Manufactured Alaska Hunts Lack Thrill, Should be Killed
COMPASS: Points of view from the community
Rudy Wittshirk / Anchorage Daily News / October 24, 2007
The soul has gone out of hunting in Alaska. The execution-style slayings of Katmai brown bears, caught on tape, clearly show Alaska’s most magnificent wildlife being rubbed out for convenient commercial exploitation (“Cameras show Katmai bear kills,” Oct. 6).
Bear hunters in the Katmai National Preserve cursed at a KTUU Channel 2 television crew recording their guided “hunt” — not because the hunt was illegal, but because the kills were so ridiculously easy they were humiliating. Now these hunters will have a hard time impressing friends back home with tales about their noble pursuit of the dangerous Alaska brown bear.
The TV crew is to be commended for standing up to these hunters in a remote area. Now everyone, including naive Alaskans, can see for themselves the legalized poaching that passes for “hunting” in Alaska.
The TV crew was accused of “interfering” with a hunt that was successful. That accusation went nowhere — but images of the pathetic bear hunt remain. In Katmai National Preserve, bear hunting is like shooting fish in a barrel — all it takes is an accommodating game management system and Alaska guides willing to cash in on human-habituated bears.
Just like any other commercial extraction of public resources, guided hunting on public lands should be open to public scrutiny. The public has a right to know how carelessly its wildlife resources are being extracted. Brown bears are top-of-the-line — imagine how carelessly the state manages the more lowly species.
Alaskans — hunters, guides, state Game Board members and Fish and Game personnel — are defensive about the Katmai incident. And with good reason — “legal” hunting in Alaska cannot stand the light of day. Other “legal” Alaska hunts are, if anything, even more unethical because motorized vehicles are used to chase down and shoot wild animals.
Hunters in Alaska have been elevated to mythical status in terms of subsistence, fair chase and general nobility of purpose and character. An opposite reality has long been evident. Science doesn’t matter. Subsistence doesn’t matter. Fair chase doesn’t matter. There is only one concern for the Alaska hunting establishment: Is it “legal?”
And that’s where Alaska politicians, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the Board of Game come in. Guides, hunters and the hunting industries lobby for liberal regulations; politicians legislate them into law; and the state implements them. Politicians determine the “science” of Alaska wildlife management — state wildlife biologists merely sell their scientific souls by giving their “professional” blessings to the incessant over-hunting.
The game management system itself is corrupt. Fish and Game answers to a state Legislature that has been demonstrably infested with corruption. That’s why the hunting establishment, the commercial hunting industries and the political hunting lobby have been able to steadily and legally “harvest” their way through our wildlife populations.
Many Alaskans extol the virtues of hunting as an ennobling and spiritual experience — a tradition of getting close to nature and all that nonsense. Some members of the hunting establishment, particularly bear hunters, glorify themselves as tooth-and-claw pioneers. However, game management in Alaska is based on emotional “into the wild” fantasies. We have “subsistence” hunts for the rich, “sport” hunts that resemble summary executions and “science” left over from the 19th century. The Katmai incident reveals just how tame and sleazy the “Alaska hunting experience” has become.
Rudy Wittshirk is an outdoorsman and photographer. He lives in Willow.
Post your comment
Comment Guidelines: We welcome your expressions of opinion on this subject. Please avoid false commentary about individuals or groups. Facts must be verified by the person posting. Off-topic comments, and comments inappropriate for a readership of all ages, may be deleted. E-mail addresses will never be published. Only comments with valid e-mail address will be published.
12 Comments
On October 24, 2007, Greer Ashton wrote:
I am desperately trying to process the following: Is it a prerequisite for hunters to not be able to spell or use proper grammar?
We don’t have to make hunters out to be a bunch of dumb slobs - they’re doing a great job of it themselves! A sport, by definition, requires willing participants. Hunters will shamelessly do and say anything to defend their right to kill anything that moves and consider it their birthright to do so. Have they ever considered that animals are kept in public trust - that means that they don’t belong to only them to do with as they please! Non-consumptive nature enthusiasts have more of a right, because there are more of them, to demand that the animals be left alone! Call us crazy, but we prefer to enjoy living, breathing animals to mutilated carcasses that seem to give such pleasure to their bloodthirsty killers!
