The Question Thread

[Bill Brasky]

I hear what you are saying in regards to humane but on the flip side the animal has a far better chance of never getting killed when a hunter uses a bow. In mind, a bow shows the animal more respect. I don't know it is hard to explain.

If you want to honorably engage in combat with an animal, then I think you should fight a bear while armed with a dagger.  Animals for the most part do not possess projectile weapons, which means that shooting an animal is never the equivalent of besting them in combat, regardless of how inefficiently you do so.  The concern is not about animals dying; it's about their suffering-- you don't respect an animal more by making it suffer. 

Humans are at the top of the food chain due to their ability to think and use tools.  The bow is a link to the old ways, even though its technologically superior to traditional bows.  Some guys do use a recurve bow, which hasn't changed in two thousand years.  Before there was written language, man was advancing away from brute force.  Using a hand-held tool would be stupid.  The projectile was developed to prevent injury to the hunter, which could often kill him through infection or trauma.  Severe injury to the primary hunter was a serious threat to the entire family group. 

Even the most primitive tribes on earth use projectiles.  Blow guns, spear-chucking sticks, sling-shots.  Sport is a carry-over of that skill.  Men like the competition of besting each other, as well as the animal.  If you want to use the sport argument, soccer was probably developed by conquering armies kicking around severed heads.  I see no reason to revert to tradition on that one, either.   

[Rillion]

Umm, I didn't make an argument against hunting with projectiles.  I just think it's silly to consider it sport, since I think of sport as a voluntary engagement between individuals or groups of similar abilities.  

No, that's not true.  I think of worthwhile  sport as being like that.  The Predator alien hunting humans was sporting, but he was still a douche.  

[davann]

I hear what you are saying in regards to humane but on the flip side the animal has a far better chance of never getting killed when a hunter uses a bow. In mind, a bow shows the animal more respect. I don't know it is hard to explain.

If you want to honorably engage in combat with an animal, then I think you should fight a bear while armed with a dagger.  Animals for the most part do not possess projectile weapons, which means that shooting an animal is never the equivalent of besting them in combat, regardless of how inefficiently you do so.  The concern is not about animals dying; it's about their suffering-- you don't respect an animal more by making it suffer.  

Yeah, I did not explain it right. Getting shot by a gun or an arrow is the same. Both with make an animal bolt if the shot does not hit the spinal system and make that impossible. Both hurt equally. The video is graphic and shows hunting in a bad way due to the fact each shot is follow in quick repetition with another. That does not happen when hunting. With bow hunting the shots are even more spread apart then when hunting with a gun.

Bow hunting sort of levels the playing field for non aggressive type animals and puts the sport back into the hunt. If the people that nearly wiped out the buffalo were armed with only bows, the carnage would have been far far less. A gun is a crude but extremely efficient way to hunt.

And a dagger vs. a bear is would not be much sport for the bear. How about a dagger, a pack of Jack Russells, some bear mace and heavy blunt long weapon? Now that would be sporting!

[BonerJoe]

And a dagger vs. a bear is would not be much sport for the bear. How about a dagger, a pack of Jack Russells, some bear mace and heavy blunt long weapon? Now that would be sporting!

LIBMAN!

[anarchir]

I also dont hunt but I took the hunter education/safety class and I live in WI and grew up shooting guns and on a farm. I think hunting is a waste of time, when we could be setting snares and dead-fall traps instead.  In a survival situation, which would you end up doing? Shoot animals and you will be wasting energy and time.

When you sight in a bow, you use these little elevation pins on it, and put your target out about 20 to 40 yards.  40 is pushin' it, most hunters will sight for the 20ish yard range.  To put it into perspective, the trailer part of a tractor trailer is normally about 55 ft, about 20 yards.  You have to be pretty stealthy to be within that range from a deer.  A good shot with a bow could hit you in the face at that distance.  Thats a pretty good shot, staying well-inside a dinner plate.  The hunter will sit still, slowly draw, and fire.  They don't sneak up on it.  (boar are different, you have to chase them - theres no way you could ever chase down a healthy deer)

I thought that in this video they made some excellent shots, but also some poor ones from way too far away that obviously missed.

While that video might appear shocking, even a hit from a rifle can send many animals running. It is the shock of getting shot. They usually will drop dead within a few feet if it was good clean well placed shot.

Yep. I only saw one deer in the video that went straight down. Typically they run a little bit and the internal damage kills them. Other times they bleed out and you follow the blood (which would suck).

the most humane way to get meat

Smash in its head with a log, or raise it on a deer farm.

[Harry Tuttle]

I haven't been listening much to FTL lately. If I was going to introduce somebody to the show is there a really good episode that has been on recently that one might share with a newcomer to get 'em hooked?

[mikehz]

Should cows be bred and then released into the forest for those who like to hunt for sport?

[Rillion]

Should cows be bred and then released into the forest for those who like to hunt for sport?

I'm pretty sure hunting a domesticated livestock animal in the forest would be even less sporting than hunting a deer. 

[davann]

Should cows be bred and then released into the forest for those who like to hunt for sport?

