PETA is after a guy in CA - article mentions AH

[rookhawk]

This L.A. hunter killed an elephant. Now he's a PETA target in bid to end trophy hunting

California may soon pass a law to ban the import of "trophy" animal parts from Africa. Activists are targeting an L.A. hunter whose hunt was captured on video.

www.latimes.com

 

[mark-hunter]

This is really bad.

But, if I may add from my personal perspective:
All these anti hunting organisations are getting their arguments based on public posts with photos from hunters themselves. We give them the food.

Photo of hunter with trophy - is the only argument they continuously (and successfully) use against us, and it gets back to us in hard way, influencing the legislative system and public opinions.

This is another example, when sponsor of this forum was targeted by one of UK tabloids:

Brit trophy hunters pay to shoot zebras for fun and post gloating photos on Facebook

BRITISH trophy hunters are targeting “at risk” zebras and then posting sick photos of their kills on Facebook, it has been revealed. Many pose with their “trophy” grinning a…

www.thesun.co.uk

(photos again?)

Then we can all remember all other cases, notable one being - Cecil the lion saga, etc.

In my country, one of our prominent politicians was accused and charged for corruption and missuse of funds, and guess, what - media found his photos on web site of his African outfitter - sponsor of this web site, and blasted the photos all over local media - with dead elephant, etc.
I am not mentioning the names, the court proceedings are still in progress, but it was 100k plus, hunt - including DG, and 10 - 12 various species of other game.

etc,

My way of thinking is this:
Problem mitigation measures can be reactive or proactive.

1. Reactive means, after SHTF situation, and generally too late.
What remains after public attack is possible suing, or legal actions, but if photo is posted on public media, I dont think much can be done. Damage is done, as per above illustrations, and it cannot be undone.

2. Proactive means, mitigating negative factors and risks in advance, before the problem happens, which means in some way to control what we download on facebook, and other platforms.

Based on all above, in my simple mind, the only real risk and negative factor, is public photo of hunter and trophy.
(Am I right?)

What we need to reconsider, is public posting of hunters with trophies in public media, and make some (restrictive) rules integrated in each hunting organisation code of ethics about posting or not posting public pictures with trophies.

In closing, this problem is more present in highly developed countries, like USA, or UK, and at this moment less present in other countries, but it is growing on daily basis.

Scientific and economic arguments, facts and statistics - are all on legally regulated hunting side and game management programs, but the influence of ignorant, and emotional anti hunting organisation is at least 90% powered by our own photos posted on public media.
And problem is growing on daily basis. And thats the fact.

You want to post picture with your trophy?
Think again.

facebook?
Think again.
Your choice.
I dont.

The outfitters perspective:
Commercial hunting outfitters the perspective is a bit different.
Posting pictures of hunters with trophies is part of advertising campaign - this brings the clients in. (or at least we think so)

So in this respect, they will have to develop their own strategy of how they will proceed, but my way of thinking is that posting photos of rich game herds, game populations on grasslands, open savanah, or waterholes is good enough.
For example, if I see on outfitters web site, a rich, dense, numerous, self sustaining herd of buffalo - in their natural range - nobody needs to tell me, what I might be doing there, and why I should go there!

 

[BRICKBURN]

Interesting.
How did PETA get the video by/from an independent source?

 

[sestoppelman]

Wow. I know this site and others can be accessed by anyone, but posting on FB and other such places seems riskier than this. I don't FB, never have, never will. Not a good place to post hunting and gun stuff I suspect.

 

[flatwater bill]

I suspect all major hunting websites are trolled heavily by the Flakes. With over 56000 members, AH is an inviting place to lurk. ...........FWB

 

[LivingTheDream]

If you think that if we stop posting pictures that suddenly the pressure to ban hunting will go away, you're crazy. If they don't find it on Facebook they will find it on here, or an outfitters website, a hunting show, a DSC promotional video, etc. We can't go into hiddening thinking it will get better.

Did you read the article, they quote a "scientist" that said even if hunting does conserve the species do the ends justify the means. Is it worth saving an entire species?!? She also referenced hunting is a hold over of colonialism, where European traditions are dictating African actions. Apparently the irony of a western scientist telling Africans what to do with their animals is lost on her. Point being it is not just a picture.

