• 59 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

I've been presented with the opportunity to hunt in Africa this year and I'm considering doing it. I've never hunted before, however, I've always liked the idea of hunting over the idea of purchasing meat at a supermarket. The one major con about hunting in Africa is that due to stupid rules in America, I can't ship meat back. However, I will be able to eat as much as I can in the country and the remainder will be donated to local villages. Also, keep in mind that I am not going to be hunting something ridiculous like an Elephant or a Predator. Most likely it will be a Springbock or Boar which are in great abundance (and Boars are a nuisance animal).

Has anyone hunted before or go hunting? Any tips? Should I go hunting out here in the states somewhere ahead of time? Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

#2 Edited by joshwent (2112 posts) -

Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

Only if you use weapons.

#3 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@joshwent said:

@horseman6 said:

Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

Only if you use weapons.

Everything is a weapon dude, even my words of kindness!

#4 Posted by GERALTITUDE (2911 posts) -

It ain't wrong just don't be lame about it. Show respect and if you're hunting in balance (boars apparently, for your case) and you're eating the meat then really it's not so bad, other than the part where you rob a creature of its life just so you can have an "experience". So yeah! Depends how you look at it I guess :D

#5 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@geraltitude said:

It ain't wrong just don't be lame about it. Show respect and if you're hunting in balance (boars apparently, for your case) and you're eating the meat then really it's not so bad, other than the part where you rob a creature of its life just so you can have an "experience". So yeah! Depends how you look at it I guess :D

It could be something I would become more interested in, but I would only do it generally if I can eat the meat. My dad always said that if you did hunt, even if you killed a squirrel, you have to eat the thing so it won't go to waste. In this instance, I wouldn't be able to eat everything but nothing would go to waste as it would be donated. Also, the place where I would be going is to a farm that does both conservation and game farming specifically for hunting. There are quite a few of those places in Africa. It's also not a place that lets you hunt Lions, Elephants, etc. If it was one of those places, I wouldn't even consider it as I find that to be disgusting. The only animals they let you hunt are those that are in wide abundance or are a nuisance.

#6 Posted by ViciousBearMauling (897 posts) -

There is something weird about killing what you eat. You either feel grateful towards the animal, or you feel like some kind of evil person.

Personally, I would do it. Your helping others with leftovers being donated. You also get to understand the true gravity of turning a living being into dinner, I think that is an important thing to understand.

#7 Posted by TehBuLL (591 posts) -

From what I've seen, hunting in Africa, especially of this sort, is a totally different ballgame than if you are hunting your own/friends land in the US. Like you said, you would be at a conservation/place of high density for your prey, so there would be a lot less attracting/hiding involved. Most of what I've seen from Africa involves you driving up to basically an area HIGHLY populated with your target and it is only a short matter of time before you get a chance to drop your target. I say go for it, but I don't think that you will be involved in an engagement of lengthy baiting/tracking your kill.

#8 Edited by Tajasaurus (792 posts) -

Hunting for sport is lame, unless it's against some jerk animal population that needs to be culled anyway. So if you stick to stuff like boar I don't think it's that big of a deal.

But also I just think that hunting and shooting and guns and stuff are super dumb, but as long as you guys are safe and aren't killing unnecessary amounts of things just to do it then whatever, I guess. I don't know. I am conflicted on the whole thing in general.

#9 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

I've been presented with the opportunity to hunt in Africa this year and I'm considering doing it. I've never hunted before, however, I've always liked the idea of hunting over the idea of purchasing meat at a supermarket. The one major con about hunting in Africa is that due to stupid rules in America, I can't ship meat back. However, I will be able to eat as much as I can in the country and the remainder will be donated to local villages. Also, keep in mind that I am not going to be hunting something ridiculous like an Elephant or a Predator. Most likely it will be a Springbock or Boar which are in great abundance (and Boars are a nuisance animal).

Has anyone hunted before or go hunting? Any tips? Should I go hunting out here in the states somewhere ahead of time? Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

I do not think there is shame in it. Especially if you enjoy it and even give the food away. I do not know how it works in Africa but don't you also need a license for that as well or is it just a matter of money? Also do not brag about it on social media sites like twitter or people will hunt you down.

#10 Posted by mjk0104 (188 posts) -

Nothing wrong with it in my opinion, unless the animal's endangered. In Australia, we even hunt our national animal (The Kangaroo) since it's often a pest and has pretty decent meat. (As long as you don't overcook it)

I have no idea what boar is actually like, but I imagine it's fairly accurately portrayed in Asterix & Obelix, right?

