Post by Woody Williams on Jul 10, 2006 9:11:03 GMT -5
ERIC SHARP: Hunting league under fire
Dart gun use causes uproar among many
July 9, 2006
Over the years, I've written about a few things that have really upset people.
But I can't think of anything that has drawn such universal condemnation from hunters as David Farbman's plan to start a professional World Hunting Association, which would operate like a fishing tournament and pay big money to selected hunters who shoot deer with tranquilizing darts on fenced game ranches.
Farbman has lost virtually all of the sponsors he said he had when he announced his plan a month ago, including Gorilla Treestands and Eastman, the biggest maker of arrows. His plan also has been denounced by groups, including Michigan United Sportsmans Clubs and the Black Powder Cartridge Rifle Association.
Both Cabela's and Bass Pro Shops, two of the world's biggest outdoor retailers, have said they oppose the WHA concept and would "encourage" their suppliers not to have anything to do with it.
Despite all that, Farbman, whose family operates a major real estate firm in the Detroit area, says the concept is too good to give up and insists he's going ahead with his first WHA professional event, complete with tranquilizer darts, in October at the Lost Arrow hunting preserve near Gladwin.
I have no doubt that Farbman is a truly dedicated hunter. I don't know him well, but some people who say they do told me that he is a deer-hunting fanatic. They said he has poured large amounts of time and money into building prime habitat and a good deer herd at the family hunting property near Ellsworth, where he spends a large chunk of each fall sitting in a tree.
When I talked with him by telephone Friday, Farbman said that despite the outpouring of criticism for his idea on most hunting Web sites, "We have half a million e-mail addresses on the good side" from people who visited the WHA site to sign up for information and express approval.
He added, "We have been talking with some of the larger hunting groups, trying to find common ground." He said he expects that by the end of July he and some of those groups will announce that they have reached an understanding on the ethical legitimacy of his concept. However, he said he couldn't say who those groups were, nor would he identify the companies he said would replace the original sponsors.
Well over 90% of the e-mails I received about the WHA were negative. They included expressions of disappointment over what the writers saw as commercialism of the sport. Not all of the writers identified where they were from, but it was obvious from comments that many lived outside Michigan.
One e-mail said: "If Michigan allows something like this to be called 'hunting,' they should put a fence not just around the deer farms but around your whole state to keep you people out of the places where real hunters live."
Another person wrote: "So let's see -- people who don't hunt are supposed to raise their view of hunting when they see people shooting fenced-in deer with tranquilizer darts, and they're doing it for money? Oh, yeah, that's going to make most people think a lot more of hunters."
A few people defended Farbman's idea. One e-mail said: "The new group will generate awareness, and, yes, money for the hunting community."
Farbman also said veterinarians would be on-site to care for the animals that are darted during the WHA events. But three veterinarians e-mailed me and said their profession has a standard similar to the doctor's tenet that they "will do no harm," and that taking part in darting animals to make money off a TV show is something no ethical veterinarian could do.
Farbman stresses that his WHA plan has as its primary aim improving the image of hunters and bringing new people, especially youngsters, into the sport by creating high-profile hunters the way B.A.S.S. created high-profile anglers.
That doesn't make sense. Hunting isn't like fishing. You can't have catch and release. And as far as I'm concerned, you shouldn't tell people that there's something wrong with killing an animal that you plan to use, which is exactly what this whole "non-lethal hunting" concept implies.
Then there's the little problem that knocking an animal down with a dart gun is nothing like killing it. I've been with researchers who have shot animals with tranquilizer darts to collect biological data, and I've seen them go down after being darted in the butt. Had they been shot there, they'd have run off, never to be found.
Hunting involves locating, stalking and trying to kill an animal by ethical means during a legal game season. Farbman's WHA fails to meet that definition on several points.
