Hunter-on-hunter criticism

[NKQualtieri]

Is that even what we call it? Or do we call it being self-aware?

I got pulled into a discussion on this after retweeting this article via MeatEater: http://trophycasefishingandhunting.com/my-thoughts-on-hunters-criticizing-hunters-do-it/

One man said to not use the word "community" because it brings to mind an urban sensibility. Another says "community" is an imagined word. Semantics. But to say that a group of people who has something in common can't act as a community of some sort seems to negate the human experience in my book. We aren't singular entities, the word "community" is simply an expression of that.

Had to say it somewhere. Nicole Unleashed, once again.

 

[Nameless Range]

This was a thread from a while back related to the hunter-on-hunter discussion.

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=263997&highlight=legalize

 

[charliebravo77]

Wish I could see the discussion. I think it's a byproduct of the recent "never apologize" mindset that has appeared out of nowhere only to fund tshirt sales and push social media metrics. I touched on that in the African PH thread which has unfortunately fallen from the first page of threads.

The author is right, we as hunters need to learn to accept criticism particularly because we represent such a small portion of the population and are often portrayed in unfavorable light. That's not to say we don't necessarily deserve it from time to time, but even then take that criticism and use it as a learning tool or an opportunity to teach someone about why they might be inaccurate or their comments undeserving. When speaking on social media in particular, it not might change the person's mind you are arguing with, but there may be an observer or two that your message reaches so it's important to maintain a level head and not lose your cool.

By dividing ourselves from within, those against us have an easier job of dismantling the community and gaining leverage. Self-policing of the fringe members that play true to negative stereotypes is an important task and one that can help hunters on the whole be presented in the most favorable light.

 

[noharleyyet]

http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=268164&page=2

 

[Flatland Crusoe]

Hunter on hunter criticism is necessary, in context especially with regard to issues that hurt wildlife or drastically hurts hunters image with the general public. You can't make positive gains without acknowledging and addressing our shortcomings.

A reasonable line has to be drawn between individual hunter actions like road hunting, illegal atv use and hunting law violations use versus cultural hunting traditions like using dogs to hunt deer or baiting bears.The big hold up to this in theory is the most hunters don't venture outside of their home area, methods and species and lack the perspective of other hunters.

What the industry has to get away from is letting people like Ted Nugent speak his wacko mind like he is somehow the founding father of hunting.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

I wonder if it doesn't really matter if WE consider ourselves a community, if the rest of the non-hunting populace views us as one? If we lose our ability to hunt, it won't matter which hunter we aligned ourselves with, or not.

I do think that we need to be careful, and we do need to police ourselves when the extreme fringes of hunting make the hunting community look bad, for the sake of all our future. I think sometimes we get going down the wrong road and are overly critical of other hunters just because they hunt differently than us, when in reality it is legal and doesn't cast a negative light on hunting as a whole. In those instances we need to try and put those things aside.

The unfortunate thing is that those who practice the most fringe forms of hunting, that could be damaging, are also the most outspoken, and use the credo "we can't divide the hunting community". When in reality it is just a small group of selfish hunters who could easily check their behavior for the common good.

 

[Brn2hnt]

Maybe I am in the minority here, but I welcome criticism from others within my same "Community" regardless of what community/subject it may be. I get nervous when everyone around me agrees with me. If everyone agrees with you, you are surrounded by "Yes Men" and that is rarely good for either decision making or personal development.

On the heels of that however, often times hunters fall into the trap of "It's different from what I like so it's not real hunting." We not only have to be able to accept criticism, but making sure that said criticism is thoughtful and rational is just as important. This is the age of the internet, and once we put something out there, you can't take it back.

Mike

 

[noharleyyet]

Is that even what we call it? Or do we call it being self-aware?

Nothing elucidates like a viral meme. The true carrot of social media.

 

[Hunting Wife]

If we aren't a community, I wonder what we are then? This person should be gifted a copy of Webster's.

