From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Hunters legitimate concern
Organization: WP Group
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:22:44 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> I support quite a few organizations that are not anti-hunting, 
rl> just as I support quite a few public health organizations that 
rl> are not anti-meat-eating.  
rl> 
rl> On the other hand, I see no reason to support any organization 
rl> that's inclined to miscast financial contributions from people 
rl> like myself as votes in favor of sport hunting.  To wit, I think 
rl> it's quite dishonest for pro-hunting advocates to pretend that 
rl> the money I spend on Duck Stamps or Ducks Unlimited is a sign of 
rl> the goodwill and generosity of hunters.  

From article <13635@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>, by jsemrad@ems.cdc.com (Joe Semrad):
js> It's almost like you didn't read the paragraph in my original 
js> post prior to the you quoted.  As I said, I am aware that not 
js> every single member of DU and similar organizations are hunters.  
js> However, very large percentages of the membership are hunters.  
js> This is obvious just from the kinds of things that are sold with 
js> DU's emblem on it.  

Let me explain something to you.  When I earmark money for wildlife
preservation, I expect it to be used for wildlife preservation,
not for promotional merchandise, fun banquets, rafles, etc.  Nor 
do I expect or want to be bribed into making a donation for a 
cause that I truly want to support.  Since I'm not the only 
person who feels this way, it seems to me that it may be a 
mistake to judge potential support for any organization on the 
basis of how much money the organization raises from promotional 
items.  

js> While money from yourself is appreciated as 
js> much as money from anyone else when you send it in you usually 
js> don't get to choose how DU spends it.  (Unless you're giving very 
js> large amounts -- how about a rehabilitated Lake Russell Lawrence?  
js> :-}) 

No thanks.

js> In a way its like your taxes;  even if you are opposed to 
js> the military you can't tell the government not to spend your 
js> money on defense.  Even if you could, they'd just spend more of 
js> someone else's money to compensate.  It seems to me that if you 
js> don't approve of something that DU does you can always find 
js> another organization that helps ducks, or get on their board of 
js> directors somehow and change what they do.  From everything 
js> you've said, it seems like you really didn't know too much about 
js> DU before you sent in your money.  Think about it: which would be 
js> worse for DU's fund raising, taking away all hunter contributions 
js> or taking away all contributions from those opposed to hunting?  

A more appropriate question to ask, in view of the original
proposition, is whether hunters or anti-hunters are more inclined
as a class to support preservation efforts.   Do you know the
answer to such a question?

js> As far as duck stamps go, every duck hunter must have one.  
js> Again, there are non-hunting stamp collectors who buy the stamps, 
js> some of whom may care less about ducks.  There are also people 
js> like youself who like ducks, buy the stamps and never hunt.  
js> (Actually with the impact on ducks that the drought has had in 
js> the past few years there are many hunters voluntarily doing the 
js> same thing.  Hopefully it sounds like the water situation is 
js> starting to improve.:-}) But here again I have to believe that 
js> the vast majority of the stamps are bought by hunters, since they 
js> are required to have them.  

To the extent that you cite a mandatory requirement as a point in 
your argument, you're contradicting the claim made by a prior 
poster that funds spend on such things as duck stamps constitute 
proof that hunters are concerned about the well-being of wild 
animals.  

To reiterate, I still consider it dishonest when pro-hunting 
posters cite expenditures for such things as duck stamps as a 
sign of the good intentions of hunters toward wild animals.  In 
view of the fact that many people misconstrue the collections as 
a referendum of sorts on hunting, it seems to me that people like 
myself ought to be careful how we choose to spend our money lest 
our contributions be mistaken, not as a sign of our support for 
preservation, but as a vote in favor of sport hunting.   Pity.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals