as it pertains to hunting. No disrespect meant to the folks that use it, to each his own, but it just seems so detached and clean from what really happens. I always picture the farmer in his combine in the middle of October bringing in the corn. I guess it is the pc way of saying things so as not to offend someone but I much prefer to use the word "killed." "Look at the beautiful buck I killed on opening weekend," sounds much more deliberate. If you said harvested someone might think you plucked it out of the garden out back. I think I will stick to killin' and shootin' critters for now.

Yep. Hate it.

It's hunting - NOT FARMING

to each his own. but s*** is still spelled s***.

I don't use it either for game I kill. It's not an eggplant, for chrissakes...

KG

I used to hate it myself but, it seems so many use it now so it really doesn't bother me all that much.

I usually say "took."

When I'm talking to someone in person, "I killed....."

Reloader

YES, It drives me nuts.

I had this very argument with a friend last November; he said he harvested an elk with his bow. I corrected him by reminding him that corn is harvested and real, live sentient beings are killed.

can't stand the use of the word because it lessens the whole thing.

It always sounds weird to my ear. One on-line dictionary (Houghton Mifflin at Yahoo) offers for harvest:

To take or kill (fish or deer, for example) for food, sport, or population control.

Not only do I kill things, I eat them as well. To hear "harvest" and "consume" makes me start to wonder if they also hear vegetables scream. Nate

I'm ok with "Harvest" and "Bring to Bag". I try to use the word that best fits the company I'm in.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills(with an implied "to you").

I say it to about everyone I've met. Definitely helps separate the people I'd like to see again from the limp-wristed pukes.

Thinking really hard on it, I do believe it would be impossible for me to care less if it upsets anyone.
-----

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills!

I don't have any problem at all with the word "harvest", I usually use it around people who don't hunt, to remind them that I'm utilizing a natural, renewable resource that is meant for food. Taking an animal is a harvest if you ask me.

Now the word "trophy" is one that irks me...

I like, write and say "take," or "kill." I think "harvest" is a wussy word best left to those unable to face facts.

i dont mind using the word.
to those who see hunting as archaic and barbaric it seems more sensitive and less likely to turn them off.
for those of us who know it passes by w/o a thought. the innner brain auto-translates to kill.
then again i dont drive around w/ animals strapped to the hood or hanging out the back of the truck.
further i dont go to town bloody.

if we want to keep doing this we better get "them" on our side. talking about killing deer, while blood caked fingernails drum the carcase in the 7/11 parking lot is not, shall we say, good for buisness.

Hate the word. No one harvests an animal, unless they planted it that Spring.... Never happens to me.

"Get" seems to fit my sensibilities. As in the Idaho standard greeting from September to November: "d'you git your elk yet?" JMO, Dutch.

How many of you have non-hunting friends and family that ask you if you "Caught" anything when you went hunting???????

I have gone back to using the word Kill, simply because that is what I am doing when I pull the trigger.

Also over the past couple of years I came to an epiphany.

I get more enjoyment out of camp life and cooking meals than I do hunting, simply because I know that when I pick up a gun, my sole, express intention is to kill something.

I enjoy guiding people to an animal and seeing them make a clean, quick, one shot kill if possible, and actually at this time in my life, that has become more important than my killing something.

While it may put some folks off to hear the word, it is in point of fact what we do when we shoot something, we kill it.

Another one I have some trouble with is the trend toward European mounts.

Why is it that two almost identical animals can be killed, one made into a shoulder mount, that some folks find disgusting, and the other made ionto a european or skull mount, and it is looked upon as an object'd art.

Yet both were killed with a bullet fired from a rifle.

Maybe our world and our societies have gotten too civilized.

Is adeer killed by a Lincoln Town Car, killed or harvested when ran over?????

its certainly a mark of the civilized and i think alot of "white" america relates the words shot & killed to the media reporting of these sick bastards that turn weapons on the innocent.(i.e.virginia tech. and others)
So anytime you relate that you shot your elk or killed your deer it can't help but be taken in a negitive lite.
do i speak differently to different people depending on their understanding of the subject?
Of course,but i make no apoligizes for my actions and have used many words to decribe getting it from the field to the freezer,harvest isn't one of them

Nope. Isn't that what hunting is all about...harvesting the surplus?

Harvest is a very appropriate word to use around the nonhunting public. Usually when something is "harvested" it is utilized. I think hunters would be smart to use this word around folks who don't have any opinion about hunting, or who are opposed to hunting.

I have sat in public places when so called hunters bragged about "did you see me kill that fucker" or "I killed that SOB". This kind of talk was completely unappropriate. Sometimes I think we're the one's on the fast track to end our sport.

MG

My 1962 Webster's lists one definition of Harvest as "the outcome or consequences of any effort or series of events: as DEATH is the HARVEST of war".
"Harvest" is a word I use for talking to people I do not know, or for talking to more than one or two friends, or if women are present. Just seems more polite, as Madgoat mentioned. I don't use it when talking with beer-drinkin' buddies.
Now "caught", on the other hand, is always corrected when I hear it used for "kill".
"Trophy" means "something kept as a memorial of victory or success". I guess it implies different things to different people, and "trophy hunter" has certainly got a bad rap as someone who kills just for his pride of having something on his wall. But few of us here are subsistence hunters or government cullers, so we are out to "harvest" a (hopefully) mature male of some species or other. If we are successful, then that animal, or photo or memory, is our trophy. The oldest, most worn out, most experienced free-range buck is a real trophy, even if he's gone downhill to being a 6 point. The poor rich folks who take 30 minutes to kill a 200 point buck on a deer farm may think they're taking a trophy, but they're really taking an "embarrassment"--like the latest Hogzilla debacle. Hunters who claim to "not be trophy hunters" are likely making an effort to disassociate themselves from that "Hogzilla-type" of "trophy" hunters, but non-subsistence sport hunters are all hunting because we enjoy it, and every good memory of a hunt, and every difficulty overcome, makes our "harvest" into our "trophy".

I use it when I first meet some untill I find out how they feel about hunting . After that I use Kill or Killed . But if they are anti I use killed , kill ,shoot , taste Good and anything I can to agravate them to the max.

The use of the word harvest is inappropriate when referring to getting a game animal. It's a misuse of the word. The dictonary mentions only crops, not animals, in defining it. I cringe every time I hear someone using it when talking about getting game.

Don

its simple.
there are funded groups whos sole intent is to have hunting made illigal.'the more people we can get on our side the better.
so, say "harvest".
tuck in the tounge.
dont photo the exit wound side and wipe the blood off your hands when you go to town.

quote:

Originally posted by Prewar70:
as it pertains to hunting. No disrespect meant to the folks that use it, to each his own, but it just seems so detached and clean from what really happens. I always picture the farmer in his combine in the middle of October bringing in the corn. I guess it is the pc way of saying things so as not to offend someone but I much prefer to use the word "killed." "Look at the beautiful buck I killed on opening weekend," sounds much more deliberate. If you said harvested someone might think you plucked it out of the garden out back. I think I will stick to killin' and shootin' critters for now.

Strange you bring up such a topic. I had this discussion with an outfitter both last year and this year.

They PREFER the word harvest and presented a small legion of reasons why it is TO BE CALLED a "harvest" as opposed to a "kill."

Since I was their client/guest, and you could tell right away that when in their home, it's their way or the highway, I didn't want to rock the boat, just kept my mouth. But I was beginning to think I was surrounded by pseudo tree huggers.

Anyway, at the end of the week, I did use the term "kill' all day long.

Harvest would be more appropriate in the beef, pork, poultry, etc. industry, because that is actually what they are doing. I've never heard that word used as it relates to that however. I believe the most common verb used is "slaughtered." "We slaughtered a hundred head of cattle today." "Hey BillyBob, check out this beautiful buck I slaughtered on opening weekend!" Doesn't quite fit, but it is interesting why we use the words we use.

Harvest is 100% PC! "Took" is as PC as I ever get.

Good Hunting,

Bob

Sometimes I use the word kill and other times I use "take" , or "I took". "Harvest" sounds like simply a way to pacify those people who choose to be stupid. Also known as "the anti crowd".

To me:

"Harvest" means ashamed to have killed.

"Critter" is another ignorant word to put on your burn pile if there is any room.

I am not a subscriber to political correctness, or dumbing down, or the lowest common denominator. And announcers of sporting events that use "athleticism" throughout the game have to be gay, just have to be.