Also, as Darji says, don't talk about it on any super-public spaces, since people love getting offended by that stuff.

#11 Edited by PimblyCharles (1314 posts) -

@horseman6: Been hunting with guns and bow for about 24 years now. I hunt in the states, and feel there's nothing wrong with it as long as you respect the animal, and use everything you can off it. You're not human if you don't feel bad every time doing it, but for me I was raised with it being a major part of my family's life and sustainability.

Have you ever shot a high caliber rifle before? I'd assume that's what you'd be using to hunt with over there in Africa. Likely at least a .270 or .30-06. If you haven't before, I'd recommend going to a range or finding a friend with a high caliber rifle or shotgun, and practice getting used to the recoil and accuracy of them.

If you've never shot before, I'd start with a smaller caliber rifle, like a .22lr or .22 mag to get used to target practice. Once you're comfortable with it, move up to the big boys listed above.

We mostly hunt deer here, which are in such high abundance, it's good for the population in the long run. Hope you're not too squeamish, as you or a guide you're with will have to field dress the animal meaning gutting it. I puked my first time as a kid, so no shame if that happens to you. You never quite get used to it, though it's easier now than it was then.

This sounds like an experience that many hunters will never get a chance to do. I think it's noble to donate any unused meat to the local villages, and could overall be an incredible time. Let me know if you have any more questions, as I'd be happy to answer them the best I can.

#12 Posted by Wilshere (287 posts) -

Nothing wrong with hunting as long as its reasonable and regulated. As far as i know hunters are the ones that care most about the wildlife. The convenient supply of wrapped goods shields people from the harsh reality of killing animals for food. Hunting seems more respectful, there is more effort in it. The animal is given the chance to escape, the hunter has to rely on his own skill to feed himself and others.

#13 Edited by mosespippy (4032 posts) -

I haven't hunted but I have gone mineral prospecting during moose hunting season. With four dudes wearing orange vests driving around the woods in a truck we almost always got mistaken for hunters. It actually made our job easier, because in our industry you want to keep the locations that you're working on a secret until you own it. We had the perfect camouflage.

My dad hunts seal. It's the second largest herd of wild animals in the world, behind the african water buffalo. With the population out of control it needs to be culled to prevent it from making it's food sources extinct. One word of advice is that anyone who smokes should bring enough cigarettes because you don't know when you'll get to a store. You could end up like my dad's friends, walking 26 miles along the ice to get to town without realizing there are polar bears around.

#14 Posted by horseman6 (363 posts) -
@mjk0104 said:

Nothing wrong with it in my opinion, unless the animal's endangered. In Australia, we even hunt our national animal (The Kangaroo) since it's often a pest and has pretty decent meat. (As long as you don't overcook it)

I have no idea what boar is actually like, but I imagine it's fairly accurately portrayed in Asterix & Obelix, right?

Also, as Darji says, don't talk about it on any super-public spaces, since people love getting offended by that stuff.

Totally understand why some people get offended if there are people bragging about it and going out to kill something because they think it's fun. You should have a healthy level of respect for your environment and animals which is why I would only hunt something in abundance. I don't know why anyone would want to kill something like a Lion, Leopard, Elephant, etc. These aren't animals in great abundance.

#15 Posted by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@horseman6: Been hunting with guns and bow for about 24 years now. I hunt in the states, and feel there's nothing wrong with it as long as you respect the animal, and use everything you can off it. You're not human if you don't feel bad every time doing it, but for me I was raised with it being a major part of my family's life and sustainability.

Have you ever shot a high caliber rifle before? I'd assume that's what you'd be using to hunt with over there in Africa. Likely at least a .270 or .30-06. If you haven't before, I'd recommend going to a range or finding a friend with a high caliber rifle or shotgun, and practice getting used to the recoil and accuracy of them.

If you've never shot before, I'd start with a smaller caliber rifle, like a .22lr or .22 mag to get used to target practice. Once you're comfortable with it, move up to the big boys listed above.

We mostly hunt deer here, which are in such high abundance, it's good for the population in the long run. Hope you're not too squeamish, as you or a guide you're with will have to field dress the animal meaning gutting it. I puked my first time as a kid, so no shame if that happens to you. You never quite get used to it, though it's easier now than it was then.

This sounds like an experience that many hunters will never get a chance to do. I think it's noble to donate any unused meat to the local villages, and could overall be an incredible time. Let me know if you have any more questions, as I'd be happy to answer them the best I can.

I've never shot a scoped rifle before but I have shot plenty of rifles including calibers 22LR, 308, and 223. If I decided that I would for sure do this, I would go to a range several times before hand and rent some rifles. I believe that at this place they test out your aim first to make sure that you can actually hit a target. They don't want you to just mame an animal.

I am worried about the dressing part a little bit but if I shoot an animal, I should also watch that part too and I would probably try to learn from it. As I do go camping quite a lot, you never know what could happen and if I got lost, it's probably a skill worth knowing. Hell, as humans we've been doing it for thousands upon thousands of years.

#16 Posted by Marcsman (3113 posts) -

Be a real man and hunt something that will hunt you back.

#17 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@marcsman said:

Be a real man and hunt something that will hunt you back.

You should read up on boars dude, they're scary.

#18 Posted by Video_Game_King (35986 posts) -

@joshwent said:

@horseman6 said:

Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

Only if you use weapons.

Psychological weapons are fine, though.

#19 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

Anyways, thanks for the input guys and gals, I have some thinking to do.

#20 Edited by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@wilshere said:

Nothing wrong with hunting as long as its reasonable and regulated. As far as i know hunters are the ones that care most about the wildlife. The convenient supply of wrapped goods shields people from the harsh reality of killing animals for food. Hunting seems more respectful, there is more effort in it. The animal is given the chance to escape, the hunter has to rely on his own skill to feed himself and others.

I feel pretty weird about this in terms of how you're people in the thread are using the term "respect" and in terms of the ethics you seem to be laying out here. I agree that peoples' disconnection from the reality of killing animals for food is an issue, for sure - in terms of how the pre-packaged nature of meat products distances it almost completely (for most people) away from the production/slaughter process. But I don't really understand how hunting becomes reasonable by virtue of it being more 'respectful' than another process. It seems a bit like saying that shouting at a stranger in the street a warning of "I'm coming to get you" and then smacking him in the face is reasonable on the basis that some people stab people dead without warning. That is to say, just because debatably worse things happen to animals (e.g. the meat industry) doesn't mean that killing wild animals becomes reasonable. Just makes it potentially 'less bad'.

The thing about the 'respect' line is that respect normally has to be mutual in some way - there normally has to be some kind of implied value of consent or equality to begin with - that all the parties involved are 'in' on it. If we play a videogame together and you beat me at it through effort and skill then that's respectful - we both decided to compete at something, consented to that and you came out on top. Hunting isn't like that - the animal doesn't want to be hunted by a human and neither does it need to be (that's my belief, well aware that the 'necessity' of hunting is a whole other massive debate). An animal in the wild is going through it's regular life and a human being decides that they want to kill it (in the vast majority of occasions, for sport). Killing that animal may require tracking and skill and so on - but I doubt that is a relevant factor in terms of 'respect' for anyone other than the hunter. Ironically, I would say it is actually massively disrespectful to take the attitude that the aspects of skill and effort involved in killing something is actually a more important factor than the life of an animal. And I'm not firing this off directly at @wilshere cos he's talking killing wild animals for food (something I'm not on board with but totally fine to accept that people draw ethical distinctions between killing for sport or food and that's fine).

Not trying to provoke a nasty argument and obviously anyone can go and do as they wish. I just think it's a really skewed value system in many ways that we see in loads of ethical decisions. "Less bad" doesn't necessarily translate to "ethical"/"reasonable" by default.

#21 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: Do you also have a problem with fishing? It seems that a lot of people who are against hunting of animals completely don't have a problem with fishing but I don't see much of a difference between the two.

Also, how do you argue against hunting of animals that are overpopulated and decimate both land and wildlife?

#22 Edited by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -
#23 Edited by crusader8463 (14413 posts) -

As long as you are not hunting for sport and actually do something with the body then go for it. Just make sure everything is on the up and up and you are doing it humanely. The only hunting I do myself is hunting around the fridge/supermarket.

If you do get to kill a boar do whatever you can to get the head made into a mount. So you can do this.

Bebop from Ninja Turtles.

#24 Posted by Marcsman (3113 posts) -

@marcsman said:

Be a real man and hunt something that will hunt you back.

You should read up on boars dude, they're scary.

Not compared to hunting a Tiger.

