Yeah, but for big game, not woodchucks.
While I do understand that you did say "who am I to judge," I want to simply state that honestly, who cares about affirming masculinity? If that's what someone wants to do, it is a very natural phenomenon and dates back very far. If someone wants to show their strength, why is that a bad thing? Ultimately, intellectuals are consistently trying to show off their intelligence in debates and such, and I'm fine with that BTW, but my point is that everyone tries to show off what they have one way or another. It seems the only people who are against it are just being pompous. Not that you are, I'm simply stating that it's usually the case and was wanting to state it here.
Wow, now I understand why those Sunday church goers look so proud exiting the church after sitting under those phallic steeples.
We live in the country! Most of our property is under a protected habitat classification, with three wetlands, endangered plants and threatened animal species. We are beginning the process for long term protection for environmental education. Our property has been in the family for 3 generations.
I grew up with family members who considered animals and environment as only for human exploitation and consumption! I learned to hunt and fish early in life, and know how to butcher a deer or other animal as needed. We have lots of deer and other animals on our property. In memory, we had had up to 6 deer in the yard at one time, with the house nearly rumbling with their hoofs as they walk around. I have had to bury two fawns so far due to accidental death, which tore me up due to their beauty. As I have matured, my desire for preservation and non-exploitation has grown. While I can understand the practical issues involved with hunting, I will not apologize for my opinion of your rather light hearted attitude to other life. Such an attitude is a revulsion to me, and attempting to frame it into some self endulging 'right', is yet one more revulsion.
Take what you need, but no more! Do not make rationalizations like it is some 'right', or fall back onto 'tradition, as if this can ever justify anything except more of the same. Do not turn 'hunting' or 'killing' into some alternative to religion. It can be considered a practical issue for life preservation, of humans. If I have to, I can take a life, but I will not frame into anything else than survival.
Other than this, I am sorry for my shortness. I am sickened to the heart with the ugliness that has become a norm for our culture. Some things I can not change.
Do what you 'must', thrive if you can.
As a fellow mammal in nature I consider my efficient dispatch of an animal a humane act that helps support my survival. I pulled my dog off another smaller dog that had wandered onto our property the other day. She was very close to ripping the victim's throat apart. That is the viciousness of nature and the stark reality of predatory life. It isn't a pretty picture but it works very well indeed.
@ Dale Headley
Perhaps you as well didn't read thoroughly my post. Here is my address to Mr Cox for your own perusal:
I will retort to your sarcasm. I believe you meant "ambiguity" and there is nothing ambiguous about a varmint being classified as a nuisance. Try the phrase vermin under Wikipedia. If you cared for and tended to fruit trees and vinifera only to have it invaded by marauding raccoon and possum you would clearly understand my classification system. In that context they are certainly not dear cute animals.
You must of skipped over the parts of my post where I explained my philosophy on the taking of game animals:
" I am adamantly opposed to big game thrill hunting where there is no need for the meat from a sustenance standpoint. Outside of nuisance varmints I eat what I kill. There is no thrill in the actual death of the animal."
Contrary to your personal beliefs there still is a place in our society for the hunter-gatherer to exist. I don't pretend to be palio-Indians or drink beer and snipe hunt. Wine is more my style. I show no trophies or brag about killing an animal. You evidently haven't had the opportunity to be in contact with hunters of my ilk who take shooting an animal seriously and with no need for bravado or pats on the back.
Your sarcasm was unwarranted and not appreciated. I can respect a vegan lifestyle. My neighbors are strict vegans and we have mutual respect for one another. Something tells me it is a good thing you are not my neighbor.
Additionally Dale, you posted:
"The REAL reason is that they are human beings that have not yet fully evolved from their evolutionary past as meat-eating predators. And that instinct is not satiated by buying their meat in the supermarket."
Your statement that being a hunter-gatherer is no longer a valid role is just your opinion. I prefer fresh venison or squirrel meat to that hormone stuffed product found at the grocery stores. Predation is a fact of life in nature and serves a finely tuned purpose. Whether I eat the squirrel or a bobcat does makes no difference to the squirrel. It is still dead and serving the purpose of providing sustenance. You intolerant vegans need to take a chill pill. My neighbors are vegan and they see no need for such bitter rhetoric and sarcasm.
We have raccoon, possum, coyote, redtailed hawk, one eagle species, etc. Even the occasional large cat has come through, but so far no issues to report. The number of prey species is large, so I expect that the effect of the predator species is reduced. We have lost four chickens, and one cat(our tom was a scraper-expect he crossed a coyote), over the last ten years. The chickens we let them go free range once the cost of feed was excessive. I am not sure if your situation is profoundly different than ours, or your local version of civilization has been more distructive to the environment and animal populations. Our two black labs might be a little off putting for the predators and prey.
We are not vegan, but we do have an organic garden, which is slowly becoming a real source of food. So take a chill pill, I know there are truely 'intolerant' people some where.
I think two recreational hunters should just hunt each other. They obviously get a lotta joy out of shooting and killing something, they should make a true hunt for survival, that should really add to the thrill of the hunt, at least for the one who survives.
That was not a serious statement, it was meant to be ironic.
That'll never happen, but perhaps it could be worked out what combination of weapons would make the fight roughly sporting. A man fighting a grizzly bear, for example, armed with a bear protective (but not proof) suit and, say, a sword or club or 22 cal pistol. I think what bothers most nonhunters is the fact that most hunting is done by blindsiding or ambushing the animal.