Hunting

Remove all ads!

Quote selectively to your heart's content, Arte. Whatever good it will do your position.

The slight difference there is that your quotes merely say what happened; whereas the one I chose says something about the frequency of these accidents. Perspective, you know? Overrated, I suppose...

You do understand which one is more important when discussing the validity of hunting on this particular basis.

Okay. These deer (or whatever species you wish to drag into a murderous light) are being hunted. Regrettably that 73 years old person still died. Teaches a lesson of the effectiveness of hunting, yes? And this leaves out the fact that its to me nothing but a red herring anyway.

You ask for a balanced population of deer? Two things:

1) Hunters should stop increasing their numbers by providing them with additional food, like, during the winter. 2) Allow natural predators back into the forests.

Both isnt what happens, coz with a thinning deer population what convenient apology for the hunter's bloodsport would there be?

Perhaps they should do the sensible thing and pressure the proper industries into a change of their standards? If that direct approach is too much hassle, remember their influence as a consumer and purchase meat from sources that dont use these hormones. (That is, if there even are such sources for healthy food in the US or Canada – in Europe we are lucky to still have that freedom of choice. Oh, isnt there a trade war going on between the US and the EU over hormone-infested beef, btw? The US wants to shove that stuff down our throats as well...)
Anyway, a change of standards would benefit both the consumer and the animals in the end.

And yeah. As if this hunting business had anything to do with anyones care for their health... How does that cigaret taste whilst they disembowel the prize of hunting?

Of course their motives are alien to me, Arte.
But then tell me: What are their motives? What can it be other than killing when their little ventures into nature end with the death of animals? Or is that nothing but a most unfortunate byproduct?

And please dont bring on the rare women who like to hunt. I am pretty sure I was right on with what I said.

 

Do you guys who are so vitrolicly opposed to hunting, feel the same way about fishing as well?

Dendri, I mentioned your quote because it claims to only recognize one incident, when the previous paragraph mentions 5 casualties in 3 different incidents, and the article does not claim to be exhaustive of every county of California, or every state in the country. But that's beside the point.

Male bonding? Family gatherings? Birthday parties? Hunter orange is, "in?" Why are you asking me? I've never even touched a gun.

See this illustrates my point. You have a preconcieved notion of what goes on in any and all hunting expeditions (or whatever), when clearly you've never done anything of the kind. Yeah, sure, all hunters smoke, its easy to say, but kind of hard to prove, don't you think?

It has a use and a function, and beyond that the motive of individual hunters is all but speculation. Male rituals, animal cruelty, delicacy or anything else aside.

But I MUST! ohhhh maaaaan. And yes, they use bows! Er... I'm positive I had more to say on this, but after digging up that site, I can't remember what it was...

EDIT! Breaking news! After looking around on that site for a while, I concede any and all points. These people are insane and just really like to shoot things! Aaaaaaahhhghhg!

Point Dendri, game, set, match!

[ November 04, 2005, 21:12: Message edited by: ArtEChoke ]

 

So we both do not know what these mysterious men in the vast wilderness experience. We do know, however, that it evolves around killing animals. Whatever higher spheres they want others to recognize in this I dont care. They can do their frolicking amongst the trees without shooting. If that is not possible, than killing is indeed their main goal.
Shooting animals doesnt seem that great an opportunity to transcend relations between people to me. Forgive my ignorance.

There is no preconception on my part. I was having a humorous moment there when I heard they do it to help themselves to some healthy meat.

They can be wifebeating rednecks or actually nice guys who kinda have a weak spot for nature. They can smoke or drink or be totally ascetic in their approach to life - it matters none to me. They kill when there is no need to.

All I need to know, really.

Good day to you.

 

I'd like hear the answer to this too.

How do you people feel about the people working in the meat industry? Namely, butchers? Are they too murderers who should be locked away?

 

No. All I am saying is that I would never be able to go hunting and watch some animal die at my hands. Maybe I'm just soft.

 

Hey, guys, I've known women hunters. Some people just like to hunt.

