PDA

View Full Version : How Do You Feel About Hunting?



SpearBrave
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:32 AM
Since we touched on the subject of hunting in several threads I thought it would be nice to have a overall discussion on hunting in general.:)

Please post your thoughts about hunting here. Do you like to hunt? Do you Like to eat wild game? Do you think hunting is Germanic? Are you opposed to hunting?

RoyBatty
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:37 AM
Hunting for food, no problem.

Hunting for sport and wanton killing - I don't like this.

Astrid Runa
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:44 AM
I don't agree with hunting for sport.
I think it's cruel and inhuman.
I'm majorly against the hunting and killing of wolves.

But if you hunt and kill for food and use EVERYTHING from the animal, including the skin and bones, then I suppose that's acceptable.

wittwer
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:46 PM
Since we touched on the subject of hunting in several threads I thought it would be nice to have a overall discussion on hunting in general.:)

Please post your thoughts about hunting here. Do you like to hunt? Do you Like to eat wild game? Do you think hunting is Germanic? Are you opposed to hunting?

Hunting? It's ok. Certainly beats lying on the couch staring at the Boobtube or Computer.
I've hunted and fished (fishing can be construed as a form of hunting) since I was nine or ten years old. As for target game, Mice, Rats, Squirrels, Rabbits, Prairie Dogs, Pronghorn, Deer, Pheasant, Ducks, Geese, and in the aquatic realm, fish, frogs, crawfish, assorted mollusks.

As for the cultural attributes of hunting, it's certainly not Germanic in nature. More like Paleolithic... ;)

Ocko
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:53 PM
I am a hunter. I go for deer and wild hog.

when out on suvival exercises I do trapping, whatever I catch there I eat.

Hunting has different phases:

phase I : shooting whatever moves

phaseII : going for the challenge (trophy)

phase III : filling the fridge

phase IV: being out in nature is the most important thing, you shoot what is necessary to shoot.

Thorwolf
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 02:58 PM
I love to engage in wild hog hunting! Here in Texas, we have so many of them, it is a public service to take them out. I have allways enjoyed this. Next, I want to start doing hog hunting with a spear, just like the germans did, long after the advent of guns. It is for sure more manly, you must risk your life in order to bring home the bacon. lol.

I am not a big fan of stand shooting, this to me has more in common with target shooting. where is the thrill of the hunt? I prefer to stalk my prey!

Ocko
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:13 PM
They still do hog hunting with lances in Germany. It adds some thrill to the fun.

wild hogs are bad here (northern Cal) too, uprooting gardens, lawns etc. They clearly make a mess. You can't shoot them around the houses and those bastards are cunning and moving around.

So you have to track them.

I think of getting a 'deutscher Jagdterrier' for hog hunting.

Rev. Jupiter
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:19 PM
I don't currently have the financial means to hunt, but I definitely support hunting, both for food and for sport.

A lot of people oppose hunting for sport because they assume hunting for sport = killing for fun. No, hunting, like all sports, has certain rules and expectations that one must adhere to in order to be sportsmanlike.

I would never lay a trap of any kind or use a stand if I were hunting merely for a trophy. However, if the primary motivation behind the hunting trip was sustenance, it would be perfectly reasonable to use any means necessary to ensure I had food on the table.

Grimsteinr
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:24 PM
Hunting was a regular thing in my Family. I learned to shoot and hunted with a .22 when I was 10. In my 12th Winter I went rabbit hunting with a 16 ga, shotgun of my Father's. For my 14th Xmas, I was given a 20 ga. pump shotgun.
I've really only killed small game. Ive shot rabbits, squirrels, muskrats, groundhogs, raccoon, peccaries, bobwhite quail, and pheasant, with .22 and shotgun. It was all, always regarded as "food for the table".
I have eaten all of those. As well, I have eaten deer, Russian boar, and American Bison/buffalo.

Roderic
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:34 PM
Do you like to hunt?

Yes.

Do you Like to eat wild game?

Yes.

Do you think hunting is Germanic?

Yes.

Are you opposed to hunting?

I certainly oppose the killing of animals threatened by extinction or protected by the law and i understand that some people have pitty of the animals killed because they are very graceful in the wilds and some hunting technics can be very cruel for the animals.

I also think that hunting as a sport is a less noble activity than hunting for food or hunting as a training method for war.

And being a hunter is one of the few excuses that allows civilians to own guns in many western european countries.

So i am in favour of hunting because it is a more healthy and useful activity for our people than staying at home playing gameboy.

Thorwolf
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:39 PM
They still do hog hunting with lances in Germany. It adds some thrill to the fun.

wild hogs are bad here (northern Cal) too, uprooting gardens, lawns etc. They clearly make a mess. You can't shoot them around the houses and those bastards are cunning and moving around.

So you have to track them.

I think of getting a 'deutscher Jagdterrier' for hog hunting.



have you ever seen a cold steal boar spear? If not you should check one out. They are great. I have seen a 800+ lb. hog dispatched with one. Although I would consider a steel shaft, as hogs in Texas are rather large!

Ocko
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 03:54 PM
I have been toying with the idea of lancing hogs but I have a healthy respect of them.

I do own 3 16th century japanese lances, they would do well for that. the vibs of them call for blood. Maybe one day I do.

Reshki
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 06:37 PM
Do you like to hunt?

Yes.


Do you Like to eat wild game?

Hell yes.


Do you think hunting is Germanic?

Of course it is.


Are you opposed to hunting?

Obviously not.


Now, for some caveats. I don't "trophy hunt". Trophy hunting being defined as guys going out to kill the biggest buck/boar/whatever to keep its head and leave the rest for the coyotes (not that coyotes need to eat).

I also don't consider stand hunting to be hunting. It's a shooting game, but you're not hunting anything, you're waiting for something to come in range.

I like spot and stalk hunting, and I eat most of what I kill. Some goes to my dogs (no, I don't "run" deer or bay hogs with my dogs, it's just a treat for them when I get home), some gets left for carrion and buzzards. The meat I eat or give to places that feed the poor with it.

I hunt deer -- with bow and arrow and rifle.
I hunt hogs -- with guns, boar spears, and occasionally, a knife. In fact, hogs are considered pest animals here, they multiply so fast, and outside of Wildlife Management Areas, you can hunt them year round.
I also hunt rabbit and squirrel.

What some don't understand is that prey animals need to be hunted, because if you don't kill off a percentage of the population, they will become too numerous, overfeed and end up starving to death, pestilence increases, and many become too weak competing for resources, that they die. In the end, you end up lose far more of the herd than if you hunt them.

Likewise, I understand some not wanting to hunt predators, as some are our totem animals like wolves (mine is the grizzly bear), but even they must be hunted to some degree, otherwise, they come into conflict with humans, both killing livestock, and eventually killing humans, particularly children. So they must be hunted to keep their population in check, but not to extinction.

flâneur
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 07:06 PM
I dont have time these days but im in touch with someone who will get me a Harris hawk when i move to fortress Europe.
Heres me aged about seven with my first peregrine falcon....which flew off.....oh how i cried.:(

Ive had kestrels,sparrowhaks,peregrines,buzzards and even a goshawk which was a fearsome beast.

I love falconry because it involves being quiet and alone,and you can eat what you get if its big enough and your falcon or hawk gets fed wild hot meat which he loves.....and it involves being out in the fresh air for hours on end.

nauthiz
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 07:46 PM
Absolutely a hunter here. I don't have the desire or the money to buy meat from the store. I do get beef raised by my neighbors and i hunt deer and elk for my meat. I freeze some and can some. I also fish.
I suppose a lot of people haven't had the chance to live like I do, there is much sacrifice to do so. Not all, but many people have an opinion about hunting from living in a bubble and believeing all they read about how savage us hunters are. The truth is quite the contrary.

Thorolf
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 07:50 PM
ive always loved to go hunting, my dad took me hunting the first time when i was about 6. Ive heard a lot of criticism from people for hunting, but the people against it around here are stupid. The deer here have no natural predators, something has to eat they will overpopulate worse than they already have.

Caledonian
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 08:10 PM
I like hunting.

I've hunted deer, rabbit, coyote, possums, quail, wild turkey, and racoons.


Before I die I would like to hunt a bear or mountain lion just for the sheer thrill of it all in that I would like the challenge.

[I would also like to get better at using a bow as it is more challenging than your standard rifle.]

[Living in the big city I haven't gone hunting in about four years meaning I'm a bit out of practice.]

[There is nothing more thrilling than carving up your dinner with a hunting knife after killing it yourself.]

Hamar Fox
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 09:48 PM
I'm definitely against hunting...animals anyway. I actually love animals a lot more than people, and could derive no pleasure from killing one. The ratio of humans to animals, of whatever species, is already too high. Killing any member of any species, but especially non-vermin, just adds to making the world an uglier place.

SpearBrave
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 10:05 PM
I am a very avid hunter, in fact it is one of things I think about the most.

Although I do get quite a bit of game, I have long been at the stage where going hunting is more important than killing game. It is a way to stay in tune with nature and keep your skills sharp about the wild world around you.:)

As far a trophy hunting goes I do see why some would want to keep a skull, head or hide from a particularly good animal. It is a way to honor the animal and the hunt. I don't much like the idea of just killing a animal for the trophy and leaving the meat and carcass for the scavengers. Given that every now and then you take a trophy sized animal then I don't think it is wrong to honor it by displaying the head, skull, or hide as long as you as honor it by eating the meat. I don't personally have any taxidermy heads as I just like to keep the cleaned skulls and hides.

I also understand that there is a need to hunt to control predator populations and nuisance animals that are not always the best to eat.

I hunt or have hunted the following game Deer, Moose, Bear, Boar, Elk, on the large game list. On the small game list I hunt Rabbits, Squirrels, and various game birds. As far as none game animals I hunt coons(the four legged type:D)ground hogs, opossums, coyotes, foxes, and turkeys.

Yes I list turkeys as none game because the only wild turkey I like comes from a bottle and is made in Kentucky;). Turkeys are very hard on crops and other game bird populations, since I don't much care for the way they taste I give them away.

For large game hunting I use a long bow, shotgun with slugs, rifle, handgun, and flintlock muzzle loader. Here in Indiana rifles are not permitted to be used on Deer, so I mostly use bow,shotgun, and flintlock. For small game I use a either .22 or a shotgun for birds.

Of all the hunting I like to do my favorite is bird hunting with dogs. I raise English Setters just for the purpose of hunting game birds such as Quail, Pheasant, Hungarian Partridge, Prairie Chicken, Woodcock, and last but not the least Ruffled Grouse. To me a bad day of Grouse hunting is better than a good at anything else. It is a thrill to watch your dogs running at full speed turn and lock on point. When the Ruffled Grouse is flushed your heart beats as fast as his wings do and you only have a few seconds to make a shot before the bird is gone. In a good Grouse woods you may get as many as 50 flushes in day but only a few birds as they are quick. Yes I do keep the tail feathers of Grouse I have taken as records of past hunts. Grouse tail feathers form a fan like turkeys.

Anselm
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 10:39 PM
Yes.
Likewise, I understand some not wanting to hunt predators, as some are our totem animals like wolves (mine is the grizzly bear), but even they must be hunted to some degree, otherwise, they come into conflict with humans, both killing livestock, and eventually killing humans, particularly children. So they must be hunted to keep their population in check, but not to extinction.

Wolves try to avoid people. There's never been a case of a wolf, unless it had rabies attacking a human. There were cases of wolf attacks in 18th century Japan due to a rabies outbreak.

Predators do a much better job than humans at managing populations, because they take the weak or sick. Hunters usually take "trophies" and the strong. But a lot of hunters just like killing. I knew guys that'd shoot dogs or anything.

I'm a vegan nowadays, although I grew up hunting, but I think hunting, if done respectfully and humanely, is better than factory farming, because the animals are free until they're killed. The land to raise cattle is taken from wolves and other predatory animals driving them from their habitat.

Ocko
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:12 PM
I have seen a 800+ lb. hog dispatched with one

there aren't 800 lbs hogs, thats BS

Landers
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:30 PM
I'm a hunt-sab (http://hsa.enviroweb.org/).

Wulfram
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:51 PM
I support hunting if it is for food. However, Ted Nugent-style hunting I don't.
I have watched his show a few times.
During one episode he sneaks up on a young bull elephant that is placidly munching away on some grass and he shoots and kills it with a rifle.

Easy as that. Fish in a barrel they say. That struck me as being rather way too easy.
When it comes to a majestic animals like that I get the impression that the animal should be given the chance to fight for its life.
Instead, most hunters, especially when the game is potentially dangerous, will kill their prey from the safety of a blind or perch.

Why not confront the Grizzly bear instead? Why not provoke it into charging you first?
This way the hunter can not only test his bravery but also his skill as a hunter.
If he is brave enough and skilled enough then he can take the bear down immediately.
If he isn't then I can't think of a more honorable way for a hunter to leave this world than to be mauled by an angry Grizzly. ;)

Gerulf
Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 11:53 PM
There's nothing at all wrong with hunting. Human beings have been hunting for as long as we have walked this earth. Hunting is part of the natural survival instinct that ALL people possess, whether they think they do or not.

SpearBrave
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 12:03 AM
I'm a hunt-sab (http://hsa.enviroweb.org/).

Then you are criminal in my home state.

Indiana was one of the first states to pass laws against hunter harassment.:thumbup

Hersir
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 04:10 AM
there aren't 800 lbs hogs, thats BS

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275524,00.html But I guess it must be some kind of hybrid, bred especially for hunting.

My family have mostly been fishermen and not hunters, but at the island where my mother grew up there are sometimes some moose that swim there from other islands. I really like meat from deer, rein deer and moose.

Whale is good too, but a bit hard to hunt those:P The small ones are endangered so I wouldnt hunt them. I got a type of dolphin on the hook when I was fishing this summer, but luckily it got loose pretty quickly. Hope it wasnt hurt badly. Hunting is common in Norway.

Even Pentti Linkola supports hunting. Humans wouldnt have been able to evolve big brains without eating meat.

Æmeric
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 04:24 AM
I have nothing against hunting though it has been over 30-years since I last hunted - wild boar in Arizona. I think the quota for deer should be increased in Indiana. We have way too many deer, more are killed every year by automobiles then by hunters. I did hit a deer a few years ago, it cost me about $1,500.

theTasmanian
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 05:43 AM
there aren't 800 lbs hogs, thats BS


Largest Feral pig confirmed kill in Australia as far as i know was 220kg's(485lb)

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/regions/content/2007/s2586799.htm


800+ is probably not a common thing i would say ;)

theTasmanian
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:11 AM
Hunting.........Love it:D

I am not a trophy hunter...i just don't get it plenty of friends are not me my be making a arch of antlers or having a cleaned skull in the shed but not a trophy as SpearBrave mentioned

I mainly hunt for food and its Human or dog food depending on the condition of the Animal or shot placement

I do how ever do a lot of culling of Wallaby's(Native species) and Rabbits(feral) as the wallaby's can become a very large pest population competing with Dairy cattle for food...so it can be a job "Shooting"(big difference between shooting and Hunting) with the aid of a spotlight and 4x4 tractor/4x4 ute as above the meat is used when possible

the main animals i shoot/hunt

Wallaby(Native animal you must have a Permit)
Rabbit(Feral)
Hare(Feral)
Goats(Feral)
Fallow deer(Feral but under permit as they are a "Game" species and under management)
Duck(Permit)
Pea fowl aka Pea cock/pea hen(Feral and i often call them "Big chewy chickens")
Native hen(Native only found in Tasmania Permit needed...as for eating its said to be cooked with a rock.......you eat the rock as its softer but i will try it myself one day)

Tasmania does not have Feral pig's like the rest of Australia.pity i love Pork:D

I have in the past hunted Camel(Australia has the worlds largest Feral population) and Donkey's(Feral)

Mainland Australia also has Samba deer ,Hog Deer ,Sika deer ,red deer and Chital deer there is also talk of making a Crocodile season.....................mmm sweet chicken :dinner:

Ruffus wallaby
http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/theMISSIONARY_257/Firearms/Rufuswallaby.jpg

Bennett's wallaby(we shoot those too...lovely skins)
http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/theMISSIONARY_257/Firearms/Benettswallaby.jpg

Native Hen
http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/theMISSIONARY_257/Firearms/Nativehen.jpg

SaxonCeorl
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:24 AM
Hunting isn't my thing (I wasn't raised with it), but I don't have a problem with it. I'm not exactly what you'd call a strong proponent of animal rights, so I don't mind hunting for sport. My only concern is that hunters follow strict safety precautions to prevent injury or death to other humans.

The only aspect of hunting I have a problem with is exposing young boys to killing and guns at an early age, as I think such exposure may desensitize them to the tremendous seriousness of what a gun is capable of.

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 02:50 PM
there aren't 800 lbs hogs, thats BS


I beg to differ, google it. now keep in mind that I am talking feral hogs, not pure russian boar!

All across the south, we have huge numbers of feral hogs, and sometimes they get extremely large. have you ever heard of hogzilla?

If you truly beleive there are no 800 lb hogs, I sugest you do more reaserch before you go with a spear>

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 02:55 PM
PrintShareThis
AP



Jamison Stone, 11, poses with a wild pig he killed near Delta, Ala.
An 11-year-old Alabama boy used a pistol to kill a wild hog that just may be the biggest pig ever found.

Jamison Stone's father says the hog his son killed weighed a 1,051 pounds and measured 9-feet-4 from the tip of its snout to the base of its tail. Think hams as big as car tires.

If the claims are accurate, Jamison's trophy boar would be bigger than Hogzilla, the famed wild hog that grew to seemingly mythical proportions after being killed in south Georgia in 2004.

Hogzilla originally was thought to weigh 1,000 pounds and measure 12 feet in length. National Geographic experts who unearthed its remains believe the animal actually weighed about 800 pounds and was 8 feet long.

Sigurd
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 02:56 PM
I must say I have not hunted myself, but it certainly is somewhere on my "to do" list, I do wish to obtain a hunting licence at some point. The idea of shooting your own food actually seems quite appealing to this Teuton. :)

I would say I probably agree with most things that have been said by folks in this thread. Hunting for food is good, traditional and does not do any harm. If it starts out as sport and then has the animal - preferably all parts of it - used then that is also fine. But hunting for sport alone is something I cannot find myself agreeing with, and it is something I consider as too decadent for a self-respecting Germanic, regardless of how many of our lords and ladies loved nothing better.

I'd say we should stick within nature here, and let her guide us a little more. With some common sense, we'd know which animal population to shoot at which time of year, and what to do with them, and which ones to stay clear of. Those close to extinction in a certain region should certainly be off the bill at least until the population has grown back a little. ;)

SpearBrave
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 03:13 PM
I have nothing against hunting though it has been over 30-years since I last hunted - wild boar in Arizona. I think the quota for deer should be increased in Indiana. We have way too many deer, more are killed every year by automobiles then by hunters. I did hit a deer a few years ago, it cost me about $1,500.

I will see what I can do about those deer this year.:)



The only aspect of hunting I have a problem with is exposing young boys to killing and guns at an early age, as I think such exposure may desensitize them to the tremendous seriousness of what a gun is capable of.

If anything teaching our youth about firearms shows them respect for what firearms can do.

I hope it never comes but there may be a day when we need these desensitized young men to protect our race and culture.

Ocko
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 03:22 PM
I have never seen a hog bigger than around 200 pounds. And that in itself is a ferocious animal.

As you mentioned a SPEARED 800 lbs hog I question that even more.

I know about hunters and fisherman that the fish gets bigger with every retelling of the story, the buck gets more tines and so on.

I don't know about domestic (feral) hogs but wild boars most unlikely get that weight.

here is a record boar from your home state:

world record boar (http://www.texashuntfish.com/app/view/Post/171/New-World-Record-Weiser-Weight-Tusk-Free-Range-Boar)

that one weighted about 600 lbs. Its hard to believe anyway.

flâneur
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 05:31 PM
I have never seen a hog bigger than around 200 pounds. And that in itself is a ferocious animal.


