Hunt, kill, eat?

[InfiniteNow]

I'm a bit of an animal lover, and frankly, humans frustrate me much more, so please don't take this as an attack, just another point of view. :hihi:

 

If a bear is attacking humans (in my area) it is for one of only a few reasons - either it has become far too comfortable being in populated areas, and is thus a threat to the people in that area, or people have encroached on its land, and it is a threat to the people in that area.

So we encroached on it's land, put ourselves in danger, took resources away, and the bear is at fault? Nah... humans. :D

 

It comes down to a choice between humans or an animal and given that choice I will always choose the humans.

Only if it's my child or loved one. Otherwise, I choose the animal! They tend not to know better even though humans most often do. :)

 

With dogs, in my experiance, only a dog which is severely disturbed will kill (in most circumstances at least) without provocation. A dog which kills a child on purpose is a danger to other children. Having grown up around dogs, I know that even a dog can tell the difference between a grown person and a child, and will allow the child to provoke it without retaliating. If the dog has lost that ability to distinguish it becomes dangerous.

This tends to be the result of how they were treated, how they were raised, and what key events occurred during development... i.e. It's the human's fault! :beer: Also, with the appropriate care and attention, the dog can be rehabilitated. :)

 

However, most dog attacks are in defense, either or itself or its owners, and those should be treated differently. In those cases, the dog acted as it should have, and shouldn't be killed.

Indeed. There's a lot of subjectivity in that though, and my take is that none should be killed. Not that you're wrong, that's just not my take. ;)

 

As for sharks - there are so few fatal shark attacks that I doubt it's really much of a problem. It does become a problem when you have a single shark which develops a liking for people (like the real life basis for Jaws). In those cases, it is necessary to remove the threat of the shark.

See my comment above about the bears. :beer:

[Jay-qu]

But dont you think there is another solution - how about re-locating the animal?

[InfiniteNow]

But dont you think there is another solution - how about re-locating the animal?

Where? Humans are spreading like a virus across the planet, tearing down habitats like angry little beavers. We actually are already relocating the animals, it's just that we're forcing them to do so on their own because of our continued expansion.

 

Where once was a forest, quiet and peaceful, now is a strip mall, loud and paved over. The trend is all too common, animals are running out of places to go, and sometimes become more ferocious when defending the little bit of territory they have left. We're diverting their water, polluting their land, forcing them away, and killing those that remain.

 

We can't stay at the top of the food chain if we decimate it's base. Just thinking through text here. Not really directed to you JQ or prgrmdave, but our evolved survival mechanisms seem all too often at present to be leading to our own detriment and this seems to be another example. The other being weight and dietary cravings.

[ronthepon]

Yup. Here there everywhere - that's us.

 

It is our fault to an extent here. We enroach over their territory and destroy their homes, which leads them to enter our lands.

 

Let us look at some other animals around the place. Take stray dogs for instance. From the sixth floor, I enjoy seeing their fights for territory all the time.

 

But they never never get in the way of us tall and long legged humans.

 

Why? Because they fear us. They realise that we are interested in minding our own business and as long as they stay out of our way, they can live in peace.

 

But leopards (for instance) have a different mindset. They are (egoistic) the kind who wants unrivalled control of territory, and can't resist the temptation of snacking on little human kids.

 

The solution?

[pgrmdave]

So we encroached on it's land, put ourselves in danger, took resources away, and the bear is at fault? Nah... humans. :)

 

I don't care who is at fault here - it is a choice between species. There are some animals with which we cannot peacefully co-exist. There are other animals which have adapted to living with humans. We are simply a strong evolutionary pressure.

 

 

Only if it's my child or loved one. Otherwise, I choose the animal!

 

Well, this is a bit selfish! Every human is somebody's child.

 

 

This tends to be the result of how they were treated, how they were raised, and what key events occurred during development... i.e. It's the human's fault! :confused: Also, with the appropriate care and attention, the dog can be rehabilitated. :confused:

 

I don't agree that every dog can be rehabilitated, but I do agree that it is the circumstances that lead to their temperment. But that doesn't excuse their temperment (barring excessively cruel treatment).

[learnin to learn]

what we need are more forest conservation project so that these animals will have somewhere to go! So instead of killing them we can actually relocate them.

Did you know that in most states you can shoot someone for coming onto your property without permission, without consequences? But these animals are protecting their territory, and their family. And we kill them! it just aint right.

