Coyote vs Greyhound

Though it may be a little biased, is the story wrong? Based on what I've seen from hog doggers, the descriptions sound pretty accurate. Cut kit - yes, water - maybe not if there are creeks around, scarred dogs - heck yes from head to toe.

They didn't talk much about how destructive coyotes can be, they didn't get in to the role dogs play in pest control until the end, but the hunter himself keeps calling it a sport. The problem is, hurt and killed dogs aren't sporting, and I think it opens up a can of worms when people call any sort of hunting an "outdoor sport." It sounds flippant to those who aren't involved, like taking a life is just the same as tackling a football player, and I think the reverse is true as well. Calling it a sport fosters a weekend warrior attitude where people don't respect what they are doing. After all, a dog is not a soccer ball or a baseball bat, they shouldn't be thrown in the back of the truck and ignored until the next game.

But journalists are word people, they are gonna take it literally. If you call it a sport, they are going to look at it in a sporting context and realize things don't mesh. Personally, as someone who has been in the media, I completely understand why the full story doesn't get told. A reporter can only report what they see, and if hunters don't make a real effort to show them why utlizing dogs is important, all they will see are the tough conditions and injuries. And yes, it is the responsibility of the hunters to make it blatantly obvious, newsrooms are run on a paper thin budget these days and reporters will get fired if they spend too much time digging in to every nook and cranny of a lifestyle piece.

The truth is, animal rights activists are well versed in media relations, hunters are not. It's just like legislative issues, the outspoken and organized group has influence while the naive group is easy to misinterpret or ignore. This article should just be one more wake up call.