Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38

Thread: Poachers being portrayed as "hunters"

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Marshall
    Posts
    1,975

    Thumbs up Poachers being portrayed as "hunters"

    Read an article today where 2 hunters were convicted of poaching wildlife in Alaska, & in the article the reporter stated that the 2 were "hunting without licences."

    Here's my email response to both the reporter & Criag Medred:

    '"A man charged with violating 21 wildlife laws while on a big-game hunting
    spree in Alaska"

    Your use of the word "hunting" in the above sentence, to describe the
    criminal behavior of this cretin, does a great disservice to all law abiding
    citizens of this great state.

    It shows an agenda that slants hunters as being lawbreakers.

    Likewise you continue to use the word "hunting" in this sentence:

    "Querin and Carson Kemmer, 24, killed a moose, caribou, brown bear and two
    Dall sheep while hunting along the Dalton Highway and Turnagain Arm without
    the proper licenses,"

    They weren't "hunting" as they weren't licensed to hunt. In order to
    partake in the privilege to hunt, you need to be licensed. They were dead
    set on breaking the law & therefore, they're criminals.

    It's a wonder why so many who hunt in this great state boycott the Anchorage
    Daily News, in regards to articles like this, that really permeate the
    leanings of the ADN, & the editors who allow this type of language to pass
    as being correct.'

    I would like everyone here to email the editors in regards to this & see what change we can affect with in the ADN...

    pdougherty@adn.com jwright@adn.com dhulen@adn.com

    The reporter hasn't gotten back to me, but Craig did! Now personally I don't like Craig's stance on subsistence, but this really show's class, I don't know how many times I've emailed Craig & he's always responded. He truely deserves some sort of recognition.


  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    372

    Default James Halpin -ADN

    I sent the reporter a message, as well. Have not received a reply. I'm sure he could have thought of a better term to use instead of calling the criminal a hunter. How about calling him a crackhead scumbag instead?

  3. #3
    Member jkb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    1,466

    Default I agree

    call them what they are criminals

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    FAI
    Posts
    2,294

    Default my note is sent

    Done. Seems like a small thing to do to remind them the difference between law abiding and not. Sure hope they get lots of mail.

  5. #5

    Default shoplifter!

    A shopper that steals is a shoplifter! A person killing an animal illegally is a poacher! I wish the left (press) would call them what they are.

    A person may have a license and may be hunting for a certain specie but decides to POACH an animal that is not allowed to be taken. Just as a person may go into a store with the intent to buy something but instead steals something. You would not refer to them as a shopper anymore, even if they slip something into a pocket and buy something else. So a hunter may turn into a poacher.

    POACHER as defined by WEBSTER'S: one who kills or takes wild animals (as game or fish) illegally.

  6. #6

    Default My letter.

    Just so there is no confusion.

    There is a difference between a hunter and a poacher as there is a difference between a shopper and a shoplifter.
    A shopper that steals is a shoplifter! A person killing an animal illegally is a poacher!

    A person may have a license and may be hunting for a certain specie but decides to POACH an animal that is not allowed to be taken. Just as a person may go into a store with the intent to buy something but instead steals something. You would not refer to them as a shopper anymore, even if they slip something into a pocket and buy something else. So a hunter may turn into a poacher.

    POACHER as defined by WEBSTER'S: one who kills or takes wild animals (as game or fish) illegally.

    Seriously, get it right. You're suppose to be educated. I took the liberty to rewrite your first paragraph to be more accurate. Please read it carefully.

    "A man charged with violating 21 wildlife laws while on a big-game POACHING spree in Alaska last year has been arrested by Washington state authorities, Alaska State Troopers said Tuesday."





  7. #7

    Thumbs down Jim Halpin's response.

    This was Mr. Halpin's response to my email to him. What are your thoughts?



    Thanks for the feedback. I agree that there is a difference between a hunter and a poacher, but the main reason I did not use the word poacher was that these men were not charged with poaching. They were charged with hunting without a license and hunting without a proper guide.

    I think the word hunter applies in this case as well because the version of Webster's Dictionary on my desk defines poaching as "to hunt or catch illegally, especially by trespassing." So a poacher is a hunter, but one who is acting illegally. Hunting is defined by the same dictionary as "to go out to kill or catch game for food or sport." This is what these men did, albeit illegally.

    I understand that these people give legal hunters a bad name. I like to fish myself. But I don't think there is much difference between saying people were fishing illegally or that they were poaching. Also, to say that someone violated the law while poaching would be redundant, given the definition of the word.

    I hope this helps to clear up why I used the word. Thanks for reading.

    Jim Halpin

  8. #8
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    I wonder if he would report on a murder that someone was "killing someone illegally".

    Not impressed with that response.

  9. #9

    Default

    Kind of like "undocumented aliens" vs. illegals.

  10. #10
    Member AlaskaHippie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Beaver Fork
    Posts
    3,853

    Default Whats next?

