What species of butterfly is this? Picture taken on 9-18-2018, near Helena, Mt

What species of butterfly is this? Picture taken on 9-18-2018, near Helena, Mt

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Butterfly picture taken on the 18th of September 2018 at an elevation of 1800 meters (6,000 feet) near Mount Helena in Montana, USA.

That is a California Tortoiseshell google[]

Identification of potential conflict areas between land transformation and biodiversity conservation in north-eastern South Africa

Transformation of natural vegetation to other land-uses, such as crop cultivation and urban development, presents the most important threat to biodiversity. Plant and animal species distribution data were employed to identify areas of high biodiversity value in the major summer crop production region in north-eastern South Africa. These areas of biodiversity conservation importance were then evaluated in terms of their (1) potential overlap with areas currently transformed by land-uses in the region and (2) potential co-occurrence with areas of natural vegetation cover likely to become cultivated. Integrating species distribution, land-cover and land capability data allowed for potential conflict areas, i.e. areas with a high biodiversity value facing large current or future land transformation threats to be identified. Areas of potential conflict appear to be central Gauteng, the KwaZulu-Natal coastline, Maputuland and the escarpment of Mpumalanga. Most of the arable areas, that are not currently under some form of land-use, are marginal lands where the physical land characteristics demand high input costs, give rise to low yields and are thus not suitable for full scale commercial cultivation. As the results indicate some of these areas have a high biodiversity value, land reform programs should therefore refrain from promoting cultivation on marginal lands in these conflict areas, as they provide the last safe havens for many species. The proportion of bird, butterfly, mammal and plant species’ ranges remaining in an untransformed state was quantified. Animal species with less than 60% of their natural range remaining, referred to as impacted species, comprised 63 bird, 207 butterfly and 15 mammal species. The grid cells containing these impacted species were identified as additional potential conflict areas. This study presents evidence that there is significant overlap between areas of biodiversity conservation interest and transformed or arable land in this region of South Africa and that there is an urgent need for the formulation of appropriate policies to promote biodiversity conservation on private farmland.

We Believe

America’s experience with cherished landscapes and wildlife has helped define and shape our national character and identity for generations. Protecting these natural resources is a cause that has long united Americans from all walks of life and political stripes. To hunters, anglers, hikers, birders, wildlife watchers, boaters, climbers, campers, cyclists, gardeners, farmers, forest stewards, and other outdoor enthusiasts, this conservation ethic represents a sacred duty and obligation to protect and build upon our conservation heritage for the sake of wildlife, ourselves, our neighbors, and—most of all—for future generations.

Potential distribution models and the effect of climatic change on the distribution of Phengaris nausithous considering its food plant and host ants

Climate change has an effect upon the distribution of butterflies, affecting species that are already sensitive due to their specific ecological requirements. This is the case of Phengaris nausithous, an endangered species in the Iberian Peninsula. For its survival, the species needs to become a parasite of one of the two species of the Myrmica ant genus: M. rubra or M. scabrinodis, in whose nests it completes its life cycle. It also needs the presence of the larval host plant, Sanguisorba officinalis. Using the known distribution of P. nausithous in 10 × 10 km UTM squares, we work out the potential distribution of the species and the effect of climate change, using two different scenarios (SRES A2 and B2, which respectively predict 3.4 and 2.4 °C of temperature increase), by modulating it based on the species on which it depends for survival. The obtained models present AUC values (Area Under a Receiver Operating Characteristic—ROC-Curve) above 0.9 in the case of P. nausithous and S. officinalis, and above 0.8 in the case of the host ants, indicating acceptable models. Climatic models show a reduction of the potential distribution area of P. nausithous with both climatic scenarios, and predict as favourable areas in 2080 locations where the species is currently not found, but with presence of its host plant and ants. If this process takes place, an introduction in its favourable areas in the Pyrenees could be considered in order to conserve the species in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Ecological Services

The Mountain-Prairie Region's Office of Ecological Services (ES) works to restore and protect healthy populations of fish, wildlife, and plants and the environments upon which they depend. Using the best available science, ES personnel work with Federal, State, Tribal, local, and non-profit stakeholders, as well as private land owners, to avoid, minimize, and mitigate threats to our Nation's natural resources.

The Grizzly Bear Recovery Team

Photo: Terry Tollefsbol, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Hilary Cooley, Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator

Hilary leads the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s grizzly bear recovery program across the Mountain-Prairie and Pacific regions. Previously, Hilary worked for the Service served as the Polar Bear Program Lead in Alaska, and the Wolf Coordinator for the Pacific Northwest Region. Hilary also has experience working for Idaho Department of Fish and Game as a regional wolf biologist. She holds a Bachelors of Science in Natural Resources from the University of Vermont, and a Masters and PhD from Washington State University in wildlife biology.

Jennifer Fortin-Noreus, Wildlife Biologist

Jennifer is a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Program. Previously, Jennifer worked for the USGS Alaska Science Center researching grizzly, black, and polar bears. Jennifer specializes in bear capture, handling, nutrition, and habitat use. She earned her Bachelor's of Science in Environmental Science from the University of Portland, then received her Master’s and PhD at Washington State University in Zoology.

Kate Smith, Program Administrator

Kate has been the program administrator for the Grizzly Bear Recovery Program for 15 years. She earned her Bachelors of Science in Sociology from the University of Vermont and her Masters from the University of Montana’s College of Business

Wayne Kasworm, Wildlife Biologist

Wayne oversees recovery and monitoring efforts for grizzly bears in the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk Mountains grizzly bear serves as the science advisor to the Cabinet-Yaak / Selkirk subcommittee and the North Cascades subcommittee of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee provides consultation support to federal agencies on grizzly bear issues maintains collared samples of grizzly bears to estimate reproductive rates, sex and age specific survival, cause specific mortality rates, and population trends assesses the genetic health of grizzly bear populations and monitors the effects of resource management on grizzly bear recovery. Wayne received his Bachelor’s of Science from the University of Idaho and his Masters in Fish and Wildlife Management from Montana State University.

Tom Radandt, Wildlife Biologist

Tom radio collars grizzly bears in the Cabinet Yaak ecosystem, maintains a project database of captured black and grizzly bears, updates annual reports for the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk ecosystems, leads training for capture and handling of grizzly bears in all six recovery zones, and also serves as the grizzly bear recovery program’s safety officer. In addition his field research, Tom advises advanced degree candidates on research methods and protocols, conducts an annual handling workshop, and contributes to international research projects. Tom received his Bachelor’s of Science in Wildlife Biology from the University of Montana in 1988 with a B.S. in wildlife biology.

Justin Teisberg, Wildlife Biologist

Justin leads a capture team radio-collaring grizzly bears in the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem, maintains the photo and genetic encounter database of Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bears, helps coordinate interagency genetic sampling, updates reports for the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk ecosystems, and conducts research on grizzly bear physiology and nutritional ecology, population estimation, genetics, connectivity, and habitat use of Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk grizzly bears. In addition to Grizzly Bear Program research, he advises graduate students’ research design, produces research on bear handling techniques, and contributes expertise and assistance to myriad collegial research projects. He received his Bachelor’s of Science in Natural Resources from the University of Illinois in 2006 and Ph.D. in Zoology from Washington State University in 2012.

Grizzly bears were listed as a threatened species in 1975 in the conterminous 48 States. Currently grizzly bear distribution has been reduced to 5 areas in the western United States, including the Bitterroot in central Idaho and western Montana. Despite numerous studies of this area, there were no verifiable sightings of grizzly bears in the last 60 years until an adult male grizzly bear was mistakenly killed by a black bear hunter is September 2007 in the northern mountains of the Bitterroot. Recovery programs include activities such as improving management of grizzly bears on public lands, genetic research, population monitoring, public education, and implementing the recovery plans for each population.

Grizzly bears. Credit: USFWS.

Grizzly bears were listed as a threatened species in 1975 in the conterminous 48 States. Currently grizzly bear distribution has been reduced to 5 areas in the western United States, including the Cabinet-Yaak in northern Idaho and northwest Montana. The Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear population is estimated to be approximately 50 individuals. Active research began in the Cabinet-Yaak recovery zone in 1983 when one bear was captured and radio collared. The Cabinet–Yaak ecosystem encompasses the Yaak River drainage and the Cabinet Mountains. The ecosystem is bisected by the Kootenai River, with the Cabinet Mountains to the south and the Yaak River area to the north. Approximately 90% of the study area is on public land administered by the Kootenai and Panhandle National Forests. The Cabinet Mountains Wilderness Area encompasses part of the study area at higher elevations of the Cabinet Mountains.

Annual Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Research and Monitoring Reports (Archives)

In 2006, the Service issued a non-jeopardy biological opinion for the Revett Silver Company&rsquos proposed Rock Creek Mine project in the Cabinet Mountains of Montana. The non-jeopardy opinion concludes that the project incorporates a conservative approach to ensure adequate measures to conserve grizzly bears and bull trout. The mitigation plan for the Rock Creek mine will be protective of threatened bull trout and should produce a positive net effect for the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem grizzly bear population.

Map of the Cabinet-Yaak recovery area. Credit: USFWS.

Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem - Archive

Grizzly bear. Credit: USFWS.

The North Cascades is a large ecosystem in north-central Washington State and south-central British Columbia. The largest area of the ecosystem, about 9,800 square miles, lies in the United States, with an additional 3,800 square miles across the international border in British Columbia. The North Cascades ecosystem (NCE) is isolated from other ecosystems in the United States and Canada with grizzly bear populations.

While study of this very rugged and remote habitat indicates that this ecosystem is capable of supporting a self-sustaining population of grizzlies, the population is estimated to be fewer than 20 animals within the recovery zone in the United States. The population in adjacent British Columbia portion of the ecosystem is estimated to be less than 25-30 grizzly bears. Given the low number of grizzly bears, very slow reproductive rate and other recovery constraints, the NCE grizzly bear population is the most at-risk grizzly bear population in the United States today.

The main threat to grizzly bears in this recovery zone is a small population size and population fragmentation, with resulting demographic and genetic risks.

In 2013, The Fish and Wildlife Service reaffirmed (78 Fed. Reg. 70104 [Nov. 22, 2013]) that the North Cascades ecosystem grizzly bear warrants uplisting from Threatened to Endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

To date, efforts toward recovery in the NCE have focused on habitat protection through a strategy of no net loss of core habitat, information and education efforts regarding grizzly bears and their habitat, and enhanced sanitation for proper garbage and food storage in bear habitat.

North Cascades Ecosystem. Credit: USFWS.

