This should get your blood boiling...

.455_Hunter

Member
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
5,099
Location
Colorado Front Range
UN Calls On South African Government To Protect Children From Trophy Hunting


The guideline suggests that allowing children to take part in trophy hunting is a form of psychological abuse, and could have ramifications for the hunting industry around the world.

Is allowing children to take part in trophy hunting a form of psychological abuse?

The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has suggested that it ‘yes’, it is. The committee is calling on the South African government to “protect children from the vicarious effects of exposure to violence inflicted on animals such as during Trophy Hunting”.
 
Doesn't get my blood boiling but I just shake my head at stupid people, most of the time.

Ban it outright and watch South Africa become as happy as sanctuary cities getting people, seeking sanctuary...



6040C29B-C2CB-44FE-B7B6-B5C7F1A0E163.jpeg
 
Is allowing children to take part in trophy hunting a form of psychological abuse?

When looking at the definitions and examples of what psychological abuse might include, it's not necessarily the act itself. What might be a normal day/event for you and me could be challenging to someone else.

*not a doctor...
 
Please explain the psychological difference between trophy hunting and regular hunting, if the resulting meat is eaten?

I took my son hunting at an early age, and shockingly, he turned out what would be considered normal.

If South Africa buys into this, they’ll next be looking for handouts to make up a deficit if hunters boycott them.
 
I trust South Africa will laugh at this nonsense, if only from a pragmatic standpoint because their economy and political system is perilously close to “failed state” status. When you are on the brink you don’t suddenly develop a conscience about things that wealthier people tell you that you should care about.
 
I do agree with the claim that animal abuse/witnessing animal abuse early in life is often a precursor to escalated levels of violence later in life. Ted Bundy and Jeffry Dahmer are prime examples. One reason the FBI keeps track of cases of cruelty to animals. What I do not agree with is that Trophy Hunting is in any form of animal abuse. As responsible hunters we all make the honest attempt to make our kills quick and humane. Anytime we do not, it is not because we are intentionally trying to make the animal suffer. Any hunter that does that, is already sick and his children have been exposed to other forms of it besides hunting. One only has to compare the death of any prey animal naturally in the wild, to how it is harvested by a responsible hunter, to know that for the most part, death by hunting is much more humane. Expose a child to watching a death to a Zebra by a pack of hyenas and the death by a hunters shot to the boiler room and I have a hard time believing any animal rights, with even the smallest amount of brains cells in their head, would think any differently than me. I am all for not exposing children to cruelty to animals. But I do not believe that responsible sport or subsistence hunting is cruel.
 
I just feel that it is about gun control - “death by a thousand cuts “.
the further you remove someone from needing to use a firearm, the less they know about it, and the easier it is to convince them that they are bad.
Once you have them convinced they are bad it becomes easier to convince them that they don’t need one, and then when they believe they don’t need one the easier it is to make them believe that everyone doesn‘t need one…..
 
Personally, trophy hunting is BS. I grew up in a semi-subsistence lifestyle and was taught to hunt for food not something to put on a wall. Killing animals just for sport has outlived it time other than killing them because they cause damage or are a danger. Yes, a bunch of you will be haters of this so prove me wrong!
 
Personally, trophy hunting is BS. I grew up in a semi-subsistence lifestyle and was taught to hunt for food not something to put on a wall. Killing animals just for sport has outlived it time other than killing them because they cause damage or are a danger. Yes, a bunch of you will be haters of this so prove me wrong!
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. What constitutes what one considers "hunting" is as varied as opinions. Subsistence hunting was the first form of hunting and many times it was not pretty, nor was it humane. Running animals over a bluff, driving them into the water and beating them with clubs. Hunting deer with leg snares and the use of old fashioned leg hold traps. Understandably. Folks were desperate and hungry. They had to live. Today, in the lower 48, there is no real need for subsistence hunting. While living off the land, foraging and eating meat that you kill can be a lifestyle, it is not a necessity. It is a choice, just like sport hunting and trophy hunting. Folks do it because they enjoy it, not because they are going to starve to death if they don't. In order for humans to be safe and provide food for others, wildlife needs to be controlled and kept within their boundaries. Their numbers also need to be controlled so they do not annihilate the ecosystem they are living within. Sport/Trophy hunting does this along with providing income for the local establishments that cater to hunters and those agencies that look out for wildlife. This includes habitat improvement and regulation/law enforcement. One reason we have the amount of wildlife today(both game and non-game) is because of hunters, their conservation efforts, donations towards wildlife and their license fees. While I am not a fan of shooting penned animals and those that are domesticated/semi-domesticated, under the guise of hunting, as long as it is done legally and humanely, I don't have any issue. Nor should any responsible and educated hunter.
 
