Get a Load of This from the New York Times

[Loyalist Dave]

The New York Times

December 26, 2011 Monday
Late Edition - Final

Hunting Deer With My Flintlock

By SEAMUS McGRAW.

Seamus McGraw is the author of ''The End of Country.''
Bushkill, Pa.

SHE took me by surprise. Though I had been stalking her through the dense
undergrowth for about 40 minutes, I had lost sight of her as the afternoon light
began to fade. It was getting late and I was about ready to call it a day when,
just as I hit the crest of a shadowy depression in the mountainside, I caught a
glimpse of her, a beautiful doe, the matriarch of a small clan that foraged
behind her.

She saw me, too.

She stepped out from behind a shagbark. Even in the spreading dusk I could see
her eyes as she glared at me. She stomped out a warning on the rocky ground.

I had to admire her guts. I dropped to one knee, fumbled in my pocket for my old
brass powder charger, freshened the powder in my frizzen, and pulled back the
hammer on my .50-caliber flintlock. I took a deep breath and then I drew a bead
on her.

An instant that felt like an hour passed before I squeezed the trigger. The
hammer fell, the powder in the frizzen flashed, startling me even though I was
prepared for it, and a heartbeat later, the whole world exploded with the
thunder of 90 grains of black powder erupting in fire and blinding acrid smoke
from the barrel of my gun, sending a lead minie ball rocketing toward the doe at
a lethal 1,400 feet per second.

In the smoke and the confusion I couldn't tell if I had hit her. And then I saw
that I had. The impact of the bullet had knocked her to the ground, and as the
rest of the herd high-tailed it over the ridge, she struggled to stand,
staggered a few yards and then collapsed again. I had hoped for a clean kill.
But I had failed. I knew what had happened -- I had flinched when the powder in
the pan went off. Instead of hitting her in the heart or lungs, which would have
killed her instantly, I had mortally wounded her. Now I would have to finish the
job.

I hate to kill.

I know that must sound like an odd confession coming from an avid deer hunter, a
guy who, like thousands of others in my home state of Pennsylvania, spends the
better part of the year looking forward to those few short weeks in October and
November, and especially to the special flintlock season that begins the day
after Christmas, when I can load up my rifle and get lost in the mountains
behind my home all alone. But I suspect that if you could wade through their
boot-top-deep braggadocio and really talk to hunters, many of them would tell
you the same thing.

For me, and I suspect for many others like me, the art of hunting is far more
profound than taking trophies. It's about taking responsibility. For my needs.
For my family. For the delicate environmental balance of this wounded but
recovering part of the country. There is something sobering about hunting for
your food. Meat tastes different, more precious, when you've not only watched it
die, but killed it yourself. There is no seasoning in the world that can compare
with moral ambiguity.

Biologists estimate there are now 1.6 million deer in Pennsylvania's woods, far
more than when white men first set foot there. I took up deer hunting a decade
ago when I realized that this staggeringly large population was decimating many
of our forests, forests that after hundreds of years of clear-cutting were at
last poised to recover. With no predators to speak of -- the wolves were wiped
out centuries ago and the last mountain lion in the state was killed more than
70 years ago -- the responsibility for trying to restore a part of that balance
fell to me. And to all the other hunters.

Maybe it's because I grew up in a family that always did things the hard way, or
maybe it's because I'm basically a Luddite, but when I took up hunting, I
eschewed all the technological gadgets designed to give modern hunters an extra
edge over their prey. I like to believe that there's something primitive and
existential about the art of hunting, and that somehow, stripping the act of
hunting to its basics makes it purer.

I wanted a weapon that required more of me, one that demanded all the skill and
all the planning that I could muster, a weapon that gave me just one chance to
get it right. I made the decision to hunt only with the most basic firearm there
is, a muzzle-loading black-powder rifle, fired by a piece of flint striking cold
steel. I often tell my more conservative friends that I carry the gun the Second
Amendment explicitly guarantees me the right to carry.

There are hundreds of us in the state. Some are history buffs, guys who believe
in the sanctity of some imagined past. Some, like me, are purists. In late
December we wander into the woods, usually alone, with our antique weapons and
our obsolete notions of what a hunt should be.

