F330 GT wrote:

Harry wrote:

In hunting or fishing, there is no such thing as "humanely" killing your
catch.

If you were a deer, which would you prefer:

1. Dying of starvation or disease as the population grows out of control and
the land can no longer support the herd. This happens quite often when hunting
is severely curtailed.

2. Ending up as a hood ormament on the front of a speeding car. Also a major
problem in some areas where the heards are too large.

3. A quick shot to the heart.

Nature doesn't provide animals or fish with many humane choices for death. Most
don't die of old age like humans.


Barry


If I were a deer, I'd prefer NOT to be shot. Period. There is no such
thing as "humane" hunting or fishing if, in the end, you kill the
critter. I understand how we humans like to use softer language to make
our slaughter of the animals we hunt or fish sound better but killing is
killing is killing.

In most cases, the land can no longer support the critters because we
have encroached upon the land, or have killed off all the "natural"
predators. In other words, if there are too many deer in an area, it
isn't because the deer just copulate all day. It is because we have
destroyed their habitat and the room they used to have for free roam
isn't there anymore.

We have deer wandering through our property all the time, and the
property of our neighbors. We're in a "hunter free" zone, and so far, we
are not overpopulated with deer. Once or twice a month, a deer and a car
have an unfortunate encounter out on the county roads, and the deer
almost always loses. Wish we could establish a "deer crossing" that
really was.

If you want to hunt "humanely," then use a camera.



--
Email sent to is never read.