Are pet owners our next generation of anti-hunters?

Had a somewhat heated conversation with a couple of co-workers today about people who view their pets as people and equal to other members of the family. In some cases, such people may even see their pets as their kids. And thankfully, the discussion never turned to animals and hunting.

With so much discussion these days on human rights, is hunting set to become threatened by a growing movement to give animals the same rights as humans? I say this because during today's discussion, I was made to be incorrect in viewing pets and people as being unequal.

I'll say one thing. I left today's discussion thinking that animal rights by pet owners falls into that category of topics, along with religion and politics, that you should avoid with co-workers.

Dan, I think people have thought that about their animals (the companion type like a good dog) as "family", since the stone age? We treat our dogs as a members of the family within reason, that loyalty comes with some responsibility and a cost IMO.

Bigger argument to me, would be people that abuse animals under the guise of ownership. (The ones that drop a dog off on the curb, since they don't "jive" anymore)

I call my boxer Zeus "my son" but that don't keep me from hunting.

My dog "Redbone" is a scrapper when it comes to hunting but at home the kids cover him up at night after his treat of course.

I love my dogs, and yeah, they are family and we even joked about one of them being more person than dog. But at the end of the day they're still dogs.

Oh, and I love to hunt/fish/trap/etc., and I eat meat.

I love my dog ill be sad and probably shed a tear the day she leaves us etc. yet I am a hunter.

I don't believe animals of any kind should be abused but in no way do I feel hunting is abusing them.

My dogs are family and treat them better than I would people because they are innocent.

I don't have a problem with hunting as long as the animals are legal to kill.

I'm afraid my wife falls into the "Pet Owner with a 4 footed child" profile...when I heard her years ago loudly explain to the half grown female French Brit exactly WHO was the Alpha "W"itch in the house...and who wasn't...both of them shot me a dirty look when I burst out laughing.

The now 9 year old pup does have a decent command and comprehension of the English Language that my 2 sons never achieved.... Gotta claim your place in the Pack I guess.
Ron

I don't see any correlation to dogs and hunting as negative? If anything, dogs have been a contributing member to the "tribe" since they where domesticated. Man has used dogs TO hunt and in return, the whole "family" eats. Not to mention, most will protect, or at least warn their "family" of danger, pretty important member of the "family" IMO.

What gets my azz, is a dog can be so loyal, he will suffer abuse with a smile on his face. Some folks just don't need an animal of any kind, just my opinion though, nothing personal directed at anyone.

The biggest threat to hunting, nowadays, is online gaming and social media. Kids just don't spend time outdoors, like they used to. And parents aren't much help, as they're taking on the same habits as their kids. Drive around the Burbs today, and there are few kids playing outside. Half of this are sitting outside, staring at a device.

Regarding pets, I've had pretty close connections to many of my dogs. Heck, I consider a couple of my chickens to be pets (a couple are really smart, and friendly). But that doesn't have anything to do with hunting, in my household. And my chickens love to eat... chicken! LOL

I have noticed some anti-hunting sentiment, being spread in my kids' schools. When my kids bring that stuff up, we talk about things like: deer wasting disease, fertile hogs, etc. Every time my kids have brought that up with their teachers, they're been supportive. Still, seems like a lot of anti outdoors education being taught.

Nothing wrong with folks that never had kids. But you have to watch the ones that never had kids and have dogs.

Helping my son bury his wife's cat a couple of weeks ago, my daughter-in-law (my very liberal daughter-in-law) commented, while holding my granddaughter, that it really puts losing a pet in perspective when you have a child. Thank you God, there might be a little light at the end of that tunnel.

Lots of folks now feel that it's evil to think of man as dominant over any other creature. Of course, the Bible states otherwise. And, our modern society believes that you can't dominate something without abusing it. They watch National Geographic and similar shows in their comfy cities and naturally assume that animals are sentient beings. I love my dogs dearly, but humans are the only sentient beings. Apes, elephants, dolphins, etc. do some amazing things, but their not sentient.

If you want to end the discussion for good, tell your co-workers you're saving up for an elephant hunt, and, if you win the lottery, you might add-on a lion.

P

The general belief, based on the comments so far, is that most of the non-hunting majority continues to draw a clear distinction between pets and game animals.

However, since when has the majority been the driving force in final decisions?

Madalyn Murray O'Hair was clearly in the minority. She got rid of prayer in public schools...nationwide.

I love my pets. But they are not the same as my own blood. I will protect them however I can, but my kids and wife come before the pets.