Does anyone remember what news story also broke when Cecil made the headlines? Oh planned parenthood was selling aborted baby parts...but Cecil was the moral outrage. Did anyone see that the Cecil act was included in the house appropriations bill as an amendment that passed yesterday? And this story breaks right the same night, wow what timing!!!

Based on all above, in my simple mind, the only real risk and negative factor, is public photo of hunter and trophy.
(Am I right?)

No you are wrong, in the 60, 70, 80, 90s there was constant advertising of photos of hunters with dead animals, we slowly caved to the PC culture citing ethics and feelings and not wanting to offend anyone. So we changed how we did poses and how the pictures were taken, and here we are now saying maybe we shouldn't take pictures. We are losing the PR battle, and are letting a vocal minority dictate how to live our lives (but honestly this is probably a larger societal problem).

But yeah let's keep giving into their outrage...

 

[mark-hunter]

No you are wrong, in the 60, 70, 80, 90s there was constant advertising of photos of hunters with dead animals, we slowly caved to the PC culture citing ethics and feelings and not wanting to offend anyone.
So we changed how we did poses and how the pictures were taken, and here we are now saying maybe we shouldn't take pictures.

What I am saying is not they will stop their crusade. Far from that.
What I am saying, is - if they dont have the photo, they dont have the only tool to use against us as argument.

The photo is proof of successful hunt. whatever they do is only a moral argument they raise, based on photo and the fact the hunt was done.
Remove the photo.
They have nothing to complain about.


Another thought to share is this:
Politicians are very good in PR. In every election, somebody gets elected - so elected ones are successful
But, I dont see much photos of elected politicians with hunting trophies, and some of them certainly are hunters.
On occasion, you may find a local mayor, or local elected politician here and there in the US - posing with trophy, but gun and hunting culture is unique in US, from the rest of the World. So this can bring local votes. ?

Finding one European politician posing with animal on the photo, will be very hard.
On occasion you will find a rare photo of european royalty, but they are not elected and those photos are disappearing at fast rate from web. Spanish royal was blasted by media for his photos from elephant hunt. Is it likely he will post the photos again?
So, why is that?

It is becasue - things change. Thats fact.
Either we will change with times, or we will dissapear with times. Like dinosaurs.
100 years ago (photography, or not) a hunter could go to any continent to hunt, and Africa was 100% huntable.
Today, Africa is huntable for international hunter maybe 50% of the territory - or less, and the fact is times are changing, and we are loosing our grounds - for various reasons, and this is one of the reasons.

All this hype about trophy hunting by antihunting organisations, can possibly end up in some trophy import ban. It will not stop hunting in africa, but it will cause many outfitters to close the business.

No, it will not stop the hunt per se, for sure, but its not helping either, isnt it?

So, if it is not helping hunting cause, why do it in a first place? just because so we can brag about it on FB? Yeah, right!

"The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there."

 

[matt85]

Hiding our pictures and cowering in the dark will not help us. If the anti's cant use our pictures against us then they will simply find another avenue of attack and nothing will change.

-matt

 

[Timbo]

This L.A. hunter killed an elephant. Now he's a PETA target in bid to end trophy hunting

California may soon pass a law to ban the import of "trophy" animal parts from Africa. Activists are targeting an L.A. hunter whose hunt was captured on video.

www.latimes.com

Yep! Unfortunately the anti-hunting brigade are slowly making more in-roads to extinguish our sport. Perhaps we should all just pack up and migrate to Africa and set up community like the Germans did in Namibia, but for hunters?

 

[LivingTheDream]

What I am saying is not they will stop their crusade. Far from that.
What I am saying, is - if they dont have the photo, they dont have the only tool to use against us as argument.

What I am saying is that your point doesn't logically make sense. They will use something else, in fact the LA times story that I read didn't have any photos of the hunter. They have just a story.