I hunt deer because I enjoy it plus I get venison in our freezer for the year.
I am a dedicated deer hunter, I travel all the way across the United States, Washington State to New York state.
I take a month off of work to hunt the entire deer season.
I generally get my New York non-resident buck tag and four doe tags for $110.
It's cheaper to fly across the country and buy my non-resident hunting license then it is to hunt here in Washington State.
Some years we hunt Pennsylvania too.

We have way to many predators here in Washington state, cougars, wolves, coyotes and bears.
The average deer kill here in Washington state is 26,000 deer a year.
New York state is smaller in square miles then Washington and the average deer kill in New York is 220,000 deer a year.

Pennsylvania is smaller in square miles then New York and Pennsylvania has an average deer kill on 330,000 deer a year.

I wouldn't spend a nickle to hun here in Washington.


Now my brother inlaw is an antler hunter, he pays the big money to hunt caged whitetails and is proud as a peacock with his mounted caged deer heads.
The last monster buck he shot in Ohio was huge. He got to keep the head, antlers and hide for thousands of dollars and the deer farm kept the meat.
No sport in shooting a caged deer or any other farm raised animal in my opinion.


But it's legal and he likes it so go have at it.

I have a friend who went on a guided bullalo hunt, they took him out in a four wheel drive truck to the Buffalo herd, told him which bull to shoot and the hunt was over.
 
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. What constitutes what one considers "hunting" is as varied as opinions. Subsistence hunting was the first form of hunting and many times it was not pretty, nor was it humane. Running animals over a bluff, driving them into the water and beating them with clubs. Hunting deer with leg snares and the use of old fashioned leg hold traps. Understandably. Folks were desperate and hungry. They had to live. Today, in the lower 48, there is no real need for subsistence hunting. While living off the land, foraging and eating meat that you kill can be a lifestyle, it is not a necessity. It is a choice, just like sport hunting and trophy hunting. Folks do it because they enjoy it, not because they are going to starve to death if they don't. In order for humans to be safe and provide food for others, wildlife needs to be controlled and kept within their boundaries. Their numbers also need to be controlled so they do not annihilate the ecosystem they are living within. Sport/Trophy hunting does this along with providing income for the local establishments that cater to hunters and those agencies that look out for wildlife. This includes habitat improvement and regulation/law enforcement. One reason we have the amount of wildlife today(both game and non-game) is because of hunters, their conservation efforts, donations towards wildlife and their license fees. While I am not a fan of shooting penned animals and those that are domesticated/semi-domesticated, under the guise of hunting, as long as it is done legally and humanely, I don't have any issue. Nor should any responsible and educated hunter.
As noted, your opinion.
 
This article is about hunting in South Africa .In South Africa a lot of marginal ranchland was allowed to revert back to a more natural state , and game is allowed to exist close to the maximum carrying capacity , with the excess managed by "trophy" and "cull" hunting . This isn't left to chance , they employ biologist to determine what the offtake should be , both "trophy" and "cull" . When you make a kill there , there is NO waste . They do not field dress the animals , they are taken whole to be processed and all of the organs and offal is utilized , and whatever of the hides that the hunter doesn't want ( capes back skins etc,) . They will work tirelessly to make this so . To the point of bringing in extra help with chainsaws and winches from the neighbor . "Culls" are usually females , excess males that are taken by hired professional hunters , camp staff or paying clients and sometimes paying local South Africans who want some venison . Hunting is an important part of the rural economy that cannot be replaced with tourism in most areas . To do away with trophy hunting in Africa devalues wildlife , and the land would be cleared to provide marginal rangeland and the wildlife would be slaughtered for cheap food . This is ugly as the way the locals harvest the animals is with indiscriminate snares and traps so they can be "hunting" while they are working in the fields , efficient but cruel .

