Cabela’s, Deer Gear, and the Secret History of the Green Bay Packers

Posted on May 11, 2012 by

Last week Cabela’s announced that it would soon be opening a new store in Green Bay, Wisconsin.  The Green Bay Gazette quoted Cabela’s CEO Thomas L. Millner as saying “Cabela’s loves Wisconsin.”  He added that his company’s corporate colors are yellow and green, just like those of a certain football team.  The story also noted that the store’s 21-acre site on Lombardi Avenue is owned by the Green Bay Packers.  When I read all this, I immediately realized that it was first and foremost a deer story.

Now, I know what you’re thinking.  True, I am working on this book about deer.  Yesterday, as is typical, I spent nearly the entire day thinking and scheming about deer.  When I took a break to walk to the mailbox, I returned with the latest issue of Deer & Deer Hunting, one of my favorite magazines.  It included several interesting articles, one of which I’d written.  In the evening I relaxed by reading most of the others.  But I’m not obsessed with deer, and there really is a cosmic connection between Cabela’s, deer gear, and the secret history of the Green Bay Packers.  Let me explain.

Cabela’s, just like Bass Pro Shops, Gander Mountain, and all of their smaller competitors, is a company built on deer.  Last year 40.2 percent of its $2.6 billion in revenues came from Hunting Equipment, 27.2 percent from Clothing and Footwear, 13.2 percent from Fishing and Marine, 9.8 percent from Camping, and 9.1 percent from Gifts and Furnishings.

What these figures don’t tell you is that hunters, especially deer hunters, also account for most of Cabela’s clothing and footwear sales. Similarly, its Camping category is heavy on deer gear like hunting knives, flashlights and headlamps, and even home meat processing equipment.  (True, most of us wouldn’t enjoy grinding hamburger in a backpacking tent, and we might also have some concerns about bear hygiene.  But at stores like Cabela’s, Camping tends to be a catch-all “miscellaneous” category.)

Today more American hunters pursue deer than any other quarry.  So do more American dollars.  If deer hunting—not all hunting, just deer hunting—were a single corporation, its $15 billion or so in annual revenues would earn it a spot in the top 200 of the Fortune 500. Conservative comparisons place it in the same general pack as companies like CBS, Pepsi, and General Mills.

This all leads us to one inescapable conclusion.  The American outdoor industry wasn’t built on fish, pheasants, or squirrels.  It was built on deer.  It could just as accurately, in fact, be described as the American deer industry—or, as I like to call it, the American Deer-Industrial Complex.

Now about those Green Bay Packers…  Today very few fans remember that the Packers began in 1919 as the amateur team—not so different from today’s tavern league baseball teams—of the Indian Packing Company, which specialized in canned meats.  Among its slogans were “A meat market on your pantry shelf” and “From the Wisconsin country to you.”

Even fewer fans remember that the very first meat packed and shipped out of Green Bay “from the Wisconsin country to you” was venison.  Through most of the 19th century, market hunters delivered deer carcasses and hides to the city’s docks literally by the ton.  All this cargo was carefully weighed or counted, and a few shipping records still exist.  In 1806, for the purpose of making candles, Green Bay shipped out 120 kegs of deer tallow weighing 4,536 kg.  During the years 1835 and 1836, Green Bay and Milwaukee shipped a combined total of 20,966 hides.  Hide prices during this period fluctuated, but in Michigan exceeded a buck a deer as early as 1814.  And yes, that’s the origin of our slang term for a dollar.

You see?  It’s all connected, and it’s all about the deer.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

P. S. — If you’d like your very own hat like the ones in the picture, visit www.bigguyhats.com.

Posted in Deer, Venison | 2 Comments

A Post-Delisting Dispatch From the Midwest Wolf Stewards Conference

Posted on April 30, 2012 by

They’re delisted.  Now what?

That was the question on our minds at last week’s Midwest Wolf Stewards Conference.  On January 27 midwestern wolves were removed from the endangered species list, this time probably for good.  Next, in just a few short months, both Wisconsin and Minnesota will almost certainly hold their first wolf hunting seasons in the modern era.  (At the moment, it looks as though Michigan probably won’t hold its first season until the fall of 2013.  If so, they’ll have an opportunity to learn from the mistakes of others.)

The photo above is from a panel discussion about wolf management and conservation. The rhetorical question posed to panelists was “What is the stake in the issue and where is the common ground?”  Unsurprisingly, we learned there’s a lot at stake and there isn’t a lot of common ground.  The panelists did, after all, represent the often disparate viewpoints of the Minnesota Deer Hunter’s Association, the Izaak Walton League of America, livestock producers, the Humane Society of the United States, Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness, the International Wolf Center, the tribes, and the newly formed advocacy group Howling for Wolves.

