Hunting vs. Endangered Hunting
Options
Replies
-
Just in conclusion to my previous statements, I had no desire to argue the ethical points of hunting, dietary preferences (omnivore/vegan) etc I just found the statement concerning "there are no cons to hunting" by a self-professed non-hunter to be both ignorant and arrogant...be you for or against hunting I am sure you can see the ridiculous nature of the statement.
Concerning the accidents I posted, yes accidents happen in every aspect of life no doubt about it! but I was just illustrating some very real cons to show the absurdity of the statement.
Personally I try to stay away from debates such as this as people have different moral/ethical codes that are driven by many factors be it emotional, logical etc.
Reminds me of what someone wrote on their feed the other day "You may have the right to an opinion, but I do not have to respect the opinion because you have the right to it!"
an accident is not a "con" to hunting. When you say pros or cons it is directly related to the hunting or killing of animals. Your saying there would be a con to driving a car is you would die in an accident. CMon dude.0 -
animal hunt each other, so they must be disgusting too
this is disgusting because he is hunting0 -
Even some animals such as the elephant need to be hunted in some areas. Take for example, Botswana. Elephants in that country are overpopulated, and not only destroy crops, but are deforesting the country. The elephants will come in huge herds, pushing over trees to eat the tender leaves near the top....then move on to push over more. They trample and destroy farmers' fields and villagers gardens. In these poverty stricken areas, a hunter comes in from the United States, or wherever, bringing a huge amount of money into the economy. They pay a license fee, they pay the outfitter, and the trackers, who are local. When they kill an elephant, that is usually selected specifically because of its destructive nature......they immediately pay another huge fee that goes into the local economy. (often in excess of $50,000) Then, the local people typically are allowed to skin the elephant and they use all of its flesh for food....food that they would not otherwise have. The hunter gets the trophy, the excitement of the chase, and the memories of the hunt, and the environment and the local economy is boosted because of it.
By this logic we should start hunting humans...aren't we the most destructive animals of all? We destroy much more of the enviroment than any other animal on the planet and push all the other species around as we please. Just playing devils advocate...
That actually might be a good sport. Have you ever read "The Most Dangerous Game"?0 -
It's fascinating the way people judge each other...
It really is. And I find it amazing that, in my personal experience with people I know first hand, the people that have the moral and ethical problems with kiling animals are the ones that support abortion and are pro-choice. Don't kill animals, but its ok to kill a child. It makes no sense at all to me....but to each his/her own I guess.
Now, pass the venison and lets go make out on my zebra rug......
I'm against killing animals but am absolutely pro-choice. I love animals, I really don't care about people or what they want/don't want to do to their offspring...it makes sense to me and I guess that's all that matters.
So, if I have kids, and decide I don't want them anymore, you think its ok to kill them? Just do not kill animals? O....K.
Backs slowly away.....
Pretty much...do what you want to your own kids...I really don't care. I like animals so I have compassion for them, I don't like most people therefore I don't care about them. I'm very aware that my opinion is an unpopular one but that's fine... I never asked anyone to agree with me or understand it.
how do you feel about infanticide in animals? e.g. lions or baboons killing the offspring of the pride/troop upon taking it over? Studies have shown that female baboons with infants experience a high level of stress and anxiety when an outsider male takes over the troop because she knows he's probably going to kill her baby.
I like primates generally, but I think baboons are evil little *****. I know they're not clever enough to know any better (but they are damn clever for a monkey species) but they are nasty and I'm really glad I'm not a baboon. I like how apes, humans and bonobos especially, have evolved compassion and empathy, in spite of having a common ancestor with baboons.0 -
It's fascinating the way people judge each other...
It really is. And I find it amazing that, in my personal experience with people I know first hand, the people that have the moral and ethical problems with kiling animals are the ones that support abortion and are pro-choice. Don't kill animals, but its ok to kill a child. It makes no sense at all to me....but to each his/her own I guess.
Now, pass the venison and lets go make out on my zebra rug......
I'm against killing animals but am absolutely pro-choice. I love animals, I really don't care about people or what they want/don't want to do to their offspring...it makes sense to me and I guess that's all that matters.