Also you point about being able to hunt 100% of African is misleading at best and really has nothing to do with anti hunting sentiment. For example, the reason you can't hunt CAR has nothing to do anti hunting. The only one that has had anti hunting sentiment is Kenya (which you can still bird hunt) There has been more pro hunting movements, Uganda, Zambia and Botswana opening back up.

Regarding politicians it is still pretty local in the US. But as a case in point, here is a photo from Bill Clinton in 1993. http://goodhunt.blogs.theledger.com/23246/bill-clintons-duck-hunts/ So yes, the past is a foreign place and they do things differently, but the more we give in the more different that past will be. It isn't the photo that is the problem it is the narrative around the photo we are losing.

Everything else as far as the results we pretty much agree upon. It is going to happen and part of the reason it is happening is because we keep giving in and not wanting to offend or hurt someone's feelings.

 

[Fred Gunner]

This will Never survive a Federal court challenge. U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and ICE already regulate all trophy imports. The U.S.A. is a CITES international Treaty Member...This would violate the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution...Similar legislation passed both the Assembly and Senate two years ago but was ultimately vetoed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, who called the trophy ban “unenforceable.”

 

[Fred Gunner]

I love posting hunting photos. If they melt the snowflakes and drive the animal rights extremists apoplectic with rage…well just the thought makes my day!
Soft Kitty Warm Kitty Little ball of fur...hanging on my wall...Purrr Purrr Purrr

 

[Firebird]

Facebook, YouTube, Instagram-and those are just the big name sites. Go to YouTube and do a search for “headshots” for example and you will have plenty of inflammatory videos to use against hunters. If you live in LA and can hunt elephants hopefully you are supporting organizations that fight to protect everyone’s rights to hunt. Most outfitters do a great job cleaning up and respectfully posing hunters kills. But Sadly there are plenty of folks that go the other direction. . .remember the fish and game guy that made a family portrait out of dead baboons? Then throw in some falsehoods about “endangered” and pix of dead zoo friends and you have the makings of public outcry. We could all do better

 

[firehuntfish]

Hiding our pictures and cowering in the dark will not help us. If the anti's cant use our pictures against us then they will simply find another avenue of attack and nothing will change.

I could not agree more with you @matt85... !

I have some very strong opinions about this which I have shared in numerous other threads, and what Matt stated above is the short summary of my own thoughts. I will never apologize or be ashamed of being a hunter. Humans have been hunters for at least 250,000 years as best we can tell. There is a reason that cave walls depict scenes of our earliest ancestors with spears and bows in hand as opposed to garden tools. We have the science, history, and logic on our side while every single argument from the anti-hunting crowd is based purely on emotion. Unfortunately, in the world we live in today, emotion, and those who can display their emotions the loudest and most dramatically seem to garner the attention from the media. We need to take a page from that book and use it even more effectively.

Trying to fly under the radar is a mistake that we as hunters have collectively been making for too long... As most of us realize, reasoning with the fanatics is a waste of time. This is not where the future of hunting lies. We need to make our case to the vast majority of non-hunters who are for the most part, undecided, indifferent, and uneducated about the facts of hunting and it's vital role in conservation.

Love it or hate it, social media is an undeniable part of society that reaches the most people. We can curse it and waste a valuable opportunity, or use it to our benefit. With that, we do need to be careful in regard to the content of what we post. I will acknowledge that there are some among us that are doing a disservice to our cause with some of the stupid material that they post on public social media. I take the opportunity to comment in an attempt to educate them if possible, and I encourage all of you to do the same when you can...

My personal opinion is that when we post a trophy photo in a public medium, we have a great opportunity to tell the broader story, and we often leave out the most important parts that actually make the case for conservation through sustainable use hunting, along with all of the many other "pros" of hunting points that needs to be made. When we post photos outside of a friendly, like-minded environment (IE: AH.com), instead of just posting the trophy photo with no explanation, I usually post a series of photos that tell a more complete story including photos of what happens to the animal after it hits the salt. In doing this, we have never had a negative reaction even from some of our most squeamish friends. Even our most avid bunny-hugger "FB friends" will comment that they didn't realize that the meat was put to use in so many ways, and they were okay with that. We are by no means doing this to seek their approval, but to educate those that forget or choose not to acknowledge where the meat that they eat actually comes from.

