A question to anti-hunters.

[Vikram]

You want to hunt, you hunt. I won't stop you. But then arises the question, why do you want to hunt?? If somebody gives the excuse that it was being done from primitive times, they forget the fact that primitive man didn't have the brains to harvest food. So his only means of satiating his stomach was through meat. But as the primitive man started evolving, he learnt the ways to grow food. If you see, no other animal on earth has evolved that much to grow food. So, hence my counter question.Regards

M24,

A cursory reflection reveals that the above reasoning is empirically indemonstrable. The primitive humans never depended on meat entirely. As he learnt to harvest crops, he also began animal husbandry.Both are efficient and easier means of producing food than hunting.Man is not an opportunistic carnivore.He is an omnivore.Period!

Is meat eating/hunting not a part of human behaviour? To say otherwise might be understandable from a moral/emotional standpoint but not tenable when facts come in.

What is more natural? A bird or animal that spent a free life in the wild and taken in a sustainable and sporting(you can question this measurement) manner or something that spent it's entire life in a cage that hardly allows it to move or stand,fed with chemicals to fatten them up and then put out of misery with a butcher's blade?

I understand your concern about hunting going out of hand.That is where game management comes in.The science of stewarding your wildlife.Remember, when you preserve habitat of the game species, you are also preserving an entire eco-system that shelters so many other species. People look at one aspect of taking the life of a beautiful creature,but they fail to see or ignore the effects on not so romantic and humble creatures that have a life that is equal in importance.

Check these statistics: The number of animals and birds taken in Germany for the years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009.

You will be astonished to know the numbers that are taken each year. More than a million deer and 6,00,000+ wild boar are taken each year in such a small country compared to us.And their country side is being over run with the wild boars! Game management for you.I agree that we have great poverty and population pressures.

http://www.jagd-online.de/datenfakten/j ... eta_id=256

Red deer- 67,246
Fallow deer- 55,407
Roe Deer- 1,10,2604 (1 million+)
Wild boar- 6,46,790 (more than half a million)
Hares- 4,21,573
Rabbits- 2,31,689
Pheasants- 2,67,824
Wild ducks- 4,68,262
Wild pigeons- 9,21,186
Foxes- 5,53,945
Chamois- 4389
Mouflon- 6888


Do you notice the levels of accuracy they maintain about the game taken? The hunters pay a lot of money for these privileges and the money goes into conservation. What kind of healthy eco-systems support such healthy wild life populations?

Each year, about 14 million pheasants are taken in UK and nearly half a million deer and still the deer population is reaching the level of pestilence in some parts of the country!

I once again concede that India's poverty and developmental issues place far more pressures on our wild life than anything else.But, to say that hunting is not something a part of human nature does not sound convincing.Yes, effective management is needed without which any rules that are in place are useless.We have one of the strictest laws in the world and see what has been happening to our wildlife.

I completely understand,appreciate and respect one's choice of not eating meat or not to hunt.But,meat eating and hunting cannot be undermined without evidence.

As you would understand, I do not mean to come across harsh in my argument.I apologise if I sound like it.


Best-
Vikram

[m24]

drifter: I never accused anyone of hunting here. It's an ongoing discussion we've been having over the past few days. I think the mods and owner would pretty much throw out the "The Tiger club" from the forum, as, of late we've been discussing only that and not guns.

Shooter & Inder: If it's for fun, I guess its high time the hunter's changed directions of their guns to the one's who are causing all these problems.

Vikram: All points accepted the way you meant it.

Regards

[shooter]

Before anyone posts a link to the oxford/collins web dictionary or wikipedia, let me point out the fun part.

Firing range/shooting ground/plinking. Most fun is in hitting the target. I mean who would like to plink or go the range while missing the target repeatedly?

In hunting the fun is NOT in the kill.
I cant explain it but one has to try to understand what i am saying.

The fun is going outdoors, stalking etc etc.
Now before someone says "do it with a camera".
I would also like to point out that it is rewarding to see the shot placed properly. But as i have written earlier many times, a lot of hunts have been memorable where i havent even fired a shot.

Thomas de gray one of the greatest game shots of all times (if not the greatest) said a man can be considered a good shot if he can make a third of his shots count. This is good according to him.

Formere mortals people like us it is more like 1 in 4-5.

See wildfowling for example. minus 8 degree temp. 0430 in themrning. Marshes with quicksand. Every step is torture. Wind biting and stinging without mercy. One wishes to shoot a small bag so as not to have to carry 5 X 4 kilo geese a mile in mud upto ones boots.
Once it was so cold i refused to get my hands out of my pockets to shoot; ditto for my mates.
This is not the same fun that one sees drunk college students overspeeding, honking and jumping signals, or people doing "patake bara boran de".

[icemanV]

I am neither a Pro - Hunter nor Anti...

I am just thinking out loud.

Assuming
1.) The government were to decide to give these Hunting based Conservation models a try.
2.) Guns for the purpose of hunting are freely available.

How can one expect our people to maintain the required discipline & hunting ethics? How do you enforce them?
I am generalising a bit, but i think we have a problem following rules. For eg. Road rules.

Ice

[mundaire]

We have a problem following rules, because our govt. is good at making them but piss poor at enforcement! Case in point, observe the people who would not think twice about skipping a red light in India, when they drive overseas they suddenly become model drivers. Why? Because the enforcement is prompt & merciless, be you a minister's son or the local DM's wife!

Cheers!
Abhijeet

[icemanV]

Answers a part of the question doesn't it.
Until such enforcement can be succesfully demonstrated any attempts to open up hunting may be counter productive.

It is a tough nut to crack.
With the amount of money we are spending on the reserves and conservation we are still not able to control poaching.(Let us not even go into the corruption angle, if ever it is eliminated blessed is this nation)
If we allow hunters as counter to poachers, who montiors the hunters.

Ice

[timmy]

Vikram, your point is made so very well! Perfect!

Shooter: I agree with you, the whole business of the hunt is very special and difficult to describe. Probably, it is something more suited to music than it is to words. (Music is much more suited to expressing emotions!) As some folks like this sort of music and other folks that, not everyone responds to the lure of hunting. And then, there are so many different kinds of hunting!

I am pro-hunting. While I do appreciate that hunters support a vast portion of the conservation budget and are therefore a desirable part of any conservation plan, I would like to see some avenue for the everyday guy to be able to pursue some sort of hunting. I don't see why a good plan cannot accomplish this, however.

I have not been hunting for many years. As I am currently in exile here in Texas, there are few public lands where the everyday person can hunt. One must know someone who owns land and will permit hunting, or buy a hunting lease on land. That is common here, but not inexpensive.

Out West in paradise, there are many places on public land where the everyday guy can hunt. Hunting pressure in these areas is high. One can have a better chance for success with a guide who can pack a hunt back into wilderness areas, but this is much more expensive than driving into the National Forest or Bureau of Land Management range and picking a likely spot.

Still, as has been pointed out, the opportunity to drive out on public land, get out of the truck with one's rifle and stalk game with some chance of success, is a wonderful experience. I can really see no good reason why such experiences are denied on the bases currently in place.

As my exchange with Asif about the .223 knock about rifle indicates, I have a great love for varmint shooting. I have expended a huge amount of .22 LR in my day, all through my trusty Marlin 39 (a superb rifle, may I add) and at one time when my young eyes were capable, my name was greatly feared in the Montana gopher population. On a single outing, I never consumed a brick (500 rounds) but have come close to it many times.

(It is only fair to point out that I was a mere pettifrogger in the varminting game: Old retired gents would regularly wear out Ruger 10/22s in their gopher madness. The ranchers would furnish them with free ammo -- all they could shoot. When you saw an old sedan in an open park by the side of a dirt road with one or two old coots in it, you could be sure that gopher hunting was going on. May I live to reach such a pinnacle!)