[Jay-qu]

Where? Humans are spreading like a virus across the planet, tearing down habitats like angry little beavers...

 

where, are you kidding? The land area of Earth allows the ~6billion current people to have their own 25,000m^2 are you using that much space? I know im not.. I share a 990m^2 block with 4 people. And this doesnt include oceans, and some of the animals we are talking about are fine with the ocean.

Yes there is flaws in this logic, habitats etc, but I am mearly trying to illistrate that there are other options. For instance build a wildlife santuary..

[learnin to learn]

but you are not thinking about the amount of land needed to grow the food you eat, create the resources that you and I want or need. no it is nowhere close to 25,000m^2 but it is a lot of land.

[Jay-qu]

and yes like I said flaws.. public areas, uninhabitable areas, many variables. But I do think it gives you some feel for the size of the Earth

[Tarantism]

I don't care who is at fault here - it is a choice between species. There are some animals with which we cannot peacefully co-exist. There are other animals which have adapted to living with humans. We are simply a strong evolutionary pressure.

 

i am sure that the annimals feel the same way, therefore they attack when threatened. we kill plenty of harmless animals alraedy, i dont understand that when they fight back and win they deserve to die. but that logic, the death penalty should be allowed to be issued, especially on hunters :hihi:

 

I don't agree that every dog can be rehabilitated, but I do agree that it is the circumstances that lead to their temperment. But that doesn't excuse their temperment (barring excessively cruel treatment).

 

the fact that we "rehabilitate" animals is rediculous to begin with. almost as rediculous as rehabilitating humans...what are the animals heroin addicts? :). but seriously, what we are doing is attempting to alter their instinct to tell them that when irritated, they should NOT defend themselves. i disagree with this, and rather i think that we should take more time to teach people how to deal with wild, or even domesticated animals. speaking to animals isnt hard, you simply have to learn how to speak without speaking.

[maikeru]

Where? Humans are spreading like a virus across the planet, tearing down habitats like angry little beavers. We actually are already relocating the animals, it's just that we're forcing them to do so on their own because of our continued expansion.

 

Where once was a forest, quiet and peaceful, now is a strip mall, loud and paved over. The trend is all too common, animals are running out of places to go, and sometimes become more ferocious when defending the little bit of territory they have left. We're diverting their water, polluting their land, forcing them away, and killing those that remain.

 

We can't stay at the top of the food chain if we decimate it's base. Just thinking through text here. Not really directed to you JQ or prgrmdave, but our evolved survival mechanisms seem all too often at present to be leading to our own detriment and this seems to be another example. The other being weight and dietary cravings.

 

In regard to the main question of the thread, besides fishing, I haven't hunted animals. I'm not much of a hunter type, although I would do it gladly if I was in the forest or wilderness without food.

 

I have to agree with this. When I think about the frantic development in Utah, lining benches, mountain sides, and canyons with expensive houses or neat suburbs of cloned stucco houses, and the mountain lions, bears, and deer coming down into the valleys, for lack of food and disturbed habitat, I feel like we're losing something very vital here. It's like this all over the world. The Three Gorges and poetic pine forests of China? Flooded, logged, polluted, developed. Miles and miles of the Amazon turned into burnt stumps, muddy pastures, or fields of soy. The American prairies and their wild flowers, buffalo, and pronghorn are things of pretty picture books.

 

If the American West was once remembered for its open skies, majestic mountains, vast forests, and forbidding deserts, tomorrow it'll be celebrated for a million square miles of suburbia and nary a cactus or cougar in sight.

[lectronicman]

Between 1967 and 1971 I hunted and did kill the human animal but never "ate" one. However since that time I have killed a single rabbit and eaten it out of necessity. I have not hunted in 25 years and don't have any intention of doing so unless it should become necessary to sustain life once again since the supermarket is within walking distance.

[Shapedoctor]

I've never hunted warm-blooded creatures and I'd just assume avoid it. I would if I was in a survival situation though. I have foraged and eaten a variety of invertebrates so I answered yes.

[simay77]

'However, I have always wanted to hunt without a gun sometime to make it more fair for both parties and a bit more adventuresome. Perhaps with a large knife or a bow and arrow'

 

 

Well said, you can hardly consider yourself a 'Hunter' because you managed to blow a deers head off from 200 yards away. There's another word for that - sniper.