Longhunter a Conservationist?

[pasmokepole]

Friendly conversation came up at the last rendezvous concerning the eastern Longhunter.

I was of the opinion that the Longhunter was, as most of us Americans are even today - the center of the universe. We have killed, trapped, poisened, run off, or displaced to reservations anything that has gotten in our way on our journey westward. The guy who shot the last eastern woodland buffalo in Pennsylvania didn't care that it was the very last one.

The other opinion was that the Longhunter was a bit of an early conservationist shooting only bucks so that the does could reproduce for the next year.

What are your opinions? Any documentation? I just find it hard to believe the Longhunter would EVER pass up a shot - doe or not. Should be an interesting topic.

 

[mikee51848]

I don't think they cared. Food is food.

 

[mikelange]

Well, the empirical evidence is that, where the longhunters and the settlers who followed them went, the game disappeared. Also, these guys primarily hunted hides, to a degree that they required pack horses -- several, quite often -- to haul out their skins. I don't have a shred of documentary evidence one way or another, but if they were conservationists they failed miserably. I tend to doubt it.

 

[Ridge]

Virginia enacted the first hunting regulation in the new world in 1699 (IIRC) to keep the fur trade alive.

They weren't conservationists.

Not by a long shot.

 

[Zonie]

I don't have a shread of evidence to proove it, but I suspect the Longhunter was about the same as the Market Hunters that followed him.

Why shouldn't he be? Game was plentiful. People needed meat and were willing to pay for it. If an area was hunted out, he could just go over the hill to the next area. The wilderness was endless and so was the game he hunted.

I don't think the original conservationists came along until the late 1800s and early 1900s.
IMO, it was in that era that the realization that the land wasn't endless and large areas had been stripped of the native animals became widespread.

Notice I differentiate between the original conservationists and those who currently claim to be conservationists.
IMO, the original ones not only recognized the need to replenish the animal herds but were firm belivers in the right and need to harvest the excess. In other words, they believed in a controlled use of the land and the animals.

The current preservationists who are against all "use" of the land and the animals for anything except photography and "counting" have bastardized the name of a worthy group by stealing their title.

OK, I'll get off my soap box.
Zonie

 

[hack]

Deer, Elk , Bear , and Buffalo were plentiful east of the Mississippi river in 1700.
I don't see any herds of Buffalo, no Elk, very few Bears, and here in Michigan the DNR
(dept.of natural recources ) are trying to wipe the deer herd out.IMHO.
:cursing:

 

[jim gray]

I don't think that they saw a need to conserve the game animals they hunted, because they would move on to other areas when they had killed off the majority of their quarry. Second as they were motivated by profit and not bound by legislation to limit their killing of game, they would have killed anything and everything they could sell.

I have never seen anything to indicate that they killed only bucks and don't believe that that would have been the case as does' skins were just as valuable as bucks' skins. Perhaps the only reason that there is any game left east of the Mississippi is that the job was rigorous, hazardous, and uncomfortable and would not have attracted many men.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

IMO, I would not even attempt to translate today's mores to people couple centuries past.

Boone had bales of deer skins taken from him on more than one occasion by the Indians. Whether doe or buck never crossed the minds of either, they were worth a buck apiece, end of story.

 

[pasmokepole]

Wonder if he thought "buckskins" really meant BUCK SKINS? Maybe he was a representative of the Sierra Club?

It is the nature of Americans to conquest and exploit everything we can. With gas prices what they are - we are still burning several thousands of gallons of gas and tires each weekend - all in the name of FUN.

Have any of you used a summer hide? No wonder the Longhunter shot them "in the red" during the summer months. So much easier to work with than a hide taken in season.

 

[Bountyhunter]

Do you remember that story that was posted in a different forum a couple weeks ago about Crocketts bear hunt? When you read the whole story, that particular bear was something like the 12th bear that his crew had killed on that trip. It goes on to say that he claims to have killed about 148 bears that year. That is a lot of bears out of one area, even if it were 50 miles wide.

As the longhunter killed off everything that moved in the east, he kept moving west to find more things to kill. I posted the thread about the converted Smith rifle last winter. My g-g-grandpa came from Ohio to Iowa, then to Kansas, shooting his way as he came. That rifle, I'm sure has Ohio roots. The last that it was used was on the high plains around Fort Wallace, KS and Cheyenne Wells, CO. My grandpa killed buffalo for the army and the railroad (1869-1871)for a buck a head. He bought a lot of prime farm ground with the money he made killin buffs. I still have it--and the rifle that bought it.

