Killing Animals for "Sport"

[Marfran]

Unsafe meat??? You must be referring to the game birds, i.e., duck and geese who were hit with lead pellets but not killed. Most ammunition for birds is now lead free. it costs more, but is available. If the bird or animal was not wounded before the kill, there is no “dangerous neurotoxin” as you say. A single shot kill with a lead bullet does not contaminate the meat. Nor does one with several hits required for a kill. I don’t know of any hunter who needs that many. I have never needed more than one shot, and that goes back to 1965 for deer. I have never had a deer processed that included the wound as you say. No wound meat = no lead fragments. All the ammunition that I use, or all the hunters I know expands. It does not fragment. Those against hunting will use any argument, just as you have, to say how evil it is. Sorry.

I did not say anything. The quotes are from a scientific journal. I provided the link.

I have never used the word evil.

 

[Marfran]

Actually there seems to be a big issue concerning deer meat donated to food pantries. I understand that many pantries will not accept it because of health safety issues.

ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2008/2008-03-31-095.asp

So if you can’t find a pantry to accept your meat, do you kill the deer anyway? Do you have the meat x-rayed? Is that safe? Eating meat that was x-rayed?

 

[Newbie2]

I did not say anything. The quotes are from a scientific journal. I provided the link.

You did write: “That’s really kind of sad. Giving children unsafe meat”. Were you implying that such meat is generally unsafe? That what came across.

 

[Ridgerunner]

If you can’t recognize that there are regions devoid of predators, you have a fairly skewed view of things.

There might be some cities on the outskirts of which there are no sizeable predators. Possibly even some rural areas. But I think I would ask the local farmers about this before concluding that it’s so.

If you look at the range maps, coyotes are found all over the U.S. (They’re bigger than some think. About the size of a skinny German Shepherd.) Mountain lions are in about 1/3 of the U.S. Black bears are in the Rockies, Appalachians, Smokies and Ozarks. Red wolves are in most of the eastern U.S. and in the Southwest. Wolverines, of course, are only in the Rockies (some claim in the UP of Michigan, and maybe they are) and in California. Feral hogs are chiefly in the Southwest and Southeast, but are essentially “where you find them”, because there’s really no difference between a Razorback and a farm hog returned to the wild. Javelinas, of course, are different.

 

[Indyann]

Actually there seems to be a big issue concerning deer meat donated to food pantries. I understand that many pantries will not accept it because of health safety issues.

ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2008/2008-03-31-095.asp

So if you can’t find a pantry to accept your meat, do you kill the deer anyway? Do you have the meat x-rayed? Is that safe? Eating meat that was x-rayed?

Are humans “contaminated” if they are x-rayed?

"Lead poisoning can cause health and developmental problems for young children and pregnant women. Since 1992, more than 500,000 Iowa children and more than 25,000 Iowa adults have been tested for lead poisoning. According to Iowa Department of Public Health records, none of the cases of lead poisoning identified from this testing resulted from ingestion of venison. "

 

[DOShea]

Why is there any discussion of meat at all? I thought the topic was about killing only for sport, isn’t it? Personally, I’d like to hear the evidence for “hunters” who go around killing animals and leave them laying in the woods. The only instances of these I’ve ever seen or heard of fall into two categories:

1. People hunting out of season or in violation of laws, they shoot then animal and can’t recover it before someone is there to enforce the law. This would also include shooting the wrong sex of an animal in violation of laws. These are not simply hunters, they are criminals as well.
2. People who shoot an animal and don’t inflict a wound severe enough to disable the animal, allowing it to run or hide and they simply can’t track it or find it. If they could, they would recover it.

I don’t know anyone who would go deer hunting, put up with all the expense of it, time, and effort only to leave the meat laying in the woods and come back with only a hunting tale. No serious hunter would ever believe them anyway.

So is there any evidence for this claimed phenomena, and if so, what is that evidence?

 

[pnewton]

You did write: “That’s really kind of sad. Giving children unsafe meat”. Were you implying that such meat is generally unsafe? That what came across.

“Generally” unsafe can be specifically reduced to a 60% contaimination of donated meat. That should be enough to cause a pause. If nothing else, I would hope that all hunters might be more motivated to excise on the side of caution enough to reduce contaimination. Also, children under six should not eat anything that has the remotest possiblity of lead.

There was also a good case made for lead alternatives. Yes, this ammunition is more expensive, but one could still use lead for all other purposes except the actual kill.

This article is Scientific American, not some animal rights, left wing blog. Instead of criticizing Marfran why not take to heart the potential harm she brought up and take corrective measures?

 

[Marfran]

Why is there any discussion of meat at all? I thought the topic was about killing only for sport, isn’t it? Personally, I’d like to hear the evidence for “hunters” who go around killing animals and leave them laying in the woods.

I agree, and I keep getting sucked into it. I did start this thread to discuss the topic of killing animals as “sport” and for the “game” of it, as opposed to other reasons. I think that hunting can be justified for food, perhaps conservation (though that is disputable and other methods can be considered), pest control, etc.

 

[vz71]

I agree, and I keep getting sucked into it. I did start this thread to discuss the topic of killing animals as “sport” and for the “game” of it, as opposed to other reasons. I think that hunting can be justified for food, perhaps conservation (though that is disputable and other methods can be considered), pest control, etc.

Several people have continued the discussion concerning hunting for the sport of it.
Apparently you do not wish to partake.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

There might be some cities on the outskirts of which there are no sizeable predators. Possibly even some rural areas. But I think I would ask the local farmers about this before concluding that it’s so.