I think you should pay a visit to any British high street on a friday night....around midnight say...;)

Old Winter
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 05:45 PM
Hunting is usually done by old fat man who can hardly hold their weapon straight, i once demonstrated against a hunters day (was a anniversary or something) somewhere and every last one of them fitted that description.

SpearBrave
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:07 PM
Hunting is usually done by old fat man who can hardly hold their weapon straight, i once demonstrated against a hunters day (was a anniversary or something) somewhere and every last one of them fitted that description.

Hunting is usually oppossed by people that are too sissy to track and kill their own food. I know I have seen several of them demostrating against hunting.:P

Actually hunting is very pysical activity and hunters are all ages and body types. ;)

Old Winter
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:30 PM
Hunting is usually oppossed by people that are too sissy to track and kill their own food. I know I have seen several of them demostrating against hunting.:P


They are usually vegetarian or vegan.

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:46 PM
I have never seen a hog bigger than around 200 pounds. And that in itself is a ferocious animal.

As you mentioned a SPEARED 800 lbs hog I question that even more.

I know about hunters and fisherman that the fish gets bigger with every retelling of the story, the buck gets more tines and so on.

I don't know about domestic (feral) hogs but wild boars most unlikely get that weight.

here is a record boar from your home state:

world record boar (http://www.texashuntfish.com/app/view/Post/171/New-World-Record-Weiser-Weight-Tusk-Free-Range-Boar)

that one weighted about 600 lbs. Its hard to believe anyway.




A feral hog, is half russian boar, and half escaped farm hog. and weather you beleive it or not , the fact is they do exist. and some of them have been dispatched with a spear. You see, the statistic you give is for a russian boar, they are considered game animals, and as such are subject to licencesed hunting only.

The feral hog, on the other hand is not a game animal,more of a pest than anything else. and as such they are not protected. you do not need a license to hunt them, just a hunting lease. of the 250 countys in Texas. 200 of them are overrun with feral hogs.

If you doubt it, come on down to Texas some time, and we will go hunt some.

I will show you what a catch dog can do! be sure to bring something high power, my sujestion would be short barreled, .45-70. maybe a marlin 336 a.


and as for the fish story, look at the pictures yourself. foxnews.com story#0,2933,27...

wittwer
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 06:48 PM
In N.A. there is only one native species which really isn't from the Boar/hog family and that is the Banded Peccary aka the Javelina and is located in the S.W.. As for the others, there are wild boar (introduced from Europe), feral hogs (escaped livestock), and hybrids (cross mating between boars and hogs). All of these can be extremely destructive to the native ecosystem and at times must be culled from the wild.

As for size, from the Illinois DNR, boars are on average approx. 200 lbs. and feral Hogs are approx. 200+ lbs, stnd about 3ft. high at the shoulder, have an average tail length of 12in. and are about 5ft. in length from the snout to the tip of the tail. There have been reports of larger animals in the wild, but without corroborated data available, these reports must be taken as possible good "fish stories".

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 07:02 PM
there is data, how about pictures of hogs 9 ft 4 in from snout to tail, mare than 4 ft at the shoulder, and waying in at 800 plus lbs. look at the news story I posted above, and you will see one.

You can doubt it all you want.


Ocko, I went to the link you gave for the 6oo pounder. It is nowhere near the size of the animal I am trying to tell you about. go to the fox news report and see a picture of this hog, I am not making any of this up!

since you have seen a picture with your own eyes, why is it hard to beleive that even bigger ones are out there?

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 07:13 PM
Pound Monster Pig, Bigger Than 'Hogzilla'
Saturday, May 26, 2007


PrintShareThis
AP



Jamison Stone, 11, poses with a wild pig he killed near Delta, Ala.
An 11-year-old Alabama boy used a pistol to kill a wild hog that just may be the biggest pig ever found.

Jamison Stone's father says the hog his son killed weighed a 1,051 pounds and measured 9-feet-4 from the tip of its snout to the base of its tail. Think hams as big as car tires.

If the claims are accurate, Jamison's trophy boar would be bigger than Hogzilla, the famed wild hog that grew to seemingly mythical proportions after being killed in south Georgia in 2004.

Hogzilla originally was thought to weigh 1,000 pounds and measure 12 feet in length. National Geographic experts who unearthed its remains believe the animal actually weighed about 800 pounds and was 8 feet long.

After seeing the pig in person, taxidermist Jerry Cunningham told The Anniston Star it was "the biggest thing I'd ever seen ... it's huge."

The Anniston Star reported that the feral hog was weighed at the Clay County Farmer's Exchange in Lineville. Workers at the co-op verified that the basic truck scales used were recently certified by the state. But no workers from the co-op were present when the hog was weighed.

Jamison is reveling in the attention over his pig, which has a Web site put up by his father — http://www.monsterpig.com (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mons terpig.com) — that is generating Internet buzz.

"It feels really good," Jamison, of Pickensville, said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "It's a good accomplishment. I probably won't ever kill anything else that big."

Jamison, who killed his first deer at age 5, was hunting with father Mike Stone and two guides in east Alabama on May 3 when he bagged Hogzilla II. He said he shot the huge animal eight times with a .50-caliber revolver and chased it for three hours through hilly woods before finishing it off with a point-blank shot.

Through it all there was the fear that the animal would turn and charge them, as wild boars have a reputation of doing.

"I was a little bit scared, a little bit excited," said Jamison, who just finished the sixth grade on the honor roll at Christian Heritage Academy, a small, private school.

His father said that, just to be extra safe, he and the guides had high-powered rifles aimed and ready to fire in case the beast with 5-inch tusks decided to charge.

With the pig finally dead in a creek bed on the 2,500-acre Lost Creek Plantation, a commercial hunting preserve in Delta, trees had to be cut down and a backhoe brought in to bring Jamison's prize out of the woods.

It was hauled on a truck to the Clay County Farmers Exchange in Lineville, where Jeff Kinder said they used his scale, which was recently calibrated, to weigh the hog.

Kinder, who didn't witness the weigh-in, said he was baffled to hear the reported weight of 1,051 pounds because his scale — an old, manual style with sliding weights — only measures to the nearest 10.

"I didn't quite understand that," he said.

Mike Stone said the scale balanced one notch past the 1,050-pound mark, and he thought it meant a weight of 1,051 pounds.

"It probably weighed 1,060 pounds. We were just afraid to change it once the story was out," he said.

The hog's head is now being mounted on an extra-large foam form by Cunningham of Jerry's Taxidermy in Oxford. Cunningham said the animal measured 54 inches around the head, 74 inches around the shoulders and 11 inches from the eyes to the end of its snout.

Mike Stone is having sausage made from the rest of the animal. "We'll probably get 500 to 700 pounds," he said.

Jamison, meanwhile, has been offered a small part in "The Legend of Hogzilla," a small-time horror flick based on the tale of the Georgia boar. The movie is holding casting calls with plans to begin filming in Georgia.

The Anniston Star reported that congratulatory calls have come all the way from California, where Jamison appeared on a radio talk show. Jamison apparently has gotten words of congratulation from Rickey Medlocke of Lynyrd Skynyrd, country music star Kenny Chesney, Tom Knapp of Benelli firearms and Jerry Miculek of Smith & Wesson.

Jamison is enjoying the newfound celebrity generated by the hog hunt, but he said he prefers hunting pheasants to monster pigs.

"They are a little less dangerous."

The Associated Press contributed to this report



For some reason, I can't get the picture on here. Go look for your self.

how is that for evidence?

Ocko
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 07:19 PM
ok, there are monster hogs. Weight not corroborated but definetly more than 200 lbs.

Here in California you can hunt hogs all year long but you need to buy a tag, its about 15 bucks a piece.


The ones which are running around here look pretty much russian boars, might have some feral blood in them but is not that dominant.

Cal. is also way more populated than Texas, a big hog wouldn't be able to hide.

Hogs weight you are talking about are getting close to cattle. It simply doesn't fit my imagination of what a hog is.

BTW I have a remington 770, 7mm, that should do a hog anysize.

Thorwolf
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 07:25 PM
It most certainly would! If you read the story, the weight was recorded on a truck scale callobrated by the d.o.t., go to the site, and see for your self.

I am glad to see that you are at least willing to listen to reson ocko.

I am not trying to fight with anyone here, just reporting on what I know to be true.

SpearBrave
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 07:53 PM
I know the hogs here in Indiana are of European/Russian stock, most adults killed are in the 200 to 300 lb range. Even a boar that size can take a hit pretty good. I have seen one shot four times with a 12 ga. slug in the vitals and still want put up a fight.

Their size may have something do with the winters, as food becomes scarce in the winter. If the wild pigs are anything like their domestic cousins then the more you feed them the bigger they get.

Caledonian
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 08:19 PM
Hunting isn't my thing (I wasn't raised with it), but I don't have a problem with it. I'm not exactly what you'd call a strong proponent of animal rights, so I don't mind hunting for sport. My only concern is that hunters follow strict safety precautions to prevent injury or death to other humans.

The only aspect of hunting I have a problem with is exposing young boys to killing and guns at an early age, as I think such exposure may desensitize them to the tremendous seriousness of what a gun is capable of.

I've shot off guns since I was twelve both pistols and rifles. ;)

[When younger I was accompanied by a adult of course.]

I remember that young age shooting beer bottles on a abandoned farm in the middle of nowhere where the beer bottles were on a fence in a distance.

[Great memory.]

Ocko
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 08:26 PM
did you drink them first?

Caledonian
Monday, October 25th, 2010, 08:36 PM
did you drink them first?

:D No man I was only twelve at the time.

If I recall correctly it was the adults present drinking at that time.

[Somewhat of a barbeque atmosphere where everybody after a feast started shooting off some rounds.]

[It was a fun day as I recall in memory.]

Northumbria
Wednesday, December 29th, 2010, 06:14 PM
Hunting for food, no problem.

Hunting for sport and wanton killing - I don't like this.

I agree with this. Hunting for sport is useless and a waste of an animals life, if you hunt for food that's fine but hunting for fun just reduces the amounts of wildlife needlessly. Culls if required (due to humans driving natural predators extinct) are also fine but again the meat shouldn't be wasted but instead fed to the dogs for example.

Northern Paladin
Wednesday, December 29th, 2010, 06:56 PM
I will fish, and release the fish once I take a picture, but I wont kill anything just for the hell of it, its just not right.

thea
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 02:55 AM
In N.A. there is only one native species which really isn't from the Boar/hog family and that is the Banded Peccary aka the Javelina and is located in the S.W.. As for the others, there are wild boar (introduced from Europe), feral hogs (escaped livestock), and hybrids (cross mating between boars and hogs). All of these can be extremely destructive to the native ecosystem and at times must be culled from the wild.

I can justify the hunting of invasive species. Hunting native species on the other hand - not so much...

Schubert
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 03:37 AM
I hunt deer, hog, bird, and occasionally a healthy grey squirrel if we want to spice up the stew in camp. Nothing better than a long hunt in the deep woods of the Northwestern Cascades with my father and grandfather, whether game is killed or not.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 03:51 AM
Nothing better than a long hunt in the deep woods of the Northwestern Cascades with my father and grandfather, whether game is killed or not.

That is a good point.:thumbup

Just the whole part about going hunting is more important than the actual killing of game. It is the tradition and the company of friends and family.

While some say "why don't you just go hiking " well I do that, but it is just not the same as stalking and carrying weapons. I often go squirrel hunting and just aim but don't fire( I don't like their meat that well).

Ælfrun
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 04:00 AM
Hunting is a good essential skill to have. Killing animals for food, clothing, bones etc is acceptable as long as the whole animal is being used. The way the chinese kill wild animals for fur is not acceptable. I do not wear fur, and I think that hunting endagered animals is very wrong.

Atali
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 05:17 AM
if you're going to use the entire animal, go for it. but if not, let it live...there's no sense in killing something for fun.

Schubert
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 06:06 AM
Is it not a little unreasonable to demand that every piece of the animal is used? Sure we eat all good meat including heart and liver (speaking of deer), but I have no use for a deer hide, I usually toss it (where it is then consumed by the elements and coyotes). It is terrible to kill for something petty like horns, but do you want me to build a teepee every time I kill something?

Autosomal Viking
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 06:18 AM
I don't hunt, but know people that did/do. It's all fine by me as long as the animal is killed quickly, eaten, and the population is not over-hunted. It's the way of nature.

Atali
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 06:25 AM
you're right, that's what i meant. if you're going to eat it, then by all means. sometimes people hunt for the horns or the skins

InvaderNat
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 07:18 AM
Yup love it, I hunt all the time - only really pests though e.g. Rabbits, Possums, Magpies, Goats and Deer. We always keep the meat from Goats, Deer and sometimes from Rabbits (if they're big enough to bother), from Possums you can get about $10 per pelt and Magpies...well I just hate them plain and simple; plus their quite smart so are a real challenge to get close enough to shoot with an air rifle or .22 (nor are they exactly a threatened species I might add).

thea
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 07:51 AM
What do you hate magpies for??? superstitions?

They're not as loud as pigeons. Aaargh! I hate the bloody pigeons! pair of them made a nest next to my window - I couldn't even wait until the nesting season was over, they had to go. I chucked the nest away, they're just sooo loud!

This summer there were a couple of magpies living in my gardens. I hardly ever heard them :)

Also, I think they're rather pretty http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Elster_wikipedia2.jpg

InvaderNat
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 10:22 PM
What do you hate magpies for??? superstitions?

They're not as loud as pigeons. Aaargh! I hate the bloody pigeons! pair of them made a nest next to my window - I couldn't even wait until the nesting season was over, they had to go. I chucked the nest away, they're just sooo loud!

This summer there were a couple of magpies living in my gardens. I hardly ever heard them :)

Also, I think they're rather pretty http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Elster_wikipedia2.jpg

Magpies are horrible, overly territorial things that swoop down and attack anyone who happens to innocently walk by their nest.

http://nest.typepad.com/.a/6a0115721817bb970b0120a56ae324970b-800wi

You'd think since they're the only birds capable of self-awareness that they'd be a little smarter/reasonable, but they're just plain horrible.


Brave though
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200812/r324313_1451003.jpg
...I hope it got what was coming to it. :P

Ingvaeonic
Tuesday, January 11th, 2011, 10:39 PM
Shooting wild pig in Australia is pretty common, though I wouldn't eat them, full of parasites and other nasties. There are a lot of other non-native feral animals in Australia, too, that are the descendants of domesticated livestock or pets that escaped into or were dumped in the bush; additionally there are exotic animals that were introduced for sport, like the red fox and the ferocious bunny rabbit, both of which are major pests.

Zimobog
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 02:42 AM
Possums you can get about $10 per pelt

Wow! That is some high quality possum!:D The fur trade is doing pretty healthy in the overseas markets like Greece, Turkey, Russia, Korea, and China. Trappers in Alaska are pretty optimistic about this years auctions.

Ælfrun
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 06:14 AM
Magpies are horrible, overly territorial things that swoop down and attack anyone who happens to innocently walk by their nest.

http://nest.typepad.com/.a/6a0115721817bb970b0120a56ae324970b-800wi

You'd think since they're the only birds capable of self-awareness that they'd be a little smarter/reasonable, but they're just plain horrible.




I agree, although they are pretty; they are a horrid species. They steal food from wherever they can get it and will eat small animals. On a good note, they do eat the ticks off of animals such as moose and cows ^^ Ticks are evil little bastards!

Elessar
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 06:24 AM
I agree, although they are pretty; they are a horrid species. They steal food from wherever they can get it and will eat small animals. On a good note, they do eat the ticks off of animals such as moose and cows ^^ Ticks are evil little bastards!

They can annoy the hell out of you at the crack of dawn when they're outside squawking. That's my only concern over magpies.

Concerning hunting, I don't support trophy or sport hunting. I find it quite disgusting.
Otherwise, I'm fine with it, as long as you respect the animal and forest.

InvaderNat
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 09:09 AM
Wow! That is some high quality possum!:D The fur trade is doing pretty healthy in the overseas markets like Greece, Turkey, Russia, Korea, and China. Trappers in Alaska are pretty optimistic about this years auctions.

Keep in mind that's NZ$, so about $6-$7 US. We have a massive problem here with possums, they're an introduced species that causes heaps of damage to the environment and native wildlife. I think there's about 70 million of them so we've got a lot of work to do. :-O

thea
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 11:03 AM
Magpies are horrible, overly territorial things that swoop down and attack anyone who happens to innocently walk by their nest.

You'd think since they're the only birds capable of self-awareness that they'd be a little smarter/reasonable, but they're just plain horrible. Brave though

They can annoy the hell out of you at the crack of dawn when they're outside squawking. That's my only concern over magpies.

Well, that's news to me! I suppose I shouldn't have judged the whole species by the pair that's nesting in our garden... That pair is very nice though: they've never attacked us when we walked by their nest (and we do that quite often because it's near our garden shed. They never squawk too - they'd be sooo out if they did!

Zimobog
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 05:27 PM
Keep in mind that's NZ$, so about $6-$7 US. We have a massive problem here with possums, they're an introduced species that causes heaps of damage to the environment and native wildlife. I think there's about 70 million of them so we've got a lot of work to do.

Try live traps baited with tinned cat food. Than you can catch the mommies with the babies on their backs and dispose of them all at once.

Bonus catches of stray cats, too.

InvaderNat
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 10:45 PM
Well, that's news to me! I suppose I shouldn't have judged the whole species by the pair that's nesting in our garden... That pair is very nice though: they've never attacked us when we walked by their nest (and we do that quite often because it's near our garden shed. They never squawk too - they'd be sooo out if they did!

Just wait until their mating season, that's when they usually start getting aggressive.

Hilderinc
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011, 11:17 PM
I don't hunt but I would really like to some time.

Here hunting is all about the deer. It would be unthinkable for someone not to use every last scrap of meat on it.

I don't know if this has been mentioned before in the thread, but many times hunting is not just done 'for fun' but it is necessary to control the population of a type of animal. Many grazing animals do not have any predators because humans killed them off, and their population would sky rocket and destroy the ecosystem if humans did not bring their numbers down.

Gerulf
Friday, January 28th, 2011, 01:53 AM
I'm definitely against hunting...animals anyway. I actually love animals a lot more than people, and could derive no pleasure from killing one. The ratio of humans to animals, of whatever species, is already too high. Killing any member of any species, but especially non-vermin, just adds to making the world an uglier place.

Are you a vegetarian?

Nooitgedacht
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 12:02 AM
An old Indian saying goes more or less like this: A vegetarian is a sign of a bad hunter. I agree to that.

Where I come from, hunting is a way of life. We farm with sheep and the extra venison is a delicacy. Just food. A man has to supply food.

Before you are allowed to hunt, you have to be trained to do it in a proper way. It starts at an early age. Handling and maintaining the weapon. Respect for life. Working with meat. Sharing with family/friends.

The animal has to die instantly is the norm. If you wound an animal, you stop everything else, you find it and put it out of its pain and misery.

Foreign hunters would hunt for trophies (SA) and they pay big bucks to do it. We love it, because they get the useless head and horns and we get the meat. We have to accompany them though, because lots of times they would wound the animals and we had to put it down quickly.

I’ve hunted Kudu, Blesbok, Impala, Ribbok, Springbok, Steenbok in South Africa and Deer, feral goats, turkeys and peacocks in NZ. Nothing in Oz up to now. There are millions of camels and kangaroos available and I still have to aquire a taste for the meat.

The only time I hunted for something more than food was in New Zealand. The feral goats are a pest and eat huge amounts of grass meant for cattle. We culled them, used only the female meat to make salamis and the male meat was chopped-up for the dogs. It stinks too much.

We never kill indiscriminately. We are from farming stock and we know how to preserve game as well.

Granraude
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 12:07 AM
I personally dislike hunting as a sport. If it's to feed you and your family I would not mind it.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 12:08 AM
Are you a vegetarian?

Nope.

Gerulf
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 04:09 AM
Nope.

So you're not a vegetarian, but you think hunting is wrong? I don't understand that. When you buy meat at the grocery store, or order a steak at a restaurant, where do you think it came from? It's wrong for me to kill the animal that I eat, but it's ok for you to have someone else do the job for you?

