Post by Woody Williams on May 2, 2006 9:45:14 GMT -5
Tennessee Outdoor Writers Association Award Winning Article..
THE OTHER SIDE OF TROPHY HUNTING.
by John L. Sloan
All deer hunters and I suspect hunters of all big game, dream of killing a trophy animal. Include me in that statement. To some degree, that is a natural progression. Hunters and fishermen begin wanting to just kill or catch something. From that they progress to wanting to kill or catch a limit. The next step in this evolution is the desire to kill or catch a trophy size animal. There is nothing wrong with that. But there is another side to trophy hunting, one that needs examination and consideration.
A recent survey of non-hunters, not anti-hunters or hunters, just people who do not hunt indicated that 88 percent of those surveyed were strongly opposed to the taking of animals for trophy purposes. At the same time, those same people had no problem with hunting for consumption. In other words, the non-hunters did not object to hunting if the game was eaten and the trophy aspect was not of paramount importance. Keep in mind it will be the non-hunting public that will decide the future of hunting. They compose the majority of voters.
That is one consideration.
But to better understand the whole situation, I feel we must examine the makeup of the hunting society in general and whitetail deer hunters in particular. First, let's go back several years.
In the early days of modern sport hunting, back when the deer herd was just developing and to see a deer was of front-page importance, hunting was by necessity, limited to bucks only. The does were protected to increase the numbers of animals. That was as it should be. Hunters who would kill a doe were poachers-fined and ostracized. That was as it should be. Youngsters were taught that a real hunter would not shoot a doe. That was as it should be.
The deer herd grew. Through sound management, deer populations increased in Tennessee from less than 200 in the 1920's to over 1,000,000 currently. The killing of does became important in the sound management of the entire herd. This was now being taught to young hunters. But at the same time, as deer hunting grew in popularity and became not just a sport but an industry, I and my fellow outdoor writers began to do a disservice to the sport. Yes, I accept my portion of the blame.
Pick up any deer hunting magazine on the newsstand. Count the number of articles about hunting trophy bucks. How many articles are there about hunting or killing smaller bucks or does? I believe you'll notice a severe disparity.
We began to write to excess about hunting and killing trophy deer; those deer that would score high in various record keeping clubs. We did that for two reasons. That is what the readers wanted most to read about and those stories made us money.
They were easier to sell to editors. Through our stories and articles, we began to shape what may become and in some instances, has become an unhealthy attitude regarding the hunting of deer and to some extent, other big game animals.
It became stylish or chic to say, "I am a trophy hunter. I will not shoot anything that does not make, "the book" (one of the various record keeping systems that measures antler growth)."
This, it was felt, gave the speaker a certain amount of prestige. It was as if he had progressed to the highest pinnacle of the sport and should be looked up to. But in actuality, nothing could be further from the truth. Although he may have become a good or even expert hunter, he lacked the maturity to understand the entire situation. And yes, my fellow outdoor writers and I must accept much of the blame.
What has this overemphasis on trophy antlers done to deer hunting?
It has spawned a group of young hunters who believe that unless they kill a "big buck", they are not good hunters. They want to emulate the Myles Kellers and the Chuck Adams of the sport. They also believe that killing a doe is easy and in doing so they may ruin their chance to kill a big buck. They learn this from reading the stories we outdoor writers write about Adams and Keller and others. And what is the effect of this thinking?
To begin with, should not the definition of trophy belong totally to the one doing the hunting? What is to become of the young man or woman, who upon their first hunt is faced with the opportunity to shoot a young, fat, six point buck but due to a misguided trophy factor, refuses to do so for fear of ridicule for shooting a "little buck"? How long will that youngster continue to hunt if he or she cannot shoot something? That young person is not yet at the stage where enjoyment of the hunt, not the kill is the primary reason for being in the woods. That person, as it is with all young people just starting to hunt, wants to kill something. If, in a certain amount of time, they do not, they tend to give up the sport. Can we afford that? And make no mistake, when Adams and Keller and the others were young, they did shoot does and little bucks. We just don't write about that part of their lives.
We, all of us, must remember that to a young hunter, a small buck or even a doe is a trophy. And that is just exactly as it should be. No organization or record book should decide for anyone what constitutes a trophy.
