search
top

Canned Hunting

The Humane Society of the United States, unlke PETA, who are mostly a joke, is a very smart anti-hunting group.  Look at this bill proposed by Senator Lautenberg:

Today, U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced legislation that would prevent importing and confining exotic animals for the purpose of hunting.  This type of hunting, commonly known as “canned hunting,” is a brutal practice of placing an animal in an enclosure that severely limits its ability to escape.

Sounds like they are putting the animal in a cage so you can shoot it, right?  Well, no.  They are putting the animal on a preserve, and the preserve has a fence that delineates the property.  Doesn’t matter if you have 10,000 acres.  It’s a canned hunt, and it’s evil and cruel.  HSUS will mislead the public on this the same way the Brady Campaign misleads the public on the gun issue.  Hunters need to wake up.  Particularly hunters in New Jersey, which is getting perilously close to banning hunting altogether.

I also have to say that if the people of New Jersey choose to keep that fossil Lautenberg around, they are nuts.  Rob Andrews is no friend of ours, but saying he’d be a step up is a bit of an understatement.

26 Responses to “Canned Hunting”

  1. Ahab says:

    I’m actually on planning on a couple of “canned hunts” this year – both of which are going to take place on huge game preserves.

  2. Kristopher says:

    So … is a cattle stockyard and meat cutting business a “canned hunt”?

    If not, then why not?

    ( your anti-spam service hates my web host, apparently …. )

  3. Countertop says:

    1st – remember (and this is something one of your commentators was confused about the other day) HSUS is in no way related to the local dog pound. They misappropriated the name for use as a more legitimate sounding PETA type extremist animal rights activist group. So far its working great for them as they have HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in the bank, mostly stealing (my opinion) donations that people intend to help stray dogs and cats but which in reality are used solely to push an agenda seeking to turn us into Vegas, end hunting, and ultimatly end companion animal ownership (they see little difference between pets and slavery – which isn’t surprising since they see little difference between meat production and the holocaust).

    2nd – Pennsylvania has some great hunting preserves. I’ve been wanting to go hunt Dall Sheep there for some time.

  4. Countertop says:

    oopes, Vegas should read Vegans

  5. Murdoc says:

    Whenever this comes up I claim that every hunt is a “canned hunt.” At least until the animals develop a means to leave the planet.

  6. Ahab says:

    Hey Countertop – you should do a post on that, because it’s something that everyone should know.

  7. Sebastian – You said, “Hunters need to wake up”. Well, in many cases it’s the hunters who are proposing the legislation. Take North Dakota as an example:
    http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/category/north-dakota-hunting-news/

    If anyone is interested, start he and scroll down through the stories to learn what they are doing.

    Same thing has taken place in Idaho and Oregon. Idaho has been successful so far in protecting their rights but recently Oregon just banned it.

  8. Sebastian says:

    I can’t tell you how disappointing that is Tom.

  9. Jacob says:

    Fudd hunters did the same thing in NY. What originally appeared was a vaguely worded bill that would have prohibited hunting within an “enclosed” space. Enclosed being anything from a 3’ high 200 year old stone wall deer could jump over to low hedges more or less surrounding a property. Look for similar language in Lautenberg’s bill.

  10. Ritu says:

    Hunting is an uncivilized activity. How would you hunters feel if you were forced to become the prey? Don;t you know animals are sentient, just like you and me? Why would anyone want to put others in pain? It’s inhuman and sad.

  11. Sebastian says:

    Yeah, except animals aren’t people. They don’t have the high brain functions of people. Humans hunting deer is no more immoral or unnatural than a pack of wolves hunting a deer. We just have far more effective, and I would add humane, tools for accomplishing the task. Given the choice, I’d take being shot over starved to death, or eaten by some other predator, which is the choice when you’re talking about eliminating hunting of deer, and other game animals.

  12. Ritu says:

    if we are humane, then we would nto think of hunting in the first place. if hunting is done based on brain functions, would you hunt an autistic child? He/she has less developed brain too.

    The wolf hunting a deer needs it to survive; we humans don’t. We humans know that the animal is put through torture and cruelty; the wolf doesn’t.

    You said … “Given the choice…”…is the animal being hunted given a choice in he first place? Did the animal choose to be gunned down?

  13. Sebastian says:

    Well, if you want to make the argument that humans have a choice, then that’s one thing. But what is choice to an animal? It’s instinct tell is to flee danger, but is that a choice? Or is it programming that’s a result of millions of years of evolution and natural selection?

    Humans have acted as part of the food chain throughout our evolutionary history. I have no issue with humans who choose not to hunt, or who choose to forgo eating meat or animal products. My own sister is vegetarian, as is my ex-girlfriend, and I have no issue. But I don’t accept that human hunting is any more cruel or less natural than any other predator hunting. Meat is an excellent source of protein and other nutrients, which humans have used through millennia to power our large brains, which is really our only evolutionary advantage. Physiologically, we’re piss poor predators. Our tool making ability is the only thing that puts us at the top of the food chain.

  14. Bitter says:

    I’m not a vegetarian, dear. :P

  15. Sebastian says:

    I know you aren’t dear. You’re quite a fan of meat, and enjoy it. Quite unlike my ex girlfriend.

  16. Ritu says:

    My point was, in the civilized world, hunting is unnecessary, besides being cruel. Cats and dogs are animals too. Do you hunt them? If no, then why not? Why not raise wild dogs and hunt them? Would that not be fun for the hunters?

