Why must we hunt?

You shop, you hunt. You surf the web, you hunt. You flip through a magazine looking at the pictures...you hunt.

People do it. What you hunt for depends on where you live, what you can afford to hunt for and what you need.

Need has become the loosely defined variable. In the United States, if you have a good lawyer and a damn good excuse, you can pretty much tell anyone what your need is and get away with it.

Including taking a 12 gauge to a chipmunk, if you are so inclined and you happen to be making a film about it.

The argument is almost pointless if one thing is kept in mind - freedom requires respect of the freedom of those around you. If you are impeding upon other's rights, then you probably need to reevaluate where you live, what you need and what kinda gun you wanna own.

I hear there are still plenty of of available acres out west for anyone who needs room to shoot.

if you hunted animals for meat, with stone age implements, would it be ok and within natural law ?

i mean you have got to be kidding. all things in moderation and killing for fun is just perverse, but industrially raised cattle are infintely worse off and their meat is rotten. their dung is sprayed onto the landscape woth considerable ecologic impact. romanticism aside, natural predators sure wouldn't hurt, i just fail to see why a) 'natural law' vs. human beings seems to imply we deserve nothing, while wildlife is suddenly sacred and b) why i have the suspicous feeling that next to no-one around here is a strict vegan (stop stealing poor cows' milk, ffs ) and that most if not all of you chest-thumping, preaching and condemning (*see board policy for details*) are curiously oblivious when it comes to preserving habitats and what it entails.

probably caught in the latest 'eco-friendly' biofuel craze. do you know who's using and producing most ethanol today ? Brazil. i'll give you a hint: that's where the rainforst used to be. another: that meant millions of square miles for billions of poor (now often extinct) creatures.

PS: if anyone mentions overpopulation (and how it warrants limitelss atrocities) once more i'll give you detailed instructions how to gradually solve it, starting with yourself to make myself clear, don't judge unless you're prepared to be judged.

Some of us would rather eat meat that has not been injected with manmade pollutants. Do you know what is in your beef,pork, chicken, etc.? Have you tried fresh venison,grouse,pheasant,etc.? Another reason is population control (which is not just for the safety of we petty humans but for the safety of the herds from disease and starvation because of less wild land). Granted many people hunt as a sport but many do not. Mnay families live off of wild game as they can't afford to eat processed meats.

I'm not a hunter, but I am a butcher, and during hunting season, I make a lot of money cleaning wild game. Every single animal that I cut up is packed very neatly into nice packages. Every client is feeding a family, anywhere from 2 in the household to some families of 5 or more. I also get contracts with the US dept of fish and game to butcher up illegally poached animals every year. The Gov takes these illegally killed animals and gives them to poor families, so that nothing goes to waste.
Personally, I believe that people who hunt just for sport have some very deep personal issues, and hunting and killing wild game without taking the meat and eating it, or giving it to someone else who could use it, is wasteful and pure ignorence.
That being said, I am a sports fisherman, thats my hunting, and honestly, 90% of the time I do not keep what I catch. I return it back to the water, to bad hunters who kill just for sport cant use tranq darts and return wild game back to the wild.
But I guess my point is, hunting has its place, when you use it like it is meant to be, to feed a familiy. Which is what 99% of most hunters do.
Just my 2cents. Peace out!

Look, not only is the world not that bad of a place yet, but deer tastes really good. Elk tastes even better. Better than beef. So as long as I'm allowed (and after I'm not) I will continue hunting, to fulfill my lust for meat. If you ate one of my venison steaks, you would go to the nearest gun shop, and buy a rifle.


We have killed off some of wildlife's natural predators, and so we need to fill in the gaps, and thin the herds. I hunt in New Mexico primarily, and also Missouri. In Missouri you can get many permits for 7.00$ each because they have way too many deer. And they are the fattest animals on the planet. There was a good 2" layer of fat on both the buck and the doe that I got last season. They are fantastic!!!

Originally posted by PapaHomer
Personally, I used to hunt for bounty on predatory animals to make money while I was in high school...
...Although I made a profit at hunting coyotes, I wouldn't call it trophy hunting...

