Should Hunting for Sport be Banned?

[Cetacea]

But then what will we do about coyotes
They ain't tasty but often need to be shot
Don't forget boars, but those *are* tasty.

How about leave the coyotes alone?

Hunting predators is always stupid, coyote eat small prey animals (vermin) and serve to keep the vermin populations in check. When coyote are being shot in huge numbers the result is population explosions amongst vermin which leads to both ecological imbalances as the vermin eat more but also the surviving coyote have more to eat and are thus healthier and have bigger litters - because nature always tends towards homeostasis.

There also the factor that as canines, Coyote are intelligent, social species who have an emotional response to the death of family

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Meh. I guess I'm too pacifist.

I just don’t care what the reason is so long as the animal doesn’t suffer, go to waste, or is an endangered creature.

Well if suffering is the problem, which is "cleaner"; a bullet through the heart/lungs and being left alone to bleed out, or being chased until exhaustion and eaten alive?

[Greater Cesnica]

I just don’t care what the reason is so long as the animal doesn’t suffer, go to waste, or is an endangered creature.

Well if suffering is the problem, which is "cleaner"; a bullet through the heart/lungs and being left alone to bleed out, or being chased until exhaustion and eaten alive?

Bullet through the heart or brain. A bullet to the lungs ensures a painful, slow death unless a quick follow-up shot is sent.

[UniversalCommons]

Think about what happens to land where there is no hunting, fishing, hiking, or other environmental use. It becomes farmland, or roads, housing, or cities. There is value in hunting, fishing, photography, hiking, and the natural landscape. People have a tendency to destroy what they have no use for. This is why if you want to have land still be natural, it has to be manged for forestry, hunting, fishing, and other activities. Otherwise it gets destroyed by people who are greedy.

[Greater Cesnica]

Think about what happens to land where there is no hunting, fishing, hiking, or other environmental use. It becomes farmland, or roads, housing, or cities. There is value in hunting, fishing, photography, hiking, and the natural landscape. People have a tendency to destroy what they have no use for. This is why if you want to have land still be natural, it has to be manged for forestry, hunting, fishing, and other activities. Otherwise it gets destroyed by people who are greedy.

I don't believe that state/provincial and federal governments use our taxes in an efficient manner. I'd prefer localised governance to have jurisdiction over this matter.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Well so it goes. I will miss you in particular.

Anyone who took that too seriously: it is almost NEVER legal to shoot without warning, someone mucking around outside your house. Castle doctrine applies to your castle, not to its grounds.

Maybe just don’t say stupid shit in the first place?

Let's be fair here, if this was the case, most of NSG would cease to exist.

Hunting should have restrictions. In fact, the story you posted, OP, was a great example of how these restrictions work and why we have them in the first place. It is not, however, a legitimate argument against the practice as much as it is an emotional appeal.

I've tried hunting a few times. Never cared for it, always felt rather queasy afterwards because maybe I'm a big sensitive baby at my core. That said, many people enjoy it, and those people should be able to enjoy it within reason (IE don't hunt endangered species, don't exceed your quotas, try to go after invasive species such as deer on the East Coast).

How is it evidence they work?

I've never hunted for sport as I could never shoot an innocent animal for no reason.

You feel over the top compassion for animals yet are perfectly OK with making millions human being suffer needlessly and for literally no damned good reason.

Id laugh at this if it was so damned tragically sad.

[Greater Cesnica]

You feel over the top compassion for animals yet are perfectly OK with making millions human being suffer needlessly and for literally no damned good reason.

Id laugh at this if it was so damned tragically sad.

The animal compassion is fine. The horrific legalist reasoning I saw in that thread, on the other hand... Oh dear.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Think about what happens to land where there is no hunting, fishing, hiking, or other environmental use. It becomes farmland, or roads, housing, or cities. There is value in hunting, fishing, photography, hiking, and the natural landscape. People have a tendency to destroy what they have no use for. This is why if you want to have land still be natural, it has to be manged for forestry, hunting, fishing, and other activities. Otherwise it gets destroyed by people who are greedy.