Do you think you're taking some kind of moral high ground because you don't kill the animal yourself?

I'm not attacking you or trying to start an argument, but I just don't get it when someone who eats meat tells me I'm doing something wrong when I go hunting.

SpearBrave
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 06:09 AM
I used to be against trophy hunting, in the sense about killing a large buck in his prime. Then I started reading more about game conservation. It really makes sense to kill that large buck with the nice rack. The large buck in his prime has most likely already passed his genes on for several breeding seasons. Also once these animals reach their prime they go down hill fast and are no longer part of the breeding population. They usually starve to death that winter or the next one.

I am still against hunting just for the collection of antlers, meaning only taking the heads and leaving the rest to rot. There are too many people that will take that meat for free and will eat it. I found a deer carcass yesterday where someone had just taken the head and left the rest. I could not see any other wounds on the body so it may have been a road kill and someone kept the head after the meat was already rotten, but it still got me to thinking.

theTasmanian
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 06:16 AM
SpearBrave they will still make good sausages :thumbup

SpearBrave
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 07:29 AM
It was pretty rotten.;)

Hamar Fox
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 08:55 AM
So you're not a vegetarian, but you think hunting is wrong? I don't understand that. When you buy meat at the grocery store, or order a steak at a restaurant, where do you think it came from? It's wrong for me to kill the animal that I eat, but it's ok for you to have someone else do the job for you?

Do you think you're taking some kind of moral high ground because you don't kill the animal yourself?

I'm not attacking you or trying to start an argument, but I just don't get it when someone who eats meat tells me I'm doing something wrong when I go hunting.

I should have specified wild animals, I suppose. I have nothing against chickens and cows, but their populations are controlled and stable. Wild animals, on the other hand, are too rare. If someone killed the pheasants or rabbits that come in my garden, I'd be pissed off.

It's a delight to see a fox in the wild. I live in a rural area and I've only ever seen three in my life. I can't relate to fops wanting to kill them at all. Likewise with deer. I've never seen a wild one. If I did, the last thing I'd want to do is kill it. I'm not going to pretend I don't like the taste of meat. But I just don't understand the thrill of killing animals at all.

DerWeißeWehrwolf
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 08:59 AM
I voted, "yes, I hunt and support hunting." But it is soo regulated & controlled, it is ridiculous. I wish it was more free

theTasmanian
Saturday, January 29th, 2011, 11:38 AM
It was pretty rotten.;)

So it was well aged :D

Zimobog
Monday, January 31st, 2011, 08:56 PM
Hamar Fox wrote:
It's a delight to see a fox in the wild. I live in a rural area and I've only ever seen three in my life. I can't relate to fops wanting to kill them at all.

Do I look like a fop to you? :D
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa106/eldertroth888/S2010002.jpg

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa106/eldertroth888/S2010040.jpg

Keep in mind I would never trap anything that wasn't plentiful in my area. Fox are plentiful here as are coyotes and wolves. There is lots of prey species here also.

Anselm
Monday, January 31st, 2011, 11:16 PM
So you're not a vegetarian, but you think hunting is wrong? I don't understand that. When you buy meat at the grocery store, or order a steak at a restaurant, where do you think it came from? It's wrong for me to kill the animal that I eat, but it's ok for you to have someone else do the job for you?

Do you think you're taking some kind of moral high ground because you don't kill the animal yourself?

I'm not attacking you or trying to start an argument, but I just don't get it when someone who eats meat tells me I'm doing something wrong when I go hunting.

I'm a vegan, as I stated earlier, but hunting if done humanely, is infinitely kinder than factory farms.

There's too many useless bloodlusters out there trapping and hunting.

I grew up hunting, so I've seen it. A few hunters had the honor to do things quickly and kindly, but I've seen terrible things. Wretched folk, many of them.
.

Thorolf
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 03:30 AM
There's too many useless bloodlusters out there trapping and hunting.

I agree that there are to many. With the way you talk though, it makes it seem as if some really high percentage are cruel people. I have met loads of hunters, probably most of the men I've met around here. I have only met a few who were truly bad, though I've never met any who want to torture the animal. Ive met poachers and I don't really mind them, they hunt deer out of season and there are to many deer as it is.The couple cruel hunters I met are ones who just shoot any animal that moves on there property, these few are people I really hate. They don't eat the animals and just shoot them for fun.

TheVinson
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 03:47 AM
I have only ever been bowhunting. I somehow feel that with all of the modern scopes and bait traps rife hunting is unfair and impersonal, that being said I do have a compound bow.

I have only ever killed deer and turkey, unfortunately the deer didn't have a huge impressive rack but we were hunting to bring the exploding deer population around here down, not enough people hunting or wolves eating.

I do feel however that someone killing an animal for fun, be it sport hunting or serial killer warm up, is wrong. If you respect life then you won't kill something just to mount it on your wall, or maybe that's my way of not hunting bears without sounding cowardly...

theTasmanian
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 06:00 AM
Here in Australia the only good Fox is a dead fox.......then the skin can be put to a good use ;)

Hamar Fox
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 10:01 AM
Here in Australia the only good Fox is a dead fox.......then the skin can be put to a good use ;)

I'd rather see a fox than a human anyday.

Heinrich Harrer
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 10:25 AM
I'm a vegan, as I stated earlier, but hunting if done humanely, is infinitely kinder than factory farms.


I should have specified wild animals, I suppose. I have nothing against chickens and cows, but their populations are controlled and stable. Wild animals, on the other hand, are too rare. If someone killed the pheasants or rabbits that come in my garden, I'd be pissed off.

I think if done appropriately and with respect for the animal, hunting is better than factory farms and the industrial slaughter of cows and chickens. At least these animals have a good and free life in nature, until they're being quickly killed to be eaten.

Many people today eat so much meat but they're so artificially removed from the process... they don't think about it and prefer to believe that their meat simply comes from the super market. While the animals are boxed in small confinments for their whole life until they're being industrially slaughtered. I think I'd prefer an animal living freely in the wilderness and a hunter with respect for his prey and a more natural connection to his meat over something like that.

And hunting is so regulated with quotas and stuff (at least here), that I don't think that rare wild life is endangered by it. Actually as we don't have any natural predators like wolves left in our country (unlike in many regions of America I guess), hunting is probably a necessity to avoid an overpopulation and destruction of the forest by wild animals. Around Berlin for example the wild boar populations are increasing rapidly and more and more of them are entering the city and causing trouble. I guess they have to be culled from time to time to keep populations in check so that things don't get out of hand.

theTasmanian
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 11:01 AM
I'd rather see a fox than a human anyday.

I would rather see Native Animals than both :P

Hamar Fox
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 04:09 PM
I would rather see Native Animals than both :P

But the foxes were introduced by your forefathers, no? Now you wish death on them because they're not native. Well, neither are Prussians or Anglo/Celts. There's nothing inherently wrong with colonisation, and it's beyond ironic that a person whose ancestors aren't native to Australia advocates the extermination of a species his own ancestors brought over (probably to remind them a little bit of home) because that species isn't native.

As you can see from my username, my ancestors admired and respected the fox, and obviously didn't think 'the only good fox is a dead fox', and 500 years later, his descendants still feel that respect and admiration.

I mean, just look at that and explain why such a beautful thing should die:

http://www.peterandmarian.com/images/Red%20fox.jpg

TheVinson
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 04:16 PM
Is it eating you animals? If no, then no it shouldn't.

GermanJerseyGuy
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 04:58 PM
I have hunted since I was a boy. Deer, duck, pheasant, rabbit, squirrel, goose, and grouse. I enjoy eating what I kill, I am eating venison chili for lunch and venison steaks marinating for dinner tonight.

Wynterwade
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 05:13 PM
I'm a vegan but after driving 85 mph (140kmh) on a small country road at midnight and a deer jumped infront of my car causing me to go off the road and hit a wooden post- I understand that animal population control is important.

I think everyone should either kill their own meat and make their own eggs, or become a vegan.

theTasmanian
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 07:17 PM
But the foxes were introduced by your forefathers, no? Now you wish death on them because they're not native. Well, neither are Prussians or Anglo/Celts. There's nothing inherently wrong with colonisation, and it's beyond ironic that a person whose ancestors aren't native to Australia advocates the extermination of a species his own ancestors brought over (probably to remind them a little bit of home) because that species isn't native.

As you can see from my username, my ancestors admired and respected the fox, and obviously didn't think 'the only good fox is a dead fox', and 500 years later, his descendants still feel that respect and admiration.

I mean, just look at that and explain why such a beautful thing should die:

http://www.peterandmarian.com/images/Red%20fox.jpg

Even the forefathers are know for mistakes.......like letting multiculturalism happen :P

Hamar Fox
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 08:38 PM
Even the forefathers are know for mistakes.......like letting multiculturalism happen :P

How did 'the forefathers' let multiculturalism happen? The generation that imported the foxes didn't let multiculturalism happen at all.

So we've established you hate foxes and want them to die, but as of yet I've not seen any particular reason why. You don't eat them; you certainly don't need their fur. All this pointless hatred and abuse towards animals has a fairly obvious origin: Law prohibits us from venting our inherent aggression towards one another. So why not take it out on something that can't fight back and, better still, has no rights, yeah?

It's essentially no different from 5 guys against 1, and that 1 guy being disabled and blind. And all because those 5 guys got their ass kicked by 10 guys the day before. We hate our boss, our mother-in-law, our ex-wife's new boyfriend, that guy who cut you off when you were driving home, so we shoot animals in the face, because, like I said, law doesn't permit us to vent against the real objects of our anger.

I like how Wynterwade said animals populations should be controlled so people don't dent their cars on the deer they kill. Why not control the human population so deer don't get killed by dented cars? I couldn't care less about non-NW Europeans, which means I don't care about 95%+ of the world's population. I value animals much more, so if I were to kill an animal, I'd know that it was only because I was too cowardly to do anything against things I value less, solely because what I value less happens to have legal protection and the ability to fight back; in short, it would be an act of pure cowardice.

Anselm
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 10:37 PM
I agree that there are to many. With the way you talk though, it makes it seem as if some really high percentage are cruel people...

I feel that it's a "sport" that attracts sociopaths. They kill past their limit, saying they're controlling the population. Meanwhile, they kill any natural predator in the area. They just love killing.

It takes a person without empathy to be glib about killing, imho.

Anselm
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 10:44 PM
I mean, just look at that and explain why such a beautful thing should die:

http://www.peterandmarian.com/images/Red%20fox.jpg

I agree mate. The fur trade is flagrantly cruel. And the "gang hunts" make good English "gentlemen" no better than a gang of bullying negros on a subway in NYC.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011, 11:41 PM
I feel that it's a "sport" that attracts sociopaths. They kill past their limit, saying they're controlling the population. Meanwhile, they kill any natural predator in the area. They just love killing.


I feel that you don't know very many sport hunters or maybe you get your ideas from the media on how hunters really are. I know a lot of hunters in fact most people I know in real life are hunters and I don't know any sociopaths. In fact every sociopath I ever met or heard of was anti-hunting. The media portrays hunters as sociopaths through movies. Most hunters are in fact very good hearted people.

Most hunters contribute far to saving the environment and habit of wild animals than any anti-hunter. Most really do care for being outside and nature that is what draws them there in the first place.



It takes a person without empathy to be glib about killing, imho.

It takes a person that believes in utopia not to gest about killing, death, and other realisms.;)

Gerulf
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 01:06 AM
This is a little off topic, but I noticed there are a few vegans here. How do you get the essential amino acids from a vegan diet?

Anselm
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 05:59 AM
In fact every sociopath I ever met or heard of was anti-hunting.
Please explain? I can't imagine how this is so, since most serial killers begin by killing and torturing animals for pleasure. So, IMHO, many sociopaths are drawn to hunting or killing for "sport."

I grew up hunting, so my opinions are based on my experiences with other hunters. I can think of two older guys that, although trophy hunters, were respectful to animals. Most were thugs. I know another guy, that I'm buddies with to this day, that quit hunting altogether because he almost shot a guy to stop him from torturing a possum.

Empathy isn't selective IMHO. If you haven't emapthy for animals, you've none at all, and that makes you a sociopath.

Anselm
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 06:04 AM
This is a little off topic, but I noticed there are a few vegans here. How do you get the essential amino acids from a vegan diet?

http://www.vegfamily.com/dietician/0105a.htm

That's the first link I could find. I've been vegan for 11 years, and I haven't had any problems.

theTasmanian
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 06:13 AM
How did 'the forefathers' let multiculturalism happen? The generation that imported the foxes didn't let multiculturalism happen at all.

So we've established you hate foxes and want them to die, but as of yet I've not seen any particular reason why. You don't eat them; you certainly don't need their fur. All this pointless hatred and abuse towards animals has a fairly obvious origin: Law prohibits us from venting our inherent aggression towards one another. So why not take it out on something that can't fight back and, better still, has no rights, yeah?

It's essentially no different from 5 guys against 1, and that 1 guy being disabled and blind. And all because those 5 guys got their ass kicked by 10 guys the day before. We hate our boss, our mother-in-law, our ex-wife's new boyfriend, that guy who cut you off when you were driving home, so we shoot animals in the face, because, like I said, law doesn't permit us to vent against the real objects of our anger.

I like how Wynterwade said animals populations should be controlled so people don't dent their cars on the deer they kill. Why not control the human population so deer don't get killed by dented cars? I couldn't care less about non-NW Europeans, which means I don't care about 95%+ of the world's population. I value animals much more, so if I were to kill an animal, I'd know that it was only because I was too cowardly to do anything against things I value less, solely because what I value less happens to have legal protection and the ability to fight back; in short, it would be an act of pure cowardice.

Wow some one has sand in their....well lets not go there

Fact 1
English imported them to kill the Rabbits(that they imported to eat and hunt) and as Sport and doing so completely f*ck the Balance of Native Animal life here(the Coons Imported them selves here just like Anglo's did in England :P ) thus the Fox now Kills far more native Animals that ARE a food source and are Defenceless against the fox

Fact 2
I live in a state with no Foxes but when i do go to one that does the Farmers normally ask for me to shoot any faxes that i see why because the kill anything they can eat,Lambs,chooks even calves so they are a pest e.g Vermin

so there in is the point in killing them all in Australia

Fact 3
I always kill humanly i don't shoot them or anything in the Ass etc its just dumb If your going to do a job then do it properly

Fact 4
If you love animals that much go cap your self because your simple existence will in some way make their life worse

Fact 5
It was the descendants of those founding Fathers that let the white Australia policy go by the way side and if you look at the skank we have as PM you might note that she's from over there please take her back :P


PS yes i enjoy being a great shot and eating the yummy little Wallaby(that your precious fox would kill) that's skin now graces my floor for my soon to be born Germanic son to lay on and so i don't care how you feel about it but as its a largely free speech type forum feel free to have your say ;)

Anselm
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 06:26 AM
It takes a person that believes in utopia not to gest about killing, death, and other realisms.;)

I love a good joke, but what I meant was being dismissive about indefensible behaviour, if that makes sense. And modern hunting isn't about survival or "realism" really, it's about killing for pleasure. We're talking about it here in the "leisure" section.

Where is the sport in killing a poor animal with the mental capacity of a 3 year old child? I mean really, most of the people that fancy themselves survivalist wouldn’t last a week without their cholesterol medication.

SpearBrave
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 07:20 AM
Please explain? I can't imagine how this is so, since most serial killers begin by killing and toruring animals for pleasure. So, IMHO, many sociopaths are drawn to hunting or killing for "sport."

Torturing animals for pleasure is not hunting, it is just plain sick. How many serial killers have been hunters?

Most hunters either eat their kill or use the pelts. Even sport hunters, they respect the animals they hunt. They maintain habit, fight to retain open land, pay extra taxes, train and maintain their skill with firearms to make clean kills.



I grew up hunting, so my opinions are based on my experiences with other hunters. I can think of two older guys that, although trophy hunters, were respectful to animals. Most were thugs. I know another guy, that I'm buddies with to this day, that quit hunting altogether because he almost shot a guy to stop him from torturing a possum.

I can think of quite a few old men like that and quite a few young ones as well.

Most thugs I ever met were city folks, that did not hunt at all. I wonder if the guy torturing the possum is even still 'hunting', as that does not sound like any hunting I ever heard of.



Empathy isn't selective IMHO. If you haven't emapthy for animals, you've none at all, and that makes you a sociopath.

Is letting animals and people starve and die a cruel death empathy? Most hunters have much empathy for animals, some even go hunting and don't even take game.

SpearBrave
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 07:54 AM
I love a good joke, but what I meant was being dismissive about indefensible behaviour, if that makes sense. And modern hunting isn't about survival or "realism" really, it's about killing for pleasure. We're talking about it here in the "leisure" section.


Well I would not call hunting indefensible behaviour. I can assure modern hunting is just as real as anything else in life as it is a part of life at least for some of us.

This thread is in the leisure section because this is where the admins decided it should be, I requested that hunting and fishing have its own sub forum some time ago.;)



Where is the sport in killing a poor animal with the mental capacity of a 3 year old child? I mean really, most of the people that fancy themselves survivalist wouldn’t last a week without their cholesterol medication.

You say you grew up hunting than you should know how hard it is to take game it requires both skill and luck.

Most people who are survivalist don't call themselves such.;)

Hamar Fox
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 12:32 PM
Fact 1
English imported them to kill the Rabbits(that they imported to eat and hunt) and as Sport and doing so completely f*ck the Balance of Native Animal life here(the Coons Imported them selves here just like Anglo's did in England :P ) thus the Fox now Kills far more native Animals that ARE a food source and are Defenceless against the fox

Did the foxes ask to be imported to Tasmania so they could disrupt the balance of nature?


Fact 2
I live in a state with no Foxes but when i do go to one that does the Farmers normally ask for me to shoot any faxes that i see why because the kill anything they can eat,Lambs,chooks even calves so they are a pest e.g Vermin

Can you think of a definition of vermin or pest that would include foxes but exclude humans? I can't. It's ironic that by far the most destructive species on the planet (humans) talks about the need to kill 'pests' that probably aren't even a billionth as destructive as humanity is.



Fact 3
I always kill humanly i don't shoot them or anything in the Ass etc its just dumb If your going to do a job then do it properly

So you've never had an unclean kill? Hunters generally don't even aim for the head, the body being a much larger target. And body shots rarely result in instant death.


Fact 4
If you love animals that much go cap your self because your simple existence will in some way make their life worse

Nope. That's not how nature works. I want to limit others from making the world a worse place for me. Killing myself would be irrelevant to achieving that end (since when I'm dead, the state of the world won't matter to me).



PS yes i enjoy being a great shot and eating the yummy little Wallaby(that your precious fox would kill) that's skin now graces my floor for my soon to be born Germanic son to lay on and so i don't care how you feel about it but as its a largely free speech type forum feel free to have your say ;)

So you admit to being a non-native animal that harms native fauna?

Thorolf
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 02:34 PM
modern hunting isn't about survival or "realism" really, it's about killing for pleasure. We're talking about it here in the "leisure" section.

It might not be about survival for all, but for some it is. For others its just extra food that saves on the next grocery bill. I know my family doesn't have a lot of money right now, so when we kill something it means we have some extra money for the bills that we aren't sure we can pay and still get groceries.

Elessar
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 07:05 PM
This is a little off topic, but I noticed there are a few vegans here. How do you get the essential amino acids from a vegan diet?

In addition to what Casualty provided, a good site to read up on would be The Vegan Wolf (http://www.veganwolf.com/index.html)

theTasmanian
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 07:27 PM
Did the foxes ask to be imported to Tasmania so they could disrupt the balance of nature?

Learn to read previous posts




Can you think of a definition of vermin or pest that would include foxes but exclude humans? I can't. It's ironic that by far the most destructive species on the planet (humans) talks about the need to kill 'pests' that probably aren't even a billionth as destructive as humanity is.