[ November 06, 2005, 20:25: Message edited by: Nakia ]

 

I think we have consumed a lot of nature; far more than is good for her or us. We continue to every day. Some nations more than others.
A little self-constraint would be nice for a change. Or the next generations will hate/pity us for our carelessness.

Self-constraint and respect is what I would like to see applied to all involvement with nature. Species dont need to be on any red list of near-extinction for me to want them left alone and cherished.

That much for "fishing for recreational purposes".

And yes, I feel a bit isolated with my point of view. But when I look at how things are currently going I see no other way for myself... cause I am somewhat pissed.

Are butchers murderers? Does it really matter to you what others think about that? Will it make a difference to you? It wont stop anyway. But just think of where butchers and their handimen stand in the hierarchy of society. Should answer your question what people think of them. Nevermind the hypocrisy of it all... but that we - I include myself here - are good with anyway.

 

The bottom line is that most people eat meat, and that meat comes from the killing of animals. It ultimately doesn't matter whether it's a domestic pig or cow or whether it's a wild moose or deer, as long as it's not wasted.

 

I am totally opposed to hunting for sport and/or trophies. Hunting wolves in the wilds of Alaska by helicopter for example.
One of the most disturbing programs I watched recently was about the Taxidermy World Championships (held every two years). Whilst it was obviously set up to paint the taxidermists as weird folks anyway, there was one guy who set out to kill a Leopard, and in the process butchered about 500 gazelles and 200 monkeys (including live ones dragged behind their vehicle. He didn't have time to stuff the leopard for the event, but turned up with a necklace of monkey and chimp fingers, ears and testicles which he jokingly claimed were of his African guides for not working hard enough.

The most disturbing image, however, was of the young girl of about 8 who believed that God had put the deer in the woods for her to shoot and mount. At one point she could be seen holding the dead heart of the deer she had shot and poking her finger through the bullet hole.

That aside, I won't condemn hunting when required for living (for instance the Inuit) or for population control - particulary of introduced species which destroy the habitat and threaten the population of native species. Examples being the Grey Squirel and muntjak deer in Britain, and after my recent trip, Possums, Rabbits, Deer and Weasels in New Zealand (Though I think they have over-looked the humble hedgehog which is also known to eat eggs.)

 

I realize that this post seems to have died over a week ago, but since I've been away for a short time, you'll have to excuse my lateness in posting my opinion.

I am not a hunter. I'm not keen on killing anything except my brother-in-law. That said, the efforts made by some to paint hunters as psychopathic killers boosting their fragile egos and attempting to destroy the eco-system as we know it is a tad extreme.

Many people hunt for food. You can argue that they should just get a better job and use the money they get from that to buy food at the local supermarket, but either way animals die, and so the route that is taken to get the food is immaterial. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that a hunter may appreciate the value of the meat he has killed more because he put more effort and time into obtaining it.

Up until the past century or so, many people relied on hunting to survive. Obtaining a game animal was cause for celebration, so things like pictures with the animals came into being, as well as the practice of stuffing trophies. Modern urbanites such as yours truly celebrate our accomplishments -- why is it we feel the way others celebrate theirs is so horrendous?

Whatever method a hunter uses is fine with me as long as he obeys the law of the land while hunting -- that means no shooting more animals than you have tags for. I'd rather they used the biggest guns and best equipment possible so as to cut down on the suffering of the animals they kill.

It comes down to a lifestyle choice, and despite efforts to prove the contrary, modern law abiding hunters are not likely to deplete any species soon, as we have learned from our past mistakes. Beyond that, I don't like the idea of forcing people to live the same as me when their actions are not catastrophic to the rest of us.

