Why do we humans need to reduce the bear population?

[tdoczi]

Why don't you stop your lecturing and tell us. Why do people in America hunt bears? I know there is not one answer, but my answer I believe sums up the bulk, i.e. the love of the hunt. So sum it up for me, since you think I'm wrong. Why? Answer that question.

answer this question- why is "love of the hunt" different than "love of killing"? should i amend it to "love of stalking and killing?" you're defining hunting using the word hunting. try definining it by explaining what it is instead.

Why do cats and dogs always chase small animals and kill them, only to leave them for dead? Answer that.

because they are animals. we as humans living in a society strive to be better than that and not just constantly do what "comes natural" to us even if it is abhorrent. all sorts of animals do all kinds of nasty things we would never permit in civilized human society. i would cite several of them but then someone will accuse me of comparing hunters to them.

[vamelungeon]

Humans are animals also.

[vamelungeon]

so all the things about hunting that you love you can enjoy without hunting.... except the killing part. so the only thing thats actually specific to hunting that you have said you enjoy is the killing of animals.

now that said, you talk of your family's history and how hunting was actually a large food source. if that is still the case, then great, but that doesnt convince me that thats representative of most or even many hunters.

Killing for food isn't a problem for me. We raised hogs, chickens, rabbits, etc. growing up, and killed and ate them. Killing to protect myself and others isn't a moral dilemma for me either. Some people can't do it. It doesn't mean the ones that can have mental issues.

[tdoczi]

Humans are animals also.

agreed. but can you really not think of things animals do that humans would have an inclination to do as well if not for the fact that we have decided that such behavior has no part in civilized society? cause i can think of a ton. you may not see it that way because you personally lack those inclinations, but plenty of others have them, and we have no problem telling them "sorry, but you arent allowed to do that."

[Pedaling Fool]

answer this question- why is "love of the hunt" different than "love of killing"? should i amend it to "love of stalking and killing?" you're defining hunting using the word hunting. try definining it by explaining what it is instead...

Like I said, I'm not a hunter and I've never been a hunter, thus I know my answer is not as precise as possible and I don't want to attempt to answer too deeply without proper reflection. However, I've listened to hunters before and the point is that I don't accept that they are mindless in their hunting and yes their killing. Like it or not, killing is a part of life, it is necessary. You seem to be confusing that with some morality construct created by humans. Nature doesn't teach us morality.

I know with a quick look that hunting can seem like it's all about killing, but if that were the case than why go thru the trouble of the hunt? Why don't you try reading thru here and with an open mind try and understand what attracts hunters to the hunt. http://homestudy.ihea.com/abouthunting/01why.htm

You want to talk about people that enjoy killing, than you need to talk about serial killers, who interestingly enough start out with killing animals (not hunting), but soon advance to humans. Now that mindset is very confusing to me.

...because they are animals. we as humans living in a society strive to be better than that and not just constantly do what "comes natural" to us even if it is abhorrent. all sorts of animals do all kinds of nasty things we would never permit in civilized human society. i would cite several of them but then someone will accuse me of comparing hunters to them.

Like it or not we are animals. Even if you think we're some type of spiritual entity, than we're spirits that inhabit an animal's body and we must bow to certain animalistic tendencies. We fit very nicely into the Kingdom of Life and that's why we still use animals for medical experiments.

[tdoczi]

Killing for food isn't a problem for me. We raised hogs, chickens, rabbits, etc. growing up, and killed and ate them. Killing to protect myself and others isn't a moral dilemma for me either. Some people can't do it. It doesn't mean the ones that can have mental issues.

none of those forms of killing are anything i have any issue with and if i ever have to kill someone in defense of myself or other i hope i am able to.

[tdoczi]

Like I said, I'm not a hunter and I've never been a hunter, thus I know my answer is not as precise as possible and I don't want to attempt to answer too deeply without proper reflection. However, I've listened to hunters before and the point is that I don't accept that they are mindless in their hunting and yes their killing. Like it or not, killing is a part of life, it is necessary. You seem to be confusing that with some morality construct created by humans. Nature doesn't teach us morality.

I know with a quick look that hunting can seem like it's all about killing, but if that were the case than why go thru the trouble of the hunt? Why don't you try reading thru here and with an open mind try and understand what attracts hunters to the hunt. http://homestudy.ihea.com/abouthunting/01why.htm

You want to talk about people that enjoy killing, than you need to talk about serial killers, who interestingly enough start out with killing animals (not hunting), but soon advance to humans. Now that mindset is very confusing to me.