The old cliche that a picture speaks a thousand words is still quite relevant and we should use it. When we illustrate feeding ourselves or other hungry people who would not otherwise have any protein to eat, you completely neutralize any emotional argument from the fanatics in the eyes of those who are undecided and uneducated yet open to our side of the argument.

Here's a typical example of what we try to include in our marketing efforts as well when we post photos from our own personal hunts. This should also be practiced in the hunting videos that we take as well.

 

[rookhawk]

I view all of this just like I view tattoos. (hear me out here)

What you post on the Internet are like tattoos. It's your life and you are able to make permanent decisions with your own life. However, if that tattoo (or hunting photo) injures your ability to go to a particular club to close a business deal or prevents you from getting a job to improve the quality of life of your family, then that becomes a problem.

Unlike a tattoo that only follows you in your life and is your 100% right as an American, there is a bit of a difference.

The hunting photos are going to end up being like pictures of you wearing a white robe and burning a cross, or goose-stepping to the songs of Wagner. This isn't just your life you're playing with at that point, its something that may haunt your children in the future. That's the problem if you have kids, the "sins of the father" may haunt them in the future. EVERYTHING on the Internet is forever. (go to the waybackmachine.org) It's what can happen to your progeny in the future for your choices that may live on after you die.

It's not that I agree with the antis, nor that I've given up my values, its that I don't want pictures to be my Internet legacy in 500 years. I want my words to be my legacy. I try to make reasoned arguments and thoughtful comments so that what I say is what must be quoted rather than a picture that is sensationalized to harm my heirs for things they did not do.

Please understand that I'm not judging anyone, or even judging tattoos. I'm a libertarian-leaning freedom lover that relishes that people have the right to do whatever they want provided it doesn't hurt anyone. My point is that we have to be careful when exercising our rights injures our families. Be careful. Be thoughtful.

 

[rookhawk]

In sort of related news, there is a new "stupid hunter of the year" award winner. Walter Palmer, America's favorite Cecil-killing dentist got embroiled again. He yet again was reckless with his pictures and the anti's have photos of him hunting something in Mongolia or Afghanistan. (Tahr, MarcoPolo, Arghali?)

All well and good, other than his family needs to live off his income from a dental practice. Kind of hard to do so when he keeps getting his ass handed to him by the antis over and over again for sloppy control over his hunting photos.

 

[Royal27]

I want my words to be my legacy. I try to make reasoned arguments and thoughtful comments so that what I say is what must be quoted rather than a picture that is sensationalized to harm my heirs for things they did not do.

So what happens when they begin to attack your words, which they will. Do you scramble and try and hide those too? No hunt reports? Have old hunt reports removed? Try and get rid of all of the words you felt were reasoned and thoughtful because others now don't think they are?

Terrorist attacks work, it's why there are terrorists. That doesn't mean that everyone should run and hide from them all. That is definitely a decision for each individual to make, and I won't criticize a person for making the decision either way, especially when all of the details aren't known.

 

[LivingTheDream]

I view all of this just like I view tattoos. (hear me out here)

What you post on the Internet are like tattoos. It's your life and you are able to make permanent decisions with your own life. However, if that tattoo (or hunting photo) injures your ability to go to a particular club to close a business deal or prevents you from getting a job to improve the quality of life of your family, then that becomes a problem.

Unlike a tattoo that only follows you in your life and is your 100% right as an American, there is a bit of a difference.

The hunting photos are going to end up being like pictures of you wearing a white robe and burning a cross, or goose-stepping to the songs of Wagner. This isn't just your life you're playing with at that point, its something that may haunt your children in the future. That's the problem if you have kids, the "sins of the father" may haunt them in the future. EVERYTHING on the Internet is forever. (go to the waybackmachine.org) It's what can happen to your progeny in the future for your choices that may live on after you die.

It's not that I agree with the antis, nor that I've given up my values, its that I don't want pictures to be my Internet legacy in 500 years. I want my words to be my legacy. I try to make reasoned arguments and thoughtful comments so that what I say is what must be quoted rather than a picture that is sensationalized to harm my heirs for things they did not do.

