Native American hunting rights and ethical meat production in America

Hunting

Native American hunting rights are a contentious issue in American politics. Often Native American hunting practices conflict directly with the practice of preserving wilderness areas in federal lands. Hunting is the most innate and natural method of acquiring meat. Yet American agricultural practices have transformed the model of eating animal products. Instead of hunting for animals in small-scale meat production for community subsistence, agro-business has taken over the land. Agro-business meats are far less ethically produced than meat that has been hunted, given that the latter refers to wild animals or animals raised in controlled environments, whereas the former refers to animals in captivity, confined inhumanely, and injected with hormones. In The Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan exposes many of the nefarious practices of the American meat industry. In light of this information, there should be no reason to come in the way of Native American hunting rights. Native American hunting rights must be preserved for the benefit of public health, for the benefit of cultural preservation, and for the benefit of the animals.

Hunting is preferable to the meat industry in America, which has been degraded by agro-business practices. If Native Americans are permitted to hunt, they will have access to the freshest meat possible. Not only are hunted animals fresh; their meats are not raised in the deplorable conditions that Michael Pollan describes in The Omnivore's Dilemma. These conditions include exposures to hormones and antibiotics that have never been tested in multi-generational longitudinal studies. Agro-business lobbyists are too powerful to fight, and Native Americans have often been forced to eat supermarket meat that is wrapped in plastic and packaged in a remote facility.

Moreover, hunting is related to the politics of land use rights. Ongoing court cases in states where protected lands coincide with Indian territory show that the needs of Indians are being systematically overlooked in policy decisions, state, and federal legislation. For example, the state of Minnesota has recently permitted the culling of wolves, a creature that naturally balances an unbalanced ecosystem "Minnesota Ignores Indians, Allows Wolf Hunting," 2013). Culling wolves is far different from hunting deer and other meat creatures. To cull wolves means to kill indiscriminately, as the carcasses are not desirable for meat or fur. On the other hand, killing dear and meat animals means food on the table.

Hunting also means engendering respect for the cycle of life, and for all animals. Children who are raised hunting will develop greater respect for animals, than those who have not been exposed to the way of life that includes hunting. This seems ironic, but it is because killing an animal has a powerful impact on a person's psyche. The person is forced to reckon with the need to take a life to feed another, and breeds a natural respect for the exact quantities of animal needed to sustain life in the community. With hunting there is no waste. With the agro-business model, there is often waste. Moreover, the agro-business model makes it so that the person never comes into contact with the animal being eaten. This does a disservice to both the animal and the human being. Interestingly, opponents of hunting often argue that hunting is cruel, when in reality the way that agro-business treats animals is much crueler (IDA, 2013).

Other arguments against Native American hunting rights are more political in nature. For example, some claim that American tax dollars fund Native American hunting practices in ways that are unfair (Lin). This argument is spurious and lacks evidential support. Any taxpayer protected lands would remain protected whether or not Native Americans are permitted to hunt. The hunt does not deplete animal populations. In fact, Native American hunting practices are relatively small scale and effective for necessary wildlife management. Other anti-hunting arguments cite human injuries and deaths, but it is ineffective to ban hunting due to poor safety habits. All hunters need to practice good safety habits, just like all drivers of automobiles need to practice good safety. The practice of hunting is safe when it is practiced regularly and in accordance with Native American tradition.

Hunting is a core component of Native American culture, identity, and worldview. For a Native American, hunting is a cherished way of acquiring food in ways that are in harmony with nature. Putting our bodies in tune with the bodies of the animal, and teaching our children to do the same, are components of Native American religious identity. The pressure on Native Americans to conform to the European standards of social behavior and conduct has destroyed communities and wrecked lives. Hunting is one of the ways Native Americans can preserve cultural identity, dignity, and self-respect.