Canned Killing II

by David Petersen

Blog Last Updated; 2/23/2009

As expected, not everyone was delighted with my bile-filled rant against the canned killing of pen-raised "wild" game on commercial game farms, which formed the topic of my previous rant, I mean blog in these virtual pages. So let's have at it again, summarizing and responding to some of the most common, and in many cases at least superficially reasonable, criticisms to my criticism of canned shooting operations and participants:

Criticism: According to some defenders of the practice, because I condemn canned killing on the grounds of both its immorality and its hurtful impacts to the image of true hunting in the nonhunting public mind, I am an "elitist snob."

Response: Happily, that puts me in such good company as almost all legitimate hunter's organization (specifically excluding Safari Club International, a collection of fat-cat losers who give one another awards for killing captive game and are the primary supporters of canned killing operations), as well as (according to surveys) an overwhelming majority of hunters and hunters' organizations today.

Criticism: Live and let live. One man's trash is another man's treasure. If it's legal, it's ethical. In this busy world, we don't all have time to enjoy a traditional backcountry fair-chase hunt.

Response: Across my years of working to uphold the highest hunting ethics and get sportsmen to understand that the future of hunting lies in the conservation of public wildlife habitat, I've heard these words ? "If it's legal, it's ethical" -- hundreds of times. Yet these aren't arguments at all. Rather, they are intellectual and moral blindfolds. Market hunting once was legal in America, and so was slavery. To proclaim that manmade laws are the highest standard of morality is to say that no higher human values exist ? no Golden Rule, no karma, no innate desire to better ourselves. Anything goes so long as you won't get arrested for it.

So far as the assertion that a person being too busy to hunt fair-chase morally permits him to buy his "trophy" ? well, forgive me for being candid, but in other realms of life we'd call it prostitution.

And so on. Overall, I'm disappointed that no one is yet put up a stimulating and informed argument against the substantive assertions of my rant, such as the opening paragraph: "Any way we choose to cut or elaborate the term ?fair chase,' in order to have any logical or moral meaningfulness whatsoever, the definition must include ?the pursuit of wild, free-ranging game animals.'"

Nor is commercial killing the only dark side to elk ranching. Consider these outtakes from a conversation I had with Dr. Valerius Geist, the world's leading authority on elk and other deer species (as printed in Traditional Bowhunter magazine)?

Dave: What are your feelings regarding game farming and CWD [chronic wasting disease] as threats to wild elk and democratic hunting in North America?

Dr. Geist: We still don't have the ability to identify the presence of CWD in carrier animals. Given this weakness, the only logical way to assure that CWD will not be further spread to wild populations is to get rid of all artificial routes. And the primary artificial route for spreading CWD is game farming, which involves the constant shipment of animals hither and yon.

Dave: Aside from its role in the spread of diseases, what are your views on the game farming industry?

Dr. Geist: Game farming is utterly incompatible with the maintenance of free-roaming wildlife on this continent, standing in direct opposition to all four basic tenets of the North American Model of wildlife conservation and democratic hunting: (1) Wildlife "ownership" must be held exclusively in the public domain. The corollary is that wildlife must never become private property. (2) In order to save North American wildlife from extinction, we long ago outlawed market hunting and commercial trafficking in dead wildlife. But game farming depends utterly on developing a huge and growing legal market in dead wildlife, throwing the doors open to illegal marketing of wild animals as well. (3) The allocation of the public wildlife resource among private citizens must be regulated by due process of law. It's the American way. It's a way that works for all. And what does game farming give us? Wildlife allocation by financial privilege. Canned hunts make a mockery of ethical democratic hunting. (4) Fair chase! Neither the U.S. nor Canada allows the frivolous killing of wildlife. But what restraints against frivolous killing exist in the private sector? None. A canned shooter may buy as many animals as he or she wants and kill them for whatever reason, in whatever fashion, no matter how frivolous, immoral and disgusting.