Why the Lies Being Told in California Should Worry Sportsmen Nationwide

It’s easy to understand why California Houndsmen are up in arms as the animal rights lobby continues its push to ban hunting with hounds for bobcat and bears.  But what you might not know is why it should matter to sportsmen in the other 49 states.

I have never hunted with hounds.  But today I am a hound hunter because each of the arguments the anti-hunting lobby is using against the Houndsmen could just as easily be used against you and I.   This fight is our fight too, and here is why:

The Top Lies Being Told:

1)     It’s Unsporting to use Hounds to Chase Bears:

This should pique the interest of every pheasant hunter, duck hunter, foxhunter and more.  The anti’s are running around Sacramento telling legislators that it’s inhumane to allow a dog to chase a bear – they say it isn’t fair chase.  In reality, there is NO difference between using a hound to track a bear’s scent and using a bird-dog to follow a pheasant/grouse/quail.  If it’s inhumane for bears – what’s next?  Pheasants?  Fox?  Coyotes?  Raccoons?  The truth is – they think all hunting with dogs is bad.

 2)     Inhumane to Shoot a Bear at Close Distance:

This flies right in the face of everything sportsmen are taught.  Hunter Education teaches us to take responsible, ethical shots.  To work to get the best shot possible.  If it’s inhumane to shoot a bear at close distance – what about a turkey or a deer?  The close distance allows the hunter to age, sex, and determine if the bear has cubs all prior to taking a shot.  Don’t be confused.  They would oppose bear hunting if you shot the bear at 200 yards.  It’s not the distance they oppose, that’s just the crutch (read: LIE) they are using.  They oppose ALL hunting.

 3)     Misleading Facts – The Number of States That Allow Hound Hunting:

The bill’s author likes to point out that 2/3rds of the U.S. doesn’t allow bear hunting with hounds.  That’s a nice sound bite, but the truth of the matter is 18 states don’t even have a huntable population of bears!  Of the 32 states that hunt bear, 18 allow the use of dogs – nearly 60%.   Of the states with more than 2,000 bears – 16 of 23 allow you to use dogs – 70%.  The anti’s argument would be akin to arguing for a ban on elk hunting in California because Ohio doesn’t allow it (Nevermind the fact that Ohio doesn’t have Elk!).

4)     Pictures – GPS collars

This one is another favorite of the animal rights lobby.  In California, they are sending packets of information to each legislators’ office that include things they claim are unsightly deeds such as dogs wearing GPS collars, which they claim prevents bear hunting from being a fair chase.  What they don’t tell you, is that GPS collars are already ILLEGAL in California.  The pictures they are using are from another state all-together.

5)     Houndsmen and Bear Hunters Are Just “Trophy Hunting”

This one should be no surprise to any hunter.  They claim the only reason we hunt is for the trophy.  When in fact, the reasons for hunting are much more complex – see The Grim Hunter.  But in California, they are telling legislators that bear hunters shoot the bear and leave the meat to rot.  Sportsmen know the truth.  There are already wildlife laws in California on the books that require sportsmen to take the bear meat – that truth just doesn’t fit into the anti’s agenda.

6)     Cruel and Inhumane When Hunting.  Sound Science When Used For Research

This one is a favorite of mine.  In California, the anti’s are saying that it’s cruel and inhumane to use hounds– but their bill allows the Department of Fish and Game to do it.  In addition, when these same hunters volunteer their time, dogs, etc. to help capture a mountain lion or a bear for research it’s called sound science.  For more than 40 years, the use of hounds has been used by private foundations, universities and wildlife agencies safely and humanely.  The truth is there is no difference between treeing a bear for hunting or for research.

Each of these lies can, and likely will, be used against sportsmen again in the near future.  It may be in Florida, or Texas, or Pennsylvania… we can’t predict where.  But if they are able to get away with these lies now, they’ll surely be used again.   Sportsmen must stand together to defeat this bill – because after all we know their real agenda is the end of ALL hunting.  If these lies are successful in California, be sure they will find their way to your state soon.

11 comments on “Why the Lies Being Told in California Should Worry Sportsmen Nationwide

  1. Chuck Lamb says:

    You are right about the arguments being used in Californa being in other states. Here in Alaska we have black bear baiting and snaring seasons, Varations of 1, 2,3,4, and 6 are a mainstay with not only the gia worshippers. but a lot of hunters. Those who oppose the taking of bears usinfg bait or by snaring they have convinced many of our own ranks that neither is fair chase and snaring is inhumane. Another line used against both methods is they were instituted to artificially inflate moose populations for out of state hunters. What they don’t mention is how many Alaskans depend on moose for food or how many millions of dollars or how many jobs are created out of state hunter. I suspect there are hunters in Californa who follow the “using hounds is not fair chase” line also.
    The anti-hunting groups learned a long time ago that they can divide hunters into factions. Factions they can not only easily take down, but get the hunters themselves to help take down. No mater what our hunting style or method hunters, trappers and fisherman damn well better learn to stick together or we are all going to lose.

    • Evan Heusinkveld says:

      Chuck – you guessed right. The anti’s brought out a hunter to testify against the houndsmen. The worst part? He proclaimed that he was an avid hunter who uses bird dogs! Unreal. Sportsmen need to stick together and not be fooled by the attempts of the animal rights movement to splinters us into smaller groups.

  2. Animal Lover says:

    Funny – people who have nothing better to do than make laws against the rest of us – that goes for the lazy ARses and career politicians. They’re like pampered little rich kids – everything has to be THEIR way – even if they’re not involved. They just HAVE to be the FUN police, the FOOD police, the CONTROL of everyone!!!!!

  3. Gary says:

    Many of these animal lovers also believe that its unfair for the dog to chase game animals such as bears or hogs but it’s really a dogs natural instinct just like wolfs or coyotes would. Hunters like us make sure are dogs are well taken care of but people shouldn’t make statements bout dog-gin when they don’t even know what there talking about or how it really is.

  4. SThomas says:

    For the benefit of those that don’t know, please provide the bill number, contact information for Congress (state or US, depending) and a list of Committee members along with their contact info with each article related to any legislation related to issues that limit hunting fishing or trapping. We must contact our representatives at the Capitol if we expect to defeat AR legislation.

    Also, it may be a good idea to use proxys to build political power. We need to utilize the power of organizations with constituents that care about a particular topic, but don’t care enough to get directly involved… for example, a contractor association that may build or enhance habitat for wildlife, a travel agent association that books hunting and fishing trips etc. It is important that these organizations have contituents; to me, the real key to political power is in the people that choose to be a part of an orgaization as opposed to supportive individual private companies that may have a perceived monetary interest in given legislation. That said, it doesn’t hurt to have them on board too. We can testify on behalf of all proxys in committee hearings.

    • A California hunter says:

      The bill is SB 1221. Sponsored by State Sen. Ted Lieu. It has already passed the Senate and is in the hands of the Assembly. We need help fighting this bill.

  5. Ann S says:

    Remember that before the animal rights movement moved to the USA it was formed in the United Kingdom in a meeting of the minds of anti vivisectionist and vegans and those that supported groups such as Animal Liberation Front and of course the Hunt Sabateurs. The Oxford Group were like thinkers and used philosophy to think up new terms for “animal rights” and morals. See Wiki Animal Rights, “The Oxford Group”. PETER SINGER author of Animal Liberation was a member of this group of which many came to the USA to teach and spread the propaganda of their philosophy in leading universities in the USA. Prior to 1975 animal rights was not uttered in the USA. Brigid BROPHY was the first to utter animal rights in the USA quoted in a California newspaper. The book, Animals, Men and Morals was the first attempt by many of those in the Oxford Group to spread their philosophical, moral views, using no science. They believed moral responsibility to show the rest of the world how they should live – anti hunting, anti vivisection for meat or biomedical research. Now for almost 40 years the animal rights agenda has been taught in grade school and grade school taught to lobby for and report animal abuse. Attorneys have been taught how to persecute what animal rights activist see as animal abuse.
    This was right before Margaret Thatcher received a letter bomb…..and at that time a deaf ear was turned to the animal rights and environmental extremist and there was no outlet in the United Kingdom and many in the group ended up in the USA. The groups of animal rights organizations believe in no more use of animals for anything ever and all the bears, cayotes, fox, cougars should be “just left alone” and it seems to hell with people, as it appears people who farm, hunt, eat animals are responsible for everything from climate change,sic, and the worlds destruction. Go figure – and our government officials believe it. That needs to change.

  6. Jsportsman says:

    A great point is made in this article comparing the argument against hunting bears with hounds to hunting anything else with a dog. Why is it inhumane to hunt bears with hounds but not pheasants? You can really see how inch by inch they are working towards eliminating all hunting with dogs. This is a serious issue that needs to be stood up against in every way possible! Thank you for raising awareness on the latest attacks on hunters.

  7. It’s not just a dog or bear hunting issue. It’s the old story of divide and conquer. All types of hunters MUST stick together, or else we ALL will lose in the end.

  8. Cole Cupples says:

    I think its a knock to our country in general just because they dont like it it means nobody should be allowed to do it. It is also a bad business practice the state will lose a lot of revenue between bear tags and bobcat tags and the gas we buy to hunt i dont know about everybody else but for me i know that i usually spend between 150 and 200 dollars a weekend to hunt and so do all the guys i hunt with and they will lose the taxes from the guys such as myself that will move if this bill passes. This is just a classic case of being afraid of something they dont understand. I dont tell people how to live their life and i would expect the same amount of respect in return.

Tell Us What You Think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s