Trophy Hunting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

my defination of trophy hunter, is someone who only takes the animal as a "trophy" so in the case of a buck hunter, would basically be shooting the animal only for antlers, or bears as only shooting for the hide... so long as the meat is consumed i am fine with it... even if it is donated... my heart pumps whether i see a fawn come walking into my stand or a big 10 point... i like a nice rack as much as the next guy and alot of times i will pass on smaller animals early in the season in hopes of a larger deer, but more so for extra meat, as a 200 lb buck has more meat than a 100 doe, the antlers are just a added bonus... bears i choose to only shoot small animals for the quality of meat, couldnt care less about a "trophy bear" and would and have passed on such an animal...

i can remember every big game animal i have shot, and could take you to the exact place i pulled the trigger, each one is a trophy animal in its own sense :)

in the debate about not eating coyotes etc, i am fine with that as they are a nuisance in most areas, and are not being hunted a purely trophies...

---

My feelings exactly. You tournament bass fishermen , have been trying to convince everyone , for years, that bass taste like poop.

The days of so called trophy hunting should be over. Harvesting an animal for meat is one thing, but just for the hide and or antlers is something that should no longer happen.

To the gentleman who said it was only because giraffes are cute that there was an outrage, and that if it was a lion or tiger being shot, I'd disagree. Firstly, most large predator species are under enormous pressure and dissappearing quickly. So there would be condemnation for that reason. And last I checked, lion and tiger meat isn't on anyone's menu so you are harvesting for a rug basically. People would be outraged by that.

And if you're going to hunt, it should be an animal that can sustain harvest. Giraffe numbers are down 40 percent over the past 15 years. Yes, they are still locally abundant but anyone with half a mind can see where they're headed.

I think harvesting animals for meat, from species that can sustain their populations despite hunting pressure, should be the only hunting allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rfb

The days of so called trophy hunting should be over. Harvesting an animal for meat is one thing, but just for the hide and or antlers is something that should no longer happen.

To the gentleman who said it was only because giraffes are cute that there was an outrage, and that if it was a lion or tiger being shot, I'd disagree. Firstly, most large predator species are under enormous pressure and dissappearing quickly. So there would be condemnation for that reason. And last I checked, lion and tiger meat isn't on anyone's menu so you are harvesting for a rug basically. People would be outraged by that.

And if you're going to hunt, it should be an animal that can sustain harvest. Giraffe numbers are down 40 percent over the past 15 years. Yes, they are still locally abundant but anyone with half a mind can see where they're headed.

I think harvesting animals for meat, from species that can sustain their populations despite hunting pressure, should be the only hunting allowed.

---

So no coyote hunting? Ground hogs? Raccoon? Crows?

As I see it . this a a big reason to " Stay Off Of Face book " I don't have the time nor the inclination to go on it !
There are so many out there that at the slightest thing , go and post it on face book , they should get a life .
This is my opinion !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

So no coyote hunting? Ground hogs? Raccoon? Crows?

---

If it was my call, no. Killing for the sake of killing is just an enormous waste of time.

To the best of my knowledge the meat from these hunts usually go to the local villages so it isn't wasted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

To the best of my knowledge the meat from these hunts usually go to the local villages so it isn't wasted.

---

If true, that's good. But that wasn't her intent. She wanted to kill a giraffe for a trophy, nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rfb

If it was my call, no. Killing for the sake of killing is just an enormous waste of time.

---

You are getting pretty close to the position of those who want hunting banned - and if you want to eat meat, buy it at the store. It's a slippery slope you're on.

If you're only purpose in hunting is to have some meat at the end of the day, you're missing out on a lot. What you call "killing for the sake of killing" many others will call "killing to have hunted".

"One does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted...If one were to present the sportsman with the death of the animal as a gift he would refuse it. What he is after is having to win it, to conquer the surly brute through his own effort and skill with all the extras that this carries with it: the immersion in the countryside, the healthfulness of the exercise, the distraction from his job.
Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rfb

If it was my call, no. Killing for the sake of killing is just an enormous waste of time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rfb

If true, that's good. But that wasn't her intent. She wanted to kill a giraffe for a trophy, nothing else.

---

Do you know,for a fact,that it was her sole motive? Do you have any knowledge of the philosophies of African Safari hunting? Are you even aware that virtually all African big game hunts are conducted within vast game preserves under exceedingly strict game laws? Are you also aware that Professional Hunters and guides strictly control which animals may be taken and that federal guidelines of all African nations dictate under what circumstances and qualifications the professional hunters must operate and require of their clientele? Are you aware that there's many species that are specifically classified as varmints/predators that make humans there number one food choice and must be quickly controlled? Hunting is the world's most recognized method of animal population control to maintain a natural balance. I understand,completely, your opinion that all hunting should be for food only,but,the world of hunting isn't as "black and white" as you seem to espouse. Are you a hunter or someone who doesn't hunt,but,has an ant-hunting philosophy? I only ask because your posts have a slightly ant-hunting tone to them.

Really, you want to use Africa as a model for hunting. A place where they auction off the right to kill endangered species. And if trophy hunting is such a great thing why are more and more African countries banning it?

Before you paint me as a Peta member I'll restate my beliefs. I hunt populations of animals that can sustain a harvest. Deer, grouse, geese for meat. That's my bag. If someone ever said these animals couldn't sustain a harvest I'd stop.

I think varmint hunting where you are doing it to control pests is a rare occurrence. Mostly you're doing it to simply blow something away and leave it there to rot.

As far as hunting to maintain healthy animal.populations, we only do.that because we've killed most of the apex predators that used to do the job, so we don't get to pat ourselves on the back for that.

As far as hunting something just to have a rack to stick on the wall or a rug in the floor, I think it's time has come and gone. We're more enlightened these days.