Older hunters, in quest of that special trophy buck, refuse to shoot a doe. In a series of recent surveys I did at five deer hunting shows, I found two disturbing trends.
First, too few hunters were killing any does at all even when the regulations were liberal. But of equal concern was the following: Hunters, given the choice of shooting a doe or an 18-month old, six-point buck, to a large degree, chose to shoot the buck. Why is this disturbing information?
In almost every state the deer herd is out of balance. By that, I mean there are too many does for the number of bucks. That in itself and as it stands right now is not a tremendous concern.
What is of concern is that we are killing too many bucks in proportion to the does. Since to some degree, bucks also experience a somewhat higher natural mortality, should this trend continue, the potential is there for serious problems.
Lack of success breeds discontent and discontinuation. The hunter hit with the barrage of trophy deer hunting tips and stories becomes reluctant to shoot anything that his friends will not be impressed with. He is led to believe that killing big, trophy deer is easy and he should be able to do it. But does he or she realize how small the number of really big bucks there are? The chances of killing one of these "trophy animals", is slim in most areas. So after a period of not killing anything, the hunter quits. We lose another one..
Am I against trophy hunting? NO. If the hunter accepts the responsibility that goes with trophy hunting, I am in favor of it. I applaud the hunter who passes up the small buck and takes a doe instead. I applaud the hunter who goes a year or two or three and kills only does, waiting for the big buck. And for the traveling hunter with several hundred dollars invested in an out of state hunt and only one tag, sure, wait for the big boy.
But let us all strive to reach the maturity to say, "If there is to be a healthy deer herd and growing numbers of hunters then I must do my part." Let none of us decide what is a trophy animal for anyone other than ourselves. Let us all applaud the hunter with the doe in his truck or the spike in his truck for being a successful hunter. If we have passed up a dozen small bucks, let us keep that to ourselves. After all, we made that decision. It is only our business.
I have spoken with several of my fellow outdoor writers. We are going to try to balance our writing just as we would have the harvest of deer balanced. Sure, there will still be plenty of stories and how-to articles about trophy deer. We still must make a living. But with the cooperation of knowledgeable editors, there are going to be a lot more stories about, "THE OTHER SIDE OF TROPHY HUNTING".
Won't you do your part?
THE OTHER SIDE OF TROPHY HUNTING.
by John L. Sloan
All deer hunters and I suspect hunters of all big game, dream of killing a trophy animal. Include me in that statement. To some degree, that is a natural progression. Hunters and fishermen begin wanting to just kill or catch something. From that they progress to wanting to kill or catch a limit. The next step in this evolution is the desire to kill or catch a trophy size animal. There is nothing wrong with that. But there is another side to trophy hunting, one that needs examination and consideration.
A recent survey of non-hunters, not anti-hunters or hunters, just people who do not hunt indicated that 88 percent of those surveyed were strongly opposed to the taking of animals for trophy purposes. At the same time, those same people had no problem with hunting for consumption. In other words, the non-hunters did not object to hunting if the game was eaten and the trophy aspect was not of paramount importance. Keep in mind it will be the non-hunting public that will decide the future of hunting. They compose the majority of voters.
That is one consideration.
But to better understand the whole situation, I feel we must examine the makeup of the hunting society in general and whitetail deer hunters in particular. First, let's go back several years.
In the early days of modern sport hunting, back when the deer herd was just developing and to see a deer was of front-page importance, hunting was by necessity, limited to bucks only. The does were protected to increase the numbers of animals. That was as it should be. Hunters who would kill a doe were poachers-fined and ostracized. That was as it should be. Youngsters were taught that a real hunter would not shoot a doe. That was as it should be.
The deer herd grew. Through sound management, deer populations increased in Tennessee from less than 200 in the 1920's to over 1,000,000 currently. The killing of does became important in the sound management of the entire herd. This was now being taught to young hunters. But at the same time, as deer hunting grew in popularity and became not just a sport but an industry, I and my fellow outdoor writers began to do a disservice to the sport. Yes, I accept my portion of the blame.
Pick up any deer hunting magazine on the newsstand. Count the number of articles about hunting trophy bucks. How many articles are there about hunting or killing smaller bucks or does? I believe you'll notice a severe disparity.