So you advocate hunting humans.....typical PETA type response to the native non-native fauna question Humans made their way here to Island Australia the fox did not



So you've never had an unclean kill? Hunters generally don't even aim for the head, the body being a much larger target. And body shots rarely result in instant death.

Yes..... Heart shots can be class instantaneous



Nope. That's not how nature works. I want to limit others from making the world a worse place for me. Killing myself would be irrelevant to achieving that end (since when I'm dead, the state of the world won't matter to me).


Ah yes the Me you see how pointless your discussion is as "its all about me"



So you admit to being a non-native animal that harms native fauna?

Yes the Fox as it has no way of getting to Australia is the non-native

door closed another case of the person with no Logical reason for why i should not hunt and no Logical solution to the Problems made by his own country men :P

Hamar Fox
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 07:43 PM
Learn to read previous posts

How does the fact I accidently said 'Tasmania' instead of 'mainland Australia' affect my argument in any way?


So you advocate hunting humans.....typical PETA type response to the native non-native fauna question Humans made their way here to Island Australia the fox did not

Where did I advocate hunting humans? I advocated against hypocrisy. If people were objective, we'd classify ourselves as vermin, because we meet all the criteria.


Yes..... Heart shots can be class instantaneous

Obviously they can. But there's a 10% chance you'll hit the heart or brain, and a 90% chance you won't.


Ah yes the Me you see how pointless your discussion is as "its all about me"

As is everything. Name one instance of something you've either argued against or in favour of that isn't related to you, and I'll prove that it is related to you.


Yes the Fox as it has no way of getting to Australia is the non-native

I don't think the fox's non-nativeness was ever in dispute. Anglo-Celts and Prussians also aren't native to Australia.

Zimobog
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011, 08:57 PM
Where is the sport in killing a poor animal with the mental capacity of a 3 year old child?

Fox are famed for their intelligence and cunning. I wouldn't say that fox have a mental capacity anything like a human; truly apples and oranges there. A human matching wits with a fox (or even a 'yote or wolf) is going to find himself on the short end of the stick a lot of the time.

That cross fox in the first photo I posted took me three months to snare. I had to track him, learn about him, and he avoided my hardware no matter how hard I tried and no matter what methods I used. I finally tricked him by knocking down a tree near the trail he and I both used in a river bottom and making a scent post out of the stump. He was unable to resist the curiosty of urine that wasn't his own and was snared by me and died a quick death.

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa106/eldertroth888/DSCN2266.jpg

Can a three year old child survive and thrive in as varied terrain and climates as NZ, Oz, Alaska, the lower US, Europe, and Asia? Fox can! Fox are sly, tricky, and beautiful to look at and beautiful to wear.

If anyone wants to pet one, I have a few pelts around here!

theTasmanian
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 06:12 AM
How does the fact I accidently said 'Tasmania' instead of 'mainland Australia' affect my argument in any way?

Plenty



Where did I advocate hunting humans? I advocated against hypocrisy. If people were objective, we'd classify ourselves as vermin, because we meet all the criteria.


Hypocrisy is your life........at some point in your history was a hunter do you hate them be you have Vegi's do you use leather fuel etc etc yep just like the Greens Party here hypocrites




Obviously they can. But there's a 10% chance you'll hit the heart or brain, and a 90% chance you won't.

Show me the statistics

and then show me the statistics that say a fast moving projectile will not kill instantly even if it misses the Heart ....again you fail



As is everything. Name one instance of something you've either argued against or in favour of that isn't related to you, and I'll prove that it is related to you.


so how is my killing a feral Fox in Australia related to you? surely not a name that you dont really know how someone ages ago got



I don't think the fox's non-nativeness was ever in dispute. Anglo-Celts and Prussians also aren't native to Australia.


true how ever we humans made the ship so we could get here......the fox could never get here on its own accord and there in is the reason they are a pest and will be killed......or even exterminated



I don't think someone who doesn't even understand the basic rules of capitalisation should be condescending towards anyone.

I like Doing it to be Annoying So You and Your Kind can Enjoy Your Trolling Some MORE

this is you i imagine
http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/theMISSIONARY_257/someone_is_wrong_on_the_internet1.jpg

you will continue as you feel you will some how get a win of some kind or prove a point but really no one will win not me not you and not the fox :2BlahBlah

feisty goddess
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 06:39 AM
I didn't grow up in family that hunted, so I always thought it was weird growing up that people would actually go to the trouble of shooting deer. It also shocked me that they would actually eat it :-O. I like a rare steak sometimes, but gamey meat is disgusting. Lamb, deer, and anything else with a gamey taste is just gross. I have never understood people who get so excited about eating lamb, it's so unappetizing looking and tastes like a dirty sock.

theTasmanian
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 07:04 AM
Mutton or Hogget has a better taste IMHO a nice strong flavour ;)

Herefugol
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:17 AM
I love shooting and firearms but I only believe in hunting for food and pest/population control, which I have done. Shooting for sport and a trophy collection is somewhat barbaric and wasteful, in my opinion. Do hunters feel proud and achieved when they shoot a stationary animal that is 500 metres away, and hang it on their wall? :shrug

Hamar Fox
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:33 AM
Plenty

How?


Hypocrisy is your life........at some point in your history was a hunter do you hate them be you have Vegi's do you use leather fuel etc etc yep just like the Greens Party here hypocrites

Fuel doesn't come from dead animals.


Show me the statistics

It's pretty simple mathematics. The brain and heart combined make up less than 10% of a creature's total body area, but the overall chances go up a bit, since the brain or heart is what's being aimed at.


and then show me the statistics that say a fast moving projectile will not kill instantly even if it misses the Heart ....again you fail

Hunters don't use particularly powerful weapons. The only way a shot could miss the heart or head and still kill immediately would be if it was powerful enough to sever the head from the body or damage the spinal cord.



true how ever we humans made the ship so we could get here......the fox could never get here on its own accord and there in is the reason they are a pest and will be killed......or even exterminated

We agree the fox didn't choose to be taken to Australia. So it's being punished for something it had literally zero control over.

Herefugol
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:52 AM
...


Do you believe that the foreign fox should be allowed to overpopulate, cause the extinction of large amounts of indigenous fauna, and suffer from starvation when there is nothing to eat? That almost sounds like the horrible state of affairs we humans are dealing with :P. Limiting the numbers of a foreign predator protects biodiversity and helps ensure the survival of our indigenous animals.

Hamar Fox
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:28 AM
Do you believe that the foreign fox should be allowed to overpopulate, cause the extinction of large amounts of indigenous fauna, and suffer from starvation when there is nothing to eat? That almost sounds like the horrible state of affairs we humans are dealing with :P. Limiting the numbers of a foreign predator protects biodiversity and helps ensure the survival of our indigenous animals.

I like how this argument is used so frequently. I suppose when humans reduce virtually every wild species to the brink of extinction, it's just because we're 'preserving biodiversity'. Humans have proven beyond all doubt that it's better they don't meddle with nature. I'm sure every person who killed a tiger thought 'Well, I'm just controlling the population', but that didn't stop the species from now being next to extinct. Humans shouldn't import wildlife, but they also shouldn't punish that wildlife for their own mistake. They certainly shouldn't try to 'correct' their mistakes, because invariably they'll make things that much worse.

Herefugol
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 12:47 PM
I like how this argument is used so frequently. I suppose when humans reduce virtually every wild species to the brink of extinction, it's just because we're 'preserving biodiversity'. Humans have proven beyond all doubt that it's better they don't meddle with nature. I'm sure every person who killed a tiger thought 'Well, I'm just controlling the population', but that didn't stop the species from now being next to extinct. Humans shouldn't import wildlife, but they also shouldn't punish that wildlife for their own mistake. They certainly shouldn't try to 'correct' their mistakes, because invariably they'll make things that much worse.

Believe what you want. Yes, it was a mistake bringing rabbits into this country, but we can still do our best to correct or reduce the problem. If it weren't for Myxomatosis to reduce the rabbit population, many native Australian animals such as the bilby would surely be extinct by now.

We've had situations here where animals have exploded in population and have used up all the available food, and ended up starving and suffering. Culling a population actually means less suffering, mate. It is not "punishing" them.

If we follow your logic that it's "our" collective fault and we must live with it, then perhaps that also applies to Germanic preservationism: that we should just put up with the destruction of our people and our culture for allowing this to happen in the first place.

Hamar Fox
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 03:07 PM
Believe what you want. Yes, it was a mistake bringing rabbits into this country, but we can still do our best to correct or reduce the problem. If it weren't for Myxomatosis to reduce the rabbit population, many native Australian animals such as the bilby would surely be extinct by now.

We've had situations here where animals have exploded in population and have used up all the available food, and ended up starving and suffering. Culling a population actually means less suffering, mate. It is not "punishing" them.


Any kind of human interference will result in the expansion of one species at the expense of another. Which species deserves our sympathy and which doesn't boils down to POV. Nature is a series of knock-on effects. But one thing is definitely clear: Without human intervention, biodiversity would be far, far greater than it is presently.

Reducing fox populations will increase rabbit numbers, which will increase competition for native fauna, which will result in reduced numbers of the latter, and will also result in increases in predators, therefore less rabbits, therefore less competition and so on. But hunting ensures absolute numbers are always lower than they have to be.


If we follow your logic that it's "our" collective fault and we must live with it, then perhaps that also applies to Germanic preservationism: that we should just put up with the destruction of our people and our culture for allowing this to happen in the first place.

Well, not exactly. I don't think we should take sides in other species' fight for survival. We should of course take our own side. Now I suppose that needs clarifying, considering I've not taken humanity's side in this thread. Well, I actually would take a Germanic or Celtic's side over animals, if the threat was literally us or them. But I don't take, say, a Chinaman's side over an animal's. And also, since there's virtually never an 'us or them' situation between animals and Germanics/Celts, I advocate coexistence and as little interference as possible.

Zimobog
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 04:13 PM
Do animals concern themselves with biodiversity and extinction? I wonder if a fox with a rabbit in his teeth ever wondered if he'd caught "the last one".


Any kind of human interference will result in the expansion of one species at the expense of another.

Or a comet from out-space could crash into the planet and kill off 90% of the organisms, resulting massive restructuring of the food chain. But you never hear greenies trying to save us from comets.

The issue I have with most of the type of thinking I see with non-hunters is the belief that man should live in plastic bubbles away from nature (because, that man is not apart of nature) and has no buisness participating with animals, or that animals are going to be "ok" if only humans are to leave them alone.

Actually, any fox I don't get is going to eventually have his liver torn out by a coyote or wolf or be extracted from his den by a black bear and defecated out two weeks later. But greenies are ok with that, too.

Neophyte
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 04:29 PM
I really don't hunt, but if it were between me and the bunny there would be rabbit stew.

Hamar Fox
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 05:00 PM
Do animals concern themselves with biodiversity and extinction? I wonder if a fox with a rabbit in his teeth ever wondered if he'd caught "the last one

This is irrelevant, since I'm not arguing from nature's perspective (which is indifferent to everything), but rather from an ethical and aesthetic perspective. Less biodiversity means the world has less aesthetic appeal to me. And my ethical objections are already known.


Or a comet from out-space could crash into the planet and kill off 90% of the organisms, resulting massive restructuring of the food chain. But you never hear greenies trying to save us from comets.

An analogous argument: I should be allowed to kill someone because he might get hit by a bus tomorrow anyway.


The issue I have with most of the type of thinking I see with non-hunters is the belief that man should live in plastic bubbles away from nature (because, that man is not apart of nature) and has no buisness participating with animals, or that animals are going to be "ok" if only humans are to leave them alone.

Man straddles both a natural and anti-natural existence, as suits him. Man can live amongst nature and submit completely to its laws or he can defy nature. What he can't do is attack nature on a fundamentally unnatural level (insofar as his activities and their effects have no cognate in non-human nature), such as through chemicals, machinery, concrete and steel, the splitting of the atom etc. and also attack it on a natural level (such as through hunting). The consequences are obvious. Man weakens nature through anti-natural acts and developments (ridiculously massive deforestation, acid rain, river pollution, toxins etc. etc.) and then delivers the finishing blow through 'natural means' (if shooting them in the face for commercial gain is truly natural). Man then pats himself on the back for defeating a foe 'fair and square' and oh so naturally.

But OK, let's forget about animals for a minute. How does it benefit humans for nature to be destroyed or reduced?

Which do you prefer:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Jurong_Industrial_Estate_aerial_view.jpg

or

http://www.bbc.co.uk/wear/content/images/2007/10/17/hay_meadow_muker_kate_empsall_470x353.jp g

So it doesn't even benefit humans for human activity to go unchecked.


Actually, any fox I don't get is going to eventually have his liver torn out by a coyote or wolf or be extracted from his den by a black bear and shit out two weeks later. But greenies are ok with that, too.

That's fine for reasons stated above.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 08:13 PM
Fox are famed for their intelligence and cunning. I wouldn't say that fox have a mental capacity anything like a human; truly apples and oranges there. A human matching wits with a fox (or even a 'yote or wolf) is going to find himself on the short end of the stick a lot of the time.
You make it sound as if a foxes are eating humans and that's inane. Moreover, I can't believe we're on a forum where swearing is unacceptable, but posting pics of pitiful, bloody little carcasses is fine.


Actually, any fox I don't get is going to eventually have his liver torn out by a coyote or wolf or be extracted from his den by a black bear and shit out two weeks later. But greenies are ok with that, too.

You just said earlier that foxes can outwit humans, now you say they’re all dumb enough to end up as bear feces? I don’t buy it. I think you just like dangling their bodies in photos and selling them.

I'm not a greenie btw. Al Gore’s hypocrisy is phenomenal. He owns a cattle ranch and that is among the most destructive things for the environment.

I also love my guns.


Most thugs I ever met were city folks, that did not hunt at all. I wonder if the guy torturing the possum is even still 'hunting', as that does not sound like any hunting I ever heard of.
And most any of these city boys, you’re making a distinction of, go to canned hunts that "good" country folks are glad to provide or hire a good country guide. Or they belong to a hunting club rented to them by country land owners.

I'm from the country, and my friend that quit hunting is as country as they come---he used to play softball with us barefoot. We called him shoeless joe jackson lol. There are good and bad people, be it rural or urban.


Is letting animals and people starve and die a cruel death empathy?

Starve? That's pretentious.

Every hunter I've ever met still takes his kids to McDonalds on a regular basis. I'm sure that some hunt only what they need and have principles against the cattle industry.

But I think there's a "mocking line" among them, if that makes sense? They can't cross it always want to distance themselves from animal rights or compassion for animals. It shows weakness to them. They prefer a hard heart.


Most hunters contribute far to saving the environment and habit of wild animals than any anti-hunter. Most really do care for being outside and nature that is what draws them there in the first place.

That's good, but you make it sound as though the hunter’s motivation for preservation is noble. He wants them to be around so he can kill more of them.

It’s rather like a pedophile making certain that children continue to thrive.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:01 PM
And most any of these city boys, you’re making a distinction of, go to canned hunts that "good" country folks are glad to provide or hire a good country guide. Or they belong to a hunting club rented to them by country land owners.


As well they should be glad it is added source of income that is much needed in rural areas. Beside most people that can afford a canned hunt are not the thug type in any sense.



I'm from the country, and my friend that quit hunting is as country as they come---he used to play softball with us barefoot. We called him shoeless joe jackson lol. There are good and bad people, be it rural or urban.


You say you are from the country you should very well know the relationship the country people have to animals whether the be livestock or game. It is a relationship of respect, the hunter and farmer respects the animals and views them as food.


Starve? That's pretentious.


I know what happens to the deer population if it is not culled by hunters. They used to ban hunting in all state parks here. They deer became so over populated that they starved and even destroyed the environment around them. Don't try the bit about natural predators because man is also a natural hunter. Besides the area I live in was not a historic range for wolves.



Every hunter I've ever met still takes his kids to McDonalds on a regular basis. I'm sure that some hunt only what they need and have principles against the cattle industry.

Well I for don't eat McDonald's period for health reasons. I am however very much for the grass fed beef industry



But I think there's a "mocking line" among them, if that makes sense? They can't cross it always want to distance themselves from animal rights or compassion for animals. It shows weakness to them. They prefer a hard heart.

I like talking about rights and what they are.;) Do you know if animals have rights did the form a congress and set written laws in place to foster these rights?;)

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:14 PM
Don't try the bit about natural predators because man is also a natural hunter. Besides the area I live in was not a historic range for wolves.?

Why not try the bit? We all know it's true. I've heard hunters joke about it. They know if the predator population goes up, they'll not have the population control excuse to "sport" hunt.

And if it was an area for deer, they had some natural predator. And you know as well as I do, hunters would kill off any coyote or abandoned dogs that are pathetically making an effort.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:16 PM
That's good, but you make it sound as though the hunter’s motivation for preservation is noble. He wants them to be around so he can kill more of them.


No really he wants to preserve nature, as many hunters also partake in other outdoor activities. Not only that it does not make sense to destroy all 'seeds' and it helps preserve future hunting traditions and needs. These hunting traditions can be very Germanic and in sense are another way of Germanic cultural preservation.



It’s rather like a pedophile making certain that children continue to thrive.

Are you comparing hunters to pedophiles?:thumbdown

Funny most leftist are anti-hunting and they support things like NAMBLA. Do you know what NAMBLA is ?

Elessar
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:17 PM
Hunters make it sound like without them the wilderness will just explode and everything will be chaos.
Animals have coexisted for millenia in a give and take, hunter-hunted relationship long before the arrival of man to "regulate" their numbers.
Why don't we "regulate" ourselves instead? Such hypocrisy.

Mother nature has a way to equalize herself, our time is coming as well.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:23 PM
Why not try the bit? We all know it's true. I've heard hunters joke about it. They know if the predator population goes up, they'll not have the population control excuse to "sport" hunt.


I have to ask what predators have you seen what happens when predators over populate they starve.




And if it was an area for deer, they had some natural predator. And you know as well as I do, hunters would kill off any coyote or abandon dogs that are pathetically making an effort.

The predator around here was man(injuns).

I wish they would kill some of the coyotes around here that way they would not get as many calves each spring.;)

Really they don't shoot at other game/predators most of the time as guns shots would scare the targeted animals. Again you know that because you were brought up in hunting traditions.;)

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:25 PM
Hunters make it sound like without them the wilderness will just explode and everything will be chaos.
Animals have coexisted for millenia in a give and take, hunter-hunted relationship long before the arrival of man to "regulate" their numbers.
Why don't we "regulate" ourselves instead? Such hypocrisy.

Mother nature has a way to equalize herself, our time is coming as well.

Can you give me time when man was not influence on nature in the last millenia?

How do know the was not chaos?

Heinrich Harrer
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:28 PM
Hunters make it sound like without them the wilderness will just explode and everything will be chaos.
Animals have coexisted for millenia in a give and take, hunter-hunted relationship long before the arrival of man to "regulate" their numbers.


That was before we had eradicated all natural predators like wolves and bears (at least in many parts of Europe). Without hunters how can there be a stable hunter-hunted relationship? Now we have simply substituted animal predators with human hunters to keep the same balance.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 09:28 PM
You make it sound as if a foxes are eating humans and that's inane. Moreover, I can't believe we're on a forum where swearing is unacceptable, but posting pics of pitiful, bloody little carcasses is fine.

How about pictures of big bloody tasty carcasses?:D
http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac267/sidthekid999/buck2010002.jpg

This was one of the deer I killed this year.:)

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:20 PM
How about pictures of big bloody tasty carcasses?:D
This was one of the deer I killed this year.:)

The motivation behind posting such a photo? Is it a nice photo of wildlife? At least your photo isn't quite as bad.

To normal people, it's pretty or disturbing seeing a chubby man dangling an animal that’s been trapped over a child. It displays a weak boastful character, IMHO.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:23 PM
The predator around here was man(injuns).


It was most likely wolves and bears in Indiana. But the "preservation concerned" hunters killed them all. That's what happened here anyway.

Hamar Fox
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:31 PM
You make it sound as if a foxes are eating humans and that's inane. Moreover, I can't believe we're on a forum where swearing is unacceptable, but posting pics of pitiful, bloody little carcasses is fine.

