Subject:
|
Re: Responsible Hunting (was Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:53:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2562 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I guess this was in response to me, though I'm not exactly sure how. I hate • to
> risk trying to connect it to the topic before which was based on rights and
> responsibilites since that doesn't seem to be the main point. So I'll take an
> approach somewhat between that and just ignoring it. Comments are mixed in
> below. (And you knew I'd have something to say, right :-)
Well, it's not in response to anyone; I've just been sitting back looking at
the whole issue over animals and cruelty and the like develop, and I just
decided to voice my opinions, on a somewhat related although different matter,
if that makes any sense.
And yeah, I kinda figured you'd respond back. :-)
<snip>
> Me too. I went camping last week a few miles from the Appalachian Trail and
> did some good short hiking.
I've always wanted to visit the Appalachains. Pretty country out there, I
hear.
> > When
> > you go out and actually act the predatory role out, you really get back to
> > your primal senses. You see sharper, you hear clearer, you can even smell
> > things stronger. I don't know if it really happens, or is just a state of
> > mind, but anyone who's ever hunted knows the feeling too.
>
> Yup. I've gotten that playing paintball war games. It's a blast. Kind of
> like doing very mild recreational drugs.
I've only played paintball war games once, and loved it. I can't wait to do
it again. Great rush.
<snip>
> > that said, I DO NOT enjoy torturing animals, or anything to that affect.
>
> Would it be OK if I disagreed?
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but I'm the only one that
knows what goes on in my head, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that
I think anyone who tortures an animal with the sole intent to torture it
should be punished severely. Hunting isn't about torture; it's about respect,
and yes, killing *for purpose of eating*. But not torture.
> My paragraph above notwithstanding, I do wildly prefer people like you to
> people like them. Also, I have a tremendous respect for those who hunt for
> their meat over those you just buy packs of pink goo at the meat market. Do
> you process your own kills or take them to a processing plant?
We process our own (for steaks and such), but we take the meat to a local
locker to make sausage and ground meat.
<snip>
> > Probably the worst moment in the hunt is when you shoot the animal.
>
> Because it's all over and you have to go home?
Yes, because I have to go home, but not because I don't get to shoot any more
animals. I completely understand what I'm doing when I aim my shotgun at a
living thing and pull the trigger. I realize I'm taking a life, and that
thought isn't a good one. BUT, I also realize that this animal will feed me
and my family, thus filling it's role as prey. That's just the natural order
of things; predator kills prey to eat, prey dies to feed predator.
> This is somewhat morbid, but what happens if you don't? I mean what is the
> result of the taint? Is it poisoned, or just not as tasty? Also, do you have
> to hoist the carcas up to let it drain, or just leave it lying there?
The meat rots easier and faster, and doesn't taste as good. As for the
carcas, after it's been bled and gutted, and you've got it back to wherever
you'll keep it until it's processed, you hang it, and use something to keep
the chest cavity open, so it airs out. You usually let it sit 2-3 days before
skinning and cutting; that gives the meat time to "season."
> > I don't take pleasure in the actual kill as much as I do the hunt.
>
> If I were to send you a camera, would you leave your rifle home? ;-)
It's not legal to hunt (deer) with a rifle in Iowa, but no, I wouldn't leave
my gun at home. Once again, it's about the predator/prey food issue. As for
the camera, me and my dad go out at different parts of the year (when the
animal's not in season) and set up videocameras and trail timers to catch the
animals on film. We've got some real nice footage.
<snip>
> > BUT, for
> > the state of Iowa, anyways, the deer population would be huge if it weren't
> > for hunters.
> Might I point out that there wouldn't be any overpopulation issues if not for
> the presense of people?
I couldn't agree with you more. People come in, invade and ruin the natural
habitat, and force animals into more compacted areas.
<snip>
> > I only take one per year (if I'm lucky), and each
> > responsible hunter does the same, and keeps the population trimmed down to
> > reasonable numbers.
>
> Reasonable as determined by what method?
The DNR determined it to be reasonable, and I'm not one to disagree.
<snip>
> > I don't expect anyone else
> > to if they don't want to, but I really don't like it when people label
> > responsible hunters as "slaughterers of innocent little fuzzy animals" and • the
> > like.
>
> Why not? What did the deer do to you? I can live with the fact that you'll
> keep hunting, but I'd at least like you to acknowledge that you are in fact
> a "slaughterer of innocent little fuzzy animals."
I'm sorry, I won't acknowledge that. Because it's not true. I do kill
animals, yes. But I don't slaughter them. There's two different meanings in
my book. No, that deer didn't do anything to me, but that deer was put on
this earth for a purpose; to feed other animals, and eat plants. That's its
role. If it wasn't meant to be hunted and killed (by a person, coyote, other
animal), then what possible purpose could it serve?
<snip>
> > For one, those animals ARE NOT defenseless; we
> > hunt them where they live every day.
>
> True. But if their defense are so awesome, how is it that you manage to bag
> them? But defenseless wasn't your claim above, it was innocence. They are
> innocent of committing any wrongs against you...at least I assume so.
Many times you don't. I've got 2 deer out of 4 years of hunting them. And
they are innocent, but they're prey. Plain and simple.
> > They know everything about the land around them, and blend in very well.
>
> Well, they may be familiar with their surroundings, if that's what you mean.
They're more than familiar with their surroundings, believe me. I've seen a
huge buck with large antlers move through trees and brush without getting
caught up on anything once, and I takes me a good 15 minutes to go through the
same brush, getting snagged every step of the way. A good likening would be
this: I assume that you can walk through your house when it's dark and not
run into anything very often, yes? That's because you know your house. Well,
animals know the land even better than that. You believe that when you see it
happen (above deer, among countless other things).
-Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
149 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