I dont think that there was much thought of conservation of any sort until the late 1800's and Teddy Roosevelt. By that time, the cougar had been shot out of the east, the elk were gone, the bear was almost gone, and the deer herd was decimated and the buffalo were gone. I dont have the figures, but I would offer an educated speculation that the wildlife figures that we have now are many times the population figures of the mid to late 1800's for most species.

Summer hides are much preferrable for clothing and for tipis because of their thinner makeup. Season? What season? Dey di'nt need no steeenkin season. Their only seasons were not to kill a female with young unless they wanted the young too and killed em all. All these rules and regulations have only been put in place in the last 50 years, at least in this part of the country.

 

[mark fish]

I come from a familiy line that spent 13 generations on the american frontier.
I am including the current generation here in the last frontier.
I can say with a degree of certainy that a frontier families valued their natural resources.
The lesson that was handed down to me was "take only what you need and leave the rest for seed.

Progressives who follow behind the pioneers are the ones who insist on exploiting the resource for maximum personel profit.
Commercial hunting is what decimates wildlife populations not folk feeding their families.

I better stop here. this thread relates to "politics" :nono: here in Alaska.
Subsistence is a very touchy subject

 

No they were not, in general, conservationists; however, at Dan'l Boone's urging, the folks at Boonesborough in the 1770s 'enacted' the first inland game laws to try to protect the dwindling supply of large game animals like the buffalo and elk.

 

[pasmokepole]

Again though, Boonesborough was a settlement. The Longhunter was only here for the short summer and returned east with his hides. He didn't care that the people settled or stationed in western Pa had enough game to get them through the winter. He himself didn't eat the majority of what he shot.

 

[mark fish]

I have to argee with you assesment of longhunters.IMO They cared for nothing but profit and glory.The modern day equalivent up here are called Guides :rotf:
I still think people who lived of the land understand what is at stake and do their best to conserve their resources.
The term wilderness was often used to justify waste or nowadays extreme enviromentalism.
Keep in mind on man's wilderness has always been another man's backyard.

 

[dlemaster]

I believe I remember reading that the Longhunters shot the deer for the skins. The skins of buck deer sold for $1.00 and that is where our modern term calling $1.00 a buck originated, they also shot the does as doe skins brought a slightly lower price. They shot their deer in summer as the winter skins were considered worthless. That means the does would have their fawns or at least ready to drop them. Doesn't sound like any conservationist to me. As said before game was plentiful and they were in it for the money.

Regards, Dave

 

[brubincam]

didnt hurt shooting the last eastern buffalo...you kneed two to make more...

 

Before we lay all the blame on the longhunters let us remember that long before them the New England, PA, VA and Carolina traders and others had an extensive hides for manufactured goods trade going with the Native Americans, who hunted and killed literally hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of deer and other animals from the 17th through the 18th centuries. There were few longhunters. There were thousands of Indians and hundreds of white traders. Tens of thousands of deer hides alone went through numerous trade centers each year, some tabulating over 100,000/yr. The Carolina traders alone numbered several hundred and dealt with all of the southern tribes from the east coast to the Miss River (and beyond). Meanwhile the French and Spanish were doing likewise.

 

[Stophel]

Somewhere in Per Kalm's "Travels in North America", he spoke of the Americans' hunting habits, and how they hunted with absolutely no regard for season, nor for the preservation of the animals for the future. He posited that hunting seasons should be established here, as they were in Sweden, but he thought that no one would actually abide by the law...

He also lamented how Americans were destroying the forests, without bothering to replant. He saw the future state of American forests being as they were in Europe...he was right!

 

[Bob J]

The current preservationists who are against all "use" of the land and the animals for anything except photography and "counting" have bastardized the name of a worthy group by stealing their title.
Zonie

Well said, Zonie :applause: :applause: Theodore Roosevelt was not only a sportsman/hunter, he was a really great conservationist.

 

[faw3]

You know we had some people 2 years ago trying to change Texas history books, it was the Indaian that wiped out the buff's not whitemen with Sharps, or shooting 1000s a day from trains,it was thos red men with MG bows and arrows ratta tatta tatt you know. ect....... :rotf: gmab Fred