But those antique weapons also carry with them an antique sense of
responsibility. To kill with a flintlock, you must get close. And because these
ancient guns are notoriously balky and inaccurate, there is a very good chance
that you'll miss your target altogether or, worse, that you'll simply wound the
creature and in so doing, inflict greater suffering than is necessary. And so
you take every precaution to make sure that your one shot is clean, that it
kills quickly and mercifully. And still, sometimes you fail, just as I did that
late afternoon in midwinter when I flinched as my gun went off.

I followed the blood trail a few yards and found her. She was still alive. I
could see her breath. It was ragged. She looked at me. I loaded my gun, charged
the frizzen[pan-LEW], and pulled the trigger. There was a flash in the pan -- that is
where the expression comes from -- and then nothing. I tried again. Still
nothing.

The sun was sinking behind the ridge. I didn't have the time or the tools with
me to fix the gun -- I had carelessly left them behind -- and so I laid my rifle
down on the ground, pulled my knife from its sheath, wrapped my arms around the
wounded and frightened doe, and ...

I hate to kill.

But if I'm going to profit by death, and to some degree we all do -- even those
who find the very act of eating flesh to be offensive still benefit from the
restorative act of responsible hunting in the nation's wild places -- then I
believe I also have an obligation to do it in the most honest way possible. It
has to cost me something. And it does. I would not be so presumptuous as to
suggest that the obligation extends beyond me. But speaking only for myself, it
is compelling. It's a debt I owe the place I've chosen to live. And it's why, if
you're looking for me on the day after Christmas, you'll find me in the woods of
Northeastern Pennsylvania with a flintlock rifle in my hand, and a few gnawing
regrets in my heart.

Copyright 2011 The New York Times Company

:bull:

This is so inaccurate..., I think I smell a fraud, (imo-hbc) [in my opinion-humble but correct] :hmm:

LD

 

[flintlock75]

I Aggree, sounds like some made up BS. Anytime i hear the old song of inaccurate and unreliable i know that the writer is full of :bull: .

 

[BigDogg]

Sounds like a politician wrote that, by the way he's trying to sit on both sides of the fence. I call :bull: too!

 

[MeatStick]

As I was reading this, I thought to myself there had better not be any response of how great this article is, cause #1 NO hunting story should use them big words, and B its a bunch of crap!

 

[TFoley]

I Aggree, sounds like some made up BS. Anytime i hear the old song of inaccurate and unreliable i know that the writer is full of :bull: .

The writer of this pompous, pontificating and mawkish load of sh!te - designed to appeal and appease at the same time - is, IMNSHO, a total frawk.

Probably eats tofu in wheat-free sammidges with spray-on cow-free butter substitute.

Gak.

tac

 

[preston cook]

Animal Emotions
Do animals think and feel?
by Marc Bekoff
Heartless Hunting: Maiming Then Killing Deer With No Remorse
The writer claims "I hate to kill" but nonetheless does it unethically
Published on December 26, 2011 by Marc Bekoff in Animal Emotions

A recent essay in the New York Times about killing deer made me ill. I admit I'm against hunting, especially by people who don't need the food, but this essay is the one of the most lame, if not the most lame, attempts to justify killng animals that I've read in a long while.

Seamus McGraw begins, "She took me by surprise. Though I had been stalking her through the dense undergrowth for about 40 minutes, I had lost sight of her as the afternoon light began to fade. It was getting late and I was about ready to call it a day when, just as I hit the crest of a shadowy depression in the mountainside, I caught a glimpse of her, a beautiful doe, the matriarch of a small clan that foraged behind her. She saw me, too."

McGraw goes on to tell us, using poorly placed romantic prose and a lame atempt to justify hunting by appealing to his and others' responsbility to restore "the delicate environmental balance of this wounded but recovering part of the country [Bushkill, Pennsylvania]", that he goes ahead and shoots the deer. He writes, remaining heartless and sickeningly dismissive of what the deer must have been feeling, "The hammer fell, the powder in the frizzen flashed, startling me even though I was prepared for it, and a heartbeat later, the whole world exploded with the thunder of 90 grains of black powder erupting in fire and blinding acrid smoke from the barrel of my gun, sending a lead minié ball rocketing toward the doe at a lethal 1,400 feet per second. In the smoke and the confusion I couldn't tell if I had hit her. And then I saw that I had."
Find a Therapist

Search for a mental health professional near you.
Find Local:

Acupuncturists
Chiropractors
Massage Therapists
Dentists
and more!

