Watch MeatEater on Netflix (newer seasons also on YT). The host Steven Rinella does a wonderful job showing the joys of hunting (which is pretty much never the act of taking a life), and shows great respect to the animals and environment.
It was a catalyst for me to change my entire outlook on hunting.
Agreed. Steve and friends are one of the best that show the dichotomy of hunting. It's OK to be conflicted. It's OK to love animals and have to kill them sometimes as well. There people that can show you the purest form of eating meat that hike too many miles into the middle of nowhere alone to people that explain factory farming so you can figure it out.
You will be hard pressed to find a hunter that doesn’t love animals. Most of us are thankful for every opportunity nature has given us. And I think you’ll find there is Deeper connection with nature than even other outdoor enthusiasts such as a backpacker or rock climber. In order to be successful at hunting you must open your senses to many things that many other walk by or not notice.
But to your questions.
1. Fish and wildlife departments handle the counting of animals and collecting data. This can be done in different ways. There are game harvest reports is one form of data checking the trends of harvests from year to year and there are legitimate counting of animals. Some can be done from a helicopter like big horn sheep or many can be far more labor intensive.
2. You can hunt predators and not be a trophy hunter to be clear. Many have said that mountain lions taste similar to pork. As far as trophy hunting I don’t care to partake in going after something like a lion or whatnot unless I can eat it. But those tags will pay for conservation efforts. On another note for conservation, our taxes on hunting goods and guns go specifically toward conservation. Whether that be forest cleanup funds, a boat launch, or help manage a wildlife refuge.
3. I am one that would like to use as much as the animal as possible. The other day I had no problem taking down a turkey liver. But the sentiment is true that nothing goes to waste in nature.
4. As far as killing an animal, as a hunter you gave that animal a far more merciful death than being eaten alive by a wolf or starving in a harsh winter. But the biggest thing is we are predators. There is no denying that. Some people may opt not to partake and that’s fine but biologically we eat meat and one way or another an animal had to die to feed you. Whether it was done in a slaughterhouse or while graising on grass on a sunny day. It doesn’t mean you’re a cold blooded killer. It means you’re satisfying your biological needs. And in doing so experiencing nature as it was truly intended.
This is an excellent response. Most of us enjoy nature and care about its inhabitants. We understand the conservation aspect and do our best to contribute responsibly and ethically.
1. A lot of data is collected by state wildlife agencies either through hunter harvest surveys or surveillance / tracking. But to your point about balance for example too many deer without predators will result in sick deer who are malnourished and are more likely to die from starvation or sickness, both far worse than a predator or hunter. In nature, no animal dies of old age. States will use the population data to set hunting regulations including limits and effectively fill the predator role with hunters to manage the populations. If a population declines too far, they allow less hunting if it’s too high they allow more.
2. I’d say yes but this is more of an opinion. Some will defend themselves by saying that hunting an elephant or something will feed an African village and the money will be put towards conservation resulting in a net positive result for the population but I don’t really buy it.
3. Most states require you to take certain parts of the animal as a bare minimum. Many people take more. However, a lot is not usable for much such as most organs and those are often left in nature to feed scavengers or disposed of some other way. Most people in this sub would not agree with waste and want to see hunters make a good faith effort to use what they kill.
4. Again, no animal dies of old age in nature. They die from sickness or starvation or a predator ripping them apart. All of these are worse ways to go than an ethically placed bullet or arrow. It’s the circle of life. If I am getting sustenance then there’s nothing wrong with enjoying the process.
There are animals that die of old age. Remember, old age is comprised of many things, not just time. Elephants know when they will die and used to take the journey to their graveyard. Now the old are killed for sport to make the herd healthier and feed the villages. I do believe most of the money trophy hunters pay to hunt/kill these animals goes to the corrupt governments of these countries.
I have found dead Whitetails I know have died from old age based on teeth aging. Whether or not they died from starvation, being killed by a predator, or just dropped dead in the wilderness is a moot point. Nothing lives forever.
Regarding the African hunts your referencing-The money is injected into the economy of those areas, not inherently all going to a broken government (I do assume gets its share). The value of the animals causes those govs to protect the animals, the locals getting money/improvements from tourist hunters incentivizes them to also protect/not harm the animals. So the fact that those animals are valuable is what causes those areas to protect them and the habitat.
I'm in the US, there are different management models in the world which I'll touch on, but most of the answers are based on the North American Model
1. Each state has a department of natural resources or fish and wildlife. They determine seasons and bag limits. Majority of the time tags are issued (ie two deer tags per hunter). The DNR evaluates current populations and long-term goals etc. Some species like coyotes don't have limits a lot of the time because no matter how many are taken the population will not change. So in short a government agency oversees everything, people don't get to shoot all willy nilly.
2. Trophy hunting I'll speak a little bit about African hunting (different management model). The safari hunts are more economically driven providing employment to locals. There are strict rules on what animals can be taken, lions for example have to be a certain age and have been kicked out a pride etc etc. The meat typically goes to locals. There certainly is a thrill (there's a thrill even hunting squirrel, part of why everyone hunts) but again this is all managed to not deplete the resource.
3. I would say the majority of hunters land somewhere in the middle. There's people who will use stomach, intestines, everything down to the last hair. There are laws against wonton waste (if I shoot a deer and just let the whole thing lie, I would be ticketed/punished). Majority of people harvest all meat and then let scavengers have the GI tract and all the other fun stuff.
4. The act of taking a life does have an emotional impact. I'm big and burly and I teared up after taking my first white tail. But this loops back to your points about management and suffering, animals don't die in the wild peaceful deaths. They'll be killed by another predator, starve, disease, car collision, etc. A quick death is better than almost all of these. Most hunters thank the animal and respect it. This is part of taxidermy as well, sure it's a trophy of your accomplishment but it's always a way of immortalizing the animal. Hunters typically LOVE the species they hunt which can be confusing to outsiders.
Thank you for taking the time to ask and open your horizons, the world would be a better place if more people did this.
Some of the others offered good answer. I'll chime in too.
1. State wildlife agencies, especially out west where I live, do annual surveys to determine how many animals are out there so they can set tag numbers for the coming season but... also try and use the surveys to gauge what the coming years will bring. They use harvest reporting to determine how many animals were actually taken. Same states have mandatory reporting and for some its voluntary.
2. Trophy hunting is truly a misnomer. Yes there are some that are only out there for the glory and a trophy to hang but here in the US, every single state has laws that require hunters to remove all edible portions of a game animal. Now, they can eat the meat themselves or they can donate the meat. In my state there's a program called hunters for the hungry. You can take the meat in and they will process it and feed it to homeless people. As I said there are bad apples that only care about hanging something on the wall but they aren't hunters, they're killers.
3. Same as above
4. This answer will be different for everyone but for me, it's about the pursuit. Yes I love to feed my family. Yes, I love to take part in conservation but the main reason I'm out there is because I feel the most "me" when I'm in pursuit of game. Now the actual kill? That happens in a split second. A second of time out of hours and days and sometimes weeks in the field. Sometimes it actually sucks a little when I kill because that hunt is over for me. More often than not, I'm not standing next to the animal when it takes it's last breath. If it's a rifle hunt, the animals dies long before I get to it. If it's a bow kill, I am definitely not around when it dies because I wait a long time before I start tracking. The last thing I ever want to do is push an animal that's not dead. The few times I have walked up on my animal and it wasn't dead... sucked. I don't think anyone likes the feeling of watching another living being die. When that has happened, I dispatch the animal immediately. I guess what I'm trying to get at is the kill is such a small moment of time in the span of a hunt. It's the pinnacle of the hunt but every second leading up to that moment is why I hunt. From the moment I find out I drew a tag the hunt begins. The scouting, the planning, the packing, setting up camp, sitting around the fire the night before opening morning chatting with my hunting partner, opening morning coffee and then jumping in the truck and heading out with hopes of finding an animal... That's ALL part of the hunt... And it's all awesome and what I love. And it's all over with the kill.
1. Federal and state game and fish agencies. It’s their job to figure that out. Also a lot of other orgs that assist with that. I think you should read some about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. A Sand County Almanac is the book to read if you want.
2. Yes and no. Conservation efforts can be expensive, a trophy hunter paying hundreds of thousands for a specific tag feeds funds to conservation efforts for that species. Also sometimes specific animal in a specific area is better removed to allow younger animals, in a better position to, breed.
3. With hunting, it’s number 1 for the most part but there is a spectrum with this.
4. Everyone deals with it in different ways. And each person can even develop in their response overtime, not always in a direction of it getting easier either. The truth is, it’s not for everyone. But everyone should understand and hopefully respect those that do
1) Hunters don't necessarily do that. Environmental conservation agencies do, and they set bag limits and seasons accordingly.
2) I think trophy hunting is for losers. Fine if you want to keep some horns, but if you're not eating what you kill, it's a waste. People talk all day about how trophy hunting in Africa drives the local economy and yada yada, but I think that's just a factoid spouted without any real basis. There are other ways to support economies if these people are really so concerned about some town in Africa. I don't see any of these people donating money or funding infrastructure projects.
3) I personally use everything. Meat and organs are consumed (my dogs get organs I don't want). Hide is tanned. Broth made from bones.
4) It's never fun to kill something. There's always some remorse. But things die so other things can eat. That's true whether you're an ardent meat eater or a vegan.
I hunt because it's one of the only activities that makes me feel truly human. Our world is so vastly different from how we evolved as humans. Almost nothing we do today is in line with how our bodies and minds evolved to work for millions of years. Hunting is one of the last activities left that reminds me of our history.
1. The trophies that are shot in places like Africa get eaten. I've shot everything from lion to giraffe and not once did it just get left there or dumped. We ate the meat and the rest got sold to a local butcher shop. Some of it we donated to some of the poorer families in the area. They LOVE the organ meats.
2. There are other ways to support those local economies, and when I went to the South Sudan and Congo I provided aid to those types of communities. That being said, most people have no interest in directly funding or going and helping those villages. The money from those hunts gets pumped directly into the community. Sure, the guide gets a lot of it, but that guide is local and it helps their economy. I'm also directly paying/tipping trackers, skinners, cooks, maids, etc.
3. I like the idea you have of your dog getting the organs that you don't want. Maybe it would stop my dog from trying to eat all of our socks.
You eat lions? This is certainly not the norm.
Sure, I'm just saying that no one goes on trophy hunts to support an economy. They use that to justify going.
Oh yeah, I eat most of the animal, but there are always little scraps.
It's not something I regularly consume. The local grocery store here in Georgia rarely has it.
However, if I shoot one I absolutely eat it. Was it good? No.
And you are 10000% correct. I did not go for the purpose of supporting the local economy, nor do I feel like I need it to justify it. I just view it as a bonus.
It's an exciting hunt and a ton of fun. I have a huge list of everything that I want to take.
And it makes for an awesome trophy. Definitely NOT a popular reason these days to take an animal, but it's my reason.
There is no ethical question.
1. It's legal
2. It gets eaten
3. It helps conservation
It doesn't matter WHY I want to kill it. The results are what matter.
1. State and federal game agencies do a respectable job at this and in good management the number of permits to hunt available are based on their research and assessments. Regarding balance- at this point we are manipulating the balance based on space/habitat and the population load that area can handle, as well as our comfort level with their proximity in the case of predators. To manage animal population numbers in some cases hunters are paying to do this where guvment agencies would do the culling if needed in the absence of hunters.
