Free the Animals !!
Dressed in camouflage, stalking and killing animals for "sport". Sounds more like terrorism, doesn't it? Hunting, which some would have us believe is a form of sport and recreation, is nothing more than an assault on animals and nature. The fact is, less than five percent of the U.S. population hunts. Notwithstanding, on federal land alone, hunters kill more than 200 million animals yearly - crippling, orphaning, and harassing millions more. The annual death toll in the U.S. includes 42 million mourning doves, 30 million squirrels, 28 million quail, 25 million rabbits, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, 6 million deer, and thousands of geese, bears, moose, elk, antelope, swans, cougars, turkeys, wolves, foxes, coyotes, bobcats, boars, and other woodland creatures.
(Compiled by The Fund for Animals with data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.)
Without question, hunters have put forth a myriad of justifications for their cruelty. Perhaps the most ridiculous however, is that hunters play a vital role in controlling the population of wildlife. What their tiny little minds fail to grasp is that the cause of virtually all wildlife population problems can be attributed directly to the State Wildlife Agencies who pander to the financial interests of the hunting industry. Irresponsible State Wildlife Agencies have upset the balance of nature and disrupted migratory patterns thereby creating the overpopulation issue in the first place. Hunters would like us to believe that the overpopulation of a species is inhumane because many animals will die of starvation and disease if they aren't "managed" the hunters. In effect they are arguing that they are doing the animals a favor by shooting them. This is peculiar, since dying of starvation or disease is not the fate of every animal that isn't shot by a hunter.
The reality is that overpopulation is beneficial to the hunting industry as a tool for putting forth their propaganda. It allows them to tout hunting as a viable means of population control. IF YOU ARE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT A PROBLEM, THE SIMPLEST SOLUTION IS NOT TO CREATE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. The argument that without hunters, animals would overpopulate their habitats is ludicrous. Such nonsense begs the question; "What did all these animals do before there hunters kept them in check?" Wildlife does not need humans to survive. That is abundantly clear. Therefore the myth had to be invented to justify the argument that humans must maintain "control" over nature.
Federal Wildlife Agencies have historically been controlled, if not dominated by those who hunt, trap, and kill animals for recreation. The very fact that they are called "Fish and Game" departments reflects the attitude that wildlife is a "resource" to be "managed", "thinned", "harvested", etc. These agencies depend almost entirely on the revenue generated from hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses, and the tax on hunting and fishing equipment. As a result, they cater to the hunters and their interests, ensure continued revenue to the agency, and ignore the 94% of Americans who choose not to hunt and kill wildlife. Those who enjoy viewing, photographing, and observing wildlife have had very little, if any say in the policies and regulations concerning our nation's wildlife and their habitats. One big reason for this disparity is the source of funding for wildlife agency budgets. In 1937, the U.S. Congress passed the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act to help finance State Wildlife Agencies, by setting a tax on guns, ammunition and fishing equipment. One factor in the way these funds are allocated is by the number of hunters in each state. The more hunters buying licenses, the more funds a state receives. States therefore have a clear incentive to kiss the ass of hunters because they will receive a larger piece of the pie.
One way in which individual states ensure that there will always be more hunters is by sponsoring "Youth Hunting Days", which are designed to put guns in the hands of children and teach them that killing animals is fun. Is it really any wonder why animal abuse abounds in a country that by it's very laws condones and supports the recreational slaughter of innocent animals. HUNTING IS NOTHING MORE THAN ANIMAL ABUSE, EVEN THOUGH HUNTERS WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE THAT WHEN THERE IS A PROFIT INVOLVED WE SHOULD EXCUSE THE CRUELTY.
Hunters would also like the non-hunting public to believe that very few, if any animals are wounded and left to die slowly and painfully of blood loss or starvation. The cruelty of wounded animals is as simple as visiting any wildlife rehabilitation center within a short distance of any hunting area. The animals that end up in these facilities are proof alone of the cruelty of hunting. According to the Animal Protection Institute, one study found a wounding rate for waterfowl of 30%. You'll never find a single hunter to own up to the fact that 3 out of 10 birds are wounded and left to die. Well someone is responsible for the millions every year, but that is a responsibility the hunters will never acknowledge.
As more and more of the non-hunting public wake up, we begin to realize that the self-serving arguments and lies of hunters are getting more preposterous. HUNTING IS ANIMAL ABUSE. Under any other circumstances, hunters would be prosecuted for what they do to animals. It is time to stop actively supporting and passively allowing hunting, and time to stigmatize it. It is time to stop being conned by hunters, time to stop pampering and coddling them, time to stop allowing hunting to be credible by calling it "sport" and "recreation." Simply put, "killing for the hell of it" is not acceptable behavior in a civilized society. The good news is that, nationwide, the number of hunters are declining, and the hunters know it. We can continue to reduce those numbers by challenging the myths that hunters would have us believe. Very few things are entirely right and entirely wrong. However, stalking and killing animals in the name of "sport", "management", "conservation", or whatever other euphemism the hunters come up with, is simply wrong.
The info above is based on US statistics. For more info on fact and figures in Africa, click on the link below :
Animal Rights Africa
(Compiled by The Fund for Animals with data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.)
