This is Conservation And Science podcast, where we take a deep dive into topics of ecology, conservation and human wildlife interactions.

I'm Tommy Serafinski and I always strive to bring you diverse perspectives on the environmental stories that I cover.

And what that means is that I talk with people who express opinions that are often on the opposing sides of environmental debate,

and why I'm doing this, because we need more dialog and understanding and less fighting and division.

That's why.

So essentially, I'm trying to at least some of you to listen to voices you wouldn't have listened to otherwise.

Today, our guest is social anthropologist Thorsten Gieser, who is a research associate in the European Research Council project.

The boar.

That's b both a r and Torsten is a one of the coauthors of a wonderful paper titled Recreational Killing of Wild Animals.

Can Foster and Environmental Stewardship.

And I was wondering, like, what are those conditions under which killing of animals can foster environmental stewardship?

And I understand that reading scientific paper may be a daunting prospect to some of you.

And besides, this paper is not open access. At least it wasn't when it came out.

I had to use my, connections to get this, sent to me. Thanks, Tom.

That's professor Tom Cameron.

And so after reading this paper, I thought, yeah, we need to dive deeper into that.

And that's what we are going to do with Torsten on this episode of the podcast.

So I make it easy for you.

Oh, of course.

Shout outs to Professor Erika

von Essen, who is also one of the coauthors of this paper and who was our guest on the episode 163 of this podcast.

And, Erika put me in touch with Thorsten.

So thanks, Erika, for your help in making this episode happen.

And finally, before I wrap this introduction, if you still want to read the paper,

the link to the paper, as well as Thurston's profile are in their description of this show.

All right. Enjoy the show.

There.

There.

Oh. Thorsen. Welcome to the show.

Hey. Why, Tommy, thanks for having me. Absolutely. It's a pleasure to have you.

And look, man, we have a topic that I wanted to cover for some time,

and then it, the paper showed up that you are one of the coauthors.

That is titled Recreational Killing of Wild Animals.

Can foster and Environmental Stewardship.

I think I got it right. I get it from from from memory.

And some people who are gonna read that title, their heads are ago.

Although although that's an argument that is quite often brought by hunters or farmers and so on and so forth.

So let's do what we always do in this podcast.

Let's jump right in and tell us, like, how killing of wild animals can foster environmental

stewardship or virtue or connection with the environment.

So basically in this article, which is it's not kind of a standard article

that just summarizes the findings of a particular study, but it's a so-called perspective article, which means,

we're trying to think new ways, and trying to make sense of, of hunting in a new way.

So we're basically with that article trying to, promote new kinds of research and suggesting kind of new, interesting avenues.

Because where we think there,

there are a lot of indications that go in that direction and that tell us that there's something really interesting going on.

But actually, there's there's also a lot more research that we need to do on these issues.

So basically the our starting point was that, first of all, as you said, killing animals is a really difficult topic.

It's a really ethical topic.

And so just a starting point basically, is that for us, kind of killing animals is always something problematic. Why?

Because it's usually messy.

Messy in the sense that we can't really completely control the killing of the animal, and especially not in a hunting context.

Yeah. Even in and the killing of domestic animals in a slaughter house.

It's still it's supposed to be in human control, but we all know that often it is

kind of the clean death, the sudden death, without any pain and so on is some ideal.

But, yeah, killing is is always a challenge, basically, that one has to deal with and has to overcome and has to develop the necessary skills.

So it's

always a difficult and an ambiguous and complex experience for those who need to do the killing.

Yeah.

And therefore it's something that is a particular experience that does something to the one who kills.

Yeah.

It doesn't leave anyone cold. Who who does the killing? Yeah.

And also killing is not just coming.

You don't just have the, let's say, a dead animal there in the end, but,

you also witness and experience kind of the dying of the animal, which is a large part of it.

You might also, experience, the animal in pain or the wounded animal.

The suffering animal.

So if you are a hunter and kill on a regular basis, that will happen at some point.

Yeah.

So that's all kind of the part of this complex experience of killing animals.

And that gives us an indication.

And then also, what is special about hunters, also is kind of they experience,

really themselves as the source of that killing and of that potential pain and dying of the animal.

Yeah.

So they are deeply implicated, and they experience themselves as being deeply implicated in this dying animal.

And and that's kind of makes room for a really intense emotional experience acquired a conflicting experience.

So there might be many emotions involved in that.

This this might be experiences of, relief when, when you actually manage to, to to to kill cleanly, for example,

that that you happen you that it's over and that it's done you sense of relief maybe.

But there's also this crunch feeling that you actually were, an animal dying now because of you.

Yeah. And and you were the one who killed it.

So there's a lot of conflicting emotion going on, and what we're saying is that conflicting emotions that take place in killing,

that gives kind of a space for hunters actually to reflect on what they're actually doing.

They are. So they are not an outsider to hunting. They're not an outsider to wildlife management.

They're not making decisions from somewhere outside. From a desk.

And, kind of giving or making decisions, about what's to happen elsewhere.

But they are really right there.

They're right there in an encounter with an animal.

And and they're actually the ones who have to do it. Yeah.

And, and so this reflection of what they are doing and,

and what the consequences of their doings are, this, we argue, gives space for hunters to develop certain virtues.

Yeah.

And virtues such as, temperance, compassion, patience.

Also, perhaps to decenter yourself as a human being and not making everything about yourself.

So they there's a there's an opportunity, actually, that killing has an effect and transforms the hunter.

And, and the question is kind of what are the conditions actually that's this positive effect of, of killing might take place.

And what are conditions that actually distract the hunter actually from taking that reflective

moment and, and develop this virtues because it could go either way.

Yeah.

And we know they're kind of good hunters. They are bad hunters.

They are virtuous hunters and not so virtuous hunters.

So a lot of things can can go awry at this point.

Yeah.

And, and we say if they really take the moment, if the conditions are right, if they develop,

this virtue is that that's can be fostered through killing them.

This might be the kind of person who would become good environmental stewards, because they are implicated

in the ecology of, what's happening at a particular place and with the animals involved.

Yeah. So so they are involved.

They are part of that web of relations where that idea that they have established through hunting and killing.

Yeah.

And that makes a particular kind of, of a, of a good stewards, which might be something else then being a good manager.

But that's perhaps something else that we can talk about.

But this kind of in a, in a larger nutshell is what the argument of the paper is about.

This is excellent because this is exactly a great jumping off point.

And there's like so many things that would like to now dig in deeper into more specific things.

I want to pick first on the term that you use in the paper.

Tug of regret during killing, and that is an argument that is very often brought up by people who are opposed to hunting.

Now that I'm noticing and the hunters,

there's a slightly different flavor to me being Auntie Hunter of being just supposed to just understanding.

So what this is, this is quite often taken like, oh, you're taking the pleasure from killing or you just like to kill stuff

and you touching on the very important thing that actually most of the hunters, or at least that's my my position, most of the hunters,

they treat that limit as a necessary to the whole process, but it's far from being the most important or far from being pleasurable.

Is that your experience in your view as well?

Yeah, I mean, this I mean, this is, of course, somehow at the core of the critique of hunting that there is kind of a pleasure to kill.

And of course, I mean, what we the question is, what is pleasure actually refers to that.

And I've already kind of indicated that the emotional experiences involved not only in that, killing,

but also in hunting generally, they are really quite complex. There are a lot of emotions going on.

And and the question is when, when hunters themselves, for example, say, they find hunting, they find pleasure in hunting.

The the question is, is that the same as, finding pleasure in killing?

And and I would say that that's not the case.

Yeah. Usually, I mean, hunting is so much more than killing,

although everything is kind of geared towards killing, but there's a lot more going on.

Yeah. I mean, most hunters, they.

I mean, when you see kind of how much time the actual killing has in, in the whole hunting process, it's really tiny moments, basically.

Yeah. It's it's a few minutes and, and there's so much more going on in hunting.

So when, when you are in, let's say you're in a forest, in a field some somewhere, you're getting to know the place

or getting to know the habitats of, of the different animals going on.

You go tracking, looking for signs and and so on. Yeah. So this is a lot of things actually.