Originally posted by sardion2000
I'm not opposed to hunting at all, I'm just saying that heedlessly hunting as much as a person can hunt for a buck may come back to haunt your descendants.

How many people even stop long enough to realize that the bounty, in & of itself, is the "trophy" of the hunt?

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
So should we just outlaw Natural Law? "NO Mr Bear you cant eat any Deer anymore. No Mr Wolf you cant eat Rabbits. No Mr Human you cant eat anything. "

No, and this is something that I never even hinted. This is merely the extreme reaction of the logical reasoning in all of my posts here.

Humanity can't step outside of Natural Law because we're nothing more or less than a part of it. The more we attempt to disobey the Natural Law, the more problems we cause for ourselves because we're all interrelated to the intricate cycle of Natural Law. Humanity is the only species on this planet to hunt for "sport," and we're beginning to see how Natural Law is shifting it's balance to make things harder for humanity to deal with. The reason why certain species are showing population imbalances is because humanity is causing those imbalances in the first place.

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
Humans hunt around the world. Mostly for food.

This is what the Natural Law is about in the first place...It's hunting for "sport" that I don't condone.

Originally posted by Yarcofin
And most "sport" anglers are catch-and-release, so there is no harm done there either.
In most hunting and fishing tournaments, they give the meat away to charity. Shark tournaments can often feed an entire town.

IMO, this would be the only acceptable ways to hunt for "sport," because it leaves "no impact" upon Natural Law...The anglers mentioned (who release their catch) don't upset the balance of nature & those who use their prey for food (even to feed a whole town, as mentioned) also remain within the balance.

Originally posted by Yarcofin
So what is more humane? Letting animal populations explode to the point that the habitat can no longer support them and end up starving themselves to death slowly, or killing them in a relatively humane manner and putting them to good use?

Let's put a reverse spin on that same question: What is more humane? Letting human populations explode & wiping out natural habitats to feed their exploding population or finding some way to curtail humans from overextending the resources that humans also need to survive? How can humanity expect to continue surviving if we continue to overextend our need for natural resources? This planet will only accomodate so many humans & we're fast-approaching the breaking point.
Any (humane) suggestions along that line?

Originally posted by Long Lance
...i just fail to see why a) 'natural law' vs. human beings seems to imply we deserve nothing, while wildlife is suddenly sacred and b) why i have the suspicous feeling that next to no-one around here is a strict vegan (stop stealing poor cows' milk, ffs

) and that most if not all of you chest-thumping, preaching and condemning (*see board policy for details*) are curiously oblivious when it comes to preserving habitats and what it entails.

Answer to a) I never said that humanity deserves nothing. Humanity deserves to survive only as long as we don't disregard the balance of the very same ecosystem that supports us...To so disregard our own ecosystem would be tantamount to species-wide suicide.
Answer to b) Why should we try to be "strict vegans" when we're born omnivores? Our bodies do require nutritional value from both plant & animal-based food sources. Bears are omnivores & they take their nutrition from plants & animals, so why should we disregard our Nature as omnivores?

Originally posted by Darkblade71
Personally, I believe that people who hunt just for sport have some very deep personal issues, and hunting and killing wild game without taking the meat and eating it, or giving it to someone else who could use it, is wasteful and pure ignorence.

This is exactly the same point that I've been trying to make all this time.
It's only by the disruption of the Natural Balance that humanity causes its own problems.

Originally posted by downtown436
We have killed off some of wildlife's natural predators, and so we need to fill in the gaps, and thin the herds. I hunt in New Mexico primarily, and also Missouri. In Missouri you can get many permits for 7.00$ each because they have way too many deer. And they are the fattest animals on the planet. There was a good 2" layer of fat on both the buck and the doe that I got last season. They are fantastic!!!

This is exactly the type of hunting that obeys Natural Law...Using the meat that's hunted is part of the balance of Nature. As pointed out above, it's the waste of natural resources that causes humanity's problems.