If there is a market for it why not? Although, cows are rather stupid. I would not have an interest in "hunting" an animal that is used to being around people and not smart enough to raise its head out of the water after getting a drink.

[Rillion]

Did anybody watch "Out of the Wild: The Alaska Experiment"? 

That was an interesting show as hardly any of them had experience hunting, and they were set down in the middle of Alaska with winter coming and had to work their way to civilization.  By the end of it, the survivors (people had the option of dropping out if they couldn't take it) were all pretty good shots, but some days they had to settle for a ground squirrel or nothing.  Their snares didn't work, but I'm not sure if that was due to not using them correctly or not.  They hunted for bears, but the best they ever got were a couple of porcupines....apparently not that sporting, but when you're starving you'll take what you can get.  They had a "bear gun" and a .22, but I don't know what the "bear gun" was. 

[Laetitia]

Did anybody watch "Out of the Wild: The Alaska Experiment"? 

That was an interesting show as hardly any of them had experience hunting, and they were set down in the middle of Alaska with winter coming and had to work their way to civilization.  By the end of it, the survivors (people had the option of dropping out if they couldn't take it) were all pretty good shots, but some days they had to settle for a ground squirrel or nothing.  Their snares didn't work, but I'm not sure if that was due to not using them correctly or not.  They hunted for bears, but the best they ever got were a couple of porcupines....apparently not that sporting, but when you're starving you'll take what you can get.  They had a "bear gun" and a .22, but I don't know what the "bear gun" was. 

I watched it. Liked it. Came up in a discussion at my folks' over the summer. My mom had watched some and thought it was interesting, but my dad was so annoyed by the whole thing that he actually interrupted my mom to rant about the &*%$!# idiots... Said the most sensible two were the ones who actually knew what they were doing in the woods, and opted out early.

[Rillion]

I watched it. Liked it. Came up in a discussion at my folks' over the summer. My mom had watched some and thought it was interesting, but my dad was so annoyed by the whole thing that he actually interrupted my mom to rant about the &*%$!# idiots... Said the most sensible two were the ones who actually knew what they were doing in the woods, and opted out early.

I thought that was pretty cowardly, actually, considering that the others were for the most part listening to what they had to say.  "You guys don't know what you're doing, and I'm fed up" is a good cover for "I'm not as good at this as I thought I'd be." 

[Laetitia]

I watched it. Liked it. Came up in a discussion at my folks' over the summer. My mom had watched some and thought it was interesting, but my dad was so annoyed by the whole thing that he actually interrupted my mom to rant about the &*%$!# idiots... Said the most sensible two were the ones who actually knew what they were doing in the woods, and opted out early.

I thought that was pretty cowardly, actually, considering that the others were for the most part listening to what they had to say.  "You guys don't know what you're doing, and I'm fed up" is a good cover for "I'm not as good at this as I thought I'd be." 

That's what I thought, but my dad said, especially in the case of the older lady, that it was a case of not being responsible for a bunch of yahoos who didn't even have the decency to save her a nibble of the field mice they caught while she was out hunting. That knowing what to do meant they'd be expected to carry everyone else in the group... and that the remaining members learned faster without the experienced two there, because they had no choice.

I don't know if I agree with him. I understood it, as it made me think about how tough it is to get my kids to do things for themselves while I'm around.

[Rillion]

That's what I thought, but my dad said, especially in the case of the older lady, that it was a case of not being responsible for a bunch of yahoos who didn't even have the decency to save her a nibble of the field mice they caught while she was out hunting.

Yes, that was really rude of them. 

That knowing what to do meant they'd be expected to carry everyone else in the group... and that the remaining members learned faster without the experienced two there, because they had no choice.

I don't know if I agree with him. I understood it, as it made me think about how tough it is to get my kids to do things for themselves while I'm around.

I think they really had no choice anyway-- they were desperate from the start.  Just because people can learn by doing doesn't mean a teacher won't help.  It would suck to be a good hunter and have to share your kills with people who are not good hunters, but on the other hand, the experienced people didn't actually catch or shoot anything, from what I recall.    I guess I would buy your dad's position more if the experienced people had shot a bear or something and then everybody else had eaten off it while not getting any food themselves. 

[Rillion]

My city council member (that is, the city council member for my district) has resigned.  That's kind of unfortunate because she was probably the best member of the council....which, yes, is not saying much at all.  It basically means that she was the only one to respond to me when I contacted the entire council about an issue of concern, and then later wrote a blog post about it supposedly inviting discussion from the community.  

I'm thinking maybe I should run for her spot.  There's no way in hell I would win, of course, but it might be fun.  I'm thinking something like:  

"Hey everybody, I live in Place 3, and you should vote for me.  I'm 31, libertarian bordering on anarcho-capitalist, and have a PhD.  If elected, I hereby promise to vote for absolutely no tax increase that comes before me, ever.  When given the opportunity, I will vote in favor of any measure which reduces....any other measure.  You might ask why a person opposed to government would run for office, but I think Plato was onto something when he said that one of the penalties for not participating in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.  If that's not enough to convince you to elect me, then you don't deserve to have me elected."