In accordance with the NCE Recovery Plan chapter (1997) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife have jointly initiated (2014) an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) planning process to evaluate a range of alternatives for recovering the North Cascades grizzly bear population. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service are cooperating agencies in the process.

A recovery plan for the British Columbia ecosystem was completed in 2004.
To learn more about the EIS process and how to participate, or to view related documents, please visit:

FAQ on the North Cascades Ecosystem Grizzly Bear Restoration Plan and Environmental Impact Statement

Grizzly bear. Credit: USFWS.

Grizzly bears were listed as a threatened species in 1975 in the conterminous 48 States. Currently grizzly bear distribution has been reduced to 5 areas in the western United States, including the Northern Continental Divide in northwestern Montana. The grizzly population in this area includes Glacier National Park and adjacent areas in Canada, and the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex. This population has approximately 1,000 animals and continues to grow each year.

Recent News:

May 24, 2018 - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announced today the availability of the final Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan Supplement: Habitat-Based Recovery Criteria for the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (Recovery Plan Supplement). The final Recovery Plan Supplement provides objective, habitat-based criteria for the recovery of Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem grizzly bears, and builds upon the existing roadmap to grizzly bear recovery for the Service and our conservation partners.

December 11, 2017 - DENVER –The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is soliciting input from the scientific community and the broader public on draft criteria set for the eventual recovery of the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) grizzly bear. The NCDE region encompasses Glacier National Park and other parts of northwestern Montana.

May 2, 2013 – A draft conservation strategy for grizzly bears in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) is now available for public review and feedback. This document describes the management and monitoring programs that would be in place if and when this population is delisted from the Endangered Species Act. These measures are designed to maintain a recovered grizzly bear population in the NCDE. This document does not change the legal status of this population of grizzly bears. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will not sign this conservation strategy or delist this population until agencies demonstrate their commitment to implementing it.

The Draft NCDE Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy is available below. Digital or hard copies may also be mailed upon request.

Public comments may be submitted to the Grizzly Bear Recovery Office at the address below until August 1, 2013.

Attention: NCDE Conservation Strategy
University Hall, Room 309
Missoula, MT 59812

Funding was received in 2003 to begin the process to determine the total number of bears in this ecosystem with statistical confidence. Additional population monitoring ecosystem wide is necessary to further recovery and any potential delisting.

More than 17% of this ecosystem is private land and the majority of bear-human conflicts and bear deaths occur on these private lands. We must continue to work with private landowners to minimize these conflicts.

Grizzly bear. Credit: USFWS.

Grizzly bears were listed as a threatened species in 1975 in the conterminous 48 States. The current population estimate within the 2,200 square mile Selkirk Mountain recovery zone is approximately 80 individuals. Threats to the species in this recovery zone include incomplete habitat protection measures (motorized access management), overutilization by human-caused mortality, small population size, and population fragmentation that produces genetic isolation.

Monitoring and Progress Reports:

Map of the Cabinet-Yaak recovery area. Credit: USFWS.

Grizzly bears. Credit: National Park Service.

Recent News:

  • Final Signed 2016 Conservation Strategy:
  • Final 2016 Conservation Strategy Appendices:

May 21, 2013 - The Service is providing the public an additional 30 days to review and comment on the Draft Revised Supplement to the Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan in the Greater Yellowstone Area. Previously submitted comments do not have to be resubmitted because they have been incorporated into the public record and will be fully considered in our final Supplement.

Public comments may be submitted to the Grizzly Bear Recovery Office at the address below until June 20, 2013:

Attention: GYA demographic criteria
University Hall, Room 309
Missoula, Montana 59812

Electronic comments may be sent directly to [email protected]

November 15, 2011 – The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion affirming in part and reversing in part the district court&rsquos decision vacating the final rule delisting grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Area. The Appellate court affirmed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service&rsquos determination that existing regulatory mechanisms are adequate to protect grizzlies in the Yellowstone area while ruling that the Service had failed to adequately explain its conclusion that the loss of whitebark pine was not a threat to the population. In compliance with this order, the Greater Yellowstone Area population of grizzly bears remains federally listed as &ldquothreatened&rdquo under the Endangered Species Act while we consider more recent scientific data.

March 22, 2007 – The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that the Greater Yellowstone Area population of grizzly bears was recovered and should be removed from the Federal list of threatened and endangered species.

Management Documents

Yellowstone Ecosystem archives

Human Fatality Investigation Reports

Distinct Population Segment Actions

On March 22, 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announced that the Yellowstone Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of grizzly bears is a recovered population no longer meeting the ESA&rsquos definition of threatened or endangered. This DPS has increased from estimates as low as 136 individuals when listed in 1975 to more than 500 animals as of 2006. This population has been increasing between 4 and 7 percent annually. The range of this population also has increased dramatically as evidenced by the 48 percent increase in occupied habitat since the 1970s. Yellowstone grizzly bears continue to increase their range and distribution annually and grizzly bears in the Yellowstone area now occupy habitats they have been absent from for decades. Currently, roughly 84-90 percent of females with cubs occupy the Primary Conservation Area (PCA) and about 10 percent of females with cubs have expanded out beyond the PCA within the DPS boundaries. Grizzly bears now occupy 68 percent of suitable habitat within the DPS boundaries and may soon occupy the remainder of the suitable habitat.

Intensive monitoring of the population and its habitat will continue so that managers can continue to base management decisions on the best available scientific information. The Yellowstone DPS represents a viable population which has sufficient numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals so as to provide a high likelihood that the species will continue to exist and be well distributed throughout its range for the foreseeable future. The State and Federal agencies are committed to implementing the extensive Conservation Strategy and State management plans. They have formally incorporated the habitat and population standards described in the Conservation Strategy into the six affected National Forests' Land Management Plans and Yellowstone and Grand Teton's National Park Compendiums. This commitment coupled with State wildlife agencies' approved grizzly bear management plans ensure that adequate regulatory mechanisms are in place and that the Yellowstone grizzly bear population will not become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Therefore, based on the best scientific and commercial information available, we are finalizing the delisting of the Yellowstone grizzly bear DPS. More information on this action and other post-delisting management documents are available below.

Background Information

Summaries and Responses to Public Comments Received
Habitat-based Recovery Criteria

5. Aaron Mitchell Anderson of Pine City, Minnesota

On April 7, 1989, one year old Aaron was playing in the front yard of his parents’ Pine City, Minnesota, home. When his mother stepped into the house for just a moment, the toddler disappeared.

Despite an exhaustive search of the area, Aaron was not found. Police eventually concluded that the child must have roamed away and into the Snake River, which bordered the family home, and drowned. However, tracking dogs were unable to to hit on his scent near the river. As a result, Aaron’s parents were adamant that the child had been abducted.

Although they later moved to St. Paul, Minnesota, the Andersons have continued to be very vocal with their criticism of the Pine City police and the handling of the investigation into the disappearance of their son.

Aaron Mitchell Anderson would now be 24 years old. Identifying marks include a small white birthmark on the lower right side of his abdomen.

If you believe you have information about the disappearance of Aaron Mithcell Anderson, please call the Pine County Sheriff’s Department at 320.629.3930.


Habitat Requirements

In Canada, Weidemeyer's Admiral is typically seen in association with deciduous trees and shrubby areas in river valleys, see page sites and smaller stream valleys (i.e., ‘coulees’) (Kondla 2000) (Figure 8, Figure 9). Cottonwood (Populus sargentii), hybrid poplar (Populus spp.), Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia), Western Clematis (Clematis ligusticifolia), and Thorny Buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea) were present at all Milk River sites surveyed by Pike (1987). Saskatoon is the only confirmed larval food plant in Alberta (Pike 1987). Clematis is the major nectar source for the adults, while Cottonwoods provide shelter and Thorny Buffaloberry provides structure for the clematis to grow upon. Kondla did not find admirals associated with large stands of willow (Salix spp.), although Porter (1989) found occasional use of willow thicket edges in New Mexico.

Figure 8. Confirmed Weidemeyer's Admiral habitat at Police Coulee in Writing-On-Stone Provincial Park, Alberta in 15-1-13W4 (Kondla 2004)

Figure 9. Weidemeyer's Admiral habitat at south Pinhorn Provincial Grazing Reserve (near 12U 0512455, 5436565) (Kondla 2004)

Recent survey effort also found Weidemeyer's Admiral in small patches of Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and Saskatoon in ravines and coulees some distance from the nearest treed riparian habitats (Kondla 2005) (Figure 10). This is fairly consistent with the use of treed and shrubby riparian habitat in nearby Montana (Kondla 2005) and the badlands of North Dakota (Royer 2003).

Figure 10. Small ravine (12U 0511183, 5436613) with very small shrub patch where an adult Weidemeyer's Admiral was observed perching and patrolling (Kondla 2004)

Males have been observed engaging in perching/patrolling mate-locating behaviour at even extremely small patches (<5 m²) of Chokecherry and Saskatoon (Kondla 2005). Although such small patches are insufficient to sustain a population, coulees or ravines with multiple small shrub patches constitute Weidemeyer's Admiral habitat.

Habitat Trends

Trends in Weidemeyer's Admiral habitat availability and quality are unknown. The abundance and distribution of suitable shrubby riparian habitat likely has responded to changes in natural disturbance regimes due to European settlement, particularly as a result of the replacement of Bison (Bison bison) by livestock and suppression of fire, and other human impacts on the landscape. Localized loss or degradation of Weidemeyer's Admiral habitat from construction of infrastructure for oil and gas production, ranching, and recreation may have occurred but the direct impacts of these disturbances are undocumented.

Russian Olive and (Eleagnus angustifolia) or Tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima, T. chinensis, and their hybrids) are invasive plants that are expected to have a strongly negative impact upon the ecology of the butterfly’s habitat in general and its larval hostplant in particular (see Threats and Limiting Factors).

Habitat patches within the known range of Weidemeyer's Admiral in Alberta appear to be currently stable, and habitat fragmentation is likely not a major threat for Weidemeyer's Admiral because their habitat is naturally fragmented and the adults are capable of flying hundreds of metres, and likely farther, between patches of breeding habitat (Kondla 2005).

Violent love: hunting, heterosexuality, and the erotics of men's predation.

"It will require a courageous grasp of the politics and economics, as well as the cultural propaganda, of heterosexuality to carry us beyond individual cases or diversified group situations into the complex kind of overview needed to undo the power men everywhere wield over women, power which has become a model for every other form of exploitation and illegitimate control."