Or you can just spend hours wading somewhere observing wildlife and, and kind of immersing yourself,

in the landscape, so that there's so many pleasurable things that go on and that hunt is usually mentioned.

What makes hunting pleasurable?

But I have to say, I mean, it's difficult because, in my experience, at least with my research on hunting in Germany,

is that hunters usually don't like to talk about killing.

All right.

It's it's something that I. You really, even amongst themselves, they don't really talk about it.

So they might talk about kind of the conditions of how it happened and so on.

But they, they don't stay much with that moment of killing.

Yeah. So I, I've never really spoken with a hunter.

And I've been doing research on this since about 2016.

I've never really spoken with a hunter who would really kind of,

speaking for me about that moment of killing and that I was so cool to see the animal die or something like that.

I've never heard anything like that. Yeah.

I mean, did the things that one might describe with kind of positive feelings with that

in, in the actual killing, these are kind of emotions, as I said, like relief.

Yeah.

So when, when you when when did really when when you managed reality to give that kind of clean death that you ideally want to have.

Yeah.

This is a, this is kind of when you, when you kind of feel happy.

Why when would that has happened really. And nothing has gone wrong. Yeah.

But knowing at the same time that this was a precarious moment and if anything had happened

and this didn't take place, then you wouldn't feel happy, then you would be really, really disturbed.

And so I, I saw many hunters were really getting quite shaky and, and so on and, and were really disturbed

because they, they only injured an animal and it got away. And now they need to find it.

Yeah.

And, and suddenly this urge started that they feel, well, the need to find it, that they need to finish the killing.

Otherwise the animal is suffering now and they're kind of compassionate in that moment

and then kind of suffering with the animal and, ashamed somehow that they didn't kill it cleanly.

Yeah.

So I think when we talk about, and this is also kind of perhaps them the regrets that the that's, that comes, comes in,

at least one part of it.

So, I would say kind of did this pleasure in killing that that is something one has to look really,

well into detail of what's actually meant when a hunter says that and what he refers to.

Actually. Yeah, I, I totally agree with that.

And I just going to add here that this emotional element, I remember, one of the first hunts where it was a it was not like I was on the hunt.

I was just, taken for a hunt that my, my, my colleague, were going hunting.

And after he shot the deer, he turns to me and he shows me how his hand is shaking.

And, from the emotions, it was like a nice, clean kill, like the he dropped the animal and my saw, it was like, what an intimate moment.

Like I wouldn't expect, you know, I would more expect him to try to conceal that.

And, you know, like, play tough guy or something was nothing like that.

He turned to me and he showed me, like his emotions, like he was shaking, literally shaking.

And he was experience hunter. He was doing like for like, you know, 20 years.

So that speaks to this emotional element and that hunters do take, you know, very seriously what's going on.

We're going to come back to that. So let's park.

I thought for a second, I just want to pick out on some other aspect that you mentioned in, in the introduction,

and that aspect is the aspect of participation in nature.

And there is a quote I don't, I don't remember, what book or who said it, but it goes like I probably gonna, I paraphrase it,

but it is the response why you cannot do the same thing with the camera, why you cannot, you know, instead of the rifle, you take the camera

and you just also tracking and stalking and lying in the ditch, waiting for the animal to show up and so on.

And the answer to that was like, because with camera, you're only an observer while you're hunting, you're participating.

And obviously that is, also a statement that I

and a lot of hunters understand intuitively because we know the difference.

But can you elaborate for, for the listeners and viewers and from your perspective,

on that difference between participating and merely observing?

I, I don't yeah, I think I would phrase it a little bit more carefully in that respect.

I know that, for example, in Germany, hunters and, wildlife, nature photographers, they're really like that.

They don't really like each other.

Yeah.

And, and I would, would say it's always the thing.

And, but one could turn the same argument, against hunters, basically.

So why would the photographer only observe?

Because he's out there with his camera and he's kind of observing wildlife through his camera.

And this is kind of detaches him from, from the actual encounter with with the animal.

It's just kind of looking at the screen and, and looks at the screen rather than at the real animal.

But of course, we know, especially with modern hunting technologies, with modern scopes and so on, there's

a lot of technological mediation to which we probably come to later, what kind of effects that has on participation.

So I wouldn't say that kind of, let's say wildlife photographers or mushrooms, or even I mean, I also do wildlife photography.

I also do tracking.

And I wouldn't say that this is the difference between the one participates in, the other just observes,

because when you do wildlife photography, for example, you know, you have to participate as well in order to shoot good pictures.

Yeah.

So, I would say they are quite similarly involved and, and immersed in, into the, the environment.

Similarly to what, what, what hunters do. So that's not the real difference.

What we argue is that kind of the real difference is actually is what they participate in.

Exactly.

When you look at kind of the whole hunting process and, and you see kind of what comes before the kill, for example.

Yeah.

So we're getting to know a place, finding signs of animals, waiting somewhere,

perhaps, being patient and then observing the animals, waiting for the right moment.

These are all things that photographers do.

To the point is, at some point, one day shoots the the experience and the participation,

begins to differ because when the photographer shoots, nothing happens to the animal.

Yeah, the animal is stays, a healthy, living animal, continues its way.

The photographer goes back, to his car and goes his way.

And this is kind of where the participation stops. Yeah.

Whereas for hunters, this is kind of where they become really deeply into it, into, a food web basically.

Yeah.

So their shooting makes a difference to the animals and to the ecosystem.

Yeah. They become part of it. They become part of these ecological processes.

But you could say that kind of the mere presence of a human being, also like a photographer,

if, if they are noticed, has a kind of an effect on, maybe induce fear or so, on animals and also has an effect on them.

But hunting has a material effect on the ecology, of a place.

And this is what, what makes its difference.

And also in terms of experience, it's a different kind of nature experience because you're doing something

within that ecosystem, you become part of it. You change it.

And and also you are experiencing the that animal and you are dealing with the dead animal.

Yeah.

So, not only has the photographer not that kind of killing experience, but also had the experience with a dead animal

and, a hunter also, in terms of his, of their knowledge, also learned a lot from the dead animal.

Yeah.

Just by field dressing, by opening up the animal, by having a closer look, kind of on the condition of, of the animal

seeing its individual, individual features, seeing perhaps, whether it has any parasites,

whether it has any disease, just opening up, looking at the organs and so on.

They can learn a lot about not only the animal, but also about the habitats where the animal lives.

Yeah, about kind of the feet available and so on, and whether it has a healthy population, in the area and so on.

So there's a lot to be learned actually, from what comes after the kill.

Yeah.

This, of course, is all missing in any other kind of nature experience.

And obviously then once you turn that animal into food that you can eat and you can share with your family or your friends, that is kind of

like an extension of that experience, which is, I feel much stronger than showing someone a photo, that you that you made.

It's more touching. Q right. Exactly.

Yeah. It becomes basically embodied.

Yeah.

You you basically also kind of embodied the animal because you eat it and, and, you also know, I mean, I,

I at times when I did my fieldwork, when I was at the hunt and you kind of,

even if you haven't killed an animal you just participated in, someone else did, and you helped with the fields wrestling and so on.

And then, kind of, I went back home and I had, kind of a freezer bag full of a of a heart or liver, kidneys and so on.

Got a hand?

Still a kind of body, in the grooves of your skin or, under your fingernails.

And you're you're kind of cutting up, the heart and so on and preparing it and eating it.

So, you're kind of still apparently there back and and you and then when, when you eat it, you you still see the the living animal.

Yeah. So you have to kind of connection just on onto your plate.

You can do the eating process also.

And even when, when you prepare food for, for later to store it and so on, you have this remind us in in your in your freezer basically.

And you put them out. And it's always kind of the death stays with you basically.

Yeah.

So you can basically forget what happened basically in there.

What happens of course, is then also kind of when you always kind of go back to the same place in hunting,

which most often is the case in Germany for hunters, is, of course, kind of where you hunt your hunting grounds.

They become full of these memories of different kills of different animals, living animals that animals and, and so on.

So this is all kind of creating kind of, a landscape that kind of invites you basically to deal with your emotions and, and what happens.