I want everybody to understand that the OP said hunting for game, therefore not hunting for food. I don't dont think anybody would have a problem with hunting for food.

The problem, and somebody even said it is mostly here in the US is that we have a bunch of rich guys (for lack of better word and not wanting to get banned) who get board and have nothing else to do.

Im not going to say anything bad about them because I have no problem with hunting. In fact i can understand where they are coming from, as I said im my last post hunting is a tradition. Kind of like Christmas, it's just something we do. At one point in time skills were needed to hunt in order to live. Back in the day being able to hunt well meant that your family would be able to live well.

Also, if times went bad and we needed to hunt for food who would people look to? If I had to trust somebody to bring me back some food im not going to have trust in somebody who is going to get killed out in the wild.

Styki

Why must we hunt? To kill the wabbit......

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Yarcofin
Hunting for sport, in my opinion, seems to be mostly an American thing. And then it is still the vast minority. Nowhere else in the world are you likely to find people killing animals and then letting the meat go to waste. And most "sport" anglers are catch-and-release, so there is no harm done there either.

I think you have watched too many movies. Hunting is something done all over the world, and in case you didn't know there are tribes that use the skins and heads of their hunted prey as adornments and for dances...

I have lived in Spain for almost 10 years. Half of my family lives in Spain since our roots are predominantly from the Northern region of Zamora. I have spent many summers with different family members, and those who live in rural areas all hunt and fish and some of them even had animals heads as trophies, so by experience I know this is not "an American thing"... This is just another unfounded rumor made by those who hate in some way or the other Americans and the U.S. in general...

Originally posted by Yarcofin
So what is more humane? Letting animal populations explode to the point that the habitat can no longer support them and end up starving themselves to death slowly, or killing them in a relatively humane manner and putting them to good use?

Now on this I guess i agree with you, the way hunting is done now a days is to make sure the herds don't grow too big and eat all resources, at the same time it also helps a lot of families with the grocery bills.

There are some people that really have no idea of what happens outside their little worlds in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Miami Florida and in general large cities... I have been to small towns where if you ask what sort of vegetables they have the bartenders and waitresses will tell you there are potatoes on the menu. There are many places around the world where people can't afford or don't have any way of acquiring "vegetables" and their main menu is fish and meat.

No offense but there are some people in mayor cities who are too naive to understand their cities do not make the world...

It is true that there are poachers that probably only would hunt for skins, but this is not a rule in most areas.

I can only imagine that the large varieties of meat i see at the walmart I go to comes from locals hunting and selling meat. A lot of people around these parts hunt not only for fun but to eat meat too, whether vegetarians want to admit it or not we need proteins, and meat is a good source of proteins.

[edit on 29-4-2007 by Muaddib]

i havent been online all weekend and i didnt realize i would get so many posts (havent read every one yet) but thanks for the posts because you guys do make some great points, and i def have learned alot reading through them.

Originally posted by darkbluesky
Why must we hunt? To kill the wabbit......

www.youtube.com...

That's a good one

thanks for the link dbs.

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by darkbluesky
So you consider yourself the arbiter of the worth of species?

You apply your sense intelligence, right and wrong, and values, and determine which species are OK to kill and eat and which are not?

Wow.

No, I do not consider myself to be that.

I just said why I don't eat anything except the three animals I stated.

Wow, just.......wow.....how incredibly hypocritical. How do you know they don't have the same feelings as any other animal? It's funny how people try to justify things in their heads.

Originally posted by iori_komei
Personally I only eat chicken, turkey and tuna when it comes to meat.
I don't consider turkeys and chickens that important, since they tend to
be incredibly stupid, I mean anything that will look up and drown itself in
a rainstorm really does'nt deserve my sympathy.

How about Pork?

