Fighting Fire with Facts: The Anti-Hunter and Public Opinion

When I watch TV shows, read articles, or listen to podcasts related to hunting, a common concept almost always occurs. Hunting is not a right, it is a privilege. That privilege can be taken away, and most of the time far too easily. It is almost a given that we will not change the minds of those against hunting. But we can be ambassadors for Hunting in the non-hunting community’s eyes.

Imagine for a moment witnessing an interaction between two strangers. One is a bully who is spouting nasty remarks, name calling, and putting down another person down. But the other person is calmly and politely trying explain their intentions with hardcore facts. Which person are you likely to side with as the bystander? The truth is, we as hunters have a choice. We can choose to be either the bully or the person with good intentions.

I’ve learned that when conversations like this arise, the quickest and most efficient way to defend oneself and our sport is through cold hard facts. Opinions are easy to debate, facts are not. However, what we need to remember is that bystander who is witnessing our choices is always the non-hunter. This is the group of people who make up the majority of voters nationwide. If we want hunting to remain a privilege, we need to make sure we are setting an example that make them want to take our side.

Here are some facts I personally like to use when I come under fire from an anti-hunter:

As of 2012, Hunters have contributed over $7.2 Billion dollars since 1937 via The Pittman-Robertson Act (also known as Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act). Also consider that on average through licenses, taxes, tags, and fees, hunters paid $1.3 billion toward conservation in 2013. Being 2016, that number has surely grown.

Hunters themselves fund more than any federal grant or contributions private organizations combined. Effectively, if hunting disappeared, so would the majority of funding to maintain national and statewide parks. Any programs that repair damaged habitats for wildlife or receive funding for preservation through hunters would also cease to exist.

Hunters support over 680,000 jobs for American’s nationwide. When the average unemployment rate of 4.9% in the United States, nothing more needs to be said.

Legal hunting has NEVER caused an endangered species to go extinct. When the words, “due to over hunting” appear next to an extinct animal’s description, it is easy to assume that we are the cause. That’s why it is vital that we make the critical distinction between us and illegal hunters.

We, the real hunting population, are just as against poaching and illegal hunting practices as the rest of the population. Poaching hurts everyone, but it especially hurts us as hunters. People who have not been educated in our ethics will almost always throw us all together. Use any and every opportunity to denounce these people and practices. This is my go to statement to make a separation between us and the unethical illegal hunter is: We love to hunt and the renewable resource it provides to our table. We would have to be downright mad want to jeopardize something we love due to over hunting. That’s why we take conservation and following the laws and regulations so seriously. We want to continue to hunt, and I want to be able to share this experience with my children one day.

Hunting promotes conservation and preservation of wildlife by helping manage a population of game animals that the natural habitat is able to sustain. Any given habitat has a maximum number of animals that it can provide for. When a population of a species exceeds that limit, the habitat will suffer and there won’t be enough food or water to support the remaining species. Through hunting, we are able to keep habitats at a sustainable level so all wildlife flourishes, not just the game we hunt.

Hunting legally in underdeveloped countries provides food for native people and puts money back into their economy. Hunters pay a lot of money to hunt in other countries *legally*. They have to apply for a license, tags, and when their done that meat is donated to a local tribe for food.

You’re not likely to change the mind of an anti-hunter. But the public’s view of us is always up for negotiation. I have already seen my fair share of ill-treatment and nasty comments to people who openly display their pride as hunters (from both sides unfortunately.) I agree with you; we absolutely shouldn’t be ashamed or apologize for our actions as ethical hunters. But, we don’t need to stoop to the same level as anti-hunters, especially when all the facts are on our side.

Sources: America’s Sporting Heritage: Fueling the American Economy (2013) & Hunting in America: An Economic Force for Conservation (2013); US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation; National Hunting and Fishing Day: Hunting Facts; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016)