Here you go



Here, you asked for proof that humans dont need animal products to live healthy, I gave you one.. And you used your own experience as a 'proof' that it isnt true, hence why I said it was a fallacious argument



And here you made the wrong association of vegetarianism with destruction caused by agriculture. Factory farmed meat also depends on monoculture agriculture, and much more so in terms of resources than vegetarianism, hence why I showed you the other paper.

I responded appropriately to your own words, I didn't invent anything you said, you were the one who said it yourself.

And just to make clear: I am not saying that humans SHOULDN't eat meat, i'm saying they don't necessarily HAVE to , to be healthy. You can be a healthy vegetarian (or even vegan, with some special care). You can also eat meat and be perfectly healthy, I definitely don't deny that! Eating meat or not is a personal choice. You eat what you want. I just felt like posting here due to seeing misinformed arguments regarding vegetarianism and health, and agriculture sustainability.

How do you know you are less susceptible to diseases?


I agree that vegetarian/vegan diets can be healthy. But they are no more or less healthy than a meat eaters diet if they do it responsibly. Of coarse the normal person that eats fast food and crap like that is going to be sick and unhealthy and fat. But you can't pin that lifestyle on every person who eats meat, especially not on the people that are responsible and know where the meat they eat comes from and that also watch how much of it they consume.

And on the other side of it, I know vegetarians/vegans that look horribly skinny and are always tired and sucked up looking. One diet isn't better than the other. They both can be very unhealthy or very healthy depending on how you do it. It is just a life choice.



I agree with this.

"And here you made the wrong association of vegetarianism with destruction caused by agriculture"

Uhhh where?

I said "Vegetarianism is completely a product of agricultural societies. maybe you can do it in a polyculture food forrest type of system".

That is what I said. Please don't take my words out of context.

If you can find me a culture that lacks large scale agriculture that is traditionally vegetarian than please do provide a link so I can read all about them. Until then I stand by what I said as a fact..that vegetarianism is a product of agricultural societies.

I never said vegetarianism is the problem with agriculture. I said agriculture has caused destruction. It just happens to be that vegetarian diets rely heavily on agriculture..again if you can provide a link to some ethnic group with a long history of non agriculture reliant vegetarianism please do.

"And just to make clear: I am not saying that humans SHOULDN't eat meat, i'm saying they don't necessarily HAVE to , to be healthy. You can be a healthy vegetarian "

I never started this thread to debate what kind of diet is healthy..but sinse people are so set on talking about vegetarianism, you still have to raise animals as a vegetarian..modern conventional farming practices grow grain to feed the animals, weather you eat the animals or are just a vegetarian drinking milk and eating eggs. The land is still being used to grow the feed for the animals. Even vegan diets(none of you are getting all wild foods so you all are part of this) pretty much rely on a lot of produce that is grown using fertilizer from farmed animals and fish. Polyculture completely avoids that because the animals are grazing etc on the land itself, and fertilizing the land so that it can become abundant with more plant, insect and animal species.

You just said it again



With this you are implying that vegetarianism causes destruction, more-so than meat eating, which is untrue, as mentioned before. Factory meat farming relies more on unsustainable agriculture than a vegetarian diet. The problem of sustainability with agriculture is not agriculture itself, its extensive MONOculture, which can be associated with someone who eats vegetables, or with feeding animals which one then eats.

And asking for me to research societies that are non-agricultural has really nothing to do with this argument. You will make your own choices on what you eat, and your choices can be more or they can be less sustainable, cause more or less suffering to one or another kind of lifeform, and this is something that is dependent on your context in the present, not on cultures of the past.

okay have it your way. You win. I wont argue in circles about things I never said.

No, I fully agree that our current model cannot continue.

For anyone interested in food, farming and sustainability I'd like to recommend two books:

Where the Buffalo Roam: Restoring America's Great Plains by Anne Mathews

The One-Straw Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming by Masanobu Fukuoka

I'm going to drop out of the rest of this thread, as it seems to have become too contentious.

I don't hunt, but I've enjoyed many free meals from animals my brothers have killed (mostly deer and wild hogs). They taste delicious.

Recently, my younger brother has been trying to talk me into joining him on one of these pig hunts. Now I've never though that highly of people sitting in trees waiting to shoot a deer far off in the distance (I have far more respect for bow hunters) but, this pig hunt thing sounds entirely different. Apparently they go out in the woods with dogs, big knives, and a gun just in case things get out of hand. They then run down pigs with the dogs then stab the pigs in the heart with a knife.

