September 19, 2020

The Hypocrisy of the So-Called Animal "Rights" Groups

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

[AUDIO:http://www.mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/audio/may4.mp3]

I and many others who write their opinions, have for years said that animal rights groups are more about stopping hunters than protecting the rights of animals. Animals don’t have rights, they need to be respected and treated as such for the purposes they serve.

In Utah, the Humane Society and the Fund for Animals, which are now one entity called the National Humane Education Society, has filed a lawsuit to stop all hunting on all wildlife refuges. So what else is new?

Ray Grass, outdoor and travel writer for the Deseret News, today has an article about the lawsuit and the effects of how hunting is a necessary and an efficient management tool. He also shares some of what will happen if this is taken away.

So often in the debate between anti-hunting and those who believe it is the best tool, reality is left out of the equation. Taken from the article by Grass are excerpts of what a biologist from the Fund for Animals had to say and what Grass himself has witnessed.

Let’s start with setting the stage for a brief conversation.

A few years back I had a conversation with a biologist for Funds for Animals over the shooting of buffalo leaving Yellowstone National Park. During harsh winters, buffalo leave park boundaries in search of food.

This is the question and response Grass got from the biologist.

I asked if he would prefer these animals be shot or allowed to starve to death. He said he would sooner see them stave.
I asked if he’d ever encountered a starving animal. He said no.

In all honesty, how can an educated man make a statement that he would rather an animal starve to death than be shot by a hunter when he has witnessed neither? Simple question and the simple answer is, it has nothing to do with the protection of the animal and everything to do with just being against hunting.

Grass takes the time in his piece to relate to his readers what he has experienced first hand. More people should have the distinct unpleasantness of seeing what he saw.

A number of years ago, while on a range ride with biologists with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in the Indianola area, after a particularly harsh winter, we rode near a grove of trees.
There, huddled in a group, were five deer. All five were alive, but none had enough energy to move any more than to prop themselves up on their front legs. They were starving to death. Close by we counted 35 deer carcasses in a 100-square-yard area that had starved. Break open a bone, and if blood has replaced white bone marrow, the animal starved.
I was probably 50 feet away from the five deer, on horseback, and I could count their ribs. They wanted to stand but couldn’t; they were hungry but there was nothing to eat. It was very evident they were in a great deal of pain and under a tremendous amount of stress.

Grass compares what he saw with what is real.

I have no idea how long they had been in this condition, but the biologist said it could have been a week or more, and they could go on this way for several more days before dying.
It was, without question, one of the saddest experiences of my life. The only thing I can think of that would be sadder than seeing starving animals is starving children.

Grass asks the same question I did.

How anyone, especially someone claiming to be a protector of animals, would choose to have an animal spend days, even weeks, suffering the pain that comes with starvation is beyond me.

Grass finishes his piece by putting the blame on the difficulties of wildlife management where it belongs and then offers up a suggestion to the “animal rights” groups.

We humans, hunters and nonhunters, are squeezing animals into smaller and smaller areas by building more and more homes and roads and buildings on what was wildlife range. Hunting is an efficient management tool.
The next best thing to hunting would be to trap and move animals that become too numerous for the land to support. So instead of paying lawyers to file lawsuits, why wouldn’t the Humane Society simply offer to pay the bill to move the animals? Instead of lip service, get involved in management.
Go out and see the results of overcrowding and then tell me starvation is a better way of dying.

Although Grass doesn’t come right out and say it, I think he is not a hunter himself. It wouldn’t matter to me one way or the other how he stands on the issue of hunting but he has at least seen both ways poorly managed wild animals can die. For that he earns my respect.

Tom Remington

Share