Background Paper on "Canned Hunts"

Peter Muller

Canned Hunts are hunts on private hunting "preserves" that are stocked with animals for hunters to kill in any way they choose. The normal state hunting regulations do not apply to canned hunt areas since the animals being hunted are usually not the species whose hunt is regulated locally. Some hunting preserves lure hunters with pen-raised birds, released just for the hunting party – others provide exotic mammals for hunting.

A canned hunting distinguishes itself from recreational (or "sport") hunting in the following ways:

The ethical standards of the people who engage in canned hunts are several cuts below the recreational hunters. Many ethical hunters, but by no means all, disapprove of canned hunts. For example, the Izaak Walton League has a policy against canned hunts whereas the Safari Club and the National Rifle Association defend the practice.

Canned hunt preserves advertise widely in hunting magazines and over the Internet. A typical list the species available and the "trophy fee."

An excerpt of a typical list:

Axis Deer $1350

Aoudad Sheep $1500

Fallow Deer $1350

Elk $3500 up

Red Sheep $4500

Etc.

Many times there is an invitation to call for prices for game animals not listed.

These lists usually include a promise of "No Kill No Pay" or perhaps, a little more telling "No Kill – No Wound – No Pay." They also include warnings "Wounded and lost game 100% of trophy fee," "You must take away any animal you cripple," and "Kills are usually at close range 3ft to 35 yard."

The picture emerges: the hunter picks the target animal, the "preserve" management pops up the animal somewhere from 3ft to 100ft of the hunter’s weapon – the animal is shot – the animal is field-dressed and/or stuffed ready for the brave hunter’s mantle piece.

This sounds perfect for the busy executive.

In fact, many of the clients are in fact such luminaries as VP. Dick Cheney, George Bush (the elder), William Clinton, Rush Limbaugh etc.

Ted Williams in "Canned Hunts" in Audubon January-February 1992 gives a very vivid description of what goes on during a canned hunt. Mr. Williams, himself a hunter, describes some typical episodes:

One, Dr. Sonny Milstead, an orthopedic surgeon from Shreveport, Louisiana killed a lion with three shots followed by a tiger with another three or four shots. The animals shot are not at all wary or alert to any danger they are relaxing and resting as the wannabe Nimrods blast them away. In fact, according to Williams "Before being ‘harvested,’ African lions raised as pets would amble over and lick your hands."

In one episode that Williams relates a hunter had paid $10,500 to kill a leopard, a cougar and a Bengal Tiger. Unfortunately – "before the tiger left its cage Bwana fainted and had to be taken back to the ranch to be revived."

To relax them and make them less aggressive, tigers, leopards, cougars and jaguars are usually fed chicken just before they are to be shot. Some of them become reluctant to leave their cages and are shot while still in their cage.

The source of the target animals is a little bit of a "black market" but not really that hard to figure out.

Many of the animals come, directly or indirectly, from zoos and other animal exhibitors. The larger zoos try to whitewash themselves by their membership in the American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA). The AAZPA has certification requirements regarding the disposition of surplus animals, which proscribes the sale to canned hunt preserves.

Even a cursory look at the facts exposes the AAZPA standards as ineffectual. There are over 15,000 animal exhibitors in the country, only 160 of them belong to the AAZPA. But even the largest zoos are not exempt from contribution to the canned hunt pool of targets. Nine board members of the San Antonio Zoo are, themselves, owners of canned hunt preserves. Sixteen of the largest zoos have admitted to either inadvertently or deliberately selling surplus animals to canned hunt operators. Zoos have organized what are known as the Species Survival Plan (SSP) in which zoos will coordinate breeding efforts for endangered species. There is a lot of pressure on the zoos to keep on breeding beyond the requirement of the SSP because the public loves to see baby snow leopards and gorillas. Many of these SSP babies are too inbred to be genetically useful in further breeding. The individuals are then sold to dealers as surplus. They frequently wind up on ranches that breed exotics for canned hunts.

