10/04© Ronald L. Moody (2004)
All rights reserved.
Reprinted here with permission.

Politics and Hunting - Trivality Torn
From a Poacher’s Eyes

“Whoever shall kill a stag, a wild boar, or even a hare, shall have his eyes torn out.” (from the old Norman game laws)

Yes - politics mattered to hunters in merry olde England under the rule of William I, the Norman king who first conquered the country in 1066 then re-wrote Britain’s Anglo-Saxon game laws to suit himself.

While fines and forfeitures were more common than floggings and torture in the origins of English common law, the ordinary citizen of the time was never in doubt that the power to make the rules was a crucial (even life-threatening) aspect of the hunter’s path.

English poachers still poached, of course. Then and now, the right to hunt, far from being a matter of trivial recreation, has been a political challenge worth the fighting and dying. In the end, however, British hunters found the majority of their game species extinct and access to the remainder open only to the lordly rich. They had won the political hunting battle only to lose the political conservation war.

Trivial, however, is precisely the value given by the typical American hunter to the politics of hunting in our republic. Three generations of incessant advertising of guns, gadgets and trophy fantasies have produced a consumer hunting culture in which decision-making and civic leadership are ignored in favor of a race in which “he who dies with the most toys (or trophies) wins.” The hook and bullet press (made free to be trivial by a political activity 219 years ago) is at the heart of this American travesty.

I predict that 2004 will be the year in which American hunters make political decisions that, irrevocably, will decide the issue of the political conservation war on this side of the Atlantic. You may remember I said that.

American hunters, like United State citizens in general, display a weak, narrow, often self-serving understanding of the word ‘politics’. Most Americans have a clear image of military bravery in battle; it becomes easy for them to believe patriotic fervor in time of war is what citizenship is all about. Lost in this perception is the depth of guts and grit demanded of a free people in order to govern the peace.

Politics is about getting and using power within a society of people: it is about the power to make the rules that govern our personal lives and shape our world. Those are vital concerns for all persons and all walks of life. My astonishment, however, is reserved for hunters and anglers who somehow have failed to notice that their sport is nothing more than a political activity conducted in a wild setting (or that the wild setting is the product of a political process).

I suppose, theoretically, Daniel Boone roaming alone in the Kentucky wilderness was free of political concerns as to what he could shoot and when (until he met a Shawnee war party bent on enforcing their tribal ‘no trespassing’ policy). Pretty much every other American nimrod from the Pilgrims forward has operated within some set of social interventions derived from political decisions.

2004 would be a major election year at any rate because the Presidency is on the ballot along with the Congress. The stark contrasts offered this year by the records of the two major political parties, however, make this election a turning point. Not since Theodore Roosevelt ran for his first elected term a hundred years ago has the ballot presented such a watershed decision for wildlife conservation and the future availability of hunting opportunity for ordinary people. Where hunting and angling in the United States is concerned this election is the big one for the next hundred years.

My essay is a non-partisan declaration of political peril. My purpose simply is to make hunters pay attention to the facts of life in our republic. But, I will tell you where to go to look for the evidence you can use to decide your own actions.

In U.S. elections (and the Presidency is a prime example) the personality of the candidates dominates the TV screen. But the names and faces of the candidates have secondary importance for the actual use of power. The important divide between candidates is largely the difference in the people they will hire to manage our public lands in particular, and the environment in general and the judges they will appoint.

The basic need that hunters have of their government is to provide for existence of abundant wild game and fish on large areas of natural lands and streams, which are affordably available to the public. The hunter’s great political problem is that meeting this need is connected to every aspect of law regulating the environment, extractive industries, and land use policy. No clear boundary exists for the hunter to decide where her/his hunting heritage is affected and where it is not over a broad range of laws and government actions.

Beyond such complexity, however, the great unrelenting truth is that who you vote for on November 2nd will shape the quantity and quality of hunting and angling opportunity available to you and future generations – period, end of fact.

Election day results amounts to 90 percent of all the conservation that will happen for the next four years. All the legislative lobbying, NEPA commenting, ballot initiatives, lawsuits and general advocacy we do adds up only to the remaining 10 percent.

You need look no farther than the ongoing stream of agency actions to decide whether your hunting future is headed in the right direction. Read the news stories concerning national forests, state lands and parks, national wildlife refuges and federal BLM lands with an eye for how the actions in the news will affect your hunting hopes and plans. Compare the policy record of the incumbent administration and the promises of the challenger to the precedent of previous administrations such as those of Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

Rather than allow campaigns to snow you with glittering generalities get on the phone or go to their websites and ask hard, pointed questions about your access to public lands, habitat quality and other specific concerns.

Be specific; be stubborn. If you are registered to vote you are the boss.

The Internet holds most of the information that exists on political issues concerning hunters. Most such websites are partisan in their message. That’s OK, just be sure to looks at sites from both sides, but always do so with your own interest in mind.

Don’t fall for political red herrings such as gun ownership rights. The Second Amendment may have been in jeopardy at one time but that currently is not the case. The crucial issue today is your land, not your guns. Without access to large areas of public land where game animals can exist in abundance the value of gun ownership will be reduced to nil for most Americans. Public land is the key to the future because access to private lands is a property right that will eventually, inevitably go to the highest bidder. The future of hunting in the United States for people of ordinary means is thus directly dependent on what policy governs public lands – both state and federal.

Among all citizens of the republic, the hunter bears a special moral responsibility to all things wild. Without our support, the wildlife and wild lands of our country eventually will cease to exist. That is a large statement but I believe it is so. The hunter’s moral creed dictates that the privilege of taking our lawful game comes only in exchange for our ensuring that wild animals continue to have adequate habitat in which they may live free-roaming lives in healthy populations according to their own nature. Failure to meet this responsibility dooms both the hunted and the lifestyle of the hunter.

Politics is the method by which we fulfill our responsibility. Preserving wildlife and wild places in a human dominated world demands that a whole nation of people agree on rules and policies to control the land and the animals as well as people.

A good set of rules cannot be bought with all the campaign contributions or conservation banquet revenues in the world. Only courageous citizenship on the part of people who are patriotic in governing the peace will produce good government.

No king will tear our eyes out if we fail as hunter-citizens. But the eyes of our descendents will not be able to see wild splendor if we allow it to disappear in the myopia of shortsighted commerce.

Ron can be reached by email at couleeking@hotmail.com

<<<>>>