Hunting with bows for hobby -not survival

I would say the reasons are up to each individual. I am not here to judge anyone nor do I want to push my opinion. All I want is a open discussion without finger pointing.

No holier than thou please. I like that sentence, picked it up in another thread.

Humans are territorial predators why are people so intent on denying that fact? We are barbarians playing dress-up barely contained by rule of law enforced by preditors made up by our own populace.

a reply to: TheGreatWork

i do not do it because i see primitive beast doing it, i do it because i love the thrill of stalking then killing the animal (and the meat). people have been having sex because its fun and thrilling since the first human's to walk the earth. I never said humans are suppose to be anything much less creators. and to answer your question taxidermy and weight on mine and my family's frames, i only kill what i intend to eat (save wild pigs i often kill and bury/ burn the larger ones)

Ive been around hunters my entire life, and even hunted off and on when circumstances allowed it and I have never met anyone that refers to it as a hobby, is this a new thing?

Closest I can think of to that description would be hunters that still hunt after they have all the meat they need, even then if they down an animal they will still take it to be processed and usually turned over to local food banks for distribution.

a reply to: Irishhaf
A new thing? Have you never heard of the dentists that go to Africa, killing for fun/hobby? They even have a name, trophy hunters. I think there was some outrage about that a while ago.

When I say hobby hunting, I mean the type that does not do it for survival in the sense of it being a way to get meat. I like to believe your surprise, because I wish it was like you described it, here, too.

A hobby hunter is someone who has a hunting license but is not interested in it as a food source or keeping the forest healthy. They hunt for the sake of hunting and trophies. The kind of hunters who would pick the most healthiest animal out of the pack because it will give the best trophy/story/whatever.

Generally these type of hunters are shunned by the traditional ones. I can only speak for my region, of course.

a reply to: Oleandra88

Hunting for survival or hunting as a hobby is all the same. It's a natural instinct to hunt, even if it's hunting in a simulation video game. It's all the same, the natural instinct to hunt is in all of us.

Bow hunting is far more challenging. It takes discipline, patience, and practice beyond what most "passive" hobbyist would be willing to do.

In most states, hunting is regulated in combination with good conservation practices, and in most cases benifits the species as a whole. An overpopulated area leads to starvation during the winter months, when nature alone is in charge.

Anyone that isnt a vegetarian is a bit of a hypocrite, if they are judging the morality of hunting, while eating a cheeseburger. The unwritten rule among true hunters is you don't kill what you aren't going to eat.

a reply to: CraftyArrow
Sorry, I strongly disagree!

Someone needing that fish or deer to survive the next two days

versus

Someone driving 200km in their Range Rover 4WD to a forest to kill something for fun and trophy...

IS NOT THE SAME. I used all caps to make it more clear.

Again, someone who hunts for survival, my opinion is, all is allowed. Heck stone it to death if you need to eat and can do it that way. You are trying to survive and the nature is more brutal than an misplaced arrow.

Someone who is not in that situation and have the luxury of picking their weapons of choice to drive through half a state to kill something for whatever reasons, in my opinion, should at least consider the way it is done. The one in this situation can have the luxury to think about it.

What everyone else does is their own business and I am not for banning bows for hunting.

a reply to: Mach2
I went to hunting and I can slaughter a rabbit for you if you want. I may be a bit overly careful with the gall bladder because I lack the routine but I will do it.

Most of the times these overpopulated areas are our fault. Either by taking out the top predators that hunt them, or messing with the local system by releasing Buffalo to Yellowstone or moving Wolfe around the country. Now we made that mess and we have to deal with it.

Any predator will pick a different food source if the original food source dwindles. This is the natures natural cycle.

I wish people would actually read what I write and I do not judge morality of hunting in itself, but the way some do it.
Big difference.

a reply to: Oleandra88

I agree. The way some do it is despicable, and where I'm from (upper MI), almost all hunters I associate with would agree.

What is the moral difference, IYO, between someone who hunts, and eats their kill, and someone who buys steak at a supermarket?

I have eaten rabbit, by the way. Very tasty, but hardly worth the effort for the amount of useful product. It does however take a remarkable amount of skill, when done witg a .22, as opposed to a shotgun, which I wouldn't do.

a reply to: Oleandra88

I hunt with a bow, basically walking in the forest with a bow, never have gotten a shot,

Does my "hobby" suck?

But i have nothing against people who soot them at animals, as long as you do it right,

And no head shots! So many things can go wrong and you only end up inflicting a horrible and painful wound.

a reply to: Mach2
The rabbits in this scenario were not hunted but raised so the hunting part in this one is not really present. I just wanted to point out I am not a hypocrite, at least here.

Sure, I wrote this before in a conversation with TheRedneck a week ago. I initially started to retype it but now I see a link is easier and a quote:

Everyone who eats meat should at least have seen the whole process from raising a calve to bringing it on the table. Respect towards the animal that will end up on my table and not wasting the meat is what I preach.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Of course it does not have to be a calve, but calves were the topic at that point I think.

What is the moral difference, IYO, between someone who hunts, and eats their kill, and someone who buys steak at a supermarket?

That is not easy to answer because it also looks like you misunderstood me. Could be my fault for not being clear enough.

