I had to come back to reality on Monday. School. Work. More school. I couldn’t drive around the countryside with reckless abandon, and I had to weave around the masses of people on campus. I missed being out deer hunting, and, as I write, I’m still pining to go back.
Leaving out the details of the luck we had, it was a blast (no gun puns intended). There is something so thrilling about marking the correct spots (something we didn’t quite do), and the elation one feels when staring down a whitetail through a scope is unexplainable.
One of my coworkers knew I was going hunting this past weekend, and when I returned, she asked me, “How did the hunting trip go, Bambi killer?” Making it a point to mention that it is actually Bambi’s mother that gets killed, I told her.
She was being sarcastic, having mentioned that she herself had been hunting before, but there are people that feel that hunters truly are going out to kill all of the sweet, innocent bunny rabbits and wide-eyed fawns. Simply put, that viewpoint is incorrect. Hunters are stewards of the land, giving back to nature and the community.
The choices of those that prefer the dietary path of vegetarianism or veganism should be respected, but the politics of hunting go much deeper than the argument of “killing Bambi” or the shooting of game just for fun, as the white settlers did to buffalo during America’s expansion. Nowadays, heightened regulation makes these unacceptable practices increasingly rare.
In many ways, hunting in today’s society is a necessity if we want to continue to see all the cuddly critters in an era of human development. The existence of hunting can be compared to the beef market. Yes, beef market.
It is undeniable that the beef market is a worldwide cash-cow (pun intended this time). However, if there were no demand for beef, the cattle population would go by the wayside, much like buffalo have. In some Nebraska counties, there are more cattle than humans, and it is all thanks to the high demand and relatively lucrative beef market.
With such, hunting creates a similar market. Take the ringneck pheasant. It is a beautiful, multicolored bird that originated from China. It is also a choice bird for many hunters as it boasts an enjoyable taste and an equally enjoyable thrill to hunt. Thanks to the money paid in part by hunters applying for permits, the state government works to keep the species in existence and plentifully supplied without becoming an overabundant pest, something that the hunters help maintain.
Notice the mention of an “overabundant pest?” Several common game species would become exactly that if they were not popular to hunt. Whitetail deer would be disastrous to the state of Nebraska if they became too bountiful.
In fact, many regions of the state actually do have higher-than-desired amounts, especially in agriculture-based economies. Deer are a notable cause of crop destruction and consumption. To prove this, Nebraska Game and Parks made several thousand season’s choice permits in isolated sections of the state available (meaning, per permit, a hunter could shoot two female deer). But not only is the system a method for population control, it has now become a social service.
The Deer Exchange program was introduced to Nebraska last year. Through this system, hunters could donate their deer to those in need. As of this year, the rate of application for the Deer Exchange Program has significantly increased, which provides a dual benefit. First, a higher number of the less fortunate will receive high-protein, lower-fat meat (compared to 80 percent lean ground beef) at no cost to them. And secondly, the state will benefit from removing overabundant populations by issuing more seasons’ choice permits.
Hunting, like many hobbies, is a worldwide outdoor recreation. Aside from the population control aspect, it is also done for fun.
Like most outdoor pastimes, there is a limit on how much and where someone can hunt. Because of this, there is a fee attached to it. Let’s not forget that hunting equipment, like guns, ammunition and clothing, are generally American-made and support a capitalist economy. As much as we want to believe it, there are costs for obtaining a hunting permit, and these costs don’t exist because our government is greedy.
The costs support research and preservation of species and landscapes. Without partial funding from the hunter, there would be much less desire and capital to maintain many populations that currently hold an intrinsic value for so many.
A term sometimes coined in natural resources classes, “charismatic mega-fauna” refers to large, popular animal species that “city folk” think of when they hear the word “wildlife.” Among others, deer, moose and elk often fall in this species classification. These animals exist in large part because of funding for land conservation and recreational hunting.
Hunters that have a legal, state-issued hunting permit also have passed a hunter safety course. Generally, this means the hunter will use better judgment than to carelessly flail firearms or to shoot your beloved “Bambi.”
Before you cover yourself in fake blood as a protest for all the slain fuzzy forest fauna that “evil killers” (who disguise their inhumane practice in a neat compact identity: the “hunter”), consider what hunting represents as a whole. Yes, animals are killed in the practice. And sure, some people use more than questionable bagging practices. But realize most of the hunting community isn’t like that, and they support much more than just bringing home a meal for their carnivorous family and friends.
Josh Loomis is a senior Fisheries and Wildlife major. Reach him at joshloomis@dailynebraskan.com.
Be the first to comment on this article!