Hunting - Is it wrong. Why?

RampagingBadger

In the thread about "the Hunt" a lot of people argued that all hunting was wrong, whether with dogs or without. I'd like to get peoples opinion. Is all hunting wrong? What about hunting for food? If hunting is wrong is it morally worse/better than killing livestock for food? If so why?

pretty-in-pink

Yup all hunting for sport is wrong, so you should only hunt what you need to eat, when you have no other options.

I'm adverse to all killing really, not a big meat person, not vegetarian, just meat makes me sick. As for why, well I just don't see the point in hunting and killing animals just because. People also hunt people. Any cruelty is wrong. There is no way to justify it, and as such it should be an offence you can spend time in jail for. Infact society could beefit from harsher punishments for crimes. No more "ah poor idiots don't mean any harm"

Back on topic, hunting will evntually dwindle down all breeds of animals and so endanger them. This is something we should avoid. Humans have done enough damage without confounding it by continuing to kill and destroy all around them. Time to put a stop to it all.

RampagingBadger

Only when you eat what you kill.

naughty_girl wrote:

Back on topic, hunting will evntually dwindle down all breeds of animals and so endanger them. This is something we should avoid.

Most endangered animals are endangered due to habitat destruction, pollution et al. Not hunting. Also properly managed hunting does not lead to extinction. An example of this would be pheasants who have provided rich men with targets for a few months every year for years and years but are a long way from endangered. I think everyone accepts that in the interest of biodiversity not endangered animal should be hunted.

fiacha

naughty_girl wrote:

Back on topic, hunting will evntually dwindle down all breeds of animals and so endanger them. This is something we should avoid. Humans have done enough damage without confounding it by continuing to kill and destroy all around them. Time to put a stop to it all.

in the context of hunting game in Ireland, the majority of the habitat is managed by or on behalf of hunters in order to maintain the game populations. this also provides habitat for other species of flora and fauna.

game clubs also introduce large numbers of gamebirds (pheasant , duck) which eventually increase the wildbird stocks.

if all hunting stops, so will the incentive (and cashflow) needed to develop habitat.

i just don't see the government having the same level of interest in this as the hunters

i'm not going to defend hunting as a sport / hobby / right etc, as that comes down to personal choice. however, don't underestimate the positive effects it has on our environment.

omnicorp

Your looking for food.
You find some nice sheep to eat, your hungry after someone (no one in particular) has been destroying your habitat aand here's some food... but oh no, suddenly a lot of people come up and chase you with dogs screaming and barking and biting at you until you are pierced with bullets and ripped apart by teeth, then the hunters leave you to rot and trample back through the destruction of plants, trees an other animals they left in there wake.

It would be different if it was for food, you know, food chain and all that, it's what makes the world go round, if everyone was vegetarian, that would be unnatural as human are carnivores foir a reason.

simu

I see nothing wrong with hunting as long as it doesn't lead to the extinction of species.

Nasty_Girl

Hunting, complex issue, tis one thing if your defendin your land or whatever but one thing that definetly churns my stomach is hare coursing. There's not one thing right with that.

omnicorp

why is it Your land.
Because you gave some money to someone else it doesn'yt belong to animals.

Nasty_Girl

Apologies what I meant to say was livestock, suppose its a bit like the whole "do you've the right to shoot someone trespassing" debate. Its a bit of a weak comment though, just because you gave money to someone else for your computer doesn't mean it doesn't belong to me!

Anyway I'm not saying this is what I would do personally I'm just sayin I guess some people in extreme cases could be driven to it.

omnicorp

but if he didn't take any precautions it's his fault.
ie) if he left day old lambs out overnight unprotected only yo find them dead in the morning

_____________________________

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/feuer.php
this is very good ^^^^^^^^

Nasty_Girl

Woah that comment opens so many new discussions that I'm not gonna get into!
But yeah I can kinda see your point, although if (and its a pretty big if) I saw a fox or a badger attacking and killing one of my cats and I had a gun nearby ..........

Ro: maaan!

Always

simu wrote:

I see nothing wrong with hunting as long as it doesn't lead to the extinction of species.

How the hell did you come up with that? What makes the last two of any species any more important that the millions before them who were killed by idiots?

omnicorp

What puzzles me is that people choose one animals life over anothers.
I'm not saying hunting is wrong if it is for food, we all have to live, in fact, that's what the foxes are doing, they'r ehunting sheep.
Kinda ironic, isn't it.

freekhead

Only when you eat what you kill.