#26 Posted by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

#27 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo said:

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

At least you're not hypocritical and I respect that. I tried to go vegetarian once (for a diet) and lasted about 2 days. It's interesting though, the different reasons for people going vegetarian. I have one friend who is a vegetarian because she dislikes the meat industry. However, she will eat meat if it's hunted.

#28 Edited by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@horseman6 said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: Do you also have a problem with fishing? It seems that a lot of people who are against hunting of animals completely don't have a problem with fishing but I don't see much of a difference between the two.

Also, how do you argue against hunting of animals that are overpopulated and decimate both land and wildlife?

(Edit - sorry, tried to click edit and pressed delete!)

Yeah agree that I find it odd how people do not differentiate between the two. I think it's maybe because the visceral effect is so different - a silent fish being plucked up on a line is not as visually arresting as say a deer getting shot. I don't see much of an ethical difference and I do have a problem with fishing. I'm not gonna go tell anyone else what they can't do but hunting or fishing are both things I personally do not feel 'ok' or comfortable about. It's the whole, people care when it's a "fluffy/cute" animal thing I guess that comes up in discussions a lot.

I think my take regarding overpopulation / decimating local wildlife just depends on the situation. Personally I'd factor in that animals' lives have value and that inconvenience to human beings' economic activity, for example, is not necessarily a reason to justify killing them. So I guess my issue is with the term "overpopulated" - it's such a loaded and confusing phrase because it often just means "there are lots of them and it is affecting local residents/farmers" etc. rather than it having some kinda ecological value (not always, just often).

I'm rambling, sorry - it depends on the situation for me. In broad terms, if it's a population of animals who's numbers are making things inconvenient for local humans economically or whatever (as in, they aren't hurting or attacking people) then I don't think that's a legitimate reason to kill something. If a certain species has its population levels surging out of its usual levels and that is causing massive and dangerous disruption to the local ecology (as in, it threatens local human and non-human lives by fucking up the local eco-system) then I can understand why hunting may need to step in. It's difficult because as humans we so often get the decision wrong in terms of thinking we know better than 'nature' in the long term. I mean look at the decision years ago to cull wolves in America's national parks.

#29 Edited by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo said:

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

I don't give a fat shit if you're a vegetarian (to each his own), but with a statement like the one you made before, I would have given you a ton of "abuse" if you weren't one, though.

Edit: Oh, and since you're kinda new to the site: Welcome on board, vegetarian duder!

#30 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: There are many instances of animals decimating the local ecology. Lionfish is a good example of this in the carribean. That particular fish destroys the sea wildlife and has become a massive problem. The governments are basically pleading for people to fish and get rid of them.

In the Florida Everglades, Burmese Pythons have become a nuisance. Like Lionfish they aren't natural to the environment and are killing other wildlife to such an extent that they have tried to get hunters and spotters into the area to remove/hunt them. Snake isn't exactly on the top of everyones "things to eat" list though.

#31 Edited by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo said:

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

At least you're not hypocritical and I respect that. I tried to go vegetarian once (for a diet) and lasted about 2 days. It's interesting though, the different reasons for people going vegetarian. I have one friend who is a vegetarian because she dislikes the meat industry. However, she will eat meat if it's hunted.

Legit - and even if we disagree I respect you being polite and articulate about it. I guess it's about what your regular diet is, where you live and so on - it can all have a big impact on changing your diet. Like I went vegetarian when I lived in the countryside and I am a proper fussy eater (hate mushrooms, peppers and a bunch of stuff) and it was hard. If I wasn't so stubborn I easily could have just gone back to it. Cos like, I was a really big meat eater, loved my steak and chops and stuff. I moved back to London to study a year later and every restaurant and shop has easy vegetarian options, so it never really comes up as an issue. So that probably plays a role in it.

And fair enough about your friend - people draw their lines in different places. Some people are about "animal welfare", some are into "animal rights" - whatever people are comfortable with I guess. I would say that when I lived in the countryside and knew plenty of people who hunted, they were certainly more well informed about animal welfare and wildlife than anybody else around there. And even though we disagreed on it, they tended to be the most respectful when discussing eating meat etc. cos they were making a more "conscious" decision about it.

#32 Edited by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: I think if you're a hunter you have to be very respectable to the environment and wildlife. Sure, there are always those hunters out there that have zero respect for animals, but I believe they are in the minority. I think we, especially those people in places like the west coast are so far removed from the process of meat getting to the table that we don't have proper respect. This is why I have no problem with hunting in general, my question was more along the lines of whether I should accept the invite to Africa as I can't bring the meat back. But like I said, the animal is not going to waste and it will provide food for people who can't normally afford meat and for those that generally don't have much. I'm actually now leaning against it though as it kind of violates one of my rules in that I can't eat probably more than a few pounds of the animal.