If you look at the range maps, coyotes are found all over the U.S. (They’re bigger than some think. About the size of a skinny German Shepherd.) Mountain lions are in about 1/3 of the U.S. Black bears are in the Rockies, Appalachians, Smokies and Ozarks. Red wolves are in most of the eastern U.S. and in the Southwest. Wolverines, of course, are only in the Rockies (some claim in the UP of Michigan, and maybe they are) and in California. Feral hogs are chiefly in the Southwest and Southeast, but are essentially “where you find them”, because there’s really no difference between a Razorback and a farm hog returned to the wild. Javelinas, of course, are different.

I live in a major Texas city and just last year, there were two city parks that were closed because of sightings of mountain lions. In addition, that same year, one of the loops around the city was shut down for over an hour because of alligators crossing and on the side of the expressway. It all depends where you live.

 

[Marfran]

People hunting out of season or in violation of laws, they shoot then animal and can’t recover it before someone is there to enforce the law. This would also include shooting the wrong sex of an animal in violation of laws. These are not simply hunters, they are criminals as well…

Out of season, and illegal species happens in ***epidemic ***proportions. Check the logs of any wildlife rehab center or local DNR.

Hunters on this thread say it aint so–but it is. And though some perpetrators are caught, the vast majority are not.

 

[vz71]

This article is Scientific American, not some animal rights, left wing blog. Instead of criticizing Marfran why not take to heart the potential harm she brought up and take corrective measures?

It is difficult to focus where Marfran wants us to when there is a persistant dishonesty and insult included in the posts.

Let us consider for a moment this post…

That’s really kind of sad. Giving children unsafe meat.

This was written in response to a priest going hunting and giving the meat over to charity.
The insult is obvious.

Now concerning the article in SA…I read it and found inconsistancies within the article itself. Too many inconsistancies to be able to take the results at face value.

 

[vz71]

Out of season, and illegal species happens in ***epidemic ***proportions. Check the logs of any wildlife rehab center or local DNR.

Hunters on this thread say it aint so–but it is. And though some perpetrators are caught, the vast majority are not.

I’m not going to do your homework for you.
If you want to claim epidemic proportions, then put up the evidence to prove it.

 

[Marfran]

I’m not going to do your homework for you.
If you want to claim epidemic proportions, then put up the evidence to prove it.

"They shoot them for fun and for sport, and for no other reason…and this happens all around the world."

youtube.com/watch?v=2_MQO7frnyg

This is an interesting video. And this does happen all around the world. I have had personal experience in dealing with animals/birds who have been illegally shot in the US.

 

[Marfran]

This was written in response to a priest going hunting and giving the meat over to charity…

I believe that the early Catholic Church did not allow clerics to hunt. Does anyone know when that changed? The Jewish religion does not allow hunting for sport, only food. Is that correct? Has that changed? (I seriously do not know the details–do any of our other posters know?)

 

[severus68]

Perhaps a valid point.

But if we are going to toss around bible passages concerning the vegetarian diet, then we are going to run smack into Acts 10 in which Peter is comanded to kill and eat.

You first say there is no such passage in the Bible, thenwhen shown, you give your own interpretation. Now you are tossing around a new passage, the meaning of which has been posted and discussed. It is not meant to be literal.

 

[vz71]

I believe that the early Catholic Church did not allow clerics to hunt. Does anyone know when that changed? The Jewish religion does not allow hunting for sport, only food. Is that correct? Has that changed? (I seriously do not know the details–do any of our other posters know?)

You are not making sense here.
You claim to not know the details, yet the line of questions clearly supports a conclusion.

What are we to believe here?

 

[TheDoctor]

I think this is overbroad. Certain top level predators were killed off because they also present a danger to livestock and humans, not in order to increase the population of animals people like to hunt.

My point exactly. I never meant to say that we killed alpha predators to artifically increase prey herds. Just as there were legitimate reasons for killing off wolves and bears so now there exist legitimate reasons for culling prey herds.

 

[TheDoctor]

I certainly agree that the issues of deer /vs/ car never end well - Do you have a recommendation for how this should be addressed? Do you agree in the wildlife management toward a specific number of deer hunted each year? Does this seem to be working?

The real equation is not deer hunted per year but deer per acre of habitat. In suburban areas of Pennsylvania an acre of forest may not be able to sustain the deer population an acre of forest will in west Texas. If we (man) take on the role of the alpha predator and keep the prey herd to a manageable number than nature will do the rest.

How do we do it? Well, we could use forced relocation but not too many deer in this area like to ride the bus () or we could use forced contraception but some of the deer may be Catholic () or we could do what nature herself would do and thin the herd.

 

[TheDoctor]

Sorry, I don’t buy that for a minute.

When I take a hike through a wildlife park and have the administration of the park falling over themselves to warn me about the dangerous predators there, I have to assume the predators are there.

Now your trying to tell me they are not?

So who do I believe? The park rangers? You?

Depends where you live. I can stroll through Valley Forge National Park and the only predator I will ever come across is the two legged kind. Remember also that we are talking two different things. Your Park Ranger is concerned with even a single predator doing harm to humans, so they will do their job to warn and protect even if the probability of an encounter is remote.

From a nature standpoint, just as there needs to be a sufficient level of prey animals to make an ecosystem vialble there needs to be a sufficient level of predators. So while the Park Ranger may indeed by concerned about the 4 wolves seen in their 500 acres, that is not nearly enough wolf to control a deer herd.