PDA

View Full Version : COMMENT: No reason to hunt mourning doves


Ktulu
09-09-2003, 11:05 AM
Michigan bill would be wasteful cost to birds, environment

September 9, 2003

BY WAYNE PACELLE

Michigan has since 1905 barred hunters from shooting mourning doves for target practice. Many things have changed over 98 years, but this policy has not, and neither has the reason behind it: Shooting doves is wasteful, unsporting and inhumane.

State legislators have heard many appeals through the years to authorize dove hunting, but have always rejected them. Many legislators rightly recognized that there is no adequate justification for shooting a harmless bird so small that its body yields but an ounce or two of meat. But that has not deterred state Rep. Susan Tabor, R-Delta Township, from again introducing a bill, HB 5029, to establish a season.

Typically, if someone wants to take the life of an animal, he or she tries to argue that the creature is a pest: the deer overpopulate, the raccoons spread rabies, the gophers dig up crops, and so on. The task of killing is thus made to seem less selfish and more socially beneficial if the critters have cost us some dough or made life a little more dangerous or inconvenient.

But it's hard to turn the gentle dove into a marauding pterodactyl. They don't possess a blood-curdling screech, but sound off with a soft coo. Doves don't overpopulate; they regulate their own numbers without any help from us, and have done so in Michigan for nearly a century. They don't destroy crops; they are ground-feeding birds that help farmers by eating weed seeds. They don't eat your ornamental shrubs. In fact, they leave your Christmas ornaments alone, too. There are no reports of doves tearing down or even tangling outside ornaments and lights and ruining the holidays for the kids.

They don't carry or spread avian influenza, monkey pox, chronic wasting disease, or any other infectious scourge. They don't tip over trash cans, although they have been known to perch on them from time to time. They don't even leave droppings on golf courses as some other birds do, thereby mercifully keeping the powerful "putt lobby" out of this fracas.

It wasn't doves that attacked Tippi Hedren in Alfred Hitchcock's horror film "The Birds." Doves are not well-known in the movies or on television, except for their end-of-episode flights on television's former hit "Touched by an Angel." They are commonly recognized, however, as the bird of peace in that perennial best-seller known as the Bible, in which we are advised to be as "wise as serpents and harmless as doves."

Clearly, some hunters would take pleasure in shooting doves. But it's not as if hunters can't already take aim at a wide range of other birds. There are, of course, many sizes and species of geese and all the dabbling and diving ducks. There are the upland birds such as pheasant, partridge and grouse. Then there are turkeys and a flock of others from coots and other rails to snipe and woodcock. It's enough avian diversity to keep any bird hunter busy with both barrels ablaze.

While there are no particularly good reasons to hunt doves, there are plenty of reasons not to hunt them. Data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reveal a wounding rate in excess of 20 percent, which means that one in every four or five birds shot is not retrieved.

Dove shooting also translates into the discharge of mounds of lead shot, which pollutes our environment and poisons other wildlife. In fact, the lead shot that hunters discharge on a day of gunning far outweighs the mass of the birds they kill.

What's more, a September hunting season is a prescription for orphaning young not yet weaned from their parents. And there's not much sport in shooting birds that tens of thousands of Michiganders feed and watch and accustom to a human presence.

But to oppose this tired idea of dove hunting, all you really have to do is look out your window. There, you may see a dove outside your home and hear its gentle call. A bird simply living its life, walking around or flying about to gather seeds and other foods to survive.

To paraphrase Plutarch: Though the boys throw stones in sport, the doves do not die in sport, but in earnest. It's a lesson to pass on to child and adult alike.

WAYNE PACELLE is senior vice president for the Humane Society of the United States. Write to him in care of the Free Press Editorial Page, 600 W. Fort St., Detroit, MI 48226.

http://www.freep.com/voices/columnists/edoves9_20030909.htm

Dan
09-09-2003, 01:15 PM
Dr. Michael Fox - Humane Society of the US - "Only a few of the million you kill would have bitten you" - Opposition to the use of bug spray.

John Grady - HSUS - "The Humane Society strongly opposes recreational and sport hunting. It is wrong to hunt and kill animals for these purposes."

Also - "Little in America can be more cruel than recreational bow hunting"

---------------

The Humane Society has a reputation of being the pet rescue group. If that was solely the case, I would support them 100%. But unfortunatly, HSUS isn't that. They are no different than PETA, or any of them, and their funders are the same folks that fund anti-2nd Amendment, anti-freedom, and other leftist causes. The Tides Foundation.

Ktulu
09-09-2003, 02:23 PM
Dr. Michael Fox - Humane Society of the US - "Only a few of the million you kill would have bitten you" - Opposition to the use of bug spray.


This is interesting. I figured most of these people were all for protecting animals but when it comes to bugs they’re all, "ooo spider, kill it kill it."

M1911A1
09-09-2003, 08:05 PM
The way I figure it, he must fall in to the category of:

The Anti-Gun Male
by Julia Gorin

LET'S be honest. He's scared of the thing. That's understandable--so am I. But as a girl I have the luxury of being able to admit it. I don't have to
masquerade squeamishness as grand principle - in the interest of mankind, no less.

A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12 year old cousin playing with his uncle's gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self esteem.

He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.

Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for ALL men against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are pure, who
perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy solutions to teenage void and aggressiveness, and to parent and teacher negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor, psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.

People are suspicious of what they do not know - and not only does this man not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do, or the number of people who have successfully used one to defend themselves from injury or death. But he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men out there who don't sit cross-legged.  That they're able to handle a firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear.

Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer than he might if thrown out on his own into a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet street where he would feel naked and helpless.  Lacking the confidence that would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.

The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some assertiveness and a certain self reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife--there was nothing I could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it otherwise is.

No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he has an affair with your
wife.  Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest not to admit that owning a firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the tradeoff with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his life - if even to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or, should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).

In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent
alpha breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his freedom lies in this other man's containment. 

Jim Simmons
09-10-2003, 01:24 PM
The first article reminded me of a question that I (a nonhunter) have been meaning to ask hunters.

I know that you're required by State and Fed law to use steel shot when hunting waterfowl, right?

Are you also required to use the steel shot when shotgun hunting other birds?

How about when hunting other animals with shotgun?

G22
09-10-2003, 02:27 PM
Use of non-toxic shot is required statewide for all waterfowl hunting. When you hunt to take ducks, geese, mergansers, coots, moorhens, rails or snipe anywhere in the state of Michigan during the waterfowl season, you may not possess or use shotshells loaded with a material other than non-toxic steel, bismuth, tungsten-iron, tungsten-polymer, tungsten matix or other shot determined by the USFWS to be non-toxic. Waterfowl hunters using muzzleloaders must also use USFWS approved non-toxic shot. Shells loaded with lead shot may be used to hunt other small game species, including woodcock.

Other animals are fair game with lead shot.
<edited to add>
Including all open season birds not mentioned in above quote from DNR.

GreggB
09-10-2003, 06:32 PM
May I point out here that mourning doves are not actually doves but are a member of the pidgeon family. So all of these SNAGs concerned about the"doves" should research their facts.

ANIMAL
09-11-2003, 12:12 AM
They ain't all that easy to hit either.

Jim, Just waterfowl

Jim Simmons
09-11-2003, 01:01 AM
Thanks you all for your responses.

I support the Dove Hunting Bill even though I'm not a hunter. Basically, I support it because there's no logical reason to continue to ban mourning dove hunting, especially when there's so many people who want to do it.

A lot of people nowadays think the casual banning of this or that is okay. What so few people realize is that if you allow every little thing to be banned . . .

pretty soon you can't do much of anything.

Autumnlovr
09-11-2003, 07:54 AM
You know, ignorant people like this tick me off. The part about doves not overpopulating is crap. I had one nest on top of my air conditioner a few years back & she laid 3 sets of 4-5 eggs in one season. (I did try to kick her out MANY times but she kept building her nest over again.) You know how doves are regulated? Indiana has a liberal hunting season & when the birds migrate.....hunters in Indiana have a field day.
PULL!

gruvinbass
09-11-2003, 08:25 AM
One of the number of reasons I head for IL in September.....dove season opens :D

Kimber45
09-11-2003, 09:07 AM
May I point out here that mourning doves are not actually doves but are a member of the pidgeon family. So all of these SNAGs concerned about the"doves" should research their facts.

Actually it is the other way around. What we call pidgeons are Rock Doves. They and the Mourning Dove are in the Family Columbidae.

Kimber45
09-11-2003, 09:09 AM
You know, ignorant people like this tick me off. The part about doves not overpopulating is crap. I had one nest on top of my air conditioner a few years back & she laid 3 sets of 4-5 eggs in one season. (I did try to kick her out MANY times but she kept building her nest over again.) You know how doves are regulated? Indiana has a liberal hunting season & when the birds migrate.....hunters in Indiana have a field day.
PULL!

If you believe the Audubon Master Field Guide the Mourning Dove is one of the most common and wdespread native birds in North America.

jbindt
09-12-2003, 01:24 AM
If you are hunting.
you should field dress it and take it home and cook it.
If you are shooting an animal only for fun.
YOU ARE AN ASS !
Take up golf,
You are giving the rest of us a bad name.

ANIMAL
09-12-2003, 01:51 AM
YOU ARE AN a** !

Is this directed at someone in particular?

G22
09-12-2003, 09:49 AM
If you are hunting.
you should field dress it and take it home and cook it.
If you are shooting an animal only for fun.
YOU ARE AN a** !
Take up golf,
You are giving the rest of us a bad name.

So tell me, do you feild dress & cook & eat Crow, Opposim, Coyote, Skunk, Racoon, Rat, & other pests?

Got any yummy recepies for these?

I guess my point is, I agree with you that you should eat what you kill, UNLESS its a pest causing dammage. Shooting an animal just for fun is not my kind of fun either. Especially since the non-varment type are sooooo goooood.