psychology of a hunter
Many anti-hunters claim that sportsmen are psychologically damaged . They say we are sadistic and compare hunting trophies to the trophies taken by serial killers .
These assertions have zero foundation in any reality or psychological evidence . James Swan , author of In Defense of Hunting , is a retired college professor of psychology and environmental studies , and a founder of the division of environment , population and conservation psychology in the American Psychological Association . He ’ s taught at four universities and three psychology grad schools . In writing for NRA ' s American Hunter , Swan eviscerates these claims with evidence :
• Some of the most prominent psychologists of the 20th century have stated that hunting is motivated by a natural instinct and is beneficial to mental health , including Erich Fromm , Steven Kellert , Jan Dizard , Karl Menninger , Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung .
• Emory University professors Boyd Eaton , M . D ., anthropologist Majorie Shostak and psychiatristanthropologist Melvin Konner , M . D ., concluded just the opposite of anti-hunter claims : that denial of the hunting instinct can lead to psychopathology .
• In his own research of more than 400 professional journals , Swan found nearly 300 articles that use the word “ hunting .” None report any correlation between ethical hunters and psychopathology .
• The American Psychological Association reported that they weren ’ t aware of any research to support claims that hunters in general are prone to mental illness .
• Criminologist Chris Eskridge compared hunting license sales with violent crime rates by county , and found that as license sales increase , violent crime decreases .
Furniture , whether an antler chandelier , hide-covered chair or pillow , are pragmatic uses of animal parts from a successful hunt .
the only way the entire animal could be used .
Further , it is those imperiled African species that rely the most on “ trophy ” hunting . The conservation , anti-poaching and habitat enhancement and protection funding from hunting depends on the income generated from hunters willing to pay to hunt those select , mature , animals that have served their biological role . Without the funding from “ trophy ” hunting , wild habitats and ecosystems would be converted to more valuable agriculture fields to feed the booming populations found in many African countries .
If the rhetoric of the animal-rights movement were adopted and trophy hunting abandoned , not only would those individual animals that were to be hunted die anyway , their entire species would suffer as habitat disappeared and they were killed for meat or depredation of those new croplands . Of course , we know the ultimate goal of the animal-rights movement isn ’ t just trophy hunting of African species or predators here in the U . S ., but of all hunting for any animal . We know , too , that their rhetoric leads to more suffering and death of animals from the fallout of their policies that have passed stateside , where animals such as mountain lions and bears are killed by state officers due to increased depredation of livestock or attacks on humans . The meat from those animals isn ’ t used to feed anyone . The hides and skulls don ’ t adorn anyone ’ s wall , which is what proponents want . But worse , those animals still die , they are just killed quietly and are completely wasted as officers are usually required to dispose of the carcasses in the ditch or landfill . That is the real waste when it comes to wildlife , and an action that is universally denounced , but the truth behind the animalrights philosophy .
The next time you hear someone condemn trophy hunting , ask them what exactly they ’ re criticizing . Listen to them . Ask followup questions about those likely inaccurate beliefs and misplaced ethics , and what they actually believe and want to see for the world ’ s wildlife . And then explain how a trophy is so much more than just a head on a wall .
Adobe Stock ; Alamy
10 SPORTSMEN ’ S MONTHLY