Any one else like hunting or fishing?

[jewel-dragons]

yes okay.... but we feed our animals with animals,but killing animals for human fun is crazy i think..... when you eat your animal after killed.... that's another story....

i'm really not an left site political person,just as right as can :-)

but killing animals for human fun..... i don't get the point.....

[GGarter]

So true Stefan.

I know it's a cheap one, but to go out in the nature, track/spot and sneak up a prey, and finally to shoot it and then bring it home and eat it, I consider more human (if you can use that phrase) than to buy a pack of meat in the supermarket, that was made from a pig that spent its short life in a stable....

Plus I do believe it is our instinctive behaviour to be hunters, so no matter if you go hunting in the woods or the coolingboxes in the supermarket, animals die.

It does not mean you don't respect the animals as live creatures.

It can also have a nature regulating effect. I know at least here in Denmark, and parts of Norway and Sweden , we have to kill some deer to help the population stay strong and healthy, because the predators (wolfs, bears, wild cats etc.) that would normally pick out and take down the weak individuals, don't live here no more. Furthermore the populations in some areas, are so dense that many of the animals would starve and possibly be killed by winther cold.

Greets Tore

p.s.

but killing animals for human fun..... i don't get the point.....

I see what you mean but it is important to distinguish between "sadistic fun" like "haahaa i killed something" which I can't really relate to, or the sport and thrill of a hunt performed in a descent way.

[Stefan-A]

yes okay.... but we feed our animals with animals,but killing animals for human fun is crazy i think..... when you eat your animal after killed.... that's another story....

i'm really not an left site political person,just as right as can :-)

but killing animals for human fun..... i don't get the point.....

Indeed we do feed our animals with animals, but the important thing to notice here, is that we choose to keep animals that need to be fed with animals and we do it for our own pleasure. We make killing necessary, because we want to keep snakes.

Saying that we need to eat an animal after it has been killed is just another arbitrary rule. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to kill animals and I'm probably speaking for 99.9% of all hunters when I say that blood lust is not one of them. Of the species I hunt, most are introduced species that don't belong in this ecosystem and have a negative impact on several other species. It actually benefits the biodiversity to hunt them.

Like GGarter pointed out, it's sometimes necessary to reduce populations, because there aren't enough predators out there doing that job. The problem with large predators is that they are incompatible with livestock and in some cases, humans. It's not possible to co-exist with large carnivores to the point where for example wolves would look after the elk population and make hunting elk unnecessary. It may be possible in certain remote areas, but that's it. Elk ("moose" if you're from North America), by the way, benefit enormously from the relatively developed forest industry here in Finland, since we plant new trees wherever we cut down trees and young plants happen to be an important part of the elk's diet. It's necessary for economical reasons to hunt them, since they cause a lot of damage to the forest industry. Some of them need to be killed and there aren't that many realistic alternatives. Another reason is security. Especially elk and deer cause a lot of traffic accidents that can be reduced through the hunting of those species.

Animals are just another resource, not unlike all those other living organisms that we use. As long as we use that resource sustainably, I don't see a problem.

[drache]

I do believe that there are a variety of motives for, approaches to, and philosophies about hunting.
I believe that an animal cleanly killed by a skilled hunter, who has fully met that animal, and will consume and share it entirely, has met a better fate, than those who meet their deaths by the millions after, well . . . lives I'd rather not dwell on.

[adamanteus]

It can be a very emotive subject. In the UK practically all forms of weapon are illegal so we would have to track an animal then fight it! So I shall abstain from giving an opinion on this one!

[Elliot]

yes okay.... but we feed our animals with animals,but killing animals for human fun is crazy i think..... when you eat your animal after killed.... that's another story....

i'm really not an left site political person,just as right as can :-)

but killing animals for human fun..... i don't get the point.....

Most hunters will eat the animal they killed, that should be part of it. If you kill to kill its a problem, but hunting isn't murder like some people see it.

[adamanteus]

Most hunters will eat the animal they killed, that should be part of it. If you kill to kill its a problem, but hunting isn't murder like some people see it.

So, you eat armadillo then Elliot.

[Josh]

i like fishing dont really catch much

[abcat1993]

Well, my neighbor shoots squirrels, and doesn't eat them, to lower the population and save his garden.
And snakecatcher, nobody ever catches much (unless they're on those ships that pull a net through the water or something like it), but it's somehow fun to think of what you're going to catch, then eat. I love fishing.

[Stefan-A]

Most hunters will eat the animal they killed, that should be part of it.

Most hunters also hunt species that have no value as food or clothing for wildlife management purposes.

Or maybe that's just a part of our local, ethically superior hunting culture.