Psychologist to speak about hunting's image at University of Alaska Museum of the North
Published Monday, October 13, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!In the eyes of James Swan, the best thing that could happen to hunting in the United States would be for a movie to do for hunting what “A River Runs Through It” did for fly fishing.
“Within two years, there were 100,000 more fly fishermen on the street,” Swan said of the popular 1992 Academy-Award winning film directed by Robert Redford. “We haven’t had a movie like that on hunting.”
Swan, 65, will be a guest speaker at the University of Alaska Museum of the North on Tuesday night as part of the museum’s ongoing tribute to Alaska’s hunting and trapping heritage. He will speak at 7 p.m. Admission is free.
If hunting is to survive, something needs to be done to change the public’s image of hunters, said Swan, an environmental psychologist who has written books extolling the spiritual and emotional virtues of hunting. The future of hunting depends more on peoples’ perception of the sport and hunters than it does on habitat preservation and the threat posed by animal-rights organizations and the non-hunting public.
“Hunters are only 5 percent of the population. ... We’re a tiny minority group,” said Swan, a columnist for ESPN Outdoors. “Hunters are sort of a mystery to people. They don’t know who they are or what they’re doing.”
As a result, they are often portrayed by animal-rights activists as killing machines, when in reality they are front-line conservationists, he said.
“Hunters get a bum rap, and I think the only way we’re going to get that turned around is through creative work in the mainstream media,” Swan said, referring to movies and television shows like the now-canceled “The American Sportsman.”
Swan has authored two books — “In Defense of Hunting” and “The Sacred Art of Hunting” — about man’s connection to hunting and the land. The books examine the psychology of hunting and why it is important to a person’s mental health, as well as putting healthy food on the table.
“It ties you to the land,” Swan said of hunting. “It’s a deeply emotional and spiritual experience. It’s a touchstone of human nature.”
Jennifer Arseneau, education program leader at the museum, said Swan’s name came up during meetings about the hunting exhibit that has been on display at the museum since May and will remain on display until Nov. 30. Given his environmental and conservation background, in addition to his love for hunting, Swan “sort of bridges the gap between being a hunter and being somebody on the academic and education side of things,” he said
The number of small-game hunters in the U.S. has decreased dramatically in the past 40 or 50 years, said Swan, who grew up hunting and fishing on Lake Erie in Michigan. Very few people hunt rabbits, pheasants and squirrels any more, activities that were easy, cheap and appealing to young hunters. Now, most hunters set their sights on big game, such as deer. The result is that hunting has become “a rich man’s sport,” as Swan put it, which makes it harder to get children involved. Without young hunters moving up in the ranks, the number of hunters in the U.S. will continue to decline.
“You used to be able to talk to Farmer Joe and give him an extra pheasant to hunt on his land,” said Swan, who now lives in California. “That’s out the window now.”
Though he has visited Alaska three times to fish, Swan has never hunted in the Last Frontier. Given Alaska’s abundance of big game and the emphasis placed on subsistence, hunting in Alaska is very different than it is in the Lower 48, he said.
“You prize and cherish it,” he said of Alaskans’ attitude toward hunting and wilderness.
Alaska, he said, “gives you the opportunity to be immersed in such a dominant force of nature that it really makes you feel humble.”
For more information on Swan, go to www.jamesswan.com.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
I would love to learn more about hunting, its something that has always interested me to be honest. I never got the chance to get involved in it as a child, since my grandfather passed before he felt I was old enough. We did enjoy fishing together though, and I think I would have liked it.
I would also treasure a freezer full of moosemeat, or a nice bit of deer leather...
Ahhh, now we have a psychologist extolling the virtues of killing and maiming innocent beings for a cruel and violent activity called “sport.”
Humanity, at least the best of it, is defined by the ability to learn, change, grow and evolve. As we evolve, we no longer define ourselves by the number of animal skins hanging on our walls. As the interest in hunting wanes, nonviolent wildlife watching programs are showing explosive growth. They can support an economy that eclipses the one dependent on weapons and violence. I’m sure this is a bane to those crafty “dudes” at the NRA and Safari Club International.
Taking up arms against other living beings is embraced only by the truly repugnant among us. There is nothing ethical, responsible, or sporting about killing. Whenever I see a photograph of some moral vacuum grinning over his kill, I am always impressed by the striking moral and aesthetic superiority of the dead animal to the live one.
There are only two motives that I can come up with that explain such activity: The first being to have photos made with your gun and the bloody head of a dead animal in a pathetic attempt to prove to your friends that you are indeed manly; the second is that you are desperately trying to compensate for something more “private” that you’re lacking.
Promoting such a sadistic activity is a perfect example of why we live in such a hateful, violent world.
Wow Orly, talk about a rant. I just couldn't pass this one by. I am a female hunter and I was insulted by your post. I am doubtful that you are an Alaskan otherwise you would understand the value most of us place upon the animals we hunt. I have fully respected every animal I have ever shot and my husband and I are passing those beliefs on to our kids. In my mind hunting (and fishing) is for food, and it happens to be a fun activity. I don't classify it as a "sport" although that is the label that always seems to be used.
If a population of animals or fish can sustain some level of harvest, than why deny folks the opportunity to put some healthy protein in their freezers? This does not make one "repugnant", but rather practical and resourceful.
If you are a Fairbanksan, I suggest you attend the lecture referenced in this article, you may learn something.
i have left Fairbanks after living there for 32 years. If you have ever been around hunting & fishing, you understand that not all people that go hunting and fishing are trophy minded. it is great to get the big one (just like getting the best vegtables at the store), but it is not what everyone is after. Chicken halibut are better than the big ones to eat. but catching a 200 to 400 lb. one is great.
so Orly, in closing don't spout off on something you don't know the facts on. i could say you are probably a demacrat, but i might be incorrect since i don't know you.
dont let orly confuse the issue by throwing around such airy and intangible phrases such as "aesthetic superiority"- moose are deeeee-licious! cheers orly!
orly plants have feelings too, unless you do eat meat, you should visit a meat plant.
Goldstreamer suggested I visit meatplant unless I’m a vegetarian. Well, I am a vegetarian, and that is why I have made the choice not to eat anything with a face.
I find it so silly whenever anyone presents the “plants have feelings too” rhetoric. There is a difference between being sentient, and simply being alive, as plants are.
Being a sentient being means that one has the ability to experience both pleasure and pain. Plants lack the neurological and physiological structures that are present in humans and animals; therefore, they are not capable of feeling pain or pleasure.
Furthermore, pain serves as a practical function in both humans and animals. It is used as a signal to escape injury or death. It's about survival. Plants simply cannot use pain to aid in their survival, like humans, and animals can. Plants do not and cannot try to run away when we pick them.
When someone doesn't like the message, they usually try to distract from the real issue. The real issue here is maiming and slaughtering innocent beings for pleasure. This is the 21st century, and we certainly don’t need to kill sentient creatures for subsistence. To suggest that we need to track down and destroy pure souls to satisfy a primal urge is reprehensible at best.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.