Yeah.

If you have the privilege that you can, go back to the same place again and again.

Yeah.

And this is again about kind of the what's the right conditions for this positive processes to take place.

And what are the hunting conditions where hunters are not allowed to go along that process.

And that is, an excellent point. And we're going to dig into that as well.

I just want to add one one other thing to that aspect of preparation of food is that I think that this also makes

you more connected with your food and understanding when it comes from because, like you said, you have that experience.

You remember that when you go to the supermarket and you basically buying these red objects in plastic tray,

you know, people not thinking much about that animal, what life that animal had and like what happened to it and like how it ended up.

It's not even recognized even as an animal.

While you like, whether you're taking the whole quota or you're taking already roast and steaks, but you know how they became what what it is.

And I, probably a year ago, I was talking with the author who wrote a book about,

you know, similar, connection between hunting and conservation.

And he was in his book.

He was talking about a restaurant in the US where they're serving food.

But when they're set up, when you order chicken, you are like actually getting a chicken with feet.

And we've had like, the whole chicken.

And he just was describing in the book reaction of people who are just outraged because they, they,

they didn't, you know, it is like shocking.

I was like, well, that's actually how it looks like.

It's just you separated yourself from, from from these things.

And, you know, again, the paper talks about field dressing and the whole experience of field dressing.

And the quote I often, remember is like when you put your hands into,

like, a still warm body cavity of an animal, you know, you you're dealing with a serious stuff that's a serious stuff.

And that these are those steaks that photographers, they don't deal with that I give you another, and for our listeners,

another kind of thing that for me, the difference between fishing and hunting is kind of in the same realm, right?

That when when you go fishing and you're successful and you catch fish, you can, oh, you always have an option to release those fish,

why don't you if you careful and you're and we we're going to talk about catch

and release as well because there is a section about catch and release in in the paper

that you release those fish and then you come back, you put your rod back in the shed and you done

when you were on the hunt and you're successful and you coming back with the now like that is your responsibility.

Now that's far from over. Now is the work.

And so the stakes and everything else is much higher.

And in, in that case, I mean. That's definitely the ticket, the case.

Just in, in terms of field dressing also, and that kind of experiences, that are afforded, by it.

I once I actually had an accident steer, field work, why field dressing?

I cut myself basically wild trying to, break through the collarbone of, of a rodeo.

So I don't know exactly what what happens,

but, basically, I ended up kind of stabbing myself into my thigh, and so it's.

And it wasn't it wasn't really dangerous.

And so, but, basically, I, I had this little wounds, and I, I could kind of see my own blood,

I could see a little bit of fatty tissue and so on.

And I suddenly have this moment where I thought, actually, that's exactly like kind of the animal that I was just cutting open.

It looked exactly the same.

Yeah.

So that was this moment also where where you think also when you kind of when you cut through, through the ribs and, and so on.

It's all kind of it's a familiar feeling somehow because, you know, a body.

Yeah.

It's it's there, there is some similarity between kind of the animal body and your own body.

That becomes very apparent in, in, in that practice of, of field dressing and butchering and, and and this is unique.

That's a unique kind of experience to, to hunting.

This is what you can't get from, from anything else. Yeah.

And and of course kind of it also creates some kind of bond because of that similarity.

Yeah.

I mean there I mean there's also I mean you probably have heard that in some indigenous cultures in the circumpolar North,

they have this bear rituals.

So when they go bear hunting,

the bear is always treated in a particular, really respectful way because they, they say, well, he's like a human.

And, and of course, you can really experience that, that is like a human when you kind of, cut away the skin.

And you see, that's also really quite big.

It really kind of seems to look human and, and that does something to people.

Yeah. When they suddenly, suddenly see the similarities.

And there's a living being, like like yourself. Bear looks very much like human being.

Once you once you peel that hide away, it's it's disturbingly similar. Yeah.

So I think that's that's something quite,

unique,

in that kind of experiences and, and what it could trigger them in terms

of, emotions and kind of developing something from these emotions, for sure.

Listen, we take a little bit detour now, but then we're going to take back around to the things that we are talking all the round.

One thing that I notice in the paper that I like was kind of

challenging the idea that the best way to care of the environment is like if you remove humans.

That was particularly interesting because it's a it's something.

We spoke on the podcast again, a few times and I and I think, think about it a lot that humans are part of the

it boils down to the question, are humans natural?

And humans are part of the ecosystem for for thousands and thousands of years.

And then you talk about like, well, even on their talls, they were deforested like their land.

And they were making, opening and clearing things and so on and so forth.

And before them there were, you know, pachyderms, mastodons and mammoths and so on.

They're essentially the same thing impacting the, the, the landscape.

So we talk often about the keystone species, cornerstone species or ecosystems.

Engineers, like humans, are ecosystem engineers as well.

Obviously there is another aspect of like, yeah, we we can quite capably wreck the whole environment,

which is which is kind of like probably material for another podcast. Right?

But let's stick with the with the natural environment.

And I would like to hear from you your views, your take.

Whether it if you want to protect an area or if you want to protect the environment and landscape,

would it be better to just, you know, remove humans altogether or what role humans play in protection of the landscape.

This idea of kind of, rim or kind of separating geographical areas and, and kind of preventing human intervention

is, of course, kind of a deer that's deeply connected to kind of this Western idea that we can

kind of separate humans from the rest of the world, that we can separate kind of nature from culture,

so that we really have these areas of wilderness that are kind of untouched by humans.

And we all know by now that this was some ideal, it wasn't it wasn't it never match reality.

And and of course, now that we know that's kind of in this age of the amateur scene that really,

really even touched kind of the deepest places on earth, in the sea.

So there there's nothing untouched left on Earth.

So to try to kind of artificially separate out areas, that's,

we now kind of we try to untouched, that won't work, right?

Because, I mean, we are everywhere.

The negative effect of this kind of thinking

is that we really think of ourselves as something exceptional and as kind of a species who doesn't belong.

Really?

Yeah. So. But if we don't belong to this planet, I mean, where else should we go?

Yeah.

I mean, the the ecological view basically is, that we are part of it.

Yeah.

So we are part of this web of relations of this process is going on and there is no outside.

Yeah.

Even wildlife manager or ecosystem managers,

they are not managing from a superior position outside and manage something that is somewhere else.

They they are not gods. But they are part of it. Yeah.

But sometimes, at least theoretically, we we still kind of take that as a basic assumption.

Yeah, we we pretend as if we were not part of it.

And we think because it's it's just not it doesn't match up with reality.

That can be a good choice. And we also see it hasn't worked that well so far.

So we argue that's kind of what is called this, this dwelling perspective.

Which is kind of a kind of a it's, it's a difficult word to kind of say.

It comes from kind of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger, and it was brought into this whole scientific discourse by,

my doctoral supervisor, actually, Tim Ingold, who worked with, Saami rain, reindeer herders in, in all from Finland.

And, and it looks a lot about kind of indigenous hunters and gatherers in the circumpolar north

that most people in the world, and especially indigenous people, they always see themselves as part of the land where they live.

And, I mean, we often look at indigenous communities as kind of exemplary in the way they deal or manage with the environment.

Of course, there's also some romanticism going on.

Sometimes is that is a little bit too much, but but basically in the way they deal, or,

and try to engage with the environment is one that comes from out of the middle of things.

Yeah.

And they, they, the, the knowledge that they gain, the way that they learn about the environment, how they learn about the animals

is, is not kind of from theory.

It's not from books, but it's actually from engagement.

Yeah.

And therefore in this perspective,

we seeing that kind of traditionally people learn by becoming engaged in something, in participating in trying things out.

Yeah. And and learning by themselves and gaining experiential knowledge. Yeah.

And and we in the West, of course, we kind of we have developed a way of considering knowledge as something that is really abstract

and kind of, located in the heart, kind of an assembly of facts, basically, that you then apply later on somewhere else.

Yeah.

So it really kind of it separates knowledge production from the place of application and actually where, where, where it comes from.

Yeah.

So, so we have, separated out knowledge from where it came from and made it into something else that you can actually study

in books or at university and so on.

