Hunting - horrifying to see 12 year old girls and grown men slaughtering animals and feeling

[patsimp]

powerful.

These are sociopaths and more. Disgusting that some will celebrate a smiling 12 year old posing beside the beautiful Giraffe she killed or the moron who killed a bear with a spear.

Disgusting cowards.

[EL34x4]

1. Thanks for sharing.

[mucifer]

2. I'm more horrified by eating factory farmed animals that are tortured their entire lives

It's all in how you look at it. Chickens and pigs that can literally barely move their entire lives and are killed very young.

These giraffes and bears got to enjoy life before they were killed.

To me hunting is less cruel than eating fast food. Just because you don't witness the torture doesn't mean the horrific suffering isn't happening. There is plenty of undercover video to prove it.

We all have choices in what we eat and what we wear.

[jonno99]

3. +1

[patsimp]

6. Hunters go into the habitant of their prey and murder animals who may be raising their children

I'm against the way animals are raised for slaughter and lead by my wallet there.

There are two issues and hunters are doing this for the love of killing animals. This is different than killing for food.

[citood]

7. My old boss was a trophy hunter

Went to Africa several times. Yes he was looking to put a trophy on the wall, but the meat is used as food. Apparently it was considered normal to allow the hunting guide's family to process the animal and sell the meat. Normally these hunting guides would just shoot the animals themselves for meat, but they've discovered they can make money by selling guided hunting trips.

[mucifer]

8. Then it really is much less cruel than what goes on here.

[patsimp]

9. so elephants, Giraffes, leopards, rhinos, tigers, lions are being killed by the locals for their

meat?

sorry - I find that very hard to believe.

[citood]

11. He never killed anything that big

There is a price for each type of animal, and a lion would cost tens of thousands of dollars. But no, the entire continent of Africa is not a wildlife preserve, and just as we hunt deer in this country, Africans hunt their local species....at least they used to. Now they charge westerners to hunt their local species.

[MiniMe]

14. One BIG difference, Deer are not an endangered species

And in general, carnivores are not good eating. I have no problem with hunting for food. It is hunting just to kill that bothers me

[patsimp]

19. deer are alive. how someone can look at a beautiful deer and then pull a trigger to kill it is

disgusting. they watch it die.

[MiniMe]

22. I don't hunt

And I don't like guns, but some of my relatives hunt deer. I don't like it much, but they do eat what they shoot. In the case of deer, I would rather see them shot by hunters than by a "thinning" of the herd.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

32. I understand the feeling, but the population explodes sometimes.

I've never hunted deer myself.

I drove across Ohio into Pennsylvania a few years ago and noticed, once I reached Eastern Ohio, what looked like red paint on the interstate about every mile or less. Sometimes it was dark red and other times it looked faded. I finally saw deer parts on one of the very dark red splotches and realized it was blood.

I later almost hit a large buck. I was driving a small car and that collision might've killed me.

When I returned home, I Googled it and saw reports that the deer populations in Eastern OH and Western PA were deemed to be out of control and more hunting was needed to bring the numbers way down.

[awoke_in_2003]

34. Are you vegan? nt

[Doremus]

47. Yes and I agree completely with #19. nt

[awoke_in_2003]

48. I can respect that opinion from a vegan

But not from a meat eater. We don't know which one #19 is

[Doremus]

50. Once upon a time I was an omni who shared #19's opinion.

The sentiment is still valid. Hunting was just as repulsive to me then as it is now. I didn't hunt then and I still don't.

I'm equally repulsed and horrified by factory farming practices. I stopped supporting it when I learned the truth. Hopefully the poster will come to the same realization.

[Mojorabbit]

52. My late husband was a bow hunter

He only took wild hogs and deer and he used almost every part. I would rather eat game that has had a free and wild life than hogs kept in crates where they cannot turn around. No time being fattened crowded into feed lots. Just my opinion. I also refuse to buy chicken raised in horrible conditions. I buy locally humanely raised poultry.

[NickB79]

63. I've raised baby chicks, piglets and calves from birth to slaughter. They were alive at one point

And yet we raise and kill them by the billions annually because people demand it at the supermarkets and restaurants.

At least those who hunt and/or butcher their own livestock have the guts to look at the animal before they kill it. I find it more disgusting when people bitch about "how can you kill such a beautiful creature?!?!" and then eat some fried chicken, hamburger or pork chops from an equally beautiful animal that was raised in a factory farm and likely died in a much more cruel fashion.

This is not the natural state of meat:

[Eleanors38]

27. Sometimes they are killed for crop/livestock destruction. Can you believe that?

Many animals -- esp. elephants -- consume huge amounts of crops, leaving local villages with the choice of running off or killing the animals (at great danger to themselves), or having safari outfits hunt the 'phants (in accordance with law) and affording better protection for the animals by putting them in a regulatory scheme. Many of these villages enjoy as well income from safari concession fees, salaries, supplies and the like. These payments go directly to villages, and not to central governments where the accounting is quite creative. Lions can be a big problem as well, endangering not only livestock, but humans as well.

Yes, locals often use the meat.

[LanternWaste]

41. While yet other times animals are killed merely for the entertainment killing brings.

While yet other times animals are killed merely for the entertainment killing brings, regardless of whether locals often use the meat or not...

[Eleanors38]

46. There are mixed reasons for hunting, adventure and "fun" among them. They are NOT disqualifiers.

They are honest emotions. Personally, I enjoy hunting. When it comes to pulling the trigger, I am fixated on a safe, clean shot which will bring the animal down in short order with no chance of escape, and not getting off to a pleasure. If the shot goes as planned, I am relieved, relaxed and happy. Then, the work begins, converting the animal to food fit for human consumption.

Hunting is an honest, natural and old practice dating back to our beginnings. Nothing wrong with that.

[Eleanors38]

54. No doubt some have little interest in he meat, but there is little evidence of waste...

either the hunter uses the meat, or the meat is distributed. I don't separate "fun," "pleasure," "entertainment," or "adventure" from the practical reasons for hunting. It is not either/or.

[saidsimplesimon]

51. Eleanor Roosevelt

is a woman to be admired. While I am well aware that she obtained a gun permit for protection, I have not read that she ever used a gun for hunting. Can you help me with a reference?

The book, “Casting Her Own Shadow: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Shaping of Postwar Liberalism,” quotes the Washington Herald’s Earl Miller as saying:

When ER became first lady, she refused Secret Service protection, insisting that she be able to travel as freely as possible. The agents complied with her wishes only after they discovered she knew how to shoot, and convincing her to carry a pistol when she drove alone. Intrigued by yet another example of ER’s independence, the press treated ER’s “packing” as front page news—especially after she nonchalantly remarked: “I carry a pistol, and I’m a fairly good shot.”

[Eleanors38]

53. I can't give you a source as to whether she hunted or not...

Even her biographers seem embarassed that such a lefty would pack a SD weapon. Little is known about her other gun-related activities, or no one is talking. I saw a pic of FDR in his chair, holding a long gun with a dead raccoon at his feet, and another writer said he kept a .32 handgun by his bed. Eleanor preferred a much more powerful Colt (most believe) in .38 Special. That weapon was used by a few for hunting, but is woefully under-powered for a reliable kill on large game. The main reason the .357 Magnum and the .44 Magnum ("make my day" fame) were developed was for use as a hand gun hunting weapon, up grades of the .38 Spl and .44 Spl, respectively.

[MicaelS]

29. Protein is a scare resource in Africa,

It does not go to waste. Except for predators...lions, tigers, hyenas, wild dogs, etc. When a big game hunter kills a game animal, the meat is butchered and either eaten there, or it goes to the local people. An elephant can feed a lot of people.

And deer in the US have to be culled one way or another, because wolves and other large predators are no longer around to keep them under control. The ironic situation is when people in suburban or rural area don't allow hunting, and since they have drive out the predators, the deer population explodes and they become a pest eating everything in sight. Including people yards.

[NickB79]

13. And farmers plow under the habitat and confine animals for slaughter

Which ultimately does far greater harm to the ecosystem than hunting does.

Hunters also do not typically hunt in the spring when females are raising young.

I was raised on a small family farm, and can say unequivocally that even livestock raised this way have it far worse than game that was hunted.

[Doremus]

49. I hear what you're saying but land development does far more damage to habitat than farming in our

area.

I swear, real estate developers are determined to seek out and destroy every last green leaf in this county. City councils fall all over themselves to give tax abatements and other incentives for millionaire developers to bring their next gated community or shopping mall to their city.

Local animals find food supplies harder if not impossible to access as more humans move in and complain about their costly plantings getting eaten. Within a few months city council decides to cull the menacing deer population, rinse, wash, repeat.

I hate human ignorance.

[NickB79]

66. I would disagree with that statement, in my experience.

If I had to choose between converting 1000 acres of land to either modern, industrial agriculture or a suburban housing development based solely upon what would be better for wildlife, I'd have to choose the housing development.

Modern farming is all about massive monocultures of corn and soy sustained by herbicides and pesticides. If you ever have the opportunity, take a walk through a cornfield. Look at the ground. It's nothing but bare dirt, with almost no weeds. No insects. No birds. No toads. No rodents. It's an ecological desert, despite the green, verdant color you see from a distance. The same goes for soybeans.

And while suburban development is also very bad for wildlife, it is less bad than modern farming. Suburban developments at least have flower beds, trees, landscaping, shrubs, the occasional vegetable garden, and storm runoff ponds here and there. It's a far, far cry from a native prairie or mature oak/basswood/maple forest, but in my experience living in both rural and suburban areas, you see more wildlife in suburbs than heavily developed farmland these days.

Of course, where you live may be different. Your area could still have a mix of mostly small farms, running diversified fields with woodlots and fencerow hedges and windbreaks like farmers did 50-60 years ago. That's what it was like where I grew up in central Minnesota in the 80's and 90's, and it was great. But where I currently live (southern MN, near the Twin Cities), the number of such farms decreases every year as suburban developments and industrial agriculture consume them

[Doremus]

69. I'd love them to plow under all the development here in the last 20 years

There aren't any factory farms that I'm aware of in a 20-mile radius. A few mom and pop farms, which as you noted, are becoming more and more scarce. When the food wars start we (or actually our progeny as I doubt we'll still be around) will be in for a world of hurt.

There is, however, an overabundance of residential and commercial development. First they sell the hardwood, if there is any old growth, and then send in the heavy equipment that makes the land look like a tsunami came through. Acres and acres and acres just destroyed, unabating, to the point where green space is becoming scarce.

It's nauseating and obscene. So, at least in our area, development is far worse for nothing more than its sheer volume.

[davekriss]

15. I absolutely agree!

There are 3 good reasons to be vegetarian (preferably vegan):

1. The creatures we eat are sentient creatures. They may not self-reflect, but they feel fear and terror and suffer just as we do. The compassionate thing to do is not contribute to that suffering.

2. It is more efficient to eat down the food chain, closer to the source (which is sunlight and green plants). The ecological footprint is a fraction of what it costs to eat the same calories from animal flesh.

3. It's far and away healthier.

[Eleanors38]

28. Respectfully, I take issue...

1) Prey animals have felt terror since other pre-human animals have preyed on them. "Contribution" to suffering an be lessened by the use of appropriate weaponry, and the knowledge of skilled use. Humans can be vegetarians, but they are predators as well, differing little from other predators in that basic instinct.

2) While some argument can be made by relative efficiencies when livestock is considered, eating wild animals through regulated hunting has little impact on ecological systems. Agricultural practices? Not so much. My killing a deer or two each year doesn't stack up to the damage done by farming which alters entire ecosystems. Note also that if eating, say, beef were prohibited, cattle would essentially go exinct in most areas because their site is self-defense skills have been bred out, and no rancher is going to let huge numbers of animals wipe out the "natural environment" waiting for that extinction.

3) Healh can be argued endlessly. I rarely eat beef, preferring the economy and natural nutrition of deer, gamebirds and squirrels.

[davekriss]

31. Thank you for your point of view

1) While it is true that prey animals have lived in terror since they first crawled out of the primordial goo, I am free to choose not to contribute to it. Call it a loving gesture to the universe for evolving a sense of compassion and choice.

Also I have almost no issue with hunting (though it's not for me). My post really was in response to the one above about the cruelty of factory farming. It is truly evil what these animals are subjected to before losing their lives to end up on our plates.

2) I can't agree to an argument that we should treat other feeling, sentient creatures to the cruelty of factory farming because it is efficient nor because they'd "go extinct in many areas" if we didn't enable their births and protect them for (in the case of cattle) the 6 to 9 months the factory farm lets them live.

You also actually didn't address the point in my second bullet, which is eating factory farm animal flesh is ecologically more costly than eating (even if only a lot more often) down the food chain. As a primer, let me suggest a documentary, Cowspiracy.

3) I also don't agree we could argue endlessly about the health benefits of vegetarianism over the fatty protein rich American diet. I acknowledge, though, that by eating deer you are eating a healthier meat (less hormones and antibiotics as well as less fat).

I would never hunt. Just not my style. But I neither intend to shame someone else for doing so nor tell them to stop. As long as they eat what they kill. A Buddhist author I read when a kid who was a meat eater pointed out that the universe seemed to stumble on the formula that to live means to kill. It's ok. But some of us choose not to participate in it.

(Another good primer: Forks over knives.)

[Eleanors38]

56. I appreciate your views as well, and tend to agree with you about livestock costs...

(hidden as usual) to the ecology. Most of livestock raising is subsidized, as well. The big feed lots and factory chickens is rather recent (we raised our own chickens and rabbits in the early 50s, but could not balance the books against 16¢/lb store-bought). But to this day, I know how to hot-dip a chicken, and to pluck then singe feathers off, before opening up the bird to extract everything, saving liver, heart, gizzard (and how to clean it), and oil sack for family meals. A few years ago, I resurrected those ancient arts when I unexpectedly killed a wild turkey. My hunting buddy was amazed when he saw that I had completed the plucking while he was getting prepared to help! All that was left was cleaning the gizzard and packing the Rio Grande Turkey into ice.

Animals taken in the wild are an efficient way to acquire and store high quality protein and minerals without either the chemistry or the harm to the ecology and public treasury, though admittedly if everyone returned to hunting, it would be unsustainable.

The big problem: How to feed everyone in the future without wrecking the ecology with Big Ag (both farming and animal ranching).

Thanks for the sources. Have you read "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" by Barbara Kingsolver?

[LWolf]

4. There are extremes in any group.

I live and teach rurally. About 60 percent of my students hunt with their families. They don't bring me pictures, although they do bring me pictures of other events in their lives. Every once in awhile, there are those who are gleeful for the kill, but they are not the norm. Neither is trophy hunting the norm.

For the rest, it's a family tradition. During the season, they often take Fridays and Mondays off, so that they have longer weekends to hunt. Many take whole weeks off, going out for 9 days. They camp. They learn outdoor skills. And, if they are both skillful and lucky, someone in the family will get a deer or an elk. It's rare for everyone to fill their tags, and often they go home empty-handed, which is a great disappointment, because that's one of the ways they provide meat for the winter.

I can guarantee that those students and their families are not sociopaths. They exhibit the normal range of human social-emotional capacity, including loving their pets and family, and exhibiting kindness and compassion for those around them.

Spending my professional time with them has been a growth experience for me, because I, too, am disgusted by the concept, let alone the reality, of killing for sport. I still am.

Seeing the family and cultural traditions up close, though, I've learned that, outside of those extremes, it's the tradition of self-sufficiency, of family and community, of feeding ourselves, and of love for the great outdoors that make the foundation, not the killing itself.

That large percent of hunters among my students? They all own their own guns, know how to disassemble them, clean them, assemble them, and shoot them safely. They don't bring them to school, they don't threaten people, and they don't shoot at things they aren't hunting.

I've had a single family outside of that norm, and those students were good people who made friends, not war, with all those around them. Their problem was their parents, survivalist types who raised them to think that firepower could solve any problem, and who were more than lax, to say the least, about teaching and supervision. We notified DHS repeatedly about unsafe conditions for these students. They never "found" anything when they visited, and never intervened, even after two predictable and life-threatening incidents, neither of which had anything to do with anyone trying to kill or injure animals or humans. In other words, the problem wasn't hunting. It was parental neglect.

[MohRokTah]

5. .

[ileus]

24. What gave it away...the "raising their children" part....LOL

[MicaelS]

25. Admit I am dense sometimes.

It finally got it.

[jcgoldie]

10. Trophy hunting is gross

But I don't think its quite right to lump all hunting together. I am a farmer and I do not allow hunting on my land, but I also teach high school and in this rural part of southern Illinois, hunting during deer season is a big family tradition. A lot of kids take off school for a day in deer season to hunt with their families. They almost always process the meat and they learn responsibility not disrespect for wildlife in my opinion. Without wolves and bears at the top of the chain, everything I have read suggests that these short deer seasons are an important wildlife management check on overpopulation of the species which would lead to starvation, habitat loss, and disease among the deer population.

[csziggy]

21. I have a small farm and for decades didn't allow hunting here

Over the years that I have owned my farm, the land around it has been developed, pushing the deer into a smaller area, Instead of the thousands of acres of hunting plantation land they used to roam, now the deer herd lives on my 60 acres, the 50 acres belonging to a neighbor and whatever suburban lawns they can graze.

Our small herd had gotten less and less healthy and the deer were not doing well at all. In 2008 a family started taking care of the farm for me and after a few years they talked with me about doing selective hunting to improve the health of our deer. They've only taken two or three deer since then. The observe the deer all year, pick one to remove from the herd and when it it hunting season they take that one.

Now our deer are much healthier. The limited hunting that is done is similar to what a wild predator might do - take out selected individuals.

One major advantage - with a healthier population, the deer are less vulnerable to opportunistic predators like the coyotes that sometimes show up. I used to see coyotes looking for sick deer or fawns whose mothers have left them because they couldn't get enough grazing. No more - the deer are much better able to defend themselves and the coyotes have moved on.

[Eleanors38]

30. Maybe you should reconsider what trophy hunting is to most people...

Just in terms of U.S. deer, the bucks with the biggest antlers are the oldest, meaning they have promiscuously spread their genes within their range, have neared the end of their reproductive capacity, and are essentially consuming forbes like a free all-you-can-eat buffet. They will be dead by other means very soon. Some think taking a trophy is an either/or proposition: Antlers OR meat. This is NOT the case as almost all hunters use the meat (it is the a LAW, btw). Increasingly, game laws are changing to antler restrictions and the practice of Quality Deer Management (QDM). This has allowed the number of potential Trophy bucks to increase

It takes a lot of work to take a trophy, but I share your concern that some trophies are killed on game ranches where "hunters" are led to feeders and given a chance to "shop," though even here the meat is used.

Several seasons ago I killed a big buck with 10 points, and saved the antlers. He was delicious. Biggest on that land, and my biggest.

And I have pics of him!

[Red Mountain]

58. A big rack isn't necessarily from an old deer

Just a mature one with good nutrition.

https://www.biggamelogic.com/ArticlesNews/tabid/136/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/308/Whitetail-Deer-Antler-Facts.aspx

From the link:
Many hunters believe that you can tell how old a whitetail deer is by the size of it's rack. This is not true. A bucks antler mass peaks around 5 to 8 years of age but the bigger determining factor for antler size is genetics and nutrition of the deer. The only reliable way to age a deer is the teeth.

[Eleanors38]

61. I agree. Antler restrictions are rather sloppy, but it beats "any buck" hunting.

Most places in Texas with restrictions have seen improvement in the number of deer with bigger racks (than before restrictions).

[Adrahil]

12. Let's make a differentiation between hunting and trophy hunting. NT

[Avalux]

17. There IS a difference.

My Dad is a hunter and has taught hunter safety courses for 30 years. He's also an environmentalist.

Growing up, we depended on venison to eat because we didn't have a lot of money. When my Dad brought home a deer that he tracked on the mountain (some years he didn't), it was a huge help. Sometimes we had wild rabbit, pheasant and quail too.

I'm a vegetarian now, but I don't disparage my Dad for hunting. I am also very proud of him for his dedication to teaching young people. If they're going to hunt, they need to know the right way to do so.

[Adrahil]

20. hear, hear.

My Sister and her family all hunt. I dont, but for them, hunting can mean the difference between having meat and not having meat.

[frankieallen]

16. If you kill a bear with a spear,

I wouldn't call that person a coward.

[patsimp]

18. go at it with bare hands if he's not a coward.

[beevul]

35. Trying to take down a bear with bare hands is not a display of lack of cowardice...

Trying to take down a bear with bare hands is not a display of lack of cowardice, its a display of abundant stupidity, as is the suggestion of doing so.

[patsimp]

36. and killing one is not sport - its disgusting

[beevul]

42. Thats your opinion.

What I posted in the post you're responding to, is objective fact.

[patsimp]

43. no that your opinion.

[Go Vols]

60. I never looked at it as a sport.

It was work.

[ileus]

23. My 11yo son just laid out a pound of ground venison.

He was talking about not being able to wait for hunting season to start. I'd told him we needed to empty the freezer before he could harvest another deer.

I'm a lot like you I don't care for hunting much these days, but instead love fishing. We actually kept 4 fish three weeks ago, we've probably caught close to 1000 each so far this year. It's been a good year fishing wise.


I'd love to get my daughter in the field but she's not about to get up early and go sit in the cold and wet for a chance to get a deer.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

26. K&R How about Trump defending hunting and killing endangered species?

TRUMP DEFENDS HUNTING ENDANGERED SPECIES
Teflon Don and his sons robustly defend their big game hunting and boast of numerous endangered elephants, leopards and other animals, they slaughtered in Zimbabwe.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3180201/Trump-defends-big-game-hunting-sons-shamed-Twitter-posing-trophy-kills-including-leopard-elephant-death-Cecil-lion.html#ixzz4AH7l68nn

[patsimp]

44. disgusting cowards

[sweetapogee]

33. our ancestors

were hunter/gatherers. I suspect some have this condition in their genetic make-up. But I could be mistaken.

[hollowdweller]

37. I think trophy hunting is silly

I just don't get it.

In fact I think hunting and not eating what you killed is somewhat unethical.

However I have no problem with hunting itself and hunting fosters an enjoyment of nature and also an undestanding of the importance of habitat.

Also even trophy hunting, if it allows some people to make a living from their land and avoid strip mining or development as a way of income I'm ALL FOR IT.

Us the the animals can always be replaced by more later but the land and topsoil and open space destruction are pretty much forever.

[Codeine]

38. Unless you're a vegan you don't get to complain.

Just because your meat comes in a tidy cellophane wrap on a styrofoam tray doesn't make it any less a dead animal. At least most hunted animals lead a pretty decent life prior to being blown away.

[jmg257]

39. Different experiences for different people. Such is life (and death) and how one relates to it all.

[Marengo]

40. What's the "more"?

[alarimer]

45. Are you aware that hunting licenses and equipment help pay for conservation?

Far more than hikers, for example, do.

And you may also be aware that, in most states, it is a fairly tightly regulated activity. In some cases (such as feral hogs) they are actually doing the habitat good. Not that we will ever eliminate feral pigs entirely, but they are incredibly disruptive.

[patsimp]

57. murdering animals is not jusfiable. And i haven't seen proof of this just hunters

who say it to justify their actions.

[MicaelS]

59. They don't have to justify it to you

Or anyone else, as long as they are following and obeying the law. Hunting is a legal activity, you don't like that, tough.

[jmg257]

62. Trying to justify it is silly...just say they like hunting

And there ya go!
Don't need some "better for the herd" excuses.

[NickB79]

64. Without the money hunters pay for land conservation, who do you think would conserve land?

Please, tell me how many dollars a year you pay towards habitat protection, or how many acres of land you've planted into native trees, shrubs and prairie?

Hunters do these things. They contribute hundreds of millions of dollars a year, through taxes on the guns, ammo, and shooting gear they buy. These were taxes the hunters and fishermen ASKED for; they were not forced upon them. They also contribute money and time directly by assisting in land conservation, invasive species removal, and species reintroduction where needed through non-profits.

Ducks Unlimited has protected 5 million acres of land: http://www.ducks.org/news-media/du-celebrates-more-than-5-million-acres-conserved-in-the-united-states

Pheasants Forever has protected 1.4 million acres: http://www.pheasantsforever.org/Newsroom/2015-January/Pheasants-Forever-Annual-Report-1-4-Million-Wildli.aspx

Trout Unlimited has protected 13 million acres of land: http://www.tu.org/conservation/conservation-opportunities/protect

There are also non-profits for whitetail deer, elk, quail, geese, bears, bass, walleye, you name it.

Your moral outrage would go over a lot better if you could show that you do some real, concrete investments to actually protect the habitat wildlife needs to survive. Hell, I was planting thousands of trees a year on our family farm, many that I grew myself from seed, when I was 15 years old; the carbon those trees has sequestered by now is likely in the thousands of tons, and the millions of acorns, walnuts and crabapples they produce every year keeps the wildlife fat and happy through our brutal Minnesota winters. I'm currently a member of the American Chestnut Foundation, and am hopeful that I'll get the chance to help replant this near-extinct species once blight-resistant seedlings are available so that it too can nourish the native wildlife like it did for millennia before.

[Orrex]

68. They'd be funded by smug self-righteousness, obviously.

Much more reliable than the thousands upon thousand of dollars produced by licensed hunting, obviously.

[AngryAmish]

55. Harambe

[GulfCoast66]

65. I love that we have vegans

In this country. It tells me we are a very rich and free society.

I hunt and fish and try to only eat meat that I know where it comes from. But I do enjoy a grain fed prime ribeye on occasion.

I am work friends with vegans. And like and respect them. And in our society eating meat is an option. And eating very much if it, especially beef, is not that healthy.

But never kid yourself. If your kid was starving you would happily ring a chickens neck or shoot a deer to feed them. Because in our hearts we are predators. Denying that is like denying evolution.

Have a great evening.

[Quantess]

67. I can't even look. I assume you mean "big game hunting" of endangered species

like tigers, lions, elephants. That is FUCKING DISGUSTING and DESPICABLE!!!

Hunting deer or gamebirds, well... at least the hunters eat the meat. I personally don't have a problem with it, although I would only do it if I were really hungry.

Those gross fucking trophy hunters don't even eat what they kill. They are the worst scumbags!!!

[Eleanors38]

70. You are in error:

"Those gross f------ trophy hunters don't even eat what they kill."

While some safari and domestic hunters do not eat the meat (some of it due to huge shipping costs), the meat is distributed to local folks who cannot readily acquire protein in quantity. Domestic hunters who kill "trophies" (a fluid term manipulated to the advantage of some anti-hunting folks) generally keep the meat; even those using game ranches often have the costs of field dressing, skinning, quartering and icing figured into the fees they pay for the hunt. The rest of us? We do it ourselves. When I hunt deer, I take a doe (if populations are too high) or the largest legal buck. Large antlers (trophies) mean the buck has contributed to the gene pool of local herds over numerous seasons. If he is aged, he is the prime candidate for bringing herds in balance as he no longer is reproducing, but consuming lots of resources (of no help to all species in the territory), and will soon die of starvation or from another predator. This predator does not mind being ahead in that line!

[bigwillq]

71. I see nothing wrong with hunting for food

Or are hunting for food where they donate the meat. Age shouldn't have anything to do with that.

But, yea, I agree, slaughtering giraffe and bear is gross---at any age.