I am confused about whether I can be for hunting, but still be a vegetarian. I know this sounds really dumb, but I don't know what to think about hunting. Being a vegetarian, I want to stop animal suffering, right? But in Wisconsin, there is an over population of deer. If there wasn't any hunting, many of the deer would starve to death due to the lack of food. If the deer have a lack of food, then they could start raiding the gardens wherevegetables are grown in causing us (vegetarians humans) to have less food. Also, with an over population many deer would be without shelter, so they might freeze to death. Therefore, shooting them (that sounds really horrible and sad) might benifit them in the long run so they do not suffer of starvation or die in the cold weather. Also, we would not run out of food. I might be totally off on this, but it all seems logical. I really do oppose animal killing, don't get me wrong there. I am just confused on what to believe.

We've had threads on this before. My feeling is that as long as we have factory farms I'm not going to tell anyone they can't hunt. I realize people are going to eat meat and I'd much rather have them kill it themselves then have animals raised in captivity under such cruel conditions.

I'll leave your other statements for the rest to answer.

I agree with Michael.

I also have relatives who hunt, and it is mainly for food and only incidentally for sport.

Animals who live in the wild (like deer) probably have much better lives than animals bred for slaughter (like cattle).

Deer are over populated because of current wildlife management practices which utilise hunting as its main system of population control. Personally im a vegan and i support hunting, but not under the current practices.

Also you shouldnt base the judgement of anothers death on their current or future circumstances. If that was the case millions of people should be put to death because they are/may be starving to death, freezing or disease.

I am against hunting. I understand what your trying to say though. There is not an overpopulation of deer in indiana atleast. But here is how i look at it. Sooner or later there is going to be an overpopulation of HUMANS. And it is ridiculous to think of going out and shooting people just because there is an overpopulation so why should anyone go out shooting the deer? I think their lifes our just as important as anybody elses life. and the same with all other living things (except spiders they are Evil.) actually just kidding on that i decided to stop killing spiders to and put them in a jar and let them outside for now on lol. :p Well theres my opinion.

Looking deeper, That is actually a very big question isn't it.

"seems" I emphasize this.

No need for Belief, Just be honest to yourself and do what you see as the kind thing to do.

Liana,
You may want to consider what your deepest motivation is for hunting. While your reasons may well be just what you stated, I know from my own self that sometimes I am not entirely honest with myself about why I want to do something. Sometimes I say that I want to do something solely for someone else, but there's really a self-serving motivation behind it. I'm certainly not accusing you. Just think about what goes through your head when you are out hunting: are you thinking only about how it will help the deer?

Edited for spelling error.

skylark, i dont think Liana hunts, i think she is just confused on where her stance is with the issue of people hunting.

we have the same issue in new jersey with an overpopulation of dear. the situation actually came up in one of my environmental classes that i took and surprisingly, i was the only person against using hunting to rectify the situation.

the way i see it, every action that humans take have unforeseen consequences. it seems extremely simple to say that there are a lot of dear, so if we hunt some of them, there will be less. but this means that we would constantly need to be hunting the deer or else they will become overpopulated again. how does a constant killing of deer constitute reducing animal suffering? i don't see the problem with naturally allowing the deer population to dwindle, as will happen when the deer population cannot find enough food, and reach some sort of steady state. and even if this doesn't happen and the deer population actually fluctuates from under- to over-population, so? why must humans always get involved in the affairs of other animals? it's one thing to try to save a species from extinction, it's another to reduce a population because we consider them too many.

who are we to say that they are too many deer anyway? i happen to think that the world is overpopulated with humans but i'm not about to suggest cannibalism as a way to reduce our number and our future suffering.

besides, aren't the deer considered overpopulated because of the fact that humans are taking more and more space from them? i think deer are becoming more densely populated within the amount of land that is given to them - it's not their fault that they're being pushed to less and less land.

and finally.. how far are humans to go with trying to reduce the suffering of other species? are we to "force" animals into vegan lifestyles such that no animals ever need to be killed for food? are we to stop the female black widow spiders from eating the males after sex?

i say let the animals be, let nature run its course. humans always make things out to have some simple answer and it never works out exactly that way. whenever we solve one problem, we simply introduce three other problems.

Thanks for all your input, especially stonecrest. Now I know that I am against hunting. If we keep on shooting the deer, than we will constantly have the overpopulation problem. If we just stay out of nature's way, it will take care of the problem by itself. And no, I DO NOT hunt!!

Some would say the hunters are in essence hunting themselves.

i'm vegan. i don't have any problem with responsible hunting.

Originally posted by zoebird
responsible hunting.

What is "responsible" hunting??

Hunting is (in Europe) mainly for fun.
Wildlife is pretty well capable of keeping thing in balance.
(or was until the "human kind" became out of balance.....)

