http://www.latimes.com/science...-20170328-story.html



Biology explains why men kill big game like Cecil the lion - and how that behavior might be stopped.

quote:

Originally posted by Kathi:
http://www.latimes.com/science...-20170328-story.html



Biology explains why men kill big game like Cecil the lion - and how that behavior might be stopped.

I've met people that I would have to say makes some of this article true. That said, there are so many absurd "theories" in there as well, the article can not be taken seriously.

Unfortunately, I believe it has to be taken seriously, considering that the numbers of those opposed to hunting is increasing while hunter numbers continue to decline.

Our world has changed and is continuing to change, and hunters in general are not viewed in a good light as is. I do not see that changing, except for the worse.

Interesting these anti-hunters mostly pay someone else to kill their game and think nothing of it.

I sent the author a polite e mail.

It all boils down to perceptions.

Ever noticed that even anti-hunters do not view European mounts in the same way they do realistic shoulder or full body mounts?

We are fighting a losing battle on this, nothing we do will ever be acceptable to those that are against us.

This is in the African Hunting topic area, but it effects ALL hunters World Wide.

I do not buy into the Biology concept, as not all hunters view hunting from the exact same POV.

The irony is that I've met more people who have lost a mate than gained one due to hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
It all boils down to perceptions.

Ever noticed that even anti-hunters do not view European mounts in the same way they do realistic shoulder or full body mounts?

We are fighting a losing battle on this, nothing we do will ever be acceptable to those that are against us.

This is in the African Hunting topic area, but it effects ALL hunters World Wide.

I do not buy into the Biology concept, as not all hunters view hunting from the exact same POV.

You may not believe it, but buying old taxidermy has become a "cool" thing with some hipsters. So, evolutionary biologists...explain that one. Actually, in that case it's more of a sociologists question. And I think mostly the symbolic interactionist's domain.

There is no expert in any field who can explain why I hunt!

Stupid idiots have nothing useful to write, so they write a load of bloody rubbish!

We have hunted ever since we stood up right.

So the author didn't think about feeding people or land management? Ecosystem protection?

"LA Times" and "science" in the same line? There's an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Perhaps biology is a bit off, but one of the keys to man becoming sentient being was learning to hunt and eat meat, which was a much higher value food and enabled prehistoric man to spend time thinking as opposed to gathering food. The invention of weapons with which to hunt made us a bit more risky prey for large predators as well.

As to biology, we are not equipped to be strict vegetarians. Our dentition is that of omnivores and carnivores. Herbivores generally lack canine teeth; we have them. Herbivores usually have a digestive tract adapted to huge quantities of vegetable material; we do not have that sort of digestive tract, but one adapted to smaller and higher energy foods such as meat. Our walking upright and our opposable thumb makes tool making and use possible, and many of our most primitive tools were designed for harvesting animals to eat.
Ah, well. Facts do not sit well with bunny huggers.

By Amina Khan Contact Reporter. That about covers the article without having to read it, not to mention the fact it was printed on another democrat sanitary paper rag...

I saw the article yesterday and refused to read the rubbish.

Im sure I will someday. So far I have not run into a single anti-hunting person who is also a vegan.
After I point out what a hypocrite they are for chastising me while they stuff chicken in there mouth. They all seem to slink away.

One of the most prominent aspects that define humans as being a "Hunting Species" is the location of our EYES. They are on the front of our head facing forward.

All predatory species have forward facing eyes.

All prey species eyes are on the side of their heads.

A study I did proves that there are some writers who try to prove how much they know to impress a would be mate. Some write article after article to impress upon those to stupid to know better that they have some secret knowledge or more knowledge than someone else to try to make themselves look better. They want to appear to be experts to show their IQ in hopes someone might be impressed. How long do I need to go on with this.......

http://www.alternet.org/enviro...ogy-status-and-shame


Article, interview of Dr. Darimont.

Biology explains many things to some. Of course, it just confuses the heck out of others.

