May
1999
Can “Canned
Hunts” Survive?
By
Peter Muller |
|
|
Canned hunting is different from regular hunting
in a number of ways. First, the “preserve” is fenced in so that
the “target animals” have little chance of avoiding or fleeing
from hunters. Second, specific animals are released to accommodate the
hunter’s taste. Third, hunting methods and weapon regulations do
not apply on these privately owned lands. Therefore, victims can be stabbed,
speared, strangled, stomped, or shot with bullets or arrows. One report
came to our organization [Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting (CASH)],
of a pig that was stabbed hundreds of times by a hunting party.
Most hunting preserves lure hunters with animals who are released on
schedule just for the booked hunt. Canned hunt preserves advertise widely
in hunting
magazines and over the Internet. The following is a typical list of the
species available and the “trophy fee”: Axis Deer, $1,350; Aoudad
Sheep, $1,500; Fallow Deer, $1,350; Elk, $3,500 up; Red Sheep, $4,500.
If a hunter is on a tight budget, he or she can always kill a boar for
$50. If hunters don’t see what they want, they’re invited to
call for prices of animals they’d like to kill. Should canned hunters
be concerned that they won’t get their money’s worth, canned
hunt operators offer a warranty, so to speak, called “No kill, no
pay.” This warranty was adjusted when it was discovered that too
many hunters were apparently merely wounding animals and then not paying.
Now some canned hunting operators have changed their policy to “No
kill/no wound, no pay.”
No doubt based on experience with hunters who were lousy shots, canned
hunt operators now include warnings that there will be a full charge
for
wounded and lost game. Operators now ask that killers take away any animals
they cripple (see <www.bedford-pa.com/fish-gro/hunting.htm> for
more details). While it seems hard to miss an animal at ranges extending
from three feet to 35 yards—the range advertised by these businesses—it
obviously happens far too often. Once the animal dies—often after
multiple wounds—the canned hunt club will either field-dress or stuff
the “trophy” for the hunter’s mantle piece. Sometimes the
club will exchange the killed animal for a pre-dressed animal that’s
“ready to go.”
The Clientele
While some traditional hunters disapprove of canned hunts,
not all do. According to “Canned Hunts: The Other Side of the Fence,”
a brochure published by the Fund for Animals, the Izaak Walton League
has a policy against canned hunting, whereas the Safari Club [see sidebar]
and the National Rifle Association defend the practice.
In an article entitled “Canned Hunts” that appeared in Audubon
magazine in January 1992, the author, Ted Williams, lists many luminaries
among the clients of canned hunting. George Bush and Bill Clinton were
on his list. I myself heard Rush Limbaugh brag about his visit to a canned
duck shoot. In the piece, Williams, himself a hunter, offers vivid descriptions
of what went on during a canned hunt. One hunter, Sonny Milstead, an orthopedic
surgeon from Shreveport, Louisiana, killed a lion with three shots. He
followed that by killing a tiger with another three or four shots. The
animals shot were not at all wary or alert to any danger, and were relaxing
and resting before being killed. “In fact,” writes Williams,
“before being ‘harvested,’ African lions raised as pets
would amble over and lick your hands.” Williams tells of one hunter
who had paid $10,500 to kill a leopard, a cougar and a Bengal Tiger. Unfortunately,
Williams continues, “before the tiger left its cage, [the hunter]
fainted and had to be taken back to the ranch to be revived.” Williams
says that tigers, leopards, cougars and jaguars are often fed chicken
to make them less aggressive just before they are to be shot. Some of
them become reluctant to leave their cages, so are shot while still in
them.
Boo the Zoo
According to News and Views, an electronic publication
of the American Federation of Aviculture (<www.softbills. com/news.htm>),
many of the animals used in canned hunts come, directly or indirectly,
from zoos and other animal exhibitors. The larger zoos try to hide their
involvement by citing their membership in the American Association of
Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA), which has certification requirements
regarding the disposition of surplus animals and proscribes their sale
to canned hunt preserves. However, even a cursory look at the facts exposes
the AAZPA standards as ineffectual. Not only are there over 15,000 animal
exhibitors in the country, only 160 of whom belong to the AAZPA, but even
the largest zoos are not exempt from contributing to the canned hunt pool.
Nine board members of the San Antonio Zoo are themselves owners of canned
hunt preserves. Sixteen of the largest zoos have admitted to either inadvertently
or deliberately selling surplus animals to canned hunt operators. Zoos
have organized a Species Survival Plan (SSP), in which they coordinate
breeding efforts for endangered species. However, zoos often breed beyond
the requirement of the SSP because the public loves to see baby snow leopards
and gorillas. Many of these SSP babies are too inbred to be genetically
useful for further breeding. These individuals are then sold to dealers
as surplus. News and Views reports that these animals frequently
wind up on ranches that breed exotics for canned hunts.
According to an August 1994 article in Animal People, there are
approximately 4,000 canned hunt preserves in the United States and about
500,000 hunters patronize them every year. Three-quarters of the preserves
specialize in providing birds to shoot. Breeders sell about 40 million
birds (pheasants, quail, partridges, and ducks) every year to canned hunt
preserves. Although there is no register of canned hunt areas, most are
believed to be in Texas. In New York State there are shooting preserves
located in Taghkanic, Catskill, Coxsackie, two sites in Pine Plains, Homer
and DeLancey, as well as others further north.
Laws outlawing or restricting canned hunts already exist in New Jersey,
California, Wisconsin, and Rhode Island. Currently Oregon has legislation
pending. Recently, New York State Assemblyman Scott Stringer sponsored
a bill (A1738) which bans canned hunts being performed on fewer than ten
acres in New York State. The bill passed the Assembly in March 1999. A
companion bill (S3939) with 12 sponsors is currently before the State
Senate. While this bill may be beneficial for the larger canned hunt operators
because it reduces competition, it should be considered a first step toward
a total ban. Please ask your representatives to vote for canned hunting
bans, and mobilize your community. Communities have to ask themselves
if they want to be subjected to people coming to town for the express
purpose of callously and wantonly torturing and killing animals. If the
answer is no, then it’s imperative that local bans be passed to prevent
this slaughter from continuing.
Peter Muller is Chair of the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting
(CASH), a Division of Wildlife Watch, Inc. CASH can be reached at P.O.Box
562, New Paltz, NY 12561. Tel.: 914-255-4227; Fax: 914-256-9113; Website:
http://all-creatures. org/cash,
Email: Wildwatch @worldnet.
att.net
|
|
© STEALTH TECHNOLOGIES INC. |
|