I don't believe that state/provincial and federal governments use our taxes in an efficient manner. I'd prefer localised governance to have jurisdiction over this matter.

A reminder that metro deer hunting with an AR-15 pistol is (probably still) a legal thing up in Wisconsin.
(there's a fai amount of permits and permissions you'd need to get, though; so if you've won the borrocratic lottery you may as well put a registered silencer on it too)

Such with crossbow, other pistol or shotgun or musket (up to and including a 4 gauge punt-cannon) is totes legal, tho.

Hunting geese with a belt fed auto-shotgun is specifically banned, however.
-40mm Bofors is possible, tho. At least until some chad single-handedly makes the state bag limit in a day.

IIRC, the cost of a 40mm bofors goose hunt is $100/goose=stamp, $200/shell (NFA DD), $500/yr/gun (NFA MG) plus the actual cost of logistics and ensuing legal fees.
-Plus there's a maximum bag limit per person of like... 3... so you'd need to swap hot-swap gunners after like every other shell.

[Katganistan]

Candice Berner.

There have been 33 fatal attacks since the 1760's. So over a 260 year period, only 33 fatal attacks have occurred.

Moving the goal posts.

[The Lone Alliance]

Think about what happens to land where there is no hunting, fishing, hiking, or other environmental use. It becomes farmland, or roads, housing, or cities. There is value in hunting, fishing, photography, hiking, and the natural landscape. People have a tendency to destroy what they have no use for. This is why if you want to have land still be natural, it has to be manged for forestry, hunting, fishing, and other activities. Otherwise it gets destroyed by people who are greedy.

That is one thing, hunters provide support both politically and economically for preserving nature. It can lead to healthy overlap where hunters and environmentalists unite towards things that help the environment.

[Katganistan]

40 to 60 alpha wolves

problem solved

No, the wolves will be too busy trying to figure out which one is the real alpha, and start fighting. Pack mentality doesn't work as good without one clear leader. I'd say 1 drunk elephant is the real solution.

Hate to burst everyone's bubble, but David L Mech, the scientist who came up with the "alpha wolf" theory, has recanted, said it's bullshit, that he looked at captive wolves and that wasn't representative and that when he looked at wild wolf populations, he realized there was no 'alphas', only parents and their cubs.

Sidenote: this means the bullshit about human "alpha males", (which couldn't be applied from a different species anyway), is complete bullshit since the study is flawed and the theory has been scrapped.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

[Great Pacific Switzerland]

And that's good IMO. For me, there needs to be a substantive reason to go hunting so it could be justified. Needless killing is needless killing, whether inflicted upon humans or other animals.

Imho sporting can be a good enough reason, so long as the hunt itself is ethical.

You can/will get fined for hunting an animal inhumanly. e.g if you shoot at the neck and it dies instantly then that's a human kill and respectful, but if you were to wound an animal in its limbs and pepper it then that's inhumane and will get you fined or even worse get your guns taken away. Thats how it is in Australia

[Kubra]

But then what will we do about coyotes
They ain't tasty but often need to be shot
Don't forget boars, but those *are* tasty.

How about leave the coyotes alone?

Hunting predators is always stupid, coyote eat small prey animals (vermin) and serve to keep the vermin populations in check. When coyote are being shot in huge numbers the result is population explosions amongst vermin which leads to both ecological imbalances as the vermin eat more but also the surviving coyote have more to eat and are thus healthier and have bigger litters - because nature always tends towards homeostasis.

There also the factor that as canines, Coyote are intelligent, social species who have an emotional response to the death of family

You forgot to mention well-meaning coyote hunters ending up shooting species that they're supposed to be helping out, principally the red wolf.
In any case, I was under the impression that lethal population management had at least some utility in relieving pressure on other endangered predators, but it seems that isn't the case. Your point stands, I'm quite incorrect here. But one point of mine still stands: they aren't very tasty.
Boars tho, they still get the vietnam treatment.