- Adrienne Rich, "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence," Signs (summer 1980)

In his novel, The Hound of the Baskervilles, Arthur Conan Doyle tells a story concerning a cruel nobleman named Hugo Baskerville. Hugo desired a neighboring woman who consistently avoided him. One night he and his companions kidnapped her and locked her in an upstairs room in Baskerville Hall. She escaped by climbing down the ivy on the outside wall, and

some little time later Hugo left his guests to carry food and drink - with other worse things, perchance - to his captive, and so found the cage empty and the bird escaped. Then, as it would seem, he became as one that hath a devil. . . . And while the revellers stood aghast at the fury of the man, one more wicked or, it may be, more drunken than the rest, cried out that they should put the hounds upon her. Whereat Hugo ran from the house, crying to his grooms that they should saddle his mare and unkennel the pack, and giving the hounds a kerchief of the maid's, he swung them to the line, and so off full cry in the moonlight over the moor.(1)

The woman ultimately died of fear and fatigue, and Hugo himself had his throat torn out by a mysterious large black beast, "the hound of the Baskervilles."

In linking hunting with predatory sexuality, Doyle's imagination matches reality. From the perspective of the man hunting with hounds, the chase is hot, charged with phallic sexuality:

The sudden immersion in the countryside has numbed and annulled him. . . . But here they come, here comes the pack, and instantly the whole horizon is charged with a strange electricity it begins to move, to stretch elastically. Suddenly the orgiastic element shoots forth, the dionysiac, which flows and boils in the depths of all hunting. . . . There is a universal vibration. Things that before were inert and flaccid have suddenly grown nerves, and they gesticulate, announce, foretell. There it is, there's the pack!(2)

In this essay, I show how contemporary hunting by North American white men is structured and experienced as a sexual activity. The erotic nature of hunting animals allows sport hunting to participate in a relation of reciprocal communication and support with the predatory heterosexuality prominent in Western patriarchal society.

Hunters unfailingly describe their relation to their prey in terms of sex and affection. For example, Robert Wegner discusses the "profound love" of deer possessed by Archibald Rutledge, a man who killed 299 white-tailed bucks in his lifetime.(3) In describing hunting, no term in the vocabulary of love is neglected (emphasis added in each case):

For many people throughout history, the most seductive voice of Mother Nature at special times of the year has been the invitation to join in the quest to hunt and kill birds, mammals, reptiles, and fish. . . . For the passionate hunter who is willing to fall in love with the creatures that are hunted, the desire to give something back to nature bears equal passion to the hunt. . . . Hunting, in the final analysis, is a great teacher of love.(4)

[Jack] felt that bow hunting made him superior to those who killed by looking through the sights of a powerful rifle. "What did they know," he had said to his girlfriend Candice once, "what intimacy did they feel with the animal?"(5)

The decision to cull was made by caring professionals [referring to the decision by Florida wildlife officials to permit hunters to kill deer stranded by flooding].(6)

Hunting, properly done, is not an outworn cruelty but rather a manifestation of man's desire to reestablish or maintain a union with the natural world. There are various paths to this marriage.(7)

There is no incongruity in describing the disposition to shoot wild animals to death as loving, if one correctly understands the vocabulary being used. "Love" here simply means the desire to possess those creatures who interest or excite the hunter. Taking possession typically entails killing the animal, eating the flesh, and mounting the head or the entire body. The identification between "loving" and possessing by killing and mounting is made in the following hunter's comments regarding two ducks he shot and stuffed: "'I saw these mountain ducks and fell in love with them,' says Paul, the tone of his voice matching the expression he wears in the photo with the Dall sheep - one of most tender regard for something precious. 'I just had to have a pair of them.'"(8) Aldo Leopold-hunter, forest manager, and founding father of modern environmental ethics- described the trophy as a "certificate" attesting to the hunter's success in "the age-old feat of overcoming, outwitting, or reducing-to-possession."(9) And Jose Ortega y Gasset, who wrote the outstanding statement of twentieth-century sportsman's philosophy, defined hunting by both humans and nonhumans as "what an animal does to take possession, dead or alive, of some other being that belongs to a species basically inferior to its own."(10)

"Romance" is probably the word most commonly used to refer to hunting, as in the following representative list of titles and subtitles, all from books about hunting: The Eternal Romance between Man and Nature, The Romance of Hunting, Romantic Adventures in Field and Forest, Romance of Sporting, even Flirtation Camp: Or, the Rifle, Rod, and Gun in California: a Sporting Romance. Andree Collard remarks on the prevalence of romantic images of the hunt, which she analyzes thus:

A romantic removes the "love object" from the reality of its being to the secret places of his mind and establishes a relationship of power/domination over it. There can be no reciprocity, no element of mutuality between the romantic lover and the "love object." The quest (chase) is all that matters as it provides a heightened sense of being through the exercise of power.(11)

This power difference determines the "basically inferior" status of prey species as claimed by Ortega y Gasset.

Hunters' statements confirm Collard's analysis of romance. One sportsman speaks of the "wild romanticism" of Africa and remarks that "as the animal moves into your sights, you are most thoroughly alive."(12) And in his book, In Defense of Hunting, James Swan describes as "romantic" the lives of the old market hunters ("people who killed ducks, geese, passenger pigeons, and anything else they could for money"). Swan explains the source of the appeal of hunting:

Though fishing and hunting share the common quest for capturing a wild creature, hunting for me has always had a more seductive call. . . . Once a fish is hooked, excitement rises to be sure, but once the fish is landed it can be returned to the water to live on. Also, relatively few fish that get off the line before being landed are harmed or killed by being hooked. There is more leniency in fishing. A hunter holds life and death in his hands, with creatures for which we have a closer kinship.(13)

So power over life and death is central to the seductive, exciting romance of hunting. But words like "seduction" and "romance" connote sex as well as power. It is not that "romance" connotes only sex when applied to heterosexual relations and connotes only power when applied to hunting. Rather, hunting and predatory heterosexuality are instances of romance because each is simultaneously sexual and an expression of power.

John Mitchell describes a dinner-table argument over hunting during which a frustrated hunting advocate throws up his hands and says: "Telling you about hunting is like trying to explain sex to a eunuch."(14) Hunters frequently use sexual allusions to explain their killing. For example:

[H]unting includes killing, like sex includes orgasm. Killing is the orgasm of hunting. But like in making love - talking and touching and, you know, looking in the eyes, and just smelling - the long story is the real lovemaking, and orgasm is the inevitable end of it. That is the killing of hunting, but only one part of it.(15)

Similarly, James Swan compares the "hunter's high" to the "payoff of an orgasm," and Paul Shepard describes killing as the "ecstatic consummation" of the hunter's "love" for his prey.(16)

Men who defend hunting frequently compare it to sex. One of the most common arguments used to justify hunting is that men who hunt today are expressing a deeply ingrained instinct.(17) In the context of this argument we find comparisons between hunting and sex such as the following: "One of my basic hypotheses here is that man is instinctively a hunter. He does not hunt for reasons of pleasure, although he has come to associate pleasure with absolute necessity. One may draw an analogy between the pleasures we have learned in the hunt and those we associate with sex."(18) Similarly, according to James Swan, hunting remains a "basic instinct, like sex, which is implanted in our minds and bodies." He likens the possibility of foregoing the hunt to the possibility of foregoing sexual intercourse: "We can get by without hunting, but is this something we really want to do? We could also drop having sexual intercourse in favor of in vitro fertilization."(19) Swan's rhetorical question suggests that both possibilities are equally unnatural, absurd, and undesirable.

The argument that sport hunting is instinctive is easily enough rebutted, for example, by noting that those who do not hunt (a 93 percent majority in the United States) show no evident signs of being repressed.(20) If hunting is instinctive, why do children in hunting families sometimes refuse to hunt,(21) and why do hunters themselves experience such pangs of conscience that many of them eventually stop killing?(22) My main interest here is not in the soundness of this argument but in the presumption it makes about hunting and sex - namely, that both are so natural as to be unalterable:

[Hunting] is absolutely beyond accepted, formal morality in the way, at essence, that other fundamental human activity, sex, is: sex can bring us pleasure or sadness, but the desire to join with another, whether or not acted on, remains basic and unalterable: by itself it is neither good nor evil it only is.(23)

By naturalizing hunting, this argument attempts to move it out of the realm of moral dispute altogether. The comparisons of hunting with sex in this respect both draw from and reinforce the common view that sexual behavior is innately determined. The naturalization of sex is a reactionary position often promoted specifically to excuse men's sexual violence against women and children, just as naturalizing hunting excuses men's violence against animals.

James Whisker compares hunting to sex in order to explain and defend hunting but rejects the literal identification of hunting as a sexual activity. Against theories that analyze hunting as an expression of phallic sexuality, Whisker argues that there exist many other phallic symbols besides guns and that, although men do admit to feeling "manly" as a result of hunting, they also derive this feeling from other sports. But the existence of institutions expressive of manliness or phallic sexuality other than hunting says nothing about the nature of hunting itself. Whisker also points out that there are female as well as male hunters.(24) A relatively small number of hunters (less than 7 percent in the United States) are female. Whisker evidently presumes that these women cannot be experiencing their hunting as a form of sexualized domination. But if we reject deterministic/dualistic theories of sexuality, it remains an open question whether some women develop a predatory sexuality (in hunting or elsewhere). To be sure, women's writing on hunting remains relatively free of the frenzied, highly sexualized accounts men frequently give of their hunting.(25) But even if sportswomen do tend to experience hunting differently than do sportsmen, this by itself would not invalidate any given analysis of the nature of men's hunting. If some women hunt in nonsexualized ways, this certainly suggests the possibility that some men might also hunt in nonsexualized ways. This abstract possibility notwithstanding, sportsmen's self-descriptions, sampled below, indicate that among them sexual experiences of hunting are very common.(26)

The reasons behind Whisker's reluctance to identify men's hunting as sexual are noteworthy. Whisker states that within sexual interpretations of hunting, the "hunter has been reduced to the position of being a sexually immature, unfulfilled and frustrated and probably mentally ill creature who is in need of therapeutic help."(27) According to Whisker, to see hunting as a sexual activity implies that hunters are fundamentally "unfulfilled and frustrated," that is, they do not gain sexual satisfaction elsewhere. Because Whisker rejects the notion that hunters are sexually dysfunctional, he also rejects the interpretation of hunting as sexual.

