I haven't heard of any hunter that "throws meat away." I know trophy hunters, and they either use the meat or they give it either to the hunting guide or to local charities. Interestingly, I read about a recent case where several hundred pounds of venison was disposed of by public health authorities because it was supposedly illegal to give to homeless people. http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/28/s...nted-deer-meat-donated-to-a-homeless-shelter/ - - - Updated - - - In most states, that's illegal.
It shouldn't be illegal. It is immoral. - - - Updated - - - Obviously you've never hunted. It is not nearly as easy as you describe.
I'm a huge animal lover, so strictly, I'm against hunting for sport. I see it as being disrespectful to the life of the animal and only proves how cowardly people are. Try going against a bear without a rifle and see how you fair! Hunting for food on the other hand, I find acceptable because it doesn't waste the life of the creature that was killed. Using every part of the animal as a food source is entirely okay to me, as long as the animal did not suffer (I'm not a vegan btw, but I am against animal cruelty).
At least in the U.S., there are very few hunters that are not hunting for both food and sport. Hunting for sport is natural. We like it because of our basic predatory instincts. Predators like to hunt. It's fun to them. Watch a well-fed housecat stalk a bug. That cat is having the time of it's life. Are you against well-fed domestic housecats hunting for sport?
Watched an interesting tv show the other day re poaching in Africa - poachers were said to be thinning the herd and weakening elephants because they hunted bigger, stronger animals while ignoring the weaker ones. Because of this, it was said, weaker elephants breed resulting in much weaker broods. If hunters are continually allowed to hunt bigger, stronger animals, then weaker ones breed and wild beasts become weaker. Should this be allowed to continue?? I am all for allowing hunting but it should be limited. Let the stronger animals breed, then after a few years to pass, allow for hunting them. Otherwise, wild beasts will be too weak and more readily succumb to illness or predatory beasts.
I never heard of such a thing . I been hunting for 38 years and never in my state have I seen or heard of someone shooting a buck and taking only antlers and leaving that delicious meat.
Without a reference the above is just conjecture. I know people that have hunting camps in south Alabama. Most have rules requiring that members kill a certain number of spike bucks each year (spike bucks being either young bucks or genetically weak bucks that have small antlers). Poachers don't give a damn about the population and it's weakness. If in that area, there were legal elephant hunting, the elephant hunting guides (and local people) would be trying to stop the poachers, which would have the effect of helping the elephant population. You are talking about a study of poachers, not legal hunters.
Well, on the other hand the sport hunters are still doing a service in some cases. There are areas where the deer population is so bad that they're damaging farmer's crops and are a huge hazard on the roads. All because there are no predators in the area to take care of them. Now I will say that for the most part, the hunters in my area who do not want the meat for themselves will often hunt for the sport and the trophy and will give away the meat to a friend or to family member if they're locals, and Maryland is one of the states that allows and encourages hunters to donate meet to local food banks. But even if they didn't...they're still doing the service of standing in for the lack of natural population control.
I'm personally against it, but it is not illegal. I know many hunters that shoot hogs in Texas and leave them to rot believing it will deter other hogs from being in the area. It's simply not true, hogs will eat anything available to them including dead hogs, coyotes, and others clean up the rest. I'm a firm believed in hunters for the hungry a charity that helps feed homeless people in central Texas.
Why? Most/many trophy class animals are either out or soon to be out of the genetic pool. For African game this is very true. I love hunting cape buffalo and the best are found within the dagga boy groups and not within the breeding herds. Hunting the dagga boys is hard and dangerous especially is they go deep into the jess. It's up close and personal. It's why I went from a 375 H&H to a 458 Lott.
That is not the definition of poaching. Not even close. I am not a fan of hunting for sport if the food isn't be donated, but you are really out of left field if you think that constitutes poaching.
I don't know why you think that is the American standard. Hunting from a vehicle is illegal in my state.
You won't get an argument from me. I also think such activity indicates a sick, sociopathic personality. Why does a person have a need to feel especially macho and derive it from killing an animal? I've hunted deer, elk, grouse, pheasant, and ate the meat of all of them. And the only ones I enjoy are the foul, so I stopped hunting long ago. So I don't speak out of ignorance.
He was lying or ignorant. It's illegal in Pennsylvania to hunt from a vehicle. http://www.envirothonpa.org/documents/7_generalhuntingregulations.pdf
It's our basic nature. Humans (and our closest relatives the chimpanzees) hunt in the wild. We like to hunt. Almost all predators like to hunt, it's just the way nature makes us.
If it's genetic as you suggest it would be as commonplace as sex. It isn't. I will admit I spent some wonderful time in the deep woods, but that comes from the appreciation of nature that we all share. Now I do the same thing with a camera. But I think the sort of thing that was described with hunters discarding the carcass while keeping the "trophy" is sick and indicative of sociopathy.
Your post seemed like you were condemning all hunting, not just the almost nonexistent (in America) practice of discarding the carcass and keeping the trophy. I honestly don't know a single American hunter who does that in America. I know a lot of hunters who, while they enjoy the trophy, primarily hunt for the meat. I do agree that the strawman practice of shooting trophies and throwing away the meat is reprehensible, I just think it's almost nonexistent. Also, humans in some parts of the world are losing their drive for sex....
In every case I believe I said I hunted and bagged deer and elk, etc. And I was equally clear that I was opposing hunting for "trophies" which is what the OP objected to also. So did you tell Daggdag that you think his complaint is almost nonexistent? He's the go-to guy here.
Every hunter I knows keeps the venison...because its AWESOME! If they get extra deer they have lotteries in place for people who don't hunt or didn't manage to get anything to pick them up for processing so they can also get venison. In my state and many others since there really aren't any more natural predators in the numbers that would normally exist in the wild if you don't cull the deer herds you will end up with many of them just slowly starving to death. I don't like the stupid trophy hunting like they do in Africa. Almost none of the meat is utilized and its just a stupid attempt to prove oneself. The hunters I know don't feel any need to prove themselves they just want to have a good time and hopefully get some venison sausages at the end of the season.
How about pest control/hunting invasive species or any other sort of hunting where the meat is inedible?