[Greater Cesnica]

How about leave the coyotes alone?

Hunting predators is always stupid, coyote eat small prey animals (vermin) and serve to keep the vermin populations in check. When coyote are being shot in huge numbers the result is population explosions amongst vermin which leads to both ecological imbalances as the vermin eat more but also the surviving coyote have more to eat and are thus healthier and have bigger litters - because nature always tends towards homeostasis.

There also the factor that as canines, Coyote are intelligent, social species who have an emotional response to the death of family

You forgot to mention well-meaning coyote hunters ending up shooting species that they're supposed to be helping out, principally the red wolf.
In any case, I was under the impression that lethal population management had at least some utility in relieving pressure on other endangered predators, but it seems that isn't the case. Your point stands, I'm quite incorrect here. But one point of mine still stands: they aren't very tasty.
Boars tho, they still get the vietnam treatment.

I've shot coyotes for a different reason- livestock protection.

[Kubra]

You forgot to mention well-meaning coyote hunters ending up shooting species that they're supposed to be helping out, principally the red wolf.
In any case, I was under the impression that lethal population management had at least some utility in relieving pressure on other endangered predators, but it seems that isn't the case. Your point stands, I'm quite incorrect here. But one point of mine still stands: they aren't very tasty.
Boars tho, they still get the vietnam treatment.

I've shot coyotes for a different reason- livestock protection.

my thought process was state-sponsored bounty programs, since the topic is sport hunting. While shooting coyotes shouldn't be the first option for livestock protection of course, I don't know if it can cease to be an option.

[Greater Cesnica]

I've shot coyotes for a different reason- livestock protection.

my thought process was state-sponsored bounty programs, since the topic is sport hunting. While shooting coyotes shouldn't be the first option for livestock protection of course, I don't know if it can cease to be an option.

It's not something that I go out to do. More often, it's when they're approaching human settlements and properties. Coyotes have attacked livestock on my brother's property before, which is why we stay on alert often.

[Kubra]

my thought process was state-sponsored bounty programs, since the topic is sport hunting. While shooting coyotes shouldn't be the first option for livestock protection of course, I don't know if it can cease to be an option.

It's not something that I go out to do. More often, it's when they're approaching human settlements and properties. Coyotes have attacked livestock on my brother's property before, which is why we stay on alert often.

It's generally better to get a good LGD and scare em off when personally encountering them. You know, convincing them it just ain't worth it. The coyote will unwittingly protect your livestock from other coyotes, because other coyotes won't move in on other coyotes territory (unless they really have to) and your grazing area is a part of the scared coyotes territory.
Now shooting when predation has already occurred, well, I don't know of a reason not to for a season.

[Greater Cesnica]

It's not something that I go out to do. More often, it's when they're approaching human settlements and properties. Coyotes have attacked livestock on my brother's property before, which is why we stay on alert often.

It's generally better to get a good LGD and scare em off when personally encountering them. You know, convincing them it just ain't worth it. The coyote will unwittingly protect your livestock from other coyotes, because other coyotes won't move in on other coyotes territory (unless they really have to) and your grazing area is a part of the scared coyotes territory.
Now shooting when predation has already occurred, well, I don't know of a reason not to for a season.

Yeah, it was in response to predation that we started shooting.

[Dogmeat]

But then what will we do about coyotes
They ain't tasty but often need to be shot
Don't forget boars, but those *are* tasty.

How about leave the coyotes alone?

Hunting predators is always stupid, coyote eat small prey animals (vermin) and serve to keep the vermin populations in check. When coyote are being shot in huge numbers the result is population explosions amongst vermin which leads to both ecological imbalances as the vermin eat more but also the surviving coyote have more to eat and are thus healthier and have bigger litters - because nature always tends towards homeostasis.