#33 Edited by pyromagnestir (4240 posts) -

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

Plants are alive too, dude! Don't you care about all the produce you're killing?! I guess not. You monster...

As to your previous comment, I think the difference is that the animal at least has a chance to escape. With all the technology we now have at our disposal that chance has dropped to next to nil, but it's better than a poor creature living in its own filth in a slaughterhouse before finally being euthanized. Any creature with a brain is programmed to know it might be hunted, that's why the oldest part of the human brain is the part that controls the fight or flight response. So there may not be consent, but there is an... expectation. Things gotta eat to survive, sometimes things gotta eat other things to get nutrients they need, those things are supposed to be able to have a chance to keep alive, nature is supposed to balance that shit out. (but sadly human beings have broken that system)

Through the act of hunting what you eat for yourself, hopefully one can understand the cost of all that meat they eat, and maybe there are some positive outcomes from that, such as a they decide eat less meat or take more interest in the treatment of animals. Or maybe they just think "killing shit is soo cooool, fuck yeah!" and then we make the Hunger games real and then throw them into it and taunt them with "how you like killing now motherfucker?! Best watch yo ass, fool!? Mwa ha ha ha!"

#34 Posted by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: I think if you're a hunter you have to be very respectable to the environment and wildlife. Sure, there are always those hunters out there that have zero respect for animals, but I believe they are in the minority. I think we, especially those people in places like the west coast are so far removed from the process of meat getting to the table that we don't have proper respect. This is why I have no problem with hunting in general, my question was more along the lines of whether I should accept the invite to Africa as I can't bring the meat back. But like I said, the animal is not going to waste and it will provide food for people who can't normally afford meat and for those that generally don't have much.

Yeah I can understand that - I'd imagine that the ability to really hunt well regularly depends on knowledge of the wildlife around you and the ecosystem that it's a part of. Again agree that the disconnection people have between the journey it takes from an animal to someone's plate is an important issue - it's one that can be transplanted to lots of stuff in a society that thrives on mass-production methods. Pretty different ethically of course but I guess we see it in the games industry - it's easy for gamers to pick up a game at a store or download it without any consideration about the team who worked on it, crunch culture at devs etc.

In terms of your trip to Africa, personally I don't think it's something that would be good to do. But if you don't have a problem hunting non-endangered animals in the US I don't see why you should have a problem doing it in Africa (wherebouts by the way, it's a big continent! Springbok implies South Africa/Namibia maybe?). As long as the trip you're a part of is above board and in the interests of local people then it's also an amazing opportunity for you to explore a new country and culture.

#35 Edited by Ghostiet (5223 posts) -

I say it's fine, as long as you don't romanticize it and eat the meat after careful preparation. If I had the option, I would only eat meat that I killed instead of buying it at shops, especially since a) it would be better and b) the animals I killed would probably suffer less than those from the butcher.

#36 Posted by horseman6 (363 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: Sorry, updated my post after you responded. I'm actually leaning against hunting there now as it kind of violates one of my rules. Although the meat won't go to waste and it would actually go to a good cause, I won't be keeping it for myself. Like my father instilled in me, even though I've never hunted before, you eat what you kill. So I don't know if I can go through with it. However, I'm still going to Africa no matter what.

#37 Posted by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo said:

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

Plants are alive too, dude! Don't you care about all the produce you're killing?! I guess not. You monster...

As to your previous comment, I think the difference is that the animal at least has a chance to escape. With all the technology we now have at our disposal that chance has dropped to next to nil, but it's better than a poor creature living in its own filth in a slaughterhouse before finally being euthanized. Any creature with a brain is programmed to know it might be hunted, that's why the oldest part of the human brain is the part that controls the fight or flight response. So there may not be consent, but there is an... expectation. Things gotta eat to survive, sometimes things gotta eat other things to get nutrients they need, those things are supposed to be able to have a chance to keep alive, nature is supposed to balance that shit out. (but sadly human beings have broken that system)

Through the act of hunting what you eat for yourself, hopefully one can understand the cost of all that meat they eat, and maybe there are some positive outcomes from that, such as a they decide eat less meat or take more interest in the treatment of animals. Or maybe they just think "killing shit is soo cooool, fuck yeah!" and then we make the Hunger games real and then throw them into it and taunt them with "how you like killing now motherfucker?! Best watch yo ass, fool!? Mwa ha ha ha!"

