The dichotomy between hunters and conservationists is pronounced. Many conservationists are or were hunters but most hunters are not conservationists. But what sets the two apart?
A hunter takes game in any possible legal fasion irrespective of wildlife cycles or the effects or impacts his actions have on wildlife or his future hunting opportunities. His motivations for hunting are varied but a hunter usually wants to kill something, or "tag out", to put meat in the freezer or even just kill for the trophy, for example big antlers.
Even though a hunter may follow the laws and rules set out by supposed qualified wildlife biologists and credentialised wildlife managers, their actions may be detrimental to wildlife in any number of ways but usually will lower populations and make them younger overall. However, it doesn't matter to a hunter what the result of poor policy of so called "government wildlife managers" will be on herd numbers and structure. A hunter believes their actions to be both valid and legitimate as they have been sanctioned by the state. Hey afterall, 5-10 years of bull draw and you finally drew your either ### bull tag right?
A conservationist on the other hand usually is a very experienced hunter acutely tuned to nature and wildlife. He is on a different level and understands the implications of his behaviour and how it affects wildlife and game populations. He realises every shot is part of a management strategy to either increase the herd, reduce it if absolutely necessary, or improve it in some meaningful way.
Many conservationists also donate to conservation organisations like their local wildlife federation or Ducks Unlimited. Or better still, they own or purchase lands to practice their craft and manage wildlife in sustainable ways. In essence a hunter-conservationist is self sufficient and self reliant, as he relies on his knowledge of wildlife and his lands for opportunities...which also leaves more wildlife for non landowners who he might have competed with had he hunted public land or provincial forests, which he knows are already heavily hunted and poorly managed.
But these are 't the only things that separate hunters and conservationists from one another. The most important thing is that conservationists make every attempt to leave nature better than when they found it. They intend to leave a legacy, to pass down better hunting opportunities to the new generation than they had during their lifetime. But doing so requires some sacrifices. Sacrifices that most hunters simply are not interested in making.
So are you a hunter or a conservationist? Are you ready to start managing wildlife or just keep shooting it cause it's still legal? Are you ready to start supporting conservation organisations above and beyond the $40 tag? Let's learn from some conservationists the steps that they use to manage game. What are you conservationists doing that sets you apart from the average hunter? How do we get these guys to take a more active role in wildlife conservation and sustainable management?
A hunter takes game in any possible legal fasion irrespective of wildlife cycles or the effects or impacts his actions have on wildlife or his future hunting opportunities. His motivations for hunting are varied but a hunter usually wants to kill something, or "tag out", to put meat in the freezer or even just kill for the trophy, for example big antlers.
Even though a hunter may follow the laws and rules set out by supposed qualified wildlife biologists and credentialised wildlife managers, their actions may be detrimental to wildlife in any number of ways but usually will lower populations and make them younger overall. However, it doesn't matter to a hunter what the result of poor policy of so called "government wildlife managers" will be on herd numbers and structure. A hunter believes their actions to be both valid and legitimate as they have been sanctioned by the state. Hey afterall, 5-10 years of bull draw and you finally drew your either ### bull tag right?
A conservationist on the other hand usually is a very experienced hunter acutely tuned to nature and wildlife. He is on a different level and understands the implications of his behaviour and how it affects wildlife and game populations. He realises every shot is part of a management strategy to either increase the herd, reduce it if absolutely necessary, or improve it in some meaningful way.
Many conservationists also donate to conservation organisations like their local wildlife federation or Ducks Unlimited. Or better still, they own or purchase lands to practice their craft and manage wildlife in sustainable ways. In essence a hunter-conservationist is self sufficient and self reliant, as he relies on his knowledge of wildlife and his lands for opportunities...which also leaves more wildlife for non landowners who he might have competed with had he hunted public land or provincial forests, which he knows are already heavily hunted and poorly managed.
But these are 't the only things that separate hunters and conservationists from one another. The most important thing is that conservationists make every attempt to leave nature better than when they found it. They intend to leave a legacy, to pass down better hunting opportunities to the new generation than they had during their lifetime. But doing so requires some sacrifices. Sacrifices that most hunters simply are not interested in making.
So are you a hunter or a conservationist? Are you ready to start managing wildlife or just keep shooting it cause it's still legal? Are you ready to start supporting conservation organisations above and beyond the $40 tag? Let's learn from some conservationists the steps that they use to manage game. What are you conservationists doing that sets you apart from the average hunter? How do we get these guys to take a more active role in wildlife conservation and sustainable management?
Last edited:
