Letters: The hunting mania and other degeneracies
To the editor:
I believe it was in one of your Greanville Posts that included a photo of a giraffe that some British asshole had just shot. He, his wife and their (young) children, were posing near and on it, all big smiles. I still haven’t gotten over that one. What kind of a degenerate would shoot a giraffe for crying out loud. What’s next on his list, the actual horse featured in Spielberg’s “War Horse?”
I’m glad you are publishing opinions on sport hunting aimed at discrediting it and the bottom-feeders who enjoy it.
A Swiftian solution to the wildlife plague
Here is a satirical little piece I wrote some time ago, since I’m most familiar with deer hunting in Texas. Please feel free to use it if you want. If you do, you might want to write a preface so that readers understand how wildlife management is handled in Texas and other states. Also, hunting magazines always use the euphemism ‘harvest’ rather than ‘kill.’ “Cull-small” is a wildlife management term for bucks with very small antlers. They should be readily shot (culled) to get them out of the gene pool, which would result in many more trophy bucks according to wildlife managers.
Here it is:
“Since wildlife management supposedly works so well with wildlife, its principles should be applied to the hunting cult itself in view of their declining numbers and cull-small ‘antlers’ [thinning hair, bad comb-overs (most deer hunters think of their hair as antlers)]. While many non-hunters and certainly all anti-hunting folks believe hunting accidents are causes for dancing in the street, there are simply not enough hunters accidently harvested every season to conserve and enhance hunter populations; i.e., increase their numbers and improve their trophy attributes like fuller heads of hair. In view of that disappointing deficiency, the commissioners that run the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department should develop and implement “hunter management” programs in which hunters harvest each other on hunt-the-hunter ranches that are surrounded by high-voltage fencing. Like the animals on killing ranches, we wouldn’t want these deviants to have a means of escape.
Hunters would use the same grossly unsportsmanlike hunting gadgets used for killing deer, but modified for human consumption. Electronically-timed and activated bait feeders would be filled with buttered popcorn or McDonald’s fries instead of corn. Hunters would lure other hunters out of hiding by pouring cheap perfume all over themselves and their surroundings. Drooling, sex-crazed hunters would come crashing out of the brush to “hunter calls” that imitate the moans of a porn star faking an orgasm. Life-size deer decoys would be replaced with life-size inflatable dolls with blond wigs. Rifle hunters would harvest rifle hunters, and bow hunters would shoot those little sticks into other bow hunters. An arrow stuck in his fat ass would certainly convince a shrieking hunter just how blatantly sadistic bow hunting is.
Just as wildlife management aims to produce lots of trophy bucks, hunter management could produce robust populations of trophy hunters with antlers like fight promoter Don King’s. Sadly, it would likely be abolished before any real progress could be made. Soccer moms and ladies who lunch would soon demand a stop to hunter management programs. The sight of jacked-up pickups speeding to and fro with dead trophy hunters piled up in their beds would prove almost as much of a distraction to those women as a bent-over construction worker’s butt cleavage. In addition to causing traffic mishaps, there would be a lot of bug-eyed precious little darlings late to school or karate lessons. Plus, no matter how rugged his face or how thick his perfectly-coiffed hair, the mounted head of an angry hunter would be as nauseating as mounted animal heads are to evolved men, women and children.”
Bill Buchanan_________