Haha are we on the "plants are alive" jokes already?!

I get your point, fair enough. I mean I don't agree with all of it but I certainly agree that an animal at least living in the wild and getting popped with a rifle is less miserable than an animal suffering in an industrial farm. My point was just that "less bad" doesn't mean "acceptable" for me. People have different lines on that, like you and that's fine. I think the argument about expectation is a bit much - I have a fight or flight response in-built in me but that doesn't mean I expect to be shot at. It just means that I am potentially equipped to try and respond. And even then, fight or flight for animals tends to have evolved from a series of natural predators in a local eco-system, which isn't really the same as trying to deal with rifle fire. If you enjoy hunting or think it's legit because the meat industry is worse then that's your decision - you don't have to try and delve into evolutionary logic to defend it - and probably shouldn't because it's a bit of pandora's box that I don't think really equates very well to the modern hunter.

Also totally agree in terms of how hunting can have massively different effects on the people who do it and who they do it with - seen it with people I grew up with. Some people went hunting when I was at school and never ate an animal again. Some went hunting, enjoyed it and continue to do so with a keen interest and feeling of care towards the local wildlife. Some went hunting and just enjoyed popping shots at animals cos they found it exhilarating and funny/made them feel powerful or whatever and get off on it.

#38 Edited by pyromagnestir (4240 posts) -

Haha are we on the "plants are alive" jokes already?!

The most obvious jokes being made at all times. That's the @pyromagnestir guarantee.

I'd argue that being shot at is a bit different than being hunted, at least to me it is. Not a huge fan of using guns to hunt, like I mentioned, it takes away from the "fairness" or balance of the whole proceedings an almost insurmountable edge to the person with the gun. And it removes the risk from the thing doing the hunting, in the wild a thing hunting something could face dangers of its own. Again, like I mentioned human beings have kinda broken the whole system at this point.

I don't hunt at all, personally. Just not against it, and I can see some potential insights that it could give, even though I believe that what most people call "hunting" these days isn't really hunting, it's... a game.

#39 Posted by CByrne (187 posts) -

This sound like and amazing trip. Go.

I hunt and fish, It's a pretty fun hobby. I'm not obsessive about it though. More or less setting in the woods by your self is relaxing. As for shooting animals. Always make sure you have a clean and clear shot. Don't take risky ones as maming an animal is the last thing you want to do. Especially with bow hunting.

I don't hunt anything that's at risk or things I won't eat. Our State's DNR keeps tabs on things decently. Like my first year hunting there was TB outbreak in the heards and the memo was, basically kill all deer and bring them to the state testing areas. Also, if there is over population due to lack of hunting the state comes in with marksmen to kill a bunch anyway because overpopulation is really bad for deer. I don't go for small or female animals either. Unlike some people I know, I don't get a thrill about shooting everything that moves.

As for boar hunting, that's a thing state side as well. Wild boars are a nuisance and there is places in the thumb area of MI where you can go hunt boar that's on some guys land. It's a shady operation, but some of the best bacon ever.

Also, talk to people and get the right equipment before you go if you need to supply your own. I went to Alaska and read some stuff on the internet that wasn't accurate at all and it made the trip miserable at some points.

Online
#40 Posted by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo said:

@sharkethic said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: So, you're a vegetarian then?

Realise that this is normally cue to getting a bunch of "man up lol" abuse on most forums but you seem a decent bunch on here - so yeah, I'm vegetarian.

I don't give a fat shit if you're a vegetarian (to each his own), but with a statement like the one you made before, I would have given you a ton of "abuse" if you weren't one, though.

Edit: Oh, and since you're kinda new to the site: Welcome on board, vegetarian duder!

Haha fair - and agree, i'd be on some pretty hypocritical thin ice there, I'd have deserved it :p

And yeah - fairly new. Same old story, long term bombcast fan but never got involved in the community before and I'm enjoying it - appreciate the welcome!

@horseman6 - sorry, totally missed some of your earlier posts. RE: overpopulation examples you raised, I agree that it can vary from situation to situation. There are grey areas where the overall impact on local ecology and wildlife need to be taken into account for sure.

