Discussion in 'Animal Welfare' started by Daggdag, Dec 26, 2012.
That's different. There's a valid reason for that, not just hanging a head on a wall.
Oh cmon, thug tastes awful.
I keep the mount, pay to process the venison, and donate what I can't eat to the food bank.
Yeah that's different. I mean if you just happen to bag a perfect 8 pointer, that's just a bonus.
Hunting for sport is totally depraved, and appeals only to those nut cases who have to try and prove their manhood with a high powered scope sighted rifle....what a sick society...I only wish the animals all had 308's or 30.06's or some such to return the fire...see how many of those macho "hunters" would continue their despotic activity.
There's nothing wrong with hunting in and of itself, it's how we survived as a species for millennia after all.
The only reason we don't hunt now is because we raise animals for slaughter. Is that really any "better"?
If you hunt for food, and you use all the animal fine...that is a different matter....but if you trophy hunt just for the horns that is sick and depraved, and is indication of a sick mind.
Pest control, if they are encroaching on your property, is an exception. But that is the only time where hunting and not eating the meet is acceptable. If you CHOOSE to hunt an animal that you can't eat, you are a poacher in my book. You don't choose to hunt pests, it's a necessity, But other animals are different.
So, I'm probably going for a bit of fox hunting this winter. I don't consider foxes pests, but there are a bit too many of them where I come from, and this means less grouse, roe deer, and other small animals. So I'm going to do it, purely for the experience, for the conservation of other species, and to help keep the fox population at a healthy level.
I'm not going to eat the fox, and the pelt will not be worth the trouble of processing it.
This is not poaching btw. Poaching is illegal hunting. What you call poaching, is just what you're reacting to in an emotional manner. The law is the law, and it doesn't matter what people "consider" poaching, when the law is clear about it not being poaching.
Men are naturally hunters. Our closest relatives hunt prey when they have the chance. It's in our instincts. I don't know anybody who hunts to prove their manhood, and I actually know people who hunt, which I'm sure you don't. I know people who hunt for food (venison is low fat, and is free range without any contaminants like antibiotics), and I know people who hunt because it's a good excuse to go outside. I don't know anybody who hunts to prove their manhood.
Do you do that with mice that you kill, or roaches? Pests are pests. No need to eat pests. All killing should have a legal purpose. In the case of pests, that purpose is to save crops, prevent disease, etc.
Do you shoot mice and roaches with a high powered rifle or rifle of any kind?
Anyone who trophy hunts, and leaves the meat to rot, is depraved, and insecure and needs to fire a rifle to prove their manhood....sick in the head in other words....
It is a big sick sport in North America and Africa...
It's not the 1800s anymore. Modern trophy hunters, although you may dislike their way of life, eat the meat or donate it to the local population if the meat is edible.
Thats BS and you know it...trophy hunters a self centred, arrogant, insecure little people who need to kill something to justify their existence...they should all visit a shrink and get some medication for their insecurities.
Hunting is a necessity. There is a very fine line between too few animals of a type in a habitat and too many. The govt issues hunting liscences and limits based on maintaining this balance. Hunters are essentially being directed by conservation depts to act as the wolves and other predators that have been driven out by civilization. If we make it too strict for hunters, they will no longer be a useful tool for managing game, prey populations will grow beyond their habitats capacity and they will suffer starvation and disease. I won't defend the wasteful mentality of the 'hunter' who does not use their kill (and really just becomes a thrill-killer at that point), for that is quite senseless, disturbing, disrespectful and disrespectable... but trying to ban it would cause a lot of problems.
Leave nature alone and it will regulate itself, as it always has done, without dumbo humans trying to do that.
In my state you can't just shoot game and leave it to rot. You have to take it out of the forest with you. Big fine and loss of hunting rights for years if you "waste" game like that. The norm is that people have the animal processed for its meat, and, if you want, you can have a mount made by a taxidermist.
Do you personally know any trophy hunters?
Because it really shows you know nothing of hunting in general, so I suspect your knowledge of trophy hunting is equally insufficient.
Start with this:
Won't work. We're simply too many humans on this planet. Creating huge areas where humans should have no influence, would lead to starvation. Sure, some national parks are possible, in huge countries like Russia, China, the US and Canada, but even there, it's usually necessary for human involvement to aid in conservation efforts.
I should be free to kill? I love freedom and respect the freedom of other species. You?
You're not free to kill anywhere.
Hunting is regulated by laws everywhere for most species. (Except bugs, insects and so on.)
That's why the concept "poaching" exists. Which is illegal hunting.
How about on Gov't owned land?
Poaching is when you are hunting on someone else's property .
Illegal hunting on private and public land is also poaching.
Separate names with a comma.