I’d hoped for exchanges that were heated enough to offer extra entertainment value.  Sadly, however, “Minnesota Nice” prevailed.  Someone at my table mentioned that when wolf discussions like this were held out west a few years back, panelists occasionally came close to raising fists or drawing guns.  But not here.  (Last year a couple guys were apparently arrested in the parking lot after a public listening session in Wisconsin, but that’s about it.)

Instead, the panel reminded me of Lake Superior, whose western edge was less than a hundred yards from our hotel and conference center in Duluth, Minnesota.  Now, when comparing this discussion to Lake Superior, I’m not necessarily speaking of its depth.  What I mean is that both appeared calm and sunny that day, and yet both felt decidedly chilly beneath the surface.  The next morning, however, I’m pretty sure I spotted the livestock guy and the HSUS guy sitting together at breakfast and chatting amiably while they enjoyed the view of Lake Superior.  So maybe there’s some common ground to be found after all.

The conference began with management and depredation updates from MN, WI, MI, and Ontario, plus a brief post-delisting update from Fish & Wildlife.  For me the Wisconsin presentations were especially fun; when I saw maps indicating pack territories and the precise location of depredations on livestock or bear hounds, I immediately recognized my own neighborhood.  I could almost see my house, but not quite.  I did recognize one or two individual farms where I knew of depredations, and a couple of the dots representing hound depredations were just down the road from where I live.  Not to brag, but last year my county once again experienced the most wolf depredations of any in Wisconsin.  Add in the county next door, and we accounted for well over 50%.

In all fairness to Wisconsin’s 800 or so wolves, I should point out that last year’s numbers for the state as a whole added up to only 71 cattle, 19 sheep, and 1 horse.  Only 10-15% of wolf packs ever depredate livestock, and even those wolves seem to prefer venison as their staple fare.  Considering the number of big farms up here in the big woods, it’s almost surprising wolves don’t take more livestock.  That’s little consolation, of course, to the individual farmers whose losses are most significant.

In the afternoon came the panel discussion I’ve already described, more presentations on political factors and tribal perspectives, and then an evening keynote on wolf management in Alaska.  Most of the second day’s presentations were on more scientific topics—topics, however, with tremendous practical relevance for wolf management and current events.  Titles, some of them slightly abridged, included Depredations, Threats, and Spatial Considerations for a Wisconsin Wolf Harvest; Attitudes Toward Wolves and Wolf Management in Northern Michigan; Wolves, Bear-Baiting, and Hunting Dog Conflicts; Modeling Individual Wolves on a Landscape of Risk to Understand Population Impacts of Harvest Scenarios; Preposterous Wolf Hunt in Wisconsin (due to recent legislation, this title had been revised from “Possible” Wolf Hunt in Wisconsin); Coyotes in Wolves’ Clothing; Disease Prevalence in Minnesota Wolves; and Wolf Pack Member Associations in Summer Versus Winter.

They were fascinating presentations, and I learned a lot—too much, obviously, to share in a single blog post.  Later I may blog and tweet more about a few of these stories, and I plan to follow up with a couple of the presenters for magazine articles I’ve been assigned.  When I do, I hope they’ll be patient with a non-scientist calling to ask lots of basic questions about their latest research.

One thing in my favor is that this may not have been much of a problem lately.  Very few of the biologists at this year’s conference complained of incessant phone calls from state legislators asking for their expert advice and input.  Since these legislators, especially the ones in Wisconsin, must have been working day and night to craft a science-based framework for the state’s upcoming wolf hunt, this could have eventually become a real annoyance.  Rumor has it, however, that the legislators instead consulted with a couple friends who were bear hunters.  But that’s a story for another time.

I have a feeling there will be a lot to talk about at next year’s conference.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

Posted in Ecology, Hunting, Wolves | 7 Comments

Time for a ride through Deerland?

Posted on April 17, 2012 by

It’s a beautiful spring day.  Depending on where you live, today might be a good day for a ride—quite possibly your first of the year.  Expect to see a lot more cyclists and motorcyclists on the road during the weeks to come.  And also, of course… deer.

The guy in the picture is Dan Rogers.  He’s one of the people I interviewed for my chapter on deer-vehicle crashes.  The title of that chapter is “The Deadliest Animal in North America,” and it’s no exaggeration.  Never mind sharks, rattlesnakes, or grizzlies.  Instead, every time you drive or ride, fear deer.