So, if I have kids, and decide I don't want them anymore, you think its ok to kill them? Just do not kill animals? O....K.
Backs slowly away.....
Pretty much...do what you want to your own kids...I really don't care. I like animals so I have compassion for them, I don't like most people therefore I don't care about them. I'm very aware that my opinion is an unpopular one but that's fine... I never asked anyone to agree with me or understand it.
I have a feeling we will be seeing you on the national news some day.....
Unlikely, I have no desire to go out and murder people but if you want to think I'm insne go right ahead...that's your opinion afterall (:0 -
Just in conclusion to my previous statements, I had no desire to argue the ethical points of hunting, dietary preferences (omnivore/vegan) etc I just found the statement concerning "there are no cons to hunting" by a self-professed non-hunter to be both ignorant and arrogant...be you for or against hunting I am sure you can see the ridiculous nature of the statement.
Concerning the accidents I posted, yes accidents happen in every aspect of life no doubt about it! but I was just illustrating some very real cons to show the absurdity of the statement.
Personally I try to stay away from debates such as this as people have different moral/ethical codes that are driven by many factors be it emotional, logical etc.
Reminds me of what someone wrote on their feed the other day "You may have the right to an opinion, but I do not have to respect the opinion because you have the right to it!"
an accident is not a "con" to hunting. When you say pros or cons it is directly related to the hunting or killing of animals. Your saying there would be a con to driving a car is you would die in an accident. CMon dude.
but that is one of the major cons of driving a car... the possibility of being in an accident..... cons don't mean "never do something because of this" they mean "possible negative thing that you may have to take steps to avoid" - as in I drive a car regularly but it has an airbag and I always wear my seatbelt, and I always check my blind spots and stuff like that, you know, to reduce the risk of dying in an accident...0 -
Hey kids.. here is a little fun fact.
Here in America (as someone else pointed out, that is what we are talking about), most grocery stores have a three day supply of food.
What this means to you and me is that, if for some reason, the trucks stopped delivering food, the stores would be empty in three days.
Right now, in America, about 2% of the population is in the agriculture industry.
They can keep eating.
The other 98% of us (myself included) are kinda screwed.
There are a group of people out there who know how to hunt and/or garden so, they are in a better position then those who have no choice but to rely on the grocery store.
I am not a hunter. I do not like killing animals and this included spiders and cochroaches.
With that said, I did take a safe hunders course here in Florida and I am very much looking forward to going on my first hog hunt.
I believe it is the duty of every family head to provide for his family and I will be damned if my family is going to starve to death because I never took the time to learn a skill that is becoming a lost art.0 -
Even some animals such as the elephant need to be hunted in some areas. Take for example, Botswana. Elephants in that country are overpopulated, and not only destroy crops, but are deforesting the country. The elephants will come in huge herds, pushing over trees to eat the tender leaves near the top....then move on to push over more. They trample and destroy farmers' fields and villagers gardens. In these poverty stricken areas, a hunter comes in from the United States, or wherever, bringing a huge amount of money into the economy. They pay a license fee, they pay the outfitter, and the trackers, who are local. When they kill an elephant, that is usually selected specifically because of its destructive nature......they immediately pay another huge fee that goes into the local economy. (often in excess of $50,000) Then, the local people typically are allowed to skin the elephant and they use all of its flesh for food....food that they would not otherwise have. The hunter gets the trophy, the excitement of the chase, and the memories of the hunt, and the environment and the local economy is boosted because of it.
By this logic we should start hunting humans...aren't we the most destructive animals of all? We destroy much more of the enviroment than any other animal on the planet and push all the other species around as we please. Just playing devils advocate...
then please stop using every road and utility you own and move into a secluded place. I guess i am the ultimate devil then, I design new roads and utilities that go through and destroy trees and vegetation to construct these.0 -
Just in conclusion to my previous statements, I had no desire to argue the ethical points of hunting, dietary preferences (omnivore/vegan) etc I just found the statement concerning "there are no cons to hunting" by a self-professed non-hunter to be both ignorant and arrogant...be you for or against hunting I am sure you can see the ridiculous nature of the statement.