 

dendri, i am a hunter and belong to farmers and hunters feeding the hungry. i have personally donated almost 500 lbs of game this year and collectively we as a group have donated over 50000 lbs of game to homeless shelters and food banks. nationally hunters donate well over a million lbs of meat a year. I hunt not to prove my "manhood" but to get in touch with who we are at heart (that is a predator plain and simple). Until you have to gut and clean your own food you can distance yourself and stand in judgement of anyone who doesn't agree with your viewpoint.Unless you are a total vegetarion, your just being hypocritical.We use animal products in every facet of or daily lives.I personally hunt using a bow , muzzleloader , pistol , rifle & shotgun. I have even went bear hunting with a group that used only longbows and chipped rock arrowheads. all of the game taken on 80% of the trips go to feed the homeless. You may try to cast hunters in as negative a light as you wish but we do more to help feed the homeless than just about any group in the usa. Can't speak for the rest of the world but all the hunters i know are very into conservation and helping others understand & appreciate nature(which includes the cycle of life & death). Until you have seen almost 100 deer in one herd slowly starving to death ,because they are on land that can only support a herd of 35 - 45 and you can't thin the herd ,because the animal rights liberals keep filing lawsuits to prevent the local government from instituting a special population control hunt, you just dont realize that they dont care about the animals just their ability to try to claim that they are better than the barbaric bambi killers.

 

I think this list shows all the organizations that utilize game meat to feed the hungry. There's an extensive network that's supported by the Sportsmens Club of America, The Safari Club and...umm...Ted Nugent along with many others. The various "Hunters" and "Farmers" against hunger groups have done an incredible work at getting quality meat products to shelters and the needy.

http://www.conservativeposts.us/hunting/huntersagainsthunger.php

 

Of course. Hunters as champions of the less fortunate. You guys really have a flair for the romantic.
Hopefully not only for so long as it serves as an excuse for your thrill, but also extended to assist the poor permanently? The whole free fish vs. fishing poles bid.

What if there were not such a large number of US citizens living in abject poverty (in the greatest and richest of all nations), or they were cared for like we do it over here in Europe? No more hunting?

Thought so.

Btw, what else to do with all that meat you have no use for. Leaving it in the woods to rot would make it too plain to see what your "sport" really is, perhaps even to yourself.

Send in the starving crowds. Great PR it is.

We are of one and the same species. Yet I dont feel much like a predator. Isnt it all rather about what you make yourself out to be? We are, after all, to some extend in control of ourselves. Or is it that I am just further up that evolutionary ladder of ours...

I have seen a lot of gruesome things in my time. Among them: People claiming sympathy with animals that, what an odd incident, make for a nice hunt and trophies. If you would feel for animals your efforts would be directed elsewhere, like fighting industrial farming, preservation of environment, whatever.
To me your bloodsport is all about enjoyment, and little beside that.

I will pass the hypocrite tag on to you folks, I think. It ought to be worn by those most deservant of it.

 

@ dendri, so you are telling my there are no poor or homeless in europe? Yeah... right, and i have a bridge in new york to sell you. Actually ,if i was being 100% into the life/death cycle, i WOULD leave most of my kill in the wild ,just like every other predator does, to support the smaller predators and scavengers that live in that area.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hunt not to prove my "manhood" but to get in touch with who we are at heart (that is a predator plain and simple).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
We are of one and the same species. Yet I dont feel much like a predator. Isnt it all rather about what you make yourself out to be? We are, after all, to some extend in control of ourselves. Or is it that I am just further up that evolutionary ladder of ours...
-----------------------------------------------
kind of funny that the only way you can respond to my post is by trying to insult me.

remember , those who can't support their views typically raise their voice and try to smear their opposition. so sad

Oh, by the way , i have no trophies(other than clothing items) of any of the animals that i have hunted other than a necklace of bearclaws & the 2 scars on my left leg and torso from getting to close to a boar(ouch!! ouch!! ouch!! never EVER get close to a pissed off 300+ lb pig)

