Hunting the Turkey

The tragic prosecution of Anthony Klaseus, who killed his own eight-year-old son, mistaking him for a turkey while on a hunt, reminded me how much distaste I have for our state’s “great” hunting tradition, the hypocrisy of “sportsmen,” and the power their interests wield.

Anthony Klaseus deserves to be prosecuted. He took his child’s life under the rubric of male bonding and family traditions. He didn’t intend to. But he loved nature, and pot, and beer, and guns.

I spent a weekend a long time ago researching a story about a family of hunters at their deer shack in northwestern Wisconsin. They were stand-up guys, responsible, affable, and completely disdainful of the louts. But they could never explain the one thing to me that I most wanted to know—why this unequal battle between them and a deer was the linchpin that kept them bonded and steeped in family traditions.

Hunting for them was an excuse to be together, to be challenged, to play. And hunters romanticize it because it is what the men pass down from generation to generation, like baseball in my family. But if I bring a rifle with a telescopic sight to the Metrodome, I’m locked up on terrorism charges.

Explain to me how thousands of guys (mostly) armed with telescopic sights, fake animal urine, camouflaged tree stands, underwater radar, and other advanced weaponry and aids, convince themselves they are engaging in an battle of wits with an animal armed with nothing but its sense of self-preservation?

I’m all in favor of men hunting each other. That’d be a fair fight. I think Gov. Ventura proposed something like that a decade or so ago.

I am stereotyping here, but within every stereotype is an ugly truth. I am suspicious of most hunters’ regard for nature beyond its ability to provide them with prey. Trust me, nature is twice as nice when you’re not worried your buddy thinks you’re a deer.

I support people’s right to hunt; and when they consume what they kill, they’re better than I, who lives off the depravity of the commercial meat industry. But let’s stop kidding ourselves about why people hunt and do away with the romantic fairy stories about hunters and hunting.

So happy fishing opener. Watch out for carp that jump and whack you in the head. I mean, people get hurt.

Comments

[Dan Sinykin]

I'm a little unclear, Adam. What stereotype of hunters are you suggesting? That they use hunting "as an excuse to be together, to be challenged, to play"? That doesn't sound so bad. What is their hypocrisy? That they believe they are in a "battle of wits"? I know a lot of hunters, and few of them would compare that activity to Scrabble. And admitting that hunting is no Trivial Pursuit doesn't mean tracking and hunting an animal with nothing but it's mere sense of self-preservation isn't a challenge. Just for one, a good hunter has to be an excellent shot to get the deer in the heart or brain and kill it immediately so as not to cause undue suffering. That's a standard hunter's ethic. And how does hunting have anything to do with bringing a gun to the Metrodome, beyond inane association of ideas? And, as you point out, many hunters eat their prey, which is a lot more humane than the commercial markets. Or was your point that hunters endanger the lives of other humans? I'm just requesting some clarity, 's all.

[stevemarsh]

Spring turkey season requires distinguishing a male turkey from a female turkey. Toking a one hitter and blindly shooting at movement is as irresponsible as getting intoxicated, blowing through a stop sign and running a child down crossing the street. It takes an alertness, an attention to detail and not an inconsiderable amount of skill to hunt any wild animal. A hunter is vetted by the state, in the same way you have to be licensed to safely operate a car. So if, as you point out, these guys are participating in the food chain in a more responsible, direct way than you are--why are you calling them tech-ed up bullies? How are they hypocrites? Because they're not articulate enough to express why they're out there in the woods on a blog? What ugly truth are you exposing here, other than your own classism?

[108]

Well, youre asking, and youre right. The fact of the matter is as an urban writer, avant garde, bohemian type, maybe liberal - dare I stereotype - you have no insight.

This particular episode has zero to do with hunting. Its the same same societal battle between the non-functional members of society and the functional and responsible that we see play out on the news each evening.