Concerning the accidents I posted, yes accidents happen in every aspect of life no doubt about it! but I was just illustrating some very real cons to show the absurdity of the statement.
Personally I try to stay away from debates such as this as people have different moral/ethical codes that are driven by many factors be it emotional, logical etc.
Reminds me of what someone wrote on their feed the other day "You may have the right to an opinion, but I do not have to respect the opinion because you have the right to it!"
an accident is not a "con" to hunting. When you say pros or cons it is directly related to the hunting or killing of animals. Your saying there would be a con to driving a car is you would die in an accident. CMon dude.
but that is one of the major cons of driving a car... the possibility of being in an accident..... cons don't mean "never do something because of this" they mean "possible negative thing that you may have to take steps to avoid" - as in I drive a car regularly but it has an airbag and I always wear my seatbelt, and I always check my blind spots and stuff like that, you know, to reduce the risk of dying in an accident...
ok.0 -
those hunts are super regulated, cost a ton of money, the money goes back to help the environment fpr those animals, helps fight poaching, all the meat is donated to the local population....they usually take place on a reserve that needs to cut back the population for whatever reason...the biologist in the area makes these calls
this type of hunt ensures that the animal will never be extinct .....stop listening to the extremists....
poaching is the number one threat to an animal becoing extinct not hunting0 -
Hey kids.. here is a little fun fact.
Here in America (as someone else pointed out, that is what we are talking about), most grocery stores have a three day supply of food.
What this means to you and me is that, if for some reason, the trucks stopped delivering food, the stores would be empty in three days.
Right now, in America, about 2% of the population is in the agriculture industry.
They can keep eating.
The other 98% of us (myself included) are kinda screwed.
There are a group of people out there who know how to hunt and/or garden so, they are in a better position then those who have no choice but to rely on the grocery store.
I am not a hunter. I do not like killing animals and this included spiders and cochroaches.
With that said, I did take a safe hunders course here in Florida and I am very much looking forward to going on my first hog hunt.
I believe it is the duty of every family head to provide for his family and I will be damned if my family is going to starve to death because I never took the time to learn a skill that is becoming a lost art.
well said ...bravo0 -
Hey kids.. here is a little fun fact.
Here in America (as someone else pointed out, that is what we are talking about), most grocery stores have a three day supply of food.
What this means to you and me is that, if for some reason, the trucks stopped delivering food, the stores would be empty in three days.
Right now, in America, about 2% of the population is in the agriculture industry.
They can keep eating.
The other 98% of us (myself included) are kinda screwed.
There are a group of people out there who know how to hunt and/or garden so, they are in a better position then those who have no choice but to rely on the grocery store.
I am not a hunter. I do not like killing animals and this included spiders and cochroaches.
With that said, I did take a safe hunders course here in Florida and I am very much looking forward to going on my first hog hunt.
I believe it is the duty of every family head to provide for his family and I will be damned if my family is going to starve to death because I never took the time to learn a skill that is becoming a lost art.
well said0 -
It's fascinating the way people judge each other...
It really is. And I find it amazing that, in my personal experience with people I know first hand, the people that have the moral and ethical problems with kiling animals are the ones that support abortion and are pro-choice. Don't kill animals, but its ok to kill a child. It makes no sense at all to me....but to each his/her own I guess.
Now, pass the venison and lets go make out on my zebra rug......
I'm against killing animals but am absolutely pro-choice. I love animals, I really don't care about people or what they want/don't want to do to their offspring...it makes sense to me and I guess that's all that matters.
So, if I have kids, and decide I don't want them anymore, you think its ok to kill them? Just do not kill animals? O....K.
Backs slowly away.....
Pretty much...do what you want to your own kids...I really don't care. I like animals so I have compassion for them, I don't like most people therefore I don't care about them. I'm very aware that my opinion is an unpopular one but that's fine... I never asked anyone to agree with me or understand it.
how do you feel about infanticide in animals? e.g. lions or baboons killing the offspring of the pride/troop upon taking it over? Studies have shown that female baboons with infants experience a high level of stress and anxiety when an outsider male takes over the troop because she knows he's probably going to kill her baby.