I understand that they enjoy taunting their opposition in this thread, and that's their reason for posting the pics. But why did they originally take the photos and store them on their computer? Presumably not as ammunition for some future online debate. It's rather that they're truly proud of being responsible for that bloody carcass's existence. That pretty much throws the noble angle of 'thinning out numbers for the good of the universe' out the window.

I wonder if they'd spent a day with the animal they killed, if it nuzzled them affectionately or ate out of their hand, tickling as it did it, they'd still want to kill the animal. Even if they did -- say for food -- surely they wouldn't take photos of it and smugly post them online.

They lack respect for animals despite what they've said in this thread.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:33 PM
Funny most leftist are anti-hunting and they support things like NAMBLA. Do you know what NAMBLA is ?

I'm not a leftist. I still go, although rarely, stump shooting with a bow, and I'm sure you know what that is. I still go to the range and fire my 1911A1 and my BHP.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:38 PM
It was most likely wolves and bears in Indiana. But the "preservation concerned" hunters killed them all. That's what happened here anyway.

Well during the "wolf hunting" thread I researched the historic range of wolves and I myself was surprised that my area of Indiana was not included in this. The Black Bears that were here were not much of predators on the deer,elk and bison.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:42 PM
Is letting animals and people starve...
You never explained how people will starve.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:49 PM
Really they don't shoot at other game/predators most of the time as guns shots would scare the targeted animals. Again you know that because you were brought up in hunting traditions.;)

If they're tired of sitting in the stand, they'll shoot anything. I wish you'd acknowledge that this stuff commonly goes on, because it does, and you well know it.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 10:54 PM
I understand that they enjoy taunting their opposition in this thread, and that's their reason for posting the pics. But why did they originally take the photos and store them on their computer? Presumably not as ammunition in some future online debate. It's rather that they're truly proud of being responsible for that blood carcass's existence. That pretty much throws the noble angle of 'thinning out numbers for the good of the universe' out the window.


Taking pictures of hunts and the game taken is a way of honoring the hunt and the animal. They have been doing this for thousands of years in almost every culture ( cave drawings ). Also saving of heads and skulls, it does honor the animal that is why I take pictures.

I am curious that on gardening sites they post pictures of the vegetables, do people feel sorry for the carrot that was killed and eaten? After all are not plants living things also.



I wonder if they'd spent a day with the animal they killed, if it nuzzled them affectionately or ate out of their hand, tickling as it did it, they'd still want to kill the animal. Even if they did -- say for food -- surely they wouldn't take photos of it and smugly post them online.


Funny I do talk to the hogs and steers I butcher. I scratch their heads and look them over all the time. When I butcher hogs next would you like to see photos? I thought of taking some for the "do you butcher your own meat thread" .;)

Yes I am proud of the fact I kill and butcher my own meat.:thumbup



They lack respect for animals despite what they've said in this thread.

I respect any animal I kill more than any anti-hunter that is for sure. As the animal knows that hunting and killing is natural and does not try and go against nature.;)

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:00 PM
I wish they would kill some of the coyotes around here that way they would not get as many calves each spring.;)


But you refute yourself. You hunt because the animals will overpopulate, yet you wish "they'd" kill some coyotes, a natural predator. You say "they'd" but I'd bet my life that you have killed them yourself.

Gerulf
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:06 PM
They lack respect for animals despite what they've said in this thread.



I hunt deer, and I have ultimate respect for them. I hunt them for meat because it is natural. Humans are part of nature and part of the food chain. I guarantee you deer have a more humane death from a hunter than they do when they're hit by a car, or slowly starve to death when they get old.

Where I live, you cannot drive down the road this time of year without seeing multiple deer carcasses on the side of the road that have been hit by cars. If deer hunting were banned for even one year, the population would be so out of control that you literally would not be able to drive at night.

As far as wildlife conservation goes, hunters in the U.S. contribute over $700 million every year to wildlife conservation. Hunters and fishermen also fund over 75% of the annual income for all 50 state conservation agencies.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:07 PM
You never explained how people will starve. And you never really answered how most anti-hunters are sociopaths.

Without hunting animals would starve, in some areas(here) people would starve, yes we have starvation here in the U.S.. Not only that would you rather prefer them to go on a government program ?

I never said most anti-hunters are sociopaths, I said most sociopaths are anti-hunters.nice try ;)



I'll tell you how most hunters I've met are sociopathic, IMHO at least. I'll give some gruesome accounts, and I only hunted from ages 15 to 20.


Are they proven sociopaths or is this just your IMHO?

I have hunted from the age of 6 and have met no sociopaths in 38 years. I can give you some very gruesome accounts committed by non-hunters if you like.


But I'm sure you're aware of your community's cruelty, and will continue to reach and romanticise it as Germanic tradition lol.

What you call cruelty I call natural and this natural act is a Germanic tradition. My first name is very Germanic and is related to hunting and war or I guess that would be cruel also.:P

So yes I plan to continue hunting and encourage other to hunt.:thumbup

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:11 PM
No really he wants to preserve nature...

If that were so, hunters wouldn’t so quickly side with the cattle ranchers that take habitat from wildlife. I mean, look at the hunter comments in this thread. “Kill the foxes cause they steal chickens. "Kill the wolves because they take cattle from the ranchers.” It’s just more excuses to kill. A sickness.

Hunters would fill up their fridges until they let meat rot, they’d give meat away to black folk to preserve "Germanic tradition." lol.

If nobody wants the poor dead beasts, like Ed Gein, they’d hide the bodies.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:19 PM
But you refute yourself. You hunt because the animals will overpopulate, yet you wish "they'd" kill some coyotes, a natural predator. You say "they'd" but I'd bet my life that you have killed them yourself.

Well I really don't hunt coyotes. I do however shoot them with a rifle if they are around the pasture. I always have rifle handy for that purpose. Sorry to disapoint you but I am mostly a bird hunter that kills less than 10% of the birds my dogs point. In fact I even help create habitat for birds on land where hunting is restricted.

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:29 PM
Good to see I have reduced you down to using part of my post and not whole sentences, always a sign your views have not much merit.;)


If that were so, hunters wouldn’t so quickly side with the cattle ranchers that take habitat from wildlife. I mean, look at the hunter comments in this thread. “Kill the foxes cause they steal chickens. "Kill the wolves because they take cattle from the ranchers.” It’s just more excuses to kill. A sickness.


Funny you mention you own and shoot weapons are they not for killing even in defence?

So you are one of those that thinks of a utopia where everything is fine and dandy where all nature gets along with one another and it is roses and lollipops without the human race.

Instead of hunting we could all gather around and sing "we are the world".[sarcasm]:D



Hunters would fill up their fridges until they let meat rot, they’d give meat away to black folk to preserve "Germanic tradition." lol.

If nobody wants the poor dead beasts, like Ed Gein, they’d hide the bodies.

Well I don't give away meat unless it is to people I know. But sure it is better that hunters give away the meat to any poor instead of giving the poor more government welfare money that can used for everything but food.

Anselm
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011, 11:59 PM
Good to see I have reduced you down to using part of my post and not whole sentences, always a sign your views have not much merit.;)
I didn't take you out of context, so it's your accusation that lacks merit.


Funny you mention you own and shoot weapons are they not for killing even in defence?

I mentioned it because you were implying that I was a leftist. Plenty of target range enthusiast would never kill an animal. If I was attacked, I would defend myself with a weapon. Although I'm guilty of having done so in my teens, I would never kill an innocent animal.


I never said most anti-hunters are sociopaths, I said most sociopaths are anti-hunters.nice try
Well I ask, for the third time, that you explain. To be against hunting you would need empathy. It would require that they were bothered by an animals suffering.

Anlef
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:06 AM
I would certainly be able to hunt and kill an animal, if need be. It is certainly a nobler way to get food than factory farming.

Yet I would feel sorrow at the same time, to see such a beautiful creature in terror, perishing. And I would certainly be grateful for the meat, to the creature itself as well.

This is also the reason why I have started to eat far less meat than before. No one needs to eat meat every day.

At any rate, I despise killing an animal for fun/sport. It goes against good spirit, against creation, and last but not least, the will of Allfather. I’m adamant there are plenty of hunters who say they hunt for ecological reasons, i.e. keeping balance, but are really motivated by the basest pleasure in killing. This is also why my feelings towards the heathen past are not very romantic, for killing for fun has been the hallmark of heathen times. (The saga's for instance display an astonishing disregard for life.) That is not to say there haven't been (nor still aren't) enough horrible Christians.

Heinrich Harrer
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:10 AM
Well I ask, for the third time, that you explain. To be against hunting you would need empathy. It would require that they were bothered by an animals suffering.

You're vegan right? Why do you focus so much on hunters? According to you all meat-eaters must be sociopaths, because they are all complicit in the slaughter of animals to fill their bellies. Why don't you say so but single out hunters?

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:12 AM
I didn't take you out of context, so it's your accusation that lacks merit.


Never said you took it out context. I am curious that you did not use the whole sentence?;)




I mentioned it because you were implying that I was a leftist. Plenty of target range enthusiast would never kill an animal. If I was attacked, I would defend myself with a weapon. Although I'm guilty of having done so in my teens, I would never kill an innocent animal.

Well to be honest you do share many of the same views about animal 'rights' as leftist do. Although they have their base motives for not liking hunting that I'm sure much differnet from yours.

How do know if the animal was innocent? First you must define what innocence is. Maybe the animal is guilty of theft another animal's food source.
Maybe that animal ruthlessly attacked and killed several unarmed plants? Some people think plants have spirits or souls. How do you know they don't?
Ever wonder where the expression 'Tree Hugger' comes from? Maybe that buck rubbed a tree with his horns until he killed it?

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:12 AM
Well I really don't hunt coyotes. I do however shoot them with a rifle if they are around the pasture. I always have rifle handy for that purpose. Sorry to disapoint you but I am mostly a bird hunter that kills less than 10% of the birds my dogs point. In fact I even help create habitat for birds on land where hunting is restricted.

I knew you'd killed coyotes. Knew I'd win that bet! Thanks for being honest there. Sounds like you kill everything in site. How do you have time for anything else with the pig slaughtering, too?

I'll talk with you more about bird hunting tomorrow, and the dog abuse I've seen from hunters. One case where I found the dog, a black lab named Sam, a home and the sociopath still spitefully killed him. It's killing culture.


How do know if the animal was innocent? First you must define what innocence is. Maybe the animal is guilty of theft another animal's food source.

A fox that "steals" an egg isn't twirling his mustache making schemes. :) He's trying to survive.

Since they're never more developed than a three year old child, I'd describe them as innocent in the same way as a child.

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:19 AM
Well I ask, for the third time, that you explain. To be against hunting you would need empathy. It would require that they were bothered by an animals suffering.

I also asked you to produce these sociopaths that were hunters, you only used the "IMHO" excuse and not facts.

I can think of at least one recent sociopath from Arizona that was a leftist and most likely a anti-hunter.

Also I think I mentioned I don't like to see animals suffering. I don't like to see them starve and die from disease. I think I also stated that hunters practice with their weapons so they can make clean kills without the animal suffering.


A fox that "steals" an egg isn't twirling his mustache making schemes. :) He's trying to survive.


Ever think the farmer raising the egg is just trying to survive.:-O



Since they're never more developed than a three year old child, I'd describe them as innocent in the same way as a child.

I think some else already explained these animals are cunning, so cunning inn fact that they have had expressions coined after them " cunning as a fox ". Do you think they are that stupid to earn such statements?


I knew you'd killed coyotes. Knew I'd win that bet! Thanks for being honest there. Sounds like you kill everything in site. How do you have time for anything else with the pig slaughtering, too?


I have killed many of them and would kill many more of them if I did have more time. They are considered vermin around here. Where I live is surrounded by woods and fields. I carry a gun every where and even have one two hidden in the outbuildings just in case I see vermin.

That honesty you speak of is not victory for you, it only states I am more about being natural. Right now in this area coyotes are my natural enemy so it is natural to kill them when I have the chance.

The pig slaughtering is done as group effort mostly family. Wait another Germanic tradition of friends and family joining together to share the task of providing food.;)

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 03:46 AM
You're vegan right? Why do you focus so much on hunters? According to you all meat-eaters must be sociopaths, because they are all complicit in the slaughter of animals to fill their bellies. Why don't you say so but single out hunters?

I know it's a lot to read, but I said earlier that hunting, if done correctly, and not for sport, is far better than factory farming, where some animals never have a good day their entire lives.

That still doesn't mean that many hunters are just savages with pickup trucks.

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 03:51 AM
I also asked you to produce these sociopaths that were hunters, you only used the "IMHO" excuse and not facts.

I can think of at least one recent sociopath from Arizona that was a leftist and most likely a anti-hunter.

Pure conjecture. There's no proof he was anti-hunting. You said every sociopath you met was anti-hunting. Didn't he keep animal skiulls in the backyard? Closer to a hunter mounting heads on the wall, or posting photos of a buck he'd killed on the internet, than a person opposed to hunting.

Another absurdity was your claiming that you prevent people from going on welfare by giving them animals you‘ve killed. Delusions of grandeur.


I think some else already explained these animals are cunning, so cunning inn fact that they have had expressions coined after them...

There's also "playing possum." Yet another aspersion on a wee animal that can barely see a foot in front of him. It’s an involuntary comatose-like state brought on because the poor thing is terrified.



That honesty you speak of is not victory for you, it only states I am more about being natural. Right now in this area coyotes are my natural enemy so it is natural to kill them when I have the chance.

I wouldn't be so presumptious to call it a victory. It does prove that you'd use any excuse to keep killing. You said earlier you were killing to control populations, then you kill the natural predators, which is more self-refutation. It's a thing hunters prefer to keep secret.

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 04:43 AM
Pure conjecture. There's no proof he was anti-hunting. You said every sociopath you met was anti-hunting. Didn't he keep animal skiulls in the backyard? Closer to a hunter mounting heads on the wall, or posting photos of a buck he'd killed on the internet, than a person opposed to hunting.


I have met anti-hunters who kept animal skulls and even pelts that does not mean anything. It only means you are making the assumptions also, something you have a habit of doing in this thread, like labeling most hunter as sociopaths.

You know one thing I noticed is your avatar a person with a gun ready to fire, does that mean you like killing, you are glorify firing weapons. One does have to ask if you don't like killing why do they post such avatar? Oh you use the excuse that it is in defense, but is it really? Your avatar does look very aggressive does that mean that maybe you are a killer.




Another absurdity was your claiming that you prevent people from going on welfare by giving them animals you‘ve killed. Delusions of grandeur.


Well actually I started a thread about doing this very type of thing before you entered into this discussion. Yes with enough people in local area sharing their game and food you could help keep people off government assistance.


I don't think it is I who suffering from any delusions, I'm not the who thinks hunting is a unnatural act for man. Or are you just trolling?



There's also "playing possum." That’s an aspersion on a wee animal that can barely see a foot in front of him. It’s an involuntary comatose-like state brought on because the poor thing is terrified.


This wee animal as you call it is much smarter than you give credit for. I wonder who is respecting animals and who is not? You keep insisting they are dumb and far below thought and reasoning. Also it should be noted that the wee possum carries diseases. Also they are destructive to property and livestock. I should not have to tell a country boy about how important livestock/property is to a rural community.:oanieyes



I wouldn't be so presumptious to call it a victory. It does prove that you'd use any excuse to keep killing. You said earlier you were killing to control populations, then you kill the natural predators. It's a thing hunters prefer to keep secret.

I think maybe you are confusing excuse with reason. I stated one of the reason why I kill coyotes. I could list more. Actually they prey on animal I don't hunt(rabbits). We have almost no wild rabbits in this area because of coyotes.

I wonder since I or any other hunter here could care less if you hunt, why should you care that most others here support hunting? Are you afraid to admit that man hunting other animals is natural act? Or are you afraid that maybe how you have been viewing things is unnatural? Or are you afraid that you may have bought into propaganda that is unnatural?

About killing natural predators coyotes do not prey on deer here otherwise we would not be over populated with deer. We are very much over populated with coyotes, raccoons, possums, foxes, squirrels, field mice, starlings, crows, and a whole lot of other animals that no one hunts in large numbers. Not to mention we are over populated by deer which is the preferred game animal by most hunters in this area.

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 04:53 AM
This wee animal as you call it is much smarter than you give credit for. I wonder who is respecting animals and who is not? You keep insisting they are dumb and far below thought and reasoning. Also it should be noted that the wee possum carries diseases. Also they are destructive to property and livestock. I should not have to tell a country boy about how important livestock/property is to a rural community.:oanieyes

You're making stuff up. I never said they were stupid. I said they were innocent, like children are innocent. I love how you malign every animal, you're not currenty killing, and have an excuse for more killing but then accuse me of trolling. :)


I wonder since I or any other hunter here could care less if you hunt, why should you care that most others here support hunting?
You started a thread entitled, "How do you feel about hunting" Yet you don't want me responding?


You know one thing I noticed is your avatar a person with a gun ready to fire, does that mean you like killing, you are glorify firing weapons. One does have to ask if you don't like killing why do they post such avatar? Oh you use the excuse that it is in defense, but is it really? Your avatar does look very aggressive does that mean that maybe you are a killer.
I think Lena Headey is attractive.

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 05:07 AM
You're making stuff up. I never said they were stupid. I said they were innocent, like children are innocent.


What makes them innocent, you believe it is their mental ability. You use the term innocent in a opinion manner. Trust me possums are not innocent of anything ask any horse farmer or chicken farmer.



You started a thread entitled, "How do you feel about hunting" Yet you don't want me responding and even accuse me of trolling?

I never had problem with you stating your opinion, but when you go out of your way to insult hunters and make accusations that most of them are sociopaths one does have to question why you are doing that. I hold no grudges against people who don't hunt. It is only when they try to impose their will on others do I have a problem. You are posting unfounded ideas about people who hunt, even insulting them. I was just asking why you go out of your way to attack people who hunt. The fact is hunting is a natural act whether it is for sport or survival that cannot be denied.

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 05:15 AM
I never had problem with you stating your opinion, but when you go out of your way to insult hunters and make accusations that most of them are sociopaths one does have to question why you are doing that. I hold no grudges against people who don't hunt. It is only when they try to impose their will on others do I have a problem...
How could anyone possibly impose anything on you? I‘m disagreeing.. I’m usually polite, and I have high standards of behavior, like any good Germanic should. It was wrong to ask if I’m trolling. I’m sure you can ban me, since you can edit my posts.

I shorten your quotes for the same reason you’re merging mine. The thread is large.

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 05:16 AM
I think Lena Headey is attractive.

Than why post a picture of her holding a gun in threatening manner with a aggressive expression on her face?

Are there not other pictures of her available?

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 05:21 AM
How could anyone possibly impose anything on you? I‘m disagreeing.. I’m usually polite, and I have high standards of behavior, like any good Germanic should. It was wrong to ask if I’m trolling. I’m sure you can ban me, since you can edit my posts.


I have no interest in banning you.:)

However given the nature of some of your post and your accusations towards myself and other members I do have to ask.

Besides I only report things in the threads I'm involved in, then I let the others staff members decide.:)



I shorten your quotes for the same reason you’re merging mine. The thread is large.

You could learn to multi quote.;) at least by copying and pasting.

Hamar Fox
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 09:20 AM
BS.

I hunt deer, and I have ultimate respect for them. I hunt them for meat because it is natural. Humans are part of nature and part of the food chain. I guarantee you deer have a more humane death from a hunter than they do when they're hit by a car, or slowly starve to death when they get old.

Everything is part of nature by definition. Human activity is still part of nature, but it has no analogy in non-human nature.


Where I live, you cannot drive down the road this time of year without seeing multiple deer carcasses on the side of the road that have been hit by cars. If deer hunting were banned for even one year, the population would be so out of control that you literally would not be able to drive at night.

So humans need to kill deer so they don't get killed by other humans? I think people seem to be missing the rather obvious solution, which is to identify the common denominator in all these animal-related problems, and reduce their numbers. And that common denominator would be humans.