As far as knocking trophy hunters , that's not a well thought thru idea . For one as hunters we should all stick together . And there seems to be some misconception that there has to be a choice between taking the meat or taking the horns . It is illegal in every state to leave meat in the field , and generally required to bring the meat out first . A trophy hunter is actually utilizing more of the animal .Trophy hunters are more selective in the animals they take , and in some cases willing to not tag anything if it doesn't meet their standard . ( Not me , I like big horn's but I hate Tag soup !) Areas that are managed as trophy areas ( antler restrictions ) have herds that are older aged on average , and breeding is done by natural selection more so then surviving males . Which makes the herd stronger . There is nothing wrong with being a " meat hunter " at all , we all are , really . As long as it's legal we should all support hunting together , or we will all lose it together !!
 
Personally, trophy hunting is BS. I grew up in a semi-subsistence lifestyle and was taught to hunt for food not something to put on a wall. Killing animals just for sport has outlived it time other than killing them because they cause damage or are a danger. Yes, a bunch of you will be haters of this so prove me wrong!
“Trophy hunting” saved the tradition of hunting in North America. Please do a little research before continuing to prove your sig line ironic…
 
Personally, trophy hunting is BS. I grew up in a semi-subsistence lifestyle and was taught to hunt for food not something to put on a wall. Killing animals just for sport has outlived it time other than killing them because they cause damage or are a danger. Yes, a bunch of you will be haters of this so prove me wrong!
Before anyone "proves" anyone wrong, we should define the terms we're using so that we can hopefully avoid talking in circles. Could you precisely define "trophy hunting" as you understand the term?
 
From my point of view, if a hunter pays to hunt and keeps the skin/cape, skull, horns-antlers, etc. as a trophy, and the hunter, guide, trackers, locals, etc. harvest the meat from the hunters kill, it’s a win-win. Hunter gets his trophy to remember the hunt, he and/or others get the meat to eat.

Now if “trophy hunting” involves a kill but the hunter is just taking the cape and leaving the rest to lie in the sun for the buzzards, that (to me) is no better than ivory poachers who slaughter elephants, hack out the tusks and leave the carcass to rot. In my book, no way, Jose.

From what I have read up on paid African hunting safaris and other worldwide guided hunts, the scenario is far more often the former and not the latter.

(Predator and varmint hunting are different to me, as the descendant of multi/generational cattle-sheep ranchers these kills serve a purpose beyond a wall mount or freezer.)

But again, my opinion is worth no more and no less than anyone else's.

Stay safe.
 
“Trophy hunting” saved the tradition of hunting in North America. Please do a little research before continuing to prove your sig line ironic…
Trophy hunting is a form of hunting for sport in which parts of the hunted wild animals are kept and displayed as trophies. The animal being targeted, known as the "game", is typically a mature male specimen from a popular species of collectible interests, usually of large sizes, holding impressive horns, antlers, furs or manes. Most trophies consist of only select parts of the animal, which are prepared for display by a taxidermist. The parts most commonly kept vary by species, but often include head, hide tusks, horns, or antlers.

Trophies are often displayed in trophy rooms or game rooms, or by gun rooms along with the hunter's gun collection.
 
Personally, trophy hunting is BS. I grew up in a semi-subsistence lifestyle and was taught to hunt for food not something to put on a wall. Killing animals just for sport has outlived it time other than killing them because they cause damage or are a danger. Yes, a bunch of you will be haters of this so prove me wrong!

Haters? When somebody disagrees with your opinion it doesn’t make them a “hater” it just means they disagree with your premise.