Please understand that I'm not judging anyone, or even judging tattoos. I'm a libertarian-leaning freedom lover that relishes that people have the right to do whatever they want provided it doesn't hurt anyone. My point is that we have to be careful when exercising our rights injures our families. Be careful. Be thoughtful.

So to be clear you think that hunters in 500 years will be compared to Nazis or the Klan? Knowing we have forward thinkers like yourself in our ranks makes be feel good about the future of hunting.

Also nice you to throw Walter Palmer under the bus, that was in Mongolia and those hunts are critical to funding conservation efforts. I was in the room when the wild sheep foundation signed an MOU with the Mongolia government regarding using the license sales to fund sheep conservation efforts in Mongolia.

The pictures aren't the problem, we are doing a bad job of messaging. See how the picture started a conversation between us, you (like an anti) called him an idiot, I (like a hunter) explain the conservation efforts from license sales (over 100k for that license).

To your point I don't use Facebook, they are collecting and selling your data, but honestly my business is my business, I think the SCI awards and Instaheros are hurting hunting but we have the wrong narrative around it, it's not the pictures.

 

[norfolk shooter]

In sort of related news, there is a new "stupid hunter of the year" award winner. Walter Palmer, America's favorite Cecil-killing dentist got embroiled again. He yet again was reckless with his pictures and the anti's have photos of him hunting something in Mongolia or Afghanistan. (Tahr, MarcoPolo, Arghali?)

All well and good, other than his family needs to live off his income from a dental practice. Kind of hard to do so when he keeps getting his ass handed to him by the antis over and over again for sloppy control over his hunting photos.

I saw them photos of Palmer in the UK press. Slight problem was you cant see his head! How do we/they/anybody know for sure it was him?? If you ask me it just some shit the antis made up as it coincided with 5 years since Cecil. In the UK the antis have even written a song about Cecil. The lion was named after Cecil Rhodes FFS. Do the same liberal cockwombles know this??

Im getting sick of all the pro choice rhetoric they put out. Because if your choice dosnt sit in there agenda its the wrong choice. What happened to mutual respect? Thats right it died with the advent of of the liberal softness and pussyfication of men. I genuinely wonder if one of the anti hunting chaps would be willing to go toe to toe with a hunter? Hold on they probably would and then say how nasty we all are and he got hurt.

The thing I find amusing is the antis say hunting in Africa is colonial. What the antis do by telling the African nations how to manage there nature is the embodiment of colonialism. "We have long gone but you WILL do as we tell you!!!" Its all rather hypocritical

 

[firehuntfish]

The hunting photos are going to end up being like pictures of you wearing a white robe and burning a cross, or goose-stepping to the songs of Wagner. This isn't just your life you're playing with at that point, its something that may haunt your children in the future. That's the problem if you have kids, the "sins of the father" may haunt them in the future. EVERYTHING on the Internet is forever. (go to the waybackmachine.org) It's what can happen to your progeny in the future for your choices that may live on after you die.

I think you are making a hyperbolic assumption here with the Klan and Hitler comparisons... Nevertheless, if that is what this world has come to by then, so be it. I will live contently and unapologetically with my choices as a proud hunter, fisherman, and conservationist. I absolutely and unequivocally refuse to relent to these cancel-culture fanatics. Hunters and hunting is as much a part of the human DNA as anything. There are those of us who choose to embrace and celebrate it and those who choose to deny it... For some, hunting and fishing is a hobby or pleasant past-time. For my family, it is a way of life that we will never forfeit...

I do understand that their are many among us who have a lot to lose as you alluded to... That is an unfortunate reality in today's world. I feel the most empathy for those folks that feel they have to hide their passion or deal with the potential backlash in their employment or with family members. In my opinion, we have allowed this to happen by trying to stay off the radar of these fanatics. For generations, we have collectively opted to be reactive instead of pro-active every time we are confronted with the anit's false narratives and the media's biased coverage.... Given what we have seen play out in this country over the last several months, how is that strategy working out for us so far? We used to ask ourselves if they come for hunting and succeed, what will they come for next? I think we already have our answers...