Hunting, yes or no?

[Cross.eyed]

with less or without hunting...normally predatory animals would be able to take on the role of human hunters in limiting animal overpopulation.

Yes in the normal sense a "check and balance" system exists, but it isn't normal anymore with humans and human structures sprawling out more every year depleting natural habitat required for an effective check in predator/prey relationship.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

Here in Canada, we can get boar, moose, deer, bison, quail and partridge at the grocery store. These come packaged in little styrofoam trays and apparently grow in the supermarket's various refrigerated display counters.

This is far more civilized than Cross.eyed's point-and-shoot method where he violently takes the life of innocent little animals. Shame on him.

FL

[zoegirl]

[Cross.eyed]

Here in Canada, we can get boar, moose, deer, bison, quail and partridge at the grocery store. These come packaged in little styrofoam trays and apparently grow in the supermarket's various refrigerated display counters.

This is far more civilized than Cross.eyed's point-and-shoot method where he violently takes the life of innocent little animals. Shame on him.

FL

Being packaged in the styrofoam calms them quite well for the civilized viewers.

As for myself?
I have never made the claim of being civil.

[Cactus]

yea..well any hunting needs to be a bit better controlled..

How about limiting hunting only to overpopulated species...and only allowing weapons like hunting knifes(much fairer than an animal getting shot!!)

Now I really have come to think of animals as a sort of resource, that we must manage and take care off. That isn't going to happen if people are just let to over exploit such resources.

This is why "fur is murder" is so silly;
because in that case...wheat is murder, millions of small animals get chewed up by harvesting vehicles every year. Why are those animals not complained about? Because someone isn't wearing them, eating them or using their bodies in anyway...

But, don't we feel a certain respect for animals, when they keep our bodies alive? When they keep us warm or cool? When they can do something useful for the environment and us?

This is why I feel that all explosive powder projectile weaponry(guns) should be disallowed for hunting, if it is ever to be noble then the animal should have a fair chance at living...as well as dying.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

How about limiting hunting only to overpopulated species...and only allowing weapons like hunting knifes

I agree. Killing a deer with a six-inch hunting knife would be so much more humane and allow the deer to fight back! ...to kick hunters in the head, so to speak.

Hey! the resultant serious injuries would even give a kick start (a pun, get it?) to the economy! (Hospital stays, medication, bandages etc.)

FL
Ph.D., tsellis Institute

[zoegirl]

Wow, what a devious plan to start a stimulus package for the economy.

[Cactus]

well of course there would be lots of hospital trips...because most hunters are fat lazy beer drinking slobs...taking away there rifles would turn it into a 'sport' for real men

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

well of course there would be lots of hospital trips...because most hunters are fat lazy beer drinking slobs...taking away there rifles would turn it into a 'sport' for real men

OK... so this was never about the poor little animals to begin with! You just want to exercise judgement on «fat lazy beer drinking slobs», a term you use to describe hunters.

I know two hunters, and neither fits your description. I also doubt that many hunters would fit your description.

FL

[zoegirl]

ACtually I know at least three hunters myself and will also say that they don't fall into that description.

[Cross.eyed]

How about limiting hunting only to overpopulated species...and only allowing weapons like hunting knifes

I agree. Killing a deer with a six-inch hunting knife would be so much more humane and allow the deer to fight back! ...to kick hunters in the head, so to speak.

Hey! the resultant serious injuries would even give a kick start (a pun, get it?) to the economy! (Hospital stays, medication, bandages etc.)

FL
Ph.D., tsellis Institute

Not to mention the coroners profession would also expand and give rise to the funeral businesses.

Cactus, I hope your not serious.
You do understand that a less effective means of taking a game animal would cause more pain and suffering than a weapon that cleanly kills within seconds don't you?

Even in the case of a natural death, an animal in the wild suffers longer (sometimes months) before expiration.
Some die of starvation, disease, impalement, freezing to death,etc.

When attacked by wolves or coyotes, the prey often lives for hours in excruciating pain having been bitten dozens of times.
Life in the wild is brutal.

A responsible hunter plans the shot (just as he/she plans the whole trip) so as to take down the animal in a quick and efficient manner as possible.

To my thinking, a deliberately well placed shot is humane.

[Cross.eyed]

Wow, what a devious plan to start a stimulus package for the economy.

Which is a much better plan than the "spendulus sackage" congress came up with.

[zoegirl]

Amen to that!!

[Cactus]

Death by a close quarters weapon does not have to be slow...or painful, why do you think people had to pay the executioner to have the axe blade sharpened?

[Cross.eyed]

Death by a close quarters weapon does not have to be slow...or painful, why do you think people had to pay the executioner to have the axe blade sharpened?

That is my point.
Back in my hunting days, I used archery tackle and found it to be more humane than rifles or shotguns.
A bow and arrow is a close range weapon (20-30 yds.) and forces the hunter to be very careful with every move he/she makes. especially with the shot.

The arrow is equipped with a broadhead that is sharpened shaving sharp.

In my experience, the proof is in what happens after the shot. If the archer has done his homework, his chance of recovering the animal increases greatly by giving much less time for the target to expire.

In at least one case I know of, a whitetail deer was feeding and was shot clean through with the arrow stuck in the dirt on the other side of the deer.
After the shot, the deer looked up towards the hunter for a few seconds and then went back to feeding and dropped dead just a moment later. THE DEER DIDN'T KNOW IT HAD BEEN SHOT!! Even a slaughter house may not be as humane as such a well planned, well placed shot.

Where it concerns you about the drunken hunters, these guys rarely ever score game-they're too busy partying, making noise, and falling from tree stands if they don't get arrested first.