#41 Edited by Aetheldod (3509 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: You know what I dislike about vegetarians ... their supposed ethics as if agriculture wasnt equally disruptive and terrible as hunting animals. Hectars of rainforest are lost to agriculture every year , heck the plant you love so much doesnt even get the chance to live more than a year before being destroyed for the next crops , also the chemicals and pesticides used etc. Sir vegetarians are no way better than meat eaters. Using you own example , what fault does a plant chilling making photosintesis when a human decides to eat it? Yeah plants may not scream but they still die anyway.

#42 Posted by TriBeard (124 posts) -

I'm not big on sport hunting, but so long as you're eating the meat and making the kill worth more than just a good job and/or a high five, then I say go for it. It's a chance to see a new part of the world, experience something you never have before, and eat some new things. There's nothing wrong with that, and the fact that anything you can't eat will be donated to locals that can and will make it an even better proposition. I don't see a downside here, so long as you make sure you do it all on the up and up legally.

#43 Posted by Brodehouse (9582 posts) -

I have no illusions that thousands of animals die every second for my convenience. Bovines die so my hands can be warm and look cool. Pigs die so I can have something tasty on Texas toast.

I've never considered being wasteful as an environmental or wholly ethical issue, I thought it was an economic one. Animals shouldn't be wasted because then there's less for everyone.

#44 Edited by kqedequalsvolvo (45 posts) -

@aetheldod said:

@kqedequalsvolvo: You know what I dislike about vegetarians ... their supposed ethics as if agriculture wasnt equally disruptive and terrible as hunting animals. Hectars of rainforest are lost to agriculture every year , heck the plant you love so much doesnt even get the chance to live more than a year before being destroyed for the next crops , also the chemicals and pesticides used etc. Sir vegetarians are no way better than meat eaters. Using you own example , what fault does a plant chilling making photosintesis when a human decides to eat it? Yeah plants may not scream but they still die anyway.

Congratulations on being the first person in the thread with an aggressive, patronising tone.

The first sentence is factually incorrect, if by agriculture you mean producing non-animal products. For example, 60% of the world's agricultural land is used for beef production alone. To use Latin America as a context, 91% of deforestation in the Amazon since 1970 is down to producing land for livestock pasture. Another core destructive factor in terms of deforestation is down to soybean production - the vast, vast majority of which is for the purposes of feeding livestock for industrial meat farming. "The plant you love so much" - 420 just blaze?

You are making an absolutely massive generalisation considering, as has been covered in this very thread, people don't eat meat (or moderate their meat intake) for a load of different reasons, but you just choose to lump everyone in together. I eat vegetables and I'm against aggressive and destructive uses of chemicals and pesticides, what's your point? It's like saying that everyone who eats meat is therefore in favour of every single method of meat production ever devised. As this thread shows, plenty of people enjoy eating meat without supporting (or have objections to) industrial farming practices. It is one of the reasons so many people actually enjoy hunting their own meat. I.e. people are individuals and have their own levels of what makes them feel ethically comfortable. No-one is saying that industrial farming of ANYTHING is faultless or perfect. My personal view is about pain/impact limitation.

I can't speak for everyone who happens to not eat meat but speaking personally I don't feel comfortable with killing a sentient animal (that feels, that experiences pain) for food that I don't feel I need to survive. I don't have any idea whatsoever what that has got to do with plants. If you can make an ethical equivalence between a daisy dying and a cow in a slaughter house then I'm genuinely baffled.

And last of all, and this is why I never, ever like entering these kind of debates. Because someone will always come in with the whole "vegetarians are no better than meat eaters" schtick. Literally WHO has implied that anyone is better than anyone? As far as I know, I am the only person who brought up being a non-meat eater on here, I've expressed my opinion and not had a go at anyone - it's their personal choice. A guy asked for his opinion on a hunting trip, people responded. Everyone seemed to be expressing their opinions respectfully on here. Yet I am the only person being treated like I am having a go at people. Everyone in this thread (I think?) and most people in the world eat meat, it's a social norm, and you're acting like you're being victimised by my dietary choices? Weird.

#45 Posted by Vuud (1943 posts) -

Practice a lot with whatever weapon you are using beforehand, but most importantly, have fun! It's a somewhat rare opportunity to hunt in Africa for most of us. Don't get hung up on all this internet moralizing junk. You are a predator, the best on the planet, you are part of nature as much as any other animal on Earth, go do what you do.

