Animals that are the cause of emotional strife when hunted.

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.

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.

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.


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

Click to expand...

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

Click to expand...

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%

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

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

KodiakBeer said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Mudinyeri said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

emotional shooting

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?