Killing A Deer/Killing A Fish, Any Difference?

[PA Man]

I just finished reading an article in the October 2010 issue of Backpacker Magazine. In an article by Bruce Barcott, a backpackerer turned new hunter. This was a surprise article for that magazine which the article pointed out that only 31% of the respondants to a facebook survey stated that they had hunted in the past five years. Anyway, in the article the author interviewed the vice president of PETA, Bruce Friedrich and Ted Nugent to get both sides of the issue of killing animals. One of the statements by Friedrich was that there is no moral difference between shooting a deer and a cat or a dog. I decided to ask this question on WC, knowing that there are large numbers of hunters who also fish, and fisherman who do not hunt. Here is the question: IS THERE ANY MORAL DIFFERENCE IN YOUR MIND BETWEEN KILLING AND EATING A FISH AND KILLING AND EATING A DEER, AND IF SO, WHY OR WHY NOT. Please keep it civil. I'm just curious as to others feelings on the topic. My opinion is there is no difference. Both are killed to provide food and I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish. Neither are killed by me out of neccessity. I guess that it is the instinct of my ancestors. What say you?

[perchjerker]

I would say no difference

also, no difference than eating chicken mcnuggets.

or a whopper.

or a can of tuna

[MN_Moose]

As long as legal means are used hunting to eat game is honest, acceptable tradition. Fishing is no different.

Is killing a plant (corn, tomato, bean) any different than eating meat? Not to me. They are all put on earth by the great creator for our use.

[JerryA]

That is a very good question. As long as both are being taken properly and being used for food, I really don't think there is a difference.

But, I have to say that I feel a lot different when I kill a deer than when I catch a walleye. I have taken somewhere around 70-75 deer in my time and I still feel thankful when I shoot one but also stangely sad. And, the feeling is getting stronger as I get older. Especially so when I shoot a big buck - like, man, the guy was just out lookin for a little luv and got zapped. I can no longer watch most of the hunting shows of TV where the guys get their rocks off shooting big bucks - all about the horns. I have wounded a few in my time also. Bound to happen if you hunt a lot, especially with a bow. I've spent the next couple of days searching only to not find the animal. This has come to bother me a lot. To the point that I will only take high percentage shots.

I've read articles about people "maturing" as hunters and I think this is what's happened to me. Just feel blessed that I can still do it.

[ffishman]

Hmmm, blowing the side out of a deer at 100 yds while he is just getting a drink of water, or jigging a lure hoping a fish will eat it. Getting a trophy fish, getting a picture and releasing it, or seeing you shot a small deer and.......

[Noha Cantell]

To be good stewards of, and over all that we prevail. Thoughtful Management is the key. If we waste the resource - any resource, it's wrong. If we do what we can to preserve it's longevity, it continuance in His creation, and use the bounty wisely, it can't be anything but what God told us to do.

I only have one quirk on this. Unless we feed the poor, the truly needy, don't ever give your fair game or fish away. Let the next guy/gal get their own under the same guidance as is there for you.

[teamlund]

I have killed aprox 20 deer in my life. I love it! I enjoy the meat and the hunt. As pumped as I am when I harvest a deer I still very extremly sad...Not sure why? I am a hunter, I kill things. I always figure the we ARE part of the food chain. We need meat in our diet and the venison in my freezer is MUCH heathier and cheaper than the beef at the grocery store. :happy:

Peta is a bunch of bleeding heart libs that put animals on the same level as people and it jsut aint so.......The good lord has put animals on this planet for us to hunt and eat. If he didnt want us eating them he wouldnt have given us K9 teeth. :cheers:

[bob oh]

Hmmm, blowing the side out of a deer at 100 yds while he is just getting a drink of water, or jigging a lure hoping a fish will eat it. Getting a trophy fish, getting a picture and releasing it, or seeing you shot a small deer and.......

The question was KILLING ??? Not do you feel superior?

