I guess some think that because some rogue poll might indicate that “wildlife viewing” is a growing trend, that it will replace hunting because we live in a progressive, socialistic-totalitarian society filled with entitlement and selfish greed. Even certain reporters are clueless, as we find in this article: “There’s a new generation of outdoorsmen stalking wild game, but they’re not armed with bows or guns. Instead, they wield tripods and cameras. This movement represents a growing trend toward what Edward Putnam, the author of “Is Wildlife Viewing The New Hunting?,” calls “non-consumptive outdoor recreation.”<<<Read More>>>
To describe wildlife viewers as “stalking wild game” with cameras is a joke. There is no such thing that exists in an honest assessment of reality. Yes, there are a tiny handful of people who actually work very hard to capture high quality pictures. However, incorrectly presented in this article, those who call themselves “wildlife viewers” are not stalkers of anything, except perhaps the closest Starbucks.
They ride around in cars, many not actually purposefully seeking to “view” wildlife, hoping to catch a glimpse of some animal and if the window of the car isn’t too dirty, and won’t mess up the “doo” they might snap a shot with their stupid smart phone. Good for them.
Hunters, on the other hand, at least have to get out of their transportation devices, while some spend hours and miles of real “stalking” searching for food, that might happen to be a “trophy.” This event is a tradition that can’t even compare with cellphone photography. Only someone who has never done it would somehow think one would be the exchange of another.
But there is a real difference between the two – not mentioned in the article, other than to state that the interest in hunting holds steady while “wildlife viewing” appears to be of growing interest. They fail to explain the biggest reason hunting interest is not growing. I will.
Hunters are tolerant and generous people, willing to share the woods with anyone bent on taking photographs of wildlife. They don’t even mind that people drive around in climate controlled vehicles “viewing wildlife,” even though it is the millions of dollars hunters pay so that those “wildlife viewers” can occasionally catch a glimpse or snap a picture.
On the other hand, many of the “nonconsumptive” outdoor recreationists go out of their way, through misguidance and selfish entitlement, to stop hunting. This present society emboldens progressives to destroy heritage while at the same time forcing their lifestyle onto others. Are all “nonconsumptive outdoor recreationists” progressive destroyers forcing their lifestyle? Of course not but when we read articles, such as this one, where the term “nonconsumptive” is propped up as the antithesis of hunting, you don’t have to be a skilled code reader to understand what is being said.
There is no comparison between the two interests regardless of what ignorant writers have to say about it. However, I have no issue with photographers and viewers enjoying many of the same things that I do and I will never lift one finger to stop them from doing it. On the other hand, I wish I could say the same for them.