Like it or not we are animals. Even if you think we're some type of spiritual entity, than we're spirits that inhabit an animal's body and we must bow to certain animalistic tendencies. We fit very nicely into the Kingdom of Life and that's why we still use animals for medical experiments.

the *mindless* part of "mindless killing" is your word, not mine. remove the word mindless and my argument doesnt change.

your attempt to cite serial killers just proves my point- there you have a behavior- the desire to kill other humans in a manner similar to that of hunting, just as other wild animals will kill each other for various reasons very often, that we have decided is not permissable. why not allow us to settle this by a death match? i mean we're animals and thats what many animals would do right? is it also not in fact what humans did for a very long time before we decided to disallow it? do you want to bring back dueling with pistols at sunrise because thats how animals settle things and we're just animals? please.

[Pedaling Fool]

the *mindless* part of "mindless killing" is your word, not mine. remove the word mindless and my argument doesnt change.

your attempt to cite serial killers just proves my point- there you have a behavior- the desire to kill other humans in a manner similar to that of hunting, just as other wild animals will kill each other for various reasons very often, that we have decided is not permissable. why not allow us to settle this by a death match? i mean we're animals and thats what many animals would do right? is it also not in fact what humans did for a very long time before we decided to disallow it? do you want to bring back dueling with pistols at sunrise because thats how animals settle things and we're just animals? please.

What you seem to be saying is that hunters hunt because they ENJOY killing; that is their primary motive. Is that correct?

I disagree.

You also seem to think it's morally wrong. We can go round and round on that issue, because it's a human construct. I can easily say so many things about what people should be doing and connect it to morality. I think all people should be riding a bike because it's morally wrong to be burning so much fossil fuels...It gets sticky.

Or maybe all people that eat any meat are morally wrong, regardless how they obtain it. Some people believe that, do you? Do you eat meat? If so, you are morally wrong in the eyes of many.

[tdoczi]

What you seem to be saying is that hunters hunt because they ENJOY killing; that is their primary motive. Is that correct?

I disagree.

You also seem to think it's morally wrong. We can go round and round on that issue, because it's a human construct. I can easily say so many things about what people should be doing and connect it to morality. I think all people should be riding a bike because it's morally wrong to be burning so much fossil fuels...It gets sticky.

Or maybe all people that eat any meat are morally wrong, regardless how they obtain it. Some people believe that, do you? Do you eat meat? If so, you are morally wrong in the eyes of many.

what i am saying is yes, at the end of the day, hunting more often than not is about deriving some sort of joy from killing. joy does not equal mindless. yous eem to equate the word joy with a drunken, reckless party, thats not what i am saying at all. joy can be calm and serene, it is still joy.

as to morality, all i am saying is "thats what animals do" is a nonsense justification.

[Pedaling Fool]

what i am saying is yes, at the end of the day, hunting more often than not is about deriving some sort of joy from killing. joy does not equal mindless. yous eem to equate the word joy with a drunken, reckless party, thats not what i am saying at all. joy can be calm and serene, it is still joy.

as to morality, all i am saying is "thats what animals do" is a nonsense justification.

Fine, I don't want to put words in your mouth. Ok, so you see most hunters hunt, because they find enjoyment in killing; I'll drop the mindless part.

I didn't justify hunters doing it because that's what animals do. I said, in part you gotta at least look to that as a factor; in other words it's not as easy as you seem to make it. Did you read the link about why people hunt? http://homestudy.ihea.com/abouthunting/01why.htm

As to the issue of morality, you throw that around loosely. I asked you some questions in post #128. Are you going to answer them or are you just going to keep throwing around morality as if you can deem certain people immoral, or at least their actions as immoral.

[rocketsocks]

I don't go to the races to see a crash, I don't watch MMA fights to see a fella get beat bloody, I take no joy in the killing, and feel only thanks for the animal giving its life, that I might live.

[Uriah]

Still curious, are you a vegan?

You must not have been too curious, as you hadn't previously asked, but yes, I am.

I slay a lot of plants. I made the decision after seeing Food, INC years ago (despite growing up in the midst of Franken Farms galore and witnessing how "our food" was raised and cultivated), and because it made sense. To some here I'm going against primal instinct.

[tdoczi]

Fine, I don't want to put words in your mouth. Ok, so you see most hunters hunt, because they find enjoyment in killing; I'll drop the mindless part.

I didn't justify hunters doing it because that's what animals do. I said, in part you gotta at least look to that as a factor; in other words it's not as easy as you seem to make it. Did you read the link about why people hunt? http://homestudy.ihea.com/abouthunting/01why.htm

As to the issue of morality, you throw that around loosely. I asked you some questions in post #128. Are you going to answer them or are you just going to keep throwing around morality as if you can deem certain people immoral, or at least their actions as immoral.

yes i eat meat. yes i am aware some people find this immoral. those arent the only things i do that people find immoral. there are also immoral things that society deemed unacceptable decades ago (such as settling disputes via a duel) that had they not so decided, and as a consequence i was raised to agree with their decision, i might find myself engaging in today and wondering why anyone finds it immoral.

we need to dial this back to my original, relevant to this thread supposition- the opinion of hunters as to whether or not a hunt is necessary is, to my mind, irrelevant. it is irrelevant because they have ulterior motives, namely that they want to kill the animals in question for their own enjoyment, fulfillment, pleasure, pride, whatever you wish to call it, and any statements they make about how it is beneficial or necessary is possibly self serving. in this context, the question of what i or anyone else find moral isnt really relevant.

if any hunter wants to say "yes i enjoy killing animals and i dont find it immoral" then i will applaud their honesty while finding them possibly immoral and continue to ignore their opinion as to whether or not a bear hunt is necessary.

[tdoczi]

I don't go to the races to see a crash, I don't watch MMA fights to see a fella get beat bloody, I take no joy in the killing, and feel only thanks for the animal giving its life, that I might live.

then why do it? i got news for you, it isnt because you need to in order to live.

now, if you or anyone else is truly acquiring all of their meat in this manner because you find it less objectionable than the other method of doing so, then great, i have no issue with that what so ever, but c'mon now, that isnt what youre doing. the self deception is ridiculous.

[BirdBrain]

Here we go again. Someone finds something objectionable and is unwilling to consider any opposing viewpoint. You might as well try to explain hiking the AT to a person who never steps off of manmade things. Some of us grew up eating our pets (pigs, chickens, ducks, beef critters, etc). Some of us had a big garden all their life. Some of us see GMO as a bigger issue than hunting. Some of us see hunting for food to be less objectionable than the mass production process of raising meat for slaughter. Some people rail against the former while eating the latter. Some people like to hear themselves talk and don't realize they are making a fool out of themselves. The chicken of the mass production farm is forced into a life of misery. I partridge faces a moment of misery. Both taste good. One is healthier than the other. The hunter is not an evil jerk for hunting down and killing a partridge. The chicken on the mass production farm wasn't coddled all its life. The partridge roamed free. If I was as ridiculous as the anti-hunter, I could go all batty and blame the world's ills on those that support the cruel treatment of chickens by buying chickens that come from mass production farms. That might actually have some merit. I will leave that to the vegan. Mean while, does anyone have some steak sauce to go with my steak and eggs?

[Traveler]

This discussion of hunters, pedophilia, and the morality of food is interesting and all, but the bear population continues to grow in the Northeast, as evidenced in NJ where there is a bear hunting season. So, what realistic options exist?

[squeezebox]

I'm wondering if as humans we seem to have a need to feel powerful, particularly men. So by killing an animal does that fill that primal need to feel that as an individual that my life matters in the bigger scope of the world? I'm not just another sheep?

[BirdBrain]

This discussion of hunters, pedophilia, and the morality of food is interesting and all, but the bear population continues to grow in the Northeast, as evidenced in NJ where there is a bear hunting season. So, what realistic options exist?

The population density of bears is not the issue. Looking at what works should be proof enough of what needs to be done. Maine has a thriving and safe bear population. People will argue semantics and speculation. The fact remains that bears are only a slight issue in protected areas in Maine (think BSP). I have watched it all my life. Every time someone tinkers with a hunting policy in Maine the ignorant proclaim all kinds of wild scenarios. When we opened up moose hunting, the ignorant proclaimed that the population would decrease dramatically. The hunter knew better. The population went up. The weak and the stupid were culled. The wise and the hearty survived. The same thing is in place for bear hunting. There is a reason you don't see bears in Maine even though we have one of the higher population densities in the country. Moose are now in decline because of a winter tick. I don't have a solution for that. If you want a healthy thriving and safe bear population, do what Maine is doing. If you want fearless bears in your backyard, listen to the guy that thinks hunters are evil murderers.

[Uriah]

This discussion of hunters, pedophilia, and the morality of food is interesting and all, but the bear population continues to grow in the Northeast, as evidenced in NJ where there is a bear hunting season. So, what realistic options exist?

Obviously the only viable solution is to eradicate a portion of them, if indeed it's deemed necessary (and therein lay the debate). But in doing so, the larger problem continues to swell, as it will continue to do so until (future) man is faced with the realities we've left behind.

Will there be an outcry in New Jersey for this?

I tend to doubt it, since most of the state's residents appear far, far removed from the its magnificent woodlands, and from nature itself. It's dangerous out there, and bears are a part of that danger, and we should continue to try to eradicate risk!

[tdoczi]

Obviously the only viable solution is to eradicate a portion of them, if indeed it's deemed necessary (and therein lay the debate). But in doing so, the larger problem continues to swell, as it will continue to do so until (future) man is faced with the realities we've left behind.

Will there be an outcry in New Jersey for this?

I tend to doubt it, since most of the state's residents appear far, far removed from the its magnificent woodlands, and from nature itself. It's dangerous out there, and bears are a part of that danger, and we should continue to try to eradicate risk!

there hasn't been much one of this year or in recent years that I've noticed, but at first? yes. to the point where the first year it was proposed it was cancelled at the last minute.