And we just wanted to remind that, yeah, I mean, there are many things that one can learn that way.

But even then, even scientists, even natural scientists, they do field work.

Yeah.

And so they also learn by practical engagement with the land, with an ecosystem, with animals.

And, and so on.

It's just kind of a matter of translating them, their experience from the field into something more theoretical.

But then they have trouble integrating it back to where it actually came from.

And then what we are saying is that it would be good if we were also aware that there is a different kind of knowledge

that comes from experience and practical engagement, and why not kind of bring them together basically.

Because I think

knowledge that comes,

let's say from, from, from this embedded position, it's a different kind of knowledge and, and it's useful.

It's valuable knowledge.

Yeah.

But we have this tendency of not really of kind of thinking that experiential knowledge is too subjective.

Yeah.

It's it's just kind of one person's point of view, kind of, and we, we want to have objective knowledge and it doesn't get together.

Yeah.

In my field, in anthropology, there's a long discussion, about kind of the, this, ongoing fight

between scientific knowledge on the one hand and so-called traditional ecological knowledge of indigenous communities.

Yeah.

And especially in the US and Canada

there, there are, fights, legal fights for decades, about what the role is of traditional ecological knowledge,

which is knowledge that usually stems from a direct engagement kind of with the land, with the animals and so on.

Is it on the same level?

Is it even knowledge or is it just belief? Yeah, it's it's superstition maybe. Yeah.

So it's quite, a difficult topic, but we wanted to pay attention that it's not only indigenous people who have experiential knowledge.

It's also we also have it here in the West.

We also gain knowledge by experiencing things.

And, and so do kind of western so-called recreational hunters. Yeah.

So so why not asking similar questions like we do with indigenous hunters, for example?

That's a that's a very good point.

And it gives us an excellent segway to talking about about this place based experiences to the connection to the place.

And I maybe I'm going to start with something, I know from social media and the like,

why the experience Hunter and the guy who is like, well connected to the land.

And he said that he would be quite happy if the, you know,

they could pay the services of hunting and like, hunting tourists hunting like, disappeared overnight.

And I was quite surprised because I perceive him as, you know, being pro hunting.

And yet his opinion is like, if you happen to not have access to land and be connected to that land, then I'm happy

if you don't have an opportunity for hunting now, first of all, shout out to Richard if you're listening to that, you know, it's you.

And and secondly, yeah, it's very it's very interesting.

It's very cold, of course, because it excludes a number of, of people who could benefit and have those experiences.

But there is a element of truth to that.

Like from my own perspective, I would,

you know, I was asked ones like, would you ever go to Africa to shoot an elephant?

And I was thinking about it and everything aside, you know, like money and whatever I would my answer was probably probably no.

And the answer was no, because like, oh, you go there and you just you don't know where you are.

And then someone shows you like, there there's an elephant. Where there. That tree.

No, it's not the tree. It's. And then I found oh that's how it looks. Boom.

Right there.

You done so I probably wouldn't like that if I hadn't experi if I had an opportunity to become somehow proficient in elephant hunting.

That's a different proposition.

And that was a little bit like with shark fishing.

You know, I'm, I came from Poland to Ireland.

And when I saw that there is an opportunity for shark fishing, I went mad.

And I never understood

my colleagues who were going on the charter boat for shark fishing.

They called one shark, and they were like, all right, done. But they never done it again.

Because for me, the main attraction was to actually

learn about shark fishing, to actually learn how to find sharks, to actually learn how to do that.

You know, the the chum there, Abu Dhabi and how to rig the bait and like know how to do this like have a less superficial connection to it.

Is that your understanding as well, is that your your experience as well, after all the research and what's your view on that?

Yeah, I mean, of course I mean the hunting tourism is difficult topic.

Because also, I mean, it's it's usually in the spotlight for being, you know, let's say not proper hunting.

And, and this kind of brings us also kind of the difficult thing about what is proper hunting.

And of course, all hunters have, kind of, opinion on that non hunters also have

opinion and anti hunters, I mean for them there, there is nothing like proper hunting.

But it's, it's, it's something that brings us to, to the question of what is ethical hunting basically.

Yeah.

So this is what's the question of hunting tourism is about.

And of course there's so many different kinds of hunting, tourism.

So I mean when, when you kind of thing think back classically to this, African style safaris,

which, which used to be quite different, I mean, where when you look kind of the, the old safaris kind of in colonial times.

And of course, one of the big problems is we were talking about the, the what's the what are the conditions in which hunting takes place.

And of course, we know that the origins of that type of hunting tourism is in, in,

colonialism in kind of, a web of kind of power relationship, really,

it's not kind of only power between human groups, but also between kind of power between human under and animal and so on.

So it's it's that that kind of historical origin is deeply problematic,

but at least compared with kind of safaris going on today, what we see is so far respect them.

They took weeks or months.

Yeah.

So safari tourist hunters, they would have had the opportunity to actually to get to know places and animals and and so on.

Yeah.

I mean just I mean it's, it's literary accounts, but I mean, if you read Hemingway, Green Hills of Africa or so

you see that there is some kind of engagement, with the local specificities.

But of course, now safaris look very different. It's a matter of days.

Yeah. Sometimes just spending 1 or 2 days and just doing that.

It's still kind of having a list of animals you want to call.

And I also would say that's quite problematic in itself, because, I mean, what's kind of the motivation behind that list?

But it's really different.

And, and this is also one of the, the key transformations that, that we've seen in in recent years

is this acceleration of hunting, in terms of the time spent in hunting.

And of course, the big problem is, on the one hand, with hunting tourism is a troubled relationship with,

a place and also, troubled relationship with the time spent with hunting.

Yeah.

So usually you're in a new place

that you don't know animals you don't know, but you also you don't have much time in order to get to know.

Yeah.

And they, they both, they usually come, come together these two problems there.

And as we say, of course there are certain things in terms of hunters knowledge and experience, and so on that are transposable.

Yeah.

I mean, when you know how to shoot with a gun.

Yeah. You can do it in Germany, in Ireland or in Africa.

It will work basically.

But the generally, what's there about things because it might be that you have to shoot, at longer distance, for example, which.

Is also a recoil will be different. Yeah. With a different type of, caliber. Yeah.

So there are certain things you have to adjust to, but that's all kind of manageable.

But you basically you need someone else, or several people actually, to assist you.

Yeah.

Which is quite interesting because, you see, kind of, hunting is usually seen as a kind of a one man

or one woman activity, kind of the lonely hunter kind of out there, kind of against nature.

That's also kind of the American trope.

Yeah. Kind of conquering and competing against nature and so on and mastering it.

But most often it's also kind of a social activity.

Yeah, it's, a distributed effort where several people work also together, they might share responsibilities.

They may they might share different tasks.

And of course, that's the case in the hunting tourism as well.

So you need to share basically.

But the the difference is to kind of non tourist hunting, hunting situations

is that of course, you're either in, in a very hierarchical power structure, just like when you go hunting in Africa

and you have your local guides who do the tracking or so and are not really paid that well, and you're kind of the,

the big guy going there paying all the cash, being able to pay thousands of dollars, for this whole trip.

And then on the other hand, I mean, it's it's an economic setting, right?

So this is all about, it's basically about money.

You're you're paying for it, you're paying for a certain experience, and you're paying an outfitter that's trying to create

exactly this kind of experience. Yeah.

And of course, because time is valuable and costs money, they try to do all that on a, on a tight budget and, within tight time constraints.

Yeah.

And these taken together are not really favorable for the hand.

Really to go or kind of to use everything that we've just talked about because it's, it's more about the experience of moments.

Yeah.

So you're basically looking for, for frozen moments in time and kind of this kind of focusing, condensing the hunting really to the kill.

And you're not kind of it's not the start of anything now because kind of you go going kind of a way, you're not staying with the trouble.

So, so to speak, in the place where you are, you leave it again.

So it's definitely something different than kind of normal hunting.

And then non touristic, situations.

But we, we perhaps we, we would have to look kind of in more detail than at kind of specific tourist experiences and what exactly they do.

Yeah.

And kind of what people take from it basically.