There also the factor that as canines, Coyote are intelligent, social species who have an emotional response to the death of family

This is an oversimplification of a complex issue. In the state of nature, coyote populations would be kept in check by wolves, who kill coyotes. The absence of wolves creates more coyotes who subsequently go on to kill smaller predators like weasels and foxes. Making coyotes the only predator that exists in any numbers. This actually increases the rodent population, because coyotes aren't as good at hunting rodents as weasels and foxes. Especially when coyotes can more easily get food from humans. They also don't hunt deer, who proliferate.

Don't get me wrong, I really like coyotes. I mean, REALLY like them. They're so delightful. I like deer too (though nowhere near as much), but huge populations of these animals isn't a sign of a healthy ecosystem. It's a sign that something is seriously wrong.



Of course, what you should do is re-import wolves. Human hunting doesn't really control populations, and more importantly it doesn't change the prey animal's behavior in the way the mere existence of wolves does. Even if they don't get eaten, they act differently. This is also why humans (particularly ranchers) don't want wolves around. Some studies from Montana show that cattle put on an average of 10% less weight when there are wolves around. They spend less time eating, and more time watching the horizon. Stress is probably a factor as well. This amounts to a lot of lost money when you have hundreds or thousands of heads of cattle.

[San Lumen]

How about leave the coyotes alone?

Hunting predators is always stupid, coyote eat small prey animals (vermin) and serve to keep the vermin populations in check. When coyote are being shot in huge numbers the result is population explosions amongst vermin which leads to both ecological imbalances as the vermin eat more but also the surviving coyote have more to eat and are thus healthier and have bigger litters - because nature always tends towards homeostasis.

There also the factor that as canines, Coyote are intelligent, social species who have an emotional response to the death of family

This is an oversimplification of a complex issue. In the state of nature, coyote populations would be kept in check by wolves, who kill coyotes. The absence of wolves creates more coyotes who subsequently go on to kill smaller predators like weasels and foxes. Making coyotes the only predator that exists in any numbers. This actually increases the rodent population, because coyotes aren't as good at hunting rodents as weasels and foxes. Especially when coyotes can more easily get food from humans. They also don't hunt deer, who proliferate.

Don't get me wrong, I really like coyotes. I mean, REALLY like them. They're so delightful. I like deer too (though nowhere near as much), but huge populations of these animals isn't a sign of a healthy ecosystem. It's a sign that something is seriously wrong.



Of course, what you should do is re-import wolves. Human hunting doesn't really control populations, and more importantly it doesn't change the prey animal's behavior in the way the mere existence of wolves does. Even if they don't get eaten, they act differently. This is also why humans (particularly ranchers) don't want wolves around. Some studies from Montana show that cattle put on an average of 10% less weight when there are wolves around. They spend less time eating, and more time watching the horizon. Stress is probably a factor as well. This amounts to a lot of lost money when you have hundreds or thousands of heads of cattle.

Colorado voted in a statewide referendum to reimport wolves last year.

[Neutraligon]

Do you consider going after the invasive species, like say pythons in the everglades, hunting for sport?

[San Lumen]

Do you consider going after the invasive species, like say pythons in the everglades, hunting for sport?

No as its not the same.

[Greater Cesnica]

Do you consider going after the invasive species, like say pythons in the everglades, hunting for sport?

No as its not the same.

Your definition is thrill shooting without substantive reasoning like meat, population control, or protection of wildlife and property right? Or is it just thrill shooting irrespective of whether a substantive purpose was accomplished?

[San Lumen]

No as its not the same.

Your definition is thrill shooting without substantive reasoning like meat, population control, or protection of wildlife and property right? Or is it just thrill shooting irrespective of whether a substantive purpose was accomplished?

If its to control invasive species then it is ok.

[Greater Kopmakia]

The state allows hunting for conservation purposes, not just because it's fun. Also most hunters do eat what they kill or at least give it to other people to eat, as not doing so is illegal in most places.

I dont care. Its a travesty to shoot a wild animal causing no harm to you and this was not done for food. There is no reason to hunt wolves or any other wild animal. Let them be.

We should let local communities and counties decide whether or not to allow hunting instead of pushing it as a nationwide or international ban on recreational hunting.