas better than I do, and are faster than I am.
If these folks had ever seen a herd of yarded up deer starving because there is no more available forage due to overpopulation, they might be willing to at least listen. There are more white tailed deer in this nation thanks to regulated hunting than there has been for generations. They've learned to survive and they've multiplied in any area you can name - I can drive to
Walmart in Cody, Wyoming and see deer in the parking lot, in people's yards, and even along the approach to the airport. If you think that's an exaggeration I have the photos to prove it. I even took a few pictures of two wild turkeys that were in a parking lot between MacDonald's and a gas station in Sheridan, Wyoming. I see deer, pheasant and antelope carcasses where they have been hit by cars lying by the side of the road, rotting away - all of that meat wasted after the animal suffered and people had occasionally been hurt. But some folks don't want to hear that - they just want to order us to quit hunting, and accuse us of being violent and bloodthirsty, They are indeed unarmed - they don't have the information to make a logical argument so they make hostile, emotional ones. Our hunting dollars are responsible for the increase in wildlife habitat and sanctuaries. They help pay the salaries of the men and women who are out in their trucks regardless of the weather, all to make sure that game is taken legally, responsibly, safely, and ethically. And the vast majority of us who take to the fields for a few weeks each fall take great pride in hunting in a way that guarantees that there will always be a new generation of animals to replace what we harvest.
So yes, it is indeed pointless to get into an argument with someone who is so anti-hunting. Life isn't Bambi in the forest with the evil hoards chasing down Mommy. It's more complex than that, and the meat my dad harvested, along with the produce they grew, sustained our family through some awfully hard times. My husband and I also fed our family that way, and now my grandchildren understand that food isn't a commodity found only at the grocery store, costing money that too many people don't even have. And if, God forbid, the day ever comes when this great nation falls into a financial collapse, my family will be eating healthy food because we are capable of getting it on our own, while others are demanding that we share. I'm not a "prepper", I'm just practical. And suddenly it won't be important to them that that meat was harvested by hunting - it'll smell mighty good.
