[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Controversial Hunting Topics (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 11/8/2015 10:29:24 PM EDT
| I'm writing a research paper on hunting and haven't decided on a specified topic for it yet. Besides basic gun control arguments, what are some topics about hunting that I could write about? Specifically, I need a topic with an opposing viewpoint to refute. I've thought about doing a generalized topic of "Should hunting be banned?" (extremely ease to say why it shouldn't but potentially too broad?). Also, I like the idea of "The Economic Benefits of Hunting", but I'm having trouble finding opposing views for this one. What are some other topics I should consider? |
|
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers.
Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. |
|
Poaching Running dogs Bag limits. Waterfowl is a touchy subject as it's overall and then by specific species. Electronic calls vs. non electronic calls. Again a waterfowl specific topic. Disturbing sea grasses/vegetation with surface drives/long tails. Currently an up and coming issue specific to waterfowl hunting. Toxic vs. Non-toxic shot. People are still asshurt 25 years later. ETA:Not sure why my computer put poaching and running dogs next to each other. I didn't type it that way. |
| Long range hunting is somewhat to very controversial depending on who you ask. A side topic that is not necessarily controversial is the steep rise in the lethality of the modern hunter. Compound bows, laser range finders, modern muzzle loaders that shoot like rifles to 300 yards, modern optics, modern bullet construction, etc have made us way more deadly than our grandpaws. |
|
How Fish & Game manages tags and herd size.
IIRC, the ideal is to have the annual hunt harvest only the number of animals that would die in the winter kill. Very humane. Might make liberals sympathetic. Or talk about the economics of hunting. Retail, tag fees, etc. lotsa environmental $$$ come from tag fees. |
|
Quoted:
Long range hunting is somewhat to very controversial depending on who you ask. A side topic that is not necessarily controversial is the steep rise in the lethality of the modern hunter. Compound bows, laser range finders, modern muzzle loaders that shoot like rifles to 300 yards, modern optics, modern bullet construction, etc have made us way more deadly than our grandpaws. And yet we have more game than at any time since man came to this continent. |
|
Quoted:
The pros and cons of trophy hunting and how it actually helps a species survive This. Big game trophy hunting, mainly African big game hunting, seems to be more and more scrutinized these days. What most folks don't realize is unless those animals hold monetary value to the locals they will be poached into extinction. If you are interested in researching the subject, Steven Rinella has a few articles (and podcasts) about it. Also there are some Joe Rogan Podcasts that address the issue. Look for the ones with Corey Knowlton and Jim Shockey. |
|
Anything hunting of fishery related should include a discussion of the common property externality, aka the tragedy of the commons. ETA: Wildlife are a valuable resource to be carefully managed. Wildlife is worthless if gone, and worthless if unexploitable. For example, a well managed African safari system benefits African governments, the locals who provide guiding services, etc. No hunting makes lions a pest that should be exterminated with extreme prejudice. |
|
Quoted:
High Fences Feeders Difference between shooting and hunting. Plenty of feuding on those topics. All of that boils down to "sporting" behavior. Or what is "fair" to the prey. Which is about as subjective as you can get. So there's about a million different opinions about what is or isn't sporting. Or even if we should even care about sporting. Honestly, I'm ok with people being allowed to hunt deer with machine guns, assuming they can do it safely. |
|
Quoted:
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers. Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. |
|
Quoted:
Long range hunting is somewhat to very controversial depending on who you ask. A side topic that is not necessarily controversial is the steep rise in the lethality of the modern hunter. Compound bows, laser range finders, modern muzzle loaders that shoot like rifles to 300 yards, modern optics, modern bullet construction, etc have made us way more deadly than our grandpaws. Long range is a good idea. Everybody makes one shot kills at 800 yards. |
|
Quoted:
Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers. Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. Landlocked puic property, specifically in Wyoming is a huuuuge issue. |
|
Tree stands and ground blinds vs. still hunting or stalking.
Steel/"non-toxic" shot vs. lead. Bait vs. no bait. Running deer with hounds vs. not. Stocking and put-and-take vs. not (although that seems to be more a fish thing than a hunting thing.) If you want to stretch out into fishing, catch-and-release vs. catch-and-keep has spawned more internet hatred, chaos, drama, and bullshit than beans vs. no beans. And the only answer I can give you to any of my suggestions is that "Colorado is not Illinois." |
|
Quoted:
Landlocked puic property, specifically in Wyoming is a huuuuge issue. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers. Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. Landlocked puic property, specifically in Wyoming is a huuuuge issue. How much land are we talking about and where? It would be hilarious if someone with the money to do so started flying in with a helicopter. 
|
|
Quoted:
How much land are we talking about and where? It would be hilarious if someone with the money to do so started flying in with a helicopter. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers. Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. Landlocked puic property, specifically in Wyoming is a huuuuge issue. How much land are we talking about and where? It would be hilarious if someone with the money to do so started flying in with a helicopter. It already happens in MT. There are folks that rent helicopters to drop them in landlocked BLM land for elk hunts. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens in WY as well. |
|
Hunting laws vs. hunting ethics.
My real life scenario was, while driving in area close to (but not on) our lease, noticed a yearling deer 20 yards off the road. The deer had obviously broken one if not both rear legs and was trying to slither away using it's front legs only. Buddy and I both knew the right thing to do would be to shoot it from the road or jump the fence and cut it's throat. Either action would have been illegal, so we left the suffering animal to wait for the coyotes. We debated and argued, tried without luck to reach the land owner, and decided to stay safe legally. It still bothers me that we left it to suffer. |
|
Quoted:
It already happens in MT. There are folks that rent helicopters to drop them in landlocked BLM land for elk hunts. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens in WY as well. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Transferring federal lands to the states, or selling them outright to oil companies or developers. Like Colorado did, well more specifically the BLM sold land to Shell Oil with stipulations about public access. Shell sold to a developer/ rich dude who intends to turn it into a private reserve, shutting down all public access. Trust me, just mentioning it probably nuked your thread. Public access is a big one around here. It is getting harder to gain access to prime hunting areas. Farmers/ranchers are locking up land and leasing it to outfitters who cater to nonresident hunters. Essentially profiting from sale of public property (wildlife is considered public property) when the public is not able to access it. Landlocked puic property, specifically in Wyoming is a huuuuge issue. How much land are we talking about and where? It would be hilarious if someone with the money to do so started flying in with a helicopter. It already happens in MT. There are folks that rent helicopters to drop them in landlocked BLM land for elk hunts. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens in WY as well. Yes it does. Another fun issue is how the advent of GPS and modern mapping allows people to access formerly inaccessible property that ranchers just assumed would always be there's alone. Look up checkerboard hunting in Wyoming. LOL. |
| How about exposing the truth about how hunters contribute more toward preservation of habitats, health of animal populations, maintaining public access to wilderness areas than all the anti hunting groups combined. Most people overlook the fact that us hunters and fishermen keep the animals healthy and the lands available for their other non-hunting/fishing exploits. |