It sounds pretty brutal and barbaric, but there's something very primal about it that makes me think about giving it a try. It seems much more natural than buying a pack of lunch meat from the store. It also seems like it would leave you with more respect for just what you're eating. Plus it just taste so good. I'm not a big fan of ham bought from the store, but this stuff taste much better.

I could see how something like that might be used as a right of passage.

Jamie

Thank you for this thought provoking thread... I personally feel that any one who hunts and kills an animal which has lived a free uninhibited natural life in the most humane manner possible, using highly skilled methods like bow hunting deserve a great deal of respect. I have chosen to be a vegetarian for 14 years as I cant find it within me to condone or support an incredibly inhumane and cruel industry as the meat industry. I am unable to hunt for my own meat and to be quite honest I truly don't think I have it in me to hunt and kill an animal.

Though I have a passion for bass fishing and it definitely is very meditative while having a powerful ability to connect you to the movement and rhythms of nature. I love fish but if I don't catch it myself I don't think its ethical to eat the creature. I think that if you choose to eat meat it comes with a certain responsibility that you should only eat an animal if you catch it or hunt it for yourself.

There is a profound disconnect within our society today with food and it is of the utmost importance to make sure if you choose to eat meat or be a vegetarian or vegan that you support locally grown organic produce that isn't contributing to the destruction of the environment and the unnecessary harm or suffering of living sentient creatures. Even the egg industry is involved in terrible atrocities towards animals. This sort of awareness that comes from growing your own food, catching or hunting for your own meat seems to resonate an innate connection that we have with nature deep inside us.

If you aren't able to hunt for your own meat or catch your own fish it is wise to try and source game meat from animals that lived free lives and haven't been factory farmed and pumped full of hormones. It is also important to make sure to select fish which aren't caught by unsustainable methods like trawling and to avoid fish that are over fished for or that come from fish farms.

Sadly the loss of tradition, community, personal responsibility and the systematic destruction of the concept of family has greatly contributed to the disenchantment of the world that we observe today. If we can even in a small way reignite those ideologies with rituals like hunting as a right of passage, growing our own food and living our lives permeated with a sense of awareness and being highly conscious than we are at least contributing to rebuilding in our own humble way that which we have so tragically lost.


Much Peace and Kindness

Well put! Our society often deprives people of the chance to actually grow up before they die. This is a real disservice to them, but the real problem is that they are not generally recognized as having a child's level of development and are allowed to act as adults in our society. We debate with them in a way we would not have to interact with children, and they often impose their rules on more developed souls, which is a shame.

Actually being part of, and experiencing, the cycle of life is a real part of growing up and human development. Until recently this was usually done with children before or around middle school age. Now many people eat meat their whole lives without ever slaughtering an animal, some without ever actually seeing one that they end up eating.

You can't really appreciate the meat you eat without witnessing and understanding the sacrifice and process involved in obtaining it. We end up with a wasteful society that throws away as much food as they eat with disgusting disrespect for what was involved in obtaining it.


> I do however think it's a fallacy to claim that your way or killing to get meat is better then any other way.

It's something you won't understand unless you were raised to understand the cycle of life or come to understand it on your own. One hunting trip as a "rite of passage" probably won't accomplish this for most people. Immersing yourself in the cycle of life to the point that you understand and accept it is not the easiest thing to accomplish in this day and age.



I'm glad that I have your approval to participate in the cycle of life. Thank you for not taking away the birthright that has been enjoyed by all humans for the past 200,000+ years. The approval of someone who is out of touch with, and doesn't understand firsthand, the past +200k years of human evolution means so much to me.

Point of fact... humans and all the species that are co-evolving with us have been evolving with projectile weapons for at least +200k years. That's if you only count modern projectile weapons, such as bows/arrows, slings, and the like. If you count all projectile weapons, such as thrown rocks then you're looking at about +2.5 million years.

Unless you disregard hunting laws and hunt from your car, or happen to live in an area with uncommonly high game population, your chances of success (even with our modern tools) is less than half. The national rate for deer hunting success is 47% (2006).

So you spend time/money on gear, go out for hours at a time, hunt many days, and still have a less than 50/50 chance of getting your meat. This is very much as it always has been. So it really doesn't matter how you (legally) hunt.