The hunters themselves, I mean, apart from kind of the trophy photoshops or the, the,

the whole animal that I take preserved back with them or just kind of, tiny trophies.

So, so, so what exactly are they taking from it? That would be the question.

What does it do?

What kind of what does the emotional experience lead to in these cases?

Does it help in the development of certain environmental virtues, or, is it kind of going against the whole grain?

How do hunters basically integrate their tourist experiences with their normal hunting experiences?

Because there is a connection, right?

I mean, most hunting tourists, it's it's not like they don't have any hunting opportunities at all.

If you have the money to pay for a safari trip, you also have the money to go hunting back home.

So how do they integrate? Tourist hunting experience with the normal experience?

And there is actually when you think about, in, in continental Europe, when you think to historic times where hunting was an aristocratic

privilege, hunting tourism or let's say a precursor of hunting tourism was part of, of hunting life.

Yeah.

So you were invited by other aristocrats from somewhere else that were related to you, or you were neighbors with,

and you went to them and went hunting on their land in, with their hunting group and so on.

And, this was just part of it. Yeah.

So it was more about in that case, it was more about, establishing relationships within the hunting community.

So, so that that's a different kind.

And then even today, in Germany, for example, even kind of normal hunters, they get invited to hunts all, all the time.

They don't just hunt in their own hunting district.

Yeah, they might also visit other places and so on.

And of course, it's also an opportunity for them to learn something new.

Yeah, to hunt in a new kind of landscape, to hunt new kinds of animals that you don't have at home.

And of course, there is a connection.

But the question is, what kind of connection and the how the hunters really integrate that.

And of course, I think if you are invited by neighbors, so and you go hunting, on their grounds,

it's a different kind of out of place hunting experience than doing it in a tourist trip to Africa in an in a very economic setting.

That is all about money.

And I think it's also different in case like if you hunt in County Kerry and then you get invited

to hunt in County Donegal, you effectively in the same ecosystem, in the same place.

It's it's it's a different geographical location.

You maybe don't know, like a very specific things about this particular landscape, but overall the assemblage of species is the same.

The weather patterns are the same, the vegetation is the same. Da da da da da.

So I guess you could you could more relate to that.

While if you going from County Kerry or Donegal in Ireland to Africa to Tanzania, you just like you said, you would need like a first month

to even get your head around the landscape itself and the animals and the sounds that surrounds you and the smells and everything else.

You're just completely out of your element.

So I guess that's also important, you know, to an extent how far geographically you go in case in terms of ecosystem.

Yeah.

Look, so I think we are here where we already started talking about what are conditions that,

if not met, will not support and will not develop this environmental stewardship.

I presume that's the one.

But the article, the paper lists a few more, like, for example, night vision technology or just in general technology.

Right. Trail cameras, I presume, is one of them.

The use of drones that's in many jurisdictions, use of drones is, prohibited.

Right.

It's we talk to the, I don't know where I when I got this from there was a guy who

had the trail cam installed, and that trail cam was sending in notification to his phone,

and when he got notification on his phone, he was taking the rifle and going to shoot the deer and whatever.

Right.

So I guess this is the these are, the more we going to piled up these conditions, the more we is starting

to really lose that connection with the environment that will then prevent developing of that stewardship.

Did I get that right?

Yeah. I mean, it's exactly kind of like you say.

It's a lot of different things that all have kind of a small impact. Yeah.

So it's not about how hunting is either or favoring a development that, towards environmental stewardship or it does not.

It's really looking at the whole set of conditions, just as like different parts of a parcel

and saying that there are so many different things that actually have an impact on all that.

So every time that a new technology is introduced, every time hunting laws are changed,

every time you go hunting in a different setting, or every, every time, kind of a new animals perhaps might be introduced.

And these are all kind of opportunities to look at

what the impact actually is on the hunting experience and what it does to the hunter, actually.

So this is kind of what we want to, to draw attention to, because there is no kind of

regularity to do this.

There's no natural law that says, well, if this condition happens, then this happens to the hunter or something like that.

There is no clear causality between these things.

It's more kind of, just just like with any kind of of of learning. Yeah.

I mean, when you are in school and, you have kind of what's the role of the teacher?

What's the role of the classroom? What's the role of your classmates?

What's the role of your learning materials?

Yeah, I mean, they all contribute in some way, but none of it is kind of causal for your your learning experience.

Right.

And this is the same with kind of the, the challenges that we kind of, list.

So we, we need to look at kind of the, the bigger whole basically, and what it is made up of.

Yeah.

And so we for example, with the, with kind of new technologies, it's not about a matter of, let's say, kind of

what do they contribute to, efficient hunting, to your hunting success?

But we also know it's an ethical question. Yeah. And it's not just an ethical question.

And that is I think what is quite new about our article is it's not just and that's a good question in terms of

how does it help for a clean, painful death of the animal.

So it's not just kind of looking at the animal, but it's actually looking back after Hunter.

Yeah. And then saying, what does it do to the hunter?

Yeah, but what kind of hunter will you be when you use that kind of technology?

So acknowledging that there there is some mutual relations that you can't get out of, of, of a hunter.

So the death of the animal has something to do with yourself and what kind of person you are.

I find it quite, quite interesting.

You know, this, you probably know this, Jagermeister. Schnapps.

Right. And, I don't know whether you, once had a look at. What's that?

It's actually written something around the label, of that bottle,

and it's, it's a line from an old, German hunting poem, from the 19th century.

From, from Old Prussian forester and hunter.

And it says and it says something like it's the hunter's shield of honor to to care and look after his game.

And to kind of recognize the creator in the creature.

So it says something about kind of the way you hunt, makes you either a good or bad person, basically.

Yeah. So and and you have that in, in all kinds of hunting traditions all over the world.

Yeah.

So the way you hunt always says something about you as a person.

Right.

And so that's a discussion that we, I don't know from, from our public debates on hunting and kind of, how hunting develops and so on.

We would never ask kind of what it does to the hunter.

We just ask whether it's ethical or not or if it's, just in terms of the animal or handed or not.

But we usually leave the hunter out.

Yeah. It's just like like there's something different there.

And, and I think it's it's quite interesting to to link them back up again and say, well, we can't really discuss new

hunting technologies, without kind of asking what it does to the hunter, because often they themselves, they see that connection.

I mean, we're in one of my, my research team on wild boar hunting, where I'm part of is,

where, for example, we, we look at hunting, in cases of an outbreak of African swine fever.

So when hunting kind of turns, culling of animals

and, and we often see, and in different countries, basically that hunters hate these situations.

They don't want to kill that way.

They don't want to be too efficient in hunting they are often ashamed about.

It's, I once interviewed a hunter in eastern Germany where we had kind of the biggest outbreak of, African swine fever a few years ago,

which is still running.

And, as part of kind of the eradication program, they set up wild boar traps there.

And, and usually this is something that we don't house in, in German hunting.

We had it done in some instances.

But usually German hunters don't like trapping big game animals.

It's something that usually reserved for, small predators like foxes and badgers and martens and so on.

But usually they do.

They think it's quite unethical. And also they don't like this kind of killing traps.

Boy, you know, in a cage and I, I spoke with, I had really trouble finding hunters who do that.

They didn't want to talk with me.

But I found one hunter that I knew through a different channel.

And, he was also kind of a forester, the forestry worker, basically.

And, he was part of of of a team, who had to look after one of these traps and, but his older colleague, he did it.

You did actually, the actual killing.

And he never wanted to have the other hand, with him when you did that.

Yeah. Even both were hunters.

He was kind of.

It was too uneasy killing that way. And. And he was really ashamed.

Yeah. Yeah.

On the other hand, I only was allowed to come in later when everything was done and ready, and it was kind of, ready to to deal with it again.

So they know it does something to them and they don't like it.

Yeah.

So, so there is this, this question of kind of that we actually why do we never discuss kind of what, what happens there.

Of course we should discuss it in terms of what happens to the animal. Yeah.

Because that's kind of the main thing.

But as I said, hunters are implicated in that death and it also affects them.

So this is something we should take into account.

