It’s inevitable: When I post a story about hunting, we get some blowback. The complaints and accusations are always filled with logical fallacies and outright ignorance.
My new favorite is the, “I hate trophy hunters” crowd. I won’t do a deep dive on economics, conservation and sustainment that hunting provides. I have addressed that at length elsewhere. So let’s look at he logical fallacy of the anti-trophy-hunters.
Somehow they are OK with hunting and shooting animals as long as I, “eat the meat”. But they want me to throw away and waste the skull, hide and rack? Seriously? That right there just shows how ignorant the anti-hunters are.
One, I don’t know of any game animal that isn’t eaten. Even if they end up giving the meat away to fellow hunters and soup kitchens. Two, I don’t know where all these trophy hunters live that waste meat, because every place I’ve hunted doesn’t even allow such activity by law. And three, the only animal I have ever seen hunted and not eaten is coyotes.
And guess which animal the anti-hunter crowd always calls the authorities over “to shoot” after fluffy is snatched off their porch? Coyotes.
Wow. I would be embarrassed to be so urbane and ignorant that I don’t even understand the ecology of my own backyard. Every bird you see, every chipmunk that runs, every squirrel that climbs in your backyard is hunting. And being hunted.
Now for the photo posted above. Let’s discuss ethics. What is the best end of life outcome for the animal pictured here? To starve and dehydrate to death stuck in a rock? Literally be eaten alive from behind by a pack of coyotes when you’re old and sick? Or be shot by a hunter.
I’d rather be shot.
“Shooting Guns & Having Fun”