I do hope to get back to New Mexico before age has ravaged me to the point that I cannot enjoy the hunt. It is my hope to go on one more elk hunt. I still have not decided which rifle to choose. If my eyes were good, I would have a real quandry: do I take the Finn M39 or the RFI 2A?

Just considering this idea in my mind brings on a host of pleasant thoughts, as Shooter has alluded to.

PS: would like to add -- have you thought about the similarity between the Finn M39 and the RFI 2A? They shoot cartridges of similar power and capabilities. They both were "inherited" from each nation's colonial power, and both were improved over the colonial powers. Both are well made and, to my eyes, things of great and desirable beauty! I think this makes them idea for a final elk hunt. Going along the lines Shooter suggested again, part of the hunt is not just taking along the most technically capable rifle, it is taking one that has an inner meaning to the hunter -- one that helps preserve those special memories that are such an important part of hunting.

[drifter]

M24,

did not mean that you accused shooter, my point is that people over here are talking about controlled, disciplened and sensible hunting.

mundaire,

also the problem being when the politicans and law enforcement people drive the wrong direction and break all road rules, it sets a bad example.

vikram,

good post it has got my eyes opened especially with the stats.

timmy's post has given me an idea, why not the govt issue us permits to the railway station and we can clear the bandicoot would be fun I am sure, and the place would become cleaner and infection free.

reg drifter

[Big Daddy]

An example of hunting for food.
In a country where I grew up in Africa (several years ago), the security officer and supervisor of my school were father and son. Years back the father was in the Chad army and the son was with the anti government militia. After a certain battle that claimed many lives, the father and son realized that they were in the same battle on opposite sides and could well have been the ones to kill each other. This somehow struck a nerve and they both deserted and crossed the border with their families to the country where I was and were successful in getting asylum and later neutralization. Later on, if you paid for a couple of cartridges they would go hunting at night and bring back a deer or a wild boar and the spoil would be divided in to two right down the middle. The head and half the meat would be for the hunter and the other half for the sponsors. Hunting is not band there but is a risky job going in to the jungle. A classic example of “sustained hunting” if you will.

BD

[fantumfan2003]

Dear m24,

The problem in India being mostly we are an indiciplened lot and hence if the limit is 20 most people will exceed this.

reg drifter.

[grewal]

I cannot Express my feelings about hunting by writing long posts , but as a whole I know that a person can give unlimited excuses to prove himself right . What sort of instinct do you ( hunters) really want to satisfy. My fellow friends have been explaining Darwin's Theory Of Evolution/survival and god know what else just prove that they are genetically engineered to become a hunter. Its a very sorry state of mind . In today's scenario the survival of the wildlife in our country is already on the brink of collapse . We are comparing this situation with Germany . How can we do that since the effort of the government in saving our environment is in such a pathetic state. Here we should discuss about improving the population of the Birds and animals but on the contrary we are eagerly waiting when will our government allow us to hunt down these poor creatures. Some one wants the government to charge money in lieu of killing these animals and later on use that money for the conservation of that very specie . Someone tries to defend hunting by neatly presenting statistics of some developed countries that how we can plan and manage our hunting policies. When any fellow IFGian come up with a protest against hunting others who are pro hunting try to gag that poor fellow by giving out their divine explanations . And why do we use that word hunting where as killing will be more appropriate . I hope that better sense prevails . And could see posts on conservation than on hunting ( killing )

[fantumfan2003]

For the Indian scenario, the focus has to be definitely on conservation.
The situation with almost all species of flora and fauna is alarming and grim.
There has to be a sustained, at least a decade long, multi prong effort to increase populations of fauna and stop deforestation on a war footing.
The government and its system does not want to and cannot do anything substantial to achieve this objective so they they should relinquish control to NGOs and private initiatives.
Easier said than done I agree. But the only way out.
If we indeed love our flora and fauna so much.