Constructive criticism requires some mental engagement from the criticized party, and many people are either too lazy or insecure to seriously consider the merits of the points being made. Much easier to say "I won't apologize..." and go on your merry way. Shut it down and continue to live in your cocoon. To each their own, but the future of hunting is bleak if people refuse to engage with even other hunters to address rational, valid criticisms.

I like Brn2hnt's post. Those who can't accept constructive criticism turn things into arguments instead of discussions. They miss the opportunity for introspection and growth that might just benefit one or both parties, and the community at large.

 

[elkduds]

I respectfully disagree.

 

[The Hedgehog]

When I saw the title of this thread I thought for sure it was going to be about crossbow hunters again..

 

[HSi-ESi]

"The unexamined life is not worth living."

I'm going to crawl back in my cave of self-awareness now.

 

[NKQualtieri]

I respectfully disagree.

This is the post of all posts in this thread. Three words that get to the heart of everything. **fist bump**

Yeah, the language aspect is starting to drive me crazy. When I wrote an article a few months back, I was lambasted and told that because I used the word "harvest" it negated the whole point of the article. Total BS.

I know I'm beleaguering a point that's been made before. But to disjoint a good argument over a definition of a word brings me back to that weird point in Clinton's impeachment hearing where he had to define the word "is".

It IS stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

 

[Dinkshooter]

The whole thing is just despicable

 

[charliebravo77]

I respectfully disagree.

It's a bad state of affairs when I can't tell if this is a serious comment or satire. I'm hoping the latter.

 

[Flatland Crusoe]

I think a large portion of hunters don't care about being philosophical about the activity, they have just always done it generally like it and that's enough for them. A portion of hunters throughout time have always really cared and studied the question. Just roughly thinking about the people I grew up hunting around I would say 3/4's or more of them never really came off as caring about the why.

I think recently it's become very popular in a fairly superficial way to yell the moral high ground of hunting for organic meat in the whole food sense for even traditional outdoor companies. I don't really put a lot of depth into when the Drury's make a post about organic meat in 2015 when I've been watching their productions for 20 plus years and all of a sudden it popped into their vocabulary 2 years ago.

I hunted for almost 20 years before I got really into the philosophy of it all and it's been pretty difficult to digest. I think part of it was getting over the idea that you are conquering nature or besting your friends. Shifting away from just donating a whole deer or paying a processor to breaking down an entire animal myself certainly had a lot to do with it as did consuming the more philosophical hunting media which has taken off in the last 5 years.

Most hunter against Hunter arguments are based on blaming their perceived hunting misfortune or hardship on a convenient target. Generally speaking most of it is baseless and selfish in nature.

 

[Jorgy]

my .02 cents - I certainly understand why someone would call all hunters a community, it only makes sense. But digging into that thought, it's hard for me to think of all hunters as my community since I firmly believe that a pretty significant portion of our "community" lack ethics while in the field. Be it, trespassing, shooting out of hours, poaching, you name it.

I think our community should be run like survivor, and every day we vote someone off the hunting island.

 

[hank4elk]

I am a Hunter.
I am a member of the HT community.
Just like the community/county I live in, I do not relate to many or all.
But I am a member none-the-less.
I will confront the trespasser,vandal and poacher as quick as I would any other scofflaw.
I will avoid confrontation in most other areas,but will not back down when I think I am pressed and right.
Am I wrong?
I don't shed hunt, avoid the discussion if I can.Same with hunting with dogs or bait.
But I'm still a member of the hunting/fishing/outdoors community......maybe not thought of as a member of same spieces by some locals tho...lol.

 

[Mudranger1]

Nothing elucidates like a viral meme. The true carrot of social media.

Can't ever just have a thread were I don't need a dictionary

 

[hank4elk]

Can't ever just have a thread were I don't need a dictionary

Sometimes I need a Dickanary.....lol