This is this, you know, discussion that on the one hand, like you said, the the hunters, you know, let's use this term proper hunters.

I'll make it air quotes for people who are listening to that.

The they don't want this to be too easy, right?

I even heard, like, yeah, I want to make that hunt as difficult as possible. I'm going to pass, you know this.

I'm going on the hunt that takes, you know, three days.

I'm not gonna shoot on the first day because maybe, you know.

But then there comes another angle of it, like, well, if you want to make that hunt as difficult as possible, like,

what about the welfare of animal? You. Right. You should you should want to do it

to be as easy and as sure, as possible.

And, you know, I, I spoke many times on the podcast about archery hunting, which in Ireland, in the UK is illegal.

Most of you, I think in most of Europe is illegal. That is some regions. Germany too. Yeah. Yeah.

But I think some regions in, in, Hungary, some regions in France and Spain are this is allowed and obviously it is allowed in the US.

And this is a big discussion, about it like, oh it's on the, on the, it's on the humane.

And these are the grounds, it is bounded most of Europe because it's un inhumane.

The margin of error is this and that.

But then there is another aspect of like, yeah, but the connection is quite different.

You need to be so much closer to an animal. It's so much more difficult.

It's your you so much more in the nature because the sound you're making is like, you know, as much as the,

you know, you step on the steak and break, well, you know, have this like big discharge of like so this is an interesting conversation

and I guess, as usual, like in life, it's you need to find a balance between being,

you know, being that hard being, you know, the whole idea of third Chase is basically, you know, what is fair

chase and is, is, is is increasing the likelihood that you're actually one with the animal.

Is that your idea of the chase or is it.

I'm gonna make it.

Like I said,

I'm gonna identify the animal with the drone, and then I'm gonna, you know, just use all means possible to kill it as quickly as possible.

So that's probably a topic for an entire different podcast, I guess.

But no, I mean, but the I think the the interesting question here is really kind of what the motivation is.

Yeah.

So, we know kind of recreational hunting is about and kind of

in Western countries is space is often or, or it includes a restraints.

So you're not using everything that you could use.

And the question is why you don't do that.

Put in a positive way. You could say, well, it's it's about the animal.

Yeah. It's about kind of fairness to the animal. You don't want to turn it into a slaughter.

And it's it's really it has to do with respect.

The negative thing would be and that's unfortunately also part of, kind of many hunting communities.

It could also have to do with personal motivations.

It could be the view that you as a hunter, you're a kind of the apex predator,

and you want to prove yourself and to show your mastery over the natural world.

And this is why you want to make it's, kind of a challenge for you. Yeah.

So it could go either way.

And so, of course, the question is for the hunting community is kind of, how do they mentor

their the kind of the, the new generation in, in which direction should it go.

And, and this is why why I think talking about stewardship actually is so, so such an important step actually.

Or it could be because, I mean, what it is, is for, for me.

And, I always have this picture in mind, you know, from, from Lord of the rings, from the steward of Gondor.

And, when we perhaps you probably know the book or the film.

So when you, when you walk into the throne room,

there is at the, at the end of the throne room, there are the steps leading up to the actual throne of Gondor.

Really kind of magnificent.

And then kind of, just down on left or one of the first few steps, there's a simple chair.

This is kind of the place for the steward. Yeah.

So the stewards could actually I mean, the throne is is free. Yeah.

You could just walk up and sit on the throne and and kind of,

make decisions from up there. But.

No. Is sitting on a simple chair, on one of the first steps.

And this is for, for me, actually kind of two different ways of looking at hunting in Western countries.

Yeah, we know we could hunt from the position of kind of the, the ruler and kind of imposing our own motivations

and wishes onto the animals and just think about ourselves, about what we want from it.

And we want to kind of have the experience of mastery.

We want some trophies and so on, and really put ourselves in the center.

Or we would say, of course, yeah, I could use all this power, but I'm not because I know I'm part of something bigger.

Yeah.

And this is why I don't use all that power and I don't take myself too seriously.

And I also take back some of my motivations in order for kind of the health of my kind of

of the game population, for the for the good of the animal, for the good of the ecosystem and so on.

And, and and this is what I understand as this kind of a virtuous hunter in that way, that kind of hunter as an environmental steward,

he has developed certain virtues to take himself back a little bit, and decenter hunting from all.

It's it's all about me.

But it's.

I'm part of something bigger.

Yeah. And this is a kind of development that I would like to see. Basically.

I'm, I'm sure I mean, there are hunters who think that way, but I think there's also kind of other developments going on

which are still kind of in this old tradition of, I'm kind of at the top of, of the food pyramid,

and I'm the one actually who decides on, on things, depending to kind of on on my interests.

Yeah. Dominion, mystique point of view.

Listen, person, I got to ask you about, catch and release you.

You say, like, catch and release is, usually in angling is it is used as a staple of,

environmentally conscious angler who is taking pleasure and, be is in an environment.

But at the same time takes care of the environment and releases the fish.

And that way.

And sure, of course, there is a mortality rate on the released fish, but,

at least fish is released and has a bigger chances of survival than if it ended up on the plate.

Or a frying pan.

So usually catch and release anglers like to label themselves as those stewards of the environment and conservationists and so on.

You argue that cuts are nearly as much.

Actually, my sometimes limit that development of, environmental virtue.

Could you please lay it out to us? Like how come?

Well, I mean, I first have to say that I'm not an expert on on angling and fishing, especially also not on catch and release.

So, perhaps just to say something about our team of authors who wrote that article.

And, and I also have to say that I can't pretend kind of to talk, for the whole team

because we're very five very different, people who came together to, to write this article

and how it came about basically was that, Sam Shepard's kind of the lead author of this article,

Robert Allen House, they had written another paper before that on angling and fishing and,

and environmental stewardship, and they're both experts on angling and fishing.

And they wanted to extend their argument and write more about the, the value of, of the actual killing experience.

And wanted to bring in some expert on hunting, so brought in my, colleague Eric from Essen, who was also on a podcast with you,

some time ago. Shout out to Erica.

And because it was all about kind of the killing experience and emotions.

So she brought in me as kind of the last person in the team.

There was also chance list, our philosopher in there who was responsible for the the philosophical input.

So I came to the paper as as the last person there.

And of course, I was never much kind of an expert.

And there's this catch and release fishing was also new for me, basically.

I mean, I knew it existed, but I had never done any research on it and, haven't read a lot about it.

But it was one of the discussions.

It was one of the points, just like with trophy hunting.

So and it was really quite difficult to say anything definitive about what we might think about catch and release.

And I think that there might also be some differences in opinion there amongst the different authors.

I think Robert, for example, had a more positive view on it where, I think Erica and I had a more negative view on, on it.

So but but as I said again, it's not an I burrower.

It's so it's really looking at usually it's a mix of different things that, go on.

The only thing that, that kind of we could agree, it's, could agree on then is if we put kind of the effect of the killing experience

in December and becoming part of the food web, and also how important it is to them, kind of what comes after the kill.

Then it's clear that catch and release cannot offer the whole experience of that.

Right.

And I think this is kind of all that I can say, basically, because I'm really not an expert on that.

But just in terms of this central them of of our paper, I think this is kind of the, the thing that we have to consider.

That's something that's catch and release cannot do.

Of course, in terms of, caring for fish and caring for their habitats and becoming,

engaged and active in kind of, preserving habitats and, and so on, or improving habitats.

That's something that's can still happen.

Yeah. And, I think there are also studies that show that did catch some release.

Anglers do a lot of these other things, so they might be really good conservationists.

But just in terms of our argument about killing experience and how they, how it can foster certain virtues

and so on, this is something that one would have to consider more problematic.

And, and catch and release.

One other thing that I just cannot leave is the importance of hunting rituals.

And, and they were discussed in a, in this context of embedded stewardship.

I'll give you my view on the hunting rituals.

Maybe it is, politically incorrect, but for example, like on one hand, the like,

you know, like after, after hunt where hunters just, like, laying down all the animals in there, I don't remember.

What's the term used for, for that could be for bystanders.

That is straight up off putting.

Oh, look at them. Right.

