The early conservationists, who were, by and large, from the upper class, drew their inspiration from the British gentry and, in particular, the British tradition of fair play in field sports. In Europe, hunting had been a leisure activity of the upper class. For many hunters, the privilege of all Americans to hunt was an emblem of American democracy. Hunting was no longer seen as a utilitarian activity, whose sole purpose was to procure meat; nor was it seen as the savage (unrestrained) encounter with the “ wild. ” Hunting was now seen as a democratic “ sport, ” one which should be played according to a body of rules that purportedly gave the animals a “ fair ” chance.
The new ethic of the “ good sportsman ” quickly found expression in a spate of new journals, such as American Sportsman (1871), Forest and Stream (1873), Field and Stream (1874), as well as in sportsmen ’ s clubs and associations. Together, these journals and associations helped hunters develop a common identity based on their allegiance to a well-defined code of conduct. According to Reiger, hunting had become more than a sport — it had become “ something approaching a ‘ world view, ’ even a religion ” (29).
Leopold ’ s land ethic is generally viewed as the first philosophical attempt to ground an environmental ethic upon an awareness of ecological principles. According to Leopold, “ a thing is right when it tends to preserve the beauty, integrity, and stability of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise ” (The Land Ethic, 262). However, for Leopold, not only is the “ beauty, integrity and stability of nature ” not marred by the killing of animals; it is actually enhanced by it. 17 Although Leopold argued for the development of a “ fellow feeling for all of life ” based on an awareness of belonging to a common ecological community, his land ethic was never intended to extend to “ fellow ” individual animals. 18 Thus when Leopold admonishes us to “ think like a mountain, ” since “ only the mountain has lived long enough to listen objectively to the howl of the wolf, ” he is calling for a long-term, species-based, objective ethic (Thinking Like a Mountain, 137). It is this so-called objective, scientific aspect of his environmental philosophy that has come to prevail in forest and land use management. 19
The hunters in the early conservation movement were singularly unabashed about the enjoyment that they derived from the hunt. Thus Ernest Hemingway, who typifies this attitude, exulted after shooting live pigeons, “ It ’ s a good feeling, like hitting a fast ball ” (quoted in Menninger, 53). Elsewhere, he boasted, “ I think they (birds) were made to shoot and some of us were made to shoot them and if that is not so well, never say we did not tell you that we liked it ” (Remembering Shooting, 152). A similar sentiment is expressed by a modern-day hunter in a 1967 booklet published by the University of Arizona ’ s College of Business and Public Administration entitled The Values of Hunting and Fishing in Arizona in 1965: “ I like the excitement of killing. You get a feeling of accomplishment when you kill something ” (quoted in Caras, 142). Happy hunters saw hunting not only as a pleasurable activity, but also as a way of developing character, and, in particular, male character. Theodore Roosevelt, a prototypical happy hunter, felt that “ the chase is among the best of all national pastimes; it cultivates that vigorous manliness for the lack of which in a nation, as in an individual, the possession of no other qualities can possibly atone ” (vii).
In addition to the notion of the chase, the code of ethics of the good sportsman was also predicated upon the notion of emotional self-restraint. For the early conservation-minded sports hunters, the self-restraint that one exercised in the course of the hunt was the bedrock out of which good character was formed. Aldo Leopold ’ s writings are premised upon this notion of restraint. For Leopold, hunting was not only an instinctive urge experienced by every normal man but was, moreover, a democratic right. Thus, the hunters who were decimating game animals were interfering with this “ inalienable right. ” Leopold longed for the day when hunters would develop their ethical capacities to the point where they would be guided not by externally imposed limits but by their own ecological conscience. The land ethic, for which Leopold is so well known, was thus intimately tied to the practice of hunting and to the “ good sportsman ’ s ” ethical code. One of the primary purposes of preserving the well-being of the land was to ensure that future hunters would have the opportunity to exercise their “ hunting instinct. ” As Leopold states, “ His instincts prompt him to compete for his place in the community but his ethics prompt him also to cooperate ( perhaps in order that there may be a place to compete for ) ” (emphasis added; The Land Ethic, 239). In other words, the purpose of self-restraint is precisely to allow for the continuation of man ’ s aggressive drive.
Narrative 2: The Holist Hunter
Aldo Leopold represents the consummate bridge between the first and second categories of hunters, the happy and the holist hunters. Although Leopold remained a happy hunter throughout his adult life, the land ethic that he developed in his later years also represents one of the earliest formulations of the holist philosophy that has come to characterize the second category of hunters discussed here. Unlike their predecessors in the early conservation movement, today ’ s hunters are far less likely to make open pronouncements about the joys of hunting and killing animals. They are more apt to downplay the joy of “ the kill, ” elaborating the many other benefits to be gained from the hunt — a sense of camaraderie with other hunters, the pleasure of being immersed in the natural world, and even the meat that is thereby procured. But an increasingly common explanation given by modern-day hunters is the argument that they render a service in “ culling ” the “ excess ” animals that would otherwise starve. The holist hunter claims to hunt not for the sake of pleasure, but rather for the well-being of the biotic community or “ whole. ”
As the inheritor of this heritage, today ’ s holist hunter comes fully armed not only with the best of today ’ s modern machinery but also with an arsenal of “ scientific facts. ” In an attempt to ground his conduct upon the science of ecology, the modern holist hunter claims to kill not in the name of recreation, but rather in the name of “ objective science. ” Thus, the holist hunter seeks to convince the public that he is playing a vital, ecological role, comparable to other predators in the natural world. By killing the overpopulated animals, he argues, he is rescuing them from an even worse death. Hunters, according to this worldview, perform a charitable service for the natural world.
