All Aboard: Stephon Marbury: "I think we don't say anything about people who shoot deer or shoot other animals," the Knicks point guard told an Albany TV station. "You know, from what I understand, dog fighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."
Mark Twain: “It is better to remain quiet and thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.”
Tickets Please: I recently participated in an on-air interview with Mike Hogan and Adrion “Pee-Wee” Smith during the “Inside The Argos” program on The Fan 590. Mike asked me to comment on the quote by Marbury that appears above. He was interested in my opinion as he knew that I was a hunter. Mike asked what the difference between hunting and dog-fighting was. I told him one of the main differences was that hunting was legal and dog-fighting was not. I was stating the obvious, but, I feel that this fact cannot be overstated. I have heard similar comments concerning the similarity between dog fighting and deer hunting from other people interviewed in the media as well as from people I rub elbows with. I would like to expound on why this obvious yet essential point differentiates the two activities.
Since hunting in general, and deer hunting in particular, is a legal activity it follows that it is under the watchful eye of the public. The activity does take place off the beaten path; however, it is open to scrutiny from landowners, outdoors people, and Conservation Officers. Hunting is also placed before the public in the form of magazines, television shows, internet sites, trade shows and books. It falls under the responsibilities of the Ministry of Natural Resources. Thus government agencies keep tabs on the happenings in the hunting community. Is this no different from dog fighting? The dark details of dog fighting are not known to the public. The recent investigation of Michael Vick has brought some facts to light, but, information about this canine enterprise is scarce. That is the rule for illegal activities - they are participated in behind closed doors.
Hunting’s legality leads to it being regulated. Governments, with input from stakeholders such as hunters, outdoorsmen and outdoorswomen, scientists, naturalists, conservationists, and even anti-hunters, make laws to govern the activity and those who participate in it. It seems to me that dog-fighting and dog-fighters answer to nobody. This secret society answers only to itself. Deer hunting has been deemed acceptable by the public and it remains under enforceable guidelines, rules, and laws which is the way it should be.
Deer hunting is also a tool for benefit of the environment. Government agencies use hunting as a method of managing animal populations so they remain at stable and healthy levels. They require hunters to pay money for licenses to participate. Often this money is returned to the system to aid environmental issues in many ways.
As legal activities, hunting and fishing also facilitate our economy in Ontario with over $3 billion in economic activity. Hunting’s legitimacy allows it to contribute such benefits. There are many people across North America who are employed in various jobs directly due to the outdoors industry. There are certainly economics tied to dog fighting, but it is mostly gambling-related and I assume that this is why it is a federal offence.
Deer hunting’s legal position in our society leads to several things: it is under the scrutiny of society, it is regulated by government with many interested parties having input, it provides economic benefits, and it provides a valuable service to the environment. This is not an exhaustive list by any means. These are a few examples of how being a legal activity makes deer hunting different from dog fighting. I could also go on about many other issues such as: the inherent prolonged suffering of dogs in dog fighting versus the intended minimal suffering intended to deer by hunters, the use of venison as a source of food versus the seemingly senseless death of fighting dogs, the penchant for hunters to contribute time and money to environmental groups and causes, or the vast legal and storied tradition of hunting versus the unknown, illegal history of dog fighting. You may not agree with hunting. But you cannot say that it is the same as dog fighting. I have only focused on the most obvious difference which separates the two activities which places them beyond logical association: one is legal, the other is not.
Last Stop: This has been a difficult year for professional sports. Gambling, drugs, official’s integrity and other issues have put the pressure on North America’s paid athletes and their employers. I think it is apparent that these problems have always been there. The difference is that they come to light more regularly and more rapidly now than they have in the past. The question I have is: “How much will the fans put up with?” Like it or not, the fans can have the greatest reforming influence on professional sport. They only need to act upon their displeasure by not spending their money on sports-related expenditures or their time on watching them on TV or in the arenas. The players and the administrations have to work for improvements too, but, the fans and their spending habits will have the last say.
No comments:
Post a Comment