Nope, she missed a few in North Central Texas.

right on, a few I have run into are bat crazy about their pets. there must be some psychological phenomenon, as they put down having kids for their freedom, yet their pets control their lives and they harbor the pets 3x worse than you would a kid. kooky.

since when has the majority wanted Islamic prayers etc in public schools?

the worst folks are the ones that constantly
let their animals roam willy nilly, then they
get run over in the roads, or shot for running
stock, or nabbed by predators, etc.
i know of a couple that let their pets roam, and
have lost quite a few to bobcats, coyotes, etc.
and they just replace them and continue to allow
them to roam and get nabbed.
that's true animal abuse.

we've lost 2 cats to coyotes in last 8 years in Southlake. we honestly did everything we could, didn't declaw cats and didn't let them outside. some times of the year the cats just do what they can to get outside. sometimes they return OK and sometimes a coyote gets them. after the 2nd cat we did stop getting cats.

what I don't understand is people that think the wild animals are a problem. the wild animals are natural here, the humans aren't. we're the problem, not them.

Same thing happened to my chickens several times in Dallas. I swear I see more coyotes, bobcats, and foxes at Dallas North Tollway and Royal Lane than I do out in the country on the farm.

There is difference between animal rights and animal welfare.

I wouldn't point the finger at pet owners but if people don't think that there are agendas already in place to somehow protect wild game then they are crazy. Anything and everything is on the table. That means the cattle industry, poultry, swine , etc. There are animal rights activities out there right now lobbying against what puts dinner on the table. If you don't think wild game isn't on there then you're nuts.

yes there is, but that's a WHOLE nother argument... that I had to go into in detail in my vet school interview...

anyway, having worked in the vet field for 5 years i'll say this. Sweeping generalizations are this, you can split pet owners into two groups.

Group A.Good people who love their pets, they may love on them and spoil them and their wives buy them little jackets. But they are pets, they either have a purpose or their purpose is to love on their owners and be companions. these people are the vast majority and I would generally it isn't what you would say would grow into anti gun/hunting nuts.

Group B. These people LIVE TO SERVE THERE PETS. They put the pet first, they send money to peta thinking it will help there local shelter. Often well meaning... but often in my opinion they are zelots with very little education and understanding of the causes they support. they are the ones who blindy accept peta's "scientific" evidence when they get on the news, even though there sources are sometimes 80 years old and have multiple papers saying the findings are incorrect... the problem is these people are the squeaky wheels. and we all know the theory on that.

they are often good people but you realize quickly that your reality and theirs are very very different... It amazes me that in some ways how naïve these people are but then how completely jaded in other ways...

Voice of experience there.

I know a few in Group B. One girl I know thinks of pets as human equivalent and has basically ruined her life fostering 15-20 dogs at any given time. No money, career is shot, marriage strained to the breaking point, etc.,etc.,etc..... She just put up a long post on FB detailing all of her travails in this regard. I so wanted to post "Until you realize animals are not humans, your misery will never end." If I thought she would listen I would. But there is zero chance of that.
It is one of the saddest things I have ever seen.

There are some subjects better left not-discussed at work. Wasn't worth the aggravation to me, anyway.

The whack jobs have the misplaced confidence to speak out. You can see it in the gallery in Congress. I've seen it more than once in a church. And if the leadership is weak, the patients can take over the asylum.

Group B listed above is one of the reasons I dread taking a dog to the vet. Their pet is sick, so they're upset to begin with. When you enter the waiting room with your bouncing "I'm excited to see everybody!" lab, they look at you like you both have ebola. "No one else should be here, it's making Fluffy nervous."

Here's a pet owner (Show Dog)that
is a far cry from an anti-hunter.....

This.

And I'll add that my dogs will likely come before a lot of people on the pecking order in my mind. But I generally dislike people on principle alone.

since this be a hunting form. if a pet escapes. as a hunter, should we hunt pet down like a dog? like pappy always say's: a person with open mind has a wider point of view

After 18 years of being a police officer I can honestly say if most citizens I met on a daily basis were replaced by Labradors the world would be a better place.

Exactly, but my coon hound is definitely higher up the list than most of my in-laws.

Pet ownership has never been a prerequisite for anti-hunting zeal. But close-mindedness and anthropomorphic regard seem to be.....

"Pet owners are tomorrow's anti-hunters"..... if TPWD adds bag limits of cats and dogs to next years hunting season, then yea, I guess I could see it happening. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense. What does owning a pet have to do with anti-hunting?

Stretch of the imagination connecting those dots.