hunting--your thoughts?

Question

Please give me you thoughts on hunting wildlife. I have not made up my mind yet if I approve of it or not. I would like to hear from the rest of you. Either for or against and WHY

Answer 1

I am for hunting for meat.



Hunting provides cash for wildlife agencies that help wildlife this comes from; duck stamps, hunting licenses, permits and other hunter expenditures.



Hunting controlled State and Federal agencies based on wildlife biologist’s recommendations, help reduce over population of animals in a given are. This reduces auto/deer accidents, winter starvation, crop damage, and attacks on humans by predators, reduces pets being killed by animals, reduces property damage and saves insurance companies billions. It also saves the tax payer billions by hunters doing the work government hunter would otherwise have to do.



Hunting provides meat for hunter’s families and the meat donated to the poor by hunter’s ads up to millions of pounds.



Hunting is also a tradition that dates back to the dawn of man. It is a very important part of many cultures.



Unlike animal slaughter houses that produce meat for the masses. Game taken by hunters has no injected hormones of anti-biotic’s. It has less fat and is far more healthy to eat. Also the animal had freedom before its death unlike livestock. Its death is much more humane and hunters do have compassion and respect for game animals.



Hunters are the first to find diseased animals in the wild, adding game management quick response to deal with such, saving many from death.

Data from hunters helps wildlife biologists greatly in their research.



Dangerous predators such as Grizzly bears, mountain lions and wolves can not be introduced to populated areas to control animal numbers. Hunters take their place with out placing many in eminent danger from large predators.



All animals eat living things to survive, even the vegan eats a living plant that was grown on a farm. The farm equipment inadvertently kills millions of small animals, such as rabbits, moles, gophers, mice and ground bird nests. Hunters are just on top of the food chain but contribute to nature in many ways.



The first conservationists were hunters; Teddy Roosevelt who set aside the first national parks was a hunter.



Hope this helped you understand hunting better.

Answer 2

For it.



1. Hunters pay over 200 million dollars a year in taxes that go to support and increase habitat for all wildlife not just game animals



2. In many parts of the country there is a huge over population of Whitetail Deer that are causing millions of dollars in property damage, causing highway accidents etc...Additionally many of these deer will die slow painful deaths by starvation during the winters if their numbers are not reduced.



3. The Human Animal is a predator by either nature or god's design (you pick). The urge to hunt is natural and it's hardwired into each and every one of us at birth.



4. When properly managed hunting benefits all wildlife.

Answer 3

I am definitely pro hunting. Hunting is part of our history and a sport enjoyed responsibly by millions of people every year, and a lot do it for survival. It is a responsible way to enjoy the outdoors and keep wildlife populations under check, such as deer herds in heavy farming communities.

Also, hunters have done much more for wildlife and the environment than groups such as greenpeace or the sierra club ever will.

And to those who say that hunting is not humane. I'm sorry to break it to you but all of that meat on supermarket shelves come from somewhere. It is much more humane to take an animal from the wild than to keep them penned up like sardines, fattening them up for slaughter. not that i'm against that either.

Answer 4

Defiantly for. Without it we would first end up with an overpopulation then they will all die out. They money spent on the items go to managing the deer. Also just for the activist they meat tastes nothing like what you can buy in the store. Wild turkey is the best white meat you can find. Frog legs are very hard to find and taste very good. Pheasant is a great tasting bird and one of the best you can find to eat. Elk and bison are a good meat too. Alligator is one of the strangest things to taste but it is surprising good. Without hunting it all these animals would die out. A few would benefit but only ones that get poached. Actually there is an overpopulation of deer there is always a new disease and it just kills more hunting is the only way to manage effectually. A good hunter will kill a sick or animal with bad genes to get it out of the gene pool and make better deer population for more deer that resemble a good healthy buck.

Answer 5

Responsible hunting can be an excellent conservation tool for reasons already listed. Hunters are usually very knowledgeable and concerned about wildlife. And considering the environmental impacts of raising, processing, and distributing cattle, chicken, and pork, responsible hunting could be the more desirable method of obtaining meat for food.



Irresponsible hunters just plain suck.



If you need help deciding, try researching Ducks Unlimited. Most hunting organizations are basically conservation organizations with an emphasis on hunting, but I think DU is the gold standard.