There are a total of bout 4000 canned hunt preserves in the United States. About 500,000 hunters patronize them every year. About 75% of the 4000 preserves specialize in providing birds to shoot. Breeders sell about 40 million birds (pheasants, quail, partridges, and ducks) every year to canned hunt preserves. Although there is no register of canned hunt areas most of the areas are believed to be in Texas. In New York State there are about 12 shooting preserves. Among them are game farms located in: Taghkanic, Catskill, Coxsackie, 2 sites in Pine Plains, Homer and DeLancey.

In 1999 Assemblyman Scott Stringer sponsored Assembly bill #A-1738 which outlaws canned hunts in New York State; Senator Maltese introduced Senate bill #S3939 which corresponds to it. Both bills passed the State Legislature and became the law in New York State by Governor Pataki’s signature. The only problem is that it only outlaws canned hunt areas that are 10 acres or less is size. The law does not apply to any canned hunt area existing at the time the legislation was passed.

Laws outlawing or restricting canned hunts already exist in New Jersey, California, Wisconsin, and Rhode Island and are under currently pending legislation in Oregon

Let’s briefly look at "sport hunting" contrasted with "canned" hunting

To review briefly, canned hunting distinguishes itself primarily from recreational hunting in that:

In NY State and other densely populated states all recreational hunting is increasingly assuming characteristics of canned hunting.

Because of the increasing encroachment of human land-use on wildlife habitat the remaining areas are getting smaller and smaller; they are increasingly interrupted by more dwellings and roads and are bounded by ever more constricting barriers.

However, even more instrumental in morphing recreational hunting into canned hunting, but less well known to the general public, is the fact that the target animals are artificially provided and released by the "organizer" – who happens to pose as a governmental organization – the Bureau of Wildlife (BOW) of the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) of the state of New York.

The general non-hunting public (about 96% of NY State’s population) as well as a fair number of hunters believes that the DEC manages the population of the deer herd as well as other wildlife populations for the benefit of the environment – which presumably benefits the managed species themselves.

A look at the actual policies of the DEC shows that the population of the various species are actually managed to accommodate the hunters’ annual demand for more targets. The declared goal of the DEC’s wildlife management policy is "maximum sustainable yield." The procedures, prescription, and proscriptions are all geared to furnish hunters with the maximum targets to shoot.

Sometimes that is done very overtly without any pretense of benefiting the environment or anything but the hunters’ passion to kill. For example, pheasants are raised and released annually by the DEC in designated areas so that hunters can shoot at them. Ring-necked pheasants are birds that are native to Asia – they have a hard time surviving a typical winter in most parts of New York. They are bred specifically for the hunt and released for hunters at specific locations and times.

Sometimes BOW of the DEC operates a little more subtly. For example – a superficial look at the white-tailed deer population looks to the untrained eye like a clear-cut case of "nature out of control" – and only the DEC can save us by permitting hunters to reduce the population. However – a look at the actual DEC hunting licenses shows that only bucks, not does, can be taken with a regular hunting license. Since all deer are in competition for browse (food) in the winter months – this eliminates a portion of the herd and provides more browse for the surviving and fawn-bearing does. Shooting out bucks has the net effect of increasing the deer herd not decreasing it because of the population dynamics of deer reproduction.

The DEC is currently weighing the option of introducing an elk population in the Catskills area of the State of NY. If the interest of the general population were to be taken into consideration – the answer would clearly be that – although elk are beautiful to look at they simply cannot be introduced into the Catskills without upsetting the fragile environment of the area and disturbing much of the existing human society and economy of the area. Though deer-car collisions have a negative impact on the drivers of the area – elk-car collisions are frequently fatal to the occupants of the car. Insurance rate will increase substantially.

Elk are quite different from white-tailed deer and their unique ways may not always be compatible with developed surroundings

The depredation to farmers and orchard-growers will be immense. Yet the DEC wants to bring in larger and slower moving targets to cater to hunters.

In all aspects of its operation BOW of the DEC acts more like the operator of a large canned hunt preserve than like a government agency responsible to the citizens of the State of New York.