Nooitgedacht
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 11:27 AM
When certain animal populations are not culled, AND they don’t have natural predators, they tend to become overpopulated.

Sometimes it is a really sad story. In South Africa the elephant population of, lets use the Addo Elephant Park (it happens in other parks too), become a huge problem. They destroy huge tracts of parkland in one go. If they are allowed to go on breeding uncontrolled, they will die of hunger. Humans, that’s us hunters, have to intervene for the sake of conservation. It is called culling, BUT this has to be done with a difference.

Elephants are like humans because they mourn their dead “mates/children” for many years. In some cases they weep themselves to death. So, and this is the sad part, if you cull them you have to kill the whole group. Adults as well as babies. If you only kill some of them, the rest will mourn themselves to death. That is cruel. Try and explain that to the veggie tree huggers.

What happens is that they are killed quickly by skilled HUNTERS. They don’t muck around with vegetarians who would like to kiss them goodbye, but use hunters. They (veggies) would probably try and drug the elephants. That would be like seeing your loved ones drown very slowly in front of your eyes, to the elephants. It has to be done quickly and very professionally by hunters. It breaks your heart to do this, especially the babies, but that is the most “humane” way of doing it.

The meat will be cut up and distributed among people who are in need. The skins, teeth, everything will be used. If you drug the animal, only the skin, teeth will be used. The meat has to be chucked away.

Do you thing the Al Gorians will understand that? No, they only see the “ivory” issue.

Nooitgedacht
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:03 PM
Veggies are guilty of double standards. They believe in minority rules, because they want to impose their minority will onto us majority. If they can accept facts, be quiet and convince other people to stop eating meat, there would so much more for us.

They don’t eat steak, mutton, lamb, venison, but they eat chicken and fish. If you compare the killing of the sheep, cattle, game to that of a fish, we meat-eating (hunters) are good (humane).

The fish would fight for ages (marlin, tuna) or sardines would suffocate in a net, dying of fright, soiling themselves due to claustrophobia. Chickens die quick, but they still have to be caught and handled.

Our meat dies instantly, because a well placed shot would drop a buck in its tracks. It would not even know what happened, because a bullet travels faster than sound.

When we shoot buck for personal use, we go out at night with a spotlight. You hold the buck with your light, get so close that you can go for a head shot and with everything dark around you, cannot miss. You don’t wound the animal.

The benefits of hunting this way are many. Instant kill, no blood and guts all over, complete skin, home early, very safe (no stray bullets). The meat tastes so much better, because it doesn’t have any adrenaline in the muscles. You bleed it out immediately.

If you give that buck a sporting chance, like we normally do with foreign hunters, we locals, join up and kill the wounded animal immediately. Then the fear factor comes into play for the buck. Those hunters are “schooled” in how to do stuff first and they have to stick to the rules. Some are great shots, but there are a few not so great. That is where we come in. We take them as close as possible and drop the animal after they shoot (wound) it. They take the useless part (head and horns) and we enjoy the meat.

It does not matter how humane the hunt is, the excitement is sometimes overpowering. My uncle died of a heart attack after he shot the only kudu of the season. He had tears in his eyes when we got to him. That is a sign of respect for the animal. We’ve had enough meat for the funeral too.

Nooitgedacht
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 12:12 PM
Hamar Fox, if you and your foxy mates are among my sheep, you won’t have a long time to compose stupid comparisons.

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 02:07 PM
It was a perfect comparison. A hunter (especially a trophy hunter) pretending to care about animal preservation because he donates money to preserve the animals he likes to blow the heads off is as laughable as a paedophile pretending to care about children because he donates money to disabled orphans.

The comparison is weak and bad attempt to make an insult. Most hunters respect animals and most hunters are common folk with conservative views. In your comparison you attempt paint the hunter as sicko how the leftist media does. What I think is going on is you are failing to see that hunting is a natural act. Many times people that make such comparisons have been indoctrinated with the idea that a hunter is evil and bad person. Nothing could further from the truth. So in essence the anti-hunter is the one that believes in unnatural thoughts, unnatural thoughts like paedophilia.

Roemertreu
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 02:21 PM
Just my own observation, but it seems to me that most anti-hunters and anti-carnivours don't really spend a lot of time in nature. They don't know what other animals do to their prey (I mentioned in one thread that there is video of a lion eating a cow alive as it was stuck in the mud). Nor how hard their life in in the winter. It's like they think animals are little people -- IMO not true -- animals have their own natures. Snakes don't understand the concept of "friends" (I've heard of PETA-folk trying to talk a snake into a box by claiming to be it's "friend" -- snake was obviously unimpressed), dogs seem to be much more miserable and dare I say mentally ill when they live in cities with nothing to do but lay about. Dogs like to chase and like to contribute to a pack. They aren't stuffed animals. Nature is not disney.

Whatever, rant mode off. My feeling is that hunting is OK if you use the meat and the hide or at minimum donate it to a food pantry. If you don't like it, don't hunt. But I don't see why one person should get to decide for another what activities he may persue.

Hamar Fox
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 02:27 PM
The comparison is weak and bad attempt to make an insult. Most hunters respect animals and most hunters are common folk with conservative views. In your comparison you attempt paint the hunter as sicko how the leftist media does. What I think is going on is you are failing to see that hunting is a natural act. Many times people that make such comparisons have been indoctrinated with the idea that a hunter is evil and bad person. Nothing could further from the truth. So in essence the anti-hunter is the one that believes in unnatural thoughts, unnatural thoughts like paedophilia.

Well, I could make any number of less offensive analogies. The analogy itself was fine, however. To demonstrate: A person who financially sponsors the preservation or well being of X, and then likes to harm individual members of X, is ludicrous. Enter for X animals, children, Chinamen or whatever you want.

As for whether it's natural, I said a few posts back that mankind can't pick and choose when to be natural. He can live naturally or unnaturally, but not both.

One example of what happens is the following: The number of people in existence, and therefore hunters, itself is unnatural, because our population size is the result of unnatural means of survival (separation from nature, 'civilisation', medicine etc.), and therefore while an individual act of hunting may be natural, hunting as a whole is unnatural, because the numbers of hunters are unnatural.

Also -- and this isn't necessarily in relation to the above post, but in response to something mentioned here a number of times -- it's also important to note that hunting isn't even coordinated. One hunter doesn't know how many deer other hunters have killed. So how would this 'population control' concept even work?

SpearBrave
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 02:42 PM
Well, I could make any number of less offensive analogies. The analogy itself was fine, however. To demonstrate: A person who financially sponsors the preservation or well being of X, and then likes to harm individual members of X, is ludicrous. Enter for X animals, children, Chinamen or whatever you want.


Yet you chose not use a less offensive analogy? Why did you choose to make such a analogies? The analogy is very false as the hunter is not harming the prey he is harvesting it and controlling it. He is working with nature not trying go against it.



As for whether it's natural, I said a few posts back that mankind can't pick and choose when to be natural. He can live naturally or unnaturally, but not both.

One example of what happens is the following: The number of people in existence, and therefore hunters, itself is unnatural, because our population size is the result of unnatural means of survival (separation from nature, 'civilisation', medicine etc.), and therefore while an individual act of hunting may be natural, hunting as a whole is unnatural, because the numbers of hunters are unnatural.


Well no the people living in a artifical enviroment of urban areas would of course view hunting as unnatural as they are far removed from nature and a more traditional rural life.

The number of hunters is actually shrinking because of leftist propaganda hence the over population of animals such as foxes, deer, and coyotes in certian areas.




Also -- and this isn't necessarily in relation to the above post, but in response to something mentioned here a number of times -- it's also important to note that hunting isn't even coordinated. One hunter doesn't know how many deer other hunters have killed. So how would this 'population control' concept even work?

Most hunters are very aware of game populations in their area. Also quotas are regulated by the states or in the case of Europe hunting clubs. So yes one hunter most likely does know the amount of the deer taken in his hunting area. There again most hunters are very intune with nature and have more respect for it as they are in that enviroment much more.

Anselm
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 06:03 PM
I can only share my experiences. When I was 15 I was hunting with an older guy who had a reputation as a great hunter. I say “older” but he was only 21-22 himself, but he wanted some company. I heard him fire a few rounds. He was a good shot, but must’ve been trying a hard angle. He called me after a few minutes---our stands were within earshot.

I get to him, and he’s in some really dense woods and he says, “Give me your gun, I‘m out of ammo.” We both had Remington 788s, and they only held 3 rounds, I think. His was a 308 and mine was 243 win cal.

Anyway, I gave him my rifle, and he points and says “look!” And there’s a deer, 10-15 feet away, and I hadn’t even noticed, since the woods were so thick---it was around a creek.

And the poor deer has one entire side of it’s jaw hanging off. It was horrific. It looked impossible from a 308 round---maybe he hit him with more than one round?

The deer just stood there in shock looking at us. He‘d turn his head and the jaw would flop around. Since he had my rifle, I couldn’t put the deer down myself. The guy laughs and says, “He’s just standing there.”

So I say, “Shoot him!” He keeps laughing, and mocking the poor thing. I had to beg him to put that deer out of it’s misery. A compassionate person would have wanted something like that over quickly. A person without empathy is a sociopath.

Herefugol
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 10:20 PM
I do feel that sport hunting attracts sociopaths. I can only share my experiences. When I was 15 I was hunting with an older guy who had a reputation as a great hunter. I say “older” but he was only 21-22 himself, but he wanted some company. I heard him fire a few rounds. He was a good shot, but must’ve been trying a hard angle. He called me after a few minutes---our stands were within earshot.

I get to him, and he’s in some really dense woods and he says, “Give me your gun, I‘m out of ammo.” We both had Remington 788s, and they only held 3 rounds, I think. His was a 308 and mine was 243 win cal.

Anyway, I gave him my rifle, and he points and says “look!” And there’s a deer, 10-15 feet away, and I hadn’t even noticed, since the woods were so thick---it was around a creek.

And the poor deer has one entire side of it’s jaw hanging off. It was horrific. It looked impossible from a 308 round---maybe he hit him with more than one round?

The deer just stood there in shock looking at us. He‘d turn his head and the jaw would flop around. Since he had my rifle, I couldn’t put the deer down myself. The guy laughs and says, “He’s just standing there.”

So I say, “Shoot him!” He keeps laughing, and mocking the poor thing. I had to beg him to put that deer out of it’s misery. A compassionate person would have wanted something like that over quickly. A person without empathy is a sociopath.

As much as that guy sounds like a lunatic, you're only citing one example. What about the sociopaths who carry out school shootings and the like with guns? Do you think the sport of shooting attracts sociopaths too? What about people who drink excessively and pick fights? Does alcohol attract the violent?

The majority of gun owners are law abiding and respectful people. There are always going to be bad apples in society, and you can't cite them as a generalised representation of a demographic.

Gerulf
Friday, February 4th, 2011, 11:57 PM
Also -- and this isn't necessarily in relation to the above post, but in response to something mentioned here a number of times -- it's also important to note that hunting isn't even coordinated. One hunter doesn't know how many deer other hunters have killed. So how would this 'population control' concept even work?

That's simply not true. State conservation agencies keep track of animal populations and how many animals are taken by hunters each year. With whitetail deer for example, the number of deer tags issued each year is carefully coordinated right down to individual counties based on deer populations. Hunting is very coordinated in the U.S. For you to make that statement only proves that you're uninformed on the subject.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:01 AM
That's simply not true. State conservation agencies keep track of animal populations and how many animals are taken by hunters each year. With whitetail deer for example, the number of deer tags issued each year is carefully coordinated right down to individual counties based on deer populations. Hunting is very coordinated in the U.S. For you to make that statement only proves that you're uninformed on the subject.

A guy from out of state can take his kids on a weekend trip, kill as many deer as he wants, then go home. That guy would have no knowledge whatsoever of what local conservation agencies have kept track of.

Gerulf
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:05 AM
A guy from out of state can take his kids on a weekend trip, kill as many deer as he wants, then go home. That guy would have no knowledge whatsoever of what local conservation agencies have kept track of.

Wrong. Besides having to buy a hunting license, you have to buy deer tags for each deer you take. The number of deer tags issued is based on deer populations. Someone from out of state must apply for a non-resident tag, and they're kept track of just like the rest.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:18 AM
Wrong. Besides having to buy a hunting license, you have to buy deer tags for each deer you take. The number of deer tags issued is based on deer populations. Someone from out of state must apply for a non-resident tag, and they're kept track of just like the rest.

So with this foolproof system in place, how did this happen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endangered_species_in_North_Amer ica#Mammals ?

Anyway, how is it decided what population level is 'acceptable'? I imagine it's related to the degree of damage that one would reasonably expect to occur once a population reaches an upper threshold. Now let's say, hypothetically, there was a species that caused 1/100th the damage as humanity. People wouldn't just want to reduce that population, they'd want to exterminate it, right? So where's the logic, or fairness, in our arbitrary judgements of what constitutes another species' 'overpopulation'?

Gerulf
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:35 AM
So with this foolproof system in place, how did this happen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endangered_species_in_North_Amer ica#Mammals ?

Anyway, how is it decided what population level is 'acceptable'? I imagine its related to the degree of damage that one would reasonably expect to occur once a population reaches an upper threshold. Now let's say, hypothetically, there was a species that caused 1/100th the damage as humanity. People wouldn't just want to reduce that population, they'd want to exterminate it, right? So where's the logic, or fairness, in our arbitrary judgements of what constitutes another species' 'overpopulation'?

You should read through your list and see how many of those species are threatened by hunters. I didn't look at each one, since most of the list included bats, rats, shrews, etc. From what I saw there, the Wood Bison looks to be the only one whose endangered levels were caused by hunters, and it looks like it's been illegal to hunt them for over 100 years now.

I realize you're trying to win an argument here, but it's clear you're simply uninformed on hunting, hunting regulations, and conservation. You're making statements in this thread that are untrue, and you seem to be basing your arguments on assumptions that you can't back up with actual facts or knowledge of the subject.

SpearBrave
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:42 AM
So with this foolproof system in place, how did this happen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endangered_species_in_North_Amer ica#Mammals ?

Anyway, how is it decided what population level is 'acceptable'? I imagine its related to the degree of damage that one would reasonably expect to occur once a population reaches an upper threshold. Now let's say, hypothetically, there was a species that caused 1/100th the damage as humanity. People wouldn't just want to reduce that population, they'd want to exterminate it, right? So where's the logic, or fairness, in our arbitrary judgements of what constitutes another species' 'overpopulation'?

All states have biologist that not only help manage game but also keep track of game and non-game populations. They also rely on hunter surveys and auto accidents to provide additional data. I will say that in my state they are very accurate about animal populations.

The link you provided is really not correct and to some extent out dated. Animal 'rights' groups lobby to get animals on the endangered list. While a one animal may be endangered in in one area that same animal may be over populated in another area. Also on that list it was mostly non-game animals that hunting had little or no effect on.

One thing I will note also about hunters helping to create habitat for game species that there are many more non-game species that benefit from this.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 12:47 AM
You should read through your list and see how many of those species are threatened by hunters. I didn't look at each one, since most of the list included bats, rats, shrews, etc. From what I saw there, the Wood Bison looks to be the only one whose endangered levels were caused by hunters, and it looks like it's been illegal to hunt them for over 100 years now.

I realize you're trying to win an argument here, but it's clear you're simply uninformed on hunting, hunting regulations, and conservation. You're making statements in this thread that are untrue, and you seem to be basing your arguments on assumptions that you can't back up with actual facts or knowledge of the subject.

Hunting has reduced hundreds of species to the brink of extinction. I don't remember where the focus skipped to America or why, but at any rate, I'm fairly sure my original argument was that hunting reduces biodiversity and bioabundance, which it clearly does.

I don't acknowledge the right of humans to regulate animal populations.

Gerulf
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 01:02 AM
I already won about 10 pages ago. I'm just mopping up here. I suppose my mistake was to let myself fall for the 'the whole world = America' thing that I let slip by me a few posts ago, and now I'm here. It goes without saying that hunting has reduced hundreds of species to the brink of extinction. I don't remember where the focus skipped to America or why, but at any rate, I'm fairly sure my original argument was that hunting reduces biodiversity and bioabundance, which it clearly does.

I couldn't really care less how closely American hunters conform to conservationist regulations, since I don't acknowledge the
right of humans to regulate animal populations.

You've posted very few things in this thread that even make sense or can even be supported with evidence.

As for the Wood Bison, I already acknowledged that it is endangered, but it's been endangered for over 100 years. The hunting laws and regulations of today have nothing to do with it's low numbers. Since I am a responsible and ethical hunter, I do NOT support poaching of any kind nor do I have any wish to hunt an endangered species.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 01:09 AM
You've posted very few things in this thread that even make sense or can even be supported with evidence.

Please post examples of what doesn't make sense.

Gerulf
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 01:34 AM
Post examples of what doesn't make sense or don't waste my time

Ok. Here you state that the animals you do eat have stable populations because they're controlled:

I should have specified wild animals, I suppose. I have nothing against chickens and cows, but their populations are controlled and stable
Then you criticize hunters for controlling wild animal populations:

I don't acknowledge the right of humans to regulate animal populations.

Then you make a couple of statements based on your own incorrect assumptions, that have no basis in fact:

it's also important to note that hunting isn't even coordinated. One hunter doesn't know how many deer other hunters have killed. So how would this 'population control' concept even work?

A guy from out of state can take his kids on a weekend trip, kill as many deer as he wants, then go home. That guy would have no knowledge whatsoever of what local conservation agencies have kept track of.

Then, to show how much of a negative effect hunting supposedly has on animal populations, you manage to find a list of endangered mammals in North America that only includes one species that was brought to endangered levels by hunters.........100 years ago:


So with this foolproof system in place, how did this happen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...merica#Mammals ?

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 01:52 AM
Ok. Here you state that the animals you do eat have stable populations because they're controlled:

All domesticated animals are controlled. That's a fact of their existence. They're species bred to coexist with society. To remove them from society would result in their extinction. For better or for worse, they need to be controlled (in the literal sense of the word, not necessarily numerically). It was clear from the start that I was specifically against the control of wild animal populations (I can't be bothered checking, but I think I stated it in my second post in this thread). I should also state that when I said/implied 'controlling' certain species was good, I meant because it helped them stay above a certain number.


Then you criticize hunters for controlling wild animal populations

Yes, I do. Hunters try to keep animal populations down. I'd like to see them increase.


Then you make a couple of statements based on your own incorrect assumptions, that have no basis in fact

Only the second one was incorrect. The first one was only incorrect in relation to the US.


Then, to show how much of a negative effect hunting supposedly has on animal populations, you manage to find a list of endangered mammals in North America that only includes one species that was brought to endangered levels by hunters.........100 years ago:

I originally intended to cite the tiger and African elephant, but at the last moment decided to use the list I posted, since most hunters in this thread are from the US. Granted, I'm no expert specifically on American hunting. I'd be very surprised, though, if only one species in the US is endangered at least in part due to hunting. I'll have to look into that further.

Zimobog
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 02:12 AM
Garrett wrote:
As for the Wood Bison, I already acknowledged that it is endangered, but it's been endangered for over 100 years.

We have a herd in Delta Junction up the road from here. The Wood Bison is genetically identical to the plains bison. As I type these words, a biologist from the UAF is confirming this by reading over my shoulder (no joke).

The situation he says is similar between reindeer and caribou.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 10:27 AM
It didn't take me long to find a better example:

The major risks to the jaguar include deforestation across its habitat, increasing competition for food with human beings,[2] poaching, hurricanes in northern parts of its range, and the behaviour of ranchers who will often kill the cat where it preys on livestock. When adapted to the prey, the jaguar has been shown to take cattle as a large portion of its diet; while land clearance for grazing is a problem for the species, the jaguar population may have increased when cattle were first introduced to South America as the animals took advantage of the new prey base. This willingness to take livestock has induced ranch owners to hire full-time jaguar hunters, and the cat is often shot on sight.[29]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said human activity unconsciously weakens a species (competition, destruction of habitat), and then is finished off 'naturally' through hunting.

Gerulf
Saturday, February 5th, 2011, 03:39 PM
It didn't take me long to find a better example:

The major risks to the jaguar include deforestation across its habitat, increasing competition for food with human beings,[2] poaching, hurricanes in northern parts of its range, and the behaviour of ranchers who will often kill the cat where it preys on livestock. When adapted to the prey, the jaguar has been shown to take cattle as a large portion of its diet; while land clearance for grazing is a problem for the species, the jaguar population may have increased when cattle were first introduced to South America as the animals took advantage of the new prey base. This willingness to take livestock has induced ranch owners to hire full-time jaguar hunters, and the cat is often shot on sight.[29]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said human activity unconsciously weakens a species (competition, destruction of habitat), and then is finished off 'naturally' through hunting.

When you posted your original list, it was in response to me explaining hunting laws and regulations in the U.S. In a later post you mentioned tigers and African elephants. Now you bring up a species that's home range is mostly Central and South America, and cannot legally be hunted in the U.S. We have no control over what the lesser races hunt in their third world countries.

Hamar Fox
Sunday, February 6th, 2011, 06:15 PM
We have no control over what the lesser races hunt in their third world countries.

Not directly. But we do have means of ensuring their populations stay below unwanted levels; namely, we could cancel any kind of financial or material aid, encourage contraception, disseminate feminist values etc.

Zimobog
Sunday, February 6th, 2011, 11:16 PM
Casualty wrote:

Wolves try to avoid people. There's never been a case of a wolf, unless it had rabies attacking a human. There were cases of wolf attacks in 18th century Japan due to a rabies outbreak.

Predators do a much better job than humans at managing populations, because they take the weak or sick. Hunters usually take "trophies" and the strong. But a lot of hunters just like killing. I knew guys that'd shoot dogs or anything.

Wolves killed and ate a elementry school teacher in Alaska this year, actually. She was out jogging and they got her and ate her.

http://www.newsminer.com/view/full_story/6672835/article-Teacher-in-Alaska-was-likely-killed-by-wolves?instance=home_most_popular5

Coyotes attack people all the time. Do a google search for it.
Wolves attack pet dogs right in the yard here in Alaska, and over the last ten years there have been about a dozen attacks I can think of...do a google search for it.

Wolves do not only eat the sick and weak, but they eat the newborn, the young, the pregnant, the strong, the unwary, the slow, the hindered by snow, the sleeping, the curious, the brave, whatever.

You are a telling romantic tales of the noble wolf, not realistic tales of a top tier predator. Like man, wolves are deadly and can take out anyone they want. Man can excercise control over himself and cull indivdual animals. Permits can be issued on the advice of trained biologists so that only a sustainable harvest number is reached and not an over-harvest. Humans who are guilty of wanton waste and cruelty in their harvests can be imprisoned and controlled by other humans. Wolves and animals can not do this.

Wolves, and other animal top predators, have no conception of control. They kill more prey than they can eat and leave the rest for the ravens. They sometimes only eat the tounge or liver of caribou and sometimes leave a number of wounded animals on the tundra to bleed without consuming so much as a morsel.

Wolves, coyotes, and bears will eat every prey species they can and then large numbers of them will turn to cannibalism or starve themselves while moving into new areas. They do not balance anything. That is a Walt Disney myth. In nature, there is only boom and bust in the so-called balanced cycle.

Nooitgedacht
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 03:15 AM
I just saw this on FoxNews.com

It's meant for the greenies too.

No Oink About It: Feral Pig Problem Spreading in U.S.

War is being waged against packs of feral pigs that are destroying crops, killing wildlife and spreading disease.

I have am empty fridge, but the distance to the US is just out of reach.

Good hunting Yanks. I envy you guys. I love pork.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 03:31 AM
I just saw this on FoxNews.com

It's meant for the greenies too.

No Oink About It: Feral Pig Problem Spreading in U.S.

War is being waged against packs of feral pigs that are destroying crops, killing wildlife and spreading disease.

I have am empty fridge, but the distance to the US is just out of reach.

Good hunting Yanks. I envy you guys. I love pork.

There are several places here in Indiana where people have released European wild Boars. They are very destructive and they are spreading very quickly. The main reason is that there is lack of interest in hunting them and they adapted to modern farming methods.

The Department of Natural Resouces has declared open season on them. You can use any weapon, any time of day or night, and any time of year. They are only about 40 miles to North of where I live, I might have to take a drive up there.;)

Nooitgedacht
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:02 PM
SpearBrave. I wonder what people who complained about indiscriminate hunting would say about this announcement.

Neophyte
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:22 PM
There are several places here in Indiana where people have released European wild Boars. They are very destructive and they are spreading very quickly. The main reason is that there is lack of interest in hunting them and they adapted to modern farming methods.

The Department of Natural Resouces has declared open season on them. You can use any weapon, any time of day or night, and any time of year. They are only about 40 miles to North of where I live, I might have to take a drive up there.;)

Interesting. We have the exact same problem over here. Pigs are even running around inside villages and in peoples' gardens.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:33 PM
Interesting. We have the exact same problem over here. Pigs are even running around inside villages and in peoples' gardens.

Are they native in your area? They are not here, when I first seen them I was shocked as I did not know what wild boar pigs(babies) looked like. I was driving and a few of them ran out in front of me, I said " holy sh*t is that a giant ground squirrel? " . I did not know the baby wild boars(pigs) had stripes like a ground squirrel.:-O

Wulfram
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:44 PM
When it comes to feral animals I support the hunting of them 100%.
Unfortunately I have heard that boar meat does not taste very good.

The photograph below is of an alligator who caught a wild boar in Kingsville, Texas. :D
Nature can only do so much in helping to rid our lands of these pests.

http://i539.photobucket.com/albums/ff355/williamofwaco/4466449734_0dbd08f701.jpg

Neophyte
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:54 PM
Are they native in your area? They are not here, when I first seen them I was shocked as I did not know what wild boar pigs(babies) looked like. I was driving and a few of them ran out in front of me, I said " holy sh*t is that a giant ground squirrel? " . I did not know the baby wild boars(pigs) had stripes like a ground squirrel.:-O

Yes and no. They used to be native around here, but they were hunted to extinction about 1000 AD. There were attempts to bring them back, in the 18th century, but they met with too much popular resistance. Then they started keeping them in enclosures in the end of the 19th century, from which they of course escaped, but I'd say that it was in the late 60s early 70s that they were brought back in scale, again in enclosures. But as usual they escaped and did what pigs do best: piglets. That this is their natural habitat helps. Some say that they on many occasions were let out on purpose, but that is impossible to prove.

It's only in the last 10-15 years that they have really made their presence felt, and they are fast becoming a real problem here now.

Heinrich Harrer
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 12:56 PM
They're quite populous around Berlin too and are coming deeper and deeper into the city:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildschwein

Die Anpassungsfähigkeit der Wildschweine zeigt sich besonders deutlich in Berlin. Wildschweine haben sich dort die stadtnahen Wälder als Lebensraum erobert und dringen heute auch in die Vorstädte ein. Gelegentlich führt sie ihr Weg bis in die Innenstadt. So mussten im Mai 2003 zwei Wildschweine erschossen werden, die auf dem Alexanderplatz auftauchten.
Der Bestand an Wildschweinen rund um Berlin wird mittlerweile auf 10.000 Tiere geschätzt. Im unmittelbaren Stadtgebiet fühlen sich nach Schätzungen der Berliner Forstverwaltung rund 4.000 Tiere wohl. Sie dringen in die Gärten und Parks ein und richten dort z. T. beträchtliche Schäden an. Sie durchstöbern auch Mülltonnen nach Essensresten. Die intelligenten Tiere registrieren sehr schnell, dass ihnen in Wohngebieten keine Bejagung droht und werden gelegentlich sogar tagaktiv. So sind in einigen Berliner Stadtparks am helllichten Tag spielende Jungtiere zu beobachten. Der Berliner Senat hat ein strenges Fütterverbot erlassen, um zu verhindern, dass noch mehr Wildschweine in die Stadt gelockt werden.

Google Translate:
The adaptability of the wild boar is particularly evident in Berlin. Wild boars have been there, conquered the peri-urban forests as habitat and pass today in the suburbs. Occasionally they made their way into the inner city. In May, 2003, two pigs had to be shot, who appeared on the Alexanderplatz.
The stock of wild boars around Berlin is now estimated at 10,000 animals. Right in the city feel estimated by the Berlin forest management around 4,000 animals well. They invade the gardens and parks, where they will partly considerable damage. They also browse through garbage cans for food scraps. The intelligent animals register very quickly that they threaten no hunting in residential areas and are occasionally active during the day. Thus, in some Berlin city park in broad daylight playing pups observed. The Berlin Senate has passed a rigorous Fütterverbot to prevent even more wild boars are lured to the city.


http://i.imgur.com/oWz6i.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ccEnx.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/oL0tP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mjFyc.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/8BF42.jpg

Wild boars trying to storm a house:
http://i.imgur.com/B5I9c.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/bXvkQ.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mM9l8.jpg

That's how football fields look after they're done with them: :D
http://i.imgur.com/KrwZA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/4Y1XM.jpg

Recently I read that the railway system was stopped for a while, because a pack of them ran in front of a train, killing some of them.

I think hunters shoot a couple of thousand annually in Berlin to keep their populations in check.

http://i.imgur.com/CQkbc.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/hlBCN.jpg

Neophyte
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 01:03 PM
When it comes to feral animals I support the hunting of them 100%.
Unfortunately I have heard that boar meat does not taste very good.

That is not true. I find it really tasty. But as with all pigs, male pigs have sex hormones that give the meat a funky taste, especially when the females are in heat. That is why male pigs destined for the dinner table are castrated when they are young.

SpearBrave
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 01:05 PM
I was just thinking of something amusing. Since jews and muslims don't like swine could these wild boars be used to keep them out.:D

Neophyte
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 01:06 PM
I was just thinking of something amusing. Since jews and muslims don't like swine could these wild boars be used to keep them out.:D

Trained attack pigs? That should do the trick. :D

Bearkinder
Tuesday, February 8th, 2011, 05:16 PM
I think hunting is an excellent pasttime and builds good character. Often in more primitive times, one of the rites of passage from boyhood to manhood wa a successful solo hunt.

Re: the pig discussion.

Feral pigs are open season here also. I can hunt them year-round on public or pirvate land (with permission if I don't own the land).

The best tasting is a dry sow, but boars are fine, just don't kill them when the females are in heat, some of the hormones can be nasty tasting. Also, with any wild game, their flavor depends as much on what they've been eating as any other factor. People have become accustomed to bland, store-bought, grain-fed animals, and don't recognize the tast of really flavorful meat.

Once you eat wild game for a while, store-bought just tastes horrible.

Nooitgedacht
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 03:25 AM
When male lions fight to become the dominant male and a new male comes into power, it will kill all the young lion cubs, sired by the previous male.

The lionesses will be on heat immediately and he will mate until all of them are pregnant with his seed. The females are on heat, because they want strong seed to impregnate them. That is the law of nature.

When we hunt and kill an antelope (etc) we stimulate that same instinctive mode of survival. Something similar to the lions. The result is that the next generation will breed stronger.

If there is no danger at all, the next generations will breed smaller and smaller, because there is no need to be big/fast/agile/etc any more. Lions and wolves eat the slow/sick/small/etc (mutated) and they never get a chance to mate.

You ask any proper farmer why he has to bring new genes into his cattle/sheep/etc and his answer will come back to this basic principle. The prize bull/ram/cock/boar on the farm has a use by date. After that inbreeding happens and you get that royal sickness, haemophilia.

Ask any royal house in Europe about it. So by the way, it is a great choice that the crown prince of Denmark has made – don’t you agree. She is one great Ozzie girl.

Now you will say I’m a racist, but that same principle applies to nations as well. The moment other nations (us) have to keep “inbreeding nations” alive in an unnatural way, it will be like the “don’t care farmer” who never allows competition among his bulls/rams, or new blood. His farming concern will go down.

The same will happen with the “inbreeding nations”. Instinctively they will breed, but they lack competition/new genes/etc. The gene pool will become shallower all the time and one of these days, they will suck-up mud, drag us down and we all die. Gravity can be a cruel enemy – ask my cheeks/guts.

Totenkopf
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 03:32 AM
Hunting for food out of necessity or to help with over-population? Absolutely.

Hunting for the sole purpose to show your buds the 12 point deer you got? Not a chance.

Nooitgedacht
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 03:53 AM
Bearkinder, you hit the nail on the head. It definitely builds great character. The problem is, that we as adults, know it, but we are too bloody lazy to get out of our comfort zone.

I grew up on a farm where we had to start a generator (even today) to the weld/angle grind/news/tv/deep freeze/etc. We used to talk around the kitchen table and my dad would teach us how to make a whip, leather chairs, saddles, etc. We would knee the dough for my mom, stoke the fire, cut meat, make sausages/butter, etc. BUT, the main thing was, we were talking to each other.

My dad/uncles took us onto the farm and showed us how to track/stalk game, how to make a bivvy, read the signs of nature. We’ve sometimes slept out in the wild and they would tell us stories about the “old times” while we were sitting around a fire. We would bbq and eat what we’ve hunted. After we cleaned the rifles and sharpened the knives, they would show us how to skin and cure meat. We would sleep on the ground with the dogs. Those were the best times of my life.

I did the same things with my son on the (now my brother’s) farm. The same thing happened on my father-in-law’s farm too. Everybody gets a turn to say something and NO tv. As farm people, we could talk the ears off a mule. AND, we like to look you in the eye when we do it.

Things like that builds character and with it, you learn to respect/love nature to the max.

Northern Paladin
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 04:02 AM
Hunting for food out of necessity or to help with over-population? Absolutely.

Hunting for the sole purpose to show your buds the 12 point deer you got? Not a chance.

Hunting for the sake of hunting? Hunting for the thrill ending a life? :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

Zimobog
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 06:35 PM
Thanks for sharing all these great stories and ideas about hunting everyone.

We hunters on Skadi have been going on and on about all the great experiences we have had hunting, all the time spent with kinfolk, learning to respect and participate with nature, spending time observing and learning about the wild creatures we hunt and trap, all the camping, the brotherhood of hunting, sharing the hardship of the elements in pursuit of food and memories...

I think the antis would like hunting (most people who try it do). Call it "taking a rifle for a walk" instead.:D

Some of my favorite memories are of hunts and the activites surrounding them. The preperation, anticipation, the stalk, the kill, the home-coming, the meals, etc. Hunting and trapping is a great life!

TheVinson
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 09:16 PM
There are several places here in Indiana where people have released European wild Boars. They are very destructive and they are spreading very quickly. The main reason is that there is lack of interest in hunting them and they adapted to modern farming methods.

The Department of Natural Resouces has declared open season on them. You can use any weapon, any time of day or night, and any time of year. They are only about 40 miles to North of where I live, I might have to take a drive up there.;)

I'm in Western NY and the hunting regulations here are ridiculous. Might have to go for a drive...

Zimobog
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 10:41 PM
^^
Or just drive up to Maine, Vinson. They have black bear and moose up there, too and lots of wild places.

Maine is one of the only places in the lower 48 you can still trap black bear legally.

SpearBrave
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011, 10:43 PM
I'm in Western NY and the hunting regulations here are ridiculous. Might have to go for a drive...

While Indiana allows this for wild boars, they are very strict on deer hunting. :)

Grimsteinr
Thursday, February 10th, 2011, 01:40 PM
When I grew up, in SE Indiana, there were no Whitetail Deer in the State, or only a very few in parks, if at all. We could only hunt small game, rabbits, squirrel, bob-white quail, pheasants, wild ducks and geese. All of these are good table fare, if you don't shoot them up, to much, with a shotgun.
And of course there was night-hunting, with hounds, for raccoon & foxes.

I'm not sure when they began to introduce Whitetail deer back into the State.
It must have been in the 1960's or '70's. Now, though, the State is, in places, over run with them. A couple years ago, they had to have regulated Hunts, in a few State parks, because the Deer were so overpopulated that the greenery, & brush that they browse on were dying out from overgrazing. And, the Deer were starving. Of the ones killed in the Hunts, 90% of them were 30 to 40% underweight.

Still, Deer hunting across the State is still tightly Regulated. You must buy a Deer-tag, for each animal you intend to kill. And each animal you kill, must be registered at a State weigh-in Station. Still, with that, some Counties permit you to kill one Antlered Buck, and I think, up to 4 or perhaps more un-antlered deer, if you buy the proper permits.
I have never hunted Deer. But, I have several Friends, who hunt them each year. They are happy to share their bounty, with my DSW and myself.
But, I did grow up hunting small, upland game. I buy a License each year. And, I take walks around our acreage and up into the adjacent State Forest, where hunting is permitted. I carry my old shotgun, just in case, I might see a rabbit. I would shoot one if the opportunity arose... I can still clean and cook a nice meal....But, I do it more for the nostalgia of it, rather than the hunting.
Old, loved habits die hard.;)

SpearBrave
Thursday, February 10th, 2011, 03:06 PM
The Deer hunting laws here in Indiana are subject of much debate lately. They have not posted the final changes for the 2011 deer season yet.

For many years the opening day of firearms season has always been the weekend closest to the peak rut time for deer. However for years the bowhunting lobby has wanted that changed so that only bow and arrow can be used during this time. The fact remains though that most deer are harvested by firearms hunters( that don't have a lobby). Last year the DNR annouced that they are changing the seasons so basically only bows and arrows can be used during this time. It cut the firearms season down to 16 days out of 30 if you include muzzle loading season. Well the people protested heavly and the DNR decided not change the hunting seasons.:thumbup

What makes this important to people like me is that every year we gather as a group of friends and family to hunt the opening week of firearms season. We gather at our family farm and all stay in a cabin and drink, tell stories, eat burnt food and play cards. While there some hunting that goes on, it is more about being together and having a good time. With these proposed changes the tradition of deer camp would have suffered greatly. The whole idea of deer camp is what I think Zimobog was talking about in the traditions of hunting. It is much more than the taking of game it is special time for hunters to bond together young and old and pass down traditions and get to know one another. :)

Anselm
Saturday, February 19th, 2011, 08:40 PM
http://current.com/news-and-politics/88816799_end-aerial-wolf-hunting-short-version.htm

Wildlife management as we all know it, is an oxymoron. Commerce is placed ahead of wildlife. If the port and trophy hunters are in charge, they are going to encourage killing natural predators. Trophy hunters in Alaska take up to 73% of prey in areas where aerial wolf hunting has taken place. 73%!

It’s the same with coyotes in America, they’re killed so that sport hunters have more prey, and hunters, unlike true predators, usually do it with a full stomach.

Anselm
Saturday, February 19th, 2011, 08:44 PM
As much as that guy sounds like a lunatic, you're only citing one example. What about the sociopaths who carry out school shootings and the like with guns? Do you think the sport of shooting attracts sociopaths too? What about people who drink excessively and pick fights? Does alcohol attract the violent?

The majority of gun owners are law abiding and respectful people. There are always going to be bad apples in society, and you can't cite them as a generalised representation of a demographic.

That guy is still an immensely popular hunter in my home town. He has a following of kids that he takes with him. Imagine his influence and how difficult it is for a young man, even with a good heart, to be critical of his behavior. I feel they end up desensitized.

Some of the kids that hunted with him were my parents neighbors. When I’d visit my folks I’d be in the yard washing my motorcycle, tooling around, or whatever, and they’d come over an chat. This was before I ever became a vegan.

They had a terrier, that their parents, of course, refused to have spayed, and it had puppies. They said, while laughing as if this were a very funny, that to get rid of the puppies, they had given them to some fishermen, and that they had killed them and used them as cut bait. So my old hunting buddy is apparently having some influence on them.

And none of those other things rewards killing---if a drunk driver hurts someone he’s punished. Fathers pile a lot praise on little boys that hunt successfully.

NatRev
Saturday, February 19th, 2011, 09:13 PM
Look how manly and strong this noble man is here, after he's shot a big old scary deer.

http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/imageBank/cache/d/deer_stalking1.jpg_e_728f45411f1ba0dbaa8 d3f75aed3ca09.jpg

It is a barbaric and uncivilised way for Aryans to behave.