Why hunt? Its enjoyable and its difficult. I wouldnt say its more difficult than other pursuits, but its difficult. Like golf, like chess, like building a classic car correctly. Its analogous to any other hobby. Its not bloodthirsty to most of us.

[Peter K]

I'm really confused as to what you are saying in this post. You have "much distaste" for hunting, yet aren't you the same guy that just wrote about consuming tasty, meaty bbq in Texas? You want us to stop kidding ourselves about why we hunt -- what is the reason, do you believe?

Please do some follow up, as I am genuinely interested.

[stevemarsh]

@108 I'm an avant garde, bohemian writer type...who shoots in a trap league with my father at the Metro Gun Club in Blaine and hunts on my family's land in Staples every fall. So you can just call me "Big Papa." As in, H-E, M-I, N-G, WAY. You see, you're too, blind to, play.

[Mike V]

Hmm, where to start. This article is really a disjointed stream of thoughts that have very little to do with eachother, but I'll try to address some of the points you make. First, you link the turkey "hunter" that killed his child to all people who hunt or fish. I think you'll find that hunters especially have very little patience for the behavior he exhibited. Every hunter I've talked to has been disgusted with his mistakes. I won't even comment on the Metrodome with a rifle thing, it's a ludicrous statement. You got one thing right though, most deer hunters hunt deer for the comraderie. I can think of worse ways to have that. As for my equipment for deer hunting, yes my rifle is scoped. This allows me to make a clean shot that allows humane harvesting of deer as opposed to wounding and potentially not finding the deer. I don't use urine or a camouflaged tree stand, and I fail to understand the underwater radar comment. There is no other "advanced weaponry". As a matter of fact, one of our hunting partners hunts with a rifle designed 2 centuries ago, with no scope. And as for why we harvest deer. It needs to be done. And I enjoy the taste of venison. You want to hunt at Cub Foods, that's fine with me, but try to understand that there are those of us that like to have the skill to survive without the aid of a supermarket.

[JDWalker]

"Explain to me how thousands of guys (mostly) armed with telescopic sights, fake animal urine, camouflaged tree stands, underwater radar, and other advanced weaponry and aids, convince themselves they are engaging in an battle of wits with an animal armed with nothing but its sense of self-preservation?"

Because they have not established a legal season for bloggers of your lot.

[Erin]

I love how defensive hunters get when non-hunters suggest that the "sport" is barbaric. Hunters fall back on the "skill" needed to kill an animal with one shot. Is this "skill" a requirement to get a hunting license? Or is it just a bonus? How many hunters would you say kill on the first shot 100% of the time. If you can answer 100%--then I digress.

Dan S. suggested that an animal's self-preservation is a worthwhile defense against night-vision goggles and high-powered rifles. Give evolution a thousand years and maybe deer will develop Kevlar vests, or invisibility shields--or the ability to shoot bullets out of their antlers...now THAT would be a sport.

I believe Adam's overall point was not against hunting alone, but how hunting equals male bonding which equals (in more cases than not, I would wager) consuming alcohol, which in this case, equaled a tragedy. If hunting is truly all about sport, skill, and brotherhood, than I challenge hunters to leave the Bud at home this season. Then tell me how much fun you had sitting in the cold, stalking your prey.

[BigBlueEdge]

You're upset that hunters have an unfair advantage over their prey? And you are suspicious that hunters would be concerned with nature beyond just fulfilling their tag. But you do apparently advocate sports like baseball and, I presume, football, basketball, etc.

You will then be surprised to learn that most people who are brought up as hunters have a great respect for the environment and the creatures of nature. Learning to be a hunter helps put us closer to nature and demonstrates the importance of things like conservation, avoiding pollution, respect for the land and other creatures, etc. Oh yes, and SAFETY. I'd wager that hunters will be, far and away, more respectful and responsible than your avergage city dwelling, non-hunting sports fan. What do those non-hunting folks learn from their 'sport'? To be loud, obnoxious, mean, win at all costs, mine is better than yours, and everyone is against me. Nice.

Does a hunter kill something? Yes. Does a hunter have an advantage over his prey? Sometimes. Does a hunter respect the world around him? Most likely. Can you say that last part about fans of your sport, as a whole? Didn't think so. Am I generalizing and stereotyping? Yes, but it was apparently OK for you to do.

[bertram jr]

I'll leave it at this: Platt seems threatened by people with guns.

No other way to explain this ramble, which tries to cover his tracks and makes no cogent point.

Which in itself is the usual end product of anti-gun rhetoric.

[eric smith]

I find this article/blog partially agreeable, and mostly ridiculous.

Yes the guy needs to be prosicuted, what he did was maybe an accident, but in no way defensible.

You go on to rip hunter's a new one, and in doing so you only prove how little you understand the concept of hunting. You stereotype the gadgets and tools hunter's use and make them sound like drunken lunatics out in the woods shooting whatever moves (sadly the subject gentlemen sounds little better from the media's take on it). You say you spent "an entire weekend" researching with actual hunters. That is a drop in the bucket my friend. Hunters and their hunting is a way of life, something they have done since the age of 8 with their family. You say you could not understand why this hunting keeps them together as a family.

No Kidding!!!

How can you expect to understand in two days, what generations have built for that family?

Further, you prove you have had little or no experience hunting yourself, so I ask you what makes you the expert? What allows you to be so certain that your opinion is correct in an area that you have little or no clue about? You are of course entitled to your opinion, my only thought is that you shouldn't be so quick to make statements as they don't seem to hold much water.

If you are curious, I do enjoy hunting, so place your stereotypes as you will, that seems to be your only credible source here, that and what you state you do not understand.

If you enjoy safe, city life, go walk in a city park, where your fleece vest, north face jacket, nalgene water bottle, gps device, and imported cross-over vehicle are the tools that you require.

Different stereotypes for different people and places I guess. Why is what you believe to be ok, better than what these "avid hunters" believe to be ok?

I hate to say the word, but this is a fine example of hypocrisy.

My 2 cents, probably worth less...

[BigBlueEdge]

@Erin:

You have some seriously wacky interpretations of things.

Do hunters have 'skills'? Um, yeah. Hunters go through fairly extensive safety training regarding firearms safety and in a variety of outdoor safety topics. In addition, hunters spend a lot of time teaching each other and passing along skills to their children. Does this result in 100% perfection? No, but things like the hunting tragedy from the original article are a tremendous exception to the norm. What do you do that you are 100% at?

More of your wacky interpretations... How did you draw the conclusion that all hunting 'equals consuming alcohol'? The vast majority of hunters keep alcohol entirely out of the picture before or during their hunting activities.

And more wackiness... Using night vision goggles??? What orifice did you pull that out of? If you are somehow getting that from the author's reference to 'telescopic sights', let me clarify for you that the term refers to a rifle scope, not night vision goggles. I'm pretty sure night vision goggles are not legal for hunting. Hunting takes place during daylight hours, not when it is dark out.

All the hunting I've ever done has been without bringing along 'the Bud' and still I've enjoyed sitting out in the cold many times. But you couldn't grasp that concept because you have no basis to understand hunting.

[Joel Rosenberg]

Okay, so you're not into hunting, and have never tried it. I got that. Lots of things I'm not into, without trying them, either.

What's fascinating to me is how much effort you've put into not understanding why other folks might be into it. It's really not very difficult to grasp.

Not quite as easy to understand as the moral failing of somebody who buys all his meat in little plastic-wrapped packages while looking down his nose at those who, upon occasion, get some of theirs in more difficult an interesting ways, granted. But not a challenge.

[bertram jr]

Look at Adam's links to the right, they'll tell you all you need to know about his "point-of-view".

(You like baseball? Does the shirtless father/son duo who leaped from the stands and attacked the first base coach at Comiskey (?) a few years back represent that all baseball enthusiasts are drunken, felonius maniacs?

One unfathomably idiotic hunter does not even begin to represent the millions of safe and ethical sportsmen who contribute millions to conservation causes and the economy while enjoying a heritage past time that actually BENEFITS nature.

It's easy to make such estimations from your corner table at "bistro -of-the-moment", or while wheeling the "mean streets" of Linden Hills in the Volvo.

Perhaps that's where your opinions should remain focused.

[John R.]

I grew up in small-town Minnesota but now live in Mpls.

I went duck hunting every weekend (in season) of every year from age 12 to age 18. And I never liked it. I just did it because my dad and my brother did, and I never really thought I had the choice not to, even though I would much rather have stayed home reading a good book than getting up before dawn to stand silent and motionless in a foot of cold water, hoping I might get a shot at some point during the six hours I stood there.

I also hunted deer a few times, and that was at least drier, although I didn't enjoy it any more than I did the duck hunting.

So, I know what I'm talking about when I say I don't like hunting. Don't like fishing, either.

I don't look down on those who do -- I just don't share their notion of enjoyment.

The stuff about bonding is no doubt true, although there are plenty of other ways to bond.

What it really comes down to is, it's fun to shoot at things. I like to shoot skeet and I like to plink at tin cans with a .22. Men huunt because it's fun to shoot at and hit a moving target. There's some sort of elemental physical satisfaction in it, like throwing a rock and hitting what you aim at.

[Jim Leinfelder]

Adam: Look at it this way. Sports are a way of sublimating our atavistic impulses for both hunting and warfare.

Think about it: Sports are all about hitting something at which you're aiming as well as battle between two tribalesque groups.

Hunting is more elemental, no sublimating. It's actually about hitting something at which you are aiming in the hopes of killing it. The eating part, well, that takes place well after and is more of secular sacrament to reinforce that a good time was had by all but the game.

You see, traipsing around in nature and reveling in its organic aesthetics and spirtual penumbra eludes many a rusticly-minded suburbanite. These are not the transcedentalists of Thoreau's time.

It can seem to them like so much pointless wandering about and kinda' sissified. But take a gun into your hands and suddenly there is an atavistic, utilitarian narrative underpinning the walk in the woods or across a field. There is a homely sense of purpose to it that, if no game is bagged, is more satisfying to a deeply-seated need in the ol' limbic system than a mere nature stroll.

Now trophy hunting, well, I chock that up to fragile ego and deeply-felt but unarticulated neediness. These mackers are not really after the meat. Instead of worshipping something greater than themselves as one might in a church, these trophy hunters are out to ennoble thesemlves by killing something greater than themselves. It seems to me to be an unworthy impulse well to the side of recreating the tradition of hunting game for the table when that was all that there was available.

Anyway, as you have observed, it's a deeply-felt need for which much effort is expended in creating a noble rationale for what is actually a pretty base impulse.

Hunting enables the interloping 21st Century human to get in the game. The boys don't want to have to concede a walk in the woods as a mere spectator sport. They wanna' git in the game. But not as game. They don't want to try and elude being killed by an apex predator. They don't have the speed or the honed senses for it.

We're still predators, though most of our basic predator assets have atrophied as our larger and larger brains gave our predecessors a better survival edge.

So, what's left is to play predator, use those forward-oriented, stereoscopic predator's eyes aided by a rifle and a scope, or a scatter-shot shell, to make up for the lack of speed, sense of smell and claws and a sturdy bite.

This'll all be WAY too in-tee-leck-chul for ol' Bertram, Jr. Just wait.

[108]

Adam, I’d be interested know what ugly truths reside in other stereotypes. Can you elaborate there, or do you limit the acknowledgment of ugly truths to only those that offend your own cultural and political sensibilities?

This particular post is completely adolescent on just about every level.

You’re leaving us hanging though. We’re not supposed to kid ourselves why people hunt (men mostly. Rubes mostly, I presume). You haven’t given us the your Obama or Thomas Frank like insight here. Whats the punchline, whats the reason? European male patriarchy? What is it?