Denying yourself modern tools is foolish except as a means to challenge yourself or experience more ancient hunting methods. Trying to hunt with old tools like traps/spears/bows reduces your chance for success and increases your chances of not getting a clean kill. Nobody wants to see suffering animals or lose wounded game.


The fact is that humans can't survive without eating animal products, and you certainly can't survive in a natural setting without eating animals or animal products. Plant foods do not contain vitamin B12, and we cannot make it ourselves. "Vegetarians" survive only by turning a blind eye to the fact that they actually are consuming some form of animal products, or by using modern cheats. Being so divorced from the natural cycle of life and the reality of nature is not conducive to a state of good mental health and development.

I think this attitude bleeds out into all aspects of our world. Because we are unwilling to militarily intervene (kill people) we allow mass murder and genocide to occur all over the world.

This infantile morality is exactly the same as the anti-hunting group. They're happy to let many animals starve to death rather than allow hunters to humanely control populations while productively using the meat to sustain life.

In my home state it was frequently the case that anti-hunting types would feed deer and create excessive populations that couldn't survive the cold winters. The same people would resist increasing the hunting harvest and not allow hunters on their land. It took regulations and many years of education showing the thousands of starving deer to create enough outcry to stop this practice. What we ended up with was increased hunting fees to cover feeding the deer in the winter and private individuals prohibited from feeding deer. So because of ignorance and unnatural morality both groups ended up having their rights infringed to some extent.


-FF

I believe this thread is supposed to be about hunting as a rite of passage, not about correct diet?

Anyways sustainable living/hunting to me is about moderation and cycles. Being compassionate to other creatures in nature is important to me, anyone who has had a pet knows animals feel emotions. On that same note plants likely feel emotions as well. So when it comes to eating you should eat as much to make you feel healthy and no more. Hunting as a rite of passage connects you to the source of your energy. The effect hunting has had on me is that I eat less meat since I understand how emotionally intense the whole venture is. Typically most of my eat does not come from my hunting, but local organic farms. I like to get as much of my food from friends/ my garden. I think it is important to cultivate a relationship with your food that is loving and responsible. Hunting has illuminated me as to the importance of knowing your food. For those who hunting is unrealistic but still want to get to know the source of their food, I suggest that you go to a local farm market and talk to the farmers, ask them if you can tour the farm. Get to know what you put in your body.

> anyone who has had a pet knows animals feel emotions.

It's important to remember and make the distinction that animals feel the animal homolog of human emotion. They obviously don't experience human emotion, and that is an important distinction.

> On that same note plants likely feel emotions as well.

I'm not aware that there is any basis whatsoever to make that statement. They don't posses even remotely homologous biology with which to produce emotion.

Everything else you wrote makes perfect sense, but I would suggest taking things much further if you really want to connect to nature.

Offer to work on the farm for a day, week, or longer. Hopefully you'll get a chance to experience the full domestic cycle of life... animals being born, nursed, named and loved, fed and cared for, slaughtered, and finally eaten at your table. Understanding and coming to terms with this is essential for full development as a denizen of this world.

Most people wouldn't consider this "fun", and it's certainly harder work than most people are used to, but I don't imagine that giving birth is "fun" either. Both are such key parts of life that they really need to be experienced and embraced in order to develop as a human being. Without these experiences you aren't connected to our species past or present, and have no real understanding of the cycle of life or nature.


-FF

one thing that most people don't get into when the topic of hunting/gathering as a sustainable source of food removed from the agriculture system, is insects. Insects are eaten by many indigenous peoples, they qualify as animal products and provide tons of nutrients, including B vitamins like B12 and a really great protein source. Essentially it's like eating tiny lobsters and shrimp..

..and yes I do plan on going there. I have been looking into ways to prepare grasshoppers and other insects and I plan on exploring that over the next year. Insects are one of the most sustainable food sources on the planet for people to be getting into and I think in the west we need to get over the issue we have about eating them. I have eaten both ants and grasshopper so far and its not bad at all. Ants are kind of sour though. I am not in the city and know of areas where I can get tons of grasshoppers and other insects pretty easily on a regular basis within walking distance.

I am most interested right now in hunting birds, rabbits, squirl etc..smaller animals that are all good to eat and I will learn to use the furs also and use the bones and eat the organs..and fishing of course.