I like primates generally, but I think baboons are evil little *****. I know they're not clever enough to know any better (but they are damn clever for a monkey species) but they are nasty and I'm really glad I'm not a baboon. I like how apes, humans and bonobos especially, have evolved compassion and empathy, in spite of having a common ancestor with baboons.
It's nature. I feel bad about people killing animals..we can choose not to. Other animals are going to kill eachother be it for food or other reasons, it's part of nature and I can accept that.0 -
I disagree with endangered hunting.
However, there is nothing wrong with hunting for food or overpopulation.
Saying it's arrogant and disgusting is quite ignorant, arrogant in itself, and bigoted. Also calling it murder is equivocation.You don't want to hunt and can't stomach it, don't hunt.
Also it is quite insane to not have consideration or caring for your own species considering. It is always going to be your species that takes care of you. For most people it's almost biologically ingrained that between one species and your own, your species comes first You might have dogs and cats that exist because they are can be related and helpful. That's not arrogance in fact an abuse of the word.It's common practice Not every member is going to rainbow and sunshine.
^Comment above that isn't true for everyone. Unless, I need to remind you of hunter gather groups and the fact unlike you and I who can say let's stop screwing/put on a condom/use BC. If disease breaks out, we can find the source and quarentine so that it doesn't kill off our species. For animals once, a virus or disease starts spreading there is no stopping it. Unless, there is outside intervention.
Also, we're apart of nature. We might have made it somewhat away from the food chain. However, nature still effects us. While we're dependent somewhat, nature is a bit of a psycho*****. All animals work to survive said psycho*****. We're still trying to survive said psycho*****.
I'm not saying everything we do is good. We have made mistakes that have either shot us in the foot, other species in the foot, or even both. The thing is we can fix our mistakes I'm just saying nature is a pyscho*****.0 -
Even some animals such as the elephant need to be hunted in some areas. Take for example, Botswana. Elephants in that country are overpopulated, and not only destroy crops, but are deforesting the country. The elephants will come in huge herds, pushing over trees to eat the tender leaves near the top....then move on to push over more. They trample and destroy farmers' fields and villagers gardens. In these poverty stricken areas, a hunter comes in from the United States, or wherever, bringing a huge amount of money into the economy. They pay a license fee, they pay the outfitter, and the trackers, who are local. When they kill an elephant, that is usually selected specifically because of its destructive nature......they immediately pay another huge fee that goes into the local economy. (often in excess of $50,000) Then, the local people typically are allowed to skin the elephant and they use all of its flesh for food....food that they would not otherwise have. The hunter gets the trophy, the excitement of the chase, and the memories of the hunt, and the environment and the local economy is boosted because of it.
By this logic we should start hunting humans...aren't we the most destructive animals of all? We destroy much more of the enviroment than any other animal on the planet and push all the other species around as we please. Just playing devils advocate...
Ironically, it's the few remaining hunter-gatherer populations that do the least amount of environmental damage and who have the most sustainable lifestyles. Hunter-gathering has been proven to be the most long lasting ecological strategy, neanderthals and their ancestors lived for 600,000+ years as hunter-gatherers in Europe... Homo erectus lasted over a million years... Homo sapiens only evolved 160,000 years ago and lived exclusively as hunter-gatherers until 10,000 years ago..... and in less than 10,000 years, non-hunter-gatherer Homo sapiens have done a huge amount of damage to the environment and need to make some pretty drastic changes if they're to stand any chance of lasting as long as earlier human species.
so by that logic, maybe we should ban agriculture and industry and only allow hunting and gathering as a means to get food, and let natural selection take care of the overpopulation........
(not really suggesting this, just playing devil's advocate)0 -
Just in conclusion to my previous statements, I had no desire to argue the ethical points of hunting, dietary preferences (omnivore/vegan) etc I just found the statement concerning "there are no cons to hunting" by a self-professed non-hunter to be both ignorant and arrogant...be you for or against hunting I am sure you can see the ridiculous nature of the statement.
