It almost seemed like WWE's Vince McMahon was hired to do the hype, which included a full-page ad in USA Today, on a pay-per-view debate titled "Should Hunting Be Banned?"
Had the two debaters, Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and Andrew Butler of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), squared off in a locked steel cage, it might have been worth $10 to watch.
But they were in England at London's Library of King's College, of all places, and the outcome of the debate was as predictable as a wrestling match: NRA, pro hunting; PETA, anti-hunting.
What now, a rematch?
This hunt-or-don't-hunt debate has gone on forever and it will continue forever. Or will it?
Instead of watching the debate, I spent the time reading both sides of the issue on the NRA and PETA Web sites. I was somewhat surprised to learn that PETA just might have the NRA pinned on the mat for a one count.
Both organizations clearly have youths in their crosshairs (oops, sorry PETA). The NRA is promoting take-a-kid-hunting and take-a-kid-fishing programs.
PETA is tugging at the kids' heartstrings, telling them that it's wrong to visit the zoo or attend a circus or a rodeo event because that is abuse and mistreatment to animals.
In fact, PETA gives tips to kids on how to tell their teachers that they don't want to take a school-sponsored trip to the zoo. Oh, and there are tips on how to get Mom and Dad on their anti-zoo bandwagon.
For the life of me, I don't understand why PETA opposes kids having a puppy or a kitty. Its policy is that all animals should be liberated.
That includes hamsters, bunnies, turtles, birds and goldfish.
The NRA clearly has a fight on its hands. Surveys show that fewer hunting, fishing and trapping licenses are sold each year.
To insure future license sales, Indiana's Department of Natural Resources (DNR) sponsors hunting and fishing programs for kids. PETA counters that by asking kids if they would imbed a hook through their dog's lip and reel it in, or snap a trap shut on their cat's foot and leave it to suffer for hours in the woods.
Where PETA gets a strong foothold with kids is the issue of hunting for trophy animals. It thrives on adverse publicity on "canned hunting," or the hunting of fenced animals that are no more than walking trophies.
Kyle Hupfer, Indiana's DNR director, will ask the next session of the General Assembly to pass legislation that would ban fenced hunting.
Last month, Hupfer ordered his staffers to rescue tigers, leopards, bears, a lion and a lemur living in filth in Shelby County.
Shooting fenced animals and allowing them to live in filth is fodder for PETA's propaganda.
After I studied the NRA and PETA Web site information, I went to other Web sites that promote the hunting of exotic animals.
If the NRA knows what's best for it, it will come out against the safari hunting of lions, leopards, hippos, zebras, elephants, baboons, cape buffalo, giraffes, crocodiles, wildcats, etc.
All of these African animals have prices on their heads, ranging from a 10-day, $14,500 elephant hunt to a 21-day, $39,800 lion, leopard and buffalo hunt.
Allowing the hunts is the business of Zambia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and Namibia. But killing the animals for the sake of a trophy head to hang on the wall is the ethical business of U.S. hunters. They should boycott it.
It can be explained to our kids and grandkids why it's acceptable to catch a fish or shoot a deer or a game bird, or why there's nothing wrong with having a pup, kitten or goldfish for a pet.
What our kids don't understand is why a wealthy person wants to use the money to kill an elephant, lion or leopard just for something to brag about.
Call Skip Hess at (317) 862-1994 or e-mail skiphess.outdoor@sbcglobal.net
No comments:
Post a Comment