    Next thing ya know folks like him will prefer to use "Misguided Romantic" as opposed to "Rapist"......

    What a wishy washy response. "I like to fish myself", thats right up there with a racist claiming to have "friends who are Black (or Asian, Caucasian, etc.)".
    “Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.” ― H.S.T.
    "Character is how you treat those who can do nothing for you."

  11. #11
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    I think his response makes a lot of sense, if the state says they were hunting illegally when charging them with violations then they were hunting illegally. Its funny how you guys turn honest reporting (reporting what actually happened and using primary sources) into a liberal conspiracy with the news paper trying to overthrow hunters...
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  12. #12

    Default The definiton isn't the issue is public perception!!!

    The act of "hunting illegally" is poaching as said before. However, I believe the what most people on here find wrong is that the 80% of people that are neither for or against hunting will tend to relate all hunters to act in a similar fashion as these two (well i would have used gentlemen, but it obviously doesn't apply here) criminals.

    Now whether or not the reporter decided to use these words to help give hunters a bad image to the general public remains to be seen. I guess I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. In our increasing urban country, hunting will continue to be further scrutinized and put under the microscope by those that just do not understand. Articles written in this manner definitely do not help our cause.

  13. #13
    Member .338-06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,045

    Default

    Words have power.

    If Mr. Halpin says they don't he's either an idiot or lying. Those poor fools in the Mideast who blow themselves (and others) up are "martyrs" in the Arab Press and "suicide bombers" in the West.
    Poachers are not just "illegal Hunters".

    Words have power.

  14. #14
    Member AK DUCKMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    698

    Default More then enough room

    To use the word poacher in that article at least a few times. Looks like WE! got slaped, twice in the same section. The other article being the compass piece o crud by this wittshirk guy. Maybe some of you guys that know how to use a pen real well, should write a rebuttal piece. Just a thought. The only thing I have found this paper good for is to start a fire. And is way behind birch bark at that. maybe if it diden't have ink it could be used to wipe. Oh never mind. Sure glad I didn't buy the one I read. In the lower right space of the smilies we sure could use a puke face
    For somthing like this............................@

  15. #15
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ak_powder_monkey View Post
    Its funny how you guys turn honest reporting (reporting what actually happened and using primary sources) into a liberal conspiracy with the news paper trying to overthrow hunters...
    From my end, I don't think it's a liberal conspiracy, but I do think it is an example of lazy writing that belies a poor understanding of hunting. One thing you should learn in your writing classes is that specific language is always better than general language. "Poaching" is better than "hunting illegally", for it is more specific - much the same as what Hippie pointed out, that "rape" is far more specific than "having sex illegally".

    Does that make sense, AKPM?

    Actually, it also occurred to me last night that his definition of hunting should include fish as well. So why then does he say that he fishes instead of hunts? Because it is more specific language. It would be nice if he applied that standard here as well.

  16. #16
    Member skybust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    alaska
    Posts
    2,426

    Default

    email sent chris

  17. #17
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    I see what you are saying Brian...

    I'm just saying if you didn't know anything about hunting and you were told by your employer "hey go write a story about this guy who was poaching" and you go and research it, look up the word poaching and it turns out illegal hunting and poaching are syonomous and the state was charging them with "hunting illegally" would you report what your primary source is saying or introduce bias into your reporting by straying from what your primary source is saying and changing words?

    BTW i'm a science major, we don't really take english classes purse unless you count technicle report writing...
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  18. #18
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    I wonder if he would report on a murder that someone was "killing someone illegally".

    Not impressed with that response.
    Only if they did not have a license
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  19. #19
    Member Toddler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    556

    Thumbs up AKPM is right

    I HATE to say this but I agree with AKPM.

    The legal charge from the state was “Hunting without a license” and “Hunting without a guide”. So Mr Halpin was simply reporting the FACTS. I personally would have like to see him work the word poaching into the article a couple of times but what he wrote was factual.

    I think if we want to fix this form of reporting we should look at changing the statute (I would like the correct wording to come from a lawyer). I would like to the violation to read Poaching as a Header and various sub sets as:
    - Taking game without a license
    - Taking big game without a licensed guide
    - Taking Game out of season
    - Taking Game in excess of the possession limit.

    and so forth.

  20. #20
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ak_powder_monkey View Post
    BTW i'm a science major, we don't really take english classes purse unless you count technicle report writing...
    Alas, that is one of the major weaknesses of many science programs. I have a degree in Biology, but I was certain to take extra classes in writing, as writing well is absolutely crucial to conveying scientific understanding to both scientifically literate colleagues and to the public which funds much of the research and benefits from it.

    I, for one, teach my Biology classes like an English class. There are absolutely no multiple choice questions on my quizzes, and my students write essays and research papers frequently. The ability to communicate well is just important in science as the ability to analyze data.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •