Is Hunting An Art Form?
From unfair to fair?
In the years since I began hunting with traditional archery equipment, I’ve had a handful of odd interactions with the non-hunter or anti-hunter. It seems that when I mention I’m hunting with a traditional bow, they pocket their views on hunting not being necessary or cruel and instead commend me for using primitive equipment.
An overly simplified version of my interactions usually go something like this;
Me: “Oh sure, I enjoy hunting for deer and elk each fall."
Them: “Yeah…I just don’t see any reason to hunt an animal, it just seems cruel and I don’t think it’s necessary. Hunting just doesn’t seem fair to the animal.”
Me: “I totally get that. I actually decided to try hunting with a recurve bow a few years back and it’s been tough to do.”
Them: “Oh, really? I guess I can respect that.”
I’m sorry, what?
I’ve had a few conversations that go almost identical to the one above and I couldn’t for the life of me figure out how someone could be against hunting one minute and fine with it the next simply based on my chosen method of hunting.
In terms of an ethical kill, I think most hunters would agree that a rifle is often more accurate and effective (on average) than with a stick and string (results may vary). A well-placed rifle shot can be lethal on impact while a well-placed arrow might take slightly longer to kill the animal (still effective though). In either case, the animal still dies, but the non-hunter seems to think it’s an easier pill to swallow when they deem the hunt to be fairer to the animal by using less technical equipment.
I’ve bounced this idea around in my head for a long time now and can only come up with one reason why this might be happening. I think the majority of people who don’t agree with hunting, don’t actually disagree with the act of hunting, but rather the methodology of the hunt.
To someone unfamiliar with why a rifle scope, ranger finder, or fiber optic pins on a bow are necessary, these things just appear to be just an easier way for a hunter to kill an animal. To that point, that’s exactly what they are, but they’re also lawful tools and there’s really nothing legally wrong with it.
Have we gone too far?
The problem is that we’ve come so far with technology that we’re a bit off-kilter with why we’re using it in the first place. Rewind the clock about a hundred years when people were actually living off the land and hunting for winter meat stores and it’s an entirely different situation. To have meat in the freezer, you had to do it yourself and as such, you want the odds in your favor because you have a family to feed.
Scopes, bullets, and binoculars all help put those odds in your favor, but in 2021 and beyond, do you really need to hunt for your food? In some edge cases, yes. There are a lot of people whose only access to meat is through hunting, but for the majority of folks, you can get some pretty cheap meat to feed a family at your local market. No one is living on the Plains anymore and jerking meat for the winter, yet we continue to push hunting tech further and further as if that's the case when clearly it's not.
I cherish hunting just like the next person does and I agree that it’s part of who we are as a people. It’s in our blood, it’s part of a larger conservation plan, and I think it’s an important piece of human history that should be kept alive. I also think we might be going overboard with how we hunt in terms of technology and to the non-hunter or the anti-hunter, it just doesn't look right. The right to continue hunting is a game of winning hearts and minds.
Back to the beginning.
If I can get someone to go from not liking hunting to respecting how I hunt simply by telling them that I've decided to hunt elk with a recurve bow, then maybe there’s something there that needs to be explored. Whether you like it or not, it seems that people naturally give more respect to anything that is done with rudimentary tools. For example;
Electronic music versus someone who composes and plays every sound with actual instruments.
Screen acting versus stage acting (live performance versus the ability to do take after take)
Performance enhanced bodybuilding versus natural bodybuilding
….modern hunting tools versus traditional tools
When people see that someone is removing the technology from an activity or pursuit, their perspective shifts. They tend to appreciate it far more than they would if that thing were produced with the help of technology. What's more impressive, having a robot build a thing or having a person build a thing?
What this means to me is that humans value the art or technique of something in its purest form and that is a foothold we should take advantage of.
So is hunting an art form?
Think about all the things you have to know if you’re going to successfully harvest an animal? The hunter has to master the natural world by understanding where animals are located and how they might position themselves accordingly to make the kill.
If the act of hunting isn’t art, then I don’t know what is. It combines the elements of the human world and the natural world and when it finally happens, it’s an incredible moment that goes far beyond what it looks to be on the surface.