#46 Posted by Aetheldod (3509 posts) -

@kqedequalsvolvo: I appologize if I came out agressive , but you were the one questioning ethics and coming out like someone who is in a high horse. Questioning if people could really have respect for hunting animals as something outlandish. And yes , I do equate all living things equally and that is what I found hypocrital about vegetarians.
I did generalized , well sorry about that , but also we get tired of vegetarians coming in and questioning etc. just like you dislike people saying that vegetarians arent any better.

#47 Posted by HerbieBug (4212 posts) -

@joshwent said:

@horseman6 said:

Do you think it's wrong of me to do this?

Only if you use weapons.

Psychological weapons are fine, though.

I will accept one hunting knife, no more than 6 inches in length, no poisons. Also if you want to file your teeth pointy for biting, I will allow that as well. You're in this for the sport of it, right? Be a man, level the playing field. :D

#48 Posted by Video_Game_King (35986 posts) -

You're in this for the sport of it, right? Be a man, level the playing field. :D

Breaking their psyche is a sport. There's a reason "hunt" and "hurt" are a single stroke apart.

#49 Posted by dudeglove (7684 posts) -

@marcsman said:

Be a real man and hunt something that will hunt you back.

You should read up on boars dude, they're scary.

Kangaroos are goddamn assholes too apparently. Like they will regularly drag other animals into rivers to drown them (like, say, people's dogs that have run off their leash to bark at them), because they're taller, or they'll fucking try to disembowel people trying to save their goddamn pets by kicking them in the stomach repeatedly. Kangaroos are, like, the biggest jerk marsupials.

As to OP, there's really nothing wrong about hunting (we really wouldn't be having this conversation had your ancestor suddenly valued another animal's life over his own existence). Conservation of animal populations is really quite a big deal (no, really) which isn't helped by the media e.g. panic over apex predators (sharks are a good example and NatGeo's "Shark Week" has really fucked over their reputation over the years, to the point where sharkologists are now legit fucking pissed about it) to the extent that such predators themselves are endangered, meaning the populations of the things they're meant to chomp on end up exploding and get all the wonderful things humans get if you pack too many of them into one place.

Taking a wolves/deer example (and this is very much the case in the Pacific Northwest states): wolves are meant to kill deer, as that means the deer aren't fucking eating all the vegetation or bark off trees or whatever and everything's in relative balance. But then Fuckwit McTosspot goes apeshit after a single wolf encounter hillwalking somewhere he probably shouldn't, local media report on it, and suddenly the government or concerned group or whoever feels the need to step in and "manage" the wolf population. The end result? Deer now unopposed breed like rabbits, bringing with them a host of problems (such as undernourishment because there's simply not enough food to support their increased numbers, and deer diseases begin running rife). Congrats Mr. "what-about-the-children?", now the wolves are fucked and the deer are breaking into people's backyards to strip their gardens clear.

The ideal but unrealistic solution? Stay the fuck away from apex predators in the first place because Mother Nature is the biggest bitch on the planet and you don't dare fuck around with her. The "humane" pragmatic solution? Just kill the crap out of those overpopulated deer, because ultimately they ruin it for everything else in the food chain who might eat what they eat.

Is it morally reprehensible that someone's profiteering off a venture whose model solely revolves around the controlled killing of certain animals? Maybe, and that's up to you to decide, but I fail to see what's utterly awful about forking over some money so a group of dedicated folk can keep wildlife populations in check. How else can you make an honest wage in Africa? Mortgage foreclosures?

In the grand scheme of things, such a task is of huge importance (plus they're not looking to kill everything - that would defeat the point), especially if it's some asshole herbivore that you're more likely to die from than something that's really only interested in ripping the throat out of something with far more meat on it than some wimpy human. Seriously, look up the stats as to how many more people die per year from something mundane like a stupid-ass stray deer crashing through their windscreen on a country road or being randomly gored by a boar than from a goddamn shark attack.

Whatever you do, just don't post a photograph on facebook of yourself posing with whatever you've killed. Alternatively, take that moral high ground and donate the money you would spend on hunting to some wildlife foundation that seeks to keep bears, wolves and other apex predators in good standing, so they're then free to head out and butcher those other douchebag animals meaning you don't have to!

#50 Edited by LoveSpuds (113 posts) -

Love how humans, the biggest plague on the planet like to label other wildlife as pests to justify killing them. I will never understand people who get any pleasure or enjoyment out of killing wild animals, especially those who try to attribute some kind of ethical code to it before pulling out a gun and shooting an unsuspecting animal as if it was some kind of epic battle of whits.