Posted on 01/26/2012 3:23:17 PM PST by texas_mrs
You don't have to go to Africa to hunt exotic animals. In fact, Texas may have more of some endangered exotics than live in the wild. That's because breeding them is a billion dollar business in Texas, where over 100 species roam large ranches and can be hunted for sport. The hunters and the ranchers they pay to hunt the trophy animals say the money generated by hunting these animals is helping to save them. They claim only 10 percent of any species can be killed annually. But to animal rights people fighting to shut them down, they're nothing more than slaughter houses. Lara Logan reports on this little known practice on "60 Minutes" Sunday, Jan. 29 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I just hunt black-tailed jackrabbits in the desert.
Ditto. High fence game ranchers figured out a way to make a good living by catering to people willing to pay the money to hunt an exotic. Find a need and fill it. Entrepreneurship at work.
Couple of things.
Colorado (and probably other states) has a program which allows hunters to donate their big game to the Division of Wildlife, which gives the meat to needy people. I know one guy who does this every year, if he is successful.
Loosely related: My folks run cattle in Texas. The PETA types that want people to stop eating meat are missing one thing. Millions of animals will never be born and have a life at all if these animal right nuts are successful.
Did you know that vegetarian is an old Indian word that translates as “poor hunter”?
I’ve been hunting since the Beatles were a band from the Siskiyous to the Okeefenokee, and that’s the first time I’ve been told I don’t know $hi+ about it because the New York Slimes says so. Fine, OK, the bears are doomed, renew your subscription...LOL
I suspect that with some people, I could provide all the proof in the world and it either wouldn’t be enough or they wouldn’t care.
If the issue of hunting ethically is some thing you care about, Muddler, you can find your own stats and determine for yourself if it’s a problem.
Otherwise, I have a good feeling as to which side of the issue you’re on.
Cows would be an endangered species if humans did not eat beef.
Anyone doubt that?
I was also considering going to Texas to hunt jackalopes.
I don’t call this hunting, but is it my business to tell people how to waste their money?
As long as they keep letting their stock breed and reproduce is it so bad?
I mean it’s not like they are planned parenthood killing off the breeding stock.
I agree, trophy hunters aren’t looking to sell gall bladders in any case. Just selling one ain’t worth the cost of the license and is a federal offence to start with. It is the poachers, not legitimate hunters, who engage in that trade.
JC
It sounds like you’re comdemning hunters who hunt older, past their prime male animals which make good trophies, but have ceased to breed, and keep the headgear but donate the meat and hide to the needy, whether African villages or food kitchens in the depressed cities of America. Did I get that right, or did I disturb your convenient little worldview?
I can also cite case after case where over-restriction of hunting has contributed to massive winter die-off of entire herds when the food stocks are depleted and starvation and/or disease takes over! The NY slimes doesn’t usually report those stories - doesn’t fit with their politics!
JC
No.
Those are fine. Just because hunting can be a moral act of husbandry does not mean that I should view the act with a Yee-haw Yippee-ki-ye. :)
We can have regrets about necessary acts. Or am I intruding upon your worldview?
Regretfully, I must call Bravo Sierra on the following premise taken verbatim from the article:
“They claim only 10 percent of any species can be killed annually.”
The folks down in Texas beg to differ. Seems their feral hog population needs a 60 to 70 percent annual cull just to keep the hog population from further expansion. They even legalized airborne hunts.
Google “Aporkalypse Now”. It is a ‘hawg wild’ situation in Texas.
SOUEEEEEE!
“First, you don’t know God’s intents. In a world that wasn’t originally created to see death, I can’t see God putting that sort of activity as something He’d be enthused about.
Secondly, anything that takes a life is evil, but there are greater evils and lesser evils. Hunting, because it is necessary, would classify as a lesser evil.”
May I suggest that before you continue to try to become a theologian, consider keeping your day job.
That's not hunting, it's poaching. It's a serious crime. Most trophey hunters eat the animals too, and if they don't they donate the meat to shelters or food pantries.
May I suggest that you get to know the Bible a bit more before you accuse me of not knowing it?
I am not aware of the Bible calling taking any life as being good. It is necessary, such as taking an animal’s life so it can feed a family. It can be merciful, such as taking an animal, near the end of its life, to the vet to put down rather than suffer to its inevitable end. It can be protective. It can also be many things, but it is not good.
If you read about our creation, since our source of food was supposed to originally come from plants, and only plants, it’s obvious that God’s original intents did not involve taking an animal’s life for any reason.
If His original intent was not to take a life, then there will come a time when it will no longer be necessary.
Until that point, it is necessary, but it still is not good. It’s not something we should feel guilty about, but it’s not something to ever be rejoiced over.
If you read Exodus 23:19, “The first of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring into the house of the LORD your God. You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk”, there is the implication that, when we do need to take an animal’s life, that we should be mindful to be merciful and be aware of the animal’s welfare when we use them for our purposes.
Poaching is still a form of hunting. It’s an immoral form, but it is still a form. There’s no natural law that states that when we kill an animal that we have to use any part of it.
As I said, I’m not against hunting itself.
Yes, you are. What is regretable about promoting wildlife health and sustainability by hunters?
JC
Fyi - hunters in Africa nearly always give the meat of their prey to local villagers. Poachers kill for profit.
To those of us who are ethical hunters, you essentially equating poaching and hunting is just as offensive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.