Without question, hunters have put forth a myriad of justifications for their cruelty. Perhaps the most ridiculous however, is that hunters play a vital role in controlling the population of wildlife. What their tiny little minds fail to grasp is that the cause of virtually all wildlife population problems can be attributed directly to the State Wildlife Agencies who pander to the financial interests of the hunting industry. Irresponsible State Wildlife Agencies have upset the balance of nature and disrupted migratory patterns thereby creating the overpopulation issue in the first place. Hunters would like us to believe that the overpopulation of a species is inhumane because many animals will die of starvation and disease if they aren't "managed" the hunters. In effect they are arguing that they are doing the animals a favor by shooting them. This is peculiar, since dying of starvation or disease is not the fate of every animal that isn't shot by a hunter.
The reality is that overpopulation is beneficial to the hunting industry as a tool for putting forth their propaganda. It allows them to tout hunting as a viable means of population control. IF YOU ARE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT A PROBLEM, THE SIMPLEST SOLUTION IS NOT TO CREATE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. The argument that without hunters, animals would overpopulate their habitats is ludicrous. Such nonsense begs the question; "What did all these animals do before there hunters kept them in check?" Wildlife does not need humans to survive. That is abundantly clear. Therefore the myth had to be invented to justify the argument that humans must maintain "control" over nature.
Federal Wildlife Agencies have historically been controlled, if not dominated by those who hunt, trap, and kill animals for recreation. The very fact that they are called "Fish and Game" departments reflects the attitude that wildlife is a "resource" to be "managed", "thinned", "harvested", etc. These agencies depend almost entirely on the revenue generated from hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses, and the tax on hunting and fishing equipment. As a result, they cater to the hunters and their interests, ensure continued revenue to the agency, and ignore the 94% of Americans who choose not to hunt and kill wildlife. Those who enjoy viewing, photographing, and observing wildlife have had very little, if any say in the policies and regulations concerning our nation's wildlife and their habitats. One big reason for this disparity is the source of funding for wildlife agency budgets. In 1937, the U.S. Congress passed the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act to help finance State Wildlife Agencies, by setting a tax on guns, ammunition and fishing equipment. One factor in the way these funds are allocated is by the number of hunters in each state. The more hunters buying licenses, the more funds a state receives. States therefore have a clear incentive to kiss the ass of hunters because they will receive a larger piece of the pie.
One way in which individual states ensure that there will always be more hunters is by sponsoring "Youth Hunting Days", which are designed to put guns in the hands of children and teach them that killing animals is fun. Is it really any wonder why animal abuse abounds in a country that by it's very laws condones and supports the recreational slaughter of innocent animals. HUNTING IS NOTHING MORE THAN ANIMAL ABUSE, EVEN THOUGH HUNTERS WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE THAT WHEN THERE IS A PROFIT INVOLVED WE SHOULD EXCUSE THE CRUELTY.
Tradition holds in some hunting circles that a son, upon his first successful kill, has the blood of the animal smeared on his face by his father.
Hunters would also like the non-hunting public to believe that very few, if any animals are wounded and left to die slowly and painfully of blood loss or starvation. The cruelty of wounded animals is as simple as visiting any wildlife rehabilitation center within a short distance of any hunting area. The animals that end up in these facilities are proof alone of the cruelty of hunting. According to the Animal Protection Institute, one study found a wounding rate for waterfowl of 30%. You'll never find a single hunter to own up to the fact that 3 out of 10 birds are wounded and left to die. Well someone is responsible for the millions every year, but that is a responsibility the hunters will never acknowledge.
As more and more of the non-hunting public wake up, we begin to realize that the self-serving arguments and lies of hunters are getting more preposterous. HUNTING IS ANIMAL ABUSE. Under any other circumstances, hunters would be prosecuted for what they do to animals. It is time to stop actively supporting and passively allowing hunting, and time to stigmatize it. It is time to stop being conned by hunters, time to stop pampering and coddling them, time to stop allowing hunting to be credible by calling it "sport" and "recreation." Simply put, "killing for the hell of it" is not acceptable behavior in a civilized society. The good news is that, nationwide, the number of hunters are declining, and the hunters know it. We can continue to reduce those numbers by challenging the myths that hunters would have us believe. Very few things are entirely right and entirely wrong. However, stalking and killing animals in the name of "sport", "management", "conservation", or whatever other euphemism the hunters come up with, is simply wrong.
It is an unfortunate fact that those people who are most eloquent in their demand for the conservation of animals are often those most eager to violate animal life at the first opportunity. Andew Linzey (1951-)
HUNTING IN THE NEWS
"Man Shoots Brother, Mistaking Him for an Elk "A man has shot his brother dead, mistaking him for an elk. The 21-year-old victim was hunting in the forests near his home when the accident happened. The light was poor and the man's brother mistook him for an animal. He died before an ambulance arrived. "One of them fired a shot at what he thought was the elk," Police said. Reports do not say whether police expect to charge the man.
"Son Mistakes Dad for Pig, Shoots Him Dead"A teenager shot dead his father after mistaking him for a pig, police say. The 17-year-old mistook his father, 58, for a pig snuffling about in bushes. They were out hunting wild pigs on their property. A preliminary murder investigation has been launched but the youngster has not yet been charged. The father and son were chasing the animals across their fields with guns. But the son opened fire as he saw "something that looked like an animal lurking behind a bush." To his horror he then discovered he had shot his father, who died on the spot.
The info above is based on US statistics. For more info on fact and figures in Africa, click on the link below :
Animal Rights Africa
-
free the animals
-
Punk Comic:
P.C. (Positively Crusty)