Remember, we (humans) have just as much of a right to use the earths resources as any other animal. If we did so responsibly than things would be in balance. I am vegan because of factory farms (and because I find meat disgusting) , but I believe that humans to have a right to eat meat if they desire to and if they go about it in a humane way.

Originally posted by Alison87
but I believe that humans to have a right to eat meat if they desire to and if they go about it in a humane way.

I do not think that for a tribe in the jungle is wrong, but if I see how hunting is done in my country than it is wrong.

- extra feeding in winter to achieve a big population in spring, so they have some left to shoot.
- Animals get shot, but not good enough to die, so they have to chase the animal to kill it properly. This chase can take up to 24 hours.
- Killing predators (like foxes), because they influence the population that hunters can eat themselves.

Killing an animal for food or clothing on a farm or in the wild is wrong-there cannot be any question about that.

I think you are thinking that possibly the deer have to be euthanized-not hunted.

In any case-killing the deer because of overpopulation is to me immoral. If they are indeed overpopulated and it is not some rumor started by a pro-hunting group trying to look for an excuse for what they are doing, killing them is not the answer.

Overpopulation only exists as an excuse to allow people to hunt. We wiped out the natural predators, wolves, coyotes, big cats, and then act shocked when the prey animals, like deer, start getting outta hand.

So then in our wisdom we let a buncha rednecks run around the woods with guns shooting at anything that moves and killing the poor buggers.

I do agree though, that someone who hunts for their meat rather than buying it at a store is sparing a lot of animals suffering. I'd much rather people hunted for flesh than bought it (not only would so many people not be able to do it when they see the actual live animal they becomes their burger, but animals in the wild do live better lives than those on factory farms).

Stonecrest

The reason they are so concerned about the deers afairs has nothing to do with the deer. It has to to with farmer joes profit margin when an 'overpopulation' of deer eat some of his crops.

The only reason there is overpopulation in the first place ,however , is back in 1828 farmer jim went and killed all the deers natural predators to increase his livestock profit margin.

So what's the solution? Do we all become astronauts and live on the moon? Sounds like fun if we can come up with an atmosphere.

Originally posted by skylark
So what's the solution? Do we all become astronauts and live on the moon?

This seems to be the option that being explored.
I chose to make a difference myself, being Vegan, using a car as less as possible, use my cycle as much as possible ( more than 3.000 miles a year), buying organic, recycle and so on.

I hope in this way the world we live in will be balanced again.

I hunt quite a bit, and I'm in the process of weaning myself from all store-bought animal protein. I respect those with ethical or religious objections to hunting, but I would suggest that those difference can be set aside in favor of attacking the far more significant problem of the modern meat industry.

Personally, I've learned many things from hunting and killing animals. First and foremost, I've been disabused of any notion that animals don't feel pain! Even small animals clearly suffer when shot incorrectly. However, if there's suffering involved in getting their meat I want to be the one delivering it. That way I can correct the problem in future by changing firearms or altering shot placement. As I've become a better shot, I've been able to kill most of my small game this winter (squirrel and hare) with single shots. I also feel much better knowing how my protein got to me.

Wild or "free" animals have a very different kind of meat than the mass-produced stuff. It's tougher, leaner and has a LOT more flavor. It hasn't been turned into a bland fatty goo. It's also "gamey," which is hard to take at first. Once you get used to it, though, you find that a little of it goes a long, long way. The meat from one or two small squirrel cooked with some honey and put in wild rice will give it far more flavor than five or ten times that amount of chicken. This, I think, is how we were meant to eat animal protein. In small amounts. You cannot gorge yourself on wild meat without getting sick.

When the local people rely in part on wild meat to make up their diet, you would THINK the end result would be extinction. In some places, where the "bushmeat" is obtained for the black market by militia carrying AK-47's, extinction is a real threat. However, in a modern state it's entirely possible to have a lot of hunting AND a thriving population of animals. Where I live, in Alaska, that's the case. Many animals which have been eliminated in the lower 48 are thriving here, largely because people don't see them as a nuisance but as part of a vital way of life.

About deer overpopulation, I think they should try to control the pop. through birth control measures for the deer. Then round up the deer overpopulated and take them to another area and set up stations to feed them. I think there is always an alternative to killing an animal.

I'd love to see it applied more widely, but there are difficulties with it presently. One person on another board told me she participated in a birth-control operation for deer- and even on a limited scale, with fairly ideal conditions, it was hard work. I think I'd be willing to do it though.

Anyway, here's a web site address I found when I did a Google search for information on the subject. It might not tell you all you need or want to know... but it's a start:

http://www.pzpinfo.org/fert.html

Hi Tom :hi:

I know someone who hunted because his family was quite imporverisged and it was a cheaper way to get meat. he hunted with a bow and they used as much of the animal as they could.