h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

... so, being human, we fire pieces of metal at high velocity into their bodies from a safe distance, chop off their heads, and put them on the walls of our houses.

Doesn't it make you proud to be part of 'civilisation'?

I have to defend the serious hunters out there, being the son of one. My dad is part of a hunting team (even if he hasn't been hunting for a while now) and there are two reasons for hunting moose. Again, I'm speaking for the sake of the serious hunters, not the trophy-hunters.
Reason number one: Food. Moose is a delicious meat and is suitable for many tasty dishes. And there is not much on a moose that you can not eat, if you set your mind to it.
Reason number two: Keeping the moose from over populating an area. Too many moose on a restricted area can severely damage their own environment, so keeping the population down is a way of ensuring the animal's own welfare, even if I can agree that it doesn't make sense, logically speaking.

In Sweden, every hunting team has a set area where they can hunt. Depending on the current population of moose, they get a set quota for every season that they are allowed to kill during the moose-hunting season. So, that means that if a hunting team has a quota of two grown animals and a calf, and they manage to kill those two grown animals and the calf on the first two days f the hunting season, they can not shoot any more moose that year, thus saving the moose population in that area from total annihilation.

Just mu tuppence worth.

See, there's only one thing that's always bugged me about the whole "overpopulation" arguement....

They would never overpopulate int he wild, as the natural balance would keep them under control. ie, when the food gets too scarce, then some animals die, leaving the stongest. Or, their natural predators will get them. But in places like Alaska, their natural predators have been all but wiped out (wolves, that is), and the number one reason for population control of the wolves is so that they don't ravage the moose populations. Does anyone else see the circular logic here??

Shanana

I see the twisted logic there.
HOwever, in the southern parts of Sweden, there hasn't been any wolves for quite some time now. I would say a hundred years or so. And this is not because of nam have hunted the wolves, but merely that they migrated north and haven't come back again. Then, of course, it doesn't help that most people don't want the wolves back, since they have an aura of danger and evil about them in folklore. And with herds of sheep to hunt, the wolves can find food in easier ways than having to fight off a moose...

Market-hunting used to be legal in the US, and so species would get wiped out or severely decimated.

I believe the overpopulation argument is mostly made to indirectly say, 'we like to eat moose, and we can without damaging the environment'. Many people look at the overpopulation argument to bolster their particular ideology: Whether or not it's preferable to the proponent that the moose die of starvation or of a gunshot.

Which death is natural? Obviously nature intended them to die a certain way, for a reason. Who am I to mess with nature.

At least, that's my own ideology. Make of it what you will.

Shanana

My own folks raised us younguns to be excessively scientific, so I personally have a difficult time imagining nature as a self-aware or even having any intentions at all. Not all hunters are as prosaic as me, though.

I imagine that those who like to eat moose (not me, I like antelope much better) who personify nature, are thinking that nature's intention was different for that particular moose, than what me (I don't care for moose, remember) or you Ms Banana (who I admire for being acquainted with Nature-I mean this seriously and not at all sarcastically, I am aware that the scientific worldview has its limits) might suppose for that same particular moose. There is no way of testing this, until we can introduce you and me and them and the moose all together.

They might suppose that since it did not hide from the hunters all that well, or nature did not give it the 'luck of the day' (to be mystical) or the acute senses that smell dangerous humans (to be lamarckian). Therefore, nature did intend for that moose to be hunted and eaten.

Certain native cultures of humans in North America, actually did think somethings similar to this. Before the moose (or whatever game animal, including cute fuzzy rabbit) was killed, they would pray for its forgiveness, and perform expiatory and exculpatory acts either before or after dinner.

You'll pardon my delinquency in responding.... I've been traveling, and haven't had access toa computer, as of late...

Well, I do agree with you, inthat I don't think nature is a "being", per se... I think of it more as a word that encompasses all of the world... you know what I'm trying to say, I'm just saying it badly.

Like you, I was brought up in a very scientifically oriented household... my mother holds a degree in nursing, chemistry, and ( I believe) literature... She's extremely well-versed in the living sciences... I just happen to have a very romantic mind, as well. GO figure, eh? So I tend to, in my writing, at least, be rather... loquacious and flowery. And Cliched.

But I like your point. There is no real way to figure out what the original fate of the dear was, and how it was originally intended to die, if there is such a thing as fate. I just don't like the fact that humans continue to do what is unneccessary and hunt animals for the sheer pleasure of it... I figure if it's a sport... give the animal a gun, show it how to use it, and then see how much the hunter likes the sport.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those over-the-top animal rights people who trounces upon anyone who eats meat, wears leather, fur, or anything like that. I just have my own views, but keep them to myself... (anyway, living in Alaska, if I say anything, I'm liable to get shot!) I figure, if we're to go with Darwinism, that humans' interfering with the local moose (or whatever) population, and their lust for a "ten point buck", then perhaps survival of the fittest will lead to leaner, more timid animals, as those are the only ones that may survive to pass on their genes....

Ah! I dunno... my brain's fried... too many politics and philosophies thrown in my face in the last fortnight.... What say ye?

Shanana

Pardon freely granted! I seldom am online more than once a week, and so I am the guilty dilatory responder, usually.

Nature is a word that has many possible heavy emotional attachments and meanings, so in a print medium I never assume what a person means.

I am pretty sure that in California, which is where I am, and Montana, which is where my friends hunt, it is illegal to kill a mammal you are not intending to eat. I heartily agree with this, mostly because the very few people who I have met who would do otherwise meet my criteria for elimination from the human gene pool for many other (not necessarily related to hunting) reasons. This makes me feel petty enough that I don't mind being an a*****e and spoiling the fun of those particular people with my laws.

I happily eat parts of kine, and don't require them to be beweaponed as they are slaughtered, although the idea of Bossie doing a Lizzie Borden is abstractly amusing.

If you aren't casting a magic spell, there isn't anything particularly useful or artistically interesting about a live set of antlers that you couldn't get with a resin cast covered with that velveteen fluff you get at craft stores.

Cats and dogs and the environment are much better varmint hunters than humans. Most small animals also reproduce rapidly, so as far as small critters go, I am indifferent to the intentions of the hunter. I grew up in in a very old neighborhood that used to be a walnut orchard, and having one's power or telephone cut by a squirrel is darn irritating. You'd think the Darwinian selection of electrocution would eliminate this behavior, but it never did.

Teeny-tiny hunter resistant deer; hee hee! They could become housepets!