On October 25, 2007, Scott wrote:
I watched the video and I have a few concerns about the hunters in the video. It’s a bit odd that there isn’t a scene of the “killing” of which you speak. In fact the whole thing just seems a bit too staged. Let me speak about how I feel personally: These hunters aren’t necessarily some that I would say represent the overwhelming majority of us. First, it isn’t safe to fire upon an animal in such close proximity of others and no clear identification of what is beyond the target. In fairness, we can’t see what’s beyond the target. So assuming that this video is actually authentic and not some horrible paid acting, I’d say these hunters really do need to attend the mandatory hunter education courses that we require all individuals born after 1/1/1975! Second, aside from the clear safety issues, it seems that these grizzlies are quite used to humans. Do you know what that means? It means that they often learn associate humans with food. That is a great risk if you’re a human. As a hunter, I don’t condone the actions I saw. But again I’m used to trying to take in all angles, knowing that anti-hunting groups tend to put several twists and turns on what actually happens. Do you know the statistics involving bear/human encounters? I do, I did the research. Do you know the facts about bears - never mind grizzly bears - and the amount of deaths from attacks on humans? I do, I did the research. You people are much safer in a park that allows hunting than one that doesn’t. My response is to do more research into why these hunters would be firing a rifle in close proximity to people and in what looks like something of an open area. I don’t hunt that way, nor do I know anyone that hunts that way. Just as there are anti-hunting people that murder, maim, and seek thrills by breaking the law, there will be hunters who don’t necessarily use common sense. But I wouldn’t understand you to process facts, as you’ve shown an inability to understand them! Make your best or worst negative comment - because when I have an answer you won’t post it. Further clouding the perception of what hunters really do for the environment.
[Blog editors’ note: You didn’t shoot the bears that KTUU captured on film in Alaska; we understand.
As for your environmental contributions, that’s a mystery. Making free-living animals dead is hardly a compelling vision. And you’re right, no one here finds that very attractive. ]
On October 25, 2007, Denise Boggs wrote:
There is a tremendous difference between subsistence hunters and trophy hunters. No one eats grizzly bears to my knowledge therefore the act of hunting these animals is simply the pleasure of killing - something pyschotics do. I have often wondered what kind of person enjoys the thrill of killing an animal just for the sake of killing. We don’t need to define slob hunters - they define themselves. Regarding the back country - that is the home of the bears. If you choose to enter you do so at your own risk. If you aren’t willing to take the risk then stay out. BTW - I’m a former Fish & Game employee in a western state with a lot of hunting. I hated working check stations because the vast majority of hunters ARE slob hunters - I have been there and seen it with my own eyes far too many times. Trophy hunters, gut shots, animals with their heads blown off, shooting animals during the rut when they are at extreme disadvantage, shooting pregnant cows, shooting does less than a year old, those who only want a big rack, illegally shooting out of their pickups because they are too lazy to get out and walk, running antelope to death (until their hearts literally burst) on ATVs or snowmobiles just for fun - it’s endless. Killing bears and cougars just to have a rug on the wall. Hunters have no one but themsleves to blame for the reputation they have earned.
On October 25, 2007, Scott wrote:
Maybe you should look at the contributions to the restoration of the animals that hunter dollars pay for. But again, I wouldn’t expect you to be “in the know” on what you can’t forward your financial and political agendas with. And here’s an FYI: Animals lose fear of humans because when they’re not hunted they have no reason to fear us. When humans feed large carnivores like grizzlies for example - again they begin to associate human activity with food. Which after one step leads to another ends up in the lap of Fish & Wildlife staff hunting down and killing a bear due to it’s aggressive nature. Banning hunting is what creates this and is why animals of all types begin to lose their fear of humans - NOT b/c we live close to them.