[oldcarpenter]

The P/c culture of catch and release has probably lead to a better fishery. Similarly, wildlife conservation and QDM have contributed to the quality and quantity of the herd, with the possible exception of "Texas style" high fence operations. Where deer hunting becomes problematic is that there is no such thing as kill and release. The onus and moral equation are greater for the hunter in my opinion given the gravity of the outcome. The experience is far more intimate and the measure of judgment and control are far higher for the hunter. Hence, the ambivalence or "mixed feelings" when an animal is harvested. I have never High Fived a kill. All this aside, I suggest that anyone with a quandry about killing in fair chase, or a shore-side fish fry, should visit a feed lot first, and follow it up with a visit to the killing floor of a modern meat packing plant. Killing ain't pretty, but the consumption of concentrated protein is what made us human, along with a few other things in this 8 million year journey.

[locomoto]

I think they are very similar. I don't hunt because I wasn't exposed to hunting in my younger days. That being said I have no problem eating venison, turkeys, ducks, geese, moose, bear, walleye or panfish.

The only difference is when you catch and kill a fish, you fooled the fish into thinking your hook had some nutritional value.

When you shoot and kill a deer, you fooled the deer into thinking you weren't going to blow a hole through his heart while he wasn't looking.

Either way if it's done within the guidelines set forth.......it's all good.

[Juls]

The P/c culture of catch and release has probably lead to a better fishery. Similarly, wildlife conservation and QDM have contributed to the quality and quantity of the herd, with the possible exception of "Texas style" high fence operations. Where deer hunting becomes problematic is that there is no such thing as kill and release. The onus and moral equation are greater for the hunter in my opinion given the gravity of the outcome. The experience is far more intimate and the measure of judgment and control are far higher for the hunter. Hence, the ambivalence or "mixed feelings" when an animal is harvested. I have never High Fived a kill. All this aside, I suggest that anyone with a quandry about killing in fair chase, or a shore-side fish fry, should visit a feed lot first, and follow it up with a visit to the killing floor of a modern meat packing plant. Killing ain't pretty, but the consumption of concentrated protein is what made us human, along with a few other things in this 8 million year journey.

That's a good answer...I can't kill a deer, it's just not in me, but I can eat one. I have no problem with people who are real sportsmen about it. I do frown on the poachers though. :)

Juls

[s3939]

Well, I've learned a few things over the past few years when reading opinions about hunting or fishing. The main thing I have learned though, is that everyone has a different set of "morals/ethics". And as soon as that is pushed into any conversation, its no longer a conversation, and people just need to agree to disagree, end of story. Thats why when you're having an article featuring the ethics of Ted Nugent and Bruce Friedrich, its going to be a pointless debate.

The question of there being a moral difference between killing a deer or a fish has already been answered in the article. Only 31% of people believe there is no difference.

I believe there is no difference, and participate in both hunting and fishing. However, I would have a harder time letting an injured deer suffer, than I do putting a walleye on a stringer and dragging it behind my boat. I believe 69% of people think there is a difference because hunting, in general, is not as SOCIALLY accepted as fishing. A 6 year old is taught it is OK by most to go fishing and if the fish is hooked deep, oh well, dinner. Most 6 year olds in todays world aren't taught its OK to kill a deer, unfortunately.

[wllye]

I quit hunting about 10 years ago. I felt sorry for the deer> Personal Choice.
I don't think hunting is bad at all if you use the meat.
For me personally killing a fish and killing a deer are not the same. IMHO.
Thats just me though. I still go with me son to pick him up and his inlaws who hunt.
Just doesn't appeal to me anymore.
As far as the killing part its like being pregnant you are or you aren't.
Dead is dead

[digjig]

Interesting question. Logically there is no difference. Both are a process of harvesting game. However, from an emotional standpoint, personally, there is a significant difference.

In both cases, responsible fishermen and hunters take game for their personal use. However, the physiological "relationship" to a fish compared to that of another mammal is, personally, insurmountable. Does that make hunting or fishing wrong? No, not in my opinion.