Like Whisker, antihunters also at times equate sexualized hunting with sexual dysfunction or deviance. But antihunters are more likely to accept sexual interpretations of hunting and use the equation to stigmatize hunters (hunters are sexually frustrated or impotent hunting compensates for small penises, and so forth). Neither Whisker's analysis nor antihunting rhetoric of this sort recognizes the possibility that eroticized animal hunting may be a sexual expression of normal men in hunting communities. As I argue in the following section, sexual descriptions of hunting are not merely metaphoric for many North American sportsmen hunting is a sexual experience. By interpreting the sexuality of hunting as sexual deviance, anti-hunters gain a quick way to demonize a morally repugnant activity, but only by ignoring the fact that hunting is not perpetrated by a few isolated, abnormal men but rather is organized and carried out by entire communities of men. Within hunting communities it is the abnormal man who does not enjoy hunting. Hunting men are not frustrated and sexually impotent, they typically enjoy sexual relations with other people, and they enjoy the erotics of stalking and shooting wild animals. Within certain patriarchal social structures the disposition to take sexual pleasure in the domination and destruction of other living beings is a normal part of men's fulfillment.

A comparison with theories of rape may be useful here. Rape is often imaged as the deviant behavior of a sexually frustrated man overwhelmed by a chance encounter with a provocative woman. To sustain this image certain facts must be ignored: that most rapes are premeditated, that rapists usually know those they attack, that rapes are often carried out by men in groups, that rapists are typically not degenerates or sexual deviants, that more than one-half of college age men surveyed said they would force sex on a woman if they were sure they could get away with it, and so forth.(28) The last two facts suggest that rape is hardly a deviant activity, yet to acknowledge this conclusion, just as to acknowledge the normalcy of men's erotic enjoyment of hunting, suggests the threatening possibility that there is something seriously wrong with normal manhood in this culture.

The other consequence of the standard image of rape is that it puts the burden on women to control their behavior to avoid "provoking" men into rape. When the man rapes, it becomes "her fault." This is not only a presumption of the legal system, it is also a common feature of men's phenomenology of rape. As the interviews in the book Men on Rape demonstrate, rapists often report feeling that they were attacked by their victims and that the rape was a way of regaining lost control or seeking justifiable revenge.(29) I would not deny that some of these men actually feel that they were the disempowered victims, but I would distinguish those feelings from the reality that rape remains a premeditated, unprovoked act of aggression. In a similar way, hunting men often report that they are only responding to some violent depredation initiated by the animal (mountain lions attacking joggers, wolves killing livestock, deer eating crops, and so forth). Hunters make these claims even in situations where the overall context reveals that they themselves initiated the attack. For instance, the 1989 film In the Blood tells the stow of some of the male descendants of Theodore Roosevelt mounting a hunting expedition to Africa. Once there, the group splits into two parties: one hunts for trophy-size Cape Buffalo, the other decides to bait and kill a large, wily old crocodile known by the locals. A native who makes money guiding white hunters tells the sportsmen that this crocodile has taken some of their livestock. Rumors are floated that this crocodile may even have killed some children. As the sportsmen carry out their ultimately unsuccessful attempt to kill the crocodile, they construct an image of themselves as benevolent protectors responding justifiably to the crocodile's aggression against the local people. Lost in this image is the reality that these white men came to Africa specifically to kill some indigenous animal or other and that once there they fixed on the crocodile not simply because he was claimed to be a threat to the locals, but also because he promised to be a challenging adversary, and because crocodiles are protected from sportsmen in most other parts of the world (thus greatly increasing their trophy value and the market value of the pelt).

North American white men do not hunt out of necessity they typically do not hunt to protect people or animals, nor to keep themselves or their families from going hungry. Rather, they pursue hunting for its own sake, as a sport. This point is obscured by the fact that many hunters consume the flesh of their kills with their families, thus giving the appearance that hunting is a subsistence tactic. A close reading of the hunting literature, however, reveals that hunters eat the flesh of their kills as an ex post facto attempt at morally legitimating an activity they pursue for its own sake.(30) The hunter often portrays himself as providing for his family through a successful kill and "harvest." This posture seeks to ritually reestablish a stereotypical masculine provider role less available now than it may once have been. In reality hunting today is typically not a source of provision but actually drains family resources. Deer hunters, for example, spend on average twenty dollars per pound of venison acquired, once all the costs of equipment, licenses, transportation, unsuccessful hunts, and so forth, are calculated.(31)

This hunting is doubly sexual - as a source of erotic enjoyment as well as an expression of masculine gender identity. In her ecofeminist critique of hunters' discourse, Marti Kheel cites a number of sportsmen and hunting advocates who understand hunting as an expression of aggressive male sexual energy.(32) The following sampling of North American hunters' literature indicates the validity of a sexual interpretation of hunting. The pattern is that of a buildup and release of tension organized around the pursuit, phallic penetration, and erotic touching of a creature whom the hunter finds seductively appealing.

Hunting is experienced as and expected to be a very sensual activity for the hunter.(33) The physical exertion exposure to the elements immersion in environments rich in sights, sounds, and smells and the stalking induced intensification of sensory capacity all contribute. But the warm internal feelings mentioned by hunters go beyond the sensory focus and stimulation entailed by stalking in the wild and suggest an additional, purely sexual aspect of the hunting sensuality.

Indeed, the hunting experience follows rhythms typical of men's sexuality in this society. For rockstar Ted Nugent, bow-hunting follows this pattern - anticipation, desire, pursuit, excitement, penetration, climax, and satiation.

Last season's hunts are still vivid in the mind, but it does little to satisfy the craving.(34). . .

It's the preparation, the thought process that goes into anticipating the hunt that's the most exciting part.(35). . .

Their grace and beauty . . . was the essence of the thrill of the hunt. My binoculars revealed their delicate features . . .

a certain light, cream-colored sheep was calling me . . .

I had worked myself up to a nervous wreck waiting to shoot . . .

the heated excitement of the shot . . .

the shaft was in and out . . . complete penetration . . .

I was hot . . . . I was on fire(36). . .

Oh yeah, a lot of blood here, I'm getting excited now . . . there's no telling what I might do . . . I'm excited . . . I am high.(37). . .

it satiated a built-up frustration . . .

a serious still hunt/stalking maneuver . . . can gratifyingly drain a guy. I like that.(38). . .

And one southern hunter explains: "Deer huntin' is like the fever. It builds up all year long and then has to be released. It's like buildin' up for 'a piece.' Once ya laid one, you move onto the next one that may be harder."(39)

This is a phallocentric sexuality. The weapon becomes an extension of the hunter's body and thereby the means by which he penetrates animal bodies: "the traditional archer carries his bow lightly and casually, almost as if it's an extension of his body." Decisions of which instrument of penetration to use are made by reference to maximizing the erotic sensation experienced by the hunter, as in this argument for traditional handmade wooden bows and arrows over high-tech factory-produced equipment: "Is there any romance in a steel cable or a magnesium pulley? Does an aluminum arrow generate any feeling of warmth for the archer?"(40)

The various dysfunctions of phallic heterosexuality all have their counterparts in hunting. In a passage that could easily be paraphrased into a sex manual, Nugent lists the varieties of "target panic," a malady afflicting hunters who become too excited to shoot properly: "The target panic demon comes in many disguises. Flinching, freezing above, below or to one side, failing to come to full draw, releasing the arrow prematurely, not being able to release at all! All kinds of mind-boggling dementia."(41) "Target panic," also known as "buck fever," is common enough among hunters to have generated its own extensive literature.

Targetted animals become objects of erotic desire for the hunter. One night in the middle of a weekend goose hunt, James Swan dreamt "I saw a Canada goose come to me, and then it was lying beside me."(42) Another hunter explicitly identifies his feelings toward hunted animals with sexual desire: "You see the animal and it becomes a love object. There is tremendous sexuality in this . . . sexuality in the sense of wanting something deeply, in the sense of eros. All quests, all desires, are ultimately the same, don't you think?"(43) And elk hunter Ted Kerasote ends his book by describing this dream:

I . . . see elk before me, around me, moving everywhere, big dark shapes in the trees, along with their calves of the year. I raise the rifle, wanting to fire, but also wanting to wait. . . . I walk among them. They aren't afraid, and behind me one of the cows rubs her flank against me. She doesn't smell like elk - dry and musky. She smells washed and clean. When I turn around she drops her coat and becomes a naked woman, pressing herself to me and pushing me down. Her skin is the creamy color of wapiti rump, her breasts are small. . . . As she bends her head to my chest and tries to take off my shirt, I lift her chin. Her eyes are wet and shining, and I can't tell if she is about to laugh or to cry. I put my hand behind her head pulling her face toward me for a kiss, when I see the elk hide under my nose in the dawn.(44)

Hunters are very aware of the physical beauty of wild animals, a beauty they describe in detail and with longing:

No one can know how I have loved the woods, the stream, the trails of the wild, the ways of the things of slender limbs, of fine nose, of great eager ears, of mild wary eyes, and of vague and half-revealed forms and colors. I have been their friend and mortal enemy. I have so loved them that I longed to kill them.(45)

Through killing the hunter gains ultimate control over the animal. In particular, he may now do something to wild animals that they generally do not permit while alive - he may touch them. Thus Thomas McIntyre exults over a successful kill: "We may look at those antlers now for as long as we wish and whenever we please. We can, if we dare, even put our hands on them."(46) Hunters take great pleasure in stroking the fur, antlers, and horns of the large mammals they kill. The erotic nature of this touching is evident from the sensual way that it is done, from the quiet, admiring comments about the animal's beauty that frequently accompany the stroking and from the words hunters use to describe this aspect of hunting:

the hand touches the gleaming points (or the horn tips), caresses the antler beams (or the burr), and plays with the soft hair on the head. Hunting is a passion better men than I have tried to describe. . . . Were someone to call it an intercourse with nature, I should shake my head at the choice of words, but I shall know what that person gets out of hunting.(47)

In this context Plato's characterization of hunting as "nothing more than pursuing the game and laying hands on it" is perfectly apt.(48)

In many types of hunting the sexuality of the hunted animals themselves is thoroughly integrated into the pursuit. Hunters make use of the calls and scents of mating animals to track or lure them, to get close enough to kill. For instance, deer hunters attempt to bring bucks close to their stands by spreading the scent of a doe in estrus Jerry Daniels, in Hunting the Whitetail, recommends that "you heat your doe scent to 103 degrees to imitate the smell of a 'hot doe.'"(49) Deer hunters are keenly aware of the sexually charged state of the bucks they pursue - they rely on this to make the bucks more reckless than usual and thus easier to kill. Deer hunters also tend to identify with these bucks for example, one hunter joked that "all bucks everywhere better watch their nuts today," as he cupped his left hand over his own.(50) The hunters' attribution of aroused states (the "hot rut") to prey animals with whom they identify adds to the overall sexual experience of the sport for the hunter - and not just for deer hunters. Archibald Rutledge suggested that: "To call a turkey one will perhaps do best if he will put himself in the place of the bird and will call in such a manner that, if he were in the place of the bird, he would come." Rutledge had such success with one particular turkey call that he "had her christened Miss Seduction."(51)