He had hit her indeed, but but the deer wasn't killed, so now he would have "to finish the job." McGraw tells us without a blink that he "followed the blood trail a few yards and found her. She was still alive. I could see her breath. It was ragged. She looked at me. I loaded my gun, charged the frizzen, and pulled the trigger. There was a flash in the pan - that is where the expression comes from - and then nothing. I tried again. Still nothing."

I imagine if McGraw had taken the time to really look this deer in the eye he would have seem incredible fear and likely a lot of pain and suffering. Perhaps the deer was wondering what did I do to deserve this?" Yes, Mr. McGraw, there was nothing, and nothing going on in your heart. You killed a healthy female deer but first caused incredible and enduring pain and there was nothing that tells us that you cared one bit about what you had done.

Oh, but "I hate to kill"

If you can bear it, McGraw then writes:"I hate to kill. But if I'm going to profit by death, and to some degree we all do - even those who find the very act of eating flesh to be offensive still benefit from the restorative act of responsible hunting in the nation's wild places - then I believe I also have an obligation to do it in the most honest way possible ... It's a debt I owe the place I've chosen to live. And it's why, if you're looking for me on the day after Christmas, you'll find me in the woods of Northeastern Pennsylvania with a flintlock rifle in my hand, and a few gnawing regrets in my heart."

At least Mr. McGraw doesn't claim he loves deer and then goes out and maims and kills them as others do. I always say I'm glad those folks don't love me.

"A few gnawing regrets", McGraw heartlessly writes. I'm sure other hunters will read this essay and while some will applaud Mr. McGraw for being an environmentalist and helping to restore an ecosystem, many others will be really upset because he's clearly a poor shot, arrogant and pompous, and clearly an irresponsible and unethical hunter. Shame on Seamus.

 

[Maven]

"...sending a lead minié ball rocketing toward the doe at a lethal 1,400 feet per second."

A lead Minie ball in a flintlock @ 1,400fps, no less? What kind of FL does that? A Lyman GP Hunter? Something's not right about that information.

Btw, my reply isn't directed toward anyone who posted on this thread.

 

[atki]

Seamus McGraw is a professional writer from Penn. Here is a website about him. He does seem to be on the side of conservation as opposed to big business.
http://www.seamusmcgraw.com/

The words are from a pro. writer. Not like us. However, I think he expressed himself fairly well about why some hunt. Not for trophies.

I'm for giving him a break. It's nice to have some talk about our past time in the New York Times.

wb

 

[MeatStick]

I think, "NO" inaccurate information, is good information. No matter the intentions.

"To kill with a flintlock, you must get close. And because these
ancient guns are notoriously balky and inaccurate"

 

[Stumpkiller]

Relatively bulky, maybe, but inaccurate ain't the fault of the rifle. Shoulda stuck with a round ball. :haha:

 

[Trench]

Relatively bulky, maybe, but inaccurate ain't the fault of the rifle. Shoulda stuck with a round ball. :haha:

He may hunt once a year with a flintlock, but that seems to be the limit of his experience with one if he feels they are inaccurate and unreliable. I agree, he shouldn't be trying to shove a bullet down the barrel of something that was probably designed to shoot a ball.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

The words are from a pro. writer. Not like us. However, I think he expressed himself fairly well about why some hunt. Not for trophies.

I'm for giving him a break. It's nice to have some talk about our past time in the New York Times.

I soundly disagree. I'm not convinced he is a professional writer simply because he has a book published. So do I, but my profession is policing.

His writing smacks more of a ploy to get his name in a national newspaper, with the information that he has a book out. ($$)

Again, his account is contradictory.

"I dropped to one knee, fumbled in my pocket for my old brass powder charger, freshened the powder in my frizzen, and pulled back the hammer on my .50-caliber flintlock. I took a deep breath and then I drew a bead on her. :bull:

So a deer watched this guy move, make noise, move some more..., and he freshened the powder in his PAN, not his frizzen.

