Anti-hunters come in all shapes, sizes and political mindsets so don’t be quick to pigeon hole the anti-hunting movement or else you’ll miss half of those who would put an end to it one way or another.

Yeah, that’s right. In this world of polarization where political parties are working day and night to turn our self-governing processes into a sporting match between this side and that side, hunters have to keep things in perspective.

Hunting is under attack and it’s being attacked by more than just PETA and similarly minded groups.

Anti-hunters in Minnesota are working hard to block the state’s wolf hunt this fall and the anti-hunting movement is again showing signs of resorting to illegal methods of protest. That headline came through my inbox today stating that PETA is urging members to resort to illegal hunter harassment to push their views.

Organizations like PETA have gained a limited traction over the years on the public and while they are a powerful lobby, they are not the greatest threat to hunting in the nation.

Anti-hunting legislation makes for big headlines, but it’s still difficult to pass such measures because when you sit down and analyze the science, hunting is a proven means of controlling wildlife populations. When you analyze the numbers, hunting is cost-effective wildlife management not to mention an economic boom to state and local governments through tourism dollars, license fees and excise taxes.

Pro-hunting organizations keep legislators informed of this and work hard to promote the sport. I strongly urge hunters to support these organizations but it doesn’t end there.

Here’s a list of some of the gravest threats to hunting that are not PETA (or another specifically anti-hunting organization):

  • Suburban sprawl: When everybody has a 10-acre lot and doesn’t like the sound of wingshooters at 7 a.m. local city councils pass discharge ordinances, effectively ending hunting over hundreds of thousands of acres of land.
  • Drill, dig and drain: Oil, minerals and food are essentials of our modern life but just like we are spending outside of our means, we are expending resources outside of our means. How can people oppose government spending while at the same time supporting activities that are harmful to valuable wildlife habitat. This is the result of “Us vs. Them” politics where either you are for us or against us. You can rag on “tree huggers” but it’s tough to climb into a treestand without doing it. If you hunt, you are a tree hugger. Get over it and push for sustainable drilling, sustainable mining and sustainable agriculture that doesn’t drain wetlands or involve drain tile.
  • Anti-government gibberish: The Tea Party couldn’t be more wrong. Government is not our enemy. If conservationists hadn’t pushed the government to act in the early 20th century to preserve large swaths of land, what would we have left today? A lot of Republicans are unfairly painted as anti-tax, anti-government zealots but this is just simply not the case. At Game Fair this summer I witnessed a massive gathering of Republicans (and Democrats) publicly praise a tax. The Pittman-Robertson Excise Tax has raised billions of dollars for conservation and is credited with being the primary savior of white-tailed deer, Canada geese, wild turkey and wood ducks, all of which were on the brink of extinction a century ago. Let’s get past the anti-government rhetoric and have some serious discussions over what needs to be done.
  • Trophy Mindset: If you celebrate a six-inch bluegill you must be a loser. If you shoot a doe or forkhorn you are a wimpy hunter. You didn’t shoot your limit? What a waste. Somehow, we’ve confused celebrating a trophy that might be once-in-a-lifetime with the need to show-off. So you have a wall of trophy deer, that’s great. But if they all came from a 500-acre plot of land you purchased and restrict others from using and manage multiple food plots, don’t call yourself a great hunter, call yourself a great shepherd. Modern hunting is about the experience, it’s about the journey. When we hunted for a living the kill was the trophy, no matter what it was. Today we can get meat anywhere we want but the pursuit of game remains the reason for the sport. When you cheapen the result you cheapen the experience, it diminishes and then it disappears.
  • Bad manners: The final one is related to number four in a way but it goes beyond that. If you are going hunting, invite somebody who hasn’t gone or doesn’t have the opportunity to go. Not every time you hunt, but at least once or twice per season you participate in. This is called sharing. If you own hundreds of acres of land that you worked hard to earn, that’s great, but consider allowing others to utilize a small part of it. If they don’t respect the boundaries you establish, don’t invite them back. How is this anti-hunting? When you don’t share, when you don’t bring others to the table, they don’t get to have those experiences. Charity is a universal value as is sharing.

Certainly there are other threats to hunting. What are your thoughts? In what ways is hunting being degraded as you see it? Where have I misspoken or misrepresented my own case? Your feedback is valued to continue this discussion.

(Originally published in www.outdoornews.com)