  17. Sebastian says:

    Why is it unnecessary? Why is it morally superior to get your protein from animals raised for the purposes of being slaughtered? Or are you referring to being a vegetarian? It’s certainly a choice, and I don’t have issue with people making that choice. But I also think hunting is a perfectly natural act for a human, should they choose to do so, and consider it a moral choice for humans to make as the occasional predators we’re evolved to be. Hell, part of the reason humans have difficulty with obesity, is because we’re really not evolved to eat fatty domesticated animals.

    And as for whether I hunt cats or dogs… I am actually not a hunter, so the answer is no. But I support the right of people to hunt. The reason we don’t hunt cats and dogs is because they are pets, and because humans don’t hunt other predators (predator meat seems to taste bad to humans), but some people keep rabbits as pets, and some people also hunt rabbits. Some of that behavior can’t be explained, but my understanding from people who do hunt is that predator meat just doesn’t taste that good. Except for bear, apparently, but bears are only occasionally predators.

  18. Ritu says:

    Just as you said some of the behavior can’t be explained, the hunting activity itself can’t be explained, and this article was on canned hunting….you fence an animal, shoot it down and feel like a hero? That’s sick!

    I get my proteins from vegetable sources. Don’t need to kill an animal to feed myself. I guess we are educated and civilized enough to realize that.

    Hunting and perfectly natural? It’s an oxymoron. Maybe it’s natural for you based on the community you grew up.

  19. Sebastian says:

    I grew up in suburban Philadelphia. I don’t even know how to hunt, which is why I don’t do it. But I do stick up for those who do, because I see no sense in pretending that humans aren’t evolved to be predators. Our large brains need a lot of protein to function, and I don’t think it can be ignored that humans have hunted throughout their entire history. Modern civilization allows the choice to be vegetarian, because we can draw on a very wide variety of non-animal sources for protein, and vitamins. I don’t take issue with people who choose that, just as I don’t take issue with people who hunt for food.

    If you fence in an animal on a 10,000 acre preserve, particularly if that animal has wings and can fly, I don’t really see the problem. Corralling an animal so the animal has no chance would be unsportsmanlike, and I would have no problem restricting this type of hunting, but that’s not what’s going on here. HSUS wants to ban hunting on any property that’s fenced in, no matter what you’re hunting. Actually, HSUS just wants to ban hunting, and this is just an incremental step that they think they can get away with.

    Hunting is an important part of wildlife management. You may not want to believe that, but it is. Hunters contribute billions of dollars annually to wildlife conservation, and fund most of the wildlife research and management through the payment of taxes on guns and ammunition, through hunting licenses, and through hunting organizations that promote conservation and management. The alternative is out of control game populations that either starve to death, or end up in fatal confrontations with humans through other means. Giving that, I don’t see why so many people have a problem with hunting, unless they are simply intent on imposing their viewpoints and morality on others.

  20. Ritu says:

    Talk about history…human beings also practised slavery, “groomed” gladiators, lived in caves and depended on hunting to live. No more. We have progressed past that. If you base your lifestyle on history, then stand up for human slavery, why not? Answer is simple: we are more civilized now. We are in a continual process of improving ourselves. We are not there yet…far from it, in fact. As long as we torture the animals, instead of living in harmony with them, we cannot consider ourselves civilized.

    Human interference is not necessary for animals to survive. Nature takes care on its own. Most of the species that went extinct were because of human interference. nature knows how to get to equilibrium.
    If you still believe in hunting, so be it. I won’t be surprised if you are also a religious person brought up into believing that humans are “superior” and have the right to subjugate all other species.

    In a civilized society, we don’t need guns to begin with. But this is America, and we just don’t care.

  21. Sebastian says:

    Actually, I’m an agnostic, and not at all religious. But I don’t believe animals have rights. I value human life and human rights more strongly than I do animals. I don’t believe humans should be unnecessarily cruel to animals, but I don’t think it’s any great wrong to use them as food.

    Slavery was entirely a human institution. It is not a natural institution, as predator-prey relationship are. We are not evolved to practice slavery, as we are to eat meat. The assertion that humans are responsible for most species extinction is just silly. Humans have only been around for about 200,000 years, and most species have come and gone long before we ever got here. Species extinction is part of nature too, and humans are not immune from that process.

  22. Ritu says:

    The concept of ‘rights’ has evolved only because human civilization has always been unequal. In an equal society, rights are a given. Would there be human rights groups had there been no discrimination among humans? What wisdom do the same humans, who rule over the animals thinking they have no rights, have to decide on values and ethics?

    How come animals do not have rights? Because they do not have ‘intelligence’? If we have intelligence, then why are we hunting in the first place? If we hunt based on intelligence, then you will agree that a pig has greater rights than George W. Bush.

    Moreover, since animals do not have rights, then they can be slaughtered; all animals, including cats and dogs, and why not! You should not criticize the Chinese and the Korean for eating dog or cat meat. I have seen dogs slaughtered in the streets of Beijing. Hang them up by a rope and clobber them to death. Or cats held by the tail and slammed against the floor. That’s for food!! So natural, as per your definition.

    Want to see how cats are slaughtered? Check this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz_l11sRXVM

    It’s so natural !!Just like the hunters you support, huh?

  23. Jacob says:

    People hunt because animals taste good. Who cares if they’re “intelligent” or not? There’s gravy in their future.

    Meat: It’s dead and delicious!

  24. Ritu says:

    Humans taste good too. So do dogs. Why not eat them?

  25. Jacob says:

    Korean’s eat dogs. The French eat cats.

  26. Jym says:

    Ritu: We don’t eat people because it’s a very easy way to spread disease. If it wasn’t, I would happily eat you. Apparently we taste like pork, yum!

top