In reality, hunters bear little resemblance to other predators in the natural world. The vast majority of animals who hunt do so for reasons of survival; in contrast to humans, most predators would not survive without meat. In addition, unlike other predators who kill only the weak or sick, hunters typically select the biggest and healthiest animals for their prey, thereby promoting a kind of “ evolution in reverse ” (Teale, 161). In fact, it is hunters who are often responsible for the creation of overpopulation. This occurs through such activities as the killing of natural predators, sex-selective shooting, varying the length of hunting seasons, and habitat manipulation, and through the abnormally high reproductive rates that intensive hunting produces. In sum, hunters help create the ecological problems that they then claim to solve. 20
The holist hunter has adopted not only the language of science but that of business management as well. 21 Leaving behind the realm of recreation and pleasure, the holist hunter has entered the business world. The express purpose of the holist hunt is to manage animal populations for the benefit of the natural world. Their “ business partners ” in this endeavor are the federal and state fish and wildlife agencies, which manage both the animals and the hunters themselves. But even some of the official “ game management ” publications reveal the true purpose of the “ managerial kill. ” According to an article in the Journal of Wildlife Management , “ The primary management plan has been the one directed at increasing the productivity of the whitetail deer through habitat manipulation and harvest regulation . . . to produce optimum sustained deer yield
s . . . and hunter satisfaction ” (Mirarchi, Scanloni, and Kirkpatrick, 92). In a similar vein, Donald J. Hankla, former chief of management for all wildlife refuges, openly maintains that “ wildlife refuges are managed in part to produce ‘ surplus game for hunters ’ ” (brochure from The Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting). One state management plan also openly maintains that hunting “ add[s] value to the quality of life for many citizens ” (White-Tailed Deer, 3). Clearly, holist hunters are intent on “ managing ” animals so that sufficient numbers will remain for them to kill. Indeed, according to the writer Joy Williams, it is more accurate to say that the Fish and Game department plays the role of a “ madam ” for hunters, helping them to “ procure sufficient numbers of animals to kill ” (24).
In many ways, the holist hunter is the official face that happy hunters present to the public. It is the camouflage behind which a pedigreed happy hunter hides. Although the trade journals make little effort to obscure the pleasures that can be derived from the exploits of the hunt, most public pronouncements are likely to bear the mark of the holist hunt.
To hunt and kill a white-tailed deer in certain districts may not only be ethically permissible, it might actually be a moral requirement . . . In every case the effect upon ecological systems is the decisive factor in the determination of the ethical quality of action. (Animal Liberation: A Triangular Affair, 21) 22
Most academic holists, like their holist hunting counterparts, downplay or decry the notion of hunting for pleasure. Thus, the environmental writer Martin Lewis claims that although hunting is often necessary “ to cull fecund herbivores, ” he blasts the “ happy hunting ” Leopold, commenting that he “ can only shudder on hearing an avowed environmentalist boast of the ‘ unspeakable delight ’ in the petty act of slaughtering another living being ” (96).
Holist philosophers frequently contrast their philosophy with that of animal rights, arguing that the latter represents an anti-ecological stance. 23 Holists contend that the philosophy of animal liberation does not accord with the reality and necessity of killing in the natural world. Thus Paul Shepard comments that “ the humanitarian ’ s projection onto nature of illegal murder and the rights of civilized people to safety not only misses the point but is exactly contrary to fundamental ecological reality ” (Animal Rights and Human Rites, 37). Similarly, Baird Callicott criticizes the humane movement for having a “ world-denying or rather a life-loathing philosophy, ” arguing that “ the natural world as actually constituted is one in which one being lives at the expense of others. ” Callicott goes on to argue that the neo-Benthamites (i.e., the “ humane moralists ” or animal liberationists) “ have attempted to exempt themselves from the life/death reciprocities of natural processes and from ecological limitations . . . in the name of a prophylactic ethic of maximizing rewards (pleasure) and minimizing unwelcome information (pain) ” (Animal Liberation: A Triangular Affair, 33). In a similar vein, Holmes Rolston charges animal rights proponents with a lack of biological and moral maturity. In his words:
The ecological ethic which kills in place, is really more advanced, more harmonious with nature, than the animal rights ethic, which in utter disharmony with the way the world is made, kills no animals at all. Those who go out and kill for fun may have failed to grow up morally. Sometimes those who object to any killing in nature and in human encounter with nature have not grown up either biologically or morally. (91)
According to these philosophers, hunters are instruments of nature, carrying out her inexorable directives. The violence that they inflict merely reflects the violence of the natural world and is, therefore, beyond ethical reproach. Violence, including hunting, should not be shunned, but rather embraced.
