Anti-hunters literally are a different breed. They don’t think like normal folks, don’t act like productive members of society and wouldn’t know a positive thought if it hit them in the face. They are “anti,” which means they are negative and all they really want to do is control and hurt others.

This would be little more than a low-grade headache for predator hunters if it only involved the true anti-hunters because they are relatively few in number — less than 10 percent by about any polling I’ve seen that bothers to ask the right questions. What makes them dangerous is that their lies and deceits easily win the hearts and minds of unsuspecting low information non-hunters — a group that does represent a majority of the population.

Most non-hunters are not anti-hunting, but they can be swayed by slick-talking antis, especially if the unsuspecting masses are provided no information refuting the lies of the antis. There are relatively few hunting organizations that fight the antis head-on. The two that do the most are the Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association.

So, what are these creatures really like who are anti-hunters? What makes them tick? The antis unilaterally have declared war against hunting, and we are not winning this war — at least not yet. Anti-hunters are self-loathing losers who are not “for” animals. They are merely “against” hunters and hunting. Truth is, they are anti-human. They use emotional appeals rather than facts and logic to propagandize the unsuspecting. Ultimately, for the antis, it is about control. They want to dictate what others can and cannot do. They do this with a collectivist mindset.

Both anti-gun zealots and anti-hunters share much in common. Although both openly admit, even brag, that they are against guns and hunting, they are more circumspect when it comes to what they ultimately really want to do. This is because they do not want to do anything constructive.

They are dismantlers. They want to tear down the very culture that has permitted private ownership of firearms and hunting in the same way that their ilk wants to dismantle the capitalist society in general.

The interesting thing is that among their ranks are anarchists who don’t want to replace the culture with anything, as well as others who envision replacing the traditional culture with some Pollyannaish naïve utopia in which there not only are no more human hunters, but also that within the animal kingdom there are no more predators and prey — all animals just get along somehow. We all know that such utopian musings are both insane and unnatural. But they don’t. They drink their own Kool-Aid.

What makes these true believers dangerous is that they are collectivists, who naturally band together for a cause, gladly forfeiting both time and treasure for what they view as a greater good. This is in stark contrast to predator hunters who, by definition, are rugged individualists who spend most of their time and treasure in the wilds in pursuit of predators. In other words, while we are out in the woods hunting, the antis are lurking around the halls of government, infiltrating classrooms in schools and subverting the general population.

The antis’ instinctive reaction is to herd-up like hay-burning prey species, while predator hunters naturally go alone or in small groups, paying little or no attention to what is happening on the social front. The unwillingness or inability of hunter individualists to coalesce into an effective social and governing force is where we are vulnerable, and the antis know it.

The gray wolf is a good example of one way the antis work their lies. Years ago, the wolf was put on U.S. Endangered Species Act lists. Since then, the number of wolves has increased enough that they were delisted — making the resumption of wolf hunting possible. But not if the antis have anything to say about it. Antis spend almost no money helping wildlife. They spend their ill-gotten money on propaganda campaigns and lawsuits to stop all hunting.

Hunters and hunting organizations do fight against anti-hunters, but the antis are more organized and have more money than pro-hunting interests. Just recently, a federal court in California granted Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association’s motions to intervene in three lawsuits challenging the removal of gray wolves from the ESA lists.             

“The delisting of gray wolves in response to population recovery lifts management from federal control and gives it directly to the states,” SCI reported. “This has beneficial implications not only for hunters, but also for farmers and communities who live alongside ever-increasing wolf populations. The three lawsuits are contradicted by the best available science cited in the delisting rule.”

This is but a single example in a never-ending string of lawsuits and lobbying the antis do to end all hunting. And they are active worldwide.

True anti-hunters are zealots and don’t give up easily. They are smart and have deep pockets to finance their efforts. In other words, they are not to be taken lightly. Anti-hunters can be defeated, but only if hunters are willing to fight the fight all the way to the end and only if hunters unite and pool resources. Whether there is a future for hunting depends on what we do right now. Literally, the future of hunting is in our hands. Decisive action can win. Anything less won’t.

This means it is crucial for all of us to get involved in some way — locally, regionally, nationally or internationally. Joining and/or supporting organizations that defend hunting is a good start. Locally, evangelize the benefits to wildlife of hunting and be a role model for others in the community to follow. If we all did only that, it would be a great step forward in the fight. Think about it. Then act. The time is now because, like leopards, the antis are not about to change their spots.