From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Closure on Sport Hunting.
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 05:07:25 GMT

 proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) asks:

>I guess that what I hate is the infliction of pain, distress, violence
>and death on unwilling participants. Now, it is possible that I am
>wrong in thinking that significant amounts of these occur to the
>animals that are hunted. 

	Ever been shot, Paul?  How about stabbed?  I can only claim the
former, and that by a cousin while we were doing rather stupid things with
BB guns (a very military game of Capture the Flag at the age of four).  I
don't hunt with him, BTW, even though the Marines have supposedly taught
him something about firearms by now.  Anyway, I never even noticed it had
happened.  Many people who are shot report no pain.  The trauma is more than
the nervous system can report in many cases.  Pain comes afterwords.  It's
generally a feeling of numbness, I'm told, followed by a chilling and the
other effects of shock.  By the time an animal feels the pain, it should be
dead.  This isn't always the case, but it's what I strive for.

>I can't help wondering: if hunters hate killing as much as you say, then
>why do they do it? Why not get into, say, wildlife photography instead?
>I don't
>pretend to understand the pyschology of hunting, but it would seem to me
>that you could have much the same experience but culminating in pressing
>a camera shutter instead of pulling a trigger? - The stalking is still 
>there, the elements of skill and patience, the time spent in nature, etc.
>Presumably this would not be a comparable experience for you; I am curious
>as to why not.

	Satisfaction, Paul.  I really don't get much satisfaction out of
looking at pictures (I don't even own a camera).  I do get quite a bit of
satisfaction after the hunt while skinning and gutting the animal, perhaps
tanning the hide, saving bits and pieces I've thought of uses for, and
let's not forget the satisfaction of cooking and eating the critter.

	You know the old macho argument, "No wife of mine is going to have
to work!?"  In this case, the man sees himself as the breadwinner, and hence
has an ego bruise of she decides to work.  He feels he should be able to
support her, and is ashamed if else is necessary.  In my own case, I prefer
the, "No wife of mine is going to have to work, but if she wants to do so
I'll not mind."  Minor point, but it does show how I do share the idea of
being able to take care of me and mine.  In respect to hunting, there is
a satisfaction in putting meat on the table that cannot be had looking at
a photograph.  This might not happen of you don't eat meat, but I'd be
willing to bet you get the same when you bring fresh sweetcorn in from the
garden.  Taking a picture of that corn hardly compares to eating it at
the table with your family gathered about.

	I've aerial photographs of the farm in full summer bloom.  There
is something more satisfying about watching the corn being swallowed by
the combine and the bin filling that the picture just can't produce.

	In short, satisfaction from the hunt is not at the point of kill,
but lasts far, far beyond that.

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >

Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals