Why we should refrain from speaking to press

G

Gerald N

Active member
http://www.bostonglobe.com/...0dOJMI1VL/story.html

Read on why this hunter is after sea ducks. No fault pointed as I realize the press cherry picks what they use for their articles and twist the story so it is most appealing to their readership. No matter what is said to a liberal journalist they will not use our words to defend our heritage, at least in these parts.

Just got done reading comments and wow how twisted some, most, minds are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I assume you're talking about the "sea ducks taste like ****" comment?

Don't blame the reporter for that, he's just reporting--and he didn't make a big deal of it.

If someone said that in my boat, I'd tell them that in that case I won't be taking you sea ducking. (Not that it's much of an issue--I don't chase eiders.)
 
I actually thought it was a pretty straight-up story, with no snide comments about shooting ducks for trophies instead of eating. The focus seemed to be on the dangers of cold-water hunting. Funny those kinds of deaths don't get reported across the country like almost any other kind of death does.
 
While the medical and first responder aspects of the article are informative the accounts from the hunters leave their mark on the non hunting readers-"they taste like " and decor for the wall. I am not comfortable with people thinking that I go out waterfowling for "wall decor" and not to consume what I harvest. Not throwing taxidermy under the bus as it is a great way to honor the hunt and the animal and I have my fair share of it in the house. Perhaps a better take or representation of waterfowlers for the article would have been a sit down interview with the hunter/s speaking of the why he takes part in this tradition: solace, the sun rise on a cold morning, sun set on a cold evening, seals, deer on the marsh, snowy owls, bald eagles swooping the decoys, other close encounters with wildlife, finding tid bits on the marsh or shoreline to take back with you weather it be a kayak or driftwood and bringing us back to a simpler time, getting in touch with nature where our food has an oppurtunity to enjoy a natural life outside of a pen and to eat a diverse and natural diet free of mans manipulation for profit.

Furthermore, allowing pictures of them with the game for a newspaper in Arkansas might be great but up here in the Boston area is not what non sporting readers need to see in my opinion. I never set up in an area where people can see me shoot game or display harvested game in public areas. While many in Massachusetts do not hunt they also do not object and I cannot think of any better of a way to turn them off to hunting than to display harvested game or harvest game in front of them.

I showed the article to a few non hunters today and their take after reading was not a positive representation based on the hunters comments. Also look at all the negative comments and while some are very radical it shows the divide and the last thing we want to do is encite extremists. Last time extremists mobilized here in MA they outlawed conibear traps under the disguise of tv ads with a dog in a land set leg trap that was illegal at the time. Just my thoughts and concerns up here where something I enjoy is constantly under fire and in my opinion we need to make sure we represent ourselves in our best interests for the betterment and longevity of our endeavor. Thanks for the comments and hope I am the only one finding fault that way damage is limited.
 
While the medical and first responder aspects of the article are informative the accounts from the hunters leave their mark on the non hunting readers-"they taste like " and decor for the wall. I am not comfortable with people thinking that I go out waterfowling for "wall decor" and not to consume what I harvest. Not throwing taxidermy under the bus as it is a great way to honor the hunt and the animal and I have my fair share of it in the house. Perhaps a better take or representation of waterfowlers for the article would have been a sit down interview with the hunter/s speaking of the why he takes part in this tradition: solace, the sun rise on a cold morning, sun set on a cold evening, seals, deer on the marsh, snowy owls, bald eagles swooping the decoys, other close encounters with wildlife, finding tid bits on the marsh or shoreline to take back with you weather it be a kayak or driftwood and bringing us back to a simpler time, getting in touch with nature where our food has an oppurtunity to enjoy a natural life outside of a pen and to eat a diverse and natural diet free of mans manipulation for profit.

Furthermore, allowing pictures of them with the game for a newspaper in Arkansas might be great but up here in the Boston area is not what non sporting readers need to see in my opinion. I never set up in an area where people can see me shoot game or display harvested game in public areas. While many in Massachusetts do not hunt they also do not object and I cannot think of any better of a way to turn them off to hunting than to display harvested game or harvest game in front of them.

I showed the article to a few non hunters today and their take after reading was not a positive representation based on the hunters comments. Also look at all the negative comments and while some are very radical it shows the divide and the last thing we want to do is encite extremists. Last time extremists mobilized here in MA they outlawed conibear traps under the disguise of tv ads with a dog in a land set leg trap that was illegal at the time. Just my thoughts and concerns up here where something I enjoy is constantly under fire and in my opinion we need to make sure we represent ourselves in our best interests for the betterment and longevity of our endeavor. Thanks for the comments and hope I am the only one finding fault that way damage is limited.
Click to expand...