It was substance and market hunting that nearly wiped out all North American wildlife. That is not my opinion, it is a fact. The formation of the Boone & Crocket club by forward thinking conservationists is the prime factor that saved wildlife from going extinct in North America due to unsustainable market and meat hunting.

The B&C club instituted hunting seasons, licenses and conservation practices. To include only shooting mature males at or towards the end of their useful breeding age. AKA a trophy.

If it hadn’t been for the establishment of “trophy hunting” and making hunters aware of the benefits of selective take we would have no wildlife left, just like there is no wildlife left in places in Africa that don’t allow sport hunting.

Here’s an article to get you started.

 
Trophy hunting is a form of hunting for sport in which parts of the hunted wild animals are kept and displayed as trophies. The animal being targeted, known as the "game", is typically a mature male specimen from a popular species of collectible interests, usually of large sizes, holding impressive horns, antlers, furs or manes. Most trophies consist of only select parts of the animal, which are prepared for display by a taxidermist. The parts most commonly kept vary by species, but often include head, hide tusks, horns, or antlers.

Trophies are often displayed in trophy rooms or game rooms, or by gun rooms along with the hunter's gun collection.

And in what state in the US can you legally shoot a trophy animal that is considered edible and leave the meat to rot?

Every single state in the US requires the meat to be recovered.

So just because the head skin and horns were kept does not mean the meat was wasted. Which is a common misconception amongst those who disparage “trophy” hunting. Most don’t understand what the word means.

Take a look at why the Boone & Crocket club was organized. Without value being placed on the trophy we’d have no wildlife left.

 
Last edited:
Your opinion.
You say that like it's a bad thing, or some type of refutation. You stated your opinion, and others stated theirs. You are free to disagree, but labeling anyone who disagrees a hater is not high road.

If you have something new to add to the discussion, please do. If you have credible information to refute what others have said, put it out there. Repetition is not validation, however, so let's move on.
 
Hunting for food, sport, hides or as a way to cull off excess animal population is hunting. The animals are just as dead. In this area, the forest preserves have "marksmen" who come in now and then and kill off excess deer in the forest preserves. No "hunting" allowed but you can pay someone to come in and kill them and dump the caresses in the landfill.
 
I’ve passed literally hundreds of deer that I could have legally killed waiting for a big buck.

I've passed on smaller turkey to get a big gobbler.

we eat everything we harvest. I have a freezer with plenty of beef and pork.

There used to be guys that were allowed to deer hunt the same farm I did. Their philosophy was “if it’s brown it’s down”. That year we found about a dozen deer spread over three sections that were shot and lost.
 
Last edited:
Trophy hunting is a form of hunting for sport in which parts of the hunted wild animals are kept and displayed as trophies. The animal being targeted, known as the "game", is typically a mature male specimen from a popular species of collectible interests, usually of large sizes, holding impressive horns, antlers, furs or manes. Most trophies consist of only select parts of the animal, which are prepared for display by a taxidermist. The parts most commonly kept vary by species, but often include head, hide tusks, horns, or antlers.

Trophies are often displayed in trophy rooms or game rooms, or by gun rooms along with the hunter's gun collection.
What about that do you have an objection to, exactly? To be clear, nothing in that definition excludes the use of the meat, skin or fur.
Your opinion.
It isn't though. Market hunting for meat very nearly wiped out wild big game in this country. Folks like Theodore Roosevelt used the concept of "trophy" and "sport" hunting to instill a sense of monetary value to those animals beyond simply poundage of meat. That played a significant part in saving those species from extinction. We don't have to like it, but it did happen.

FWIW, I say this as someone who does not consider themselves to be a "trophy" hunter. I'm about as close to a "subsistence" hunter as can be found in the lower 48. Hunting provides all of my family's red meat. I do like to get larger, male animals and I do display the antlers, as hunters have done for 10,000 years or more, but that's not why I am hunting that animal. I do not have them "prepared for display by a taxidermist" (you can tell me if that's a defining characteristic of a "trophy", as the definition you posted seemed to imply). I do not post pictures of them for strangers to see.
 
Back
Top