Concerning the accidents I posted, yes accidents happen in every aspect of life no doubt about it! but I was just illustrating some very real cons to show the absurdity of the statement.
Personally I try to stay away from debates such as this as people have different moral/ethical codes that are driven by many factors be it emotional, logical etc.
Reminds me of what someone wrote on their feed the other day "You may have the right to an opinion, but I do not have to respect the opinion because you have the right to it!"
an accident is not a "con" to hunting. When you say pros or cons it is directly related to the hunting or killing of animals. Your saying there would be a con to driving a car is you would die in an accident. CMon dude.
pros and cons
noun
the favorable and the unfavorable factors or reasons; advantages and disadvantages.
Getting accidentally shot would be an unfavorable outcome of hunting ergo Con! or getting in car accident is also a con...why they invented seat-belts and airbags. I am not saying it will happen but it does happen on occasion...I would conclude that accidents do happen hunting as I have illustrated, I am sure actual hunters would agree this is a reality since they have been known to wear safety vests, have safety instructors etc to minimize this from happening. So yes it is a con of hunting.
I am out, clearly you are vested in the idea that your statement was not ridiculous.0 -
there are quite a few hunter-gatherer populations remaining in some remote parts of the world - in a lot of cases their entire way of life is under threat, including by narrow-minded conservationists that want to ban all humans from hunting. Never mind that they've hunted sustainably in the places they live for tens of thousands of years.
I seriously object to your blanket statements about hunters. Just because you knew a bunch of hunters that did stuff you didn't like doesn't mean they're all like that.
I don't agree with hunting for trophy only if the meat is not going to be eaten, or if it's not necessary for conservation (e.g. culling populations to prevent overpopulation, which will in the end harm the very population you're culling) or protecting other populations (e.g. killing a wolf that's done unprovoked attacks on humans). But that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with ecologically sustainable hunting for food, whether you're from a hunter-gatherer population or an agricultural or industrial population. So to answer the question regarding endangered species - if it's likely to lead to an animal's extinction, then no, because that's not sustainable.
Also, hunted meat v farmed meat... I don't see much difference except that you know the wild animal lived free for its whole life instead of in a farm... there are plenty of farms that treat their animals humanely as well as many that don't. So I'm not against farmed meat either, but farmers do have a responsibility to treat animals ethically. And while I respect the choices of people as individuals who choose to be vegetarian, it's not possible for the whole world to go vegetarian. Humans are omnivores, not herbivores.
I have heard all his before and do not care
at all
my blanket statement is how I feel and it will never change hunting as it is especially in North America (which is the kind of hunting being discussed in this thread) is arrogant , pathetic and disgusting
So...you'd rather animals die of disease, and both animals and humans die of starvation?
While I agree that trophy hunting for its own sake is stupid, wasteful, and, frankly, d*ckish, the bulk of hunting that goes on in North America is actually for conservation purposes, including population control, since we no longer have sufficient apex predators such as cougars and wolves to keep most of the populations healthy. Not doing so results in the slow and painful deaths of the very animals you claim to care about, from disease and starvation.
Most of the people who hunt do so to feed themselves or others, no different from any other animal. I personally know several people who have made it through the year pretty much solely from hunting, my own family included. But go ahead and enjoy the privilege you have to be able to be a vegan and not have to worry about starving.0 -
can you link me to all the studies on this? I'm really interested in this topic, usually in relation to humans, human ancestors and species that are closely related to humans but I'm also interested in the topic generally. I've not seen any specific studies in sentience on apes, just a whole lot on language and other aspects of cognition. I've seen scientific discussions on the question of awareness of life and death - mostly related to archaeological evidence for deliberate burial and ritual disposal of the dead in early human species.... and chimpanzees and bonobos grieve for dead loved ones (some real tearjerker clips on you tube of mother chimpanzees and bonobos parting with dead infants
) and recognise each other as individuals (I think most higher primates recognise each other as individuals).... but nothing specific on sentience that I can recall (maybe it was covered at uni and I forgot about it..)
anyway I'm genuinely curious about this (I know stuff gets misconstrued on the internet and usually people ask for research papers to make someone prove a point when debating, but I'm really just very curious and not trying to argue at all)
LOL, I'm a few years out of my graduate studies as well and this isn't my specific field, not to mention I don't have direct access to the journals the way I did when I was still at UCLA but here's what I've been able to dig up over my lunch break:
This one seems especially apropos to the discussion of the use of domesticated animals but I can't claim to be familiar with the journal it is published in:
http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/article/S0168-1591(09)00039-2/abstract?cc=y=?cc=y=
The abstract on this one cracks me up, wish I still got this journal. We can't even agree on what constitutes "behavior" so trying to establish a working definition for sentience is problematic to say the least. I tend to stick with the mirror test but....
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347209001730
Behavioural biologists do not agree on what constitutes behaviour
Animal Behaviour, Volume 78, Issue 1, July 2009, Pages 103-110
And crap, this one came out since I left school, Nooooooo!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347209003571
Pigs learn what a mirror image represents and use it to obtain information
Animal Behaviour, Volume 78, Issue 5, November 2009, Pages 1037-1041
I can't get full text on these from here, but if you know how clue me in because I want to read them myself, but Animal Behavior is one of the leading journals for this field so they should be good.0 -
Right now, in America, about 2% of the population is in the agriculture industry.
They can keep eating.
The other 98% of us (myself included) are kinda screwed.
Yep.
I lived in Houston when Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the Gulf Coast. After Rita, it was 2 weeks before the grocery stores were fully stocked again, and people were breaking into homes to steal FOOD. This is no joke. People will do crazy things when they feel like their ability to maintain their current quality of life is threatened. That's nothing compared to what would happen if people's actual survival were threatened.
It's easy to sit on the throne of moral absolutism and act like you're better than hunters when you can drive to Whole Foods and buy a rotisserie chicken. It's not so funny when there's no chicken left and you don't know where your next meal is coming from.0 -
can you link me to all the studies on this? I'm really interested in this topic, usually in relation to humans, human ancestors and species that are closely related to humans but I'm also interested in the topic generally. I've not seen any specific studies in sentience on apes, just a whole lot on language and other aspects of cognition. I've seen scientific discussions on the question of awareness of life and death - mostly related to archaeological evidence for deliberate burial and ritual disposal of the dead in early human species.... and chimpanzees and bonobos grieve for dead loved ones (some real tearjerker clips on you tube of mother chimpanzees and bonobos parting with dead infants ) and recognise each other as individuals (I think most higher primates recognise each other as individuals).... but nothing specific on sentience that I can recall (maybe it was covered at uni and I forgot about it..)
anyway I'm genuinely curious about this (I know stuff gets misconstrued on the internet and usually people ask for research papers to make someone prove a point when debating, but I'm really just very curious and not trying to argue at all)
LOL, I'm a few years out of my graduate studies as well and this isn't my specific field, not to mention I don't have direct access to the journals the way I did when I was still at UCLA but here's what I've been able to dig up over my lunch break:
This one seems especially apropos to the discussion of the use of domesticated animals but I can't claim to be familiar with the journal it is published in:
http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/article/S0168-1591(09)00039-2/abstract?cc=y=?cc=y=
The abstract on this one cracks me up, wish I still got this journal. We can't even agree on what constitutes "behavior" so trying to establish a working definition for sentience is problematic to say the least. I tend to stick with the mirror test but....
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347209001730
Behavioural biologists do not agree on what constitutes behaviour
Animal Behaviour, Volume 78, Issue 1, July 2009, Pages 103-110
And crap, this one came out since I left school, Nooooooo!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347209003571
Pigs learn what a mirror image represents and use it to obtain information
Animal Behaviour, Volume 78, Issue 5, November 2009, Pages 1037-1041
I can't get full text on these from here, but if you know how clue me in because I want to read them myself, but Animal Behavior is one of the leading journals for this field so they should be good.
thanks
that's really interesting
I don't know how to get the full text either... I'm forever looking at abstracts.... it depends on the journal, some make the full text available after a certain amount of time has passed. but for the newer studies, I don't think you can without a subscription or being in a computer suite of a university that has a subscription for student access to the journals0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions