[quote]Aggv wrote:
hunting a baited animal is the equivalent to fishing with dynamite.
and comparing the hunting techniques of the ancient native people to the modern hunter is one of the more ludicrous comparisons i’ve read on here in awhile. [/quote]
No, baiting for animals is liking baiting for fish. Dynamite gives fish no ability to escape.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
Sustenance hunters are hunting for survival, not for entertainment. I don’t think fair chase applies here because of what is at stake. I think traps are grimy, and should only be used when absolutely necessary. [/quote]
Okay, I still don’t understand your use of grimy. Most sustenance hunters in my area use traps.
So, using rifles with optics in a blind can be fair chase. And, a good chunk of people believe baiting is fair chase.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
…because some dumb ass purposefully entered the croc’s habitat and it did what it’s designed to do the animal should be put down? Agree to disagree I guess. [/quote]
I don’t have an opinion, but that is the policy of fish and game.
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Running several hundred buffalo off a cliff was not only inhumane but it was a vast waste. Most of the meat rotted. That is simple fact.
The Indian of yesteryear gets a pass for wasting literally tons of meat and the guy down the road gets scorned by modern day non-hunters for killing a wolf just for the experience (and to help lower their numbers)? How does that work?
By the way, how can one not really need food? (As in, “Hunting for food you don’t really need”)[/quote]
Links? I always thought they used everything but, a lot of articles make no mention of it.
http://www.vorebuffalojump.org/pdf/VBJF%20Newslet%20-%20nutrition%20article.pdf
[/quote]
Interesting article.
I’m inclined to suspect that they really didn’t waste that much. The Afrikaaners dried their biltong (jerky) by just skinning and gutting the animal, splitting the carcass into sides, and letting it dry. The process took about five days.
I imagine the Plains Indians did something similar on such a big kill: after butchering the animals into manageable chunks, they would let the meat desiccate on the bone in situ, thereby preventing wastage through rotting, but also reducing weight for the long slog back to camp.
Also worth noting that “rotten” doesn’t necessarily translate to “inedible”, at least not if you’re an eskimo.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
Sustenance hunters are hunting for survival, not for entertainment. I don’t think fair chase applies here because of what is at stake. I think traps are grimy, and should only be used when absolutely necessary. [/quote]
Okay, I still don’t understand your use of grimy. Most sustenance hunters in my area use traps.
So, using rifles with optics in a blind can be fair chase. And, a good chunk of people believe baiting is fair chase.[/quote]
The idea of something writhing in pain for who knows how long doesn’t sit well with me. That’s why I say traps are grimy. If you’re talking about a cage of some kind, I suppose that is better.
A lot of people disagree about what fair chase is. My opinion is that shooting an animal [b]purely for sport[/b], especially in unsportsmanlike conditions, is wrong.
I don’t think I’ve ever met a hunter who hunts anything purely for sport.
Every hunter I have ever encountered, both here in North America and in Asia, hunted in order to obtain meat and/or fur, to eradicate a destructive or dangerous animal, or both.
In Shizuoka, where I used to live in Japan, for example, wild boars do immense damage to gardens, orchards and rice fields. So an ageing but enthusiastic band of hunters is out in force with dogs and shotguns in the early hours of the morning, hoping to turn the pesky scavengers into several pounds of sausage, stew meat and pork-kebabs.
In West Sumatra, Indonesia, bands of hunters with dogs, spears, machetes and the occasional handmade musket (!) go out into the jungle to hunt wild hogs, not for their meat (pork is forbidden to eat) but because of the damage the hogs cause.
Ditto for wolves, foxes, coyotes, bears, elk, moose, deer, jackrabbits, prairie dogs, grey squirrels, you name it. They are killed because they’re a pest, or they taste good, or their skin is good to wear, or some combination of the three. Never just because “killing them is fun”… although it might very well be. If a hunter didn’t find some joy hunting, he wouldn’t be a hunter.
I will allow, of course, that such people either exist today or existed in the distant past: the modern dove hunter in Argentina who blows away hundreds of birds, leaving all but a few of the breasts to moulder on the ground; the 19th-century “buffalo hunter” who sniped bison from a train, leaving hundreds of carcasses to rot on the plains; the 20th-century “white hunter” who couldn’t give a good god-damn for the meat, as long as he has another head for the trophy room (in all fairness, his Bantu guides and porters did not let much of his kills go to waste).
These, however, are the great exceptions in my experience. Hunters by and large love and respect the wild, and deplore the idea of killing in a wanton, wasteful or senseless manner.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I don’t think I’ve ever met a hunter who hunts anything purely for sport.
Every hunter I have ever encountered, both here in North America and in Asia, hunted in order to obtain meat and/or fur, to eradicate a destructive or dangerous animal, or both.
In Shizuoka, where I used to live in Japan, for example, wild boars do immense damage to gardens, orchards and rice fields. So an ageing but enthusiastic band of hunters is out in force with dogs and shotguns in the early hours of the morning, hoping to turn the pesky scavengers into several pounds of sausage, stew meat and pork-kebabs.
In West Sumatra, Indonesia, bands of hunters with dogs, spears, machetes and the occasional handmade musket (!) go out into the jungle to hunt wild hogs, not for their meat (pork is forbidden to eat) but because of the damage the hogs cause.
Ditto for wolves, foxes, coyotes, bears, elk, moose, deer, jackrabbits, prairie dogs, grey squirrels, you name it. They are killed because they’re a pest, or they taste good, or their skin is good to wear, or some combination of the three. Never just because “killing them is fun”… although it might very well be. If a hunter didn’t find some joy hunting, he wouldn’t be a hunter.
I will allow, of course, that such people either exist today or existed in the distant past: the modern dove hunter in Argentina who blows away hundreds of birds, leaving all but a few of the breasts to moulder on the ground; the 19th-century “buffalo hunter” who sniped bison from a train, leaving hundreds of carcasses to rot on the plains; the 20th-century “white hunter” who couldn’t give a good god-damn for the meat, as long as he has another head for the trophy room (in all fairness, his Bantu guides and porters did not let much of his kills go to waste).
These, however, are the great exceptions in my experience. Hunters by and large love and respect the wild, and deplore the idea of killing in a wanton, wasteful or senseless manner. [/quote]
That was a great write up. I wasn’t trying to paint ALL hunters with that brush, just the people who met the criteria I outlined earlier. I do think the wolf and coyote hunt has drawn out more of these types, however. Most hunters I know do eat meat are are honourable, but I also know a few through acquaintances who just want to kill stuff.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
The idea of something writhing in pain for who knows how long doesn’t sit well with me. That’s why I say traps are grimy. If you’re talking about a cage of some kind, I suppose that is better.[/quote]
People starving because of lack of food doesn’t sit well with me.
Um, purely for sport is withing SPORTsmanlike conditions. So, you’ll have to tell me what you mean by that.
Sort of off topic, but I think if more people had to hunt or at least participate in finishing an animal that meat consumption would go way down. I’ve been to a few pig roasts where some people are really turned off when they realize pork actually comes from an animal.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
The idea of something writhing in pain for who knows how long doesn’t sit well with me. That’s why I say traps are grimy. If you’re talking about a cage of some kind, I suppose that is better.[/quote]
People starving because of lack of food doesn’t sit well with me.
Um, purely for sport is withing SPORTsmanlike conditions. So, you’ll have to tell me what you mean by that.[/quote]
If you’re starving you do what you have to do.
What I mean is you are out for the sole purpose of killing something, and then you create an environment that is more akin to a slaughter than a hunt.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
…because some dumb ass purposefully entered the croc’s habitat and it did what it’s designed to do the animal should be put down? Agree to disagree I guess. [/quote]
I don’t have an opinion, but that is the policy of fish and game.[/quote]
Gotcha, imo it’s a stupid policy.
Appropriate for this thread.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
https://gma.yahoo.com/cheerleader-fights-back-against-critics-her-big-game-172547538--abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1
Appropriate for this thread. [/quote]
Man, what a girl.
Kendall Jones, huh?
Lemme guess: her great-granddaddy’s name was Henry, but his friends called him “Indiana”.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
https://gma.yahoo.com/cheerleader-fights-back-against-critics-her-big-game-172547538--abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1
Appropriate for this thread. [/quote]
Man, what a girl.
Kendall Jones, huh?
Lemme guess: her great-granddaddy’s name was Henry, but his friends called him “Indiana”.[/quote]
Ha! Ya, she’s an impressive young lady.
[quote]Will207 wrote:
Most hunters I know do eat meat
[/quote]
I should hope that ALL of the hunters you know eat meat.
I wouldn’t imagine that many hunters are vegan or vegetarian.
Which reminds me of a funny story. Bill Mollison, the Australian founder of the Permaculture sustainable agriculture movement, was visiting the Japanese Permaculture Institute. This institute did a lot of appropriate-technology, organic gardening, ecologically-friendly activities, and the members were by and large millet-eating earth children.
Mollison literally wrote the book on Permaculture, and was viewed by the faithful as some sort of an inspired guru. So when they asked him what they should do about the prevalent wild boar problem (uprooting fruit trees, digging out earth swales and raised garden beds, etc.), they were likely expecting an enlightened, mellow solution that would be in harmony with Gaia.
Instead, Mollison’s advice was,
“Catch ‘em an’ eat 'em.”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
…I’m inclined to suspect that they really didn’t waste that much…
[/quote]
They couldn’t help but waste a significant amount. I didn’t say they tried to waste it but waste was inevitable.
(Remember, the context here is bison run off of a buffalo jump, i.e., cliff)
A typical Plains Indian village of a few dozen - few hundred people simply didn’t have the labor resources to thoroughly butcher several hundred buffalo before they rotted. You’ve got to recall that only the squaws did the butchering. The braves did the hunting but wouldn’t lift a finger when it came time to process the animals.
The requisite time to process the animal before spoiling would of course also depend on the time of year, i.e., the weather.
[/quote]
I can’t help thinking that if I were the chief of a nomadic tribe that a) could pack up the entire village for relocation in the space of a few hours; and b) knew exactly where several tons of meat was going to quite literally fall out of the sky, I would relocate the village to the foot of the cliff, let the braves drive the buffs off the cliff, let the squaws process the meat, let everyone gorge themselves over the next couple of days, then pack up the leftovers (by now processed into jerky and/or pemmican) and go.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Will207 wrote:
Most hunters I know do eat meat
[/quote]
I should hope that ALL of the hunters you know eat meat.
[/quote]
Haha, yea. I meant to say they eat the meat of the animals they kill.
This is a picture I took of a location close to where I live that was used as an actual buffalo jump. (It was also used to film Starship Troopers) The cliffs are 100’ or more high and are extremely rugged. Not only would the Plains Indians have to manage to cause a buffalo stampede but they had the added difficulty of guiding this stampede in the direction they wished. I doubt the buffalo were naturally inclined to jump down a vertical cliff. Then the women would have to climb down these cliffs and back up with whatever buffalo parts they detached with their stone tools. It was neither quick or easy.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
…I’m inclined to suspect that they really didn’t waste that much…
[/quote]
They couldn’t help but waste a significant amount. I didn’t say they tried to waste it but waste was inevitable.
(Remember, the context here is bison run off of a buffalo jump, i.e., cliff)
A typical Plains Indian village of a few dozen - few hundred people simply didn’t have the labor resources to thoroughly butcher several hundred buffalo before they rotted. You’ve got to recall that only the squaws did the butchering. The braves did the hunting but wouldn’t lift a finger when it came time to process the animals.
The requisite time to process the animal before spoiling would of course also depend on the time of year, i.e., the weather.
[/quote]
I can’t help thinking that if I were the chief of a nomadic tribe that a) could pack up the entire village for relocation in the space of a few hours; and b) knew exactly where several tons of meat was going to quite literally fall out of the sky, I would relocate the village to the foot of the cliff, let the braves drive the buffs off the cliff, let the squaws process the meat, let everyone gorge themselves over the next couple of days, then pack up the leftovers (by now processed into jerky and/or pemmican) and go.[/quote]
Wouldn’t different tribes come together for the hunt? That would add a lot of extra women and mouths to eat.