Hunting prey and keeping a trophy of the hunt has been a rite of passage for many people for ages, mostly with males, but not exclusively. It is not a recent development. Native populations worldwide wear parts of the animals they have killed as symbols of prestige, honor, wealth, social hierarchy, skill as a provider, etc. Some even keep trophies because of the religous belief they could inherit a certain characteristic of the symbol. I happen to think a nice trophy buck or a tanned hide or a stuffed animal looks fine in a home. Not every trophy represents an animal killed for only the sport. You can still eat the animal while having it mounted, stuffed, skinned and tanned, etc. Saving that portion of the animal as a decoration is much less waste than throwing it away.

I only meant when the animal is killed solely for the purpose of decoration. When the animal is not used, except for the pleasure of the hunt and as a decoration.

For instance, the settlers killed many of the buffalo, they often killed them and only took the heads to mount. They stopped using the hides and meat because it had long since lost value because it was in such abundance. The effort of skinning and preparing the meal for trade or sale was more than the price it could have fetched.

I forgot to mention. If you had killed a human, would you cut off his or her head and mount it on your wall?

Animals aren't humans but if it's obsense (and savage as many people accuse tribes for doing so) to use a dead human as decoration, why isn't it so for animals? They were living. They have a right to be respected after death. If we didn't consider humans so godlike and animals so inferior, we'd act a different way all together.

They have a right to be respected after death.

For some hunters, that is exactly the reason they keep the trophy, out of respect for the animal's prowess, strength, skill, etc. Those who have not hunted for trophies probably don't understand the difficulty involved in a true hunt. For example, deer and elk don't get to be huge specimens by being naive, unintelligent, and unwary of humans. I am also not talking about kills made in game farms which I feel are more like harvesting than hunting.

If we didn't consider humans so godlike and animals so inferior, we'd act a different way all together.

As I understand it, native Americans considered many wild animals to be gods living among them and yet they still killed them, sometimes in rites of passage, and kept trophies as symbols of their skill as a hunter and to acquire the strengths or spirit of the animal they killed.

Animals are not considered inferior by most true hunters. Humans can run but they are like slugs compared to a pronghorn or whitetail out on the plains. Ask a hunter if they would consider running down a deer. Humans can be strong but compared to a grizzly we are weak as babies. When in the presence of a grizzly and unarmed we better have a way to escape or we could just as easily be lunch. That is why humans originally developed the weapons we have, not for war, but for killing animals or protecting ourselves from them because we were no match for many of them as hunter or prey.

Don't get me wrong, I dispise wasteful killing and what I consider unsportsmanlike hunting, but I also don't like seeing true sport hunters lumped together with the imitations.

I am a hunter. My license fees provided the funding for this wildlife sanctuary. They provided a salary to manage game by wardens. The equipment I use provided jobs for many employees. My quarry teach me that I am also a naturaly part of this environment. I know that I can put food on my family's table without some beaurocrats's sayso. I can honor my prey and grace my home with its likeness, and teach my children that meat must be captured, slaughtered and prepared. I will die a hunter, and my children will learn valuable skills about survival in the wild, self-preservation and responsibility that they will NEVER receive from GreenPeace or the Sierra Club.

Hunting when done with respect for the game, the land, and consideration for the public is very beneficial for the preservation of our natural resources. Unfortunately there will always be extremist repesenting all sides that make it challaning to have common ground. So far this thread is rational and civil...fingers crossed

The original question concerned saving animals or parts as trophies. I imagine there is a diversity of opinion on this among hunters. Most people on this forum know me as a conservationist and supporter of environmental protection. It might surprise some to know that I grew up in the country and hunted game for many years starting in my pre-teens, and saved some trophies such as squirrel tails and antlers, but not heads or feet. I couldn't afford the taxidermy but also I just didn't want to look at animal faces I had killed. But I didn't and don't now have a problem with that among other hunters if that is their choice. I also was never a proponent of hunting non-game predators strictly for the trophy. I know some ranchers who suffer losses would argue differently ...I think we need to balance those kinds of economic losses against the value that predators bring ecologically and aesthetically. I don't want to live in a world where there are no big predators.

Before I knew better, I was also an indiscriminate killer of all snakes, but I stopped killing even poisonous snakes except for those that stray into my mother's yard - I don't kill poisonous snakes on my property. I lost interest in hunting in my early twenties though I never lost enthusiasm for the outdoors. I have since put away my gun and spent the time since hiking, canoeing, rock climbing, caving, watching wildlife, etc. Many of my nephews and cousins hunt and I benefit from the overflow game that trickles down to me. I wouldn't rule out taking up a gun to provide meat someday in the future but it would probably be more of an economic decision than a sporting one.

I agree with tplife that many beneficial conservation efforts are funded through license fees. For instance, Ducks Unlimited is one of the biggest contributors of wetlands preservation today.

"Hunting when done with respect for the game, the land, and consideration for the public is very beneficial for the preservation of our natural resources."
That's right, only humans should have the right to squander natural resources.

Anyone out there who's trophied a big cat actually eat it?

As a matter of fact I have, but I do not make cougar a staple. All big cats legally hunted have generated funding for all you Cali folks to enjoy. It's better than having the police shoot them at your expense. Toof, I'm really on your side.

water daddy, are you going to finish that last panther kebab? I'm collecting leftovers for lunch tomorrow. Did I mention that I hunt with an AR-15, which Diane Feinstein (D, CA) says is only a killing machine that civilians should not possess? Ted Nugent for President!

tplife, watch out! in Palo Alto, CA yesterday the police shot a cougar with an AR-15. The cat went crazy and ran off. Fortunately no one was mauled, but the poor critter died a inhumane death that a hunter would not stand for. Feinstein overlooked me, I have an AR-10E2. Of course I was enlightened and moved away from Cali...the place is freakin weird, but very beautiful nonetheless.....(Sigh) the good ole days.

These attitudes and attempts at clever comments really aren't conductive to the conversation. This is how fights get started, not conversations.

Killing animals that you don't eat is a waste of life. You don't eat them, you don't use them for survival (tribal people who don't have stores do, I don't see US citizens walking around in animal skins), you only kill them to get off on how you can triumph over mother nature. It's senseless murder. And this attitude/behavior leads to many animals becoming endangered.

I find it interesting that someone who uses the handle, "CramItWitWalnutsUgly" would feel compelled to point fingers about an attitude that might lead to a confrontation. Enough said.

CramIt, it's not conducive to you, b/c you dislike difference in opinion. That's find my friend, I will part this discussion with a few thoughts and let you be.

In modern civilized America where laws and conservation are practiced no hunted game species will go extinct to hunting. In fact the populations of species hunted have boomed over the last hundred years. All the plants and animals that civilization cannot generate revenue, use, and attention for; are the species I'm worried about.

It may be hard to believe that gun toting, meat eating, outdoor enthusiasts like me actually have a conscious, but I don't hold it against you. I don't expect you to understand my native american ancestory, or what it's like to actually be forced to live off nature while fighting for the greater good of humanity and your freedom.

I concur with one point, killing just to kill is sick and wasteful. :( Now I'm getting depressed. Quick where's the comic relief?

Here ya go water_daddy...

Waterdaddy, Feinswine didn't overlook you! That AR10's an "evil looking" killing machine too! Anyway, I envy you, I ran out of money before the ban hit and could only register 2 AR lowers and my machine pistol. RE: Hunting, I'm agreeable that others don't share my opinion, otherwise I'd be preaching to the choir at AR15.com or SniperCountry.com. I just resent having my rights taken because of support from those who want their meat sanitized and dyed with a wrapper on it. Did like the cartoon though.

Monte- My name is an inside joke with a friend on here and since it's not aimed at anyone-besides, how can I possibly know what people on here look like to call them ugly?-I don't see how it can offend or start a fight.

Waterdaddy- please don't tell me what I like and dislike. The WHOLE POINT of this is to have differences in opinions. I would never have started this thread if I didn't like or want to hear what other people had to say.

I'm learning alot of things that I didn't know before. That's ones of the reasons of listening to other people's viewpoints.

I have to say I'd not quite as opossed(sp?) to hunting as when I started this thread. People are making very good points but I DON'T think it's conductive at all to make jokes about an animal's suffering especially when people on here feel very strongly about animals rights and animal sufferage.

And, further more, I never insulted anyone and stated that hunters don't have a conscience. I don't know where you got that from.

Walnut,

what joke about animals suffering? I have seen some flippant remarks about animals dying, but that is to be expected when 50% of your diet is meat. I hold animals in high regard as both beautiful and useful, but I (and others on this forum) am unwilling to grant them as much dignity as you wish. This is for a variety of reasons, some of which may not be discussed in this venue.

Ryan

"People who cant afford to buy meat have to rely on hunting???????????" In the USA????? Is this 1/100,000 of the polulation?? Are we stretching the idea?

People have told me that they can't afford to buy meat. I personally have never had that issue. But I wanted to factor it in just incase.

I can see where small game hunting just might be economically a plus, but larger game are likely a minus money wise unless you are really set up for serious hunting. ......license fees, guns, bows, clothing, travel, butchering fees, freezer costs, taking time off work perhaps......

Dove hunting - an issue that resurfaces in Iowa with each congressional session.

