[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

Title:The Hunting Notesfile
Notice:Registry #7, For Sale #15, Success #270
Moderator:SALEM::PAPPALARDO
Created:Wed Sep 02 1987
Last Modified:Tue Jun 03 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1561
Total number of notes:17784

594.0. "'60 Minutes' 1-21-90" by SA1794::CHARBONND (Mail SPWACY::CHARBONND) Mon Jan 22 1990 10:15

    Did anyone catch '60 Minutes' last night on CBS ?
    
    There was a segment on zoos selling excess animals,
    and many of these animals winding up on 'game ranches'
    instead of other zoos. They has a shot of some guy with
    a gun about to shoot some sort of antelope (oryx, maybe)
    for which privilege he payed $4000. This 'hunting' took
    place on some fenced-in land in Texas. (It took this clown
    four shots to down the damn thing.)
    
    A lot of stuff apalled me. 
    
    1. That somebody would pay $4000 to shoot some goofy looking 
       critter.
    2. That anybody would want a 'trophy' not taken by fair-chase
       methods.
    3. That these 'game ranches' are willing to cater to these
       people. 
    4. That such people call themselves hunters.
    5. The picture of 'hunters' that the public gets from this
       sort of thing.
    6. The implication in the show that *zoos* are morally
       proper, but 'hunting' was not. 
    
    I don't call any person with a gun and a license a hunter.
    That is, to me, a badge of honor, implying the willingness
    to learn all about one's quarry, and pursue it fairly, in
    it's native habitat, with no guarantee of success. Calling
    this guy shooting a penned animal a 'hunter' is am insult
    to me, one that would get you a bloody nose. If this guy
    called *himself* a hunter, I'd bloody *his* nose. 
    
    As for these fenced-in, no-game-no-pay operations, I think
    they are a disgrace. But I feel the same way about zoos,
    where animals are allowed to breed to excess, gawked at
    by people too lazy to get out in the woods, killed or
    sold to these game ranches, and generally treated with
    none of the respect we hunters show for our quarry.
    
        Dana
    
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
594.1Another CBS head game for the public?SKIVT::WENERMon Jan 22 1990 15:2215
    
    	Yeah I saw it Dana, and like you, I was severly disimpressed.
    I had mixed feelings about it though and as much as I didn't like
    to hear what happened to the animals, I also didn't like what CBS
    did to slap hunting!  They are certainly using a situation like this
    to warp the puplic's mind against hunting.  I feel like writing them
    a letter asking them what their point was...  
    	As unethical as it may seem, I almost think the animals have a 
    better life while they live on the game farm. At least they're not
    all cooped up in a cage and can roam a bit.   I agree, too, that paying
    4000.00 for a head in this instance is killing, not hunting, and I
    certainly would want no part of it, whether I could afford it or not!
    
      - Rob
    
594.2it's all a $$ gameINDEV2::GSMITHI need two of everythingMon Jan 22 1990 15:2515
    Dana..
    
    I feel, for the most part, the same way you do about those so-called
    hunters.
    
    Keep an open mind on zoos, however. There is a lot of *good* work
    being done today at many zoos. Endangered species are being bread
    and some released to the wild, natural (as possible) settings are
    being built, rather than 'cages', etc. We still have a ways to go,
    but we are learning a lot.
    
    Of course, there are zoos that are still a 100 years behind also.
    
    	Smitty
    
594.3TELL THEM.JUPITR::MILLSMon Jan 22 1990 16:031
    IF YOU HURRY WE CAN HEAR YOUR LETTER BEING READ ON NEXT WEEKS SHOW.
594.4WRITE 'EM BACK, NOW!!!CSCOA5::HUFFSTETLERReckless AbandonerMon Jan 22 1990 18:5116
Dana,

-1 was right on!  Send your comments to the CBS to straighten 
them out!  It seems like everyone in the press these days is so 
far to the right (or left, whichever is the most "liberal") that 
the only thing ever presented about hunting or gun ownership is 
negative.  ABC is running a series in the near future (maybe 
starting tonite) called "Guns."  In their ad to plug the show, 
they would show a picture of someone with a caption like "Killed 
on his doorstep" or "Died after being shot in the street."  The 
whole ad had a "gun ownership is wrong" flavor to it, and seemed 
to imply that if no one could own guns that these people would 
still be alive.  I guess I'll wait to see the show before I flame 
a letter to ABC, though.

Scott
594.5BOMBE::BONINTue Jan 23 1990 17:0111
         I'm sensitive to antigun and antihunting propaganda in the
         media, and I fail to see how last Sunday's 60 Minutes segment
         was antihunting. It's the zookeepers who looked bad. They
         tell the public that surplus animals are sent to good homes.
         But in turns out that giraffes end up in people's back yards
         and exotic game animals get shot on Texas game farms. The San
         Diego zoo was even accused of deliberately overbreeding so
         that they could have lots of cute little baby animals to draw
         in the paying visitors.

         Doug 
594.6I saw no antigun/antihunting....RIPPLE::CORBETTKEKENNY CHINOOKTue Jan 23 1990 22:109
    I have to agree with .5.
    
    It appears as though the zookeepers were allowing the dealers full
    control over what was done and the game farms provided the most
    profit.  I used to live in San Diego, and the zoo is highly thought
    of.  It will be interesting to see what falls out due to this report.
    
    
    Ken
594.7A Set-up?SKIVT::WENERWed Jan 24 1990 10:2515
    
    	re:  last two,
    
    		To me, I guess, it seemed that they added subtle comments
    like "and it took the hunter 4 shots to kill it" that really didn't
    relate to their base story.  Also, I just thought that any anti or
    non-hunters might see this as more 'fuel for the fire' so to speak.
    Many anti-hunters I'm sure don't know the difference between real
    hunting and what was broadcast.  It seemed like a set-up in that 
    the story got everyone's emotions going over the animals' treatment
    and then they throw hunting in there to confuse matters.  Then 
    people may associate the improper treatment of animals with Hunting!
    
    - Maybe I'm being too picky?		- Rob
    
594.8paranoid? Who me?DECWET::HELSELLegitimate sporting purposeWed Jan 24 1990 15:3211
    I may just be paranoid, but I too perceived a hidden anti-hunting
    agenda, although it was subtle.  The thing about the 4 shot's, as .7 
    pointed out, had nothing to do with the story.  Also, why did we have
    to see the hunter stalking (?) the animal......to drum up sympathy?
    
    If it were greenpeace, we'd have seen the hunt drive 4 rounds into it
    with blood spurting in every direction, I'm sure.  I was surprised they
    didn't show the kill (?) and give the "please remove children from the
    room" message beforehand.
    
    /brett