In noting the sexuality of hunting we may start understanding what might otherwise be a puzzling phenomenon, namely, the perception of hunting as a dating situation by hunters such as James Swan:

I do not remember ever taking a date out hunting in high school, but on a number of occasions we did organize group outings where several couples went out at night spearing carp. . . . One could . . . make a Freudian argument about the symbolism of the spear being thrust into spawning carp. . . . Later, in college, . . . many women students hunted. It was not the kind of date in which most other students on campus participated, but we had a lot of fun.(52)

A Pennsylvania woman describes one such hunting date: "I dated a man who looked forward to that first [day of deer season] with an ardor I wished he would have reserved for me. . . . Before hunting season opened, my boyfriend and I walked the woods of Central Pennsylvania, listening and looking for game. . . . We stopped a lot to kiss."(53)

Sportsmen see their hunting as connected to their sexual relations with women. As reflected in the title The Man Whom Women Loved (from a book about big game hunter Bror Blixen), hunters commonly believe that success in hunting animals will gain them affection and sexual attention from women. James Whisker projects this hopeful belief on to prehistory, stating: "Man . . . would receive sexual favors from the waiting female as a reward for being a good hunter and provider" and speculating that perhaps "the community gave successful hunters sexual rewards, e.g., by offering the most attractive female or a virgin, or the most accomplished lover, to the hunter."(54)

Thomas McIntyre believes that for both male deer and male humans the possession of large antlers lures females:

[T]rophy antlers may have served for the male hunter the very same function they served for the male deer. A female was far more liable to be allured by and to "select" a male who had manifested his ability to provide food, protection, and social rank. . . . Do we also keep the racks of the animals we hunt for similar, unspoken reasons? Probably. Our initial reaction upon entering a trophy room, a present-day cave, filled with antlers reaching to the ceiling is to be just the teensiest bit impressed and intimidated.

Note the specific process by which successful trophy hunters gain sexual access to women, according to Mcintyre: by impressing and intimidating others. Mcintyre does not merely tacitly condone the rapism implied by his remarks he gives explicit approval to men's sexual aggression (excused through the usual biological determinism): "Is this, then, a bad thing? I don't think so . . . we are all to some extent still motivated by down-home primitive emotions and lusts that all the bullying in the world for us to act 'socially responsibly' is not going to purge from the wicked, wicked human."(55)

Hunters speak admiringly of the imagined sexual lives of the large, antlered males they seek to kill Ted Kerasote describes rams as "hierarchical and sexually freewheeling: souls who begin their combat early, establishing dominance through their horn size who won't bond to a single female or even collect a harem." By applying human social categories to the lives of game animals (Kerasote's "harem"), hunters bolster their expectation that somehow in killing male animals who are sexually active they will also gain sexual access to females - the presumed dominant sexual status of the targetted animal transfers to the man through the act of taking possession. The general belief is that the antlered male's sexual prowess correlates with his antler size, as in McIntyre's remarks above and Kerasote's statement that the bull elk with large antlers "is the mate a cow wants."(56) By transference the antlers a trophy hunter has "collected" measure the extent of his virile masculinity in the hunting world antler size matches the function of penis size in Western patriarchal culture more generally. Antlers are thus the phallic centerpiece of the trophy hunter's attention: "The big boy up front was a huge specimen with maybe 30-inch horns, a truly outsized trophy. His buddy was a respectable 26 1/2 inch."(57)

The designation of the antlered male as a prized trophy insures that hunters are often aware of the biological sex of targetted animals. In fact, hunters extend the bare maleness of their targets into intense attributions of manly status and power, referring to their targets as the "fallen monarch," "ancient patriarch," "king of the mountain," and so on.(58) Large antlers on an animal represent to the hunter the animal's success in surviving years of threats, including harsh conditions, challenges by males of the same species, and the predatory efforts of previous hunters. The hunter's sense of being, developed from his exercise of domination, is felt more fully when the victim is himself imbued with power. The victim must be seen as powerful for the hunter to feel manly and alive in his conquest thus, hunters construct elaborate rules of fair chase to keep the power difference between hunter and hunted from appearing absolute.(59) The application of manly titles to their antlered prey is part of this process of constructing a victim imaged as powerful.

Interestingly, hunted animals do not lose their status as objects of the hunter's erotic desire when the hunter is self-conscious about the maleness of his prey. For example, Larry Fischer calls one hunter's thirty-five-year career of shooting "trophy" deer his "love affair with large, mature bucks."(60) The erotic stroking of the corpse is part of a successful hunt regardless of the animal's sex. Indeed, the antlers themselves are a particular focus of this sensuality. Nor is the phallicism of hunting lessened when the prey is seen as male - it takes on homoerotic connotations as in this dialogue exchanged between hunters stalking giraffes: "Give it to him!" "Right in the ass?"(61)

The erotic pursuit of overtly male animals becomes significant when we consider that heterosexuality is explicitly intended in the comparisons between men's hunting and sex. For example, Ted Kerasote, after inadvertently flushing three sage grouse, wonders why his reflexive response was to imagine shooting them: "[D]oes my tracing these grouse across the Wyoming sky, nothing in my hands except my bicycle gloves, lie buried in my hypothalamus like my sexual preference for women? If this part of my brain were a few microns smaller would I prefer men? Would I feel no pleasure at my imaginary tangents intercepting feathered motion in the sky?"(62) Significantly, Kerasote contemplates a theory that assumes if a certain part of his brain were slightly smaller he would simultaneously lose his pleasure in hunting and his sexual preference for women. This position moves beyond a mere comparison of hunting and heterosexuality as two structurally similar instincts the desire to kill animals and a sexual orientation toward women are here seen as coming together in a single package.

For those who defend hunting as an instinctive behavior, the desire to hunt evolved to facilitate food procurement, while the supposed heterosexual instinct evolved to facilitate human reproduction.(63) Thus in principle the two "instincts" remain distinct and separable. Yet, the position articulated by Kerasote - that hunting and male heterosexuality are but variant expressions of a single innate quality-remains a common assumption. The bumper sticker "I HUNT WHITE TAIL YEAR ROUND," described by Matt Cartmill as "decorated with drawings of a deer's scut and a woman's buttocks to make sure nobody misses the pun," illustrates just one instance of this viewpoint.(64) And for anthropologist Paul Shepard, heterosexual intercourse and hunting are but two forms of the same phenomenon, which he calls "venereal aggression." According to Shepard, the woman draws on to herself, the hunting man's hostility toward animals subtly transforming it in the process into sexual relations between people.(65)

Hunting men relate their pursuit of male animals to their sexual relations with female humans, because both eroticize power difference. Thus we can understand the behavior of Rex Perysian who, after shooting a boar to death with three arrows, "stood astride the boar and . . . lifted its head by the ears for the camera. 'I'll grab it like I grab my women,' he told his pals. Then Perysian dropped the animal's head and bellowed into the woods, boasting that the kill had sexually aroused him."(66) The biological sex and species of his targets are less essential to Perysian's masculine sexual identity than is the establishment of domination, so the fact that his victim is a nonhuman male does not preempt his comparison with his sexual relations with women. Nor does his mounting of a male animal undermine his identity as a heterosexual male, because he is in the position of dominance. Ultimately a man's sexual identity as lady "killer" and big game hunter fuse, as in the following lyric from Ted Nugent:

I am a predator That's one thing for sure I am a predator You better lock your door(67)

Men are often portrayed as innately predatory, with women and nonhuman animals as their natural prey. Sharing a common status as the designated targets of men's sexualized violence, women and game animals can merge in men's minds, as in Ted Kerasote's dream of shooting/kissing elk/women, and in Paul Shepard's remarkable statement that the "association of menstrual blood and the idea of a bleeding wound is inescapable."(68) Although hunters often consciously image their animal targets as virile males, the very same animals may be seen as female outside the immediate context of the pursuit itself. For instance, the character "Bambi" is a buck in the Disney movie and in Felix Salten's novel. He is represented in the movie as "Prince of the Forest" and this is exactly how sportsmen tend to think of the bucks they hunt. Yet the name "Bambi" has come to be given exclusively to girls, indicating that the male deer is ultimately feminized by our broader, nonhunting culture.(69) This becomes explicable in terms of the radical feminist observation that the eroticizing of power difference occurs originally and typically in the subordination of women.(70) Notwithstanding his overt maleness, as a designated target for sportsmen, the character "Bambi" assimilates the prototypical target of men's sexual violence, the woman. Thus in discussing the 1989 gang rape and beating of a woman in Central Park, columnist Joanne Jacobs wrote: "The most critical element of this attack was that they were male. She was female. They were predators. She was Bambi."(72) Gender marks relative positions of power as much as it signifies biological sex. In this sense the feminization of the buck can be compared with the practice of referring to sexually subordinated men in U.S. prisons as "gal-boys," as "she" or "her."(72) Regardless of their biological sex or species, subordination feminizes people and animals.

Although both groups are designated as targets for men's violence, the status of women and wild animals is not identical. Within traditional patriarchal marriage, women's situation can be seen as closer to that of domesticated animals than to that of game animals.(73) Significantly, the term "husband" simultaneously means a woman's spouse and a man who manages livestock for reproduction. The farmer completely controls the sexual and reproductive lives of cows and pigs to further his interests. Thus, the common use of terms such as "cow" and "sow" to refer to women shows either women's similar domesticated status or a cultural expectation that such subjugation would be appropriate. Similarly, the application to women of the term "bitch" is significant given that, as Joan Dunayer has explained, breeders have always treated the bitch or female dog "as a means to a useful, profitable, or prestigious litter."(74) The specific use of the word "bitch" to insult assertive women shows the hostility felt toward those members of domesticated groups who do not quietly assume their designated subordinate position.(75)

The names of domesticated animals, almost invariably terms of derision, express the contempt felt by the conqueror for the conquered. In contrast, the names of game animals rarely become terms of derision. Hunters zealously pursue those wild animals they have made into emblems of strength and independence. Deemed worthy of being killed, game animals instantiate just the characteristics the hunter hopes to possess by transference through the process of killing and eating. Thus, it would be contrary to the purpose of the hunt to see game animals as totally despicable creatures.