Holist philosophy, with its grounding in science, has been a welcome arrival on the scene for happy hunters. Just as the public was beginning to look askance at the conjunction of pleasure and violence, holist philosophy came to the rescue, providing the happy hunter with the ideal shield from attack. Happily ensconced in the safe refuge of the holist camp, hunters could now successfully defend themselves against the charge of cruelty. 24 Armed with the claim that their mental state has been purified of the taint of pleasure, holist hunters contend that they are beyond rebuke. Although their official trade journals continue to enumerate the multiple pleasures to be found in the hunt, increasing numbers of holist hunters are now anxious to assume the camouflage of the holist hunt. The heyday of the happy hunter appears to be coming to a close.
Narrative 3: The Holy Hunter
Although happy hunters and holist hunters have had their share of literary and philosophical proponents, it is the third category of hunter, the holy hunter, that has received the greatest attention from the academic world. Often the writers who promote the notion of the holy hunt are hybrid writers, with academic backgrounds in multiple fields, such as anthropology, philosophy, and nature writing. Just as the happy hunter once sought legitimacy through the marriage of hunting to the language of ethical discourse, academic philosophers (both holist and holy) now seek to wed environmental ethics to the practice of hunting.
For the holy hunter, hunting is not a means of recreation; nor is it a form of charitable work. For the holy hunter, hunting is a religious or spiritual experience. Holy hunters are fond of contrasting their spiritual orientation with the crass and superficial mentality of the typical sportsman or happy hunter. Although all three categories of hunters emphasize the importance of a proper state of mind, for the holy hunter this assumes an overriding importance. For holy hunters, purportedly it is not the superficial pleasure derived from an act of conquest, nor the satisfaction of performing a “ charitable ” act. The only appropriate attitude for the holy hunter is the religious one of reverence and respect. Although the notion of emotional self-restraint is still emphasized, it is now seen as a by-product of a transformed worldview. Hunting is seen not so much as a game that requires adherence to rules of good conduct; it is more akin to a religious rite. Thus, one hunter quoted in the Booklet of Values in Hunting describes his feelings about hunting in these words: “ It makes me feel almost religious, when I am sitting on a mountain waiting for a deer sometimes. I almost feel like praying. ” And according to James Swan, many hunters “ feel that ultimately hunting is their religion ” (35). In the words of Holmes Rolston, “ hunting is not sport; it is a sacrament of the fundamental, mandatory seeking and taking possession of value that characterizes an ecosystem and from which no culture ever escapes ” (91). Similarly, Paul Shepard insists that “ Hunting is a holy occupation, framed in rules and courtesy, informed by the beauty of the physical being and the numinous presence of the spiritual life of animals ” (Searching Out, 86).
Holist philosophy has also found a home in the academic world, tracing its roots back to Aldo Leopold ’ s thought. The major tenet of holist philosophy is the notion that the primary locus of value resides not in the individual parts of nature, but, rather, in the whole to which the individuals belong. Although the concept of the whole is conceived in various ways (i.e., as an “ organism, ” a “ community, ” or an “ ecosystem ” ), all forms of holism maintain that the well-being of the whole must always take precedence over the individual parts. The early writings of Baird Callicott, a self-professed disciple of Aldo Leopold, represent the logical extension of this mode of thought. According to Callicott:
One of the distinguishing features of the holy hunt is that the hunter not only claims to revert to a primeval, animal state; he also claims to identify with the animal that he kills. Thus, Randall Eaton states:
What do I mean at the deepest level when I say I want to be a tiger? I really mean that I have affection for tigers and that I want to know the essential nature of the tiger. If the truth be known, I want to be a tiger, to walk in his skin, hear with his ears, flex my tiger body and feel as a tiger feels. ( Know Thy Animal , 47)
And, in a similar vein, deep ecologist Gary Snyder believes that the hunter becomes “ physically and psychicall
y one with the animal. ” As he elaborates, “ To hunt means to use your body and senses to the fullest; to strain your consciousness to feel what the deer are thinking today, this moment; to sit and let yourself go into the birds and wind while waiting by a game trail ” ( Earth House Hold , 120). And in Barry Lopez ’ s opinion the “ hunter wants to be a wolf ” ( Of Wolves and Men , 166).
The notion that through an identification with nature one can attain a sound ethical relation to the natural world has been popularized in recent years by deep ecologists. According to deep ecologists, the roots of our current ecological crisis can be traced to an overly narrow, atomistic sense of self. To remedy our problematic relation to nature, it is necessary to expand this narrowly defined sense of self first to family and friends, then to our species, and finally to all of life. 25 This process of identification is viewed as a matter of maturation according to which the expanded Self represents the most mature state of being. What is significant for our purposes, however, is the types of activities that some deep ecologists cite as helpful in promoting this expanded concept of Self. Thus, along with sunbathing, bicycling, skiing, and meditation, Bill Devall and George Sessions cite hunting as one of the activities that helps to promote a mature sense of Self (188).
Animals and Women Feminist The Page 13