[Blog editors’ note: One of the editors has spent ample time in Alaska and finds it unreasonable to want moose, wolves and other animals to fear humans. Wolves inside Denali National Park appear mostly disinterested in humans, which isn’t not a bad thing. Aggression is overrated. Caution, respect and common sense are better, and no one should be feeding bears, wolves, coyotes or any free-living animals who then associate people with food and lose their freedom and lives in the process. ]
On October 25, 2007, Edita—NYC wrote:
I wonder at those who cling to the “We have to kill them in order to save them” mantra. I have a hard time believing that even those who espouse this childish philosophy really believe it. It seems to me that the need to have other animals “fear” humans is an egocentric one orginating from the desire to dominate other species.
You cannot respect the earth or those that inhabit it if you are focused on domination.
At the root of hunting, and almost all abuse, exploitation, oppression and disprespect is the desire to dominate the “other.”
The fact that some hunters try to elevate this impulse into some sort of moral or ecological duty is nothing short of delusional.
On October 25, 2007, Marion wrote:
you people have been brain washed, seriously because first of all a wild animal NO MATTER HOW TAMED will always have its killer instincts and will attack people still. I have many animals such an iguana and he is a wild animal and he has his aggressive moments and bites me.
On October 26, 2007, Dustin wrote:
I have to wonder why hunters, for instance, come to animal rights websites, throwing tired rhetoric around like it’s a revelation. Do you really think we’re gonna throw our veggie burgers down and jump ship?
I truly am curious why you come here, and what you hope to accomplish? We are an animal advocacy organization, not a defend-our-position-to-people-who-enjoy-killing-animals group. In fact, I am rather interested in a justification to YOUR position—-beyond the tired rhetoric, lame excuses and false environmentalism and ludicrous claims of “wildlife management.”
Do you really not have anything better to do? We do; we’ve got a revolution to start.
Dustin Rhodes
Friends of Animals
On October 28, 2007, i love hippies wrote:
Other “legal” Alaska hunts are, if anything, even more unethical because motorized vehicles are used to chase down and shoot wild animals
actually it is not legal to chase down animals on motorized vehicles except wolves in some areas. and lets not forget the root of the problem these bears are used to humans because of a bunch of tree huggers that want to go take pictures of them. o yea and please someone respond and compare my bad grammar to my intelligence level because you have no legitimate retort
[Blog editors’ reminder: Anonymous comments are hard to take seriously on any blog and publishing them is not something we want to get used to. Opinions are welcome and commentary with verified factual content especially so — and real names increase the value and improve the tone of discussions.]
On October 28, 2007, Priscilla Feral wrote:
It is, indeed, legal to chase wolves by aircraft and snowmachine in Alaska. Actually, there wasn’t a problem with bears minding their own business. The problem was with Homo sapiens who took advantage of bears and likely called it an act of bravery. Labeling people who condemn this violence as tree huggers is meaningless, and the profanity some hunters offer us eliminates chances for having their opinions posted.
Priscilla Feral
Friends of Animals
On November 4, 2007, Ellie wrote:
If we respect non-human animals and their habitat, they can adjust their populations naturally. Hunting leaves more food for animals who survive, which in turn increases reproduction. Thus, hunters have created a vicious cycle of killing, which leads to overpopulation, and killing again.
People in the third world were colonized by powerful countries, which destroyed their natural way of living. Natural selection doesn’t apply.
On May 12, 2009, Gerhard Gehrmann wrote:
Are humans part of the natural world?
On May 17, 2009, mike kurdzioler wrote:
you would think that out of all the wisdom the anti-hunter posseses, you would realize that hunting did not start yesterday. Truth be told the first Thanksgiving (just a small part of our heritage as americans) did not consist of veggie burgers and soy milk. Hunting has been a part of our lives for as far back as the human race. I challenge any one of you “know it alls” to go onto the hunting and conservation sites and take the classes. Your average duck hunter can identify every duck, your turkey hunters can tell you the farthest distance a hen will travel from her nest. Can you? probably not with out looking it up. I will also challenge everyone of you anti-hunters who love your animals alive and walking to get up at 4:30am and stay through dark eveyday for 7 months to get out there and enjoy the wildlife you cherish so dearly, but im sure you already do that. or maybe your to busy staring at your computer learning proper spelling and grammar. just one last tid bit they call it hunting and not killing for a reason. cause we dont kill something everytime we go out HUNTING you silly animal rights guys! ! !
[Blog editors’ note: Why not just go out for a nice walk instead?]