So we can understand why parents might choose to name their daughter "Bambi": although the name connotes a creature periodically subjected to men's predatory efforts (who is to that extent in a subordinate position and thus feminine), it also connotes a creature who lives in the wild, that is, generally outside of men's control, and who thereby commands a certain degree of grudging respect. The word "fox" is another term transferred from a hunted animal to women. Like "Bambi," the word "fox" is not nearly as derisive as the names of domesticated animals, but does connote one targetted for aggressive pursuit and ultimate violence. In the United States men apply "foxy" to women they find sexually desirable and somewhat wily and evasive. Indeed, the "fox" becomes sexually desirable because she is independent and evasive, thus exciting to run down and conquer? Women considered sexually undesirable, on the other hand, are called "dogs," a usage which picks up the already tamed status of those animals-because dogs come when you call them, there is no exciting challenge in shooting them nor any increased masculine status. While challenging and exhilarating, the sport of fox hunting remains extremely violent and orgiastically bloody, culminating in the fox being torn to bits, the body parts distributed to various participants, and the blood smeared on novice's faces. The sexual use of the term "foxy" implies an erotic of predation and bloodshed.


Hunting and predatory heterosexuality are both structured as institutions of men's sexualized dominance. Their structural similarity allows each to be used to describe the other-hunting to describe heterosexuality, as in this nineteenth-century romantic poem:

O let my love sing like a thrush In the greenwood's blossoming crown And leap away like a fleeing roe So that I can hunt it down(77)

And heterosexuality to describe hunting: "[T]he 'dedicated' waterfowler will shoot other game 'of course,' but we do so much in the same spirit of the lyrics, that when we're not near the girl we love, we love the girl we're near."(78) Ultimately it becomes difficult to tell whether hunting describes sex or sex describes hunting, as in the following lyric by Jon Bon Jovi:

First you're gonna fall Then you're gonna bleed For the glow of it all That's the stow of love(79)

The many examples of such cross-talk between hunting and heterosexuality reflect the fact that both institutions eroticize power difference. But this discourse does not merely reflect some independently existing social reality, it is performative, each speech act one part of the process of developing and maintaining the erotics of men's predation.

The overt violence of hunting coupled with its erotic stimulation make its imagery a useful resource for promulgating a predational sexuality between women and men. For example, Robert Franklin Gish describes the media portrayal of one of Cosmopolitan magazine's "bachelors of the month":

There he stood, attorney as hunter, in front of the mounted trophy heads of several species of exotic antelope his left leg rests on the top of an elephant's foot made into a stool he leans against a once beautiful tusk of ivory a zebra's skin adorns the wall. "Mellow minxes" were invited to write to this good "catch." As for him, . . . this particular hunter extends his notion of hunters and hunting to his "feelings about relationships" as well: "I don't want a pushover, mentally or sexually. What's the thrill? There's nothing wrong with a one-night stand, but it's not worth it - what's the point? It's too easy. The challenge and the chase are what's important. That's what always intrigues."(50)

Through this kind of material, Cosmopolitan and other similar media encourage women to entertain men's sexual aggression.

Notice that although the primary image in the Cosmopolitan example centers on the man as hunter, pursuing both women and wild animals, the man himself is secondarily positioned as the woman's prey through the reference to him as a good "catch." This is not uncommon. The recent book, The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right, constructs men as predator/prey and women as prey/predator. On the one hand, the overt function of the book (as indicated in the subtitle itself) is to instruct women on how to "capture" men. Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider refer to men as "live prey" and report that they themselves followed The Rules "to ensure that the right man didn't get away." As in any hunt, the object is to take possession of the quarry - the authors write of their readers' supposed mounting "desire to own this man" and advise against dating married men because "We do not take what is not ours." Thus the book presumes that women sexually prey upon men. But, on the other hand, the entire premise of "The Rules" assumes that pursuing others sexually stimulates men, so that if a woman wants a man to fall in love with her she must play hard to get - acting like an "elusive butterfly." The authors essentialize this, calling men's pursuit of women "the natural order of things." They advise women never to initiate sex: "Let him be the man, the aggressor in the bedroom. Biologically, the man must pursue the woman. . . . Flirt when he tries to kiss you or bite your neck. This will turn him into a tiger." The tiger allusion connotes predatory aggression. Fein and Schneider suggest that women should gain sexual satisfaction not by communicating their needs to their partner but by letting "him explore your body like unchartered territory."(81) A charter confers powers, rights, and privileges, including exclusive use thus the man taking possession of the woman constitutes the erotic promulgated in this image.

So Cosmopolitan, The Rules, and other such media direct women's sexuality along the lines of male domination and female submission, eroticizing men's sexual predation. Men's magazines such as Playboy carry out a similar function for men. Hugh Hefner initially conceived Playboy magazine as just one step beyond its prototype, the existing men's magazines that fetishized hunting:

At the time other men's magazines, such as Modern Man, buried their sexual content under pages of he-man stories - how to hunt bears or canoe the Amazon - and masqueraded their nude pictorials as "art figure studies." Hefner sensed there was a market for a men's magazine that didn't feel "wrestling alligators was a more manly pastime than dancing with a female companion in your own apartment."(82)

Playboy has never completely forsaken its roots in the erotics of hunting. The "Playboy Bunny" is a sexualized image that identifies women with a domesticated animal that is also hunted for sport, meat, and as a varmint. And Playboy magazine has periodically used hunting motifs in its pictures of exposed women. One striking example of this is the feature entitled, "Stalking the Wild Veruschka" in which, according to the caption, the model is "painted to portray the untamed creativities with which she's so often compared" (January 1971, p. 101). More recently, the following two captions invite the male viewer to see himself as predator and the unclothed female models as prey:

All creatures great and small can credit evolution for providing camouflaged markings that protect them from predators. Fortunately, Kerri Kendall doesn't need to hide from anybody, because even in her faux catskin suit and cap she would be easy to spot. But don't be fooled by her trusting smile she's still not an easy target.(83)

Julianna Young has an irrepressible sense of humor. Try to imagine her wearing this bra while swimming in the ocean. Wouldn't any deep-sea fisherman love to reel in such an enviable prize? Talk about your trophies! We'd bet townspeople and tourists would line up three-deep just to watch the photographer record the catch.(84)

A recent cover photograph from Musclemag International magazine also used the image of women as trophy fish. While holding the weapon used to harpoon trophy fish in phallic position, the man slings an evidently slain woman over his shoulder. Inside the magazine, the caption of the cover shot reads: "Eddie Robinson and his wife, Vanessa, having fun at the beach [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 1 OMITTED]."

Such images and captions both sexualize women's status as prey and further the eroticization of hunting itself, although it is difficult to draw a line between one function and the other. In the interests of accuracy one might say simply that such media eroticize men's predation, leaving it ambiguous whether the target is a woman or a nonhuman animal (as the images themselves do).

The annual Sports Illustrated (SI) "swimsuit issue" is worth analyzing in this context. Recent SI swimsuit issues draw heavily on cross-imagery between erotic sport hunting and predatory heterosexuality. In the February 20, 1995, issue of SI, five different models pose so as to blend in with the topical vegetation of Costa Rica. One woman is placed on a large piece of driftwood, which the caption calls her "perch." And three different pictures show women waist-deep in natural pools, apparently emerging from the water toward the male viewer. This is significant because immediately following the swimsuit pictorial is a story in which white men go to Costa Rica to hook large fish and pull them out of the water for trophies. This juxtaposition of imagery indicates that SI, like Playboy and Musclemag International, believes that the image of women as trophy fish (or fish as trophy women?) enhances the erotic appeal of their feature stories.

Sports Illustrated took their propagation of the erotics of predation further in the January 29, 1996, swimsuit issue. Again, women blend into natural settings such as water, sand, rocks, trees, and animals. But this year many of the models are dressed in animal-print bikinis representing species men kill and collect (leopard, tiger, cheetah, lion, zebra, and butterfly). The women are photographed in South Africa, and the swimsuit pictorial immediately follows a feature describing a private South African game park. SI has edited the magazine so that it becomes difficult to tell where one stow ends and the other begins: the game park and swimsuit features are grouped together under a single title - "Hot Spots" - and the first photo in the game park article shows a female model in a bikini sitting next to a white man surveying the landscape with binoculars. The article remains studiously vague about sport hunting at the game preserve - all the tourists mentioned in the story intend to photograph the wildlife. This emphasis on photographing the animals actually strengthens the magazine's identification of the wild animals with the female models (who are also there to be viewed). Even with hunting downplayed, violence against animals remains a major theme of the stow, as the sightseers repeatedly put themselves in positions where they must consider shooting various wild animals in "self-defense."

SI pictorials heavily exploit race as well. Of the five pictures of women of color in the 1996 issue, each portrays models in an animal-pattern swimsuit and/or a suit with a native African motif. The white women sometimes pose wearing items of African jewelry, such as a necklace or bracelet. And the metal rings used to constrict and elongate the necks of some African women are featured prominently in several photographs, thus fetishizing the mutilation of women. The series of eroticized photographs of African women with elongated necks works in subtle tandem with this highlighted statement, nominally about giraffes, from the preceding game park stow: "big game is so abundant . . . you can order a longneck anytime you want." In this feature, women, animals, and people of color all share a common status as objects placed on display for the white male viewer's entertainment. Sports Illustrated blends the iconographies of pornography, hunting, and racial conquest, using each to reinforce the others and in so doing promoting a unified white male identity of sexualized dominance over all disempowered others. One of the Costa Rican photographs, ominously captioned "Patricia Velasquez can paddle but she can't hide," represents women, animals, and people of color through a single image of a camouflaged model the picture of white men's dominance over these groups is completed by their production, distribution, and consumption of the photograph.

Constructing the erotics of men's predation has material consequences. The SI features in fact market Costa Rica and South Africa as alluring vacation spots, places which cater to white men in their desires to shoot exotic wild animals and/or have sex with fascinating foreign women (the Costa Rica feature begins with the header: "our raven-haired beauties add to the exotic flavor of Latin America's hottest new destination"). The desire to see certain people and animals of the Third World turned over to the recreational pleasures of affluent white men is not new. In his 1925 travelogue, The Royal Road to Romance, Richard Halliburton proclaimed: "The romantic - that was what I wanted . . . I wanted to . . . make love to a pale Kashmiri maiden beside the Shalimar, . . . hunt tigers in a Bengal jungle."(85) Although for the mass readership of SI, safaris, tropical trophy fishing, and sex tours abroad remain a fantasy indulged in only vicariously, affluent white men increasingly experience such "romance" for real. Exploiting the indebtedness and relative poverty of the Third World, First World businessmen, military leaders, and politicians work with local elites to develop prostitution networks to attract North American, European, Australian, and Japanese men and their hard cash.(86) Similarly, the exploitation of global economic inequalities turns Third World lands into game preserves serving an international clientele. In this way the bodies of indigenous animals, women, and children become available to affluent foreign men for sexualized domination and penetration.