It is the very nature of living beings to hunt outside their species. If not, feel free to ask your local Grizzly to become Vegan during the Salmon run. Perhaps our African brethren can ask their local Lion population to abstain from hunting the Wildebeest or Gazelle. I am sure the Alligator and Crocodile populations would be open to discussions to end their carnivorous exploits. No?

I know from my hunting and fishing experiences, wanton waste is not an option and smart stewardship is paramount. I eat what I kill and I do not kill what I do not intend to eat. I do not hunt duck or goose purely on the grounds that I prefer not to eat them. Conversely, I do enjoy Walleye, Pheasant and Venison. Oddly, that is the game I pursue.

I would go a step further in saying that we, as a hunters and fisherman, are MORE sensitive to the circle of life, food chain or hoof-to-plate process than non-hunter/non-fisherman omnivores. We as individuals who hunt and fish can appreciate exactly what our quarry are giving up. The scary thing is there are actually people walking among us who believe that hamburger and chicken breasts are in their original form when they purchase it at their local grocery store under cellophane!

Besides, who would you rather have dinner with, Fred or Ted? For me it's a no-brainer, the Motor City Madman with a side of roast venison!

My 2 cents.

-DJ

[T Mac]

Difference between killing and eating a walleye or a deer:
The walleye tastes better. ;)

(maybe I ate too many deer in the past...?)

[northernbite]

"Waste not, want not" I still hunt and am very selective in my harvest. I like eating deer and fish.
I only keep what I will eat in winter and that's it.

Paul

[Texeye]

There is no difference in my mind as far as the question goes.

I think the only reason this becomes a question, is because we no longer kill to survive. Now it is not survival, it is recreation. True, "most " of us eat what we kill, but many don't. We can now look at shooting that deer with big round eyes with a whole different perspective. It is not mandatory to kill it as it once was, so I think we soften up knowing we can go get a big steak at the grocery. (I'm getting soft, BTW) I think it is much easier for a person to justify killing a fish than a deer just because we are more detatched from fish.

Besides, I can catch, clean and eat a fish very easy, when compared to the work and time involved after killing a deer...I'm getting soft that way too! :),

[digjig]

I think the only reason this becomes a question, is because we no longer kill to survive. ),

Sure we do. We just pay someone else to do it (Tyson, Jimmy Dean, Inc., etc.). And I am as guilty as anyone.

[Texeye]

O.K. you got me! But that is mass killing and we don't see it.:)

[Manxfishing]

As far as a Moral difference
No it's all the same

As far as doing it
One's a warm blooded aniamal with big brown eyes
I do it every year. And I understand all to well why some people don't hunt
For me I try and make it a clean kill and let nothing go to waste.

For the Fish
I can't bleed them, but I have no problem cleaning them

It's a huge difference

[MrStarnes1]

well put. i too believe the biggest conservationists are the ones who apply for their tags, who harvest their animals, which in turn keeps the herd in check which will in turn prevent a slow death due to starvation due to the over abundance of animals in certain areas.
you could say i am guilty on both accounts of taking more than i need when it comes to hunting and fishing. i have many people within my family and circle of friends who are either unable to get out to catch walleye or who are physically unable to harvest a deer. on average i will put 40-50 walleye and 2-3 deer in my freezer. i have no problems giving them to those people who are less fortunate than myself to experience the thrill of the hunt or the enjoyment of a day on the river. or even the new program called sportsmen against hunger
like several have mentioned previously, i too have watched deer struggle for their last gasps of air, it too bothers me, but it is also the reason i spend hours at the shooting range to perfect my shot to prevent it from happening. but on the other hand, who here has caught a walleye ten minutes after being on the water and had it slowly go belly up in your live well and die. or released a fish back into the water only to see it go belly up and have the sea gulls slowly peck its insides out.
its all the price you pay and its things that will always happen. just remember to cut the hook on deep hooked fish if they are to be released and only take high percentage shots. we are spokesmen... and spokeswomen for our sports and we have to promote it in a positive image
**steps down from huge soap box**
-Josh




Interesting question. Logically there is no difference. Both are a process of harvesting game. However, from an emotional standpoint, personally, there is a significant difference.

In both cases, responsible fishermen and hunters take game for their personal use. However, the physiological "relationship" to a fish compared to that of another mammal is, personally, insurmountable. Does that make hunting or fishing wrong? No, not in my opinion.

It is the very nature of living beings to hunt outside their species. If not, feel free to ask your local Grizzly to become Vegan during the Salmon run. Perhaps our African brethren can ask their local Lion population to abstain from hunting the Wildebeest or Gazelle. I am sure the Alligator and Crocodile populations would be open to discussions to end their carnivorous exploits. No?

I know from my hunting and fishing experiences, wanton waste is not an option and smart stewardship is paramount. I eat what I kill and I do not kill what I do not intend to eat. I do not hunt duck or goose purely on the grounds that I prefer not to eat them. Conversely, I do enjoy Walleye, Pheasant and Venison. Oddly, that is the game I pursue.

I would go a step further in saying that we, as a hunters and fisherman, are MORE sensitive to the circle of life, food chain or hoof-to-plate process than non-hunter/non-fisherman omnivores. We as individuals who hunt and fish can appreciate exactly what our quarry are giving up. The scary thing is there are actually people walking among us who believe that hamburger and chicken breasts are in their original form when they purchase it at their local grocery store under cellophane!

Besides, who would you rather have dinner with, Fred or Ted? For me it's a no-brainer, the Motor City Madman with a side of roast venison!

My 2 cents.

-DJ

[gregk9]

I hate killing!!

Killing sucks!!

I absolutely HATE whacking a fish over the head with a club and cutting his guts out!! Normally I'm a catch and release guy but sometimes harvesting needs to be done.

I'm not killing Bambi though. Bambi's a mammal. That's different from a fish. That's a little to close to home. I'm a mammal too.

[Water Wolf]

I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish.

A fish isn't an animal? What is it, a plant?

[PA Man]

A fish isn't an animal? What is it, a plant?

I did a Bing search on the definition of "animal". It listed three....#2 definition was "a mammal". That is the definition I was referring to. Definition #1 was a non-plant, Definition #2 was a brutish person. Thanks for trying to correct me.

[Water Wolf]

I did a Bing search on the definition of "animal". It listed three....#2 definition was "a mammal". That is the definition I was referring to. Definition #1 was a non-plant, Definition #2 was a brutish person. Thanks for trying to correct me.

My friend, a fish is not a mammal either. You better check your dictionary again. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a mammal as a class of vertebrate animals of more than 15,000 species, including humans, distinguished by self-regulating body temperature. Fish are cold-blooded and definitely not human. You stated, "I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish." That statement implies that a fish is not an animal. Just wanted to make sure you knew that a fish is not a plant or a mammal. But a fish is definitely an animal. Weren't you paying attention is biology class, geeezzz.
:fishhit:

[PA Man]

My friend, a fish is not a mammal either. You better check your dictionary again. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a mammal as a class of vertebrate animals of more than 15,000 species, including humans, distinguished by self-regulating body temperature. Fish are cold-blooded and definitely not human. You stated, "I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish." That statement implies that a fish is not an animal. Just wanted to make sure you knew that a fish is not a plant or a mammal. But a fish is definitely an animal. Weren't you paying attention is biology class, geeezzz.
:fishhit:

I'm sorry, I can't follow you. I checked the definition of my post again and I stand by it. Where in any post I made did I say that a fish was a mammal? I think that most who read my post understood what I was trying to say. If you did not, so be it. You are just nit picking. Done.

[Tim_Kelly]

If you want to go "catch and release" hunting, take a camera not a gun. If you want the meat take the gun. Same as fishing really.

[LTD70]

I don't kill fish or game,I harvest them.To kill is when you shoot the game and leave it lay or catch a fish and throw it on shore and leave it there.Harevest is when you bring it home and eat it.

[doubleheader]

The question was KILLING ??? Not do you feel superior?

Loved it Bob.