"The impact of the bullet had knocked her to the ground, ..., she struggled to stand, ....,Instead of hitting her in the heart or lungs, which would have killed her instantly"...,

I have killed almost a dozen deer with my flintlock, with a projectile much lighter than the "minnie ball" he claims to have used..., when you hit them and "knock them down" you either hit them in the shoulders/hips, or you hit them in the spine..., and a heart or lung shot does NOT kill instantly. The doe I shot through and through, in the lungs yesterday morning went 70 yards before dropping dead.

Some folks do deserve the benefit of the doubt, but I don't view this as "pro-hunting". It's kind of you to give this person some leeway, but I think his piece isn't what he'd have you believe. :hmm: I view this as opportunism, veiled as a hunting piece, that panders just enough to the anti-hunting crowd to get the piece past the Editor, in my opinion. :cursing:

LD

 

[jamesthomas]

I think it was a bunch :bull: too. Bulky? inaccurate? I call :bull: on this too. I don't think he has even shot a flintlock before, and just used a description he read in a book somewhere.

 

[roundball]

Just another wannabe know-it-all gun writer who's in love with himself.

Obviously lacks very much first hand hunting experience. Article is very self serving, contains multiple inaccuracies, and puts traditional muzzleloading hunters, particularly Flintlock hunters, in a poor light.

I get so tired of these wannabes who write and publish articles on the Internet and in newspapers as if they're some font of actual knowledge and experience when in fact they're not.

Articles like these do a dis-service to us all.

 

[hoochiepapa]

I know Mark Bekoff, I raced against him on bicycles in the 80's. Talk about pompous and self-centered, that's him. THere was a short video of him on the local news not long ago, and he stated that he wouldn't even kill a fly, because everything has a right to live. He now has long hair, and is at peace with the earth. :barf:

 

[BillinOregon]

Mike: Your comment just about made me spew coffee ... Sounds like a pompous toot indeed.
:rotf:

 

[rabjr]

Seamus McGraw is a professional writer from Penn. Here is a website about him. He does seem to be on the side of conservation as opposed to big business.
http://www.seamusmcgraw.com/

The words are from a pro. writer. Not like us. However, I think he expressed himself fairly well about why some hunt. Not for trophies.

I'm for giving him a break. It's nice to have some talk about our past time in the New York Times.

wb

Anyone else send him an email like I did?

What I get from this piece of trash is a writer needing a story and it probably took him all of ten minutes to bang this out on his laptop. I think it was most likely fabricated purely for publication catering to both hunters and non-hunters... :shake:

 

[Spikebuck]

This guy obviously doesn't even know how animal rightists think, if he indeed was trying to pander to them. One cannot and never will change their "thinking." When I was a volunteer field representative for the US Sportsmens Alliance (then the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America) I used to do a lot of online research on the anti's and found one article where the animal rightist writer was asking everyone to move roadkill to the side so their relatives could come and grieve in safety!!! I told my wife that Crows must be related to everything because they were the only ones I ever saw grieving over roadkill!!! :haha: You can't bring these people to reality.

All he accomplished was to possibly move people who are not "anti" but also not hunters more toward the anti's with his misrepresentations. One ***** like this can destroy the good work of many others who accurately and professionally portray our sport to the non-hunting public. He should be ashamed of himself.

 

[MeatStick]

E-Mail response


Thanks, Paul. I know people like yourself who are more skilled than I would probably never have made the mistakes I made. I've gotten better since then.



On Dec 28, 2011, at 5:53 PM, Paul wrote:

> I thought that "Flintlock" piece was a load of crap. Have you ever really fired a flintlock? People like you do more harm than good with you misguided ramblings. The flintlock rifle is a very dependable and accurate hunting tool in the hands of someone who understands them and handles them properly. I have been hunting and trapping for about 35 years and I could see through your story that you are a fraud so I'm quite certain that a few thousand others saw through it as well.

 

[rabjr]

:haha: Haven't gotten a response to mine yet and I don't really expect one. :shake: