Animals that are the cause of emotional strife when hunted.

I've found that there are some animals that cause controversy when hunted due to purely emotional issues and the lack of education about the species.

Here are the ones I find cause the most strife.

1. Elephant

2. Wolf

3. Zebra

4. Giraffe

Here are some basic facts about each species mentioned. I'd like your take on them as well.

1. Elephant, usually folks who are anti elephant hunting have the false belief that elephants are on the brink of extinction. While that is true in certain regions non of those places allow the hunting of elephants. And in fact elephants in most of Southern Africa are quite the opposite. They are in fact beyond healthy in numbers and badly over populated in many areas. Sport hunting of elephants brings in vital funds that are needed to maintain their habitat. Without sport hunting elephants suffer greatly as all of the countries who have banned sport hunting have found out.

2. Wolves, create an emotional reaction that I find very curious. People will gladly smack any and all of their smaller cousins the coyote but get all mushy and sentimental over the wolf. There are many places where wolves need to be hunted for conservation reasons. Why is it that the coyote is considered an enemy but the wolf is the untouchable version thereof?

3. Zebra, are you kidding me? Nope I've caught plenty of flack right here in THR for posting pictures of zebra I've killed. Folks have a warm mushy spot for the pajama donkey for some reason. I think it's that they remind folks of horses and there have been so many cute animated versions of them on cartoons. Keep in mind that the Zebra was pretty much put on this planet to provide food for apex predators as far as a can tell. I can't tell you how many times I've been invited to various farms in South Africa to come and help cull of extra zebra. Just like horses to many zebra are not a good thing for the surrounding land. Zebra can be really challenging to hunt too.

4. Giraffe, hey they appear to be cute gentle critters and they have buttery brown eyes and long eye lashes I agree they are about the most gentle looking critter there is. But then again have any of you ever been around a hand raised deer? Same same they are just as cute and gentle but guys go out and swat them at any chance with no issues what so ever. Why the diff? Most folks who own or manage wildlife bearing property in Africa have a need from time to time to cull out a few of the older bulls. If there is one critter I've been asked to please shoot more than any other while in Africa it's an old giraffe bull also known as a "stink bull". I guess they get to be a PITA when they get old and grumpy. Come on tell the truth is it the buttery brown eyes and long lashes that set your heart strings to strumming?:D

I think the Prairie Dog causes way more emotional strife than any of the animals on your list. I can't believe you're from Colorado and didn't list them. :D

Following Prairie Dogs, I get the most flak from my liberal acquaintences about these animals:

1. Wolf (agreeing with you)
2. Elk
3. Buffalo
4. Any animal I shoot but don't eat

Very rarely do I get into a discussion about hunting zebra, giraffe or elephant.

Any animal I shoot but don't eat


How many times have I heard that one right here on good old THR over the years!?!

I think baboons also.

And snakes. Why some people give poisonous snakes a pass is beyond me.

well, I will probably not be very popular on this thread since I actually have personal objections to hunting certain animals. But being one of "THEM", I guess i am more qualified to comment on this than some of the other THR members.

First off, full disclosure: a few years ago I decided to give up eating all mammals. I only eat birds and fish. I suppose I would be ok with eating cold blooded reptiles and amphibians but I havn't really given it much thought

First of all, I do not think it very ethical to hunt for pleasure, things that you are not going to eat. The obvious exception is animals that become a nuisance or infestation. In this case, there is no choice. the animal population must be reduced. Preferrably the meat would be utilized but this is not always practical.

Now, there are some animals that are not sensible to use for food. Animals that are known to carry diseases that can be spread to humans would not be very ideal food for humans. Such animals would be scavengers that scavenge in unclean places, that eat sick or diseased or dying animals. Rats for instance, or buzzards.

What meat would nearly ALL people agree should be off limits as food? Lets make a list.

how about people? people should not eat people correct? Lets expand the list from this starting point.

people
apes
monkeys

I don't think anyone would object to the above 3 being placed "off limits" as food. What else? How about we take a look at the bible and religious views and analyze the traditional rules of meat as food. The bible says "cloven hoof animals that chew their cud" are ok to use as food. why would the bible say this? Well, I think I know. The safest meat to eat is that of animals that eat the least contaminated food and that have metabolisms most different from our own. The most likely place to get a disease in nature is by eating an animal that has a disease. Therefore, the more carnivorous an animal is, the greater the odds that animal will end up with a disease of some kind. Obviously then, we should not eat the flesh of a flesh-eater. What animals are the least carnivorous of all? that would be animals that eat grass and very little else. The only way a mammal can metabolize grass is via multi chambered stomachs with the appropriate microbes for breaking down cellulose. These are ruminates and they chew their cud. These include cattle, bison, sheep, goats, deer, and maybe horses and camels. I'm not very knowledgeable about the gut functions of camels and horses. Camels and horses do not meet the cloven hoof requirement in the bible however. I do not know the purpose of this requirement as outlined in the bible. I can't even guess. So I will ignore it for now since I'm not all that religious.

Pigs do not chew their cud. This is the origin of the jewish and muslim prohibition of pork products. this pig prohibition then does seem to have sensible origins. Ok, what else? Hindus have a prohibition on beef. This prohibition does not seem to have any origins in health and safety however. It appears to be strictly from the belief that cows are a superior species of some kind. So it is a moral issue with hindus and not a health issue. Ok, lets put that aside for now, maybe the hindu prohibition isn't as sensible as the jewish/muslim prohibition on pork.

Ok, what else? I would say that people should not eat anything that is highly useful or intelligent or a friend of mankind. That would be horses and dogs obviously. Ok, so horses have two reasons for not being used as food. One is that they are very useful, and the other is they don't meet the cloven hoof requirement in the bible. Dogs are considered unclean by muslims. There's two reasons to not eat dogs. A third and fourth reason to not eat dogs(or canines in general) is that they are carnivores and they are highly intelligent.

now, here's a couple that I came up with on my own. Certain physical attributes to me are just too darn similar to humans for me to ignore. One is plantigrade paws/feet. The other is having only two breasts on the pectoral muscles like a human. elephants have breasts in the human-like location. So do bears. Bears also have plantigrade feet. I find the idea of eating bear meat repulsive...almost as repulsive as eating a gorilla or a chimpanzee.

One more thing to think about...cardio health. It is a well established fact that red meat somehow leads to increased risk of cardio disease. Since heart attacks run in my family, I have chosen to eliminate all red meat. Fish appears to increase cardio health somehow. It doesn't matter how or why, just that it is fact.

Alright, that pretty much covers everything about using meat as food...so there are two animals americans eat that may be in contradiction with common sense depending on your views of "common sense". those are pigs and bear.

There is still the issue of population control and nuisance animals. Wild pigs are a problem and they must be killed. Wild elephants are a problem in africa and some of those must be killed. I don't know that wild bear are a problem. I think they are not, but if there was no hunting of them, they certainly would become a problem. So even though I don't think people should be eating these animals, I recognize they need to be thinned out in the wild.

Personally, I shoot animals that I don't eat primarily because they are problematic. Prairie dogs are problematic, likewise coyotes, rats, sparrows and a number of others. With that said, I believe prairie dog meat is quite popular in Argentina. I choose to eradicate them, but not eat them myself.

As far as what I wouldn't eat ...

If I was a member of the Donner Party, I'd eat human flesh. If I was in China or Indonesia and offered monkey brain stew, I'd most likely eat it. I've eaten some things that many people wouldn't want to hear about and I wouldn't rule out much in order to survive.

Human flesh on a daily basis ... no. Monkey brains for breakfast every morning ... probably not. But if it came down to eat these things or starve to death ... sure.

Remo, contrary to your statement, "It is a well established fact that red meat somehow leads to increased risk of cardio disease," it is NOT a well-established fact. My wife is a dietitian and we receive any number of scientific journals in our household every month - many of which have studies related to the linking of certain foods to certain disease states. At best, it is a hotly contested hypothesis that consuming red meat has a correlation (not a causal effect) to heart disease. Nor is it a "fact" that fish improves cardiovascular health.

If you choose to eat - or not eat - certain meats because of your own personal preference, I'm fully in support of it. However, there are very, very few FACTS when it comes to causal relationships between certain foods and disease states.

From a Biblican perspective, the Old Testiment laid our a number of "eat this, not that" laws for the Israelites. However, Peter was specifically instructed, in the New Testament, that nothing should be deemed unclean - all animals were OK to eat.

Well, most women don't have a problem with shooting snakes. ;)

That being said, hunting in general is bound to stir up some complaints from people who have no idea about modern wildlife management or the reasons for it. We simply cannot have the large number of top-level predators like wolves that would exist naturally in nature. Why? Because they kill far more than wildlife and, in fact, pose a real risk to humans as well. And without these top-level predators, we have to take their place to avoid overpopulation of other species.

in the days the bible was written... they dind't have overpopulations of wild hogs screwing up everyone's deer hunting.


end of story.... so it is written, so it shall be. :D


if you really want to look at the biblical sense, didn't God put man over animals? Their lives aren't as important as mine. They don't have a soul... they are here for our use.

I'm nto saying go out and indistriminantly kill for no reason, but coyotes have to eat.... buzzards have to eat. If I kill a few pigs now and then, and leave them laying somewhere, it doesn't make me unethical.

pajama donkey

I just learned somthing new...Mt. Dew coming out the nose is rather painful.

I suppose I would be ok with eating cold blooded reptiles and amphibians but I havn't really given it much thought

FYI: Spring Lizard is about the nastiest thing you could ever try eating! Given the option of srping lizards or pinenuts, I'll opt for the pinenuts!

I can't believe nobody has mentioned big cats.

I have no desire to shoot anything just for the hell of it. That includes zebras , elephants, and giraffes. I will shoot a wolf if given the legal opportunity because they have hurt my elk hunting.

I'm in the if you don't want to eat it and it is not causing you any problems why would you want to shoot it camp myself.

But, if a man wants to shoot an elephant legally I don't see what business it is of mine. These threads where somebody is trying to justify why they feel this way or that and ridicule anybody who feels differently are a curiosity to me.

By far the biggest knee jerk reactions come about with the mention of feral cats and dogs.


If your list started with elephant at 3 I'd agree 100%

These are ruminates and they chew their cud. These include cattle, bison, sheep, goats, deer, and maybe horses and camels. I'm not very knowledgeable about the gut functions of camels and horses. Camels and horses do not meet the cloven hoof requirement in the bible however.

Remo,

More info on camels for you..

"Camelids are large animals with slender necks and long legs, and are strictly herbivorous. Camelids differ from true ruminants in a number of ways. Their dentition shows traces of vesitigial central incisors in the upper jaw, and the third incisors are developed into canine-like tusks. Camelids also have true canine teeth and tusk-like premolars which are separated from the molars by a gap. The musculature of the hind limbs differs from those of other ungulates by the fact that the legs are attached to the body at the top of the thigh only, rather than attached by skin and muscle from the knee downwards. Because of this, camelids have to lie down by resting on their knees with their legs tucked underneath the body.[1] They have a three-chambered rather than a four-chambered digestive tract, an upper lip that is split in two with each part separately mobile, and uniquely among mammals, elliptical red blood cells. They also have a unique type of antibodies lacking the light chain, in addition to the normal antibodies found in other mammals. These so-called heavy-chain antibodies are being used to develop single-domain antibodies with potential pharmaceutical applications.
They do not have hooves, rather a two-toed foot with toenails and a soft footpad (Tylopoda is Latin for "padded foot"). The main weight of the animal is borne by these tough, leathery sole-pads. The South American camelids, adapted to steep and rocky terrain, can move the pads on their toes to maintain grip.[2] Many fossil camelids were unguligrade and probably hooved, in contrast to all living species.[3]"

You are correct that horses are not ruminants.

I hear lots of ignorant people complain about the hunting any animal. Then they go buy a hamburger and think nothing of it.

By far the biggest knee jerk reactions come about with the mention of feral cats and dogs.


If your list started with elephant at 3 I'd agree 100%

R.W.Dale

My list wasn't ordered it's just a list.

I don't shoot canines of any variety, but I don't object if somebody else wants to.

I don't shoot canines of any variety, but I don't object if somebody else wants to.

I don't either, although I am starting to change my mind about coyote...

As long as something isn't being hunted to extinction (including parts of its range, not just as an overall species) or endangerment like the tazmanian tiger, passenger pigeon and dodo...I won't care too much.

Motivation plays a role to me. Is the hunter out for sadistic pleasure, i.e. hunting simply because they get off on hurting/killing somthing? If so, I see a problem, not with the actual hunting, but with the mental state of the hunter as it's indicative of deeper problems. Other than that, I don't have a problem with most any legal hunting. Populations have to be managed, hunters put money back into the economy and fund conservation, meat can be donated to those in need, just to name a few benifits of hunting.

So the particular animal being hunted doesn't cause me any emotional strife, but the individual hunter might cause me some concern. Though I'm really not qualified to accurately judge a persons motives.

the only exception I can think of is the panda bear...that evolutionary failure was on the road to extiction before humans ever got involved. Some things must be allowed to fail.

Personally, I shoot animals that I don't eat primarily because they are problematic. Prairie dogs are problematic, likewise coyotes, rats, sparrows and a number of others. With that said, I believe prairie dog meat is quite popular in Argentina. I choose to eradicate them, but not eat them myself.

As far as what I wouldn't eat ...

If I was a member of the Donner Party, I'd eat human flesh. If I was in China or Indonesia and offered monkey brain stew, I'd most likely eat it. I've eaten some things that many people wouldn't want to hear about and I wouldn't rule out much in order to survive.

Human flesh on a daily basis ... no. Monkey brains for breakfast every morning ... probably not. But if it came down to eat these things or starve to death ... sure.

Remo, contrary to your statement, "It is a well established fact that red meat somehow leads to increased risk of cardio disease," it is NOT a well-established fact. My wife is a dietitian and we receive any number of scientific journals in our household every month - many of which have studies related to the linking of certain foods to certain disease states. At best, it is a hotly contested hypothesis that consuming red meat has a correlation (not a causal effect) to heart disease. Nor is it a "fact" that fish improves cardiovascular health.

If you choose to eat - or not eat - certain meats because of your own personal preference, I'm fully in support of it. However, there are very, very few FACTS when it comes to causal relationships between certain foods and disease states.

From a Biblican perspective, the Old Testiment laid our a number of "eat this, not that" laws for the Israelites. However, Peter was specifically instructed, in the New Testament, that nothing should be deemed unclean - all animals were OK to eat.
mudinyeri,

oily species of fish (salmon, herring, sardines) are proven to lower cholesterol and cardio disease. Something to do with omega acids or something or other.

Red meat(beef) has a curious effect on human metabolism. It increases a human body's ability to produce body heat. This is a plus in winter. But the negative effect from red meat is that cholesterol and fat from red meat raises the cholesterol and fat levels in your blood at a slightly higher rate in comparison to the amount consumed than other meat does. I'm sorry I don't have links. this is all purely from memory.

Something that made me want to vomit(regarding pork) was what I read a few years ago. I immediately stopped eating pork after reading this and also after working for 2 weeks repairing equipment in a hog killing plant. That is that cannibals claim pig meat tastes almost identical to human meat. The hog killing plant(especially the rendering part of it) cured me of any desire to eat any processed pork product(hotdogs, etc). very shortly after that I read the claim of the cannibals regarding the flavor of pig meat. I also watched a movie "gangs of new york" where daniel day lewis taught how to kill a human with a knife by using pig carcasses. In the movie, he stated that a pigs internals are identical to those of a human. That got me researching it and it is true. Pig and human internal organs are nearly identical. In fact, they even used to transplant pig heart valves into humans with disfunctional heart valves. They use pigs as guinea pigs for certain things because they are so similar.

That combined with the bible old testament prohibition of pig meat and the jewish/muslim prohibition of pig meat was enough for me to swear off eating pig.

btw, in the Donner party, NONE of the individuals that refused to eat human flesh died(of starvation)...iirc. All of the individuals that ate human flesh either died or survived but developed severe emotional problems...iirc. I will never use starvation as an excuse to consume human flesh.

That is why some cannibal tribes refer to humans as "long pig".

I still feel sad when i shoot a deer. I understand there lives are important to them. but i still shoot plenty.

I would say dogs should top the list, even over wolves.

I admit I do have trouble with the idea of hunting higher primates. Monkeys are delicious though.

I shoot loose dogs on sight.
Our village laws say that any loose dog is to be shot, the owner has to apologize and pay up the 50$ bounty we have to keep the dogs at bay.

Im in the Arctic, "Dog country" and teams are still fairly numerous.
Ferral dogs are an Eskimo's "Ultimate disater", as a loose pack will find a camp, and not being afraid of humans, will move oon in and eat everybody they can kill. Old Eskimo storys abound with this plight, and many older adults and several young ones here have m,assive scars from being torn up by a three or four dog at once attack, and many have been killed by such, especially children.

Wolves, on the other hand have killed ONE person up this way since 1946, when a Rabid Wolf attacked my fatherinlaws fatherinlaw, Punekok Sampson, who died of Rabies inthe hospital. There are no old storys in Eskimo history of Wolf attacks, none whatso ever.

However, being Alaska, "Fur" is still a viable resource that we can sell, trade and wear, as it keeps up alive and warm in -40.
Tradional, warm, biodegradeble and a renewable resourse that I can obtain with decent effort and have it be worth my while, natural fur is "Best"

We dont eat predators, except Lynx.

^why would you eat lynx?

Probably because they taste good. I'm just guessing though, I've never tasted them, but I would assume that they are delicious.

I believe that a lot of objection comes from the corrupt way that animals are managed in many African countries. Political corruption takes center stage in trophy hunting and animal trafficking, and that is the reason I would avoid hunting these types of animals.
Venomous snakes could be easily relocated.
Rodents, yes.
Prairie dogs..no. I used to really enjoy hunting them and told myself that they were a pest animal that had no place in our pastures. Well I was wrong. They are very neccesary for a healthy prairie ecosystem, much more than the cattle I was supposedly protecting.

Probably because they taste good. I'm just guessing though, I've never tasted them, but I would assume that they are delicious.
I didn't phrase my question very well.

I meant why would a people/culture choose to not eat predators, but then make an exception for lynx? What is special about the lynx?

I figured that was what you were asking and that's how I answered it. I shouldn't speak for caribou though. I suppose they are too tender and sweet to exclude as well.

why would you eat lynx?
My guess is that they taste good. Lynx are similar to bobcat, and bobcats taste pretty darn good.

I agree with the list, and would add cats. Myself, I get most flack for shooting coyotes and bobcats.

I've never heard the "extra body heat with eating red meat" argument. Red meat is higher in fat and cholesterol, I believe, than say chicken breast and my understanding is that was the main unhealthy "brand" red meat has received. Which is nonsense, moderate portions and adequate exercise are far more important to being healthy than red vs white vs fish. Red meat is an excellent source of protein and iron. Also, the only sound statistical evidence I'm aware of for omega-3 fatty acids (fish) was a study that looked at the "mediterranian diet" which is high in fish protein and low in fat. It is likely the benefit was from the entire diet and lifestyle, and not just omega-3 fatty acids. If you're gonna cut red meat on that basis, you should probably cut eggs, shrimp, and various other foods high(er) in cholesterol.

The take home message is to not over-eat (moderation) and to exercise if you want to be healthy. Too many potato chips and too much ice cream is bad for you too, moderation is the ticket.

My wife is a dietitian and we receive any number of scientific journals in our household every month - many of which have studies related to the linking of certain foods to certain disease states. At best, it is a hotly contested hypothesis that consuming red meat has a correlation (not a causal effect) to heart disease. Nor is it a "fact" that fish improves cardiovascular health.

Exactly. Most people read something in a "study" and take it for fact, which is terribly misleading. Just like anything, there are good scientific studies and there is garbage in study form that has no more research design than an article in sports illustrated. Most people can't tell the difference. Correlation is marketed as causation by the media or food industry or somebody who stands to gain money from the so called "evidence." Such is the case for fish oil supplements. The mediterranian diet is associated with lower cardiac deaths per population, so now fish byproduct (fish oil capsules) are marketed as dietary supplements based on this study...see how that's a bit misleading?

The same goes for hunting. You hear on Oprah or Animal Planet that elephants and wolves are "endangered"...

^I havn't eaten an egg or a mollusk or a cephalopod or a crustacean in 5 years or more and I get up a 5AM every morning and run 3 miles.

cholesterol is not rocket science. you are what you eat. read the labels. simple as that. There is good cholesterol and bad cholesterol. If you deprive your body of dietary cholesterol, your body will produce its own cholesterol. But the catch is the cholesterol your body produces is remarkably higher in the "good" cholesterol than if you simply consumed cholesterol in your food.

there is a genetic component. Many people can eat all the fat, oil, and cholesterol they can possibly cram down their throat and their blood levels are not effected. I am not one of those lucky ones. Some recent research indicates its not our genes, but the type of gut bacteria inhabiting our intestine that determine how sensitive our blood levels are to our diet.

but fish is different. You can gorge yourself on oily fish(sardines and such) and even though it contains gads of fat and cholesterol, your blood cholesterol will go down. I don't think they have a good explanation as to why. They just know it works and it only works with oily fish. Tuna wont do it.

And no, exercise won't do it. It is not physically possible for a person over 40 to burn up as many calories/fats/etc as he can eat. your metabolism is too slow by then and your joints will no longer stand up to that much consistent strenuous activity. Been there, tried it.

you may convince yourself there's nothing wrong with your gluttonous lifestyle, but you're not convincing me.

but fish is different. You can gorge yourself on oily fish(sardines and such) and even though it contains gads of fat and cholesterol, your blood cholesterol will go down. I don't think they have a good explanation as to why. They just know it works and it only works with oily fish. Tuna wont do it.
Boy I'd sure like to see the evidence of that!!!

And no, exercise won't do it. It is not physically possible for a person over 40 to burn up as many calories/fats/etc as he can eat. your metabolism is too slow by then and your joints will no longer stand up to that much consistent strenuous activity. Been there, tried it.
Exercise won't do what, exactly? It is absolutely possible to to have a diet/exercise balance for persons over 40...

there is a genetic component. Many people can eat all the fat, oil, and cholesterol they can possibly cram down their throat and their blood levels are not effected. I am not one of those lucky ones. Some recent research indicates its not our genes, but the type of gut bacteria inhabiting our intestine that determine how sensitive our blood levels are to our diet.
This is very true, some folks get away with atrocious diets, some don't. I'm not sure what to make of that gut bacteria statement...referring to cholesterol only or...?

you may convince yourself there's nothing wrong with your gluttonous lifestyle, but you're not convincing me.

Perhaps you should re-read my post. I'm the guy who says a moderate diet and exercise is beneficial for your overall health, not gluttony. I also stated that red meat is a good source of protein, which it is. Nowhere did I say gluttony is good for you.

I believe that a lot of objection comes from the corrupt way that animals are managed in many African countries. Political corruption takes center stage in trophy hunting and animal trafficking, and that is the reason I would avoid hunting these types of animals.


HGUNHNTR,

Interesting can you give me your source so I can read it for myself? It's been my personal experience that international trophy hunting tends to keep the most corrupt politicians at bay. The ones who are supporting supplying and benefiting from poaching.

Apparently you've got some experience to the contrary with this subject ?

I have to agree with Caribou about the dogs... In this area, it is common to shoot wild dogs on site, if they do not have a collar. A swift killing shot poses no problem.

The problem for me is when i take a shot and the shot was/is not a swift killer... One past shot broke the back(on a wild dog), but left full lung capcity, and that critter made more whinig, yelping, barking, noises than i care to remember.... I shot again and that took care of it.

another similair shot was on my third ever deer, a doe ( 20 + years ago now)... my scope had gotten knocked out of whack, and i shot 7 times at that deer with a .30-30, I know at least 1/2 bullet hit he deer, as I somehow managed to break bones in 2 legs(front and a back), gut-shoot, and hit a third hind quarter. I ran out of bullets, had to blood trail the deer a 1/4 mile, and finally finished off the doe with my knife. In the process i leaned my 30-30 against a tree, and almost lost the rifle.

The only thing worse that the two above, was when i must have gotten bad shots off... It was the cases where i shot and got clean hits on the animal, but never found the animal that caused me the most strife.

whether it was the archery doe, or the rifle 10 point is a close one, but i never found either of them.

"red meat" is not automatically higher in cholesterol - blanket assumptions like that are almost always wrong.

DOMESTIC BEEF is very high in cholesterol, sure, but compare it to the nutritional values of venison or bison - its a world of difference, though they are all "red meat".

COB: I agree with you final sentiment. There have been a few times when I have lost animals that I know for sure I hit well - massive blood at the site of the shot - but still lost the trail, and never recovered the animal. That is about the only time I truly feel bad.

I guess I've heard about every anti-hunting argument there is, these last sixty or so years. And watched a fair number of people get all huffy over certain animals moreso than others.

99% of it is emotion-based, and usually with terminal ignorance of the realities of "the outdoors". Misinformation about numbers, as H&H pointed out. And few people seem to understand "carrying capacity" as it applies to any habitat.

I don't know about lynx, but cougar is yummy tasty. Helps to not try eating the biggest, oldest tom cat in the territory, of course. As with most animals, young mature critters are best.

In the US, it seems to me that folks get most upset about wolves and grizzlies, first. Then, for some reason, feral animals, whether burro, horse, cat or dog. There is this blind spot in the brain, apparently, which cannot distinguish between in-the-wild ferals and in-the-corral livestock or in-the-house pets. And that includes a fair number in the THR membership, I've noticed.

RangeMagazine.com has a section of brief biographies called "Red Meat Survivors". Four or five, each issue. Poor old folks, they've been eating red meat all their lives. But they keep flopping over dead somewhere between 85 and 100. Lord knows how long they'd have lived if they'd shunned red meat.

I get emotional shooting Prairie Dogs, but it is more giddy than anything. And no I do not eat them. I leave them for the scavengers. While on vacation in Houston last week I saw a Prairie Dog for sale in a pet store for $150. I blurted out "what the heck, I shoot these things for free." The lady standing next to me telling me how cute they were look horrified. And I must admit I was a bit embarrassed for blurting that out. But I was so dang surprised to see one in a pet store.

Poor old folks, they've been eating red meat all their lives. But they keep flopping over dead somewhere between 85 and 100. Lord knows how long they'd have lived if they'd shunned red meat.
My great grand mother nearly made 105 eating bacon and red meat, chewing tobacco and drinking beer her entire life. My grand mother is 93...

Why eat Lynx?? 'Cause they taste great!! :D Think Chicken thighs....

They are the only "Cat" around,North American Arctic wize so maby its just the exception to the predator rule for Weasle/Dog familys (They smell strong, I dont think I could swallow 'em easily)

.........and theres three kinds of Bears, who we eat in different seasons, though they be Omnivoirs....~~LOL!!~~ ....till you move to the Ocean, where Polar Bears roam....Seals and Whales , who eat fish, are eaten day in and out and rendered for their food grade oil to dip frozen meat into......, with valuble skins as well and other products as well.

Anybody still get emotional when a Seal is clubbed or a Whale harpoond?? My whole family sure does ..........all that meat and blubber, blubber that renders into oil at room temp and cleans the veins, the good stuff.


We throw a little Party :D

I have always felt good when I kill something. I am a Hunter , and theres a season for everything. Sometimes we shoot, sometimes we dont :D It's all good :D

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/guns/gun%20funnies/meat.jpg

Personally, I love pork. And the claims about pig anatomy being close to human anatomy, I have to ask: So what? There are alot of animals that are similar in anatomy to a human, think back to basic biology class. I've never tasted 'human', but I sure love pork loin and ribs!!!!

In response to the OP, I don't suppose there's anything out there I WOULDN'T drop the hammer on... 2 or 4 legged. I suppose also the circumstances surrounding the implied shot would come into play, but I don't have a problem with killing any of the animals listed, or birds for that fact, but don't construe that as thinking I go out of my way to kill something every day. On the contrary, I don't. But if the opportunity presents itself, I'm the kind of guy they call to take care of the problem.

Horses!

It is a big controversy here in Nevada. Not the domestic ones, the wild ones.

I have never eaten horse meat, but I guess in other countries it is quite common. Even the Bizarre Foods guy has consumed it on several episodes. He claims it is as good, if not better then beef.

As far canine-type creatures go, I'm not sure if could kill any of them unless it was a self defense situation.

HGUNHNTR,

Interesting can you give me your source so I can read it for myself? It's been my personal experience that international trophy hunting tends to keep the most corrupt politicians at bay. The ones who are supporting supplying and benefiting from poaching.



Hey there H&H, my sources are not written, but rather from friends that live in Africa. (Uganda, and Kenya) Like most profitable business in both of these countries, there is a huge amount of corruption, any business that turns a profit is a target for abuse. It may appear on the surface that certain outfitters (I won't name any) are totally legit, but a closer look reveals an agenda that takes advantage of locals, and the animals they are supposedly conserving. It really isn't that hard to imagine if you think about it objectively, without trying to justify your decision to support their business.

lizziedog1 wrote:
I have never eaten horse meat...

I haven't either. My teenage daughter ate some last year in Switzerland, though she didn't know that's what it was when the meal was served. She said it was indeed, better than beef.


-Matt

Way back many a year ago I read that a Gringo would ride a horse until it foundered, and then walk away. A Mexican guy would get another day's ride out of the horse before it fell again and he walked away from it.

An Apache would get two more days of riding and then when the horse died, he'd eat it.

The Gringo and the Mexican went hungry. The Apache didn't. There's a message there, somewhere, about comparative smarts.

Horse meat...I don't understand why people are so afraid of it. Horses certainly look delicious, I can't wait to try some.

Mourning doves got a big reaction here about eight years ago when Minnesota started a season on them.

Horse meat...I don't understand why people are so afraid of it. Horses certainly look delicious, I can't wait to try some.
I think I ate horse once. Can't be certain though, it was back in the early '80s, I was very small/young. This was back before it was wrong. I must have though, because I definitely remember my parents showing me some ground meat and telling me it was horse.

Funny, the folks always owned horses; Mom was a rodeo champ. Dad gets old retired horses nowadays since they are not for work, they are just pets. He gets them from the guys who load up on them and haul them down to Mexico for slaughter; now that it is wrong... here.

Around my household it's all good to shoot whatever i want ,, UNTIL i bring it home and string it up in the garage to skin-it (either for meat or fur) then my tweenage daughter will give me the "how would you like it" routine ... same with my wife,, i can shoot-it as long as it's not doing something "cute" (like a fox hunting in snow) She was watching a Predator-hunting show the other night with me and they had camera zoomed-in on juvenile male coyote "barking" from a ridge top and then BLAM ! They shoot it ! I hear an Awwww he was just so cute !! Then i remind her of all of the "cute" fawn-carcasses we found this spring while shed-hunting (5 total in less than 1-sq-mile) then i got the "yea, i suppose"

^To have coyotes in the ecosystem, you must expect them to consume food. When most deer hunters are confronted about hunting deer, the majority quote deer overpopulation. "they are becoming a nuisance animal", well...aren't the coyotes helping to reduce the "nuisance" as well? I am not agains coyote or deer hunting, I enjoy both, but be honest about your motivations.

Having lived in Switzerland for a year I made many trips to the Chevaline Boucherie (horse butcher). Yes it was good, better than beef but I don't much care for American beef anyway, or the effect feedlot beef has on the environment in which I like to hunt and fish.
Eating horse and hunting horses are two different things altogether though.

Hey there H&H, my sources are not written, but rather from friends that live in Africa. (Uganda, and Kenya)

HGUNHNTR,

Interesting,

Hunting has been banned in Kenya since 1978 therefore there is no "trophy hunting" business there. And Uganda just reopened to hunting two years ago and has a very small nearly insignificant hunting industry. Considering the locations mentioned I'm thinking your sources are feeding you flawed and anecdotal information.

Pure and simple and the facts bear out that countries which allow safari hunting have large healthy populations of game. Those that banned it do not. Kenya being the prime example.

Are there going to be some dirty back alley deals cut in any business that involves cash and profit? Especially in a cash strapped third or fourth world African republic? Of course there will, that's how business works in those places. With that in mind all one has to do is take a quick look at Kenya and the wildlife population crash after the hunting ban to see what happens to wildlife in Africa if it isn't paying it's own way.

There is plenty of information out there on the subject written by biologist, conservationist the UN and NGO's (one who are not funded by animal rights organizations) if you are interested in how the Safari industry has kept game populations healthy and profitable. Please don't take my word for it. Start by looking up the White Rhino population recovery.

Just a quick example lets take Botswana. They have over 100,000 elephant and a carrying capacity of less than that. They allow approximately 300 trophy elephant licenses per year. Those licenses along with other species are the primary, almost in fact sole source of revenue for the entire game department and many villages depend entirely on the jobs and communal revenue that is derived from the hunting industry.

Take the hunting away and within a short period those elephant are now worthless, in fact a liability to the locals, and guess what happens next? If the elephant are eating your crops smashing your lapas and chasing your women out of the fields and you no longer have a job because you used to be a tracker or a skinner or a driver or a cook or a maintenance guy or a game scout or any other myriad of functions for a safari camp. All of a sudden the only way you can feed and cloth your family and go get drunk on Friday night is by poaching those elephant and selling their teeth to the Chinese gangs that buy ivory. Now the game department has no funds to fight the rampant poaching and has to beg for money that is quickly drained on an ineffectual anti poaching effort that will fail and the world elephant population will once again crash to almost unsustainable levels. And people like your friends can scream "LOOK I TOLD YOU SO it's those DAMN HUNTERS KILLING ALL THE ELEPHANTS." Just like they did during the 80's after the hunting ban went into effect and the elephant was almost wiped out by commercial scale poaching.

With all due respect to your friends in Kenya and Uganda I really don't understand why this is so hard to grasp. Especially if you live in Kenya and have a real life example of this exact scenario staring you right in the face. Unless of course you live in a mega city like Nairobi or some such and you have about as much understanding of wildlife conservation as your average New Yorker. Of course saying you are from "Africa" holds way to much water with most people who have never been there. Most people hear Africa and think National Geographic when in reality the majority of "Africans" now days are urbanized and clueless just like most Americans.

I also have a friend in Kenya named Dr. Dave Hopcraft (PHD in zoology) who owns and operates a 100,000 + acre ranch in the N'Gong district he is a fifth generation white Kenyan. He's got a bit different take on the hunting ban and the safari industry than your friends do. He and his fellow land owners/managers have been petitioning the government to lift the hunting ban at least on private lands for decades. The ministers in government have been given irrefutable proof and about the damage the hunting ban has caused. However every time the referendum comes up for vote the international animal rights organizations start handing out a new batch of fancy cars, houses and cash to the right members of government. Magically the hunting ban which is always soundly defeated by the popular vote is upheld by the higher members of parliament who have veto power and have received the biggest and juiciest bribes by the various well funded animal rights organizations.

It would be interesting to me to hear how your friends address this very well documented and repeated cycle that is the rampant governmental corruption that has kept hunting ban in Kenya alive. I would especially like to hear how they justify screaming corruption in the hunting industry when they live in a country that doesn't allow it.

unting has been banned in Kenya since 1978 therefore there is no "trophy hunting" business there. And Uganda just reopened to hunting two years ago and has a very small nearly insignificant hunting industry. Considering the locations mentioned I'm thinking your sources are feeding you flawed and anecdotal information.


You are correct, but are you saying that the Kenyan government enforces this laws in tribal areas of Kenya? I think not, especially if there is profit to be made and they are part of it.

And Uganda just reopened to hunting two years ago and has a very small nearly insignificant hunting industry.

Very small and insignificant maybe in GDP, but it is a very significant percentage.
It appears we just operate under a different set of priorities.

Horse meat,

Having spent a lot of time in Europe especially France I've eaten horse meat a time or two. It's meat plain and simple I find it to be pretty close to lean beef. Zebra is not a very good meat in my opinion as the fat is bright yellow and pungent smelling. Locals tend to think of it as a delicacy just like they can't get enough giraffe bull. Which I thing smells like bad kitty litter. Then again I can't stand mutton of lamb either because of the smell and South Africans think that's the best meat ever.

If any of you guys have taken any animal science/ ag courses you'd remember I'm sure that the horse market was 80% meat and protein feed production in this country until about 5 years ago when the ban on horse slaughter and the exportation of horses for slaughter was pushed through by the animal rights lobby.

There is now of course a HUGE surplus of unwanted horses in USA. You can't hardly give a horse away in most pats of the country. I've got four pasture maggots draining my bank account as we speak. My girls think I love our horse too..;)

There is now of course a HUGE surplus of unwanted horses in USA. You can't hardly give a horse away in most pats of the country

so true, just about 2 years ago, my buddy bought 2 very good horses for $5 at auction. It wasn't so long ago those two would've set you back a couple grand.

You are correct, but are you saying that the Kenyan government enforces this laws in tribal areas of Kenya? I think not, especially if there is profit to be made and they are part of it.

HGUNHNTR,

Lets define the parameters of the hunting ban in Kenya. You can still hunt animals on your own property or on tribal property if you are a tribal member for food and skins etc. But you can not charge to guide hunters on said property you can not import firearms into kenya for the purpose of hunting, you can not purchase a hunting license as a foreigner you can not hunt as a foreigner and you can not export any trophies or animal parts from Kenya unless they are a sanctioned part of the tourist industry.

It is illegal to sell animals for the purpose of hunting to foreigners and it is a felony to be caught hunting in Kenya unless you are a licensed resident and hunting on private or tribal land with permission of the land manager.

So how exactly are the locals making money off of hunting in the "tribal" areas? Any foreigner would be NUTS to try and hunt (remember it's a felony) in Kenya. Have you ever seen what an African jail looks like? Your soft white European buttocks won't last long in that place.:uhoh:

mudinyeri,

oily species of fish (salmon, herring, sardines) are proven to lower cholesterol and cardio disease. Something to do with omega acids or something or other.

But the negative effect from red meat is that cholesterol and fat from red meat raises the cholesterol and fat levels in your blood at a slightly higher rate in comparison to the amount consumed than other meat does. I'm sorry I don't have links. this is all purely from memory.

Anyone can link almost anything from the intard-web. Show me scholarly journals with published studies that establish a causal relationship between oily species of fish and lower cholesterol or red meat and higher cholesterol.

The simple answer is ... you can't. There are simply too many other environmental factors, including inherited traits in humans, to control for.

Your soft white European buttocks won't last long in that place My buttocks are neither soft, white, nor
European..........well maybe soft ;)
So how exactly are the locals making money off of hunting in the "tribal" areas? Have you heard of usurping the law?

Quote:
Your soft white European buttocks won't last long in that place
My buttocks are neither soft, white, nor
European..........well maybe soft

I haven't been on THR for very long, but I'll assume the above is a first (at least I hope it is).

Here are the ones I find cause the most strife.

1. Elephant
Robert Ruark agreed. He said it was proper to cry after shooting one's first elephant. But I suspect you mean something else.

Around here, hunting rabbits and Bambi will get you dirty looks from some people. Globally, there's whales and polar bear.

Horse meat,

Having spent a lot of time in Europe especially France I've eaten horse meat a time or two. It's meat plain and simple I find it to be pretty close to lean beef. Zebra is not a very good meat in my opinion as the fat is bright yellow and pungent smelling. Locals tend to think of it as a delicacy just like they can't get enough giraffe bull. Which I thing smells like bad kitty litter. Then again I can't stand mutton of lamb either because of the smell and South Africans think that's the best meat ever.

If any of you guys have taken any animal science/ ag courses you'd remember I'm sure that the horse market was 80% meat and protein feed production in this country until about 5 years ago when the ban on horse slaughter and the exportation of horses for slaughter was pushed through by the animal rights lobby.

There is now of course a HUGE surplus of unwanted horses in USA. You can't hardly give a horse away in most pats of the country. I've got four pasture maggots draining my bank account as we speak. My girls think I love our horse too..;)
ethanol is to blame.

People can't afford to feed a horse due to the higher cost of feed. Land is being snatched up for ethanol production. even cattle feed is getting pricey and therefore so is beef. There's been a worldwide grain shortage for awhile now. partly due to US ethanol production and partly due to unusual weather around the world.

the horse slaughter regs are just the icing on the cake.

obviously these new regs ruin the "salvage value" of a pet horse. I'm not sure what they do to wild horses. Probably cause them to die of starvation if there's no predators introduced to hunt them.

I have a degree in biology and don't get sentimental over animals. Anthropomorphism drives me nuts. OTOH, I don't shoot animals that I don't intend to eat or that are not making pests of themselves TO ME. On the whole, I prefer people to be honest. If you enjoy going out and shooting prairie dogs, just say you enjoy shooting prairie dogs. Don't try to spin it as you are doing it for some farmer or rancher's benefit unless you are also out there dutifully helping him with sundry other chores. Funny how many guys only want to help out Squire Brown when it involves shooting something. Likewise, if you want to legally shoot a giraffe, elephant, lion, what have you, just shoot it and admit that you enjoyed shooting it. Tortured explanations of how you really did for the benefit of the veldt ecosystem ring false to the ear. They're only animals, either it is okay to kill them or it isn't. If it is, then you don't need the spin.

Have you heard of usurping the law?

Of course I have but how are these supposed black market "trophy" hunters getting their trophies home? And of course if this is going on it's a tiny little illegal black market segment and has no bearing on the original subject which was the supposed rampant corruption in the legal "trophy" hunting business.

I thought there was a virtual war going on in africa regarding ivory poachers?

also, the chinese and other similar races seem to have a fetish for rare animal parts...tiger penises and bear gall bladders.

I thought there was a virtual war going on in africa regarding ivory poachers?


Depends, some areas the poaching is once again reaching epic proportions some areas not so much. Right now the major issue is rhino horn. Rhinos are getting swatted at an unsustainable rate at the moment.

Aw, well, I'm just fed up with all this killing. I'm disgusted by the screams of anguish from the tearing off of the little rootlets from onions, radishes and carrots. Worse than mere ungruntling.

And for some reason all this got me to thinking of Arlo Guthrie and "Alice's Restaurant" and his session with the recruiting sergeant, "Kill...I wanna kill..." which segues into the thought that for some, the sweet aroma of blood enhances concupiscence.

You guys do terrible things to my already-twisted sense of humor...

Seems to me the animals causing the most "emotional strife" are:
1. Primates
2. Pets
3. Any animal that has been portrayed as a main character in a popular animated movie (bambi, dumbo,...).

if you really want to look at the biblical sense, didn't God put man over animals? Their lives aren't as important as mine. They don't have a soul... they are here for our use.

You must not have any pets???? I guarantee my dog would die for me or my wife if she had too. I would even venture to say that she would get help if I or my wife was hurt. No soul huh? Thats the second time today I've heard that out of some bible thumpers mouth. No offence though I read the good book too...........Just not narrow minded.

Now to answer the question. I feel bad when hunting almost anything but do it for food and the joy of the hunt. Even when protecting the garden from some bothersome squirrels and rabbits. Those mainly make me feel bad cause I will not eat them. But if I didn't dispatch them I would have NO produce!!!

Add diseased, starving feral (aka "wild") horses t your list. The remnants are roaming northern NV, typically very sickly and diseased, yet folks would rather have the gov't spend upteen thousands to use helicopters to round them up (and stress them even more), so the can be sold to some altruistic person to spend thousands in vet bills only to have to put it down a few months later. Otherwise, they get sold to a butcher for sale to the French......

Otherwise, they get sold to a butcher for sale to the French

oneounceload

The federal wild horse protection act put an end to that over 30 years ago. It is illegal to slaughter wild caught horses. It is also illegal to hunt or shoot them.

Not totally..............;) things were done that were not always "legal" but were done anyway. Once sold to an individual, there was no real follow up, so things were done that shouldn't have been. They busted two soldiers for shooting them near Reno a few years ago - they got prison sentences, but the the Feds using helicopters to round them up were acting legally

16shells, have you any idea how few people know that there is a fish named a dolphin? After "Flipper", to prevent confusion and mayhem, restaurants began serving "mahi-mahi", the Hawaiian word for dolphin.

(Maybe it's just "mahi" in the islands. Then again, maybe they liked it so much that they named it twice. Sorta like Walla Walla, WA.)

I get a kick out of how current food trends have changed the opinions of some folks. I have some cousins who used to give me no end of <removed> for hunting. Now they have all moved to the northeast where the "local food" movement has taken hold (it has been a standard around here since before the white folks arrived). Now these cousins who used to poo-poo me for killing deer and and ducks to eat, are asking me for meat.

I may be of a more libratarian bend than most, but as long as your not causing me or mine any trouble, I am not going to care what you choose to hunt or eat. I also ask that other people keep their opinions about how I feed my family to themselves. I personally only hunt what I am going to eat, but fact is, I dont hardly have time to hunt that, so popping pests is off my radar right now. When I retire and have more time, I do think I might shoot some coyotes as they are a nuisance around here. But for now, Donald and Bambi are my concern.

You must not have any pets???? I guarantee my dog would die for me or my wife if she had too. I would even venture to say that she would get help if I or my wife was hurt. No soul huh? Thats the second time today I've heard that out of some bible thumpers mouth. No offence though I read the good book too...........Just not narrow minded.

We "Bible Thumpers" don't take offense at your belief that pets have souls. You're welcome to believe whatever you want to.

I'm pretty sure name-calling is against the High Road's principles though. Maybe back off of that just a tad. ;)

There are intelligent animals and stupid animals. Look into a deers eyes and there's not much there. Look into a canines eyes, and there's more going on. The last canine I shot was a fox nearly fifteen years ago. Went for a head shot on a moving animal and caught it across the withers, paralyzing it. It looked at me like a dog when I approached - fear, curiosity, pain. I could only see a dog lying there.

So, I never shot another fox. I've also passed on wolves and "brush wolves" (as coyotes are often called in Alaska) on a number of occasions.

But, that's me. I don't judge others who shoot wild canines and I don't question the motives or the biological need to shoot canines. Maybe it's the libertarian in me, but I have no desire to tell others they should behave like me. And therein lies the problem - too many people think their "feelings" should be honored by others.

I don't feel much when I shoot a deer, caribou, rabbit or game bird. Those animals eat and crap and procreate, and not much else. They're cattle. There's not much behind those eyes.

Those animals eat and crap and procreate, and not much else. They're cattle. There's not much behind those eyes.

I could say that for a bunch of humans I've met as well...

And no, exercise won't do it. It is not physically possible for a person over 40 to burn up as many calories/fats/etc as he can eat. your metabolism is too slow by then and your joints will no longer stand up to that much consistent strenuous activity. Been there, tried it.

Remo, you really need to come spend a day with the concrete foreman I work with. He's 63 and works 10hr days all the time forming, pouring, finishing, and setting bar. I know that when I was working with him I was burning in excess of 4000 calories a day. I know that because I was eating 4000 calories a day and still lost 40lbs that summer. The guy worked longer & harder than I did and he wasn't dead tired at the end of the day like I was.

partly due to US ethanol production

We owe a big thanks to the Iowa & the US govt for this problem. The US govt subsidized ethanol production years ago when corn prices were low because farmers in Iowa said they'd vote for a candidate that supported it. Turns out corn produced ethanol is a pipe dream to say the least. Sure, you can get ethanol from corn, but its horribly expensive to do so both in materials & time not to mention infrastructure. For every pound of ethanol you get at the end of the process, you need between 8 and 10 pounds of corn. Funny thing is that agricultural wastes (plant stalks, chaff, grasses) & algae's are far more energy bearing than the corn grain. They also happen to be easier to grow and far more economical than corn.

If we were to make syngas by gasification (which is a product of a catalytic reaction between vaporous hydrocabon gases http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_gasification ) we'd be swiming in gasoline from algae or ag wastes. For every pound gasoline you get from ag wastes, you need only 2-5lbs of ag waste to get gas. For algae its one pound of gas from 1-2 pounds of algae. Catch is nobody has quite figured out how to make the small scale lab experiments scale up to large scale industrial processes. This was already taken care of with corn grain ethanol because its a nearly identical process to making whiskey. Problem here is that there are fewer people growing hay, processing ag wastes, or growing algae than there are farmers who farm corn.

Ever wonder why Iowa is the first in the primaries? Gov't subsidies for farming are a big reason why. Sugar is also another prime example of gov't subsidies run a muck, but thats not the purpose of this forum.

*MODERATOR NOTE*

I'm not trying to start a political debate, only wanting to inform about why ethanol produced from corn is causing feed prices to rise. Please moderate as needed to meet THR's mission.

Humpback:

I'm a self employed owner of a small boiler repair company and I do much of the work my own dam self. I am also my own engineer and my own foreman. 12-14 hour days 7 days a week all winter long is what I'm talking about. I know full well no 63 year old man can consume 4000calories a day without being well in excess of 250lbs. I also know when I was in my 20s I ate more than 5000/day and still couldn't get anywhere near 200lbs. And I know what a foreman does and it aint much compared to what I can do. I've been in the concrete business too. You are wasting your time trying to school me in anything.

As for ethanol, mr hump, I happen to live in iowa. The farmers know it is a hoax. But just what the H do you expect them to do? NOT grow corn? yeah right.

I agree to disagree and leave it at that.

As for corn, if I was getting that much money to support someones pipe dream, I'd be farming the subdivision I live in. But my neighbors probably wouldn't take kindly to me tearing up the area for corn.

a Gringo would ride a horse until it foundered, and then walk away. A Mexican guy would get another day's ride out of the horse before it fell again and he walked away from it.

An Apache would get two more days of riding and then when the horse died, he'd eat it.



I saw this in an old Western, i think John Wayne said it in "The Searchers"...

It's irrational, and I know it. You can shoot and/or eat any other animal on the face of the planet. But please, oh please, not horses!!!

Ferral Horse! For some stupid reason it's against the law (as far as I know) to sell a horse for slughter for any reason even dog food in Oregon. The amount of money the BLM throws away feeding pens full of Horses would put our school system back on track in a year. If I could get a horse tag for SE Oregon I would get one in a heart beat and fill my freezer. It's easier to get close to elk in the Steens Mtns than to get close to the ferral horses, plenty sporting for my taste buds.

Ferral Horse! For some stupid reason it's against the law (as far as I know) to sell a horse for slughter for any reason even dog food in Oregon. The amount of money the BLM throws away feeding pens full of Horses would put our school system back on track in a year.

USMC,

It ain't state, it's federal. Check out the Federal Wild Horse Protection Act. In the USA it illegal to kill or capture for the purpose of slaughter any wild horse donkey or burro.

Hunting any animal causes me emotional strife, which is why I don't hunt. On the other hand, if you are a hunter, and like to hunt, and do so within the parameters of the law, I have no problems with it. Those people that truly, and I mean really hunt because they rely on that to feed themselves and their family, or to make a living, then I don't only agree with it, but would do the same! It wouldn't change the fact that I might feel saddened every time and animal gets killed.

I just don't like killing things that haven't done anything wrong to me. I kill spiders and other bugs all the time. Why? Because I hate those things around me! I absolutely hate spiders. Do I like that I killed them, not at all. And that goes for everything. Maybe I'm more empathetic then most. So I'll pass, and let other people do the killing for me, because I'll be damned if I can't enjoy a delicious steak any delicious meat just because I don't want to kill the poor creature...

I doubt if there's an animal anywhere that does not cause strife to someone when it's hunted. 'ell, some folks even object to steppin' on sidewalk ants.:rolleyes:

The slaughter of animals to extinction causes me great emotional strife even tho I love to hunt. To see wanton waste and disrespect to an animal after the kill also causes me pain. To see folks kill in a manner than does not result in a quick death makes me sick.....I've had to dispense of far too many gut shot deer I've come across late in the season. I love to hunt, but I believe we must promote a positive image as hunters and show respect to our quarry and respect for those who do not share the same opinion. The time of parading dead animals on the roof of your car and hangin' em in the front yard on the meat pole is over.

The time of parading dead animals on the roof of your car and hangin' em in the front yard on the meat pole is over.

I think this depends on location... In many rural areas, hunting is a part of the local culture, & it's being passed on to the next generation as a respected past-time... My local taxidermist is staying busier than ever, & our local newspaper routinely posts pictures of kids holding deer, fish, etc... throughout it's pages. Once you get into the urban population, this changes, and kids are just as happy to hunt digital game on the flatscreen, with the Wii remote gun/ controller.

and kids are just as happy to hunt digital game on the flatscreen, with the Wii remote gun/ controller.
I worked at Bass Pro Shops over the christmas holiday in the Santa's Wonderland area.
One of the things I had to sell was a wii hunting game and gun. While helping kids with the display model, it saddened me when i though about how most of these kids playing the hunting game would never actually have the opportunity to do that in for real

Isee you on the vid games........

I raised my older kids on the tundra, with no TV or vid games.....Guns, dogs, snowmachines , boats, harpoons, spears, bows and arrows, such like that. My little ones are kept active withus,though we dont homeschool anymore, they have to Work with us, and still learn with sweat and a good story at the end of the day with new found skills......
If theres a basketball game, they play it with a ball onna court, not onna TV.....

The village kids that skipped school beyond elementry 'round here are oflike mind and skills as my sons and I who support our familys with Hunting /Fishing/Gathering.
Insted of learning Apples and Oranges, dogs and Cats, they sought an education that is applicable to where we live in the jobless void of the Arctic, to be Hunter, Gather'rs and Fisherman. Harder work than ever found in a school desk.

Their same age 'classmates" are a befuddled mess of vid age kids without a freeking clue nor means to support themselfs.......

You should see and hear my boys when some other young mans says with authority"I got that rifle on my playstation" Hahahahaha ,my boys will say "How many Caribou you get with it?" ~~LOL!!~~

I'm going to add (to post above), I don't normally make a sport of killing dogs for the fun of it... Only ones that are problematic. An older lady who is a friend of mine raised goats for extra income... One day 2 large dogs (with collars) got into her fence and started killing her goats. They killed 28 of them, and then went home. She confronted the owners, who did not put the dogs up... the next day they killed 16 more. She lost 44 goats in 2 days because of "bad" Dogs.

Another neighbor lost 2 calves to unknown "wild dogs". Then Myself and a third neighbor lost animals to these dam dogs that were running in a pack and killing whatever they could find. The dogs were enough to cause emotional stress, as well as financial loss & destruction. After several of the above mentioned episodes, Dog hunting became a common occurence. Some Coyotes were hunted in process, but the Dogs were a bigger problem.

Unlike Wolves, Ferral dog packs do not fear man.

No Wolf attack storys in Eskimo lore, but the Ferral pack was the "Ultimate Disaster"

Any unrightfull, unnessesarry Death is unnerving.

all of them. I can't hunt. Can't watch hunting videos. I don't kill pests, I relocate them outside. No idea why I feel like that. I am all for hunting to eat, and I'm sure I could if I had to.

JustACowgirl, have you ever traveled through the Navajo country in western New Mexico and eastern Arizona? Noticed the general lack of fertility in that desert area?

There are over 60,000 feral horses on Navajo land. Your solution, please.

In general, through the west, this excess of horses, over and above the carrying capacity of the range, means a notable reduction in white sage in Nevada, prairie grasses in Wyoming and high-desert forage in Arizona. This reduces the availability of food for deer, elk, antelope and sage grouse in Washington state. The over-use of streams degrades salmon waters and reduces the number of plants sacred to the AmerInd.

Your solution?

I note that one contract for live capture of feral burros called for payment of $1,500 each. How's your billfold, Cowgirl? The federal government is not only broke, it's $14 trillion in the hole.

To add to the horse problem, the economy has people trailering their horses a long way from home and abandoning them. The numbers are not insignificant.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who replied. It's been eye opening reading your responses.

And, it's wandering and that means it won't remain open much longer. :)

And, it's wandering and that means it won't remain open much longer.

Art,

WANDERING!! How can you say that? I'm sure that we are all interested in the geopolitical effects of a warmer planet and the coming of end times according to at least one surefire source, a doomsday preacher, that will occur this Saturday. Have you prepared for the rapture?

Also what caliber do you suggest for brown bear defense? I think the .223 is a fine choice for most any big game hunting use and of course buckshot is a fine choice for zombie SHTF scenarios. I am offended that people would consider killing zombies as they USED to be somebodies loved one. What bunch of soulless slobs you zombie killers really are!!

I can't stand to see zombies killed on TV it makes me sad..

He Art do you like corn on the cob or canned corn better. I like to put canned corn on top of my corn on the cob that way you get the double corn taste with out having to try and eat two corns on the cob at the same time. Of course tequila goes better with canned corn so go figure.

Wandering? REALLY!:evil:

It's OK to kill a zombie if you are going to eat it. There, back on topic.

JustACowgirl, have you ever traveled through the Navajo country in western New Mexico and eastern Arizona? Noticed the general lack of fertility in that desert area?

There are over 60,000 feral horses on Navajo land. Your solution, please.

In general, through the west, this excess of horses, over and above the carrying capacity of the range, means a notable reduction in white sage in Nevada, prairie grasses in Wyoming and high-desert forage in Arizona. This reduces the availability of food for deer, elk, antelope and sage grouse in Washington state. The over-use of streams degrades salmon waters and reduces the number of plants sacred to the AmerInd.

Your solution?


Sounds like a good place to reintroduce wolves..........

It's OK to kill a zombie if you are going to eat it. There, back on topic.

Zombie is very high in cholesterol. Some however have impressive racks and make for handsome trophies. So I think it's OK to leave the carcass to rot and hunt them purely for the trophy.

Art,
First off, this thread was asking about emotional responses. You came back on me awfully hard for posting my opinion. And I admitted it was irrational.

Secondly, I have traveled quite a bit through NM and Arizona in particular. You'd be hard pressed to find many places in the Southwest that aren't barren, comparatively speaking. We are the desert, after all :rolleyes:
Sounds like a good place to reintroduce wolves..........
If there was less government regulation, maybe horses wouldn't be a problem. If the feral horses cause a problem for people, then those people ought to have every right to deal with them, just as we deal with coyotes. I'm just sayin' I don't like that it is a problem that has to be dealt with in the blow 'em up kind of way. Not pushing for legislation to prohibit it. They are just animals.

Just animals that I happen to have a particular soft spot for. :)

Oh, and what's with the zombie thing? :eek: :scrutiny:

Cowgirl,

You can't blame Art for the Zombie thing. Even if he is to be blamed for most other things.

I'm just saying that a Croone and Brocket Zombie makes for a fine trophy. They don't get that big from being stupid.

No, no, I was blaming Art for the zombie thing. It just seems to be a recurring theme, and I wonder if I'm missing something? What have zombies got to do with anything? :what:

Maybe I don't know what a zombie is???

It's irrational, and I know it. You can shoot and/or eat any other animal on the face of the planet. But please, oh please, not horses!!!

I know it's hard to take, but there are places--civilized ones--where eating horsemeat is considered okay, and tasty.

In some countries they eat puppies.

Out west, "a good horse" or "a good dog" has associations folks might not have elsewhere... More like a partner than an entrée.

Ah, Cowgirl, little cricket! :D Zombies, as in the voodoo Caribbean walking dead, okay? Folks got to talking about the proper armament for the end of the world as we know it, or when the bad brown stuff hits the rotating impellers, and that led to others teasing them for worrying about attacks by hordes of zombies. And, senses of humor for some of us being rather warped ("rather"?) the whole zombie thing has grown.

I and H&H and others have discovered that getting bigger is mandatory, but growing up is optional. You can guess what option we chose. My own claim to fame is that I have pushed adolescence beyond all previous limits. I have no clue what I'll be if I ever grow up.

(Thread drift? Me? It is to laugh. Ha.)

I've never understood the thing girls have for horses. I've always pretty much hated horses. Horse people have destroyed more than one of my hunting spots over the years. I don't have much use for ferral or invasive species. Wait, are humans invasive species?

I've never understood the thing girls have for horses. I've always pretty much hated horses. Horse people have destroyed more than one of my hunting spots over the years. I don't have much use for ferral or invasive species. Wait, are humans invasive species?

The horse is an invasive species in the Americas.

I prefer a jeep to a horse, but you cannot get another mile out of a jeep by rubbing its nose and saying it is a good horse, and a fine horse, and you have sacks of sugar where you are going.

Horses make me sneeze. Loratadin helps.

Art, you are one odd individual. :rolleyes: But then again I guess we all are. :neener:

I've never understood the thing girls have for horses.

As for that, more of my horsey friends are guys than gals. :neener:

Maybe I shouldn't post on threads like these. All of a sudden, I have provoked more of a response than I intended!

Maybe I shouldn't post on threads like these. All of a sudden, I have provoked more of a response than I intended!

Don't take it to heart, it's just a forum.

I worry about killing bugs by accident.

I was hauling target frames around in the pits yesterday, and I came across the biggest millipede I've ever seen. Amazing creature. I was so afraid I'd step on him by accident. That would have been really, really bad karma.

I'm very happy to report that he was still cruising the catwalk, and minding his own business when I cleared out of there.

Not really a hunting story, but at least as "rational" as the folks who get all bent out of shape if somebody legally kills a game animal.

Please do not let the Zombies know about all them feral horses, next thing you know we will have Zombie Cavalry units roaming the hills. Just not sure if I could deal with that...............:eek:

I worry about killing bugs by accident.
.

There are people over in India who sweep the path in front of them so they will not step on a bug...

Please do not let the Zombies know about all them feral horses, next thing you know we will have Zombie Cavalry units roaming the hills. Just not sure if I could deal with that...............

OK, now that is seriously funny! In a really sick, warped sort of way.

Mountain Man Huge Glass "Lord Grizzly" who crawled across Montana with a broken leg and a near scalping after being mauled by a Bear and abandoned for dead had a saying I am fond of, and my wife lives by...

"Meat is Meat".......

The wife, she's a better shot than I and when were zooming across Montana a few weeks back remarked on how fat the beef were and that it was too bad we couldnt hunt them ...... :D made smile inside...

Maybe I shouldn't post on threads like these. All of a sudden, I have provoked more of a response than I intended!


........all the more reason to post! Variety and active discussions are the lifeblood of any internet forum. Without, they are dead. Those that accept the fact that other folks have opinions and that they are not necessarily wrong, just different, display intelligence and maturity. Those that don't are just narcissistic and immature. Altho I don't always agree with fellow posters here, I do respect their opinions......and every once in a while, they change my mind.

You know those sharp pointy teeth in your mouth called canines????? They are proof that GOD created us to eat meat! Bottom line.....end of story! It's your own personal agenda to pick and choose what meat you prefer........:D

Please do not let the Zombies know about all them feral horses, next thing you know we will have Zombie Cavalry units roaming the hills. Just not sure if I could deal with that...............

Thank you for posing that possibility scallop. Now I will make sure to add a large bore, large powder charge Sharps cartridge to my firearm list. Something in the 50-90 to 50-110 class should suffice for zombie cavalry.

As for animals that cause me emotional strife, the only thing that I felt sad about was the deer I got this last season. My friend took me hunting and he winged it from his stand (he was about 200yds from me) and it ran over to my stand where I proceeded to finish it off. It looked in pain the whole time until I put two slugs into it to put it down for good.

"I was so afraid I'd step on him by accident. That would have been really, really bad karma."

Yeah; would have certainly upset his podiatrist, too...

But what about the children? Shouldn't they be armed with Howda pistols in case zombies ever domesticate horses?

Mountain Man Huge Glass "Lord Grizzly" who crawled across Montana with a broken leg and a near scalping after being mauled by a Bear and abandoned for dead had a saying I am fond of, and my wife lives by...
Ah Hugh Glass, I'm not sure I believe the story but damn... a tough SOB!


He Art do you like corn on the cob or canned corn better. I like to put canned corn on top of my corn on the cob that way you get the double corn taste with out having to try and eat two corns on the cob at the same time. Of course tequila goes better with canned corn so go figure.
Well since you brought it up, I hate cooked corn. It's so much better uncooked. Except canned corn, when I'm fishing. If I could only save some for the fish, Id be a much better fisherman:D

I wonder what emtional strife a Frenchman would have if I ate this here Arctic Treefrog....

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/th_DSCF3309.jpg (http://s53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/?action=view&current=DSCF3309.jpg)

Frogs.......Seems to be the Omen of the day here inthe Arctic.....The rapture taday and all, Global warming .....I swear I saw the Geico Gecko jumping tree to tree a couple days ago, and several drunks have reported seeing snakes.....

I'm all enraptured over delivering a rifle to a buddy of mine so he or his wife can play Ma Bell if necessary. Even got paid!

Thinking about it, critters about which I get all emotional are those which outsmart me. Like the buck I figured that I'd shoot after he came out of the gully. Forty years ago, and he hasn't come out yet! Or the coyote that sat down behind a bush to scratch a flea. Dangfino where he went! Grossly unfair, sez I!

Just got back from Disney World with family, while there i was amazed at the squirrels. These critters would not move as I walked by; came with inches of several that just sat there, same way with some rabbits... How does this become emotional, you might ask?

I was walking along by a rather crowded pool at Coronado Springs resort today, minding my own business, when this squirrel bolts across the sidewalk... All i saw was a gray streak for a split second that ran straight towards/under me...He ran right under my foot, as i was walking...All i heard was a crunch, snap, pop; my foot hit something soft as i was in "downstep" and the little guy started kicking his last few kicks.

Parents just stared at me in disbelief, & Kids started looking at me like i was the "Squirrel Murderer"... I sort of froze, reached down, grabbed him by the twitching tail, and did an underhand toss in the thickest, closest, (manicured) flowerbed within range...:eek: Drops of blood sprayed the sidewalk, As I tried explaining, then gave up, and continued walking

This little guy caused some emotional stress to onlookers today, and i heard three different lanquages saying???
( i had a small pocket knif in my pocket, thought of skinning him on the spot, for an easy meal, but decided against it... think Knifes maybe illegal in the park)

From the bottom of page 1-lynx-I understand it is very good eating.

We just finished a nice beaver dinner. Most trappers just throw away or feed to the dogs. One day many will get eaten, maybe sooner than you think.

HEY!! I can relate to an awsome Beaver dinner!!!!

Muskrats too :D

My oldest daughter brought a nice 60LB Buck Bever and skinned it quite well. Killing and caring for it didnt phaze her a bit, but brought out the joy in being able to help provide for 12 in the house ...:)

He's a Roasting as I write :neener:


http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/th_DSCF3297.jpg (http://s53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/?action=view&current=DSCF3297.jpg)

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/th_DSCF3224.jpg (http://s53.photobucket.com/albums/g71/edwardhailstone/?action=view&current=DSCF3224.jpg)


If your really emotional, think of all the trees that have been spared ......

Save the tree, Eat the Beaver :D

Elephant are an emotional experience. While I've never been the "Official Killer" of one, I've been "Involved" in the culling of a number of family groups in and around Kruger in SA.

I do not in any way question that "X" number of elephants need to be culled to maintain a healthy population for a given carrying capacity.

They (the elephant) are definitely aware of what's going on when the group is being culled.
(Much different than popping off a fawn for the pot while mom runs blithely away.)

(The practice of killing all of the members of a family group was apparently instituted due the propensity of individuals to behave very badly when members of their group were culled)

We are the alpha predator, and as such are responsible for keeping things in balance.

They are really good to eat.


I would probably do it again, given the opportunity, but I had the definite sense that we were killing a more sentient creature, and I personally needed to justify the obvious distress we were inflicting in light of the greater good.

I've not had this experience with other, even more objectively intelligent creatures.

The African guides WILL hunt out the big cats. They will do anything for $1. I'm all about some hunting, but I think we should leave the big cats alone for a while, and keep an eye on their counts in years to come .

mopar92, one problem with some of the big cats: It's really difficult to do a headcount on some species. Leopard, for sure. Just like the US cougars. Critters which are sneaky and nocturnal quite often are more common than usually thought.

Every now and then, some Sierra Club type in Austin will jump up and yowl about the cougar being endangered in Texas. Snort! Around here, sometimes, we're bum deep in lion poop. Doesn't mean they're commonly seen, and tracks only show up where it's soft dirt. We're a little short of soft dirt. :)

The African guides WILL hunt out the big cats. They will do anything for $1. I'm all about some hunting, but I think we should leave the big cats alone for a while, and keep an eye on their counts in years to come .

Mopar,

In areas where sport hunting of big cats (lions) has recently been outlawed. The lions killed for depredation purposes quickly out numbers the trophy hunting kills. Botswana being a prime example.

Now when you make a statement like the "The African guides" who exactly are you talking about? If you are referring to PH's they are strictly limited in the number of cats they can kill by the various game departments of the various countries they are hunting in. They don't just go out and shoot lions willy nilly and haven't for at least 50 years.

Furthermore the only big cats with population concern that is hunted is the lion and is under strict control at the moment a wild lion hunt today is becoming very expensive and very hard to find due to conservation efforts. Leopard populations are extremely healthy in all areas that allow hunting of them. There is only one country that allows the hunting of cheetahs on an extremely limited basis and that is Namibia. So exactly which big cats are you referring to?

I am curious where you are getting your myopic and politically charged "information" from when you make a statement like "The African Guides will hunt out the big cats". The very gall of that statement is emotionally charged incorrect and very suspiciously animal rights org driven. Is that where you read it in animal rights literature ? Because in reality it's the PH's and their various organizations that are now and have been in the past the folks who have recommended and implemented most of the truly effect conservation and game management policies that are so effective in Africa today.

There has not been one single incidence of an animal rights org implementing one single effective policy that has contributed to the salvation and population growth of any animals world wide and in Africa in particular. Please lets not let the facts get in the way of our opinions however.:rolleyes:

Myopic, emotionally, politically charged refers to the side of the position one disagrees with.



A pro hunter will get his facts from sources, an anti hunter will get his facts from sources, and both will think their facts are the gospel.

ZJ

Really? You are going to argue that the PETA HSUS (known, established and watched terrorist groups) are using any facts or proven conservation methods to try and ram their radical agendas down our collective throats?

Hey guys if you are an animals rights person just come out and say it. You already know where I stand. But slinking in the dark and taking the occasional pot shot is pretty low brow. If you really believe in something stand up and be heard.

I know it frustrating when I keep introducing facts and actual been there done that knowledge into these threads BUT. Here are a few things that should be known.

In Africa a "guide" is a person who takes out non hunting tourists in mini vans to view animals.

A Professional Hunter (PH) is what we would refer to as a hunting guide in the US.

Professional hunters do set prices on trophy fee's nor do they set quota on a particular species. So the comment about African "guides" shooting out big cats for profit is blatantly false to the point of ludicrous.

That's like saying that Wyoming hunting guides are shooting elk into extinction. They guide hunters to legally take elk within the limits of the law. JUST EXACTLY like African PH's do in Africa. If there are people hunting outside of those parameters they are poaching and I guarantee you they are not licensed PH's or won't be for long.

To generalize two things here "African" and "Big Cats" is naive at best and down right ignorant at worst. What African country are we speaking of and what species of big cat are we referring to?

Once again to put it in perspective. In North America guides are overshooting deer. Kind of vague wouldn't you say. As in where in in North America? What country, what state, what county, what kind of deer? When you peel off the layers we might be speaking of a single instance on a single ranch in one state. But that is a whole heck of a lot different than "guides" in America are wiping out the deer now isn't it?

I wasn't saying you were wrong H&H, just that you jump to name calling pretty quick. I'm sure the gentleman didn't pull the idea out of the air and has gotten that idea from some source. I would also bet that that source could come up with an example or two to fit the bill. To say that no PH in all of Africa has ever killed a cat in a questinable manner would be ridiculous.

If you feel that the hunting industry in Africa is overwhelmingly above board, wanton killing of cats is not occurring, and he has been mislead you may be right.

But, if you think you aren't influenced by your own prejudices as a pro-hunter same as an anti-hunter is influenced by his you are, well I guess you are normal.

The deal, ZJ, is that you are responsible for establishing the credibility of your source before you post allegations from that source. Saves hassles over accuracy. That said, there's nothing wrong with, "I read where thus and such said this and that." That's asking for opinions about the credibility of the statements.

I think it's fair to say that H&H has proven his specific knowledge of hunting in various parts of Africa. Too many photos, too many posts over a bunch of years.

I think I have a reasonably good track record of accuracy about the hunting I've done, and it should be obvious from my posting history that I do not get dogmatic in areas where I lack a significant amount of experience.

Quite a few other folks here who are quite similar.

Few among us who have done the BTDT thing give a rat's patoot about the maunderings of anybody allied with PETA or HSUS--or any other such oxygen thieves. Zero credibility.

Art, I thought your response to Mopar was great. Wasn't snotty and didn't belittle the guy.

There are a few people on these forums who have hunted more, killed more, and spent more doing it than myself, but it's very few.

Maybe one of them can tell me what is to be gained by getting indignant with a hunter who believes something that he disagrees with.

Well, for a fact, not fiction, a very good friend and customer go hunt big game every year I'm Africa. The last local guy he had was new to him. His regular guide was not able to do the hunt with him. The guide he normally has is a reputable and solid guy. The last 2 years the group has had "offers" to exceed the limit and they can "fix" it if they need to. You tell me?

One event does not mean widespread misbehavior. I hear of that sort of crookedness, and just figure that it's another instance of somebody's billfold getting a bit skinny.

"Anecdotes are not data." :D:D:D (Unless they are very numerous and consistent over decades.)

back to the OP:

i take issue with killing elephants, but not for any superor moral reason, i just like elephants, and couldn't bring myself to kill one except out of need.

when it comes down to it, i'm not much in support of sport hunting, period. there's no need for it; my local grocery store has all the meat i need. i support culling wild herds for population control, so if a sport can be made of it, fine.

what i'm completely opposed to is canned "hunting", which isn't hunting, or sporting, in the least. i don't care if it were an animal like a pigeon or a squirrel, it's cowardly, lazy, and disgusting. the videos i've seen disgust me, and i can't imagine how shooting an animal while it was in an enclosure would bring anyone but a sadist pleasure.

i also am against whaling, which is marine hunting, to me. again, i just have a deep affection for cetecean life.

when it comes down to it, i'm not much in support of sport hunting, period. there's no need for it; my local grocery store has all the meat i need. i support culling wild herds for population control, so if a sport can be made of it, fine.

what i'm completely opposed to is canned "hunting", which isn't hunting, or sporting, in the least. i don't care if it were an animal like a pigeon or a squirrel, it's cowardly, lazy, and disgusting. the videos i've seen disgust me, and i can't imagine how shooting an animal while it was in an enclosure would bring anyone but a sadist pleasure.


Canned hunts is meat you would otherwise get from the grocery store, but you kill the animal yourself. Why the disgust? It's technically hunting, but not very sporting. However, it beats buying meat from the grocery store that's caged and electrocuted.

Also, not to open a new can of worms,but I'm biased against elephants, because they're one of the few animals that are self-aware. African elephants are kind of iffy, but the Asian elephants definitely are. Giraffes, zebras and wolves I don't quite care about. I'm also in support of whaling, but not dolphins for the same reason.

I can't believe nobody has mentioned big cats.

I had lion in a restaurant in Chicago many years ago and it was good.

If I may just offer one more tidbit on African hunting? I have no dog in this fight since I've never hunted Africa, but there is one indisputable fact on the issue which should not be ignored.
Forty years ago (or thereabouts) a number of countries in Africa banned hunting while others continued. Those countries which banned hunting saw a steady drop in game numbers, while those countries which continued hunting saw no drop or saw increases.

That may sound bizarre, but the simple facts of the matter are that hunting gives animals economic value.

In Kenya (a non-hunting country), an elephant is just a big thing that destroys your fields, a lion something that eats your cattle. The locals kill wildlife any way they can get away with it, from a motive of pure self preservation. They'll use poison, snares or whatever they can devise.

In Zimbabwe, an elephant might be worth ten thousand dollars paid directly to the local village, if shot legally by a hunter. In fact every animal killed within their zone brings direct payment. This is due to something called Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). This program gives a direct economic incentive for rural Africans to preserve and protect wildlife.

An elephant in Zimbabwe is worth a cool ten thousand to the local village. An elephant in Kenya is worth a couple hundred bucks for it's tusks. This is why wildlife in Kenya is confined to a few heavily guarded parks, while wildlife populations in Zimbabwe are healthy across the country.

The same is true across Africa. Those countries that allow hunting have stable animal populations because hunting provides an economic incentive to protect wildlife. Those countries that have banned it have endangered populations because another grain field provides more incentive than protecting the land for wildlife habitat.

Bambi, Thumper and Rocky. Everything else is a threat to her.

Well, for a fact, not fiction, a very good friend and customer go hunt big game every year I'm Africa. The last local guy he had was new to him. His regular guide was not able to do the hunt with him. The guide he normally has is a reputable and solid guy. The last 2 years the group has had "offers" to exceed the limit and they can "fix" it if they need to. You tell me?

mopar,

I'll ask you this simple question one more time. What African country did this take place in?

The reason I ask. Is that in South Africa much hunting takes place on game farms that don't have set quotas. The land owner, owns the game, therefore they can and do let you overshoot your "quota" for an extra fee. It's really nothing more than a marketing scam making the hunter think he's getting away with something when in reality the land owners are doing nothing more than making extra profit on surplus animals that they need to sell.

Most lion "hunting" in the country of South Africa is not of wild lions. I am not saying that you can't hunt a natural wild lion in South Africa but the majority of Lion hunting in that country is of pen raised and released lions. The Free State tends to be the area of the worst offenders of the ole "For a little palm grease we'll let you shoot another lion that somehow got onto the ranch property wink, wink" scam.

Which is an entirely different dynamic than the hunting of wild lions in countries like Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Tanzania, Namibia, and until recently Botswana.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ZJ

Please indicate where I called mopar a "name". I can't find it in either of my posts above.

If I may just offer one more tidbit on African hunting? I have no dog in this fight since I've never hunted Africa, but there is one indisputable fact on the issue which should not be ignored.
Forty years ago (or thereabouts) a number of countries in Africa banned hunting while others continued. Those countries which banned hunting saw a steady drop in game numbers, while those countries which continued hunting saw no drop or saw increases.

That may sound bizarre, but the simple facts of the matter are that hunting gives animals economic value.

In Kenya (a non-hunting country), an elephant is just a big thing that destroys your fields, a lion something that eats your cattle. The locals kill wildlife any way they can get away with it, from a motive of pure self preservation. They'll use poison, snares or whatever they can devise.

In Zimbabwe, an elephant might be worth ten thousand dollars paid directly to the local village, if shot legally by a hunter. In fact every animal killed within their zone brings direct payment. This is due to something called Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). This program gives a direct economic incentive for rural Africans to preserve and protect wildlife.

An elephant in Zimbabwe is worth a cool ten thousand to the local village. An elephant in Kenya is worth a couple hundred bucks for it's tusks. This is why wildlife in Kenya is confined to a few heavily guarded parks, while wildlife populations in Zimbabwe are healthy across the country.

The same is true across Africa. Those countries that allow hunting have stable animal populations because hunting provides an economic incentive to protect wildlife. Those countries that have banned it have endangered populations because another grain field provides more incentive than protecting the land for wildlife habitat.

Kodiak,

Right on the money, great post!

5th Sticky from the top of the Hunting forum page...

The deal, ZJ, is that you are responsible for establishing the credibility of your source before you post allegations from that source.

Please do correct me if I am wrong, but I do not recall H&Hhunter citing any sources in this thread before he stampeded directly to trying to link Mopar to "terrorists." Just because H&H is on the majority side of the argument here doesn't earn him a pass.

Can anybody here present an argument against the information I posted in my rebuttal to mopar's statement that "African guides WILL hunt out the big cats"?

When you make a firm statement like that I'd think that you'd have some facts besides I knew a guy who said.....

So far we can't seem to produce the name of the country the alleged hunt took place, the name of the outfitter, the name of the crooked guide, or have even established what species of animal the supposed hunters were offered to shoot over quota. Not one word as to what kind of big cat or if it even was a cat in question.

I haven't even brought up the issues with a CITES permit and the difficulty or impossibility of obtaining one AFTER you've killed a big cat making it very difficult and a federal offense to import into the USA. You see things are not as simple as they seem at a glance. The whole concept of shooting extra cats in a wild hunting area is so slim as to be darn near impossible. Wild big cats in particular are the most extremely tightly regulated species to hunt currently. It makes no sense for a PH to allow a hunter to shoot an extra one that he can't import for a nominal extra fee when he's got guys lined up five years in advance who are going to pay for a full 21 day safari just in order to have the opportunity to hunt one with no guarantee of success implied. The only way a guy could do it in theory would be to pay for another entire 21 day hunt plus associated fees. Not to mention that each country is only allotted so many CITES import permits per season and they are all booked up years in advance. So even if you did pay the 40 to 80K to hunt your second lion you'd be shoot out of luck trying to import it unless you'd made prior CITES arrangements.

If you know the first thing about hunting DG in Africa this whole thing is so wildly out of whack and false that it pretty much defies all logic and truth to even think about making a statement like that. The comments is so far fetched that it reminds of the infamous and highly defended 2500 Lb bull elk "kill" we had posted on here some years ago.

Then I am sure you have something besides your own moral outrage to bring to the table.

Joe,

Why would say that I am "outraged"? There is no outrage here. What would you like referenced? You can very easily look up CITES regulations and lion hunting. If you'd like you can visit a more African hunting oriented site such as Accuratereloading.com and see how far you get with the above inaccurate statement since my word isn't good enough. And you can very easily try and book a multiple lion hunt outside of a high fenced game park in South Africa through one of several reputable booking agents. Make sure and mention you want to shoot over your quota on lions for a nominal fee.

My information is solid and common knowledge amongst African hunters please feel free to verify it.

So, neither of you is willing to provide anything but "my post is my cite" assertions. Until somebody comes up with something more substantial, I'm placing you both in the uncited bin. Slight advantage right now to the side that didn't try to link the opposition to terrorists, but nothing commanding.

Joe,
So, neither of you is willing to provide anything but "my post is my cite" assertions. Until somebody comes up with something more substantial, I'm placing you both in the uncited bin.

What a bunch of carp....

I said you are welcome to look it up yourself but here goes... You are also welcome to look into my numerous posts from the past of actual African hunting..:rolleyes:

Since we still don't know what kind of big cat we are talking about here that the guides are going to shoot into extinction I'll just assume we are talking about lions. For now. It's kind of tough to cite anything when the quote was so vague. So I'll just back up some of my statements.

I'm not sure what you need cited from me. Possibly that Lions are on the CITES list? Or that it is generally agreed that hunting is not the cause of lion population reduction in Africa?

http://www.huntingreport.com/worldupdate.cfm?articleid=423

A VICTORY FOR HUNTING -- LIONS TO REMAIN ON CITES APPENDIX TWO
BANGKOK (October 18, 2004) – In a victory for the hunting community and the main lion-hunting countries of Africa, CITES has rejected a proposal by Kenya that the African lion be moved from Appendix II to Appendix I, which would have imposed strict quotas on hunting.
The 13th meeting of the participants in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species here rejected the proposal by Kenya, which was backed by many international anti-hunting organizations, on the grounds that while lion numbers may be decreasing, they are not endangered and a move to Appendix I would do nothing to reverse their decline.
This is not the end of the lion story, however. At its meeting in Johannesburg early this year, the CITES Animal Committee voted to include the African lion in its Review of Significant Trade. Kenya and other lion “range states” have agreed to provide trade data to the committee.
The Kenya proposal was opposed by every country where lions are hunted, as well as some (such as Switzerland) which have only a distant interest. In its submission to the CITES Secretariat opposing the proposed move, the Swiss pointed out that trophy hunting and international trade are no threat to the species. Threats that do exist – reduced prey numbers, disease, and diminished habitat – cannot be prevented by an Appendix I listing.

That lion hunting is getting very difficult to arrange or that it's extremely expensive?

http://www.backcountrytaxidermy.com/Africas-Lion.html

A recent CITES scare and a shortage of good Lion hunting areas has resulted in the price of fair chase hunts skyrocketing. Added to this, recent legislation in South Africa cracking down on the hunting of large captive bred predators has created more demand than there are Lion hunts.

Expect to pay anything from $40,000 upwards for a good Lion Hunting concession in any of the southern and central classic destinations. For the best, like some areas of Zambia, Botswana, and Tanzania, expect to pay from $75,000 upwards of $100,000.


That in the country of South Africa much of the lion hunting is canned?

http://planyoursafari.com/blog/canned-lion-vs-wild-lion-hunting-part-ii/

As a recap – “canned” lion hunting (defined as a “hunter” shooting a trophy lion from a captive bred source) is a big industry in South Africa.

Unfortunately, published numbers are only available until 2005. The CITES record keepers need a wakeup call maybe? Anyway, you will see that “canned” lion hunting trophy exports started in 1994, and have gained in popularity since. This is probably because “canned” lions are made available to the trophy hunter at a much reduced cost compared to the expense involved in embarking on a wild lion hunt. A “canned” lion, if you are a canny hunter, can probably be supplied for roughly $20,000 versus a wild lion costing at least three or four times that. Of course a female lion goes for a real bargain price, you are forbidden to shoot a wild one these days.


Here is but one example of what it's going to cost you to bust a cap into a wild lion. They have a quota of 6 for the year and get $2800 a DAY for a minimum of 21 days PER LION. I hope this is starting to make sense to you.

http://www.safaribwana.com/HUNT/lion08.htm

Would you like some facts on leopard hunting too?

Okay, those are some good cites. If you want to roll your eyes and pms because I wanted them, well that's your drama and adds nothing to your case.

You are also welcome to look into my numerous posts from the past of actual African hunting

To me, you are some guy on the internet whose real name I don't even know. There are other guys on other boards, whose names I don't know either, who say they are Navy SEALS, psychic, porn stars, millionaires, and all sorts of cool things. I am absolutely not saying you are a liar and that you haven't hunted Africa. I am saying that people's personal history as anonymously posted to the internet is not as convincing to me as more conventional cites.

The question wasn't about the laws I don't think, but whether or not the laws were being obeyed. Africa has a bad reputation in that department, deserved or not, which is what got us to this point.