Video: A Professional Hunter’s Response to Anti-Hunting Harassment

Rhino Hunt Auction

Bob Fretwell of Mesquite, Texas, protests outside the Dallas Convention Center where the Dallas Safari Club is holding a weekend show and auction, where a permit to shoot an endangered black rhinoceros in Africa was up for bid, in Dallas. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez, File)

By John McAdams

African Professional Hunter Paul Stones provides an outstanding response to some of the anti-hunter harassment he receives on a regular basis.

Produced by the Dallas Safari Club, this video does a great job of countering some of the anti-hunter harassment that’s commonly directed at the hunting community, especially outfitters in Africa. Stones acknowledges that many of the people who are opposed to hunting may have good intentions, but that their actions are informed by a shallow understanding of the real situation in Africa.

The fact of the matter is that if they have even been to Africa at all, many of those people spent their entire trip in national parks or preserves such as Kruger National Park. While those are fantastic places to visit, they don’t represent actual conditions for most of Africa, especially in areas where there is legal hunting.

As hard as it is for many people to understand, particularly those who live in cities far removed from actual interactions with wildlife, hunting has very real and tangible benefits for wildlife conservation. This is true all over the world and indeed, hunting serves as the foundation of the entire model of wildlife conservation that has resulted in an incredible recovery of wildlife populations all over the continent.

Without hunting, the whole house would collapse on itself and there would soon be very little wildlife left in most of Africa.

 

While Paul was narrating as though he was responding to an actual comment by an anti-hunter, I don’t think those people are the intended audience for this video. It’s very difficult to convince someone who is so strongly against hunting that they’re actively engaged in harassing hunters.

There is a certain segment of the population that we’ll probably never convince about the true benefits of hunting. That’s fine because, fortunately, there aren’t very many of them. People like that are often loud and vocal, but relatively small in number.

Hunters make up only around 4-5% of the population. There are probably about the same amount of rabid anti-hunters in the U.S. The majority of the population (85-90% of people) are non-hunters and don’t know very much about it. They likely don’t feel strongly about hunting one way or another.

Those are the people who need to see this video, because they’re the ones who will ultimately decide what happens to hunting in the future. I believe it’s possible to convince them to support hunting if presented with the facts.

So keep that in mind and show this video to people you might actually convince with it. Make a difference where you can, and spread the information to those who need to receive it.

comments

  1. avatar Tasty Animals says:

    Anti-Hunters are so ignorant & most live in cities & think meat is made in the supermarket like AOC.

    We live in a food chain world! Our Creator gave us dominion of all creatures…the end.

    1. avatar Merle 0 says:

      That’s quite true. I’ve been asked a few times by those types “why hunt when you can just go to the grocery store?”. You can’t even explain it to them.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Merle O,

        The ignorance of anti-hunters, it hurts!

      2. avatar LifeSavor says:

        We shop at an Amish organic farm. Once, when I asked for a bag of beets, Amos started to explain why the beets were dirty. I stopped him and said that I knew beets are grown underground. He said, I would be surprised at how many ‘Englishers’ ask him why the produce has dirt on it. They are so used to seeing clean, shiney, grocery store produce that when they see his they are startled.

        So, how can you explain hunting when people do not seem to know why their vegetables have dirt on them?

        BTW, I am not a hunter. We are grateful to have Amos take care of the livestock.

    2. avatar Texican says:

      It is hard to understand people’s ignorance in the info age. Whether you believe God gave man dominion over the Earth, as I do, or in the theory of Darwinism, as I used to, man is at the top of the heap and can act accordingly. The godly way shepherds resources and the ungodly way wastes them.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        I hear vegans say they choose veganism to protect animals. They would be shocked to found out how many animals died, directly through vermin control and indirectly from habitat change, for their plate of vegetables. Estimates would be 100+ animals per ton of vegetables.

        1. avatar Merle 0 says:

          Also to include how animals die in the wild naturally. It typically isn’t pretty. Being shot by properly placed bullet is far more humane then starvation and infection after breaking a limb.

    3. avatar Arc says:

      Only a moron would think wild meat, void of any and all inspections, would be sold at a grocery store. Farmed meat and wild meat are worlds apart from each other.

      A lot of ‘hunters’ are equally as as ignorant when they walk up to a fox den and pop half a dozen pups then post pictures of their great and noble kills in the trophy kill section of their favorite forum. Some brag about intentionally gut shooting “pest” animals, then boast about their kill counts. Many forums have put up registration walls to hide their more depraved sections from search engines but anyone can still view for themselves. From what I’ve seen, conservation, communing with nature, keeping populations ‘in check’, its all a bunch of bullshit.

      The majority aren’t killing for need, or for meat, they go out and shoot at animals because killing is simply fun. Its empowering to have a god complex and lord over something else that will never be able to sue or seek revenge. “Hunting” is marketed as a damn recreational activity and seasonal event, its marketed as fun. Some even have a fetish for it.

      On a side note, its pretty damn big stretch to call shooting animals over a bait pile “hunting” or “sport”, there is nothing sport about setting up an automated deer feeder and shooting from a few hundred meters out.

      But hey, you can wallow in ignorance and continue to believe that John Doe public doesn’t pay attention. Just like the article says, hunters are a very small percent of the population and if you piss off the general population, your outlet for killing for the shits and giggles gets voted away. I’ve long since been pissed off with the pervasive lack of ethics and moral compass in the ‘hunting’ community, followed right up with the hypocritical double face that gets put on for the public. Keep up the mass killing contests, which are an insult to life and the effort God put into creating it, and continue to turn Joe public against your. . . hobby.

      Until the community polices its own and cleans up its lack of ethics, I’ll vote against it every time, and at the end of the day, the votes are what count.

      1. avatar Bill Meyer says:

        It is people like you who put the T in Tyranny. BTW, I am a non-hunter, but look askance at people who work from the “My vote wins, screw you” mentality. Surprised you haven’t used the “you don’t really NEED to hunt” mantra.

  2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Good luck.

    Time to say it again: about half of our population operates on emotion. Facts and honor are irrelevant to that half.

    We would be wise to find an emotional appeal to such emotional people since facts and honor do not matter to such people.

    And along that vein, I have a suggestion. Lots of pro-abortion people defend abortion as a “merciful act” — a quick and “humane” death for unwanted children who “would likely suffer a horrific life of neglect, abuse, and/or rape”. (Yes, my spouse’s aunt just said this a week ago as a reason to support killing children in the womb.)

    Well, if that emotional appeal works on such people who support killing children in the womb, why not apply that to wildlife conservation and hunting? We can proffer a similar justification: hunting is a merciful act — a quick and humane death for animals who would likely suffer a horrific life of disease, starvation, dehydration, and mutilation from hierarchical/territorial disputes with other animals.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      That is patent bullshit. I have been peripherally involved in the abortion debate since 1974. I have **NEVER** heard anyone on either side of the discussion claim that abortion was in any way a good deal for the aborted. That is simply a LIE, and you should be ashamed.

      Generally, pro choice people wish to discuss how we can avoid unwanted pregnancies, thus reducing abortions. Anti choice people wish to screech at others that you will obey them or they will put you in prison, and absolutely *refuse* to discuss ways to reduce unwanted pregnancies, like sex ed early and often, combined with readily available and nonjudgemental birth control at any age whatever.

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        LarryInTx,,

        I’ve heard the same as Uncommon_Sense reports, and we live in different parts of the country. I am not lying. It is not a common argument, but, I have heard it from the pro-abortion side.

        It is a pretty sick argument, also. Probably why it is not often used.

      2. avatar jwtaylor says:

        Then you aren’t listening. The “nobody wants them anyway” and other arguments about how the babies are better off dead are common refrains.
        It’s rare to hear pro-abortion talk about reducing unwanted pregnancies, it’s always about “the right to choose” murder.

      3. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        to Larry in Tx. You sir are clueless. Perhaps you need to get off the internet and go out into the real world.

        Celebrate your abortion by shouting it out to the world.
        https://shoutyourabortion.com/

  3. avatar Hody Snitch says:

    I don’t hunt. Never have and probably never will. I however, would not deny a person the right to hunt. I just wish the Fudds would extend me the same courtesy regarding my long gun or handgun selection. Don’t tell me what I need or should have based on your perceived hunting needs.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Those claims are not FUDDS, they are politicians and some other liars.

    2. avatar Arc says:

      I don’t recall any “right to hunt” being written into the COTUS. The 2A is “… Shall not be infringed”, but there is no mention of hunting and thus a privileged that is subject to state and federal regulations / code. Yes, you can “hunt” on your own land all you want, up until its in conflict with the law, out of season, etc. Game wardens aren’t push overs.

  4. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    About the same number of hunters n rabid anti’s. And look who’s armed, and not. If the armed pelple were doing violence the ant-people would all be dead.

    The people with guns aren’t the problem; they’re so non-violent that when some whack-job uses a gun, it’s news just for that. Would the news would report that.

  5. avatar I Haz A Question says:

    Dear Anti-Hunter,

    You think those raccoons are cute in your National Geographic photos and Internet memes? The ones where an adult female is innocently escorting her little ones through the woods, minding their own business with inquisitive eyes and curious paws? Where they just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace?

    Well, I would love to be left in peace, but those vermin won’t leave me alone. They are among the most destructive, stubborn, and recalcitrant buggers you can encounter in your own back yard. They destroy landscaping, they defecate everywhere they please, they tear up your projects and abscond with little treasures they decide must be theirs and no longer yours. Some will run from you for a short distance if you chase them, often hiding under nearby cars or running up tall trees. Others will charge at you to enforce their perceived territory. But no matter what you attempt to rid yourself of their continued destruction – traps, bitter tasting baits, automated water nozzles, bright lights and scary noises – they will always return to take whatever they please.

    As you pour your strawberry vinaigrette on your vegan cashew salad and prepare to watch the latest recorded episode of “Ellen”, they are watching us. All of us. And some of us have decided we can no longer succumb to their attacks on our persons and property. We have lost too much money replacing the damaged fencing, the torn up lawns, the lost trinkets and chewed porch posts. We have lost too much sleep hearing them chirping or snarling at each other in the middle of the night. We have tried all the methods you wish to suggest to us for persuading them to stay away. But even if they do, they’ll simply choose another yard and terrorize our neighbors instead, forcing them to take the same actions and come to the same conclusion:

    I must hunt and kill the raccoons. For doing so will keep the local population under control. You see, in my corner of suburbia, the raccoon has no natural predator hunting it. Not hawks, not coyotes, nothing. It successfully lives a healthy life in the sewers or under houses, eats garbage, and roams freely. And breeds like crazy.

    So as I hear the rustling in my yard tonight and reach for my trusty .22LR rifle, I understand that you believe me to be a monster. Yet you will not be with me as I walk outside into the dark, past the rows of bushes I’ve had to repeatedly replace over the years, past the porch posts I’ve had to replace or repaint due to damage, past the area where my wife’s yard ornaments once stood before they disappeared, only to be found some distance away destroyed. You will be enjoying your beauty sleep as stand out in the frigid 2am air and shine my light and line up my sights in time to see a large adult male facing off with me and about to charge. And believe me, being charged by a large snarling raccoon is not fun.

    I will shoot the raccoon, and I will have to dispose of its large body. All while you sleep soundly.

    Because I am your neighbor, doing what’s necessary to protect our street so these buggers don’t choose YOUR home a few doors down.

    I am the suburban hunter.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      I Haz a Question,

      When I was in high school, a raccoon family decided to take up residence near my family’s garbage cans. Every day I would go outside to see my family’s trash strewn all over the yard. And every day I would pick it up. And I mean strewn all over — it would take me at least 15 minutes to put it all back in the garbage can/s.

      Needless to say, that got old really quick. After the fifth or sixth straight day of picking up trash strewn all over my yard, I had finally had enough. I loaded up my Marlin Model 60 semi-automatic rifle (chambered in .22 LR) and went on alert mode. Later that day or evening I heard noise from my garbage cans so I went outside with rifle in hand. As I approached my garbage cans, multiple raccoons scattered. Some climbed up short trees that were a few feet away. While I hated to do it, I shot those raccoons out of the trees and killed them. Last but not least, one was trying to hide in one of my garbage cans. I shot and killed that one as well. And that was the last time that I ever remember having to pick up garbage strewn across my yard.

      I respect and value animals greatly and don’t like killing them. Sometimes, though, they need killing and I would do it again to stop damage to my property.

      I also support hunting animals as an important means of population control as well as providing food. In one particularly bleak year (financially speaking), I was fortunate to take three deer which ended up being almost all of our meat that year. Last year, our deer hunting success simply keeps the deer population in balance — and provides super high quality meat as a bonus. (Speaking of, I just cooked up some venison medallions earlier this week: they were outstanding lean meat with effectively no fat, no cholesterol, and no artificial hormones or chemicals.)

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        A neighbor had a raccoon family take up residence in her attic. Dissuading the family and repairing the damage cost her over $8000. I’ll shoot them.

        1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          If you ever have a racoon family living under your house or, hopefully not, in your ceiling there’s a pretty simple way of getting rid of them. My 1929 house is a pier-and-beam construction and has attracted racoon families on three occasions over the years. Pest experts and exterminators will happily charge you hundreds if not thousands to get rid of these pests, only to often see them return again and again. Here’s what I do instead: Racoons are nocturnal creatures who do their hunting during the dark hours. The first step is to find how they’re getting access to your house. In my case it was an opening in the wood sheeting that led under my house. There were actually two openings. I sealed the first one with screen wire but, not wanting to trap a racoon under my house, I left the second opening alone. I then placed newspaper around the opening, waited for nightfall, and closely watched the opening. As soon as I saw that the newspapers were disturbed, I knew the racoon was out hunting. I sealed that opening and my racoon problem was solved. My total cost: some screen wire, staples, and a newspaper.

    2. avatar Randy Hudson says:

      Don’t discard that meat so quickly. The front and hind legs are very good eating. A few minutes in the pressure cooker then a few minutes in the fry pan and then some gravy. Good eating

      1. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

        Wut the….

        Raccoon legs?

        1. avatar Merle 0 says:

          Raccoon is actually pretty good. I’ve only eaten country raccoons though. Not sure if a city raccoon would taste good.

        2. avatar FormerParatrooper says:

          Soak the coon in Hamm’s beer for two hours. Put on the bbq, low and slow. Sauce and enjoy.

          Use the hide for a hat.

          That’s how my Grandfather took care of them. Delicious.

    3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      “Some will run from you for a short distance if you chase them, often hiding under nearby cars or running up tall trees. Others will charge at you to enforce their perceived territory. But no matter what you attempt to rid yourself of their continued destruction – traps, bitter tasting baits, automated water nozzles, bright lights and scary noises – they will always return to take whatever they please.”

      This sounds like you are describing the homeless situation in West coast cities. Maybe there’s a connection?

    4. avatar Arc says:

      You could do what, you know, the overwhelming majority of people do and get a $4.99 latch from your favorite hardware store, or a racoon proof trash can. Racoons might be little ninjas but they can’t pick small pad locks yet.

      What do you think people do in bear country? Shoot every bear they see? Hur hur hur, that will land you in jail in a hurry. They get bear resistant and bear proof trash cans or lock their can in a sturdy cage. Hurricanes in Japan? They lock their rubbish bins in concrete / wire cages.

      There is more often than not, a perfectly effective, non-lethal method to solving a problem but like I said before, people kill animals not for need but because they find killing to be fun.

  6. avatar Someone says:

    Killing is not conservation? Life should not be auctioned? Okay, so how much will YOU pay to the conservation fund?

    1. avatar Ing says:

      These are the same people who will defend Planned Parenthood selling parts of dead babies. Maybe if we turned the whole abortion process into an auction and only hunted pregnant animals for baby parts, they’d suddenly leave hunters alone and discover the value of human life.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Pretty sure auctioning human baby parts is illegal. What would you advocate, making it more illegaler? Arguing against something which is already illegal seems kinda stupid.

        1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          If you don’t prosecute the human body part sellers how is it illegal? Is this selective enforcement???
          Undercover video clearly shows human body parts being harvested for sale. But the abortion people were not prosecuted.

  7. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    Somebody should show the ANTIS the NATGEO special about Keystone animals, mostly predators, which when gone also causes other species to disappear. With wolves gone in most of the country and large cats in the other parts, WE are the Keystone predators. Just google Keystone Species.

  8. avatar Darkman says:

    The number of people involved in these protests is so small as to be irrelevant. You’ll never change their minds. “Never Try To Teach A Pig To Sing…It Wastes Your Time And Annoys The Pig”. So the best course of action is to simple ignore them. Giving them as little press as possible. Their only voice lives on the Interweb. Which for the most part has become the realm of the Offendials of Society. Regardless of what anyone does. Some small irrelevant group will scream at the top of their lungs. About how they are right because their intention are good. Just as much damage is caused in the world by so called good intentions and unintended consequences. The road to Hell is paved by good intentions. Keep Your Powder Dry.

  9. avatar Aeromed says:

    Most of God’s little creatures have a special place on the earth. It is often on a plate right next to the mashed potatoes.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Aeromed,

      I heard about a region where people were riled-up about “urban sprawl” and how it was eliminating gargantuan areas of wildlife habitat. The story goes on to say that someone erected a billboard which referenced the urban sprawl controversy and stated a similar line, “There is plenty of room for all of God’s creatures — right next to the mashed potatoes.”

  10. avatar former water walker says:

    I’ve only been hunting once a lonnnng time ago. Not my thing but I support those who DO. I don’t understand “protesting” in Africa against heavily armed folks. Is it as retarded as it sounds?!?😎

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      The jury is still out. But it seems likely that if push comes to shove, those demonstrators will never actually regret their mistakes.