I remember commenting on one of the, on the, one of the social media posts like, hey,

this is not meant to show that they like killing, it is meant to show the abundance of resource.

Not that, oh, look how many we killed.

But then there are things like the last meal I think of this called when the animal is dead

and you take a, branch and, you put it in an animal's mouth and was like, oh, this is to show respect.

Then you sometimes you see on the hunting forums, the pictures and the comments, are you always showing the respect?

And so on. And like to me it's like, well, how are you showing a respect?

You stuffing the branches into a dead animals mouth that that's silly.

That's not the respect, but that's just, there's just just my view. So

please explain to me

and to listeners like, what is the role of those hunting rituals are they are on, you know, on

which side of the argument they are, and how important they are for this developing environmental stewardship.

Since I'm an anthropologist, I perhaps have to start with kind of, what we know most about, which is kind of also,

kind of indigenous hunting because the hunting rituals, we know, we know it also from archeology.

Hunting has always been surrounded with rituals. Yeah.

And this a recent book also, really quite good spy. Yam dessert.

The North American sociologist who wrote a nice introduction or kind of a handbook on hunting.

And he also argues that, all these rituals are basically there

in order to deal with the problem of death and killing that happens in hunting.

And and interestingly, it's again linking back to this point of hunters being implicated in killing this.

So the thing is when when you kind of look back in time and when when people lived as hunters and gatherers

and small bands, hunters go out and kill and then to come back into the community.

And of course, the question for the community is, okay, so there's this person who has just killed

and, he's coming back now into the community.

Yeah. So he's it's a person who knows how to kill.

And, and, and he's bringing that with him into the community.

So they're often kind of exactly rituals happening at this time and place when hunters return.

Yeah.

It's an important step of, of the whole hunting practice, basically the return to the own community.

So a lot of things need to be done, not just when he's out there,

but especially when he's come, when he's coming back, and when the dead animal is also back in the community.

So a lot of these hunting rituals are also about kind of the treatment of the animal

after the kill and also the treatment of the meat and of the whole animal in, in itself.

And why?

Because an animal is, is not just kind of, a body, but it's also in, in tradition

and in indigenous hunting communities, it's a living being with a soul, and the soul is still there, although the living being might not.

So it's something that you have to deal with in some way.

Yeah. So this is kind of the, the origins where these hunting rituals actually come from.

It's to deal with both the, the soul of the animal.

And and then also the way you deal with and interact with that soul has some impacts on the living human people who who deal with it.

And this is why you need to be careful in all times.

So when we come to Western recreational hunting, then of course we are kind of in a different setting.

Let's say we have the kind of the traditions that that you mentioned.

They are especially kind of Central European, traditions.

A lot of them coming from Germanic countries or kind of Prussian countries going towards Eastern Europe,

Austrian Hungarian Empire and so on. They're quite big.

And of course we have to see that the, the question is whether they, these rituals have the same origin,

because as far as we know, most of these rituals have their origins in aristocratic practices.

So this so-called strictly, as we call it in the German hunters language, the kind of the,

the laying out of animals after a big society or hunt, there is an element of showing off.

Yeah.

So it was basically different lords

kind of demonstrating to their hunting guests how many animals they have, how rich they are engaging basically on their land.

So this is certainly still the case that there is it's a kind of a performance there.

And there's also an element of competition there somewhere in terms of that.

Usually, hunters would be honored for killing so in so many animals that they would get

to one of these little twigs as a, as a token of, of respect, depending on how many animals they, they killed.

So it's also within the hunting community, it's also meant as a, kind of a show of appreciation.

There's a little bit of competition, maybe also a little bit of shaming for those who haven't killed anything.

So this is all in these rituals?

But I would claim that's what's also in there.

And again, we have to really think about everything.

Kind of hunting experience is always complex and ambiguous.

It's also about the animals.

Yeah.

Because what happens is that when you went to one of these big hunts and,

let's say these are usually this pressure hunts or driven hunts, wild boar, red deer, roe deer and so on.

And, the hunt is over and they all come back to a central place.

So there's usually food waiting for the hunters, and, kind of the animals are brought in their field, dressed their,

once it's finished, they're put down on the ground on, on this twigs.

They're all kind of prepared. They're lined up.

So it's all a kind of matter of of respect, basically how you do that.

And it's a time for hunters also to walk around to see the animals being opened and see you dressed, to look at the, the dead animals.

And there's time they spend time next to and with the dead animals lying around there.

And then there's, of course, kind of the horn signal set up late and everything.

So everyone gathers around the animals. Yeah.

And they honor the animals with these different melodies that are played and and so on.

So it's actually what I would say.

It's again, it's creating this time and space for hunters

to think about what they've done and about the hunting day and about the deaths, because the dead animals, they're right there.

Yeah.

So they're spending a lot of time with the dead animal not doing anything with it.

They just they're.

Yeah. Yeah.

And so if you get rid of these traditions, you're taking away at least the opportunity.

I'm not saying that every hunter uses that opportunity in order to reflect,

but you are you basically taking away the opportunity actually to to do that.

Yeah.

And in fact, I mean, what I have experienced in my research in Germany is it's one of the things at stake at the moment because, for example,

we've kind of the new kind of hunting ducks coming up in, in Germany in recent years, there's a tendency to get rid of these rituals

because it's, they, they argue, it's actually, these are invented traditions, especially from Nazi Germany.

And, and we don't really need it. It's really superficial. It's decorative.

And, we should think about the dead animal as potential meat.

So as soon as we kill the animal, we have to start considering that as as potential meat.

And we have to deal with it in a way that is hygienic and that is similar to what they have in slaughterhouses, basically.

Yeah. So weird.

So for for them, honoring the animal is by, by kind of ensuring that you can actually use the meat.

And therefore they would say that, taking all this time and going through these rituals actually, is a potential,

hygienic problem, that might prevent you from using the, that animal as meat and therefore they don't want to do it.

Yeah. So there are certain reasons why they have that.

But what I would argue is the way they deal with animals is quite different from how old traditional hunters

in Germany do it, because they're not that much interested in establishing a relationship with the animal.

For them, hunting is more kind of, an intervention, and they deal with the living animal.

And as soon as it's dead, it's kind of ceases to be an animal.

And it's seen as, treated as meat.

Whereas traditional hunters, they have this time in between.

Yeah, between living animal and meat.

And so they spent time also with the dead animal.

Yeah.

And, and I think that's in the, in my view, it's quite important actually for establishing a relationship with the animal

and to, to see an animal not just kind of as a potential meat provider, but also as a kind of, a living being, basically.

And it's not to treat it as something with a soul, of course.

I mean, we have this older religious elements that are also part of hunting traditions in Central Europe.

We have the traditions of Saint Hubert and also kind of the,

the Christian mass, on on the 3rd of November, for example, coming up in two days, actually.

So there is this understanding that is also, as I said earlier with this poem, there's kind of God, is also in that creature.

And that's something that you can honor.

But whether you have that religious outlook or not, which hardly any hunter does these days in Germany, it's still

they spend time with the dead animal. Yeah.

And I think that's also an important part of an emotional experience and emotional relationship to the animal when you hunt. Wow.

You explained that beautifully. You explained it beautifully.

And even though I was or maybe I still am on this side of like get, get, take care of the meat as quickly as possible.

I appreciate your argument.

And I'm I'm less on that side now after you said because I, I can appreciate it.

I can see the importance.

And like you said, the opportunity to to take time and reflect.

And maybe some people have an opportunity and capacity to reflect that.

Or reflect on that in some different settings.

But I guess, like you said,

if there is this ritual, then the opportunity for that reflection is kind of like a built in into a process, and it's a part of a system.

And I. Am a, big fan.

And of course, I mean, we shouldn't forget also, I mean, we're talking about hunting traditions or rituals,

and we shouldn't think that there's kind of this one way.

And it's always been like that.

Yeah.

Of course, I mean, yes, it's true.

For example, in Germany, the Nazis really they change these traditions.

They they Nazi fide's hunting traditions to, But this is not to say that they were the first to, to do them.