Statistically, car crashes truly do make whitetail deer the deadliest animal in North America. Last year an estimated 1.5 million deer-vehicle crashes resulted in about 150 human fatalities, over 10,000 injuries, and insurance payouts of over $3.8 billion. The total cost for vehicle repairs and medical or funeral bills was undoubtedly far higher.

A disproportionate number of the fatalities involve motorcyclists. The odds are not in their favor.  One of the other people I interviewed for this chapter of Deerland was state trooper Dean Luhman.  As I rode along with Dean during his afternoon and evening shift, I learned a lot about car crashes, roadkill, and how all this works behind the scenes.  It’s quite a story.

Dean mentioned that he’s been to the scene of three deer-motorcycle crashes, and all three were fatal.  He actually saw one crash happen; the rider was about a quarter mile in front of him when the deer came out of the ditch.  He figures the guy never saw it, and it pretty much tackled him right off his bike.

I could tell from the way Dean told these stories that all three crashes were unsettling, even for someone who’s seen as much as he has.  Here’s the thing: If you hit a deer while driving, you’ll be making a trip to the body shop. If you hit one while riding, especialy if you’re not wearing a helmet, you’ll probably be making a trip to the morgue.

Dan Rogers is one of the rare exceptions. He’s a motorcyclist who collided with a deer and lived to tell about it—despite the fact that he wasn’t wearing a helmet at the time. The lingering effects of his TBI, however, can often make it difficult for him to tell about it in an organized, coherent way.  That said, he’s made incredible progress over the past couple years.  It’s taken the help of some great doctors, a couple of top-notch neurosurgeons, and an entire team of skilled physical, occupational, and speech therapists.  It’s been a long road, and he still has a ways to go.

For now, at least, Dan isn’t able to ride a motorcycle or drive a car.  He does, however, still enjoy bicycling.  Every time he rides he wears a helmet.  If you’re riding, especially if you’re riding a motorcycle, he suggests that you wear one, too.  Maybe slow down just a little.  And watch for deer.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

Posted in Crash, Deer | 2 Comments

Deer in the Bible???

Posted on April 2, 2012 by

Since Passover and Easter are almost upon us, perhaps it’s time for a brief post about deer in the Bible.  Yes, they’re in there.  But because the Holy Land has seen some deforestation and climate change over the past few thousand years, many people assume that something was lost in translation, and that those biblical Bambis were actually just antelope, gazelle, or even wild goats.

Evidence suggests, however, that both roe and fallow deer roamed widely through the Middle East during Biblical times.  Both are smaller than the typical whitetail; the largest bucks stand about three feet high at the shoulder.  Small numbers of both species still remain in Syria.  According to contemporary accounts, the roe deer was common in southern Lebanon as late as 1890, but had pretty well disappeared by about 1912.  Around the same time, fallow deer in Israel were hunted to extinction; the last one was shot in 1914.

Happily, Israel now has over 500 fallow deer, which were reintroduced in 1978.  The genesis of this rapidly growing herd is a fascinating footnote to history.  In a dramatic cloak-and-dagger operation, an Israeli general hustled four deer out of Iran precisely at the peak of the Islamic revolution.  Captured just days earlier in a wildlife refuge, they enjoyed a brief stopover at the Tehran zoo before they were crated up, loaded on a flatbed truck, driven at dawn through streets still filled with teargas, and loaded onto the very last El Al flight out of Tehran.  (Here, courtesy of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is an archived article about the country’s reintroduction of deer and other biblical wildlife.)

Scriptural references to deer and deer hunting are few.  The one hunters most love to quote is Genesis 27, verses 3 and 4: “Now therefore take, I pray thee, thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me some venison. And make me savoury meat, such as I love, and bring it to me, that I may eat; that my soul may bless thee before I die.”

In context, however, this one’s a little problematic.  It was spoken by a dying Isaac to his son Esau, who would soon be cheated out of his birthright by his younger, less hairy, and less outdoorsy-smelling non-hunting brother Jacob—and all this with help from Mom.  (And you thought your family was dysfunctional!)  Still, if you live in a state where deer hunting is at all popular, don’t count on getting personalized plates that read, say, GEN27V3.  That one’s probably already taken.

And then there’s Nimrod, whose name has somehow become a term of disparagement.  In his day, he was “a mighty hunter before the Lord, wherefore it is said, ‘Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.’” Used to be, calling someone a Nimrod was the highest compliment.