Directly answering your question (but please look above, it is not about hunting, it is the way it is done):

Someone who buys a steak at a supermarket is not "moral inferior" than a hunter, because given your example, I do not know anything about that person. You just presented me two gray figures.

Is the one buying meat aware? Does he live in the city where hunting is not possible from the start? I hope you see from my answer what I meant above. I differentiate between hunters and not trying to say hunting is not moral, cruel or similar.

Also see my quote above.

a reply to: Oleandra88

As far as being "our fault"? I will admit, humans did a lot of damage, when it comes to forestry, fauna management, particularly in the early 20th century. Some of it was lack of understanding the ramifications. Much of it was greed.

On the other hand, a lot of woodland, and natural habitat was cleared for farmland, and subsequently used to feed the masses of human population. Was that a bad tradeoff?

Survival of the fittest is, afterall, natures way. We happen to be on top at yhis point in the planet's history, and I do believe, as sentient beings, we have responsibilities to not drive species to extinction. Which is something we unconcionably have done in the past.

Unless of course you are a sharp shooter with a bow and arrow. I know a few!

a reply to: Oleandra88

a reply to: Oleandra88

Those trophy hunters are an economic boon to the area they go, when they shoot an animal that can be used for meat it goes to the locals as well.


They also have to obey the laws of the country they are in, and anything you spend that much money on doesn't strike me so much as a hobby as a status thing... kind like paying to get walked to the peak of Everest.

a reply to: Oleandra88

I have no evidence, other than my own experience with ppl, but I don't believe most "city, or suburb" dwellers have any concept of the reality of how their foodchain works, let alone the, often graphic, specifics involved.

IDK if that is a bad thing, or not, but in some ways it keeps them from having a perspective based in reality.

a reply to: Irishhaf

I did not say the meat is going to waste with them. I start repeating myself so I leave you figuring it out for yourself. Maybe take a look at my original message and read it without bias.

This is tiring. Originally it was about different weapons and I only had to explain the trophy thing because a nother member (sucessfully I see) torpedoed this thread with a uninformed counter-question.

Strike the trophy hunter thing. I reword my question:

Do hunters have moral obligations to think about the kind of way they kill their prey, in these times, today? Please also note the survival aspect, if you need food, everything is allowed and morality is over board because nature is more cruel than a misplaced shot, arrow, knife or whatever weapon used.

a reply to: Mach2

I agree. The sentence "city childs think milk comes from tetra packs" is not strange to me. Or that they think cows are pink because a chocolate company had a pink/lila cow in their advertisement.

Again, I wonder myself what these kids learn in school. Is city school and more rural school different? Or what is the case here? I mean, not that I did not knew it before, but I learned where eggs come from in pre-school. Just one example.

I am not sure if I buy into this complete ignorance theory. I definitely see the detachment you can get if your meat comes prepacked in plastic your whole life.

I grew up in the Country....killing is a part of that lifestyle...you kill to feed yourself and you kill to protect your stock and crops and you kill to protect your Family and you kill to earn money sometimes you kill to aid and help wildlife in order that the populations stay manageable to avoid decimating diseases from setting in.....there is a great satisfaction in nailing a Yote @ 150 yards on-the-fly with a head shot...when you are aiming to protect your livestock.....but its no different than a 20 yard head shot on a Pigeon that is sick and spreading disease wherever it goes.....or thinning semi-wild cats that have overpopulated and distemper has set in.

Now I have seen people running down Yotes with Ski-doos and people trapping them with treble hooked snares and people mass poisoning them.... I have seen people killing them for kicks.

I myself almost became deluded...we used to set out the waste pile from our Fall butcherings in the middle of a big field.....then we would load up all of our guns and sit in the back of our Pickup trucks with Spotlights waiting for the Yotes to come flowing in....then after a few hours when there was a large number there we would pop up turn on our lights and open fire on all of them....I began to look forward to it every Fall....but then I caught myself and chose to keep a more serious attitude about it.

Killing is different for everyone...I do believe that most people are lacking large amounts of empathy and intuition and this means they really have no emotional opinions when they have killed or are in the process or planning and killing......large amounts of these attributes can be both good and bad depending on which direction they are driving the killer.

I don't kill anymore...and I don't believe anyone who can earn a decent living and buy food should be allowed to hunt it should only be for the poor and needy......and it should be free to those who need it.Hunter assistance can be provided to these poor people by volunteers with bloodlust in their veins the same guys who sport hunt now....they can meat hunt or not hunt at all.

a reply to: one4all

Brave words!

Your last paragraph, I feel this should be a self explaining thing and it touches the moral question of using bows.

I am thankful for all the input and I want to make clear I do not judge anyone. I got some perspective from the "bow crowd" and I can see their arguments (skills, drive). I am sure many bow hunters go the extra mile to make sure it is a fast kill. As Luminari and others wrote, I can imagine the immersion is higher and it is more intense than scoping. I mean it is easier to trigger than to release the arrow.

I still did not get any numbers on how many times a bow hunter will loose an arrow and thus the animal is gone without a deadly hit but injured. I only have numbers for my region/country. So I am inclined to think, firearms are the better deal, still.