Free: Contests & Raffles.
The anti-hunters have been using this stuff for over 2 decades. They understand the importance of manipulating the non hunting public's emotions.All HSUS and PETA campaigns ads and media are based upon emotional manipulation and shock factortime to turn the tables on themQuote from: AspenBud on May 29, 2013, 05:08:21 PMQuote from: Broker on May 29, 2013, 04:34:34 PMQuote from: JLS on May 29, 2013, 12:39:55 PMQuote from: Broker on May 28, 2013, 01:32:11 PMThe general public doesn't care about hunting or wolves, they care about their jobs, families, safety and comfort. The argument needs to be presented to the GP that wolves are needlessly cruel in their killing and sportsman are a far more efficient, humane way of controlling wildlife in a way they can understand.I agree the public needs educated. However, a wolf must kill or it dies, same as any predator. If humans don't kill we have other options. I much prefer wild game for the taste and health benefits, but if I had to I would purchase meat from a store.To argue to the general public that wolves are needlessly cruel, and humans are a much kinder way to die is a very bad tactic to take IMO. Do you really think a deer cares whether it's eaten by a pack of wolves, or ends up in my freezer? I doubt it. Maybe a more logical argument is to articulate how HUNTERS have brought back wildlife populations to where they are today through self imposed taxes to fund wildlife management. And as they have funded the wildlife populations, feel that they have a vested interest in being able to continue sustained harvest of these populations.I disagree with you on this one. The general public doesn't care how much money we put into conservation or the amount of wildlife habitat we have collectively saved as sportsman.You need to appeal to their emotions to cause them to move on an issue. Seeing a deer, elk or moose plucked away from it's mother in the most savage way will get them going if you offer them a more sanitary alternative. This tactic worked perfectly for the anti hunters when they banned leg hold traps, dogs and bait. Did you not see the commercials?Remember, these people like to eat meat, they just don't want to look into those soft brown eyes and do the killing themselves. They want to think their chickens are free range and happy before they end up in the bucket at KFC.I don't know how much time deer spend on the topic of their demise but I doubt very much a deer would prefer to be torn to shreds by a wolf vs just tipping over dead without notice from a hunter's bullet. Of course, I've never spoken with a deer about it's feelings so that's just a guess on my part. The animal rights people will just fire back with stuff like this...Eyewitness account of Elks being bowhunted caused shock and outrage by the publicand more. I think the public has a stronger stomach in regards to what happens in the wild than you think.In a lot of ways the public doesn't count in this, which is why we need to push for ways to keep the issue off the ballot and get the WDFW to manage them with data based on science, not emotion.
Quote from: Broker on May 29, 2013, 04:34:34 PMQuote from: JLS on May 29, 2013, 12:39:55 PMQuote from: Broker on May 28, 2013, 01:32:11 PMThe general public doesn't care about hunting or wolves, they care about their jobs, families, safety and comfort. The argument needs to be presented to the GP that wolves are needlessly cruel in their killing and sportsman are a far more efficient, humane way of controlling wildlife in a way they can understand.I agree the public needs educated. However, a wolf must kill or it dies, same as any predator. If humans don't kill we have other options. I much prefer wild game for the taste and health benefits, but if I had to I would purchase meat from a store.To argue to the general public that wolves are needlessly cruel, and humans are a much kinder way to die is a very bad tactic to take IMO. Do you really think a deer cares whether it's eaten by a pack of wolves, or ends up in my freezer? I doubt it. Maybe a more logical argument is to articulate how HUNTERS have brought back wildlife populations to where they are today through self imposed taxes to fund wildlife management. And as they have funded the wildlife populations, feel that they have a vested interest in being able to continue sustained harvest of these populations.I disagree with you on this one. The general public doesn't care how much money we put into conservation or the amount of wildlife habitat we have collectively saved as sportsman.You need to appeal to their emotions to cause them to move on an issue. Seeing a deer, elk or moose plucked away from it's mother in the most savage way will get them going if you offer them a more sanitary alternative. This tactic worked perfectly for the anti hunters when they banned leg hold traps, dogs and bait. Did you not see the commercials?Remember, these people like to eat meat, they just don't want to look into those soft brown eyes and do the killing themselves. They want to think their chickens are free range and happy before they end up in the bucket at KFC.I don't know how much time deer spend on the topic of their demise but I doubt very much a deer would prefer to be torn to shreds by a wolf vs just tipping over dead without notice from a hunter's bullet. Of course, I've never spoken with a deer about it's feelings so that's just a guess on my part. The animal rights people will just fire back with stuff like this...Eyewitness account of Elks being bowhunted caused shock and outrage by the publicand more. I think the public has a stronger stomach in regards to what happens in the wild than you think.In a lot of ways the public doesn't count in this, which is why we need to push for ways to keep the issue off the ballot and get the WDFW to manage them with data based on science, not emotion.