Actually, they reworked the older traditions and changed them, adjusted them to their ideology

and in the same way, we could ask now, instead of asking, well, should we get rid of traditions or not?

It's ask well, can we adjust the traditions? Yeah.

So for example, when you, when you want to, to kind of lie down kind of the animals in in rows

but you're still thinking about you shouldn't spoil the meat are the ways how you can combine the two.

Yeah.

For example, what you often see is, you know, when you have a bigger animal and you feel dress it

and, you need to, to leave the, the, cavity open, so that it cools out and bacteria can't really, develop.

So you might put a piece of wood in kind of into the cavity, you to hold it open so that it can pull out.

So traditionally, this is not done when the animals are lined up.

But but, I see it often now that people do that.

Yeah.

So, so they, they try both to think of the tradition and of, thinking of the meat later on.

So there are ways of how we could combine it.

Those things are seldom just like, people tend to think that the, the previous folks who done it, they who invented it.

But like you said, it's probably it started somewhere in the Ice age.

And then it was developed and developed.

And like I said, I'm a big proponent of, in general, this mindset of like,

let's develop things forward rather than try to take them back to some, some place. Wow.

It was interesting.

This is, one of the most fascinating discussions about hunting, that I had on this podcast in a long time, maybe ever.

So so thanks for that.

And folks who are listening

to that, always remember, if you enjoy this sort of content, go to the description of the show and subscribe to my newsletter.

The link is in the description.

We also going to link the the paper, although it's not open access. But we're going to do it anyway. Yeah.

Well, one, one can offer you the document. It's open access.

You just can't download it. But if you want to read it, you can do it with the link. Yeah. Oh, excellent. Excellent. Yeah.

So that link will be in the description of the show. So subscribe to our newsletter.

Read the paper.

And to close this off task, and I gotta ask you about what would be your advice,

to hunters, how to talk about hunting, how to, you know, deal with their social pressure that hunting is, at the moment.

And would there correct angle of that discussion be like, hey, this is what we going to lose if we're going to lose recreational hunting?

Because I don't think that the, there will be, you know, like during those discussion,

the common theme is like, oh, hunting always going to be around as long as there are animals.

But perhaps this is going to be like, you know, trained sharpshooters in air quotes, which is go at night

and using night vision, control the numbers. Right.

Which is exactly not what we're talking about here.

So how to talk about hunting, hunting if you're a hunter and if you're, you know, sitting at the table

with people who are maybe not stoked about hunting, what is the what would be your advice?

It is difficult, because, I mean, at least in Germany, but I also know it from, kind of the research of my colleagues in other countries

is, that's kind of now in the 21st century, many hunters

really feel on the defensive, like they need to justify what they are doing.

And of course, this is this is also true because we have become more sensitized towards animal suffering and animal deaths.

We we are kind of new questions about,

whether we should at all, hunt and kill animals,

is kind of a strong movement of veganism, vegetarianism and, and so on going on, especially now amongst the younger generations.

So it's, it's clear that, especially I mean, and that's the problem of this term, recreational hunting.

Yeah.

So it's actually a term that, I mean, at least when you, when you speak, we find this in

Germany is nothing that any hunter would use the same, like, what you hear in an English speaking context.

Sports hunting? No hunter in Germany would call hunting a sport.

Listen, it has quite a different connotations in in Germany, sport for us is more like football, tennis and so on.

And you wouldn't kind of give the impression that you're trivializing hunting.

So true. Hunting is always something serious.

But yeah, the problem is that in that kind of setting where you feel on the defensive

and where there also are, there are good arguments basically, about not killing animals.

Yeah.

I mean, we shouldn't forget that, so it's that therefore I say hunt kind of killing animals should basically always be problematic.

We should always be reflexive.

About, why we do it, actually, there may also be good arguments, actually, for not killing animals in certain circumstances.

And I think this is kind of addressing this

problem.

That is something that hunters usually don't know how to do.

Because the, the public debate is usually should do how to kill animals or should you not?

And, of course, kind of. It's a polarizing discussion.

And of course, when you are on the side of, the people who actually kill animals,

you basically don't want to support the other side's arguments, but do you want to speak against them?

And this usually kind of has the negative effect that you present hunting as something that you do

because you're interested in conservation or in maintaining the balance of the ecosystem and so on.

And I think and of course, I mean, that might somewhere be the case.

But honestly, I mean, that's not why recreational hunters go hunting. Yeah.

I mean, it's something else. Yeah.

So how to bring that to the table without kind of trivializing it.

And, and I think the only way to do that is,

and I think this is also something that many people probably could respect.

And I also experience that myself when I give public lectures on hunting.

Where also sometimes animal rights activists might be present that usually they, they are.

Okay, okay. At the end of my lecture, because I didn't claim that there was no problem.

I didn't say there is no suffering in hunting.

I don't claim that hunting is always good and should always be maintained.

And then so on.

But I basically I'm, I'm trying to say, well, it's it's problematic

and it always has been, even kind of with our ancestors, even with the Neanderthals.

And so on.

Hunting was always something problematic.

But this is not to say that we shouldn't do it.

Yeah, but it's really and we have to say that as a society, we have decided together as a society that it's okay to do it.

Yeah.

And as long as this is the case, we can discuss about whether we want it or not.

But as long as we're doing it, shouldn't we focus on how we do it and how we can do it in a way that is kind of respectful to the animals,

but a way that is also has a, a positive effect on the hunters themselves.

Yeah.

And also on, on the whole kind of community and perhaps also kind of, for, for general society at this.

I mean, as we said earlier, the death of animals is usually something that disappeared from, from the public and, in the last decades.

Yeah.

So we, we have tried to separate the killing and the death of animals, even on farms.

It's we all have kind of caged it in, in small containers.

We have professionalized the killing of animals.

We have reduced the number of people who actually do it, and we don't want to see it. Yeah.

So maybe what one wonders could actually add to our public debates

is that they bring the death of animals back into visibility.

And also that might hurt.

It might be painful discussion.

But maybe it also is a necessary just discussion because we confront the rest of society

who probably, really enjoys eating the meat produced by hunters to face

what else is involved and, and how it came about that they actually are in the position that they can actually eat meat.

Yeah.

So I think that's I mean, it takes some guts, probably to open your eyes to make yourself vulnerable

basically in saying, well, IQ, but also admitting how difficult it is.

And then I'm not taking it easy and then I'm also fine, perhaps.

And then that's one of the most difficult things that I'm also fine.

Kind of, discussing the how of hunting with the rest of society.

Because what happens at the moment, the big problem seems to be, at least in Germany, is that there

the public debates are usually between hunters and non hunters.

Yeah. So politics that impose, hunting laws.

I usually they imposing laws from outside of hunting and all the hunters do is basically oppose these changes coming from outside.

Yeah.

But what if hunters could actually be part of the general gist discussion

and not just being defensive and not just trying to kind of quickly pass over?

That's a difficult thing of killing, but actually saying, yeah, that's what we do and let's talk about how we do it, how we do it properly,

how we do it ethically, in a way that not is not only just ethical for us, but also for majority of our society.

Yeah, of course we we can't appeal to the, the vegans and those, who think that killing animals

generally shouldn't be done, but at least let's have a kind of, a discussion in society.

And also kind of link up the ethical views of, of mainstream society with those of the hunting communities.

Yeah.

And this, unfortunately, is something that I don't see a lot of hunting communities do, especially not the hunting associations.

The hunting associations, in my opinion, whether that's the kind of the, the local or the national one to Germany

or even face, as a European hunting association, they don't like to discuss hunting ethics in public,

because it's all a matter of kind of defending themselves.

But I really think they should take up that discussion, because there are things that go wrong,

in, in the hunting world, there are difficult developments going on.

And, if the community themselves don't want to address them, then someone else from outside will do it.

So, I'm not sure that is a good thing.

Absolutely. Like, you hit a nail on the head.

We should discuss those things, because otherwise all there will discuss them for us.

And that might not be the exact picture.

Torsten, listen, thank you so much for your insights and for your time. It's been great conversation.

I'm sure the listeners learned a lot. Appreciate you.

Yeah. No problem. It was really fun talking with you.