I'm against it, not because of the usual sentimental reasoning "Doves are symbols of peace" or "Doves mate for life" . I am against it because doves are SOOOO docile they actually sit and allow you to get within a few feet of them before taking flight. You even see many of them run over by cars!!! What possible sport is there in shooting an animal that sits still for you??? As for eating their meat, they only weigh about 10 ounces total, and the only portion containing much meat is the breast, which weighs about 2 ounces. "Buy a chicken!"

If you like the flavor of dove, why not shoot the pigeons (their close relatives) who not only are bigger (mmmm, more meat), but who add a little sport to the hunt as most of them live in the city, so marksmanship would be paramount!

The biggest problem with man trying to 'balance nature' is that the scale vascilates so dramatically from one side to the other and never balances.

Personally, if it weren't for endangering the animals themselves, I'm for re-introducing ALL the native large predators (mountain lions and other large cats, bears, wolves) back into every area of the country. Perhaps people would then be a little more careful about allowing their pets and their children to run at large.

What possible sport is there in shooting an animal that sits still for you??? As for eating their meat, they only weigh about 10 ounces total, and the only portion containing much meat is the breast, which weighs about 2 ounces.

You apparently have never hunted mourning doves! First of all, few real sportsman shoot game birds while they are sitting. It is not considered good sport, as you say. Besides, you must be talking about another type of dove or else the mourning doves are domesticated in Iowa because I have never found them easy to hunt at all. I find mourning doves to be one of the most elusive and difficult game birds to shoot due to their rapid take-off, fast flight, erratic movements, and small size. Additionally, if a mourning dove is shot at relatively close range while sitting, there often wouldn't be enough good meat remaining to even eat. Another reason most mourning doves are shot in flight. In the case of some game birds and areas, shooting them other than in flight is illegal. As far as the weight of the breast of a mourning dove, I suspect the ratio of the breast weight to body weight is similar with many other game birds as well, they are just a small bird.

Most pigeon meat (squab mostly) is farm raised as far as I am aware. Hunting pigeons is difficult because most states, as I am sure you are aware, do not allow any hunting within at least 1/4 mile of any inhabited site, which coincidentally is where the pigeons generally are located.

Really, doves are hardly hunted anyway. Usually, at least in my part of the country, you go to a "dove shoot," where on opening day you wear a tie with your jacket, drive out to a field in your Rover, and hope some doves will check out the field or at least fly over it. Actual "hunting" is counterproductive, as doves are spooked by movement. You want to just blend in with the surrounding hedgerows or thickets, not seek them out.

This reminds me, I think I'll go apply for my fishing/hunting license today. For two reasons.
If I need to eat and to monitor the quality of the pond.

Ice fishing has started here and a new year has begun. Every year I get a fishing license, although it has been over 5 years since I have ever caught a fish myself, I do like to have my license because if I ever need to hunt or fish I would like to have that freedom. We live out inthe sticks and its many miles to the nearest store. Sometimes in bad weather we can be without electric for a while. But mostly, I want to be with my kids if they decide to learn to fish and help them.

I would also like to monitor the chemical intake into our ponds from the blueberry barrens near by which surround the pond we live on. The pond is about a mile across in length and half amile wide, brown trout is often found here.

In the 1940's early applications to the blueberry barrens included using arsenic, now velpar and guthian (spelling?). Cant tell if the area has been contaminated as far as the water shed and the pond, but I do want my fishing license to help research this privately and legally and to have an option.

Unfortunately, unless I was very hungry, I dont think I could bring myself to eat any of our local fish or game until I get some better test results done.

CramItWitWalnutsUgly,
I think you posted a very similar post to this forum in the past. Elicited much the same responses. What is your purpose?
For myself, I lost interest in hunting after my part in the Vietnam police action. I have many doves gleaning under my bird feeders year round, but their numbers increase during "dove season".
If I'm wrong about your former posting, I apologise.
Deer, in the East, are multiplying and often conflict with motorists. Controlled hunting, with the assumption that the meat will be eaten, is probably a good thing.

Boy, reading this I realize just how crazy I must be. Seriuos, no jokes.

Killing animals for killing's sake is just sick? May I explain? The hunting experience is basically like any sport. A surge of adrenaline. You wait. Sometimes stalk. For hours. Then, you hear or see something. Your heart races. You get that nervousness that only pursuit can bring. Your sight and hearing are very focused. You try your darndest to find the angle and distance that will allow you to bring down your prey. Then, you aim. And fire. The expectancy and then determination of the outcome make you feel alive. Like few things do. And up until 100 years ago, this physical/emotional response helped bring home the need to hunt for your food.

My other area of difference is the basic lack of fundamental logic that seems to be missing here. And in most discussions on personal and public policy. Forgive me if I've posted this before.

Everything dies. No one, or nothing, gets out of here alive. I listened with amusement when watching "The Biggest Loser" last night. (One of the few shows I watch.) One of the trainers said something along the lines of, "Working together, we saved his life!"