Perhaps the concepts of "prejudice" and "bias" such as:
bias: a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation

needs to be considered by some.
"Harvest" was an acceptable word for taking of game from ancient times. It is not a new invention to please the PC police.

PS After checking several dictionaries, nearly every one of them lists, as verb transitive,"the taking of game or fish" as an appropriate definition of "Harvest".

As Charlie Daniels says "I'm not politically correct and I don't give a damn."

Hunt: to go out to kill or catch (game) for food or sport.

Harvest: the time of the year when matured grain, fruit, vegetables, etc. are reaped or gathered in.

Hmmm…. Do we Hunt or Harvest?

Yes, It bothers me and I have a strong DISLIKE in how the word in used in the hunting community.

We are hunters there for we Hunt not Harvest.

I few statements that I agree with:

“It's hunting - NOT FARMINGâ€

“YES, It drives me nuts.â€

“It always sounds weird to my ear.â€

“Definitely helps separate the people I'd like to see again from the limp-wristed pukes.

Thinking really hard on it, I do believe it would be impossible for me to care less if it upsets anyone.â€

“I think "harvest" is a wussy word best left to those unable to face factsâ€

“Harvest is 100% PC!â€

"Harvest" sounds like simply a way to pacify those people who choose to be stupid. Also known as "the anti crowd".

“To hear "harvest" and "consume" makes me start to wonder if they also hear vegetables scream.â€

"Harvest" means ashamed to have killed.

A few of you have made some statements that make me think you lean to PC or you hear vegetables.

“I usually use it around people who don't huntâ€

“it seems more sensitiveâ€

“Harvest is a very appropriate word to use around the non-hunting publicâ€

“I use it when I first meet some until I find out how they feel about huntingâ€

“Tuck in the tongue.â€

Tucking the tongue or acting PC is why the “funded groups†are Kicking are Ass!

By acting PC you are making a crack in the dam and not standing up for hunting.

By teaching others to do the same is hurting the Hunting Community.


Men Should Be Men! ………… It is NOT Harvesting!

I don't hate it. For me, it is not a matter of PC, it is a matter of politeness, based on the people I am with. I don't curse around women, I don't scratch my nuts in public (unless the theater is dark) and I don't tell my daughters everything I did when I was young.

I think one of the things the internet, and recent times have brought about is a lot more of, "this is how I am, to hell with you" and a lot less common courtesy and respect. And I don't care which "side" started it.

It has been a long time since words hurt me. Sticks and stones and all that.

Folks,

The "fuck 'em if they don't like it attitude" may feel good but it doesn't benefit our sport. The vast majority of people are neither pro or anti hunting. When speaking with these folks who might be inclined to have an open mind about hunting it is best to not make hunting sound any more barbaric than possible to them. If you use HARVESTED instead of KILLED it makes what we do sound more like we are taking the excess from a sustainable resource rather than murdering every living thing we see. Offending these people who do not hold a solid anti hunting position is just counter productive.

Mark

At a local charity get-together, a few men with verbal knowledge and a small degree of sophistication can discuss "harvesting a nice whitetail with 10 inch G2's and 8 inch G3's" and the pretty ladies setting next to you won't have clue and won't get up and leave like they might if more descriptive terms were used. Same as with "they were working in Angola as problem solvers for a private security firm" doesn't give a clue to the clueless about what you are discussing. There are times that word choices depend on who else is hearing. To me, "harvest" has nothing to do with "Political Correctness", which I also hate with a passion.

It is basically a question of manners and politeness. If you enjoy pissing people off, then hey call it what you want. I speak much differently in front of my mother than I do in front of guys in my reserve unit and differently sill in front of my predominantly physician clients. It is not being PC to say to my mom that her friend was not likely to recover from the cancer she was just diagnosed with; it is protecting her from the answer that I received from the doctor I asked the question to which was "The old girl does not need to be buying any green bananas." I would probably not choose to use the word harvest, just cause it sounds weird and contrived to me, but I would not use the word “kill†in front of people I did not know to be comfortable with it. IF I brought up hunting at all in such a group it would be to say how much I enjoy the travel, the ability to donate the meat to the needy and the quality time spent with my boys and my wife. I don’t view it as my job to “convert†anti’s nor do I see the need to create any.

I use the word harvest all the time and will continue. Like Madgoat said you HARVEST the surplus.

What I do really dis-like is when some people refer to a large animal they have HARVESTED and call it a pig or hog.

Steve

It has nothing to do with politeness, manners or whatever you say or who is around. You kill it period.

Anyway Im going to go walk my car down to the local gunstore. Or am I going to drive my car to the local gunstore

quote:

Originally posted by Gibson:
I don't have any problem at all with the word "harvest", I usually use it around people who don't hunt, to remind them that I'm utilizing a natural, renewable resource that is meant for food. Taking an animal is a harvest if you ask me.

Now the word "trophy" is one that irks me...

Hey, hey, hey !!!! HEY !!!

I like the word "TROPHY".
If I sell enough of them, I get to go back to Africa !!!!!

Harvest has its place, but to describe an individual kill isn't it.

Thirty and more years ago the animal rights fanatics were on the ascendance, and like England had attempted its appeasement of the Third Reich, hunters and wildlife managers attempted appeasement of the anti-hunters. Hunters and wildlife managers, almost to a man, began to use the word harvest to describe the taking, the killing of an animal. Wildlife managers were almost exclusively male then, whereas now the personnel of the profession are much more diverse, and wildlife managers were mostly hunters, whereas now in some agencies wildlifers who hunt are in the distinct minority; times change, sometimes for the better and other times not.

The use of the word harvest to describe the killing of an animal has spread throughout the wildlifers’ world, and the original reason for its use has failed utterly and, worse, it has carried unintended consequences into hunters’ ranks. The use of the word harvest to soften the effect of the killing of a deer or elk has not reduced one whit the antipathy of those to whom the killing of an animal is anathema. Unfortunately, it has also contributed to the denigration of the prey that hunters hold so dear.

When wildlife managers have done their jobs properly, there is indeed a harvestable surplus of a population of game animals. There are more deer than the habitat can support without detrimental effects on the habitat that will reduce its future carrying capacity and so there is some surplus of animals that may be removed by hunters to benefit individual people while at the same time benefiting the game population as a whole. Just because there is a harvestable surplus does not begin to suggest that individual animals are harvested.

Bucks and bulls are stalked and killed by hunters. They are not merely uprooted and the tops lopped off as are beets and broccoli. Little is as disgusting to the hunters who appreciate their prey than the mental image of a person who says, “I harvested an elk.†Images of somebody wearing overalls, perhaps with an elbow of their shirt worn through, carrying a scythe and whisking it through the neck of a bull elk somehow rooted by its hooves arise unbidden when some fool says the “harvested†a game animal. Such words and the images they evoke properly describe the treatment of a vegetable that is produced, exists, and is killed solely for man’s benefit. We don’t even use such derogatory language to describe our relationship with cattle, sheep, or other beasts raised solely to end up on someone’s table, so why do we tolerate it when it is used to describe a wild animal that exists for itself and is no less the product of natural selection than the predators, including man, that it must elude to maintain its life.

Indeed, let us maintain the aptly descriptive “harvestable surplus†when discussing animal and fish populations in the generic sense, for it is fully substitutable with the equally descriptive and accurate “removable surplus.†Let us cease, though, denigrating those individual animals that form the hunters’ sacred prey by lying to ourselves and others about harvesting them as if rams were rutabagas. No matter what innocuous (and erroneous) words we might employ to hide the fact from anti-hunters, they are not fooled into believing that somehow the animal did not die, and the anti-hunters will never condone an action against which they are so committed, no matter how illogically. Let us instead recognize the wildness of the animals which we hunt, and let us honor them by being honest about our interactions with them. We, as hunters, will attempt to find individual animals of the population and to kill them in as humane a manner as possible, and we, as wildlife managers, will continue to produce the removable surpluses that biologically permit hunters to pursue their prey.

Should someone who is unable to distinguish between a bear and a bean or a caribou and a carrot use the honorable name of hunter? Bears and caribou are hunted and killed; beans and carrots are planted and harvested. Let us clean up our language and be honest.

My couple of cents worth

Perhaps the Organ Donation Team at hospitals should be requesting to "scavenge" the organs of the dead/dying, rather than to "harvest" same.