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
Answer to a) I never said that humanity deserves nothing. Humanity deserves to survive only as long as we don't disregard the balance of the very same ecosystem that supports us...To so disregard our own ecosystem would be tantamount to species-wide suicide.
Answer to b) Why should we try to be "strict vegans" when we're born omnivores? Our bodies do require nutritional value from both plant & animal-based food sources. Bears are omnivores & they take their nutrition from plants & animals, so why should we disregard our Nature as omnivores?
..

you are of course right, my point is that talking is cheap as long as they're being hypocritical about their 'lofty' ideals and as you might have noticed my post was directed at those who explicitly wanted to ban hunting altogether.

unless these people follow your own guidelines, their 'advice' or whatever you like to you call it, is little more than a thinly veiled depopulation agenda, which is frankly a wholly idfferent topic.

PS: isn't it strange how people who are alledgedly appaled by hunting are way too willing to judge entire species by invoking shallow sterotypes and adress overpopulation by violent means( as opposed to giving women a chance to decide for themselves?) i defintely see a pattern.

[edit on 1.5.2007 by Long Lance]

In my area of the country, the Pacific Northwest, Southeastern Washington more precisely, there are more whitetail deer now, then when Lewis and Clark did their famous stroll through the area. Primarily because of the depredations of their predator counterparts, namely cougar and wolves. At certain times of the year, spring and early fall, along certain stretches of highway the toll of roadkilled deer can reach double digits within a 5-10 mile stretch, I once counted over 30 deer in one ten mile stretch of highway between Dayton Washington and an even smaller town called Waitsburg. The only reason it isn't worse is because of the hunting that takes place. Personally, I'd like to see a limited year round hunt of whitetail deer. With the absence of wolves and cougar, man is the only predator speicies that can control the incredible population explosion that has taken place over the past 30 years or so.

As much as I like the big cats like cougars, bringing them back into the area in anything like the neccessary numbers is not an option, too much livestock, and too many people. Cougars and people just don't mix. The same holds true with wolves, though wolves were never that prevelent in this area, only a very small population, long since wiped out unfortunately.

Most hunters, and all the ones I know, utilize their kill, eating it, turning it into leather goods etc... Hunting is not "sport", its how they feed their families, or at least augment what they feed their families.

Since its only a matter of when, not if, this area ever has a really cold, long lasting winter, there is bound to be a massive deer kill. It's actually a more merciful end to be killed by a hunter then to starve to death in a wheat field covered with snow.

[edit on 2-5-2007 by seagull]

I dunno. I imagine the reasons vary with the individual, but "must" is probably the kicker. Most hunters don't have to, as we know.

But bear this in mind - the most vocal, active, and effective proponents for maintaining a healthy environment for fish and game are the sportsmen (and women) who hunt and fish.

So you don't want to hunt? Fine. What else are you doing for the areas where fish and animals live? I assure you that the hunters and fishermen in your area are doing more than anyone else to ensure that the various federal and state departments of natural resources are optimizing the quality of the environment.

It's all wonderful for those PETA psychos to protest shooting Bambi, but where are they when the deer are overpopulated and sick and starving to death?

Sport hunters and anglers do as much or more for wildlife than any other single group.

[edit on 5/2/2007 by yeahright]

Yeahright. Your last sentence is the kicker. Where will all these antihunter, antimeat types be when, not if, but when there is a massive winter kill of the overpopulated deer? My guess is snug in their little homes sipping whatever the PETA nuts sip. Whilst those often denigrated sportsmen/women are out trying to save as many as is humanly possible.

The anti-hunter types also are ignoring the overall effect of the Pittman-Robertson Tax -- a federal tax on hunting equipment (guns, ammunition, etc) that goes exclusively to wildlife programs.

The various wildlife organizations (e.g. Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, etc) raise $millions for habitat improvement, land acquisition, and other projects. Various philanthropic watchdog organizations consistently rank the largely volunteer wildlife groups higher than the better-known mainline environmental industries like the sierra club and wilderness society (90%+ of donations go to actual on-the-ground projects as opposed to the 50-60% of the big groups with big staff).

Combined with hunting and fishing license fees, sportsmen contribute more money to wildlife habitat and conservation than PETA does.

federalasst.fws.gov...

[edit on 3-5-2007 by dave_54]

Thanks for sharing that with us Dave, and thanks for the link.

i was not aware that hunting taxes were used this way.