Another thing is that some larger wild game that are hunted often in America are now at their highest populations ever, due to environmental efforts that were put forth by hunters to regulate and protect these species and their habitats. Anyone who thinks hunters are all just people sitting in trees drinking beer shooting all the animals are not that informed. Many many wildlife preservation efforts in America have had hunters behind them all the way.

Ducks unlimited was also started entirely by hunters, and now there is more protected wetland area for ducks and other wetland species than ever before. These people did not just shoot all the ducks into extinction.

Collecting bivalves(clams, oysters etc) is another strategy for getting nutrient dense food off of the agriculture system..and for those with ethical issues surrounding meat..well bivlaves don't have nervous systems..so its not in theory any different from eating a plant. I personally don't feel like eating plants is somehow morally more okay than eating animals, I think that is sort of biased towards one kingdom and maybe even disrespectful to the plants..but that is just how I feel about it. I eat them both and I think they both deserve equal respect and concideration.

Crickets aren't bad. They're easily raised or caught and will eat just about any plant material. All sorts of worms, grubs, bugs, insects, and semi-palatable plants can be eaten in a survival situation. It's not really what I'd be seeking out or hoping to live on, but there's certainly nothing wrong with eating them, and they're great for supplementing your diet and during lean times.

Knowing you can survive in nature with little to nothing is a great feeling. If you assume the worst case your only real route is trapping. That's human intelligence at it's best, and I highly suggest reading a book on survival trapping. The number of traps you can make with literally nothing but twigs and branches is staggering.

There's really no other viable way to survive alone in the woods when there isn't gatherable food around. It's very hard to gather enough worms, grubs, and insects to sustain yourself without an occasional squirrel, porcupine, bird, etc.. Traps require almost no energy expenditure and are highly effective.

It really amazes me how many people intend to just basically roll over and die if our fragile system collapses. With no understanding or connection to the natural world this is the fate of the majority of our population. It just doesn't strike me as a proper way to live.

> Another thing is that some larger wild game that are hunted often in America are now at their highest populations ever,

Seems pretty obvious that a desire to maintain populations and a willingness to use effective tools is the only way to properly manage wildlife resources. Hunters are the only ones in this category, but most people don't seem to realize this.

Letting non-hunting environmentalists manage wildlife is a very bad idea. The have a consistent record of making foolish decisions that result in untold amounts of animal suffering.

A recent problem in my current state is the reintroduction of wolves, which was a very bad idea in the first place. We consistently met and overshot target populations, but the feds wouldn't allow hunting them despite them getting out of control. After quite a legal struggle my state has now realized that it's nearly impossible for our hunters to kill them.

People don't want to hunt them in the first place since they aren't good eating, fur is worth very little any more, and even mounts can't really be exported because they're considered "endangered" in most states. The few hunters that actually go out and hunt them find it nearly impossible to kill them without sophisticated techniques like long range shots, calls, decoys, scents, etc..

We now have an overpopulated wolf population with no way to keep their numbers in check. They're a dangerous top level predator, and the elk and deer populations are suffering. The elk that are managing are scrawny from running in fear all the time, and they're killing the trees because their scared grazing habits tend to make them girdle a lot more trees because they're constantly eating and running. Because the wolves have no natural predators and the game is plentiful they have taken to randomly killing for sport and frequently leave carcasses after only eating a snack from them.

Ranchers have not had too much trouble from livestock deaths, but this is mostly because they ARE allowed to shoot the wolves and are compensated for losses from the conservation fund. Seems the wolves are pretty wary and have no problem killing wild game, and/or prefer the sport of it.


My point is that for people connected to nature, aka people who participate in it, these things are easily foreseeable. People not connected in this fashion are generally meddling fools that create the exact problems their ignorant bleeding hearts seek to prevent. When you're not connected to the cycle of life you are the meddling fool with a child-like understanding of life.

Thus, hunting is certainly an important right of passage if you ever hope to be one with nature rather than just a meddling outsider that blunders through life without ever gaining a true understanding of the great cycle we are all participating in.


-FF

Killing plants is okay?

Man cyb, you have it totally wrong. Yes sport hunting is that for sure. but REAL hunting is exactly opposite. I cant resonate with you feeling like its barbaric cause it is in no way cruel as far as I see it. Animals eat animals, and when humans hunt its usually very humane. Clean kills very little to NO suffering. Deer especially are tricksters, and hunters generally congratulate THEM (the deer) on there abilities and how difficult it can be to track them. Its no easy feat.

