Is hunting/fishing morally acceptable?

[JHansel7]

Hey Guys-

I say it is, but the real reason i am posting this is because I need some reasons, I am doing a speech on it for school. Any help would be appreciated!

[WaveWacker]

Kind of depends on who you ask. I feel that it is more then morally acceptable. It is a part of my heritage and a tradition that I carry out every year with family and friends.

There is much more then the actual "harvest" of an animal. Time spent with hunting/fishing partners (dog's included) are for most people some of the most cherished memories they will ever have.

[WaveWacker]

Duplicate Post Removed

[Cooter]

You can always use the Biblical perspective, the disciples were fishermen! Numerous scriptures to support both hunting and fishing as well.

[End of the Line]

I know I could never be a vegetarian! Its also our way of disease control in some situations. It would be immoral and inhumane to let someone die of a spreading disease caused by chickens or other animals. Anyone want to argue that a turkey is more important then a human? Hunting/fishing is a necessity the way I see it.

[Deitz Dittrich]

Ok.. here is my take on the issue.

We as humans were made to consume meat products. From our mouth structure, to our digestive system, to the fact that we have steroscopic vision(predator.) Hunting and gathering may be part of our heritage and such like that, but beyond that we are desigend to be meat eaters.

I feel its more moraly incorect to farm animals for food than it is to take wild animals. Am I against farming animals.. No way, but you could deffinatly make the arguement that raising an animal only for food is more of a moral battle.

[catman71]

look at the rest of the food chain and ask yourself if you would rahter be harvested with a tremendous tool like a high powered rifle in the hands of a skilled user or be chased down and eaten alive like do the predator dogs or big cats. we are the only predator with the capibility to humainly take prey. i often wonder about your question and hope the pearly gates are not guarded by pheasants passing judgement because i wouldn't make it......

[Gissert]

I remember these issues well from my school days. I always enjoyed the research than went into the pro/con type subjects.

To paraphrase Ted Nugent, everything you do in life is connected to a gutpile somewhere. Like or dislike Ted, his words are very true.

If you build a house, you displace living things, and some perish.

The food you eat, even in a vegan diet, were directly responsible for the deaths of other plans and animals.

Leather shoes? Gutpile.

In today's society, some will make the argument hunting is no longer necessary, as we can purchase what we need from grocery stores.

Does that insulate the consumer from the fact that something perished so that they may receive nutrition? Perhaps, but they still are a link in the chain, it is just not as obvious to them. They are as responsible as the person who pulls the trigger on a deer, or the guy working the kill floor at the locker plant.

I feel blessed to have come from an ag and hunting background. Whenever I look at meat in the store, I think of how it came to get there. I wonder how many folks are so removed from the source of their food that they dont think that nice meal extends beyond the nice pink or yellow styrofoam it came in?

In my opinion, hunting in no more moral or immoral than farming animals. I really see no difference.

One angle that could be considered is many of the people who hunt put back millions of dollars into preserving habitat through dollars raised by the Pittman-Robinson act, or through grops such as the RMEF, DU, NWTF, etc.

I really enjoy the family time that hunting provides, and enjoy the processing of game and fowl as much as the time in the field. Feeding the family is icing on the cake, so to speak.

[HC Eye Hunter]

Here's the way I see it. In my eyes as well as many others hunting and fishing is morally acceptable. In the eyes of those not connected or those who are removed from nature, hunting and fishing may not be viewed as moral.

So maybe it comes down to education and what someone is exposed too throughout their lives to decide that question.

[fishnhooks]

It has to be acceptable or they wouldn't have been made to taste so good

"hooks"

[FOOT]

I had a very similar project back 30 years or more ago when I was in college. I was in a class called "Animal Rights and Human Obligations". You guessed it, it was taught by a tree hugging, PETA loving anti-hunter. In fact the entire class followed his lead. I was the only hunter/fisherman in the class of 35.

Anyway, our assignment was to choose a side pro or anti hunting and defend it. I of course took the pro side.

My main arguement was backed up with 2 examples of the need for hunters.

The first was the Kaibab Range in Arizona. Hunting became illegal in the Kaibab and the deer herd flourished. In fact the herd went from 15,000 to over 140,000 deer. Trouble was there were no natural predators so the deer browsed the trees up as far as they could and when all the food was gone there was a mass die off. In 2 years the herd was down to under 5000 deer.

The other example was The Great Swamp in New Jersey. Again deer hunting was outlawed so the deer flourished and then began to die. New Jersey opened the Swamp to hunting but the successful deer hunter had to drag/carry/transport their deer to one of 7 checkin stations without gutting them. At each station a team of forensic biologists conducted an exam of each deer taking tissue samples, weight, teeth, etc. In fact the bioogists actually did the gutting for the hunters. The findings were - EACH AND EVERY deer was in some stage of STARVATION from lack of adequate food source. It seems the deer had eaten everything they could and were now going to be dieing off.

In both cases hunting was re-established.

I successfully defended my position of pro-hunting and got an A for the course and had a coulpe of the fence sitters actually come over to my side.

I would get on the internet and research these 2 areas and see what else you can come up with. Most of the anti's, if they are not morally corrupt will have to agree that hunting is necessary. We, humans, are the top predators in the ecosystem and need to hunt to control the population of other animals.

[JHansel7]

thanks for all the help so far.

[JHansel7]

I like the one about "Leathershoes. Gut Pile." Can anyone think of anymore like that?

[tealitup]

Look at the Snow Goose and what it has done to its own habitat. Also, in Helena Montana they have an over whelming amount of deer - they have been actually attacking people (there was something on CNN about it).

Describe your first part of your paper as if you were a starving animal... then the last part as one that is diseased. the struggle, the missery - relate it to a person.

Another example could be New Jersey and the hunting of bear. Or--- Mountain Lion in the State of California - there was a lady from MN who was attacked while riding a bike.

Another way could be... why are humans on the top of the food chain? why are animals on the planet? if life is a cirlce for which animals accent each other for the long term survial of the whole than by utilizing a method of hunting we are in turn keeping more species alive.

[MinnesotaMuskie]

Another Nugeism..." Your leather jacket is really a fur coat with a haircut."

[irvingdog]

Clearly, someone rolled a grenade in the room.

Here is a timeless quote, and the only way I look at this:

"To an adherent, no evidence is needed,

To a ditractor, no evidence is enough".

I'm getting to old. I refuse to argue the point.

You get it or you don't. Just ask vegitarians.

[mntraveler]

I know I read a very good article somewhere on this site about this very topic, it may have even been on this thread. The article was written based on either you feel it is acceptable to use the resources proivded on the earth, or you don't. It may have been an unauthorized link, but I really thought that article did a good job of arguing that man is meant to utilize game.

[CodyDawg]

A quote you could use from Aldo Leupold (you will have to look up the exact language).

There are two inherent dangers in not owning a farm. One is the supposition that heat comes from the furnace and the other is that breakfast comes from the grocery.

This is basically what others are trying to convey, that some of us do our killing and others hire it done. Either way, the chicken comes out of it dead.

You could also use the wild turkey's comeback as an example of sportsman coming to the aid of wildlife. It sure wasnt PETA that brought the wild turkey back.

Good luck and post your report if you have a mind to, I am sure we would all love to read it.