I am a hunter!! and it is not wrong far from it...

if there was no hunting in ireland the phesant would be in danger by now cause its the hunters that breed thousands every year...anyway the bird cant even breed in the wild

i only hunt vermint anyway, i never shoot any game because i dont eat them.... the fox, wild cat, magpie and grey crow need to be managed because they cause a lot of damage in certain parts of the country

one more thing how can a person from the city "dublin" even point any views in this topic because they dont know the first thing about country life anyway

simu

Ro: maaan! wrote:

How the hell did you come up with that? What makes the last two of any species any more important that the millions before them who were killed by idiots?

Actually I had in mind a system of quotas that would allow certain numbers of whatever species to be killed but whereby hunting a particular species would have to be prohibited if population levels fell too low. You'd need a lot more than two of any animal to keep the species going.

Where the hell did you get the Noah's Arc idea from my post?

Ro: maaan!

Always

simu wrote:

Actually I had in mind a system of quotas that would allow certain numbers of whatever species to be killed but whereby hunting a particular species would have to be prohibited if population levels fell too low. You'd need a lot more than two of any animal to keep the species going.

Where the hell did you get the Noah's Arc idea from my post?

I was just going for the extreme example. Don't really know anything about animals breeding. Figured two would be enough. Would be for cats.

I was really just asking you why it would matter if they were all killed, yet not matter if half of them were killed. Does stopping an amimal from becomming extint matter to a hunter? Do they all feel sorry for the animal when they see that they've almost wiped it out? Do they see any value in the life of an animal? Or would this quota just be in place so as they could keep killing them?

simu

Well, to me, it seems pointless to get upset over the death of individual animals. Animals die and suffer in nature as well but from a biological point of view, it doesn't matter as long as the species survives.

I have no idea what hunters think about animals as I'm not a hunter myself. I'm just noticing that there are people there who have a wish to hunt and am trying to accomodate that.

puntosporting

The harsh reality is that us humans are a blood thirsty breed and we like to kill ****!
I see no attraction in hunting foxs with a huge pack of dogs who then proceed to rip the little critter to shreds!
I can understand to a degree shooting game its a challenge and the guy holding the gun does the killing,also your not strictly killing wild animals!
But as i stated earlier the whole fox hunting perplexes me!
I dont buy this excuse of im hunting fox's because they are killing livestock or whatever,if that was genuinly the case why not kill these animals with a shotgun or whatever why the pack of hounds?

omnicorp

I don't buy the "I'm killing for the sake of Nature excuse and you city folk know nothing about it"
Bottom line is that it is fun and that if it wasn't people wouldn't do it.

Fantasy

Always

Hunting is totally wrong .. unless your starving to death or something !!! i dont get why peope would just want to go round killing animals when its not nesecery. :mad: I am vegetarian and totally against animal cruelty and hunting is just another form of cruelty.

Big_Dirty_Pig

Fantasy wrote:

Hunting is totally wrong .. unless your starving to death or something !!! i dont get why peope would just want to go round killing animals when its not nesecery. :mad: I am vegetarian and totally against animal cruelty and hunting is just another form of cruelty.

So what about all the germs you kill when you wash?
Taking away the vegetables you eat is cruel to the poor caterpillars is it not?
If ya got head lice you'd take great pains to get rid off em though wouldn't ya? :rolleyes:

omnicorp

Fantasy wrote:

Hunting is totally wrong .. unless your starving to death or something !!! i dont get why peope would just want to go round killing animals when its not nesecery. :mad: I am vegetarian and totally against animal cruelty and hunting is just another form of cruelty.