M.

[nagarifle]

one thing about hunting is if you say its fun, people look at you as if you are crazy, going to work is not fun, but you have to do it, now if you make it fun its gets easy, playing football is fun, so the question is what is fun? fun is anything you enjoy doing. However everything that is fun is not legally or morally right. rapist rape and for them its fun. that is not right. get the idea?

Now i do not enjoy watching football games on tv for me thats not fun, but for many that is fun.
just because i do not enjoy football does that give me the right to say that anyone who watches football is mad and it should be banned?

that is the issue, isnt it? to me that is what i call controlling other people by giving then unsavoury name tags.

in hunting if there are local rules/laws, then those should be followed.

lets talk about money, in hunting there is money, many a jobs are involved, so my question would be who will find them employment? so hunting is banned? then who will hunt and destroy all the wildlife?

one must keep in mind that laws are not for law abiding citizens but for criminals.

[Vikram]

I cannot Express my feelings about hunting by writing long posts , but as a whole I know that a person can give unlimited excuses to prove himself right . What sort of instinct do you ( hunters) really want to satisfy. My fellow friends have been explaining Darwin's Theory Of Evolution/survival and god know what else just prove that they are genetically engineered to become a hunter. Its a very sorry state of mind . In today's scenario the survival of the wildlife in our country is already on the brink of collapse . We are comparing this situation with Germany . How can we do that since the effort of the government in saving our environment is in such a pathetic state. Here we should discuss about improving the population of the Birds and animals but on the contrary we are eagerly waiting when will our government allow us to hunt down these poor creatures. Some one wants the government to charge money in lieu of killing these animals and later on use that money for the conservation of that very specie . Someone tries to defend hunting by neatly presenting statistics of some developed countries that how we can plan and manage our hunting policies. When any fellow IFGian come up with a protest against hunting others who are pro hunting try to gag that poor fellow by giving out their divine explanations . And why do we use that word hunting where as killing will be more appropriate . I hope that better sense prevails . And could see posts on conservation than on hunting ( killing )

Grewal,

Could you please show us one single example of 'gagging' a fellow member for his views?Or are you suggesting that logical reasoning or statement of facts should not be used to make a point and instead keep repeating our feelings? As long as one is willing to exercise one's right to free speech, one should respect others' right too.It's that simple.

What do you think the so-called killers/hunters are trying to demonstrate? All the pro-hunting types have been trying to present a view that demonstrates how sustainable and ethical hunting is an effective tool of CONSERVATION! Have you attempted to read and understand at all what is written? You are only looking at one dimension of the issue and not even that is accurately described.Hunting does involve taking a life, but that alone does not define it.

Did you read my sentences about India's developmental problems and pressures on wildlife?Where was the fact of Indian scenario neglected?

Are you a meat eater,Grewal?

Look forward to your reasons.Thanks.

Best-
Vikram

[shooter]

I cannot Express my feelings about hunting by writing long posts , but as a whole I know that a person can give unlimited excuses to prove himself right .

I agree. Works both ways.

What sort of instinct do you ( hunters) really want to satisfy.

Please read my post for the answer.(8posts above yours)

Here we should discuss about improving the population of the Birds and animals but on the contrary we are eagerly waiting when will our government allow us to hunt down these poor creatures. Some one wants the government to charge money in lieu of killing these animals and later on use that money for the conservation of that very specie . Someone tries to defend hunting by neatly presenting statistics of some developed countries that how we can plan and manage our hunting policies. When any fellow IFGian come up with a protest against hunting others who are pro hunting try to gag that poor fellow by giving out their divine explanations . And why do we use that word hunting where as killing will be more appropriate . I hope that better sense prevails . And could see posts on conservation than on hunting ( killing )

Paaji, do you actually read others posts?
Whenwe give example of research, stats, you say its an excuse, when we try to describe what we mean by 'fun' you say we are making excuses.
Its not even an argument. No matter what i say, you will say its an excuse.

Actually i think what you are saying is an excuse;an excuse not to see others point of view. there are other members here with whom we have discussions but they hear our view and we theirs.

Paaji, its easy to say "save animals", what do the others do? etc etc.

Even i can say about others including you:

I cannot Express my feelings about gun ownership by writing long posts , but as a whole I know that a person can give unlimited excuses to prove himself right . What sort of instinct do you ( gun owners) really want to satisfy. My fellow friends have been explaining Darwin's Theory Of Evolution/survival and god know what else just prove that they are genetically engineered to protect themselves and their familied by self defence. Its a very sorry state of mind to think you can have enough time to reach for a gun and use it well when faced with danger. In today's scenario the law and order in our country is already on the brink of collapse . We are comparing this situation with America. How can we do that since the effort of the government in making ammo available is in such a pathetic state. Here we should discuss about improving the law and order and control guns but on the contrary we are eagerly waiting when will our government allow us to buy guns freely. Some one wants the government to charge money on import duty and later on use that money for fighting crime those guns will be used to commit. Someone tries to defend gun ownership by neatly presenting statistics of some developed countries that how we can plan and manage our gun policies. When any fellow IFGian come up with a protest against guns and crime, others who are pro guns try to gag that poor fellow by giving out their divine explanations . And why do we use that word gun owning where as weapon loving will be more appropriate . I hope that better sense prevails . And could see posts on gun control than on gun owning ( killing ).

Lets not live in utopia.

"stop corruption"
Govt is bad
Make working in national parks mandatory for school kids.
Stop supporting tiger trade.


Why stop here

Lets add
start world peace
stop poverty etc etc.

Bhai by what logic do you justify the following:

metro train, computerising the govt offices, combined training, university education, family planning, has known to work in developed countries so adopt it but wildlife management shouldnt be adopted because IT WORKS IN THE WEST????

Govt and forest dept is not corrupt. these officials dont graduate from univ. of corruption. they are representative of common people liky you and me.
Pehle hum to sudhrey. Saying no to buying tiger skins is easy after all humko offer hi kaun kar raha hai,
What takes effort is:

for a farmer not to plant rice as a cash crop but use more sustainable crop using lesser water for lesser sum of money.

Not to buy 5 houses and invest in flats and plots of land as this creates a market for more urban land.

To set aside some area ideally 15% of land "as it is" for wildlife to flourish

Not to buy shahtoosh. Dont get me started on no one you know owns one.

Not to use expensive woodwork in living room but use 'uglier' but environmentally sustainable wood in farmhouses and drawing rooms.

To use less water for lawns. and use more hardy indian plants and trees.

To use car pools.

For people believing in bambi syndrome and 'poor animals' to give up meat.

Sharing newspaper with neighbours/have just one for home/work or to give it up and use internet instead.

Not to use cooler/ac for at least one day a week. Millions of indians do it and believe me, after 2 months one gets used to it.

Use fewer cars/car pools when going for functions at least if not work.

This list is far from exhaustive. These are few steps that save money rather spend it.
If one is willing to spend money, the list is endless.

Paaji this habitat destruction has been done by you, me, mundaire, vikram, moa, m24, srswamy, fantumfan, hvj1, inder, prashantsingh, the whole ifg community, the whole country.(at least an iota if not more; think one billion iotas)
; not just a few netas.

Isko theek bhi humko hi karna hai. Shikar vagerah to baad ki baat hai. pehle khud ko to sudharein.
The agricultural land is more expensive in india than uk even when the pound was worth rs. 87. Population, you say?
Yes i say but it is also demand and supply. We all in last few decades have created a never ending demand for land by our greed. S***w the wildlife, i need a farmhouse with a swimming pool. Woh kisi ko nahi dikhta but the person consuming a tonic in china is easier to criticise.


Paaji i hope you have read this post and hope in the end you dont say "How is this related to conservation."