For some reason anti-hunters ,and please note that i am not including none hunters in this group, seem to want to vilify us , even though more than 50% of all money spent on wildlife & wilderness conservation comes from hunter fees and permits. On a side note: Sure, safari in africa will cost you $900-$1800/day + $500-$5000/permit tag(depending on species and country)& most require a minimum of 2-3 weeks. the typical anti-hunter response is why don't you just take a picture? well, the truth is that the income from the hunts is the only thing that is keeping most of these species viable. ask any representative what would happen if they could not make money from hunters. as an offical in botswana said "without the money from hunters we would have to charge the tourists several hundred dollars for every picture they wanted to take of our wildlife". also less money coming into the country from hunting means you have to produce more of your own food , so you have to clear more land which necessitates killing more game.
do you realize how much an elephant eats in one day? put up fences? nope ! elephants regularly
push over trees! unless you want to build very high ,very thick concrete walls around all of the fields. then , when the herbivores leave do to lack of food what do you think the carnivores eat?
yep , africans!
sorry , simple economics , without the income from hunting most african countries have to make the simple choose between africans and african wildlife , guess which one most will choose?
Yes i do enjoy the thrill of the hunt , whether i make a kill or not. Personally , i don't hunt from a stand or still hunt(staying in one spot and waiting for the animal to come to you) just not my style but no recriminations against those who do or prefer it. Same goes for dog hunting(just way to noisy !! I prefer to track my prey whether this takes an hour or (if i have the time) a week.
I just don't get your hypocrite commit at the end of your post . I thinf that i plainly stated what i think most would say .That if you are not a 100% dyed in the wool(oops! no wool for these guys) vegetarion , than you have to honestly look at your view as being a bit(just a tad!) off. You eat meat from a grocery store or go out to a restaurant but you think it is wrong to hunt for your own food? You wear products made from animal products but you think it is wrong to hunt and use the animal parts in just the same way? Buckskin shirt and leggings , wonderful bear skin winter outer boots and mitts , supper supple deerskin gloves and moccasins(da*n gloves took forever to get them right!) , nice boar leather pack , you get my point. How can we be hypocrites for trying to provide for ourselves( and yes i grow about 3/4 of an acre of vegetables in the spring and summer. just gotta love those potatoes and carrots!) Still can't grow a decent tomato to save my life !!! Anyway ,cant wait to hear your thoughts on our discussion.

 

Do you mind pointing out where I claimed there are no poor and even homeless in old Europe? I said they are being cared for around here, namely by govermental operations and NGOs. Now, I dont know to what extend that is true for the US, too, but it cant be much if they are in need of the contribution of your hunting, as you would have us believe.

And that they need to rely on it I doubt very much. Which makes your argument rather absurd.

Btw, better keep your bridges. I hear your infrastructure isnt in the best of shapes as it is.

"Like every other predator does..." Ok.
Anyway, most predatory beasts I know of rather secret their kill away then leaving it graciously behind for scavengers to feed on. Then again its perhaps not my call to lecture you on the predators ways.

I admit that was not exactly appropriate. My apologies. Still, I feel you have debased yourself far more by playing this 'I am a predator inside' card. Emphazising animalistic instincts all the time?

I dont intend to. Your body would be whole had you left that beast alone. As you should have. What was gained by that confrontation? Absolutely nothing.
But I am sure the women love them and your tales of vanquishing the vile creature. Or something.

I challenge your claim that it is hunting and not tourism (photo safaris) that keeps the African nations interested in the well-being of their wild-life. If you think that a bunch of hunters keep the National Parks running, and that the millions of tourists dont contribute the gros of required budgets, you have something coming, martaug. I just hope no one buys this nonsense, sorry.

Yes, you enjoy the thrill. Were that any different would you still hunt just to thin out those "starving deer herds" we hear so much about? Would you hunt simply to, as you claim, help keeping up National Parks? Help sustain species through your fees, as you proclaim is the case?
Or to put it this way: Would you stop huntig were there no fees used to maintain whatever you want to think is maintained by those funds?
I suppose the answer to that is: No.

It's all about your personal amusement. What is being done with your money is secondary at best. Be it that it's used to run preservation programs for endangered species (and doubt that quite a bit!) - or to buff up the population of your favourite prey with additional food (which I personally suspect is the case). And I wont accept this particular justification for huntig with that being so,

But if it works for your conscience, well... have it your way.

Puh. Yes, I do eat meat. I used to live a couple of years by a strict vegetarian diet, and gave it up for a reason. But that is beside the point. Although... actually it has some relevance for this topic, sort of, but my post is becoming already too long for my liking.