Contact ERIC SHARP at 313-222-2511 or esharp@freepress.com.
www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060709/SPORTS10/607090629/1066/SPORTS&template=printart
Dart gun use causes uproar among many
July 9, 2006
Over the years, I've written about a few things that have really upset people.
But I can't think of anything that has drawn such universal condemnation from hunters as David Farbman's plan to start a professional World Hunting Association, which would operate like a fishing tournament and pay big money to selected hunters who shoot deer with tranquilizing darts on fenced game ranches.
Farbman has lost virtually all of the sponsors he said he had when he announced his plan a month ago, including Gorilla Treestands and Eastman, the biggest maker of arrows. His plan also has been denounced by groups, including Michigan United Sportsmans Clubs and the Black Powder Cartridge Rifle Association.
Both Cabela's and Bass Pro Shops, two of the world's biggest outdoor retailers, have said they oppose the WHA concept and would "encourage" their suppliers not to have anything to do with it.
Despite all that, Farbman, whose family operates a major real estate firm in the Detroit area, says the concept is too good to give up and insists he's going ahead with his first WHA professional event, complete with tranquilizer darts, in October at the Lost Arrow hunting preserve near Gladwin.
I have no doubt that Farbman is a truly dedicated hunter. I don't know him well, but some people who say they do told me that he is a deer-hunting fanatic. They said he has poured large amounts of time and money into building prime habitat and a good deer herd at the family hunting property near Ellsworth, where he spends a large chunk of each fall sitting in a tree.
When I talked with him by telephone Friday, Farbman said that despite the outpouring of criticism for his idea on most hunting Web sites, "We have half a million e-mail addresses on the good side" from people who visited the WHA site to sign up for information and express approval.
He added, "We have been talking with some of the larger hunting groups, trying to find common ground." He said he expects that by the end of July he and some of those groups will announce that they have reached an understanding on the ethical legitimacy of his concept. However, he said he couldn't say who those groups were, nor would he identify the companies he said would replace the original sponsors.
Well over 90% of the e-mails I received about the WHA were negative. They included expressions of disappointment over what the writers saw as commercialism of the sport. Not all of the writers identified where they were from, but it was obvious from comments that many lived outside Michigan.
One e-mail said: "If Michigan allows something like this to be called 'hunting,' they should put a fence not just around the deer farms but around your whole state to keep you people out of the places where real hunters live."
Another person wrote: "So let's see -- people who don't hunt are supposed to raise their view of hunting when they see people shooting fenced-in deer with tranquilizer darts, and they're doing it for money? Oh, yeah, that's going to make most people think a lot more of hunters."
A few people defended Farbman's idea. One e-mail said: "The new group will generate awareness, and, yes, money for the hunting community."
Farbman also said veterinarians would be on-site to care for the animals that are darted during the WHA events. But three veterinarians e-mailed me and said their profession has a standard similar to the doctor's tenet that they "will do no harm," and that taking part in darting animals to make money off a TV show is something no ethical veterinarian could do.
Farbman stresses that his WHA plan has as its primary aim improving the image of hunters and bringing new people, especially youngsters, into the sport by creating high-profile hunters the way B.A.S.S. created high-profile anglers.
That doesn't make sense. Hunting isn't like fishing. You can't have catch and release. And as far as I'm concerned, you shouldn't tell people that there's something wrong with killing an animal that you plan to use, which is exactly what this whole "non-lethal hunting" concept implies.
Then there's the little problem that knocking an animal down with a dart gun is nothing like killing it. I've been with researchers who have shot animals with tranquilizer darts to collect biological data, and I've seen them go down after being darted in the butt. Had they been shot there, they'd have run off, never to be found.
Hunting involves locating, stalking and trying to kill an animal by ethical means during a legal game season. Farbman's WHA fails to meet that definition on several points.
Contact ERIC SHARP at 313-222-2511 or esharp@freepress.com.
www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060709/SPORTS10/607090629/1066/SPORTS&template=printart
; I hope he loses a bundle of money.