Answer 6

We have a choice. We can reduce the populations of deer by hunting or we can let them outbreed the habitat's carrying capacity and starve to death (after eating your garden). No herbivore can be allowed to breed unchecked by predators. At the same time, hunters spend money that both fuels the local economy and supports wildlife conservation efforts.



It took me a long time to get over the effect of watching Bambi but information finally won out over emotion.

Answer 7

I think bow hunting is good. It gives the animal a chance and is a challenge. I don't hunt personally, but think it's ok. We have soooo many deer in my area; they eat up everyone's gardens and have become an annoyance since hunting isn't allowed here. They need to be thinned out in some other way than people hitting them in their cars. If there are lots of a certain type of animal in a particular area, it makes sense to me...go ahead and hunt them. Of course, use the meat or give it to someone who would appreciate it, too.

Answer 8

When evaluating hunting, I think it's important to compare and contrast the Indians' (Native Americans') approach with that of the so-called "civilized" white hunters who came over from Europe. The Indians hunted buffalo for food, clothing and shelter. They used virtually every part of the animal and almost nothing went to waste. The Indians hunted only what they needed to survive. They lived in harmony and balance with the buffalo, just as other animals do.



When the European settlers came and saw the vast herds, they hunted them for trophies, for sport, or just because they had guns and too much time on their hands. They hunted them nearly to extinction, and if they hadn't been one of the first endangered species to be protected by law, they would be long gone. By the way, I'm not an Indian; I'm white, and I'm ashamed of what our ancestors did.



If you plan to eat what you hunt and you do it legally, it's no worse than getting your meat from a slaughterhouse, and perhaps more humane in some cases, so I can't say there's anything wrong with that. I eat meat too, so I would be a hypocrite if I said it was wrong.



If you hunt just for bragging rights or a trophy to put on your living room wall, I'm not so impressed.



Poachers who hunt endangered species should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and never allowed to hunt again.

Answer 9

FOR IT!!!



It keeps the animal population in check. If you don't do it, the animals will over-populate, run out of food, and starve to death. It is called the food-chain. Humans have been hunting since they were created, and meat is important for everyone's diet. I don't care what a Vegan/Vegetarian says about it.



Remember, animals kill people too, do you want to put little children and others at risk for possible attacks?



Animals are also used for making products such as fur that is very valuble.

Answer 10

I am for. I am for the practical and useful method of hunting that "most" hunter use. The number of natural predators is decreasing, i.e. habitat, management,etc. The most widely hunted animal in the US is te white tailed deer. I don't know where you live but in most places in the US they are grossly over populated. While i think that we cannot be god in this matter and control populations we can begin to decrease the populations via hunting. I do not support the kind of hunting that is destructive and usually beer induced. I use every part of anything I kill and think that unless your going to eat it, you shouldn't kill it.



just my $0.02

Answer 11

I'm for it, with reservations. As others have pointed out, hunters were the first conservationists, and responsible, "fair chase" style hunters continue to be among the best and most effective advocates for conservation and sound management of wild areas.



Irresponsible hunters are a menace to wildlife, to ecosystems, and sometimes to humans. (I know a woman who was nearly killed when some drunken idiot put a bullet through her kitchen window in pursuit of a deer, and another guy who was shot by one of his own companions on the trail.)

Answer 12

I assume you mean hunting as a sport?



Either way, I am against it.



It is not a sport. Sport implies the idea of rules, regulations, an unbiased judge and equality between the competitors. In sport, both sides should know they're playing.



By hunting animals, we disrupt the delicate balance of the ecosystem that ensure the survival of our animals. Natural predators kill the slowest, weakest, loudest or sickest animal, to ensure the hunted species continues to say strong - think Darwin's Natural Selection. Hunters, however, kill any animal they like—including large, healthy animals who are needed to keep the population strong.



We do not need to hunt. Okay, fair enough we did back in the days of the cave men when we needed food to survive. But in this modern age, we can go down to the supermarket and grab whatever animal we decide we want to eat. We don't hunt because we need to, we hunt because we want to prove our superiority over a defenseless animal, so we can hang their heads on the wall.



So yes. I'm against it, definitely.