Anyhow, the quantity of meat I eat in a year equals what others eat in a month, I would wager. Also, I am careful about where that meat (or eggs etc) comes from. For the sake of my personal health, but far more for the sake of the animals. I make a conscious decision there, and keep in mind that we have eaten meat at all times, even before we turned human - well, most of us turned human that is. My problem with the product from domesticated animals isnt so much the killing. Though anyone who feels the killing part is something to shrug off just like that is, in my humble opinion, total scum. Those anmials make a sacrifice for us. We owe them.
Far more I am against the conditions those animals have to live in. Death to them is a mercy too often, as it means an end to suffering.
Why I oppose hunting of wild animals you ask? I will not tire to repeat myself: We have all we need with the domesticated animals. Since killing is nothing I deem an exciting pasttime, I want at least the wild animals untouched. These day their death serves no purpose whatsoever - no matter how much you want to have the times returned when we needed them to survive.

You are not hypocrites, in my opinion, because you feel like it's necessary to be self-reliant. That, to me, is nothing but a romantic notion meaning death for animals for no good reason. You are hypocrites when you claim you shoot animals for any given reason other than your personal thrill.

I hope I did not disappoint you.

 

As Beren has already warned...personal comments need to be left out of this thread.

Now, as to the economic impact of hunting, this document may have pictures that bother you...but the tables are irrefutable. It was put together by the National Association of State Game and Fish Organizations...not a partisan group like the NRA.

Now that we've established the validity of the claims of the economic impact of hunting (mind you, fishing wasn't even a part of this), it all boils down to a persons reasons to hunt...and those reasons are personal and different for each and every hunter. The only person with the moral highground to condemn hunting as brutality to animals is someone who abstains from all meat and animal products.

Just look upon it as the hunter exercising his or her Right to Choose.

Hmmm...could there be a fundamental disparity between the anti-hunters stance on two different issues of "choice"?

 

An interesting thought popped into my head at 2:30 am this morning -- many people would vociforously(sic) defend the rights of Native American people to hunt -- it is their culture and heritage, and they are all pure "noble savages" (as the term used to be used) who are capable of bonding with the land. Should any horrid European dare to criticize or even discuss the matter, he is of course, evil incarnate. HOWEVER . . .

If a European descent person hunts, he is evil -- he is totally incapable of "bonding with the land" or otherwise respecting nature. This is racism of the highest degree, but I've seen it . . .

Dendri, I'm curious -- you seem to arguee that all hunters are liars, hypocrites, fools, and otherwise just plain stupid. I get the feeling that you have had some sort of negative interaction with hunters which explains your extreme (and I would say, with all due respect) vitriolic hatred of hunters. Care to elaborate? It would help me to understand where exactly you're coming from.

 

Sure it has an impact on the economy, as has prostitution. No one disputed that. Most of what is required to stalk through the woods doesnt grow on trees. The question is whether the sales figures of companies in the business of guns, munition, or whatever hunting gear, has a positive impact on the fauna. Otherwise I fail to understand how this is relevant for those arguing that hunting is actually favourable for sustaining the ecosphere. This is how that point came up.

I dont think so. Anyone not indifferent towards the fate of the animal that is part of the menu is entitled to get involved. This isnt about brutality against animals, or denying that we are omnivorous, but about needless killing, and whether that is acceptable.
The valid motives are missing here: Hunger or need of clothing. Excitement of shooting living, feeling creatures for sports, no matter how disguised or explained, will mean little to those arguing on behalf of the wild animals.

Edit:
@ LKD Nono, I always try my best not to build up hatred for... whatever. It will solve little, is not that healthy and makes you go to extremes that should be avoided. But you feel I am extreme in my opinion?
And no, I havent had any kind of key experience to make me opposing hunters so much. Other than what we can all see on TV. I guess I have just taken a closer look at what happens to animals? Or it bothers me more me than... others?

If you dont know where I am coming from after following this discussion there is little hope of me successfully transporting my views and feelings. It would be useless to try, just as my efforts in this entire thread are for naught.

Also, you will have noticed there are others opposed to hunting. They just dont go to the length of explaining why.

[ December 05, 2005, 22:12: Message edited by: Dendri ]