All men must be castrated and then the world will be as one and in harmony with nature.

Can't say I have ever gone hunting to impress the ladies. It has never really impressed any lady I know, including my wife. I do know a lot of divorced guys, however, because their wife didn't care for how much they went hunting. All of them are much happier being able to hunt more often now too.

This kind of reminds me of the theory that men buy a Ferrari to impress the ladies (which some may). Every Ferrari owner I have talked to says all it attracts is middle aged men and young boys who want to know what you do for a living. All of them say they bought the car because they wanted it.

My honest take, we do everything for one of two reasons, because we have to or because we want to.

"There is no expert in any field who can explain why I hunt" - Saeed

But I'm certain Saeed could explain why he hunts -- if he chose to.


I started nearly 70 years ago when I set snares for rabbits. Why I did that I could only say that I'm a hunter by nature. I never saw anyone do it, including my family. I just did it. My dad did some deer hunting but his brother (my uncle) was a better shot so he did the killing. I was never a witness to any of it as they had to leave the island we lived on and go to the mainland of New Brunswick for that activity. Commercial fishing was their employ, but they had to supplement that with hunting, gardens, a cow or two, hens and a pig that was shared with cousins. So, hunting and gathering were necessary for survival, not for entertainment, personal pleasure or a hobby -- that was the '20s, '30s and '40s. I was born in 1935. After the Great Depression and two World Wars things got somewhat better.

So I've lived a good part of my 81 years in relative security from war and economic depression. My motivation as a hunter for the past 60+ years therefore has been, as mentioned;

1) I'm a hunter by nature (love the outdoors, hiking, hunting, camping, photography, astronomy -- built 5 telescopes from 4.25" to 12.5", etc.)
2) Conservation -- the North American conservation model of wildlife resources as expressed and taught by Shane Mahoney -- author, lecturer and biologist.
3) Protection -- of property, domestic animals, human life and natural resources such as trees and other plant life, as well as management of predators that can reduce the moose, elk and deer populations very quickly in some key areas to the point of extinction -- somewhat related to conservation. This has been happening in some parts of our province.
4) Protein -- no better source of pure protein.

I'm not A TROPHY HUNTER PER SE. And, I've not personally met many, though I correspond with some. The hunters I know personally, are just hunters, mostly for the same reasons I hunt.

5) I love firearms and ballistics, and write about those matters. There's a scientific bent to my nature.

This is not strictly reserved to the African context, or the so-called "Cecil" event. Therefore I've chosen to go on record in stating why I hunt and believe that most of my motivations apply to the vast majority of hunters.

Bob Mitchell

www.bigbores.ca

Moonbats and snowflakes, all of them!

From my point of view, it would be far more relevant to ask why the descendants of hunters and carnivores for millennia are now, so suddenly, ashamed and afraid of hunting and killing!

quote:

From my point of view, it would be far more relevant to ask why the descendants of hunters and carnivores for millennia are now, so suddenly, ashamed and afraid of hunting and killing!

Really simple, those people have been so far removed from the natural world that they simply can not comprehend hunting or killing.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
Moonbats and snowflakes, all of them!

From my point of view, it would be far more relevant to ask why the descendants of hunters and carnivores for millennia are now, so suddenly, ashamed and afraid of hunting and killing!

This is a key point I make with people. To be a non-hunter, or worse, an anti -hunter is to deny your humanity. It also denies science. Modernity has (to an extent) obviated the need to hunt and kill to exist, but it has changed much faster than our evolved bodies. The fact our bodies have changed so little since we came out of the trees is a fact some people can't accept and they try to hide it via various means. It only takes a bowel movement to bring us back to our animal realities, and even that has been shoved so far into the shadows as to be nearly completely deniable it even exists.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
We have hunted ever since we stood up right.

And as long as I can stand upright, I will continue to hunt!
.......................................................................

quote:

Really simple, those people have been so far removed from the natural world that they simply can not comprehend hunting or killing.

And trying to get through to them is like talking to a brick wall!