We began to write to excess about hunting and killing trophy deer; those deer that would score high in various record keeping clubs. We did that for two reasons. That is what the readers wanted most to read about and those stories made us money.
They were easier to sell to editors. Through our stories and articles, we began to shape what may become and in some instances, has become an unhealthy attitude regarding the hunting of deer and to some extent, other big game animals.
It became stylish or chic to say, "I am a trophy hunter. I will not shoot anything that does not make, "the book" (one of the various record keeping systems that measures antler growth)."
This, it was felt, gave the speaker a certain amount of prestige. It was as if he had progressed to the highest pinnacle of the sport and should be looked up to. But in actuality, nothing could be further from the truth. Although he may have become a good or even expert hunter, he lacked the maturity to understand the entire situation. And yes, my fellow outdoor writers and I must accept much of the blame.
What has this overemphasis on trophy antlers done to deer hunting?
It has spawned a group of young hunters who believe that unless they kill a "big buck", they are not good hunters. They want to emulate the Myles Kellers and the Chuck Adams of the sport. They also believe that killing a doe is easy and in doing so they may ruin their chance to kill a big buck. They learn this from reading the stories we outdoor writers write about Adams and Keller and others. And what is the effect of this thinking?
To begin with, should not the definition of trophy belong totally to the one doing the hunting? What is to become of the young man or woman, who upon their first hunt is faced with the opportunity to shoot a young, fat, six point buck but due to a misguided trophy factor, refuses to do so for fear of ridicule for shooting a "little buck"? How long will that youngster continue to hunt if he or she cannot shoot something? That young person is not yet at the stage where enjoyment of the hunt, not the kill is the primary reason for being in the woods. That person, as it is with all young people just starting to hunt, wants to kill something. If, in a certain amount of time, they do not, they tend to give up the sport. Can we afford that? And make no mistake, when Adams and Keller and the others were young, they did shoot does and little bucks. We just don't write about that part of their lives.
We, all of us, must remember that to a young hunter, a small buck or even a doe is a trophy. And that is just exactly as it should be. No organization or record book should decide for anyone what constitutes a trophy.
Older hunters, in quest of that special trophy buck, refuse to shoot a doe. In a series of recent surveys I did at five deer hunting shows, I found two disturbing trends.
First, too few hunters were killing any does at all even when the regulations were liberal. But of equal concern was the following: Hunters, given the choice of shooting a doe or an 18-month old, six-point buck, to a large degree, chose to shoot the buck. Why is this disturbing information?
In almost every state the deer herd is out of balance. By that, I mean there are too many does for the number of bucks. That in itself and as it stands right now is not a tremendous concern.
What is of concern is that we are killing too many bucks in proportion to the does. Since to some degree, bucks also experience a somewhat higher natural mortality, should this trend continue, the potential is there for serious problems.
Lack of success breeds discontent and discontinuation. The hunter hit with the barrage of trophy deer hunting tips and stories becomes reluctant to shoot anything that his friends will not be impressed with. He is led to believe that killing big, trophy deer is easy and he should be able to do it. But does he or she realize how small the number of really big bucks there are? The chances of killing one of these "trophy animals", is slim in most areas. So after a period of not killing anything, the hunter quits. We lose another one..
Am I against trophy hunting? NO. If the hunter accepts the responsibility that goes with trophy hunting, I am in favor of it. I applaud the hunter who passes up the small buck and takes a doe instead. I applaud the hunter who goes a year or two or three and kills only does, waiting for the big buck. And for the traveling hunter with several hundred dollars invested in an out of state hunt and only one tag, sure, wait for the big boy.
But let us all strive to reach the maturity to say, "If there is to be a healthy deer herd and growing numbers of hunters then I must do my part." Let none of us decide what is a trophy animal for anyone other than ourselves. Let us all applaud the hunter with the doe in his truck or the spike in his truck for being a successful hunter. If we have passed up a dozen small bucks, let us keep that to ourselves. After all, we made that decision. It is only our business.
I have spoken with several of my fellow outdoor writers. We are going to try to balance our writing just as we would have the harvest of deer balanced. Sure, there will still be plenty of stories and how-to articles about trophy deer. We still must make a living. But with the cooperation of knowledgeable editors, there are going to be a lot more stories about, "THE OTHER SIDE OF TROPHY HUNTING".
Won't you do your part?