Quote from: JLS on May 29, 2013, 12:39:55 PMQuote from: Broker on May 28, 2013, 01:32:11 PMThe general public doesn't care about hunting or wolves, they care about their jobs, families, safety and comfort. The argument needs to be presented to the GP that wolves are needlessly cruel in their killing and sportsman are a far more efficient, humane way of controlling wildlife in a way they can understand.I agree the public needs educated. However, a wolf must kill or it dies, same as any predator. If humans don't kill we have other options. I much prefer wild game for the taste and health benefits, but if I had to I would purchase meat from a store.To argue to the general public that wolves are needlessly cruel, and humans are a much kinder way to die is a very bad tactic to take IMO. Do you really think a deer cares whether it's eaten by a pack of wolves, or ends up in my freezer? I doubt it. Maybe a more logical argument is to articulate how HUNTERS have brought back wildlife populations to where they are today through self imposed taxes to fund wildlife management. And as they have funded the wildlife populations, feel that they have a vested interest in being able to continue sustained harvest of these populations.I disagree with you on this one. The general public doesn't care how much money we put into conservation or the amount of wildlife habitat we have collectively saved as sportsman.You need to appeal to their emotions to cause them to move on an issue. Seeing a deer, elk or moose plucked away from it's mother in the most savage way will get them going if you offer them a more sanitary alternative. This tactic worked perfectly for the anti hunters when they banned leg hold traps, dogs and bait. Did you not see the commercials?Remember, these people like to eat meat, they just don't want to look into those soft brown eyes and do the killing themselves. They want to think their chickens are free range and happy before they end up in the bucket at KFC.I don't know how much time deer spend on the topic of their demise but I doubt very much a deer would prefer to be torn to shreds by a wolf vs just tipping over dead without notice from a hunter's bullet. Of course, I've never spoken with a deer about it's feelings so that's just a guess on my part.
Quote from: Broker on May 28, 2013, 01:32:11 PMThe general public doesn't care about hunting or wolves, they care about their jobs, families, safety and comfort. The argument needs to be presented to the GP that wolves are needlessly cruel in their killing and sportsman are a far more efficient, humane way of controlling wildlife in a way they can understand.I agree the public needs educated. However, a wolf must kill or it dies, same as any predator. If humans don't kill we have other options. I much prefer wild game for the taste and health benefits, but if I had to I would purchase meat from a store.To argue to the general public that wolves are needlessly cruel, and humans are a much kinder way to die is a very bad tactic to take IMO. Do you really think a deer cares whether it's eaten by a pack of wolves, or ends up in my freezer? I doubt it. Maybe a more logical argument is to articulate how HUNTERS have brought back wildlife populations to where they are today through self imposed taxes to fund wildlife management. And as they have funded the wildlife populations, feel that they have a vested interest in being able to continue sustained harvest of these populations.
The general public doesn't care about hunting or wolves, they care about their jobs, families, safety and comfort. The argument needs to be presented to the GP that wolves are needlessly cruel in their killing and sportsman are a far more efficient, humane way of controlling wildlife in a way they can understand.