Leviticus admonishes hunters who drain the blood of animals or birds to cover it with earth.  Seems like a decent, respectful thing to do.  In other Old Testament news, when Deuteronomy lists “the beasts which ye shall eat,” deer do indeed make the list. They also made King Solomon’s table. Venison—a dish fit for a king.

Finally, the Song of Solomon repeatedly mentions deer in a more poetic, metaphorical sense—as in Chapter 4, verse 5: “Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.”

Deer are also mentioned briefly in 2 Samuel, Psalms, Isaiah, and Habakkuk. I found no mention of deer in the New Testament.  And here’s a confession: I am not a biblical scholar.  I only managed to find these quotes with help from Google and a concordance.  (Centuries before computers were invented, whole monasteries full of monks spent their lives compiling printed concordances.)  In the process, I learned that some concordances are more thorough than others; the one in the back of my rarely-opened Bible skips Deer and goes straight from Death to Desire.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

Posted in Deer, Venison | 5 Comments

Are American Deer Hunters Socialists?

Posted on March 11, 2012 by

Why, yes they are are.  And that’s a good thing.  In fact, it’s the law.  American deer hunters are socialists, and it’s OK.  If anyone tells you otherwise, be very, very suspicious.  Seriously.  Let me explain…

(But first, let me hasten to add that American hunters are also capitalists, and that the American Deer-Industrial Complex is alive and well.  Just to verify this, yesterday I drove down to Saint Paul, Minnesota for an annual deer expo.  The shot above shows around half of the expo’s booths.  I spotted a couple interesting new bits of deer gear.  I also saw people getting out their checkbooks and credit cards, and I overheard many deals being done.)

So what’s up with that deer-hunting socialism for which we should be so thankful?  At the first Thanksgiving in 1621, the Pilgrims were lucky that their new neighbors were more skilled at both hunting and farming.  Better yet, their neighbors were happy to share with those less fortunate.  Edward Winslow writes that the Indians “went out and killed five Deere which they brought to the Plantacion, and bestowed on our Governour, and upon the Captain, and others.” Turkey wasn’t actually on the menu that day, and the main course was venison.

But that was just sharing and being neighborly.  The real socialist hunting tradition started later, when all those newcomers ventured into the woods and started learning some woodsmanship themselves.  Back in the Old World, hunting was a privilege reserved for royalty and nobility.  Here, anyone could hunt.  The colonists could pursue, shoot, and eat whatever they want, and what they most wanted was deer.  It was an unheard-of freedom, one of the things that made America different right from the beginning.

It still does make America different from most other countries.  This land is your land, and these deer are your deer.  Really.  They are.  The wild deer of North America belong to you.  They also belong to me, and to everyone else.

This radical Marxist idea is a key tenet of something called the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.  (Wildlife biologists and deer managers usually just call it “The Model,” and it’s so revered that it’s always capitalized.)  According to their professional organization, The Wildlife Society (TWS), The Model is based on seven key principles, the first and foremost of which is that wildlife—not just deer or other hunted species, but all wildlife—belongs to the people, and the states or provinces hold it in trust for the benefit of all.  When deer walk onto your land, they don’t become your property.  They still belong to everyone.  In the law this principle dates back to an 1841 Supreme court decision, which in turn referenced the Magna Carta.

Here in the U.S. and Canada, you don’t have to be wealthy to hunt.  And if you’re lucky enough to live in a state with plenty of public land, say one of those left-leaning states like Montana or Wyoming, then you’ll have lots of great places to hunt—even if you don’t own a single acre of your own.  And all those deer, elk, pheasants, and eagles belong to you and me.  (I’m not saying we should start hunting eagles.  That’s just a reminder that this isn’t only about hunting.)  Is this a great country or what?

OK, so maybe I’ve exaggerated a little.  Maybe this isn’t socialism, and maybe instead we should call it a democratic, egalitarian tradition.  And most American hunters, however they may vote, have been pretty happy with The Model for the last three or four centuries.  But last week, interestingly, Field and Stream blogger Hal Herring wrote about the outgoing Conservation Director of Alaska’s Fish and Game Department.  Before resigning after being charged with 12 game violations, he’d quietly been working on a secret plan to privatize Alaska’s wildlife.  He actually does believe The Model is an evil socialist plot, and he’s described it as such.  (But as these photos will attest, The Model seems to co-exist very peaceably with capitalism as we know it.)