All I have to say is go hunting with a passionate hunter. My friend was fighting tears after shooting his first deer with a bow. He had rifle hunted before. It was ego shattering if anything. He showed clear signs of having a spiritual experience and apologized (and thanked) many times to the deer for taking its life. He also smoked almost a full pack of cigarettes.

Talk about up close and personal when it comes to gutting, dragging, hanging, and skinning a dear. When you go through something like this it really brings you to a primal state of consciousness. I was able to imagine and feel as if I were doing this in order to live. Very moving strong emotions that you wont feel doing anything else, especially pushing a shopping cart around trying to decide if you want T-Bone or RibEye.

Venison is awesome. Elk is amazing. Moose is Mind Blowing!

I would like to go bull frog hunting sometime, as I have learned how good frog legs taste and would like to do the whole process myself.

One of the most honourable techniques of hunting...

Life of Mammals


Much Peace and Compassion

Nice link Aegle!

Because I have been much less sick in these last few years, and when I was, I was getting better much quicker than before. Also the allergies that I had/have are much less "powerful". Again this is just from my own experience.

>> Hunting is one of the most barbaric, ego boosting, self congratulatory, nasty businesses out there...
> Yes sport hunting is that for sure. but REAL hunting is exactly opposite.

You have no business morally judging any form of hunting that doesn't involve wanton cruelty for the sole purpose of deriving pleasure from the suffering of another being.

Trying to split hairs and micro-moralize like this usually just reveals ignorance of the subject, which points out the absurdity of making judgements like this in the first place.

Hunting IS a sport, and sports are usually based on measuring the skill of a useful activity. People trophy hunt to add an element of difficulty, to have a mount showing the beauty of nature, and to honor the animal and the hunt. There's nothing wrong with any of that, and should be praised rather than disparaged.

Taking the biggest and oldest animals available is exactly what people should be doing and is an element of good wildlife management. All states have regulations restricting the taking of underage animals, and it's pretty ridiculous to be criticizing people for putting in extra effort to take that to it's furthest extent.

People still eat or donate the meat from trophy game. In most states abandoning game or failing to harvest the meat is a crime. It rarely happens and the DNR makes it easy to donate your meat if you don't have storage or the desire for it. There's absolutely nothing different about a "sport" hunter who puts in extra time and passes up younger animals in order to get something worthy of display or recognition.

There's nothing wrong either with paying guides to take you on a guided hunt. Having help and hunting in a group has always been part of hunting. If you don't happen to have hunting buddies or live in an area with good hunting then there's absolutely nothing wrong with paying a professional guide to help you.

I don't consider shooting staged animals (Cheney style) to be particularly sporting, and nobody considers that to be "sport" hunting. Even that is not morally abhorrent since it has it's place. People with time limitations, introducing and training youths, etc. are certainly valid reasons. Even in those quickie "hunts" for city slickers the meat is eaten. Nothing is wrong with going out and shooting your game bird rather than buying one in a supermarket. The bird is killed as humanely as anything used in factory farms, and it also provides connection to the animal and training to the people involved.


Before you disparage others activities you should first understand them, then you need to flesh out a logical and valid reason that it violates some legitimate moral principle. Think about that next time before you try to shame and make someone feel bad about their activities.

The #1 thing I see in anti-hunters is a basic ignorance of what they're talking about. The second thing is a complete failure by them to identify a legitimate moral objection.

They invariably try to play upon some vague discomfort about anyone taking pleasure in participating in the cycle of life. IF the cycle of life is indeed a good and natural thing then you SHOULD take pleasure in participating in it. Trying to divorce yourself from it is just burying your head in the sand and willful ignorance. Seeing hunters as taking pleasure in the act of killing an animal is just a symptom of their ignorance about the experience.

The REAL experience that I see most often can best be described as tears of sadness on a first hunt. Then progressing to tears of mixed joy and sadness as you start to become one with the cycle of life. When you really embrace and understand the cycle of life it really is just tears of joy that you are participating in and witnessing the cycle of life continue. Not everyone expresses these feelings the same way, and men rarely actually shed tears. If someone uses humor or expresses a casualness or pleasure at the experience it's not because they're some sadistic sack of humanity who takes pleasure in killing, but because that is just how they express these feelings on the outside. Think about that next time you rush to judgement against someone.


-FF