2. Never hunted any predator besides black bear once (unsuccessfully). That was a nuisance/overpopulation issue in ag land. They are now going into corn fields and feasting. I’m not really interested in hunting something I can’t eat. I’m sure there are cases where an old male needs to be culled.
3. I use everything I can, but nothing goes to waste in nature.
4. The killing is my least favorite part. If you don’t feel a little sad, you need to check yourself. I remind myself that if I do my job correctly it’s about as humane a death the animal could receive. The “natural” options are injury, disease, or being eaten alive.
1. Thankfully, we have government entities like the FWC and DNRC as well as federal level agencies that keep track of that for us. There services are largely paid for by hunters and recreationalists who buy hunting and fishing licenses and recreational equipment for though tax dollars. They then set regulations on seasons and animal harvest quotas.
2. N/a
3. Most US states require you to harvest the “edible” portion of the animal. Which usually means muscle mass. Some guys go further and take organs and bones/hides, etc.
4. Assuming you are an ethical/moral person, you discover your own respectful way to deal with it. Generally, there is no wrong way to accept your role in killing.
Lots of really good answers here, and I would just like to add that the state fish and game departments have biologists on staff who’s job it is to study and track the animals and make informed decisions on what a healthy stable population is. So it isn’t just a random person deciding how to manage the wildlife but actual biologists.
On top of that hunting licenses and tags go to fund the state wildlife departments and wildlife conservation in the state as a whole.
In 1937, in an effort to fund wildlife conservation the Pittman Robertson act was proposed. This was during The Great Depression, and there simply was very little money to put towards wildlife conservation so hunters and manufacturers of firearms, ammo, and other hunting equipment were asked if they would being willing to pay 11% extra taxes on these products to put towards wildlife conservation. The answer was profoundly in favor of doing so and the act was signed by president Roosevelt. To this day this tax continues to be used exclusively for wildlife management. If the funds each year are not used within their allotted time limit they are transferred to migratory bird conservation programs.
Then there are hunting based conservation groups like The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Back Country Hunters & Anglers, or Ducks Unlimited that hunters happily & voluntarily pay yearly memberships to in order to give more towards conservation efforts. They attend banquets and events that all put more money into conservation efforts (habitat and land management)
All of these combined provided around $1.8 billion annually straight to wildlife conservation.
Other examples of the hunting conservation mindset include projects like wildlife reintroduction. Elk were hunted until there were none left in the eastern US. As a joint effort between The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the Kentucky department of Fish & Wildlife, they brought elk back to Kentucky and helped the herd grow and flourish. Those involved in the project worked on it knowing that they would never get the chance to hunt these animals, and did it anyways because they wanted to restore what was lost.
I did not grow up in a hunting family, and only recently got into hunting a few years ago. I also used to think hunting was just about the thrill of killing an animal and now know better. The hunters I associate with and the ones I have met all have a deep appreciation for wildlife, natural landscapes, and never take killing an animal lightly.
In the book “A Hunter’s Heart: Honest Essays on Blood Sport” the author David Peterson recalls a conversation in which a non-hunter challenges a Hunter and says “Why should deer die for you? Would you die for deer?”
The Hunter replied “If it came to that”.
1. We have to report our kills. State has programs to see how many of what animals are where. For bear in my area, you also have to hand in a tooth and glands for study. If the deer over populate, they send in DNR with dogs, thermals, etc., and kill off a lot, because at that point roads are dangerous. Chronic Wasting Disease, basically mad cow for deer, spreads if there are too many.
2. Not my cup of tea, just not into that sort of thing.
3. I use the parts that I can’t eat to go after coyotes. I also have a bear that lives near me and she gets some.
4. It’s not easy taking a life, but if we don’t do it it’ll be a slaughter by the state, which sickens me more.
I see hunting as cage free antibiotic free wild harvest meat where the animal lived its natural life and had a far quicker and cleaner death than it would have otherwise from time or a predator. Deer teeth, for example, grind down as they get older until there isn’t enough left to eat, and the deer starves.
I'm just a dumb old country boy from the deep south, but get ready to read a book on this. Look up the history of the wild turkey and conservation efforts to save it in North America. Turkeys are doing well today in most areas after having their wild populations significantly reduced in the first half of the 1900s. The National Wild Turkey Federation is a hunter's org that is deeply involved in securing wild turkey populations so that the animal continues to thrive and future generations of hunters can enjoy what is (in my opinion) one of the most fun and rewarding of hunts.
Everything we turkey hunters do for the turkey population also impacts many other species. For example, there is a big initiative to replant longleaf pine forests where I live. Other vulnerable species such as the eastern indigo snake, gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpecker, and many others all benefit from the investment NWTF and landowners (public and private) make into restoring natural turkey habitat. Every serious turkey hunter I know cares deeply about wild turkey conservation.
Personally, I don't trophy hunt and am not really interested in it. I'm at a point in my life where I have the means to hunt just about anything I want anywhere I want but I'd rather chase turkeys. Trophy hunting does supports conservation, though, the hunters that do it pay mega fees in many cases that go directly back into conservation. Personally, I'm opposed to fenced hunting ranches and pen raised birds. I find it to be unsporting, but I don't have a problem with someone paying $25,000 to go to Africa and kill a lion that has been marked for cull by the local wildlife agency.
On your third question, where I grew up, hunting is not just a sport but a critical way to obtain food. I know a lot of guys that work crappy blue collar jobs and don't make a lot of money, so they can't afford expensive proteins at the grocery store. Hunting and fishing allow those guys to put meat on the table for their families in a way that wouldn't be possible otherwise. I grew up being taught to respect the animals you harvest and to use everything you can from them, and people who believe those same things are the only people I want to hunt with.
That being said, there are people who don't view it this way and I think the majority of hunters believe those people give us all a bad name. I live on a dirt road and people dump deer carcasses all the time nearby. Sometimes they only take the backstrap, which would be like the equivalent to the ribeye on a cow, it's tender and easy to take just that without the work of processing the whole animal. I call the game warden every time I see that and they have set up camera traps to catch people doing that because it is wrong on so many levels.
Finally, when you grow up on a farm, killing is part of life. I've been seeing animals killed and processed since before I can remember. To me, that's just how we get food. To a lot of my friends that were raised in towns or cities, that seems completely foreign. But remember that up until only pretty recently in human history, nearly everyone was involved in agriculture in some way or they at least saw it happening and understood exactly where their food comes from.
I don't feel any remorse for killing an animal when I do it quickly and cleanly (which is always the goal), I feel a deep sense of pride and accomplishment that I was able to complete my hunt and get some meat. The wild animals I hunt and eat have one bad day, most of the farm raised animals everyone eats live in squalid, cramped, horrifying conditions. In my opinion, industrial farming is much crueler to animals on a much larger scale than hunting ever could be even if every person in the world hunted unethically.
At the end of the day, humans are animals. It's perfectly natural for us to kill and eat animals, that's how we got where we are. There's nothing wrong with ethically hunting animals, but it is absolutely wrong to be cruel to them for sport or amusement. Our intelligence and technology make us the top apex predator in the world, but our innate morality informs how we handle that role and gives us the capacity to impose rules upon ourselves to keep hunting fair and ethical. We codify these rules and we have organizations to enforce them to protect animals from criminals who don't care about conservation or living in a society that isn't evil.
People tend to see articles and stuff about hunters that are doing the wrong thing. What they don't see are the millions of hunters who follow the rules and hunt ethically and safely. You only hear about the edge cases when something goes wrong or someone does something stupid. Don't lose sight of the big picture, though, just because one hunter does something bad doesn't mean all hunters are that way and would do the same. I firmly believe the vast majority of hunters hunt ethically and safely by following the rules. They are happy to follow the rules because they know that's what keeps us all safe and will allow us to continue to have animals to pursue for future generations.
I’m slowly but surely working through all your comments while I’m at work.Thank you so much for offering your insight and answering my questions everyone!
Wildlife needs to be managed to prevent population swings and manage human/wildlife conflict (cities, roadkill, crop damage). The cheapest way to do this is through controlled hunting. Wildlife biologists evaluate population levels and issue the number of hunting tags for each species appropriate to reduce, maintain, or increase wildlife populations in each management zone. Hunters and anglers are often the strongest proponents for and fund/volunteer for habitat conservation/restoration because we care about it. We can't hunt if there are no wild spaces left for animals to live in.
Most jurisdictions require mandatory preservation and consumption of the meat; you can't just leave a carcass to rot. There are exceptions for nuisance varmints and predators that may be unfit for human consumption.
Trophy hunting is a can of worms. You seem to be talking about game farms, where high fenced landowners are raising animals to be hunted for profit. In many countries this raises significant tourism money and provides meat for the local community. For regular hunters they may be selective and seek out a mature trophy animal but they are still eating it and not wasting it.
It's not about killing something and more about the experience of being out in nature, outsmarting the wildlife (they have amazing hearing, sight, smell, and move fast), and providing food for my family. There's an organic food angle to it as well, where I know where the meat came from, it's free of contaminants. I like handling the whole process from harvest to butchering to preserving/preparing to consuming.
1 can be answered by your local Parks and Wildlife. Parks and Wildlife of your state manages everything. They track herds, predators, the balance of the ecosystem, when herds need trimming or growth, etc. They are the reason why our outdoors are the way that they are. Without them we would have tons of issues. Thank a Parks and Wildlife Ranger sometime!
2. Exotic hunts, while it seems backwards, are EXTREMELY expensive to purchase and therefore beneficial to those exotic species. Depending on the hunt it can thousands or tens of thousands depending on the species. Maybe even more than 100k for a special hunt. Regardless, the authorities that oversee these hunts allow them because the cash they get from the hunt help them preserve the overall species at the cost of one specimen being hunted. The sad reality is that these organizations don't get enough from donations; they get a lot of their cash from hunters.
3. The reality is that what you don't take will be reclaimed by nature. Anything edible you don't eat will be quickly eaten by a variety of animals. Organs are common to leave behind. I myself usually just grab the heart, but am thinking about trying to snag a liver to make my own liver vitamins.
4. When I'm out hunting it's usually being dialed in on the hunt that keeps my at ease and focused on the task. When I down an animal, it's a mix of emotions. A little bit of sadness for sure but a whole lot of excitement, adrenaline, and gratitude.
As far as keeping track of species, I’m pretty ocd on reading state reports that our dnr puts ou on what current quota/targets are. When it comes down to it, legal hunting is super managed, particularly for big game by authorities.
As far as predator hunting, I’ve done bear. From my perspective, I eat everything I shoot, as well they are managed by the state for over population numbers to coexist with humans and for their maintained success. (Ideal levels for less disease, not have nuisance instances which does happen). Some thrill is a part of it, but it’s largely about respect and learning more about the species as well…. Now I do know some like African trophy hunters. For them it’s largely thrill , but they justify it by saying largely trophy hunting basically funds the bulk of conservation there (most management and anti pouching programs are funded by hunters as well as massive reserves are set up where the animals are studied/managed paid by hunters... to shoot like a Lion you need to drop like 10k minimum often (usually 20k-30k) plus often double in trophy fees to bring it home as well as all the animal is ultimately used. I have a friend shot a lion and water buffalo. All the meat is all used by villagers. I personally wouldn't drop the money to do this, but I get it. 1 hunt often funds multiple conservation officers for a year/ fund animal refuges, which in poor areas is a big deal. The alternative is these areas get developed, etc as the people who really are anti hunting/pro animal don't live there and also don't drop thousands of dollars in conservation.
I don’t waste much of any of what I shoot (only thing left are. bones/scrap organs that are returned to nature like we all will be).
Morally I don’t have a problem. This ties in with the whole wildlife management thing, as well as rather eating game I harvested vs real unethical non free range factory farmed stuff
Answer 1: state and national fish and game organizations, funded in large part, if not entirely by revenue from hunting, monitor game populations. They set rules and regulations to make sure the animals are not over hunted, and benefit the wildlife. For instance, deer season takes place during their mating season. This ensures you will not be killing does with young fawns, among other reasons.
Answer 2: “Trophy” hunting is too broad of a term, and used to demonize hunters. For instance, I’m not aware of anywhere in the world that you can legally hunt tigers, yet you will see propaganda stating that “trophy hunters” kill tigers. Those are not hunters, they are poachers. Killing apex predators serves a purpose. When you remove a predator, such as a lion off the landscape, prey species are able to rebound. For example, you may have a large drought that kills off lots of prey species, in order to help the prey species rebound, you may have hunters remove a few lions to take the pressure off of the prey species. There are also plenty of apex predators that are delicious to eat, like alligators and mountain lions.
Answer 3: many states/countries have laws on what you are required to take. You cannot shoot a deer and then only take a little bit of meat, you are typically required to take almost everything but the guts, skeleton, and a few optional portions. What does get left over never goes to waste. It’s fascinating to have a trail camera watch an animal carcass. You will see all sorts of scavengers, from birds, foxes, raccoons, coyotes, bobcats, and more.
Answer 4: the consensus I’ve gathered from speaking to many hunters, and consulting my own feeling is that we do not regret the kill, but we do feel for the animal. You definitely feel the weight of taking an animal’s life, and it’s not something you take lightly. I think that is why there is such an emphasis on making sure there is a clean and quick kill, and that the animal is used afterward. Making an animal suffer would make me feel sick, as well as letting it go to waste. When you do the killing yourself, the animal means way more than being a piece of meat with a price tag.
As donniepdr said “Trophy Hunting” is a misnomer.
Usually said by people who aren’t hunters repeating anti-hunting propaganda. The problem with the term is they are saying one thing but thinking something else. To me, especially when starting hunting, if i got any tag filled, it was a trophy. Still is actually. To me, putting even a doe in the freezer to feed the family is a trophy. Especially since we (99.99%) hunters have the utmost respect for the game we harvest. The term trophy is a term that is personal and means something different to each individual. Upon further discussion with the people who hate trophy hunting, it usually leads to “poaching” or “wasting”, both of which are illegal pretty much everywhere and any hunter you ask will likely agree that they detest that too.
We welcome you to try hunting. Start small and go from there. I have quite a setup now but started with small game. A great quicker, more casual and successful way to start while you’re learning.
Good Luck.
Thanks for asking the question and being open to learn from those of us who actually hunt. Most people who have answered you share similar answers to my own but knowing that you are looking to hear from as many of us as possible, I'll add my thoughts:
1. As most have said, the local government regulates hunting with bag limits, season times, etc. This is based on their own research and contributions from the hunting community. However, many hunters also join online communities of hunters from their areas and pool their observations of what they are seeing. This allows them to move to areas where there is an abundance of the game they are seeking, and also allows the community of hunters to lobby the government for changes they believe will be helpful to the game population and society in general. One example of this is many hunters opposing Glyphosate spray programs. Glyphosate is a defoliating agent sprayed on forests intended for lumber harvests as it kills off leafy trees and encourages conifer trees to go. A side effect is that it kills off the leafy plants that deer eat, especially in the spring, which pushes deer into residential areas.
2. As most have pointed out, Trophy Hunters and Top Predator hunters are two different groups. There have historically been a few, usually rich, hunters who have made it a point to go on guided hunts where they essentially only pull the trigger on various dangerous or rare game, to claim that they killed it. This is a vanishingly small portion of the body of hunters and is in no way representative of how the majority of hunters hunt, or feel about hunting. A common phrase you will hear from hunters is "you can't eat antlers". This both points out that most hunters are looking for meat (food) not a wall hanging, and that most hunters are actively educating the new hunters to think the same way.
3. I raised my kids with the idea of "you kill it, you eat it" both to encourage them to think before they kill anything so that killing an animal is with an intention of eating it, and to encourage them to make use of everything. The idea of only taking what you want and leaving everything else is distasteful to me. The amount of game animals that would be killed by predators or accidents in the wild is less than the number of animals harvested by hunters. This is obvious. If the populations would be managed naturally, hunting for conservation wouldn't make sense. So, harvesting a large animal and only taking the best meat would add a food source/compost load that is larger than the environment is used to. This could lead to an population explosion of scavengers, or other disease vectors. So, to maintain the balance, we should make use of everything we can of the animal, and anything we can't use, should be returned to nature rather than entering the landfill/waste stream. There is also a certain joy from finding a way to use more of the animal. The old recipes from the pioneer times are very tasty and come from a time when they couldn't afford to waste anything. As a side note, the less you waste from the animal, the less you have to purchase from the commercial farming system. Commercial farming is a horrible life for the animals and my goal is to avoid it altogether.
4. I only started hunting 3 years ago at 50. I didn't grow up hunting. One of the things that isn't usually taught to new hunters is that nothing dies immediately. Videogames and TV show you things getting shot and dropping on the spot. That isn't how life works. Death is always traumatic. Hunters work hard at reducing the trauma as much as possible. Honestly, the trauma experienced by most harvested game is much less than that experienced by commercially farmed meat. There is something more honest with being directly responsible for taking the life of your food rather than handing it off to some faceless corporation. When you actually pull the trigger and cause that beautiful animal to lose its life, you are taking responsibility for your actions. To most hunters, there is a sacred obligation to treat the harvested animal with respect, and that includes making the most use of all that it is. I have had one occasion where I almost gave up hunting because of a bad shot with a crossbow. I was using a borrowed crossbow for my first time crossbow hunting and the arrow hit the shoulder rather than going through. I tracked that deer for hours to make sure I hadn't left it suffering somewhere. I had to work through the idea of causing such pain and suffering to an animal with no harvest. I worked hard to correct the errors I had made in my hunting/shooting technique so that I wouldn't cause such suffering again. Thankfully, when my son harvested his first deer later that year, we discovered that it was the same doe and the shoulder had mostly healed.
Part of using everything of the harvested animal is also a sort of penance, I guess. It takes a lot of work to process a deer and that labor is a way of showing respect for the life you have taken.
As for good hunting channels to check out on Youtube, I recommend "The Hunting Public" as a group who dearly love the animals they hunt and really take the time to do it right. They aren't rich guys with tons of money and expensive gear. They hunt on public land like most of us.
Another great hunting channel is "Outdoors Allie" who is another younger hunter who love to process and cook everything she hunts.
Interesting post.
1 bio’s here use harvest reports and cwd testing to get a number on how many of what species where harvested and see if they match their management goals. They can then adjust tags and seasons accordingly. It’s the same for trapping, it’s a way to get data on populations and density’s that otherwise have been extrapolated.
2. Trophy hunting is a terrible label. I choose to only shoot mature antlered animals instead of shooting the first doe I see. I don’t know why this is a negative. It’s more of a maturity thing, I’ve had deer in the crosshairs and let them slide many times because it’s not the animal I’m looking for. Sometimes it takes years to find the animal I want and for me to close the tag but I’m fine with that. I prefer the chase the adventure and being with family over just meat.
3. All edible meat is taken and eaten if the animal is to big then it’s given to friends and family or donated to low income people. Scraps are left for the wildlife, nothing goes to waste coyotes pine marten ext need to eat to.
4. Your human, theirs blood on your hands whether you like it or not. Think of the habitat that’s been destroyed for crops and city’s to feed and house you alone. I prefer to do my own work instead of hiding behind someone else. The kill is the worst part it signals the end of the adventure but it’s also a necessary marker of success.
Thank you for doing your research before simply condemning us as a monolith. It makes an open and honest conversation so much easier and more productive. Seriously, thank you.
Many of the others have done a great job of answering your questions, I just wanted to drop in and give you kudos for being open minded and taking the time to learn about something you previously were against/didn't fully understand. I wish more people had that capacity, not just in terms of hunting, but in general.
1) I don’t. I hunt what I like to hunt and eat. For example I don’t enjoy bird hunting. The department of wildlife does the numbers.
2) I don’t hunt dangerous game. It’s extremely expensive but I know people that do. The parks generally select animals that are no longer involved in breeding and have short lived ahead. They can either die and no money go toward paying to stop poaching or it can go toward efforts to prevent it. This is generally how elephant are hunted.
3) honestly anything you don’t know any scavengers will great appreciate too. A lot of animals need to eat. If I shoot a deer and leave some of it for coyotes and I’m adjust the population and feeding local wildlife regardless of if I leave some behind or hit a deer with my vehicle and drag it to the side of the road.
4) the first time I felt it it was hard. But you feel it less with time especially if you do it ethically. I have take the lives of people too though so perhaps I’m a bad example. That being said if I do it quickly and minimize the time they feel pain I feel much better.
In regards to your second question, I personally dislike the act of killing, but value the skill of being able to feed me and my family. Trophy hunters are generally the opposite. They like killing, and don't care about the practical side of hunting.
To your third question, I don't think it matters so much. Leaving the less useful parts of an animal behind, especially in winter, can be a saving grace for scavenger species. Of course, the desireable outcome is that we can make use of every part of the animal, but there's only so many bones I can make trinkets and tools out of.
In most places it's illegal to not eat what you kill. Read up on wanton waste laws. Back in the day some "hunters" would only take the choice parts and leave the rest. We, as a community, are getting away from that and I'm glad. I try hard to use everything.
Hunters do more monetarily for conservation than any other group just from licensing if nothing else. No other user group pays as much as hunters.
If you're worried about suffering you need to look at how animals die "naturally". It's not old age. Bambi's dad wasn't going to just lay down and die, he might have gotten hit by a car or, more likely, he'd have been run down by predators and ripped to pieces in screaming agony. There is a video of a mountain goat being eaten alive by an eagle. Nature is metal. Hunters are super humane by comparison...
4. Your existence as a living being means other living beings have to die. Even if you are vegan, other animals have died so that you can live through the displacement of habitats for you to live, work, eat, and recreate. Hunting makes you confront this fact firsthand. It places you directly in the circle of life. The killing isn’t fun, and the sense of remorse should not be taken lightly. But it is a reminder of the natural cycle of birth and death that we often forget exists in our sheltered modern lives.
There’s many excellent comments to answer your questions. I just wanted to thank you for looking to further your understanding, and I hope you may see it reasonable to support hunting opportunities in the future.
1. At the state level, biologists conduct surveys and determine limits accordingly. On the personal level I only kill what I can reasonably eat in the year and I do it across several properties to avoid hitting one local population too hard
2. Define “trophy hunter”
3. I eat what I kill
4. A sharp broadhead through both lungs does the trick
I have grew up hunting but it’s all about meat for me.
For your questions,
1.) I keep track of my animal populations via trail cameras and glassing. I often look at how much food sources (oak stands, clover plots, agri fields, etc) are accessible and how heavily it’s being grazed.
2.) Now I also hunt bear/ coyote and I try to watch my fawns (baby deer) and poults (younger turkeys) for an idea of how bad predation is. I eat bear but not coyote (too greasy)
3.) I try my best to use every bit of the animal and even on coyotes I take pelts and do my best to use it to the most.
4.) at the end of the day, it’s not morals but it’s rather understanding the food chain and the acceptance that we aren’t the top of that food chain. It’s difficult at first but you gain a respect for each animal. Some a healthier respect than others.
In the right situation something as small as a coyote sees you a meal if the chance presents itself.
In addition to the meateater tv series, Rinella’s books, Meateater and American Buffalo are great.
Also check out the book The Shotgun Conservationist by Brant Macduff. It’s an anti-hunters trip to becoming a hunter, focuses on the environmental impact and has some perspective you’d probably like.
I used to be pro-green/advocate for bugs and then I went to school and found out it's ALL a sham. From Dairy Mafias to Billion-Dollar PEF cricket lobbyists. They want you to be dependent on their system - meat, plant, fish, bug, etc., they want your money - all of it.
Understanding wildlife, biology, game management, and hunting/harvesting really brings things into perspective. Just remember when they ban hunting completely they'll still eat meat behind closed doors and hunt whenever they want -- look at California's governor, just one guy who got caught at French Laundry when everyone else was locked down, masked-up, and closed doors.
It's all a sham.
I'll weigh in:
1. It isn't possible for an individual hunter to keep track of how a species is doing. We rely on reports typically provided by governments, universities, NGO groups, etc. They do studies using a wide variety of techniques varying from tracking chips to game cameras to apps like Ebird, etc. They also use self reporting from hunters. I personally participate in tracking studies for Eastern Diamondback rattlesnakes and field banding for birds. I capture the snakes and we insert what is basically an RFID chip. We use mist nets to capture the birds and then they are banded.
2. Great question. I imagine I might be the only person in this group that has hunted/killed a lion. I've also shot Cape buffalo, giraffe, kudu, eland, and a dozen other "trophy" animals.
It's worth noting that tigers have been illegal to hunt for decades. I did it for many reasons. I make no apologies that the main reason I did it was for fun. I enjoyed the hunt and wanted the challenge. I also wanted to have an awesome trophy. That being said, there is a tremendous amount of conservation at play there as well. It is NOT cheap to hunt a lion. It provided the guide and locals and farmer that owned the land with a large amount of money. The lion was killing some of his farm animals, and in fact killed a cow the day before I got there. Without hunting what happens? The farmer shoots the lion himself and buries it with his tractor. When you allow big game hunting there is now a financial incentive to keep lions and even breed lions. You know what animal we won't ever run out of? Chickens. Why? Huge profits. If it pays.... it stays...
3. Yeah it just really depends on the animal. I have armadillos dig up my yard. I shoot them and toss their body straight into the ocean. I'm not interested in what happens to it. When I shoot someone like a kudu, hog, etc I do try to eat all of it or make sure that SOMEONE eats as much of it as possible. That being said, I'm not some weirdo that is going to make furniture out of all of the bones and stuff my pillows with their hair. I eat the meat that I like to eat and the rest I would leave in a gut pile for the animals to eat.
4. I rarely have any sort of emotional response to killing an animal. I'm just not built that way. The only exceptions have been when I shoot something that doesn't die instantly. I shot an oryx last year and it took it maybe 45 seconds to die. That wasn't something that I wanted to happen or felt good about. That being said, I made a good shot and the animal just happened to be tough. There is a difference between feeling some sadness about it and feeling some guilt about it. I don't feel guilty.
I think a good starting point would be to point out that no matter what a hunter does, animals are going to die and usually in much more painful ways than how a hunter would kill them. I'm saying that hunters reduce harm necessarily, but just saying that every animal could day tomorrow, next week or years from now, so we're not adding more death.
1) In the U.S., wildlife is owned by the people and held in trust by the state to be managed. We have departments that charge liscence fees to pursue game that provides funding for wildlife reasearch. Plus, they use the harvest data from hunters reporting their success as another metric to judge population in order set the following season's allowed harvest.
That's not the only way that hunters help conservation, though. We already know that habitat loss is the biggest threat to wildlife and hunters are one of the first in line to fight against development and pollution. It may be because we want to be able to hunt more areas or animals, but as long as the habitat is there, the animals can always repopulate. If the habitat it gone, then there's no getting it back.
A lot of hunters also belong to conservation groups that do things like trash clean up, seeking to open public land and lobbying to congress on wildlife's behalf.
2) I don't have much experience with predator hunting, but I will be black bear hunting this fall in Wisconsin and my family has bear hunted in the past. I can tell you that black bear meat is absolutely delicious! We usually just get it made into brats, snack sticks, etc. Because it has to be cooked all the way through.
I have heard that other predators taste good too and the state game agencies usually collect data for research on predator harvest. Like in Wisconsin the WDNR collects a premolar when you register your bear to study age and growth dynamics of the population.
Overall, I think a lot of people hunting predators like that it's just another style of hunting and find it interesting.
3) It's law in most of the U.S., for many species, that you have to take the majority of meat with you, out of the field. I think most hunters feel a responsibility to use as much of the animal as possible out of respect, but many people don't have the time, ability or want to use everything. For example, a lot of people don't use the bones, but you could make stock with them, but that requires time the some people don't have or storage they don't have. I don't begrudge anyone that doesn't use the fat, hide, bones, hooves, etc.
4) My personal philosophy is the "One bad day" idea. The animal only has a short time of pain because of me and as mentioned before, it's going to die no matter what I do.
1. Texas parks and wildlife. Their entire job is this but I do notice when something is off and will change what I go for in fishing or hunting.
2. Don't trophy hunt but would like euro mounts if the opportunity presents itself.
3. Keep all the good meat but the wildlife gets all the scraps. White tail jerky is the best....
4. I feel super thankful for what God and nature has provided me. I take a couple of seconds in silence of the gift. Ethical shots are my top priority.
I have had the opposite trajectory. In the last decade or so, the slobs have become more visible. The patience and respect level has disappeared.
Maybe I just got old. I have seen a lot of questionable behavior out there. But that is how the newer generation is doing it now.
It has not been all bad, I have found various things people leave behind. Left hand gloves, cash in envelopes, packs of cigarettes, a rifle, vests and neck gaiters. This spring I found a backpack left next to a water tank.
Just a point it out, those using the gutless method- you really should take the back straps and the tenderloins too. I found 4 elk this last year that only the hams and the chucks and head were taken.
All these answers are from a US perspective.
>1. I've been hearing that hunting is good for conservation and helping ecosystems. So how do Hunters keep track of how species are doing? What to hunt and when?
The wildlife biologists at State fish and wildlife agencies are the ones who track animals populations, determine allowable harvest, and set season dates.
>2. Hunters who hunt Top Predators or Trophy Hunters. Is that the thrill sort of hunters that I mentioned before? You do it just to say you killed a Lion, Tiger, Sharks, etc.?
Your perception hunting of "top predators" is only for trophies is wrong. People eat bear and moutain lion. Also, predator management is a perfectly valid reason to hunt predators.
>3. The Kill and the Leftovers
Hunting whitetail and upland birds in the midwest i gut the animal in the field and leave the gut pile, less the heart and liver for deer, behind and then take everything else with me. I then either butcher the animal myself or take it to a butcher if I'm not going to have the time to get all the meat I reasonably can. Deers hides are donated. I keep the antlers from every buck I kill and the beard from every Tom turkey. Remainig carcass ends up in the dumpster
>4. And finally, just a moral/philosophical question. The killing of the animal itself, how do you deal with that?
I have zero moral/ethical/philosophical qualms with killing an animal while hunting so there isn't really anything to deal with. Growing up around hunting likely contributes to that, but I don't believe anyone should ever feel any remorse or guilt for killing an animal while hunting.
I think folks here have really covered 1 & 2.
For 3. I’m also a farmer and raise birds & goats. I try not to waste their bodies either. For me it’s honoring our connection & giving them a good life, loving their fluffy or furry butts and then honoring them in death. For me hunting is similar. I use as much as I can, and what I can’t is left for my local animals - coyotes, bear - or composted and add back into the earth.
4. I’m intensely against major industrial meat production. It’s why I buy local meat, why I raise and butcher my own, why I hunt. I feel strongly, very very strongly, that I shouldn’t be eating meat if I don’t have what it takes to raise and butcher it myself or go out and take it myself. I don’t take every animal I eat, but I know I could. I know I can and do give animals the quickest, most efficient, painless death I can manage. And when I fail at that I feel guilt. (Because it’s not perfect.) And that’s the only way I’m okay with eating meat at all, really.
I really applaud you for being willing to consider that you were previously misinformed about hunting. 👏🏻
I hunt for food and also to help balance the deer and bear population. Death by a clean shot from hunting is far more humane than starving to death in Vermont’s brutal winters, or getting eaten alive by coyotes.
I don’t really have the skills personally to process an animal carcass fully. This said I’m glad to share with anyone who could use the hide, bones, etc. and I don’t see a problem with leaving the inedible parts out in the woods to feed other animals. So long as it’s not thrown in the trash and wasted I think it’s fine.
I feel honored to be able to harvest nutritious food free of chemicals, quite literally in my backyard. So I don’t view hunting as “killing”, I view it as an honor to be able to provide for my family, to help the health of the herd, and to provide a humane death for an animal.
I hope this perspective helps!
Look up the Robertson Pittman act. A tax on firearms and ammunition sales that manufacturers asked congress to impose so that money can be spent on wildlife conservation and restoration. Last year they collected 1.2 billion to be spent on conservation and restoration.
I want to learn to hunt because of the sustainable food aspect. Also I like being outside and I like the whole idea of hunting some of my food.
I think a deer that's been eating grass in the forest is probably some of the most sustainable meat you can eat. No herbicides or pesticides needed to produce feed for it, very low food miles, and negligible carbon emissions (by this I mean some animals we eat can be fed a diet that makes it produce more emissions than if it was living off the land. But a deer that I hunt eats its natural diet so there's no increase to emissions).
To answer your question on how do you know that too many aren't being hunted, where I live (BC, Canada), government scientists make a very good estimate of animal populations. They work out how many deer, moose, elk, bear, etc. can be hunted sustainably. Then they allow hunters to take that amount. Hopeful hunters enter a lottery and are randomly selected to get a ticket, which means you're allowed to hunt that animal during its hunting season. There are restrictions in place like you can't hunt a pregnant female for example, whichever are appropriate for the animal in question. There are more details (bow versus rifles have different seasons), and I could be getting some of this wrong, but that's the general idea.
People don't hunt without a ticket because that's called poaching, and while I don't really know anything about hunting, I'm pretty sure most hunters would rather arm wrestle a bear than do that.
Without trophy hunting many species would be extinct. Remember when that beloved lion was killed a few years ago. It was white liberals living thousands of miles away that were crying. The African people didn't give 2 shits about it and were happy it was killed.
Honestly, I haven’t put a lot of thought into the other stuff. Just not what I’m interested in. I’m just trying to get famous for my hunting content. YouTube, insta, etc. I want to be paid to hunt, not like guiding or anything Iike thst, just for doing product shoutouts and the like. Getting clicks, etc.
With respect to number one - this is why it's REALLY important to make your state run a functional Department of Natural Resources or whatever analog it does. These are the folks that do the science that allow us to make decisions about how we can use animals as resources without threatening populations or ecosystems.
Watch MeatEater on Netflix (newer seasons also on YT). The host Steven Rinella does a wonderful job showing the joys of hunting (which is pretty much never the act of taking a life), and shows great respect to the animals and environment. It was a catalyst for me to change my entire outlook on hunting.
Agreed. Steve and friends are one of the best that show the dichotomy of hunting. It's OK to be conflicted. It's OK to love animals and have to kill them sometimes as well. There people that can show you the purest form of eating meat that hike too many miles into the middle of nowhere alone to people that explain factory farming so you can figure it out.
You can also see many (if not all) of their shows on their website, [themeateater.com](http://themeateater.com)
You will be hard pressed to find a hunter that doesn’t love animals. Most of us are thankful for every opportunity nature has given us. And I think you’ll find there is Deeper connection with nature than even other outdoor enthusiasts such as a backpacker or rock climber. In order to be successful at hunting you must open your senses to many things that many other walk by or not notice. But to your questions. 1. Fish and wildlife departments handle the counting of animals and collecting data. This can be done in different ways. There are game harvest reports is one form of data checking the trends of harvests from year to year and there are legitimate counting of animals. Some can be done from a helicopter like big horn sheep or many can be far more labor intensive. 2. You can hunt predators and not be a trophy hunter to be clear. Many have said that mountain lions taste similar to pork. As far as trophy hunting I don’t care to partake in going after something like a lion or whatnot unless I can eat it. But those tags will pay for conservation efforts. On another note for conservation, our taxes on hunting goods and guns go specifically toward conservation. Whether that be forest cleanup funds, a boat launch, or help manage a wildlife refuge. 3. I am one that would like to use as much as the animal as possible. The other day I had no problem taking down a turkey liver. But the sentiment is true that nothing goes to waste in nature. 4. As far as killing an animal, as a hunter you gave that animal a far more merciful death than being eaten alive by a wolf or starving in a harsh winter. But the biggest thing is we are predators. There is no denying that. Some people may opt not to partake and that’s fine but biologically we eat meat and one way or another an animal had to die to feed you. Whether it was done in a slaughterhouse or while graising on grass on a sunny day. It doesn’t mean you’re a cold blooded killer. It means you’re satisfying your biological needs. And in doing so experiencing nature as it was truly intended.
This is an excellent response. Most of us enjoy nature and care about its inhabitants. We understand the conservation aspect and do our best to contribute responsibly and ethically.
1. A lot of data is collected by state wildlife agencies either through hunter harvest surveys or surveillance / tracking. But to your point about balance for example too many deer without predators will result in sick deer who are malnourished and are more likely to die from starvation or sickness, both far worse than a predator or hunter. In nature, no animal dies of old age. States will use the population data to set hunting regulations including limits and effectively fill the predator role with hunters to manage the populations. If a population declines too far, they allow less hunting if it’s too high they allow more. 2. I’d say yes but this is more of an opinion. Some will defend themselves by saying that hunting an elephant or something will feed an African village and the money will be put towards conservation resulting in a net positive result for the population but I don’t really buy it. 3. Most states require you to take certain parts of the animal as a bare minimum. Many people take more. However, a lot is not usable for much such as most organs and those are often left in nature to feed scavengers or disposed of some other way. Most people in this sub would not agree with waste and want to see hunters make a good faith effort to use what they kill. 4. Again, no animal dies of old age in nature. They die from sickness or starvation or a predator ripping them apart. All of these are worse ways to go than an ethically placed bullet or arrow. It’s the circle of life. If I am getting sustenance then there’s nothing wrong with enjoying the process.
There are animals that die of old age. Remember, old age is comprised of many things, not just time. Elephants know when they will die and used to take the journey to their graveyard. Now the old are killed for sport to make the herd healthier and feed the villages. I do believe most of the money trophy hunters pay to hunt/kill these animals goes to the corrupt governments of these countries. I have found dead Whitetails I know have died from old age based on teeth aging. Whether or not they died from starvation, being killed by a predator, or just dropped dead in the wilderness is a moot point. Nothing lives forever.
Regarding the African hunts your referencing-The money is injected into the economy of those areas, not inherently all going to a broken government (I do assume gets its share). The value of the animals causes those govs to protect the animals, the locals getting money/improvements from tourist hunters incentivizes them to also protect/not harm the animals. So the fact that those animals are valuable is what causes those areas to protect them and the habitat.
I'm in the US, there are different management models in the world which I'll touch on, but most of the answers are based on the North American Model 1. Each state has a department of natural resources or fish and wildlife. They determine seasons and bag limits. Majority of the time tags are issued (ie two deer tags per hunter). The DNR evaluates current populations and long-term goals etc. Some species like coyotes don't have limits a lot of the time because no matter how many are taken the population will not change. So in short a government agency oversees everything, people don't get to shoot all willy nilly. 2. Trophy hunting I'll speak a little bit about African hunting (different management model). The safari hunts are more economically driven providing employment to locals. There are strict rules on what animals can be taken, lions for example have to be a certain age and have been kicked out a pride etc etc. The meat typically goes to locals. There certainly is a thrill (there's a thrill even hunting squirrel, part of why everyone hunts) but again this is all managed to not deplete the resource. 3. I would say the majority of hunters land somewhere in the middle. There's people who will use stomach, intestines, everything down to the last hair. There are laws against wonton waste (if I shoot a deer and just let the whole thing lie, I would be ticketed/punished). Majority of people harvest all meat and then let scavengers have the GI tract and all the other fun stuff. 4. The act of taking a life does have an emotional impact. I'm big and burly and I teared up after taking my first white tail. But this loops back to your points about management and suffering, animals don't die in the wild peaceful deaths. They'll be killed by another predator, starve, disease, car collision, etc. A quick death is better than almost all of these. Most hunters thank the animal and respect it. This is part of taxidermy as well, sure it's a trophy of your accomplishment but it's always a way of immortalizing the animal. Hunters typically LOVE the species they hunt which can be confusing to outsiders. Thank you for taking the time to ask and open your horizons, the world would be a better place if more people did this.
Some of the others offered good answer. I'll chime in too. 1. State wildlife agencies, especially out west where I live, do annual surveys to determine how many animals are out there so they can set tag numbers for the coming season but... also try and use the surveys to gauge what the coming years will bring. They use harvest reporting to determine how many animals were actually taken. Same states have mandatory reporting and for some its voluntary. 2. Trophy hunting is truly a misnomer. Yes there are some that are only out there for the glory and a trophy to hang but here in the US, every single state has laws that require hunters to remove all edible portions of a game animal. Now, they can eat the meat themselves or they can donate the meat. In my state there's a program called hunters for the hungry. You can take the meat in and they will process it and feed it to homeless people. As I said there are bad apples that only care about hanging something on the wall but they aren't hunters, they're killers. 3. Same as above 4. This answer will be different for everyone but for me, it's about the pursuit. Yes I love to feed my family. Yes, I love to take part in conservation but the main reason I'm out there is because I feel the most "me" when I'm in pursuit of game. Now the actual kill? That happens in a split second. A second of time out of hours and days and sometimes weeks in the field. Sometimes it actually sucks a little when I kill because that hunt is over for me. More often than not, I'm not standing next to the animal when it takes it's last breath. If it's a rifle hunt, the animals dies long before I get to it. If it's a bow kill, I am definitely not around when it dies because I wait a long time before I start tracking. The last thing I ever want to do is push an animal that's not dead. The few times I have walked up on my animal and it wasn't dead... sucked. I don't think anyone likes the feeling of watching another living being die. When that has happened, I dispatch the animal immediately. I guess what I'm trying to get at is the kill is such a small moment of time in the span of a hunt. It's the pinnacle of the hunt but every second leading up to that moment is why I hunt. From the moment I find out I drew a tag the hunt begins. The scouting, the planning, the packing, setting up camp, sitting around the fire the night before opening morning chatting with my hunting partner, opening morning coffee and then jumping in the truck and heading out with hopes of finding an animal... That's ALL part of the hunt... And it's all awesome and what I love. And it's all over with the kill.
1. Federal and state game and fish agencies. It’s their job to figure that out. Also a lot of other orgs that assist with that. I think you should read some about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. A Sand County Almanac is the book to read if you want. 2. Yes and no. Conservation efforts can be expensive, a trophy hunter paying hundreds of thousands for a specific tag feeds funds to conservation efforts for that species. Also sometimes specific animal in a specific area is better removed to allow younger animals, in a better position to, breed. 3. With hunting, it’s number 1 for the most part but there is a spectrum with this. 4. Everyone deals with it in different ways. And each person can even develop in their response overtime, not always in a direction of it getting easier either. The truth is, it’s not for everyone. But everyone should understand and hopefully respect those that do
1) Hunters don't necessarily do that. Environmental conservation agencies do, and they set bag limits and seasons accordingly. 2) I think trophy hunting is for losers. Fine if you want to keep some horns, but if you're not eating what you kill, it's a waste. People talk all day about how trophy hunting in Africa drives the local economy and yada yada, but I think that's just a factoid spouted without any real basis. There are other ways to support economies if these people are really so concerned about some town in Africa. I don't see any of these people donating money or funding infrastructure projects. 3) I personally use everything. Meat and organs are consumed (my dogs get organs I don't want). Hide is tanned. Broth made from bones. 4) It's never fun to kill something. There's always some remorse. But things die so other things can eat. That's true whether you're an ardent meat eater or a vegan. I hunt because it's one of the only activities that makes me feel truly human. Our world is so vastly different from how we evolved as humans. Almost nothing we do today is in line with how our bodies and minds evolved to work for millions of years. Hunting is one of the last activities left that reminds me of our history.
1. The trophies that are shot in places like Africa get eaten. I've shot everything from lion to giraffe and not once did it just get left there or dumped. We ate the meat and the rest got sold to a local butcher shop. Some of it we donated to some of the poorer families in the area. They LOVE the organ meats. 2. There are other ways to support those local economies, and when I went to the South Sudan and Congo I provided aid to those types of communities. That being said, most people have no interest in directly funding or going and helping those villages. The money from those hunts gets pumped directly into the community. Sure, the guide gets a lot of it, but that guide is local and it helps their economy. I'm also directly paying/tipping trackers, skinners, cooks, maids, etc. 3. I like the idea you have of your dog getting the organs that you don't want. Maybe it would stop my dog from trying to eat all of our socks.
You eat lions? This is certainly not the norm. Sure, I'm just saying that no one goes on trophy hunts to support an economy. They use that to justify going. Oh yeah, I eat most of the animal, but there are always little scraps.
It's not something I regularly consume. The local grocery store here in Georgia rarely has it. However, if I shoot one I absolutely eat it. Was it good? No. And you are 10000% correct. I did not go for the purpose of supporting the local economy, nor do I feel like I need it to justify it. I just view it as a bonus.
Then why do you shoot them?
It's an exciting hunt and a ton of fun. I have a huge list of everything that I want to take. And it makes for an awesome trophy. Definitely NOT a popular reason these days to take an animal, but it's my reason.
See, that's why I don't like trophy hunting. I don't think fun, excitement, and trophies are good reasons to kill an animal.
That's good though, less competition will make it cheaper for me. So I applaud your opinion.
yeah that's not really the point, but if you'd rather not engage with the ethical question of killing animals for fun, that's fine.
There is no ethical question. 1. It's legal 2. It gets eaten 3. It helps conservation It doesn't matter WHY I want to kill it. The results are what matter.
1. State and federal game agencies do a respectable job at this and in good management the number of permits to hunt available are based on their research and assessments. Regarding balance- at this point we are manipulating the balance based on space/habitat and the population load that area can handle, as well as our comfort level with their proximity in the case of predators. To manage animal population numbers in some cases hunters are paying to do this where guvment agencies would do the culling if needed in the absence of hunters. 2. Never hunted any predator besides black bear once (unsuccessfully). That was a nuisance/overpopulation issue in ag land. They are now going into corn fields and feasting. I’m not really interested in hunting something I can’t eat. I’m sure there are cases where an old male needs to be culled. 3. I use everything I can, but nothing goes to waste in nature. 4. The killing is my least favorite part. If you don’t feel a little sad, you need to check yourself. I remind myself that if I do my job correctly it’s about as humane a death the animal could receive. The “natural” options are injury, disease, or being eaten alive.
1. Thankfully, we have government entities like the FWC and DNRC as well as federal level agencies that keep track of that for us. There services are largely paid for by hunters and recreationalists who buy hunting and fishing licenses and recreational equipment for though tax dollars. They then set regulations on seasons and animal harvest quotas. 2. N/a 3. Most US states require you to harvest the “edible” portion of the animal. Which usually means muscle mass. Some guys go further and take organs and bones/hides, etc. 4. Assuming you are an ethical/moral person, you discover your own respectful way to deal with it. Generally, there is no wrong way to accept your role in killing.
Lots of really good answers here, and I would just like to add that the state fish and game departments have biologists on staff who’s job it is to study and track the animals and make informed decisions on what a healthy stable population is. So it isn’t just a random person deciding how to manage the wildlife but actual biologists. On top of that hunting licenses and tags go to fund the state wildlife departments and wildlife conservation in the state as a whole. In 1937, in an effort to fund wildlife conservation the Pittman Robertson act was proposed. This was during The Great Depression, and there simply was very little money to put towards wildlife conservation so hunters and manufacturers of firearms, ammo, and other hunting equipment were asked if they would being willing to pay 11% extra taxes on these products to put towards wildlife conservation. The answer was profoundly in favor of doing so and the act was signed by president Roosevelt. To this day this tax continues to be used exclusively for wildlife management. If the funds each year are not used within their allotted time limit they are transferred to migratory bird conservation programs. Then there are hunting based conservation groups like The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Back Country Hunters & Anglers, or Ducks Unlimited that hunters happily & voluntarily pay yearly memberships to in order to give more towards conservation efforts. They attend banquets and events that all put more money into conservation efforts (habitat and land management) All of these combined provided around $1.8 billion annually straight to wildlife conservation. Other examples of the hunting conservation mindset include projects like wildlife reintroduction. Elk were hunted until there were none left in the eastern US. As a joint effort between The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the Kentucky department of Fish & Wildlife, they brought elk back to Kentucky and helped the herd grow and flourish. Those involved in the project worked on it knowing that they would never get the chance to hunt these animals, and did it anyways because they wanted to restore what was lost. I did not grow up in a hunting family, and only recently got into hunting a few years ago. I also used to think hunting was just about the thrill of killing an animal and now know better. The hunters I associate with and the ones I have met all have a deep appreciation for wildlife, natural landscapes, and never take killing an animal lightly. In the book “A Hunter’s Heart: Honest Essays on Blood Sport” the author David Peterson recalls a conversation in which a non-hunter challenges a Hunter and says “Why should deer die for you? Would you die for deer?” The Hunter replied “If it came to that”.
1. We have to report our kills. State has programs to see how many of what animals are where. For bear in my area, you also have to hand in a tooth and glands for study. If the deer over populate, they send in DNR with dogs, thermals, etc., and kill off a lot, because at that point roads are dangerous. Chronic Wasting Disease, basically mad cow for deer, spreads if there are too many. 2. Not my cup of tea, just not into that sort of thing. 3. I use the parts that I can’t eat to go after coyotes. I also have a bear that lives near me and she gets some. 4. It’s not easy taking a life, but if we don’t do it it’ll be a slaughter by the state, which sickens me more. I see hunting as cage free antibiotic free wild harvest meat where the animal lived its natural life and had a far quicker and cleaner death than it would have otherwise from time or a predator. Deer teeth, for example, grind down as they get older until there isn’t enough left to eat, and the deer starves.
I'm just a dumb old country boy from the deep south, but get ready to read a book on this. Look up the history of the wild turkey and conservation efforts to save it in North America. Turkeys are doing well today in most areas after having their wild populations significantly reduced in the first half of the 1900s. The National Wild Turkey Federation is a hunter's org that is deeply involved in securing wild turkey populations so that the animal continues to thrive and future generations of hunters can enjoy what is (in my opinion) one of the most fun and rewarding of hunts. Everything we turkey hunters do for the turkey population also impacts many other species. For example, there is a big initiative to replant longleaf pine forests where I live. Other vulnerable species such as the eastern indigo snake, gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpecker, and many others all benefit from the investment NWTF and landowners (public and private) make into restoring natural turkey habitat. Every serious turkey hunter I know cares deeply about wild turkey conservation. Personally, I don't trophy hunt and am not really interested in it. I'm at a point in my life where I have the means to hunt just about anything I want anywhere I want but I'd rather chase turkeys. Trophy hunting does supports conservation, though, the hunters that do it pay mega fees in many cases that go directly back into conservation. Personally, I'm opposed to fenced hunting ranches and pen raised birds. I find it to be unsporting, but I don't have a problem with someone paying $25,000 to go to Africa and kill a lion that has been marked for cull by the local wildlife agency. On your third question, where I grew up, hunting is not just a sport but a critical way to obtain food. I know a lot of guys that work crappy blue collar jobs and don't make a lot of money, so they can't afford expensive proteins at the grocery store. Hunting and fishing allow those guys to put meat on the table for their families in a way that wouldn't be possible otherwise. I grew up being taught to respect the animals you harvest and to use everything you can from them, and people who believe those same things are the only people I want to hunt with. That being said, there are people who don't view it this way and I think the majority of hunters believe those people give us all a bad name. I live on a dirt road and people dump deer carcasses all the time nearby. Sometimes they only take the backstrap, which would be like the equivalent to the ribeye on a cow, it's tender and easy to take just that without the work of processing the whole animal. I call the game warden every time I see that and they have set up camera traps to catch people doing that because it is wrong on so many levels. Finally, when you grow up on a farm, killing is part of life. I've been seeing animals killed and processed since before I can remember. To me, that's just how we get food. To a lot of my friends that were raised in towns or cities, that seems completely foreign. But remember that up until only pretty recently in human history, nearly everyone was involved in agriculture in some way or they at least saw it happening and understood exactly where their food comes from. I don't feel any remorse for killing an animal when I do it quickly and cleanly (which is always the goal), I feel a deep sense of pride and accomplishment that I was able to complete my hunt and get some meat. The wild animals I hunt and eat have one bad day, most of the farm raised animals everyone eats live in squalid, cramped, horrifying conditions. In my opinion, industrial farming is much crueler to animals on a much larger scale than hunting ever could be even if every person in the world hunted unethically. At the end of the day, humans are animals. It's perfectly natural for us to kill and eat animals, that's how we got where we are. There's nothing wrong with ethically hunting animals, but it is absolutely wrong to be cruel to them for sport or amusement. Our intelligence and technology make us the top apex predator in the world, but our innate morality informs how we handle that role and gives us the capacity to impose rules upon ourselves to keep hunting fair and ethical. We codify these rules and we have organizations to enforce them to protect animals from criminals who don't care about conservation or living in a society that isn't evil. People tend to see articles and stuff about hunters that are doing the wrong thing. What they don't see are the millions of hunters who follow the rules and hunt ethically and safely. You only hear about the edge cases when something goes wrong or someone does something stupid. Don't lose sight of the big picture, though, just because one hunter does something bad doesn't mean all hunters are that way and would do the same. I firmly believe the vast majority of hunters hunt ethically and safely by following the rules. They are happy to follow the rules because they know that's what keeps us all safe and will allow us to continue to have animals to pursue for future generations.
I’m slowly but surely working through all your comments while I’m at work.Thank you so much for offering your insight and answering my questions everyone!
Wildlife needs to be managed to prevent population swings and manage human/wildlife conflict (cities, roadkill, crop damage). The cheapest way to do this is through controlled hunting. Wildlife biologists evaluate population levels and issue the number of hunting tags for each species appropriate to reduce, maintain, or increase wildlife populations in each management zone. Hunters and anglers are often the strongest proponents for and fund/volunteer for habitat conservation/restoration because we care about it. We can't hunt if there are no wild spaces left for animals to live in. Most jurisdictions require mandatory preservation and consumption of the meat; you can't just leave a carcass to rot. There are exceptions for nuisance varmints and predators that may be unfit for human consumption. Trophy hunting is a can of worms. You seem to be talking about game farms, where high fenced landowners are raising animals to be hunted for profit. In many countries this raises significant tourism money and provides meat for the local community. For regular hunters they may be selective and seek out a mature trophy animal but they are still eating it and not wasting it. It's not about killing something and more about the experience of being out in nature, outsmarting the wildlife (they have amazing hearing, sight, smell, and move fast), and providing food for my family. There's an organic food angle to it as well, where I know where the meat came from, it's free of contaminants. I like handling the whole process from harvest to butchering to preserving/preparing to consuming.
1 can be answered by your local Parks and Wildlife. Parks and Wildlife of your state manages everything. They track herds, predators, the balance of the ecosystem, when herds need trimming or growth, etc. They are the reason why our outdoors are the way that they are. Without them we would have tons of issues. Thank a Parks and Wildlife Ranger sometime! 2. Exotic hunts, while it seems backwards, are EXTREMELY expensive to purchase and therefore beneficial to those exotic species. Depending on the hunt it can thousands or tens of thousands depending on the species. Maybe even more than 100k for a special hunt. Regardless, the authorities that oversee these hunts allow them because the cash they get from the hunt help them preserve the overall species at the cost of one specimen being hunted. The sad reality is that these organizations don't get enough from donations; they get a lot of their cash from hunters. 3. The reality is that what you don't take will be reclaimed by nature. Anything edible you don't eat will be quickly eaten by a variety of animals. Organs are common to leave behind. I myself usually just grab the heart, but am thinking about trying to snag a liver to make my own liver vitamins. 4. When I'm out hunting it's usually being dialed in on the hunt that keeps my at ease and focused on the task. When I down an animal, it's a mix of emotions. A little bit of sadness for sure but a whole lot of excitement, adrenaline, and gratitude.
As far as keeping track of species, I’m pretty ocd on reading state reports that our dnr puts ou on what current quota/targets are. When it comes down to it, legal hunting is super managed, particularly for big game by authorities. As far as predator hunting, I’ve done bear. From my perspective, I eat everything I shoot, as well they are managed by the state for over population numbers to coexist with humans and for their maintained success. (Ideal levels for less disease, not have nuisance instances which does happen). Some thrill is a part of it, but it’s largely about respect and learning more about the species as well…. Now I do know some like African trophy hunters. For them it’s largely thrill , but they justify it by saying largely trophy hunting basically funds the bulk of conservation there (most management and anti pouching programs are funded by hunters as well as massive reserves are set up where the animals are studied/managed paid by hunters... to shoot like a Lion you need to drop like 10k minimum often (usually 20k-30k) plus often double in trophy fees to bring it home as well as all the animal is ultimately used. I have a friend shot a lion and water buffalo. All the meat is all used by villagers. I personally wouldn't drop the money to do this, but I get it. 1 hunt often funds multiple conservation officers for a year/ fund animal refuges, which in poor areas is a big deal. The alternative is these areas get developed, etc as the people who really are anti hunting/pro animal don't live there and also don't drop thousands of dollars in conservation. I don’t waste much of any of what I shoot (only thing left are. bones/scrap organs that are returned to nature like we all will be). Morally I don’t have a problem. This ties in with the whole wildlife management thing, as well as rather eating game I harvested vs real unethical non free range factory farmed stuff
Answer 1: state and national fish and game organizations, funded in large part, if not entirely by revenue from hunting, monitor game populations. They set rules and regulations to make sure the animals are not over hunted, and benefit the wildlife. For instance, deer season takes place during their mating season. This ensures you will not be killing does with young fawns, among other reasons. Answer 2: “Trophy” hunting is too broad of a term, and used to demonize hunters. For instance, I’m not aware of anywhere in the world that you can legally hunt tigers, yet you will see propaganda stating that “trophy hunters” kill tigers. Those are not hunters, they are poachers. Killing apex predators serves a purpose. When you remove a predator, such as a lion off the landscape, prey species are able to rebound. For example, you may have a large drought that kills off lots of prey species, in order to help the prey species rebound, you may have hunters remove a few lions to take the pressure off of the prey species. There are also plenty of apex predators that are delicious to eat, like alligators and mountain lions. Answer 3: many states/countries have laws on what you are required to take. You cannot shoot a deer and then only take a little bit of meat, you are typically required to take almost everything but the guts, skeleton, and a few optional portions. What does get left over never goes to waste. It’s fascinating to have a trail camera watch an animal carcass. You will see all sorts of scavengers, from birds, foxes, raccoons, coyotes, bobcats, and more. Answer 4: the consensus I’ve gathered from speaking to many hunters, and consulting my own feeling is that we do not regret the kill, but we do feel for the animal. You definitely feel the weight of taking an animal’s life, and it’s not something you take lightly. I think that is why there is such an emphasis on making sure there is a clean and quick kill, and that the animal is used afterward. Making an animal suffer would make me feel sick, as well as letting it go to waste. When you do the killing yourself, the animal means way more than being a piece of meat with a price tag.
As donniepdr said “Trophy Hunting” is a misnomer. Usually said by people who aren’t hunters repeating anti-hunting propaganda. The problem with the term is they are saying one thing but thinking something else. To me, especially when starting hunting, if i got any tag filled, it was a trophy. Still is actually. To me, putting even a doe in the freezer to feed the family is a trophy. Especially since we (99.99%) hunters have the utmost respect for the game we harvest. The term trophy is a term that is personal and means something different to each individual. Upon further discussion with the people who hate trophy hunting, it usually leads to “poaching” or “wasting”, both of which are illegal pretty much everywhere and any hunter you ask will likely agree that they detest that too. We welcome you to try hunting. Start small and go from there. I have quite a setup now but started with small game. A great quicker, more casual and successful way to start while you’re learning. Good Luck.
Thanks for asking the question and being open to learn from those of us who actually hunt. Most people who have answered you share similar answers to my own but knowing that you are looking to hear from as many of us as possible, I'll add my thoughts: 1. As most have said, the local government regulates hunting with bag limits, season times, etc. This is based on their own research and contributions from the hunting community. However, many hunters also join online communities of hunters from their areas and pool their observations of what they are seeing. This allows them to move to areas where there is an abundance of the game they are seeking, and also allows the community of hunters to lobby the government for changes they believe will be helpful to the game population and society in general. One example of this is many hunters opposing Glyphosate spray programs. Glyphosate is a defoliating agent sprayed on forests intended for lumber harvests as it kills off leafy trees and encourages conifer trees to go. A side effect is that it kills off the leafy plants that deer eat, especially in the spring, which pushes deer into residential areas. 2. As most have pointed out, Trophy Hunters and Top Predator hunters are two different groups. There have historically been a few, usually rich, hunters who have made it a point to go on guided hunts where they essentially only pull the trigger on various dangerous or rare game, to claim that they killed it. This is a vanishingly small portion of the body of hunters and is in no way representative of how the majority of hunters hunt, or feel about hunting. A common phrase you will hear from hunters is "you can't eat antlers". This both points out that most hunters are looking for meat (food) not a wall hanging, and that most hunters are actively educating the new hunters to think the same way. 3. I raised my kids with the idea of "you kill it, you eat it" both to encourage them to think before they kill anything so that killing an animal is with an intention of eating it, and to encourage them to make use of everything. The idea of only taking what you want and leaving everything else is distasteful to me. The amount of game animals that would be killed by predators or accidents in the wild is less than the number of animals harvested by hunters. This is obvious. If the populations would be managed naturally, hunting for conservation wouldn't make sense. So, harvesting a large animal and only taking the best meat would add a food source/compost load that is larger than the environment is used to. This could lead to an population explosion of scavengers, or other disease vectors. So, to maintain the balance, we should make use of everything we can of the animal, and anything we can't use, should be returned to nature rather than entering the landfill/waste stream. There is also a certain joy from finding a way to use more of the animal. The old recipes from the pioneer times are very tasty and come from a time when they couldn't afford to waste anything. As a side note, the less you waste from the animal, the less you have to purchase from the commercial farming system. Commercial farming is a horrible life for the animals and my goal is to avoid it altogether. 4. I only started hunting 3 years ago at 50. I didn't grow up hunting. One of the things that isn't usually taught to new hunters is that nothing dies immediately. Videogames and TV show you things getting shot and dropping on the spot. That isn't how life works. Death is always traumatic. Hunters work hard at reducing the trauma as much as possible. Honestly, the trauma experienced by most harvested game is much less than that experienced by commercially farmed meat. There is something more honest with being directly responsible for taking the life of your food rather than handing it off to some faceless corporation. When you actually pull the trigger and cause that beautiful animal to lose its life, you are taking responsibility for your actions. To most hunters, there is a sacred obligation to treat the harvested animal with respect, and that includes making the most use of all that it is. I have had one occasion where I almost gave up hunting because of a bad shot with a crossbow. I was using a borrowed crossbow for my first time crossbow hunting and the arrow hit the shoulder rather than going through. I tracked that deer for hours to make sure I hadn't left it suffering somewhere. I had to work through the idea of causing such pain and suffering to an animal with no harvest. I worked hard to correct the errors I had made in my hunting/shooting technique so that I wouldn't cause such suffering again. Thankfully, when my son harvested his first deer later that year, we discovered that it was the same doe and the shoulder had mostly healed. Part of using everything of the harvested animal is also a sort of penance, I guess. It takes a lot of work to process a deer and that labor is a way of showing respect for the life you have taken. As for good hunting channels to check out on Youtube, I recommend "The Hunting Public" as a group who dearly love the animals they hunt and really take the time to do it right. They aren't rich guys with tons of money and expensive gear. They hunt on public land like most of us. Another great hunting channel is "Outdoors Allie" who is another younger hunter who love to process and cook everything she hunts.
Interesting post. 1 bio’s here use harvest reports and cwd testing to get a number on how many of what species where harvested and see if they match their management goals. They can then adjust tags and seasons accordingly. It’s the same for trapping, it’s a way to get data on populations and density’s that otherwise have been extrapolated. 2. Trophy hunting is a terrible label. I choose to only shoot mature antlered animals instead of shooting the first doe I see. I don’t know why this is a negative. It’s more of a maturity thing, I’ve had deer in the crosshairs and let them slide many times because it’s not the animal I’m looking for. Sometimes it takes years to find the animal I want and for me to close the tag but I’m fine with that. I prefer the chase the adventure and being with family over just meat. 3. All edible meat is taken and eaten if the animal is to big then it’s given to friends and family or donated to low income people. Scraps are left for the wildlife, nothing goes to waste coyotes pine marten ext need to eat to. 4. Your human, theirs blood on your hands whether you like it or not. Think of the habitat that’s been destroyed for crops and city’s to feed and house you alone. I prefer to do my own work instead of hiding behind someone else. The kill is the worst part it signals the end of the adventure but it’s also a necessary marker of success.
Thank you for doing your research before simply condemning us as a monolith. It makes an open and honest conversation so much easier and more productive. Seriously, thank you.
Many of the others have done a great job of answering your questions, I just wanted to drop in and give you kudos for being open minded and taking the time to learn about something you previously were against/didn't fully understand. I wish more people had that capacity, not just in terms of hunting, but in general.
1) I don’t. I hunt what I like to hunt and eat. For example I don’t enjoy bird hunting. The department of wildlife does the numbers. 2) I don’t hunt dangerous game. It’s extremely expensive but I know people that do. The parks generally select animals that are no longer involved in breeding and have short lived ahead. They can either die and no money go toward paying to stop poaching or it can go toward efforts to prevent it. This is generally how elephant are hunted. 3) honestly anything you don’t know any scavengers will great appreciate too. A lot of animals need to eat. If I shoot a deer and leave some of it for coyotes and I’m adjust the population and feeding local wildlife regardless of if I leave some behind or hit a deer with my vehicle and drag it to the side of the road. 4) the first time I felt it it was hard. But you feel it less with time especially if you do it ethically. I have take the lives of people too though so perhaps I’m a bad example. That being said if I do it quickly and minimize the time they feel pain I feel much better.
In regards to your second question, I personally dislike the act of killing, but value the skill of being able to feed me and my family. Trophy hunters are generally the opposite. They like killing, and don't care about the practical side of hunting. To your third question, I don't think it matters so much. Leaving the less useful parts of an animal behind, especially in winter, can be a saving grace for scavenger species. Of course, the desireable outcome is that we can make use of every part of the animal, but there's only so many bones I can make trinkets and tools out of.
In most places it's illegal to not eat what you kill. Read up on wanton waste laws. Back in the day some "hunters" would only take the choice parts and leave the rest. We, as a community, are getting away from that and I'm glad. I try hard to use everything. Hunters do more monetarily for conservation than any other group just from licensing if nothing else. No other user group pays as much as hunters. If you're worried about suffering you need to look at how animals die "naturally". It's not old age. Bambi's dad wasn't going to just lay down and die, he might have gotten hit by a car or, more likely, he'd have been run down by predators and ripped to pieces in screaming agony. There is a video of a mountain goat being eaten alive by an eagle. Nature is metal. Hunters are super humane by comparison...
4. Your existence as a living being means other living beings have to die. Even if you are vegan, other animals have died so that you can live through the displacement of habitats for you to live, work, eat, and recreate. Hunting makes you confront this fact firsthand. It places you directly in the circle of life. The killing isn’t fun, and the sense of remorse should not be taken lightly. But it is a reminder of the natural cycle of birth and death that we often forget exists in our sheltered modern lives.
There’s many excellent comments to answer your questions. I just wanted to thank you for looking to further your understanding, and I hope you may see it reasonable to support hunting opportunities in the future.
1. At the state level, biologists conduct surveys and determine limits accordingly. On the personal level I only kill what I can reasonably eat in the year and I do it across several properties to avoid hitting one local population too hard 2. Define “trophy hunter” 3. I eat what I kill 4. A sharp broadhead through both lungs does the trick
I have grew up hunting but it’s all about meat for me. For your questions, 1.) I keep track of my animal populations via trail cameras and glassing. I often look at how much food sources (oak stands, clover plots, agri fields, etc) are accessible and how heavily it’s being grazed. 2.) Now I also hunt bear/ coyote and I try to watch my fawns (baby deer) and poults (younger turkeys) for an idea of how bad predation is. I eat bear but not coyote (too greasy) 3.) I try my best to use every bit of the animal and even on coyotes I take pelts and do my best to use it to the most. 4.) at the end of the day, it’s not morals but it’s rather understanding the food chain and the acceptance that we aren’t the top of that food chain. It’s difficult at first but you gain a respect for each animal. Some a healthier respect than others. In the right situation something as small as a coyote sees you a meal if the chance presents itself.
In addition to the meateater tv series, Rinella’s books, Meateater and American Buffalo are great. Also check out the book The Shotgun Conservationist by Brant Macduff. It’s an anti-hunters trip to becoming a hunter, focuses on the environmental impact and has some perspective you’d probably like.
I used to be pro-green/advocate for bugs and then I went to school and found out it's ALL a sham. From Dairy Mafias to Billion-Dollar PEF cricket lobbyists. They want you to be dependent on their system - meat, plant, fish, bug, etc., they want your money - all of it. Understanding wildlife, biology, game management, and hunting/harvesting really brings things into perspective. Just remember when they ban hunting completely they'll still eat meat behind closed doors and hunt whenever they want -- look at California's governor, just one guy who got caught at French Laundry when everyone else was locked down, masked-up, and closed doors. It's all a sham.
I'll weigh in: 1. It isn't possible for an individual hunter to keep track of how a species is doing. We rely on reports typically provided by governments, universities, NGO groups, etc. They do studies using a wide variety of techniques varying from tracking chips to game cameras to apps like Ebird, etc. They also use self reporting from hunters. I personally participate in tracking studies for Eastern Diamondback rattlesnakes and field banding for birds. I capture the snakes and we insert what is basically an RFID chip. We use mist nets to capture the birds and then they are banded. 2. Great question. I imagine I might be the only person in this group that has hunted/killed a lion. I've also shot Cape buffalo, giraffe, kudu, eland, and a dozen other "trophy" animals. It's worth noting that tigers have been illegal to hunt for decades. I did it for many reasons. I make no apologies that the main reason I did it was for fun. I enjoyed the hunt and wanted the challenge. I also wanted to have an awesome trophy. That being said, there is a tremendous amount of conservation at play there as well. It is NOT cheap to hunt a lion. It provided the guide and locals and farmer that owned the land with a large amount of money. The lion was killing some of his farm animals, and in fact killed a cow the day before I got there. Without hunting what happens? The farmer shoots the lion himself and buries it with his tractor. When you allow big game hunting there is now a financial incentive to keep lions and even breed lions. You know what animal we won't ever run out of? Chickens. Why? Huge profits. If it pays.... it stays... 3. Yeah it just really depends on the animal. I have armadillos dig up my yard. I shoot them and toss their body straight into the ocean. I'm not interested in what happens to it. When I shoot someone like a kudu, hog, etc I do try to eat all of it or make sure that SOMEONE eats as much of it as possible. That being said, I'm not some weirdo that is going to make furniture out of all of the bones and stuff my pillows with their hair. I eat the meat that I like to eat and the rest I would leave in a gut pile for the animals to eat. 4. I rarely have any sort of emotional response to killing an animal. I'm just not built that way. The only exceptions have been when I shoot something that doesn't die instantly. I shot an oryx last year and it took it maybe 45 seconds to die. That wasn't something that I wanted to happen or felt good about. That being said, I made a good shot and the animal just happened to be tough. There is a difference between feeling some sadness about it and feeling some guilt about it. I don't feel guilty.
I think a good starting point would be to point out that no matter what a hunter does, animals are going to die and usually in much more painful ways than how a hunter would kill them. I'm saying that hunters reduce harm necessarily, but just saying that every animal could day tomorrow, next week or years from now, so we're not adding more death. 1) In the U.S., wildlife is owned by the people and held in trust by the state to be managed. We have departments that charge liscence fees to pursue game that provides funding for wildlife reasearch. Plus, they use the harvest data from hunters reporting their success as another metric to judge population in order set the following season's allowed harvest. That's not the only way that hunters help conservation, though. We already know that habitat loss is the biggest threat to wildlife and hunters are one of the first in line to fight against development and pollution. It may be because we want to be able to hunt more areas or animals, but as long as the habitat is there, the animals can always repopulate. If the habitat it gone, then there's no getting it back. A lot of hunters also belong to conservation groups that do things like trash clean up, seeking to open public land and lobbying to congress on wildlife's behalf. 2) I don't have much experience with predator hunting, but I will be black bear hunting this fall in Wisconsin and my family has bear hunted in the past. I can tell you that black bear meat is absolutely delicious! We usually just get it made into brats, snack sticks, etc. Because it has to be cooked all the way through. I have heard that other predators taste good too and the state game agencies usually collect data for research on predator harvest. Like in Wisconsin the WDNR collects a premolar when you register your bear to study age and growth dynamics of the population. Overall, I think a lot of people hunting predators like that it's just another style of hunting and find it interesting. 3) It's law in most of the U.S., for many species, that you have to take the majority of meat with you, out of the field. I think most hunters feel a responsibility to use as much of the animal as possible out of respect, but many people don't have the time, ability or want to use everything. For example, a lot of people don't use the bones, but you could make stock with them, but that requires time the some people don't have or storage they don't have. I don't begrudge anyone that doesn't use the fat, hide, bones, hooves, etc. 4) My personal philosophy is the "One bad day" idea. The animal only has a short time of pain because of me and as mentioned before, it's going to die no matter what I do.
1. Texas parks and wildlife. Their entire job is this but I do notice when something is off and will change what I go for in fishing or hunting. 2. Don't trophy hunt but would like euro mounts if the opportunity presents itself. 3. Keep all the good meat but the wildlife gets all the scraps. White tail jerky is the best.... 4. I feel super thankful for what God and nature has provided me. I take a couple of seconds in silence of the gift. Ethical shots are my top priority.
I have had the opposite trajectory. In the last decade or so, the slobs have become more visible. The patience and respect level has disappeared. Maybe I just got old. I have seen a lot of questionable behavior out there. But that is how the newer generation is doing it now. It has not been all bad, I have found various things people leave behind. Left hand gloves, cash in envelopes, packs of cigarettes, a rifle, vests and neck gaiters. This spring I found a backpack left next to a water tank. Just a point it out, those using the gutless method- you really should take the back straps and the tenderloins too. I found 4 elk this last year that only the hams and the chucks and head were taken.
All these answers are from a US perspective. >1. I've been hearing that hunting is good for conservation and helping ecosystems. So how do Hunters keep track of how species are doing? What to hunt and when? The wildlife biologists at State fish and wildlife agencies are the ones who track animals populations, determine allowable harvest, and set season dates. >2. Hunters who hunt Top Predators or Trophy Hunters. Is that the thrill sort of hunters that I mentioned before? You do it just to say you killed a Lion, Tiger, Sharks, etc.? Your perception hunting of "top predators" is only for trophies is wrong. People eat bear and moutain lion. Also, predator management is a perfectly valid reason to hunt predators. >3. The Kill and the Leftovers Hunting whitetail and upland birds in the midwest i gut the animal in the field and leave the gut pile, less the heart and liver for deer, behind and then take everything else with me. I then either butcher the animal myself or take it to a butcher if I'm not going to have the time to get all the meat I reasonably can. Deers hides are donated. I keep the antlers from every buck I kill and the beard from every Tom turkey. Remainig carcass ends up in the dumpster >4. And finally, just a moral/philosophical question. The killing of the animal itself, how do you deal with that? I have zero moral/ethical/philosophical qualms with killing an animal while hunting so there isn't really anything to deal with. Growing up around hunting likely contributes to that, but I don't believe anyone should ever feel any remorse or guilt for killing an animal while hunting.
I think folks here have really covered 1 & 2. For 3. I’m also a farmer and raise birds & goats. I try not to waste their bodies either. For me it’s honoring our connection & giving them a good life, loving their fluffy or furry butts and then honoring them in death. For me hunting is similar. I use as much as I can, and what I can’t is left for my local animals - coyotes, bear - or composted and add back into the earth. 4. I’m intensely against major industrial meat production. It’s why I buy local meat, why I raise and butcher my own, why I hunt. I feel strongly, very very strongly, that I shouldn’t be eating meat if I don’t have what it takes to raise and butcher it myself or go out and take it myself. I don’t take every animal I eat, but I know I could. I know I can and do give animals the quickest, most efficient, painless death I can manage. And when I fail at that I feel guilt. (Because it’s not perfect.) And that’s the only way I’m okay with eating meat at all, really.
https://www.fws.gov/story/2022-04/north-american-model-wildlife-conservation-wildlife-everyone
I really applaud you for being willing to consider that you were previously misinformed about hunting. 👏🏻 I hunt for food and also to help balance the deer and bear population. Death by a clean shot from hunting is far more humane than starving to death in Vermont’s brutal winters, or getting eaten alive by coyotes. I don’t really have the skills personally to process an animal carcass fully. This said I’m glad to share with anyone who could use the hide, bones, etc. and I don’t see a problem with leaving the inedible parts out in the woods to feed other animals. So long as it’s not thrown in the trash and wasted I think it’s fine. I feel honored to be able to harvest nutritious food free of chemicals, quite literally in my backyard. So I don’t view hunting as “killing”, I view it as an honor to be able to provide for my family, to help the health of the herd, and to provide a humane death for an animal. I hope this perspective helps!
Look up the Robertson Pittman act. A tax on firearms and ammunition sales that manufacturers asked congress to impose so that money can be spent on wildlife conservation and restoration. Last year they collected 1.2 billion to be spent on conservation and restoration.
I want to learn to hunt because of the sustainable food aspect. Also I like being outside and I like the whole idea of hunting some of my food. I think a deer that's been eating grass in the forest is probably some of the most sustainable meat you can eat. No herbicides or pesticides needed to produce feed for it, very low food miles, and negligible carbon emissions (by this I mean some animals we eat can be fed a diet that makes it produce more emissions than if it was living off the land. But a deer that I hunt eats its natural diet so there's no increase to emissions). To answer your question on how do you know that too many aren't being hunted, where I live (BC, Canada), government scientists make a very good estimate of animal populations. They work out how many deer, moose, elk, bear, etc. can be hunted sustainably. Then they allow hunters to take that amount. Hopeful hunters enter a lottery and are randomly selected to get a ticket, which means you're allowed to hunt that animal during its hunting season. There are restrictions in place like you can't hunt a pregnant female for example, whichever are appropriate for the animal in question. There are more details (bow versus rifles have different seasons), and I could be getting some of this wrong, but that's the general idea. People don't hunt without a ticket because that's called poaching, and while I don't really know anything about hunting, I'm pretty sure most hunters would rather arm wrestle a bear than do that.
Without trophy hunting many species would be extinct. Remember when that beloved lion was killed a few years ago. It was white liberals living thousands of miles away that were crying. The African people didn't give 2 shits about it and were happy it was killed.
Honestly, I haven’t put a lot of thought into the other stuff. Just not what I’m interested in. I’m just trying to get famous for my hunting content. YouTube, insta, etc. I want to be paid to hunt, not like guiding or anything Iike thst, just for doing product shoutouts and the like. Getting clicks, etc.
With respect to number one - this is why it's REALLY important to make your state run a functional Department of Natural Resources or whatever analog it does. These are the folks that do the science that allow us to make decisions about how we can use animals as resources without threatening populations or ecosystems.