Mr. Michaud

I agree with most of what you have stated. Though I didn't feel the article gave a fair representation of me and why I waterfowl, I also didn't think the writer went out of his way to cast a negative light. I think he by dumb luck stumbled across a group of guys that were good at running their mouths and not thinking how this would sound to the non-hunting NE crowd. If this were published in a hunting/fishing type magazine (or maybe even their local Ohio newspaper), I still wouldn't agree with their reasons to hunt, but this discussion would be different.

Those who don't think this could be taken the "wrong way", read the comments section following the article. One commenter even described these hunters as "waterfowl assassins." Mr. Michaud is spot on for the local reaction.

While I don't personally have any mounts in the house (nor is it a desire of mine at this point in my life) I question the comment: " In short order, each of the men shoots his daily allotment of four eider, including a few they describe as “studs” that will make great wall décor." How many are they getting mounted? While I fully understand the odds of taking that prime specimen first is low, once you have it in hand, why shoot something you have no intentions of eating. Wouldn't shooting after those "wall studs" were taken be considered "wanton waste"?

Chuck
 
Last edited:
is defatted and grilled, scoter and eider are pretty good fare. Eider rare is rather beefy in flavor. Yeah, the idiot needs some lessons in what to say to the morons from the liberal media!!!
 
I read that last weekend when I was out on the Cape. What I thought at the time was it was a good article for a major paper. It made duck hunting seem risky, but in general I thought it was fine. As far as seaducks tasting like shit.... papers so seldom get stuff right, I was glad to see some truth printed :). I don't/didn't see it as a biggie. The people who actually care why we hunt are already decided (both pro and anti) and those who don't aren't going to care if it goes in a pot or on the wall (or in the trash).

I do agree with your point of being careful around the media and this article could have been written in a way to make the hunters look horrible if that was the intent of the writer.

T
 
What, no comments about gun safety in the header photo? One guy above and behind another guy. Lower guy stands up and gets a load of shot in the back of the skull. Upper guy gets excited and sees a low bird then swings shot into the lower guys head. Just being in front of the muzzle without triple ear protection is mind boggling stupid.

That photo is the stupidest part of this hole article.
 
We all assume the dangers when we go out, but most people are oblivious to what and why, we do what we do. I took the purpose of this article as simply informing non-duck hunters as to the dangers of cold water exposure while waterfowl hunting, especially during the second season or when pursuing sea ducks. I don't think the intent was about gun safety or the ethics surrounding eat what you shoot. I thought it was a good article, spoke some truth, reiterated PFD'S and dry suits and also was a plug for Mr. Smith and his business.
 
Interesting read. It appeared to be fairly written without the writer going out of his way to make the group look bad or good. I don't have mounts anymore, I used to have several but gave them away to neighborhood kids, sporting clubs, etc. They are not much of a "thing" for me anymore and I also dont find myself wanting to hunt/shoot anything that I know/have heard that will taste bad. If I knew someone who wanted to eat or mount such a bird, I might make an effort to take one. As far as the comment threads at the bottom of the story, I rarely read these since they usually are blistering to the positive or the negative. Kind of hard to find a comments section that divides down the middle.


dc
 
I do believe that refraining from speaking to the press, or non hunters, does more damage than good. Intelligent answers, and keeping a cool head may be the way to go. Hunters pump Billions of dollars into the economy, and those we purchase from advertise, in Papers, Magazines ,TV and the Internet. Plus we foot the bill for Conservation. Each one of us should be prepared to answer questions posed to us. Now a days you never know when you will be called upon to represent us. In short, Don't Be Stupid.
 
I do believe that refraining from speaking to the press, or non hunters, does more damage than good. Intelligent answers, and keeping a cool head may be the way to go. Hunters pump Billions of dollars into the economy, and those we purchase from advertise, in Papers, Magazines ,TV and the Internet. Plus we foot the bill for Conservation. Each one of us should be prepared to answer questions posed to us. Now a days you never know when you will be called upon to represent us. In short, Don't Be Stupid.


Agreed. We sure need better spokespersons than Ted Nugent. How come my great grandfather got Teddy Roosevelt, my grandfather Aldo Leopold and Ding Darling, my father Curt Gowdy, and I have a bunch of bozos on tv?
Click to expand...
 