Frankly I find it utterly disgusting and beneath us as a species.

Anyone that seeks delight in the torture and murder of innocent animals is either mentally ill or down right evil.



"Love all living things whose humble task is not opposed in any way to yours, to ours: men with simple hearts, honest, without vanity and malice, and all the animals, because they are beautiful, without exception and
without exception indifferent to whatever "idea" there may be.

Love them, and you will see the eternal ...in the glance of their eyes of jet, amber, or emerald. Love also the trees, the plants, the water that runs though the meadow and on to the sea without knowing where it goes; love the mountain, the desert, the forest, the immense sky, full of light or full of clouds; because all these exceed man and reveal the eternal to you.”

http://www.mourningtheancient.com/savitri10.jpg

Savitri Devi

Bearkinder
Saturday, February 19th, 2011, 09:45 PM
Look how manly and strong this noble man is here, after he's shot a big old scary deer.

http://www.shootinguk.co.uk/imageBank/cache/d/deer_stalking1.jpg_e_728f45411f1ba0dbaa8 d3f75aed3ca09.jpg

It is a barbaric and uncivilised way for Aryans to behave.

Frankly I find it utterly disgusting and beneath us as a species.

Anyone that seeks delight in the torture and murder of innocent animals is either mentally ill or down right evil.

??
Seriously? Or is this a joke?

Go back and read some posts. I covered it a bit, and so did others. If animals aren't hunted they will compete and die of disease and starvation. I fail to see how killing them with gun or bow is torture, but starving to death and all sweetness and light. Or would you like to introduce predators like wolves to cut them down? Those wolves will also attack the old and infirm, young children, pets and livestock, BTW.

Hunting is historically a thing all races did, and often in Germanic and Anglo society was a mark of a gentleman to be a good hunter. Nothing un-Aryan about it.




"Love all living things whose humble task is not opposed in any way to yours, to ours: men with simple hearts, honest, without vanity and malice, and all the animals, because they are beautiful, without exception and
without exception indifferent to whatever "idea" there may be.

Love them, and you will see the eternal ...in the glance of their eyes of jet, amber, or emerald. Love also the trees, the plants, the water that runs though the meadow and on to the sea without knowing where it goes; love the mountain, the desert, the forest, the immense sky, full of light or full of clouds; because all these exceed man and reveal the eternal to you.”

http://www.mourningtheancient.com/savitri10.jpg

Savitri Devi

All due respect to miss devi, but she makes the same mistake common with those who want to love the environment, but are ignorant of how it works. Humans are not outside of nature, they are part of nature. We're what's called an apex predator. It is the right and duty of humans to watch over nature, build the strong and cull the weak. We breed animals to exaggerate the best features and breed out the worst. When the weak and small are culled from wild herds, it benefits the herd as a whole.

Now if we wish to weep for tortured animals, then mayhap we need to search for those that tie them up alive and stick hot knives into them. When you find those guys, let us know.

Huginn ok Muninn
Monday, February 21st, 2011, 02:01 AM
http://current.com/news-and-politics/88816799_end-aerial-wolf-hunting-short-version.htm

Wildlife management as we all know it, is an oxymoron. Commerce is placed ahead of wildlife. If the port and trophy hunters are in charge, they are going to encourage killing natural predators. Trophy hunters in Alaska take up to 73% of prey in areas where aerial wolf hunting has taken place. 73%!

It’s the same with coyotes in America, they’re killed so that sport hunters have more prey, and hunters, unlike true predators, usually do it with a full stomach.

The article you cite also says there is an effort to close the loophole that allows the aerial wolf hunts. So making arguments on an individual basis seems to be working.

Hunting is highly regulated, and it should be for some of the reasons you state. There are species that have been driven to the brink of extinction because of unregulated hunting, like the American Bison, and others that have indeed been wiped out totally. This does nobody any good, including hunters. We are a part of nature, but we have to guard against using our extreme advantage to our eventual disadvantage.


That guy is still an immensely popular hunter in my home town. He has a following of kids that he takes with him. Imagine his influence and how difficult it is for a young man, even with a good heart, to be critical of his behavior. I feel they end up desensitized.

Some of the kids that hunted with him were my parents neighbors. When I’d visit my folks I’d be in the yard washing my motorcycle, tooling around, or whatever, and they’d come over an chat. This was before I ever became a vegan.

They had a terrier, that their parents, of course, refused to have spayed, and it had puppies. They said, while laughing as if this were a very funny, that to get rid of the puppies, they had given them to some fishermen, and that they had killed them and used them as cut bait. So my old hunting buddy is apparently having some influence on them.

And none of those other things rewards killing---if a drunk driver hurts someone he’s punished. Fathers pile a lot praise on little boys that hunt successfully.

There will, unfortunately, always be evil in this world. Because this particular guy is evil does not make hunting itself an evil thing. If he influences others, yes, that's a problem, and those others need to see a different viewpoint... perhaps if you could offer that to them in a palatable way, you could have some influence. Decency and chivalry, even toward animals, is not weakness in any way, but an exercise in mental strength and honor. Make them see that.

Because this guy exists, though, does not mean that hunting itself is evil, or that hunters in general are, either. I know hunters who are some of the most decent, well balanced individuals out there. Maybe that comes from exercising the principles of decency when they are called to while hunting. If you look, there are plenty of discussions out there among hunters (http://www.fieldandstream.com/answers/hunting/big-game/what-use-hunting-big-game/do-you-think-roy-weatherby-was-right-about-extrem) about how to drop an animal in its tracks, so that it does not suffer. It's obvious that the aim of the majority of hunters is not to cause pain and suffering, and even to take steps to avoid doing so, so it's unfair to paint every hunter as being like this one sadistic bastard you know.

Gareth Lee Hunter
Thursday, February 24th, 2011, 09:38 PM
There weren't enough poll options provided for me to make a selection regarding the subject.

I believe we have the right to kill animals for food, in self-defense, and to protect property involving our livelihoods. But the methods used to end the lives of animals must be humane. Causing needless suffering in any case is unacceptable to me.

While I do accept hunting for food as an acceptable pursuit, I don't condone trophy hunting, killing members of endangered species, or canned hunts.

Personally, I no longer hunt game animals. But I would never vote against the practice of hunting for meat. :)

OutlawsnUnderdogs
Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 05:16 PM
Do I think hunting is Germanic?........ that is a strange question.... I think hunting can be generally attributed to the entire human race.

The wife and I hunt for meat, we also raise our own meat and buy animals at livestock auctions and whatnot. I think hunting is natural and very healthy for us.


When I read the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis I have often wondered if it was written as a metaphor. For example, "Adam" stands for a specific species or line of human, Eve stands for a line that branches from the Adam species. The coupling creates two different types of peoples the farmer agriculturalist city builder people, and the nomadic herdsman hunter gatherer people. Following the metaphor the agriculturalist farmer types kill of the nomadic herdsman hunter gatherer type. Just my theory anyway.

I think all people should hunt provide their own food, it removes a lot of illusions about life and makes one responsible for their own survival. I view hunting as a very healthy way of life.

Van Wellenkamp
Wednesday, September 28th, 2011, 01:20 PM
I love to hunt I share the same views almost to the letter as Ocko. Deer and hogs, the thrill of the hunt and just being in nature.

catherinekjso
Tuesday, October 4th, 2011, 06:21 AM
when we talk about hunting...!
there's only one question that comes in my mind ...

is there any difference left between animals and humans...????:|
and who gave us the right to hunt...!!!

Mrs vonTrep
Tuesday, October 4th, 2011, 04:05 PM
when we talk about hunting...!
there's only one question that comes in my mind ...

is there any difference left between animals and humans...????:|
and who gave us the right to hunt...!!!


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_SnuEJgrQl4g/SbHaAjBmoSI/AAAAAAAAAcI/THlw9rY-YoE/s320/To+All+You+Hunters

Bearkinder
Tuesday, October 4th, 2011, 04:25 PM
when we talk about hunting...!
there's only one question that comes in my mind ...

is there any difference left between animals and humans...????:|
and who gave us the right to hunt...!!!



http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_SnuEJgrQl4g/SbHaAjBmoSI/AAAAAAAAAcI/THlw9rY-YoE/s320/To+All+You+Hunters

:thumbsup

LOL, that was just too good to let slip by.

OutlawsnUnderdogs
Tuesday, October 4th, 2011, 04:32 PM
when we talk about hunting...!
there's only one question that comes in my mind ...

is there any difference left between animals and humans...????:|
and who gave us the right to hunt...!!!


Not to get down on you or anything......

Who gave a tiger the right to hunt animals.... a wolf.. or any other predator for that matter......

I think the answer to that question is ...Nature.....

Neophyte
Wednesday, October 5th, 2011, 01:32 AM
when we talk about hunting...!
there's only one question that comes in my mind ...

is there any difference left between animals and humans...????:|
and who gave us the right to hunt...!!!

The difference between humans and (other) animals? No animal would think twice about eating you. ;) If you think about it, I am sure that there is a lesson somewhere in there.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2026914/Mum-bear-eating--Final-phone-calls-woman-19-eaten-alive-brown-bear-cubs.html

Sjoerd
Thursday, August 16th, 2012, 12:28 AM
I have been hunting since I was 10. I prefer hunting ducks, ptarmigan, turkey, rabbit, and deer. I have been invited to hunt moose from time to time, but I refrain as I really think moose are amazing animals. Respect for nature is needed in order to be a truly ethical hunter.

I only support ethical hunting for the purpose of acquiring wild game and furs. The animal's body must be processed so that little is wasted.

I loath poachers and I detest the "tourist hunting" industry such as safari hunts, etc...



http://www.africahuntlodge.com/images/client/lion_nick.jpg

This seems unnecessary to me. Why bother flying all the way to Africa to have a guide lead you to some big exotic animals where you can kill them? Seems like trying to prove your manliness or something.

Pless
Thursday, August 16th, 2012, 02:22 PM
Waidmannsheil, hunters!

I do hunting around the whole year!

What I down goes for the pot except for cats and "things" like rats, foxes and the likes.

Being a reasonable cook, I do everything in pot and pan what I've downed

Roarbuck, Red Deer, Wild Boar, and a lot of winged game has passed my pots'n pans


Pless

InvaderNat
Thursday, August 23rd, 2012, 11:30 AM
http://www.africahuntlodge.com/images/client/lion_nick.jpg

Dude thats just sick :thumbdown What kind of arsehole is that smiling prick!! Killed an endangered and beautiful lion, you've got nothing to smile about you wanker! Shooting pests and numerous game animals is one thing but that just boils my blood.

Seriously I want to throw that guy into a cage with a live one.

Georgia
Friday, August 24th, 2012, 09:16 PM
Hunting and fishing are part of life here in the Deep South. My husband and I went hunting as well as fishing...a lot. We always took the children, as soon as they were old enough. The meat was a welcome addition to our meals as it helped a great deal with the cost of food. As we were getting older we enjoyed just being in the tree stand and "hunt" with our Binoculars.

Catterick
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 10:08 AM
Since we touched on the subject of hunting in several threads I thought it would be nice to have a overall discussion on hunting in general.:)

Please post your thoughts about hunting here. Do you like to hunt? Do you Like to eat wild game? Do you think hunting is Germanic? Are you opposed to hunting?

No one can say hunting is not Germanic. We can argue it has no place in the modern world, or condemn certain reasons for hunting. That would be more reasonable. I don't like killing animals just for fun but no one can argue subsistence hunting isn't a part of nature.

Flag-Soil
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 10:36 AM
I come from a shooting and fishing family, I grew up on trout, rabbit, pigeon, pheasant, duck. I don't countenance the anthropomorphising of animals, to me it is sentimental nonsense and towny, but of course, I do not want to see any species become extinct. I think the exotic meat stalls we have these days are great, they sell burgers made of Kangaroo, water buffalo, bison, zebra, and crocodile.

You are what you eat. Exotic meat is aristocratic. I would love to try Lion, or Kentucky Fried Eagle!

Englisc
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 10:44 AM
In England, hunting is overwhelmingly the preserve of the upper class - on Boxing Day they gather together and go fox hunting. The pictures published every year are quite a spectacle. Leftists and animal rights activists have been campaigning against this for years, and in 2005 a law was passed that restricts some of the hunting practises. The current Conservative government promised in it's manifesto to hold a vote on repealing this hunting law.

As I don't belong to that particular social circle, nor do I live in the countryside, I have no exposure to hunting. Individual hunting isn't something I think really happens in England, especially because very few people privately own guns except for farmers and members of shooting clubs.

That said, I have absolutely nothing against hunting - as long as it is regulated so that rarer animals are not hunted to extinction.

Catterick
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 10:46 AM
As I don't belong to that particular social circle, nor do I live in the countryside, I have no exposure to hunting. Individual hunting isn't something I think really happens in England, especially because very few people privately own guns except for farmers and members of shooting clubs.

There are too many idiots with airguns around.

SpearBrave
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 02:34 PM
No one can say hunting is not Germanic. We can argue it has no place in the modern world, or condemn certain reasons for hunting. That would be more reasonable. I don't like killing animals just for fun but no one can argue subsistence hunting isn't a part of nature.

At the time I started this thread there were several anti-hunting post questioning hunting as a Germanic tradition.;)

Hunting is a way of life in many areas of North America. There is very much a place for it the "modern" world.

Do we need subsistence hunting....No. Hunting is both a sport and a tradition. Most of the nature preserves in America are paid for by hunters via taxes imposed on licenses and firearms, gear, ammo and the other things. Without these funds to buy land for habitat there would not be as much wildlife in America. An example of this recently here is bears. Bears have been extinct in Indiana for more than 100 years. Kentucky has bears and a very good management program. A few weeks ago a large bear swam the Ohio river ( a very large river ) and is now wandering around the area. While they are making local news about it, many of us that are in the woods near the river have been seeing tracks and other sign for years. Though I'm not that interested in shooting another bear, I think it would be good to see them here.

I will say however many lower income rural people cut their food bill down by adding game to their diets. This does not hurt the overall population of game animals at all.

Yes, I hunt for fun and I often kill animals that are overpopulated such as squirrels and I don't eat them, I give them away to people who do. I do however eat deer, quail, grouse, rabbits, moose, groundhog, pheasant and many other animals. Do I need to kill these animals for meat...no. Beef and pork are much less work and cheaper for me for than hunting. Yet venison and wild game is more than 40% of my diet lately.

When I was younger I was opposed to trophy hunting. Being that some of these guys do not eat what they shoot. However, since the big trophy hunting craze it has led to more game and non-game animals overall. Waiting for a animal to reach it's full maturity has given that animal the chance to spread it's DNA and we have better herds. Most hunters are very ethical and help with conservation efforts for both game animals and non-game animals. So, these tree hugging anti-hunter types can also enjoy wildlife paid for by hunting.

There is also the case of wildlife management. In many cases wild animals have adapted very well to modern agriculture. Deer and wild turkey in my area are very overpopulated. In the case of deer they damage crops and cause vehicle crashes even killing people at times. I personally kill at least 15 deer every year and some years double that. What I don't eat I give away. Wild turkeys also damage crops and also they have hurt other native species such as quail and grouse. While I don't hunt wild turkeys personally I will tell others where they are so they can kill them. The only reason I don't hunt wild turkey is the legal season is in conflict with mushroom season and I love to hunt mushrooms( https://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=140669&highlight=Hunt ).

There is also the hunting of non-native species. In some of the counties to the North of me a jerk wad released European wild hogs. These are very dangerous and destructive animal. While the guy who did this did get prison time for it, the damn things have been breeding like crazy and spreading. I often go up there and kill them. I do eat the sows, but not the stinky strong boars.

Hammish
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 03:50 PM
This was an interesting thread, I remember it from before.

I notice that most of the posters that are against hunting of any kind live in either an urban environment or in bucolic, overly settled, domesticated rural settings, like rural England. And for the most part are almost all Europeans.

So their view of wild animal (truly wild) seems mostly derived from media representations (Bambi Complex).

What I found most interesting in this thread was the judgements of the people that hunt. How if a type of hunting was not to their tastes, then it is just wrong in their mind.

I guess I'm more open in my thinking...

I don't care for cat hunting, wouldn't care to kill a mountain lion, even though I've seen them or their sign while out hunting, and find the braying of the hounds sort of annoying.

But I've known a few cat hunters and they really loved it, so who am I to judge? More power to them.

I used to hunt more when I lived in a Rocky Mountain state than I do now, living in a over populated, west coast, liberal paradise, but I still get out.

Birds and Deer are more my speed now. I've killed deer with both bow and rifle, and of the two bow hunting is by far the most enjoyable.

I get a much greater sense of accomplishment getting a kill spot and stalk with a bow then I ever do with a long gun.

I really appreciate that I grew up and have lived in semi wild sections of the USA where I could enjoy the freedom of getting out and experiencing what a typical European has to spend many thousands of dollars to enjoy.

Shadow
Sunday, July 31st, 2016, 07:31 PM
I was born in a city but live in the country and so am surrounded by hunters. I don't hunt but we have all thought about it in terms of a collapse and survival.

Coillearnach
Friday, August 5th, 2016, 05:03 PM
I don't hunt and never want to hunt unless necessity demands. Don't really care for the wild game I've had either. I'm not against hunting for food (really do love animals but need to eat meat nonetheless) but pure sport is utterly disgusting to me and raises a serious red flag regarding another's character well beyond the standard homicidal triad link. Hate fox hunting in particular and do not care a fig that it's traditional, those twats can find something better to do.

Fishing is something we do quite a bit (saltwater) for food, taking care to buy fish-friendly hooks and sincerely attempting to kill as humanely as possible.

Hersir
Friday, August 5th, 2016, 07:32 PM
I'm eventually going for my hunters permit, it's one of the few ways we can get guns legally in Norway. We have way too much moose in our forests, I wouldn't mind hunting some. I would be concerned with unnecessary suffering of the animals, but at least I can make sure it will be over for them pretty quick. We have little knowledge about the animals raised for store meat, but food laws are strict here.

I like fishing and do it often.

renownedwolf
Saturday, August 6th, 2016, 12:25 AM
I like, support and enjoy hunting, as limited and expensive as it can be in the UK. I support traditional hunts also, like fox hunting, but for traditional reasons, not for the sake of it as some sport, which unfortunately it has become. (lefties have certainly driven it into a worse direction, now toffs farm foxes for it instead..) There is the argument that sport hunting provides lots of revenue for/and conservation, (hunting/culling purely for conservation/livestock protection is a different matter) but unless you are going to actually stalk, hunt and kill some wild beast with the bare minimum equipment, i.e a homemade bow and your own skill and not blasting something from the back of a landie with a high powered rifle because you have a tiny cock and a shitty suburban cucked lifestyle behind a desk, it seems rather pointless to me.

Shadow
Saturday, August 6th, 2016, 10:15 PM
Hunting is not the same thing in the UK as it is in the US. In the UK there was the King's Deer whereby commoners could not even hunt the animals. Hunting was originally training for war. It took on a governmental-state sponsored air. It was a formal affair.

But in the US hunting evolved from subsistence living as new waves of settlers pushed westward. Individual hunting was supported by the government in our 2nd Amendment. Hunting was for the common man. Children were taught to use firearms and hunt as life skills. Guns became so important in American culture that at times Americans have been gun innovators.

renownedwolf
Wednesday, August 17th, 2016, 02:33 PM
Outrage Ensues After American Hunter Videos Himself Killing Bear with Spear


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/16/outrage-ensues-hunter-videos-killing-bear-spear/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

SpearBrave
Thursday, August 18th, 2016, 01:47 AM
I'm impressed! I thought I did not want to hunt bears anymore, now maybe this might change my mind.

You have to admit after watching the video, and knowing how powerful and quick bears can be that took a pair to even do it.

renownedwolf
Thursday, August 18th, 2016, 08:49 AM
Alot of folk probably don't realise that he gets one pitch of that spear, if he should miss..