Still, those views are shared by certain politicians, and also by one or two deer celebrities who are active in the captive cervid industry.  Apparently, right now there’s a feud brewing in Deerland about The Model and how it relates to certain aspects of deer farming.  That’s a story for another time.  For now, here’s a link to the Quality Deer Management Association’s position.  Apart from a few exceptions like me, most QDMA members own a large amount of land and have the time, money, and inclination to manage it for the benefit of deer.  I’m pretty sure most of them are not Marxists.  If they do own a hammer and sickle, the sickle is only used for trimming around their deer stands.

The QDMA is not alone.  Below is a partial list, in alphabetical order, of outdoor organizations that are 100% behind the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.  (A big thanks to Eric Nuse of Orion – The Hunter’s Institute for providing this list.  And yes, his organization is on it.)  I don’t agree with every organization’s position on every issue, and for that matter they don’t all agree with each other on most issues.  Except this one.

There may be others, but here’s a start:  Archery Trade Association/BPA, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Bear Trust International, Boone and Crockett Club, Buckmasters American Deer Foundation, Camp Fire Club of America, Catch a Dream Foundation, Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, Conservation Force, Conservation Fund, Dallas Safari Club, Delta Waterfowl Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Houston Safari Club International, Hunter Education Association, Izaak Walton League of America, Masters of Foxhounds Association of America, Mule Deer Foundation, National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, National Trappers Association, National Wild Turkey Federation, North American Bear Foundation, North American Grouse Partnership, Orion – The Hunter’s Institute, Pheasants Forever, Pope and Young Club, Public Lands Foundation, Quail Forever, Quail Unlimited, Quality Deer Management Association, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Ruffed Grouse Society, Safari Club International, Sand County Foundation, Shikar Safari Club, Texas Wildlife Association, The Wildlife Society, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Tread Lightly!, US Sportsmen’s Alliance, Whitetails Unlimited, Wildlife Forever, Wildlife Habitat Council, Wildlife Management Institute, and, finally, the Wild Sheep Foundation.

So remember…  This land is your land, and these deer are your deer.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

Posted in Deer, Hunting | 6 Comments

Wolf Stories Worth Telling

Posted on March 5, 2012 by

First, I’d like to thank everyone who stopped by to comment on last week’s wolf question.  Today I have another.  I’m hoping you can help me out with something.  I wouldn’t exactly call this crowdsourcing, since so far the crowds visiting here are relatively small.  But here’s the thing:  I have a few ideas for wolf stories I’d like to tell, and yet I have a feeling there are more out there that I’m missing.  These might be stories worthy of a blog post, a magazine article, or even a whole book.  I’m just not sure what they are.

Over the past decade there’s been a constant legal battle over the delisting of Midwestern wolves.  During that time they’ve been delisted, relisted, delisted, relisted, and now probably delisted for good.  Boring, or not?  Ancient history, or not? 

Wolf advocates and animal rights activists have fought hard to prevent these wolves from being delisted.  Next, they may fight to prevent them from being hunted.  Interesting people you’d like to meet (at least vicariously), or not?

In only a matter of months, on the other hand, it could quite literally be open season on Midwestern wolves.  Want to learn more about how all that will work?  Or should I just wait and let you know when tags go on sale down at the hardware store?  Or if you’re not into wolf hunting, should I just let you know when might be a good Saturday morning to not walk your German Shepherd down any back roads while wearing that favorite fur hat of yours?

These are only three of the most obvious stories.  But are there bigger wolf stories out there that no one’s noticed yet?  Or bigger stories coming next year, stories about topics most of us haven’t yet anticipated?  Any Western history likely to repeat itself here in the Midwest? 

I live in wolf country.  If I were about to go poking around in the woods down the road from here—or more frighteningly, in certain office buildings down in Saint Paul, Madison, or Lansing—in search of new stories, then what would they be?  What wolf stories would you like to hear?  If you have ideas, you can either comment here or go to the menu bar and click on Contact to shoot me an e-mail.

By the way…  The images I’ve used to illustrate this post are not from stories I plan to research further.  Other than that, I’m open to suggestion.

© 2012 Al Cambronne

 

Posted in Wolves | 2 Comments

So… Who wants to go wolf hunting?

Posted on February 27, 2012 by

“So… Who wants to go wolf hunting?  Seriously.  Who wants to go wolf hunting?”

I first heard these words almost a year ago at the Midwest Wolf Steward Conference.  Two speakers, Dennis Udovich from the Minnesota Bear Guide Association and Mark Johnson from the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, were beginning a presentation that was very different from the others we’d been hearing all day from geneticists, ecologists, biologists, and wildlife managers.  They began with this rhetorical question, and then reminded us that recovering wolf populations here in the Midwest had already reached a level that made delisting imminent.  For years we’d been talking about how we’d get to that day.  But so far we’d given very little thought to what would happen the day after. 

For one thing, it seemed likely that Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan would soon be holding wolf hunts.  Whether we liked that idea or not, it was going to happen.  So how should a hunt be structured and managed?  And how would we measure the hunt’s success?  Harvest numbers?  Hunter participation?  Money earned for each state’s DNR?  Greater tolerance and acceptance of the wolves remaining the day after wolf season ended?  It was time to begin a serious discussion of these issues.

Immediately, Johnson and Udovich had our rapt attention.  But as I watched them outline possible answers to all those questions, I wondered if their calculations were a little on the optimistic side.  Were there really that many people out there who wanted to go wolf hunting?  And would they really pay that much for the privilege?  Time will tell.

Now, less than a year later, both Minnesota and Wisconsin are planning hunts that could begin as early as this fall.  It seems likely that by the fall of 2013 all three states will hold a wolf season.  The details are still being ironed out, and almost every day we’ve been hearing about new proposals and amendments.  As an example, the other day I read that lawmakers in one state were debating the season’s start date.  One wanted an early start so hunters could enjoy a longer season, and another wanted a late start so wolf pelts would be in prime condition when the season opened.  Although this seemed like a small detail, it was about underlying motives and values.  Assuming wolves should be hunted in the first place (and not everyone is making that assumption), are they vermin to be exterminated, or trophies and furbearers to be valued?

So will the hunt lead us to value wolves more, or less?  Will it help solve livestock depredation problems, or will hunters end up shooting innocent wolves that hadn’t been bothering anyone?  Will hunters even manage to shoot all that many wolves?  And when wolves become more wary, will harvest rates decline even further?  What about hunter participation levels?  When the novelty wears off, what then?

The hunt will raise many more questions, and undoubtedly much controversy.  Tomorrow the Wisconsin state legislature is holding a public hearing in Madison, and some speakers will probably question whether there should even be a wolf hunt.  By now, however, that question may already be moot.  The train seems to have left the station.  But so many other questions remain.  If you’re a hunter, I’m especially curious to hear your answer to these two:  Will you join in the next wolf hunt?  (Or, if you’re not from Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Michigan, would you?)  And why or why not?

Myself?  No, thanks.  Although for the most part I do enjoy the process of hunting, I’m also very interested in the product—and by that I mean the most useful product.  When I hunt deer, I’m after venison.  I’m not into antlers or taxidermy.  I know some people are, and I don’t have a problem with that.  But I mostly like to hunt things I can eat.

I’m guessing that will not be the motivation for most wolf hunters.  Technically, I suppose you could eat wolves.  The other day I read about a new movie called The Grey.  Apparently it’s about some guys surviving after a plane crash on the tundra, and hungry wolves are circling.  Somehow they manage to kill and eat one of the wolves.  So at least for the moment, the humans are less hungry.  To prepare for their roles, the actors sampled stew made from a wolf that had been legally harvested in British Columbia.  It seems only Liam Neeson kept his down, and he claims to have gone back for seconds.

A long time ago I spent a few years in Asia.  I remember one or two occasions when social obligations required me to partake of strong drink and a delicious stew containing what was known locally as “fragrant meat.”  It’s said to balance one’s chi in a way that’s especially beneficial in the wintertime.  The stew was expensive and seemed to include more noodles than meat.  I noticed that it did, however, include bits of star anise meant to make it taste meatier than it was.  (This spice is also a common ingredient in many of the regional cuisine’s vegetarian dishes.)  Even back then, this traditional dish was a national embarrassment for certain countries, and it could only be found in rural backwaters or in a large city’s more questionable neighborhoods.  By now this tradition is nearly forgotten, and that’s probably for the best.  Traditionally, however, black dogs were said to be tastiest, followed by brown, grey, spotted, and then white.

I’m open-minded, and I’m curious to hear your thoughts.  For me, wolf stew wouldn’t be motivation enough.  Still, there may be other reasons that will motivate thousands of Midwesterners—and also nonresidents from outside the Midwest—to head for the woods of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Upper Michigan and give wolf hunting a try. 

If you’re a hunter, will you be one of them?  Why or why not?  And if you’re not a hunter, you should feel free to weigh in, too.  What do you make of this whole business?

© 2012 Al Cambronne

‘

 

Posted in Wolves | 9 Comments