  11. avatar Alan says:

    I personally am not a hunter. I’m not opposed to hunting, simply not interested in hunting. By the way, while I never hunted, for a number of years, I bought an annual hunting license, the small fees paid were, in my view, a worth while contribution to wildlife conservation and management. These contributions ceased, when government, in what passes for it’s august wisdom, required the furnishing of my social security number on the license application. The individual establishes their own limits, or certainly should, lest their freedoms be lost. In any event, to those opposed to hunting fine, nobody forces you to hunt. You should extend to others the same courtesies that you would receive from them. I submit that playing golf is about the best way to ruin an afternoons stroll in the country. I do however note that that is what some choose to do, and that is fine, so long as golfers do not attempt to force me to play. People opposed to hunting should keep the foregoing in mind. Most likely they won’t, but they most certainly should.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Thanks I will check this out. “Jim Shockey’s Uncharted” series on the outdoor channel is the only hunting show that goes into the economics of hunting in the different countries he hunts in.

  12. avatar Ralph says:

    Anti-hunting “activists” don’t hate hunting. They hate hunters. And they would rather see the hunter dead than the quarry, whatever the quarry may be. If hunters stopped hunting, the anti mob would find a new reason to hate them.

    The culture war is a war of beliefs and values. It affects everything. And the cold war is starting to get hot.

  13. avatar Yum says:

    As a member of PETA, I find this offensive.
    I should clarify which organization.

    People for
    Eating
    Tasty
    Animals

  14. avatar Wally1 says:

    I had to laugh about the Raccoon dissertation , but I understand it, I had a similar problem with ground hogs, man, can they tear up an orchard. Although I live out in the county and it is not illegal to shoot them, my neighbors have small children and gunfire may be disturbing to them. You know, trying to be a decent neighbor.
    I started practicing with my bow and man what a hoot to nail one at 80 yards. So two years fast forward and I hear gunfire near my neighbors house. I walk out there to see what’s going on and contact my neighbor, (the one with the kids). His daughter is shooting a 10/22 and blasting the groundhogs. She was having a great time, obviously with eye and hearing protection and adult supervision. Her dad apologized for the noise, My answer “Not a problem, commence firing! P.S. Although never ate a Raccoon or a Groundhog, I have ate Muskrat, Frikken Nasty, There is a reason they are called “Musk and Rat”. They might keep you alive in a survival situation, that is if you can keep the nasty thing choked down.

  15. avatar Chuck says:

    Most non-hunters don’t understand the conservation involved in hunting. Most of the natural apex predators are in decline in the Western States for a number of reasons, but even when we weren’t present, the Predator : Prey ratio was still very small. Nature’s way of ensuring a balance. Years back, a decision was made to reduce hunting in some areas of different States, and the result in a very short amount of time, was massive winter kills and starvation among some herds. Hunters were who stepped up to the plate buying hay and feed to be distributed to these herds, simply because we abhor watching and hearing of animals starving to death. Eastern States that reduced and stopped hunting all together, were soon having to cull the herds or watch animals starve. Sure, there’s always a bad apple in any bushel and you’ll hear of someone being arrested for needless slaughter, poaching, or some related crime, but 9 times out of 10, that wastrel was reported to Fish and Game by other hunters. The majority of us leave no sign that we were there. We clean up our camps because it’s the right thing to do. We try to leave as little sign that we were there as possible in order to keep the wilderness pristine. We willingly pay fees and licenses for the privilige to hunt, because we know that money is used by Fish & Game to monitor the herds and their programs to maintain and re-introduce animals that left the areas.
    We talk about calibers and bullet design and advances not because we’re bloodthirsty barbarians, but because we were taught to kill as humanely as possible. None of us want to see an animal suffer and die as a result of poor hunting skills or bad shots. We willingly track for days a wounded animal because it’s the right and humane thing to do. We eat what we hunt and loathe wastefulness.
    We’re the great great grandsons and granddaughters of the very pioneers that settled this land, and we care for it more deeply than you’ll ever understand.

  16. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Anti hunters are very racist people. I have no problem saying that. In African a “pest” is a lion. Or a crocodile. Or a giraffe. Or any animal over 400 pounds. And some time there are smaller. These white people don’t really care if a black person is killed or a black child is eaten alive.
    Also hunter dollars really do help these isolated villages.

    If was a hunter that is the argument I would be making.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email