Domestic hunting in the United States replicates the international scene. State wildlife officials are paid to manage people, animals, and plants so as to provide hunters with annual surpluses of those wild animals they most enjoy tracking and shooting. The casual hunter not heavily invested in trophy collecting may see the hunting trip primarily as a vacation, a chance to get away from the restrictions of work and family life for a while to unwind with the guys and blow off steam in masculine fashion-nominally by shooting at animals but perhaps also by drinking, gambling, passing around pornography, frequenting the local strip clubs that cater to hunters, and so forth. A drawing from Vance Bourjaily's book on hunting celebrates and promotes the common targetted status of geese and local women for men out on a hunting trip [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 2 OMITTED].

Recognizing the common structure of hunting and heterosexuality as eroticized power difference can give us a deeper understanding of men's violence. Andrea Dworkin recounts the story of a thirteen-year-old girl on a camping trip in northern Wisconsin. Walking alone in the woods, the girl came across three hunters reading pornographic magazines. They chased her down and raped her, calling her names from the pornography.(87) Dworkin cites this as one example of how pornography is implicated in violence against women. But this situation does not just link pornography and rape, it also links hunting, pornography, and rape. The men were in the woods to consume pornography and to kill deer. When one of the men saw the girl he said, "There's a live one" (she thought he meant a deer). One man beat on her breasts with his rifle. An occasion nominally devoted to killing nonhuman animals slides easily into a sexual attack against a human female.

A recognition of hunting and heterosexuality as interlinked, socially encouraged forms of men's predation supports a heightened understanding of such events as nine-year-old Cub Scout Cameron Kocher firing a rifle at seven-year-old Jessica Ann Carr, hitting her in the back and killing her as she rode a snowmobile with a friend.(88) Cameron said he was "playing hunter" when he fired the gun. The article mentions that Cameron's father and mother taught him to fish and to hunt for squirrels and rabbits but does not ask where the boy got the idea to hunt human females. The remarkable statement by Cameron's lawyer, that the boy's "feelings of guilt, if they exist, are that he disobeyed his father," I contrast with a more encouraging thought from hunter Sidney Lea. Lea compares the aging hunter's decreasing zeal for killing with "an analogous change in a man's sexual career," concluding: "[T]he diminishment of either predatory instinct isn't irredeemably grim nor even sad. For it is compensated, one hopes, by an increase in moral judgment."(89)

1. Arthur Conan Doyle, The Hound of the Baskervilles, in Arthur Conan Doyle, The Complete Sherlock Holmes (1902 rpt., Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1930), 2: 674.

2. Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting (1942 rpt., New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1972), 77-78.

3. Robert Wegner, Deer and Deer Hunting, Book 3 (Harrisburg, Penn.: Stackpole Books, 1990), 14.

4. James Swan, In Defense of Hunting (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 10, 22, 148.

5. Louise Erdrich, "The Wandering Room," in Women on Hunting, ed. Pam Houston (Hopewell, N.J.: Ecco Press, 1995), 25.

6. Ted Nugent, Blood Trails: The Truth about Bowhunting (Jackson, Mich.: Ted Nugent, 1991), 8.

7. Bryant Nelson, quoted in Robert Franklin Gish, Songs of My Hunter Heart: A Western Kinship (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1992), 14.

8. Paul Asper, quoted in Ted Kerasote, Bloodties: Nature, Culture, and the Hunt (New York: Kodansha, 1993), 155.

9. Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac (1949 rpt., New York: Ballantine Books, 1970), 284.

11. Andree Collard with Joyce Contrucci, Rape of the Wild: Man's Violence against Animals and the Earth (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989), 48.

12. John Mitchell, The Hunt (New York: Knopf, 1980), 140-41.

13. Swan, 52, 26 (emphasis added).

15. Trophy hunter Ali Ustay, quoted in Kerasote, 117.

16. Swan, 206 Paul Shepard, The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Game (New York: Scribner's, 1973), 173.

17. The argument that hunting is justified because it is instinctive is given by, among many others, Ortega y Gasset, Shepard, Nugent, Gish, and Swan.

18. James Whisker, The Right to Hunt (Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.: North River Press, 1981), 18.

20. Evelyn Pluhar, "The Joy of Killing," Between the Species 7 (summer 1991): 123 Matt Cartmill, A View to a Death in the Morning: Hunting and Nature through History (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993), 229.

22. Dena Jolma, "Why They Quit: Thoughts from Ex-Hunters," Animals' Agenda, July/August 1992, 38-40.

23. Thomas McIntyre, The Way of the Hunter: The Art and the Spirit of Modern Hunting (New York: Dutton, 1988), 102.

25. See, for example, Houston.

26. My sources are a selection of prominent books and articles written by hunters to describe their experiences hunting. I have not attempted to insure a representative sample, as this essay aims to explore the meaning and significance of hunting as a sexual experience not to quantify the prevalence of such feelings among hunters.

28. See, for example, Naomi Wolf, The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used against Women (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 162-68.

29. Timothy Beneke, Men on Rape (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1982).

30. See Brian Luke, "Justice, Caring, and Animal Liberation," in Beyond Animal Rights: A Feminist Caring Ethic for the Treatment of Animals, ed. Josephine Donovan and Carol Adams (New York: Continuum, 1996), 92.

31. Mitchell, 7-8 Linda Chinn, "Where Does All the Money Go?" Traditional Bowhunter 6 (June/July 1994): 70-71.

32. Marti Kheel, "License to Kill: An Ecofeminist Critique of Hunters' Discourse," in Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations, ed. Carol Adams and Josephine Donovan (Durham: Duke University Press, 1995), 90-92.

34. Nugent, Blood Trails, 70.

35. Ted Nugent, The Spirit of the Wild, 1992, videotape.

36. Nugent, Blood Trails, 45, 50, 21, 62, 31, 19, 23.

37. Ted Nugent, Archer's Africa, 1989, videotape.

38. Nugent, Blood Trails, 59, 67, 40, 57.

39. Quoted in Stuart Marks, Southern Hunting in Black and White: Nature, History, and Ritual in a Carolina Community (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 150.

40. Jay Massey, "Why Traditional?" in The Traditional Bowyer's Bible, ed. Jim Harem (Azle, Tex.: Bois d'Arc Press, 1992), 1: 17.

41. Ted Nugent, "One Way Ticket Out of Target Panic Hell," Ted Nugent World Bowhunters 28 (February/March 1994): 26-27.

43. Mortimer Shapiro, quoted in Mitchell, 140.

45. William Thompson, quoted in Cartmill, 238.

46. Thomas McIntyre, Dreaming the Lion: Reflections on Hunting, Fishing, and a Search for the Wild (Traverse City, Mich.: Countrysport Press, 1993), 145.

47. Valerius Geist, Mountain Sheep and Man in the Northern Wilds (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1975), 153.

48. Plato, Euthydemus 290B, cited in Ortega y Gasser, 48.

51. Archibald Rutledge, "Miss Seduction Struts Her Stuff," in The Field and Stream Reader (1933 rpt., New York: Doubleday, 1946), 78.

53. Kathryn Ayars, "Coming to Terms with Hunting," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 20 Dec. 1989, Op-Ed page.

55. McIntyre, Dreaming the Lion, 144-45.

57. Nugent, Blood Trails, 67.

58. Jim Posewitz, Beyond Fair Chase: The Ethic and Tradition of Hunting (Helena, Mt.: Falcon Press, 1994), 102 Kerasote, 85, 89.

59. See Brian Luke, "A Critical Analysis of Hunters' Ethics," Environmental Ethics 19 (spring 1997): 27-28.

60. Larry Fischer, review of Whitetail Magic by Roger Rothhaar, Traditional Bowhunter 6 (June/July 1994): 71.

63. For example, Ann Causey, "On the Morality of Hunting," Environmental Ethics 11 (winter 1989): 338.

66. Alfred Lubrano, "'Canned Hunts' Become Target of Controversy," Philadelphia Inquirer, 2 Feb. 1996, A1.

67. Ted Nugent, "I Am a Predator," Intensities in Ten Cities, CBS Records, 1982.

70. Sheila Jeffreys, Anticlimax: A Feminist Perspective on the Sexual Revolution (New York: New York University Press, 1990), 2.

71. George Hackett and Peter McKillop, "Opinions, But No Solutions," Newsweek, 15 May 1989, 40.

72. For example, Jack Henry Abbott, In the Belly of the Beast: Letters from Prison (New York: Vintage Books, 1991), 80.

73. Andrea Dworkin, Right-Wing Women (New York: Perigee, 1983), 174, 184.

74. Joan Dunayer, "Sexist Words, Speciesist Roots," in Animals and Women, 14.

75. Joreen, "The Bitch Manifesto," in Radical Feminism, ed. Anne Koedt, Ellen Levine, and Anita Rapone (New York: Quadrangle, 1973), 50-59.

77. Quoted in Cartmill, 120.

78. Hunter George Reiger, quoted in Houston, 259.

79. Jon Bon Jovi, "That's the Stow of Love," If You Can't Lick 'Em . . . Lick 'Em, Atlantic Records, 1988.

81. Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider, The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right (New York: Warner Books, 1995), 34, 131, 83, 113, 13, 26, 127, 82.

82. Lesley Riva, "The Bunny Trail," Remember 2 (June/July 1995): 34.

83. Playboy's Bathing Beauties, March 1995, 43.

84. Playboy's Book of Lingerie, July 1994, 47.

85. Richard Halliburton, The Royal Road to Romance (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1925), 4.

86. See Kathleen Barry, The Prostitution of Sexuality (New York: New York University Press, 1995).

87. Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1989), xviii-xix.

88. Pittsburgh Press, 28 July 1989, A9.

89. Sydney Lea, Hunting the Whole Way Home (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1994), 30.

Brian Luke is an assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Dayton. He has published mainly in the areas of environmental ethics and animal rights theory. His current research investigates the major institutions of animal exploitation in terms of male dominance.

Events Past

04.13.21 "Monitoring and Managing Ash--a Program for Long-term Ash Conservation." Jonathan Rosenthal is Director at the Ecological Research Institute in New Paltz, NY. He will discuss current efforts to save the ash tree from extinction through selective breeding.