Excuse me, but no you didn't. At best you delayed his death.

The truth is, all animals have self preservation instinct. Needed for survival of species. But it doesn't stop death. Nor does the lack of hunting stop animal suffering. Quite to the contrary. Death by desease, starvation, dehydration, or just old age is MUCH more agonizing than a bullit. This simple fact escapes modern men so easily.

Even if shot and it takes a couple hours, or longer, to die, compare that to days without water. Starvation. Desease ripping an animal apart from the inside for days. I know this probably won't change anyone's mind, and I'm used to the artficail constructs from reality in this world. We all have them.

What worries me is when public and private policy is made from the perspective of these artificail worlds.
Hunting is not "bad", or "cruel", it's an activity that brings excitement and fun. And used to be crucail for survival.

I just hope the artificail doesn't take away too many freedoms.

And this is NOT an argument for no laws. Only that all laws shouldn't dodge basic facts, for the sake of the mental constructs of a few.

From the crazy person,

Randy

Randy, thanks for pointing out a few truths that few are willing to admit.
tooflet, a good friend of ours says mountain lion is excellent eating, but I can't speak from personal experience. If some was offered to me, though, I would certainly try it. Hunting is one of the reasons the human race has evolved intellectually (sometimes I wonder, though). It was the introduction of meat and fats into the human diet that seemed to accelerate our rapid development of creativity and industry.
Mrs H

I gave up hunting because I felt it wasn't my place to kill something for food or the sport of hunting. Now every fall just as the rut is starting I hike into the woods and place boxes of deer condoms through out the forest.Now for reality.I still hunt. I do it because I enjoy it.I don't need to harvest deer to feed my family,I like the taste of venison. Nor do I do it to show everyone how big my stones are.I enjoy being in the outdoors and seeing,touching and feeling nature.My trips to the woods include two cameras and a gun. The gun is off to my side and the cameras are on my lap ready to go.If an animal comes by that I want to harvest my heart doesn't race. I don't have thoughts of "I'm going to blow you apart". I wait until I can get the best shot. After the animal is down I don't go hoot and hollering through the woods that I'm the man!!!!!!!! People hunt for different reasons. Those reason are their business. All people are different.Not all people care to hunt and thats their choice . Its funny that there are people that hate hunting but will kill their neighbor over what god they believe in.

The hunter who takes his own food in all likely hood has a greater appreciation for animals than someone who buys an anonymous meat at the grocery.

i'm amazed at the number of people that have more respect for animal life/rights than human. how many babies are aborted because of their mom's/dad's sport? who cares?

Abortion has little to do with respect for animals or sports. And to put it in that category is quite demeaning.

I was actually a Vegan for about two years. I was so disconnected from the natural world and dependent on organic foods and huge corporations to get fed. Looking back, with the attitude of living on wild foods and some fish / game, it is easy to see how a person who isn't into hunting can get caught up in the "senseless taking of life" argument. "i don't eat animal products and i'm fine... everyone else should be exactly the same way".

Eating at McDonalds without respect for your 10% beefburger is the same thing as taking a hatchet to a tree without the intention to use it's wood for fire in the same way that catching a fish and roasting her for subsistence is the same as picking wild greens for a salad and respecting that you must take life to continue living. Or, if you're into Alan Watts at all... the fish and leaves become your human consciousness the consciousness is inseperable. Isn't it silly to think you're even the same person with so much "input and output", hahaha.

I'm coming to see that hunter's understand and feel this connection to nature more than all these "green" friendly groups in support of large scale cooperative organic agriculture. Diets of salads, banananas, and soy shakes imported from 1000s of miles away are not as sustainable as what is in your back yard... and most likely not as healthy, as I personally feel much better eating eggs and some fish on occassion and hope to incoroporate much more wild food over time and as things come into season this year.

brainwash made me tired after 2 years.

anyways, a little different angle here, but i hope i contributed something. I was the kid who had the grandparents with tons of animal heads / stuffings, rifles, bows, camo, etc. everywhere..... but i was never shown the reasons behind all of it.

Remembrance, you'll have to educate me... I am curious about people who are vegan, but yet will still eat fish.

No offense intended, but I've always been curious why is it that fish meat is somehow perceived differently from chicken or cow meat?

Typically because people never see fish they assume that they are stupid and unfeeling, lowly creatures. In reality fish are generally about as smart as birds and non-primate mammals.

I have a friend who is a avid deer hunter. He tells me that every year he kills enough for his family and then watches as prime deer walk away. I asked him to kill one for me this year! They are over-populated here, and what better source of meat without antibiotics or hormones added. I'll pay for the bullet and the processing.
I used to be a hunter before Nam - lost my ability to kill there. Organic veggies and a piece of venison each week.
Yummy!