Right, although I am against hunting unless it is for food (livestock farming is the same) and conditions should be improved on farms etc... There is a circle of life. animal eats animal. It's very simple, you're going to die anyway

Doper Than U

Hunting, like it or not, is necessary for humanity's survival. Killing animals for food is an absolutely integral and vital part in the life of our planet... killing animals for no other reason than for fun is not necessary for survival, and finding fun in cruelty to another living creature is something people should be put away for.
Many vegetarians are adamant that the whole world should follow their lead. This would very quickly destroy our planet, and the first to go would be the animals. Think about it... in order to grow healthy fruits, vegetables and grain you need land. Lots of it. Lots more than is currently farmed now. Herbivores like deer, cows, sheep, goats, horses, wildebeest, antelope, elephant (etc etc) need grass and vegetation to live. Lots of it. Once we usurp all the land for our own vegetarian needs, we take it from them... once we do that, they starve, and so do all the foxes, lions, wolves, tigers, leopards (etc etc) that live on the herbivores.
There is an argument than says that vegetables take less room to raise than cattle, this is absolutely true... but as soon as the entire world becomes vegetarian, the extra space we would have saved becomes moot... the world simply cannot sustain that amount of intensive vegetable (etc) farming.
Every year a massive amount of grain is lost to pigeons. Farmers shoot 5 million per year to keep the 20 million pigeon-popluation steady. Once you stop shooting these birds, they breed and breed, and will very quickly decimate the grain crop, leaving everyone (including vegetarians) with no grain to eat. Everything must be done in balance, that is what this planet, her very nature, is designed to do. The morals (or lack thereof) of a human being should not undermine this balance by assuming he/she knows better. Nature is inherently cruel.
Also, much of the planets delicate ecosystem is destroyed by intensive farming, both for vegetarian and meat products... more and more would be destroyed by farming to cater only for vegetarians.
Humans are designed to eat meat, they can do without it should they choose to. I think far more important than not eating meat, is making sure the meat you do eat is from a healthy, happy, free animal that is in plentiful supply. Up until the invention of factory and intensive farming, that's pretty much what we had. I see nothing wrong whatsoever with going out each day and hunting just enough food (animal and vegetable) for your family (as long as you kill the animal swiftly and cleanly) and making sure not to waste much, if any, of it.
Animals in the wild typically die grisly horrible deaths, they rarely make it into old age, and they must fight for every last morsel of food. A gunshot is *usually* a far swifter and fairer death.
I would rather hunt and kill my own food every day than purchase the cheap, flaccid, insipid "meat" from a big supermarket, knowing it comes from a factory farm where animals are kept in such appalling conditions that you wouldn't even touch them, let alone eat them (if you saw them).

Hunting to eat? Yes, absolutely... Hunting for sport? No, not at all. Hunting to defend your livestock? Depending on how responsible you are, yes... Chasing down an animal until it collapses from exhaustion and ripping it apart with hounds? No, it is unnatural and unnecessary.

Capt'n Midnight

I always liked Billy Connolly's take on this "It's called fishing, it's not called catching.."

I know of one hunt where they have not caught a fox for years, yet because of the hunt the land isn't poisoned. As a form of vermin control it is not particulary effective or cruel because of the frequency and numbers of animals killed. Vermin AFAIK are entitled to no protection under the law and you can't be porsecuted for killing them in any manner (unless someone knows different).
Not sure if foxes are vermin, but many other intelligent mammals are, and crows are some of the most intelligent birds. And I keep mentioning rat poison is kinda nasty, death by internal bleeding over an extended period of time.

Maybe if they put muzzles on the dogs, and throw them back after a photo and a weighing like many fishermed do ?

And yes they should have licences for people to eat meat, you have to go to a farm and meet the meet and then after you've proved that you realise that these animals can have an independent existance you get to kill a few (not just one) to show you understand where your food comes from. Again you have to be able to empathise / interact with the animal as you would with a pet or a wild animal before stage two. Also you would have to gut, clean and prepare at least one animal too.

Fantasy

Always

Big_Dirty_Pig wrote:

So what about all the germs you kill when you wash?
Taking away the vegetables you eat is cruel to the poor caterpillars is it not?
If ya got head lice you'd take great pains to get rid off em though wouldn't ya? :rolleyes:

I'm not that extreme , if i was i would barely be able to move without feeling guilty... Im topic is hunting and thats what im talking about. Things like killing germs when you wash and killing headlice can hardly be helped , well unless you want to go round filthy dirty with lice eating at your scalp.

simu

Fantasy wrote:

I'm not that extreme , if i was i would barely be able to move without feeling guilty... Im topic is hunting and thats what im talking about. Things like killing germs when you wash and killing headlice can hardly be helped , well unless you want to go round filthy dirty with lice eating at your scalp.

Won't someboady puleeeeze think of the baby lice?

omnicorp

The Lice have to live somehow, like humans