03.09.21 "What Shapes Understory Herb Communities in the Southern Appalachian Mountains?" Matt Candeias. Matt was a NFBS member during his undergraduate years at Buffalo State College. He is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Illinois.

02.09.21 "In Search of Some Rare Ones." Bonnie & Joe Isaac have been searching for plants of special concern in Pennsylvania during the last two field seasons. Bonnie is Collections Manager of the herbarium at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, and also current president of the Botanical Society of Western PA. Joe is now retired, having served as an urban forester, and as a field botanist for the Carnegie Museum.

12.05.20 Reinstein Woods Nature Preserve, Honorine Drive in Cheektowaga. Easy walk to look at winter woods and enjoy being outdoors together.

11.10.20 "Prairie Fens in Michigan." Presented virtually by members of the Michigan Nature Association via Zoom.

11. 17.20 Field Trip: Forest Lawn Cemetery, City of Buffalo. The park has an amazing variety of tree species, which hopefully will be revealing the splendor of fall coloration. Enter through the southwest gate at Delaware and Delevan and continue straight a short way to the circle with a large Fireman Monument.

10. 13.20 "Your Buggy Neighbors--the Insects that Share Your Yard with You Every Day." Speaker Jack Kowiak . He has given presentations throughout WNY and Rochester on plants, gardens, and the insects that inhabit them. Mr. Kowiak was originally scheduled for our May 2020 meeting, which was cancelled due to the coronavirus crisis. He will present his program virtually via Zoom.

09. 16.20 Field Trip: Heritage Trail. This scenic 4-mile trail follows path of the former Erie Railroad in Lancaster. The path is paved and an easy walk. We will only walk a part of the trail, but expect to see lots of fall wildflowers and a variety of trees and shrubs.

09.0 8 .20 "Plants are Cool Too!" Videos from the series created and hosted by Dr. Chris Martine , the David Burpee Professor in Plant Genetics & Research, at Bucknell University in Lewisburg, PA. Topics will include Skunk Cabbage, Blue False Indigo, rare cliff plants, and more.

08.22.20 Field Trip: Genesee Road in Colden We will return to the 110-acre property, this time to look for late summer flowers.

08.08.20 Field Trip: Iroquois National Wildlife Refuge, Swallow Hollow Trail . Meet at the Visitor Center. Directions: I-90 east to Rte. 77 drive north through Village of Alabama and keep going north until you see the sign indicating a left turn into the refuge.

06.27.20 Field Trip: Letchworth State Park. Joint trip with the Rochester Mushroom Club (Rochester Area Mycological Society). Meet at 10:00 at the St. Helena Shelter, which is on west side of river north of Castile entrance.

06.20.20 Field Trip: Furman Fen and Houghton Bog. Near Springville. This will be a joint trip with Nature Sanctuary Society. To attend the field trip, meet at Sprague Brook County Park at 8:30AM in the parking lot north of the main entrance. The park is located at 9674 Foote Road, Glenwood 14069.

06.06.20 Field Trip: Property between Kennedy and Frewsburg, Chautauqua Co. Owned by Dennis Wilson, NFBS member and retired Forester, District 9. He has promised us lots of trees and wildflowers, and will be our guide.

03.10.20 "A History of New York State Forests." Our speaker will be Matthew Nusstein, who is park naturalist in the Niagara region of the New York State Park system. He has led hikes at Evangola State Park, Knox Farm, Alleghany State Park, and more.

02.11.20 "Plant Diversity of Albania, a little known corner of the Mediterranean." Our speakers, Jon & Priscilla Titus, have recently returned from a sabbatical in Albania. Jon is professor of botany at SUNY-Fredonia, and Priscilla is staff ecologist with the WNY Land Conservancy.

01.14.20 "The Mountains of Southeastern Arizona--A World Apart (Sierra Madre Zone)." Speaker Joanne Schlegel spent 2015-16 living in this area, exploring the several mountain ranges that contain plants found nowhere else in the U.S. Joanne is a past president of NFBS, and is currently vice president & field trip chairman.

12.10.19 "What Plants Say" We will enjoy another botanically themed movie, and enjoy holiday treats afterward.

11.12.19 " The Mountains of Southeastern Arizona--A World Apart (Sierra Madre Zone)." Speaker Joanne Schlegel spent 2015-16 living in this area, exploring the several mountain ranges that contain plants found nowhere else in the U.S. Joanne is a past president of NFBS, and is currently vice president & field trip chairman.

10.14.19 Field Trip: Canadaway Creek in Cassadaga, Chautauqua County. The ravines of upper Canadaway Creek in Cassadaga, Chautauqua County. Possible all-day outing/hike/creek walk. If water in the creek is high, the hike will be about 2.5 miles. If the water level is low and the group is adventuresome, it could be up to 5 miles. There are maintained trails, with railings in the steep portions. There may be creek crossings, but only if the water is low. It will be led by Erik Danielsen and other members of the Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy.

10.08.19 "Trees, By the Numbers." Our speaker will be Erik Danielson, member of NYFA and the Chautauqua County Water Conservancy, superb botanist and leader of our recent field trip to Gratiot Point. Erik has lately been seeking and studying the oldest/biggest trees in WNY and has made some remarkable discoveries.

09.10.19 "New York Wildflowers and Their Natural Communities." Professor Bruce Gilman is newly retired from the Dept. of Environmental Conservation and Horticulture at Finger Lakes Community College, where he taught aquatic ecology, field botany, and glacial geology, and was director of the Muller Field Station and curator of the Finger Lakes Herbarium. His research has included study of old growth forest dynamics, Great Lakes alvar communities, and Finger Lakes water quality.

09.07.19 Field Trip: Stella Niagara Preserve in Lewiston. Purchased by the WNY Land Conservancy in 2015 from the Sisters of St. Francis and including 1/4 mile of shoreline--the largest privately-owned undeveloped stretch of land along the Niagara River. It is also an important birding site. Restoration projects on-site have made substantial progress, including creation of a wetland & sedge meadow for frogs and dragonflies. Graham Tuttle, restoration manager for Stella, will lead the walk.

08.17.19 Field Trip: Garden Day. We will visit the beautiful gardens of three of our NFBS members, then go out for lunch.

07.12-14.19 Annual Weekend Trip: Botanizing the Adirondacks. Participants will need to drive to our lodging on Friday, July 12. We will do a full day of botanizing on Saturday and a shorter day on Sunday. We will have two terrific guides–Steve Daniel and Anne Johnson. Steve has suggested possible visits to Bonaparte Swamp and to a mine tailings site which has become famous for–amazingly–its orchid diversity. More details will be coming in the next Clintonia.

06.08.19 Field Trip: Point Gratiot Park, Dunkirk. Lake Erie in Dunkirk. The diverse sandy beach flora here includes Potentilla paradoxa(S1), and the cliffs host Houstonia, Shepherdia, American Bittersweet, Hop Tree and much else. Unfortunately, we will have to wade through knee deep water to access the cliffs, so bring appropriate footwear. Our guides on site will E. Danielsen and other members of the Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy.

05.18.19 Field Trip: Private property on Genesee Road in Colden. The owners purchased this 111-acre property about 6 years ago. It contains a mix of woods, wetlands, and former fields. They are in the process of trying to restore it, with 3000 new trees already planted, Hopefully the marsh marigolds here will be in full bloom. Our guide on site will be property owner M. Dearing.

05.14.19 " Meet the Spurge Family." Michael Siuta, our speaker, will examine the Euphorbiaceae family, which occurs around the world and whose relationship with man goes way back in history. This fascinating family has given us medicines, poisons, allergens, industrial products, weeds, wildflowers, and ornamental plants. Michael has been a member of NFBS since its inception in 1983. He has twice served as president and has served as editor of Clintonia since 2005.

05.11.19 Field Trip: Heart's Content Trail, Allegheny National Forest south of Warren, PA. This one-mile loop trail is reputed to have excellent spring wildflowers. It also includes 20 acres of virgin forest with 300-400 year old trees and is said to be the most important site for virgin hemlock & white pine in PA. Other trails are here as well.

05.04.19 Field Trip: Felker's Falls and Devil's Punch Bowl, Ontario. These two preserves lie on the Niagara Escarpment at the eastern edge of Hamilton, Ontario and are owned by the Hamilton Conservation Authority. They both have beautiful waterfalls, and Felker's also contains woods, trails, and several rare plants and critters.

04.12.19 "True Bugs: Household Invaders, Human Biters, and Plant Pests. Long-time NFBS member Wayne Gall will be our speaker. During his long and impressive career, he has been resident naturalist at Tifft, curator of entomology at the Buffalo Museum of Science, and regional entomologist for the NYS of Department of Health, He has taught graduate courses at Buffalo State College and U.B., and is currently serving as entomologist for the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture with a laboratory at the Peace Bridge.

03.12.19 "The Battle Against Invasive Species: Some Recent PRISM Crew Projects." Speaker Lucy Nuessle is the new Project Manager at WNY's Invasive Species Management Program. Ms. Nuessle graduated from U.B. in 2012 with a double major in environmental studies and chemistry. She has worked for the Clean Air Coalition of NWY, at Reinstein Woods, and for the DEC's Giant Hogweed Control Program. She has also worked at an organic farm and a local nursery.

02.12.19 "Unique Sedges of New York." Speaker Scott Ward will discuss this often overlooked and under-appreciated group of plants, with special notes on their subgroups and habitats. Mr. Ward is a graduate student at SUNY-Brockport. In 2015 he was awarded a grant to begin a long-term tree study in Bergen Swamp, and has also undertaken projects studying plant cover in a section of 12-Mile Creek and invasive swallowwort in various habitats.

01.08.19 "Environmental Impacts on Tourism in the Rockies". Speaker Scott Cheyne is a native of Alberta, Canada, where he has led many tour groups in the area of Banff & Jasper National Parks. He is currently taking special classes in St. Catherines, Ontario in preparation for a possible park ranger position in one of Canada's national parks.



  1. Sheldon

    I think this - the wrong way. And with it he should stay.

  2. Waluyo

    I think, that you are mistaken. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM.

  3. Mogore

    I consider, that you are mistaken. I can prove it. Email me at PM.

  4. Mac An Bharain

    It's a pity that I can't speak now - I'm late for the meeting. But I will return - I will definitely write what I think.

  5. Moogunris

    the Authoritarian, cognitive point of view.

  6. Haye

    It is easier to tell, than to make.

  7. Oran

    Bravo, what words ..., the brilliant idea

Write a message