Agreed. We sure need better spokespersons than Ted Nugent. How come my great grandfather got Teddy Roosevelt, my grandfather Aldo Leopold and Ding Darling, my father Curt Gowdy, and I have a bunch of bozos on tv?

__________________________________________________

Amen to that!
 
Well put Jeff about Ted Nugent et al as to what a pitiful example they are for the hunting community.

Glad to see others share my concerns and I can see point that while malice may not have been the intention of the reporter; quotes were certainly selected that cast a shadow over us to neutral readers. I agree we have people for and against hunting but much like the rest of the political landscape we have a significant segment in the middle that is neutral. Neutrality can be influenced and in a state of some six million residents (or more) with less than 6000 (plus or minus a few) active resident and non resident waterfowl hunters, we certainly know that the pro hunting segment is far smaller than the general population.

My concerns that have been expressed and realized by some are the exact reason why so many companies have a spokesperson and prohibit the rank and file employees from speaking with the press. Great dialogue and thanks all for weighing in.
 
I live in an area where sport hunting and fishing are still outdoor pursuits with high levels of participation in the general population. Yet, our local media outlets are populated largely by "reporters" fresh out of college media programs, largely from urban areas. This is their first job. As a frequent attendee at Public meetings on deer management, Great Lakes Fishery management, watershed and wetlands management issues discussions, etc. I am amazed at the dichotomy between what I "hear" in the meeting room and what is "reported" from that group discussion. I don't think it is a direct consequence of a "liberal agenda" as some have stated, but rather it reflects a near absolute lack of knowledge on how ecosystems function and wildlife and fish populations within these ecosystems interact to remain in a fully functional state, as well as maintain some semblance of homeostasis.

Ted Nugent is a former Michigan resident, he now resides in Texas. He has quite a large following among the new wave of "I killed NINE of these today sportsman." His rants employ the same weapon that Sampson used to kill 1,000 Philistines. The difference is that he directs this weapon at non-hunters and fishers, moving likely the same number to despise people who participate in these two outdoor pursuits on a near-daily basis...

I would offer that is incumbent on each of use to engage the media at every opportunity presented to attempt to convey the worth and value of hunting and fishing, from an economic, cultural fabric maintanance, and ecosystem oversight and management perspective. We should take some time individually to sit down and craft a personal "mission statement" that encapsulates these values and benefits in sound bite length that can readily be incorporated into a ninety-sceond news feature. These are the editing constraints that guide reporters-make it easy for them to grab it and report it.

If you define successful salesmanship as the ability to convey a perspective that results in generating broader acceptance and adherence, or simply positively altering someone's perspective on a given subject or point of information, then we, as sportsman, all should be striving to become better salesman. Because in our current generation and cultural environment, sales are WAY DOWN! Remember the definition of entropy?
 
Last edited:
You may have to give the American Sportsman, and Mr. Gowdy, some of the credit as to Why? As I do believe that's when it transitioned from book form, to TV, and it pretty much has gone down hill from there......

The question is, if these new shows/entertainment do Not represent most hunters, why are they still on?
 
You may have to give the American Sportsman, and Mr. Gowdy, some of the credit as to Why? As I do believe that's when it transitioned from book form, to TV, and it pretty much has gone down hill from there......

The question is, if these new shows/entertainment do Not represent most hunters, why are they still on?
Click to expand...
That is a very valid question, Vince. Does this "chunk" of the current Blood Sports particpant group buy the "stuff" and watch the shows and commercials? Or, are they the true majority of hunters and fishers....?

I just wish they would pick-up their empties on a consistant basis within the camera shot! That would go a very long way toward setting a good example of proper and responsible conduct in the field.
 
RL~

I completely agree with your thoughts. Let's never step away from an opportunity to put our best feet forward. Very few people of any generation truly understand the apparent contradiction/paradox they see between hunting and wildlife conservation. I think we each have a responsibility to fill the knowledge gap - in a thoughtful, respectful and open-minded way.

All the best,

SJS
 
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140126/NEWS/401260320


Well, looks like I have finally found the article that I have been looking for without irrelevant information. Dr. Angell has done a good job communicating with the press and the press conveying his information without weighing it down with extraneous statements. Glad to finally see an article with this content as for some it provides life saving advice from a very unfortunate turn of events.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top