[orchard frank]

Seems like a big difference to me. We certainly harvest a fair amount of both, but I consider a deer higher on the evolutionary scale, and I have more of an emotional reaction to taking one. I don't think anyone has the right to decide this as a moral issue, except for themselves. Hunt, don't hunt, just leave me alone. As far as fish, not much emotional reaction from me. Here is my take---I can dump out a pail of perch minnows (or impale them on a hook), and not think about it, but would not consider dumping out a bunch of fawns to die.

[thump55]

Are you saying that fawns work as perch bait? :)

[ffishman]

Superior? How the heck did you get that out of what I said. In case you missed the point here is is for you. I will type real slow, so you can understand it. I drive my 60K bass boat with my super expensive electronics to the fishing spot. I grab my 300 dollar rod with my 600 dollar reel, and hook on a 35 dollar lure. I put it in the water. If the fish hits it, that is his choice,if he swims away he still has a choice. How does that compare to shooting an unsuspecting animal at 100 yards. I have known guys that hunt, and in the heat of the hunt shot smaller deer than they wanted. But, the deer was there and they took the shot. Result, a small dead deer. If I catch a fish, that is under sized, it gets released.

[MrStarnes1]

this has turned into a big pissing match. for those who feel strongly against killing deer.... dont go and eat hamburgers, bacon, steaks, jerky, or any chicken from now on. all you guys get is the fish you caught and on thanksgiving day, you only get spam.
if you think its wrong shooting a deer, go pay a visit to your local farm animal auction or meat processing plant....
its the way of life, its how man has survived since the stone age

[castandblast]

In a way I envy those who can easily make this issue (and others like it) black and white. On one hand I agree, we hunters are killers (harvesters does sound better but is no more accurate as a description). So there really should be no difference between killing a deer or a fish, regardless of its size, number of legs or cuddliness factor. On the other hand, there is something in many of us that tells us there is a difference. I can shoot a deer or a goose or clean a fish, but I would have trouble shooting a chimp or golden retriever or cleaning a dolphin. So I end up in the grey area. It used to bother me more than it does now. But I try more now to accept that some answers in this life aren't gonna come out of a book or website, etc. And some questions (I believe) don't have a right or a wrong answer. Whether we are talking about a fishing, hunting, religous or parenting issue - sometimes a person is going to have to go on faith and instinct that their actions are correct. For the most part, people are good. And for the most part good people try to do the right thing. I guess thats good enough for me...it'll have to be, cuz I am not one of the lucky ones who can make black or white answers from grey questions.

[locomoto]

Good response castandblast.

[1625rebel]

In the end, hunting and fishing are pretty much the same. In both sports people can selectively harvest what they want. If I have a 18" walleye dangling on my line, he's gonna go in the livewell and get the knife. I don't usually feel much remorse for it. If I didn't eat it, I'd be grilling a steak in my fridge instead. If I catch a 28" walleye, she's going back into the lake. Similarly for deer I suppose you can choose your shot.

I don't hunt deer (or even own a gun for that matter). It's not because I am against it, I just wasn't brought up with it. My Dad never hunted either (his Dad had an early stroke). If it was a family event, then I would probably get my hunting gear put together right now. That's the part that looks like fun to me; getting together with close friends, generational gatherings, card games, beer, etc. Actually shooting a deer would not be my idea of fun, but I fully respect those that do. If we didn't have hunting there would be a lot of starvation some winters, and that's not something to be taken lightly.

I'm glad we have opportunities to hunt and fish, and I hope the youth of this country carry on these traditions for generations to come.

[johnboat]

My answer to your intended question is, of course, NO.
The difference on the "effect" of harvesting either food source is that a fish, when released, won't run into traffic killing unsuspecting men, women, and children, as well as cost millions if not billions of dollars in damage to crops and the insurance industry. A deer, if not harvested, will.
I have filled my belly with both food sources and enjoy them both equally. But not near as much as I enjoy the time spent out in the field or on the water with my son while harvesting them.

[bobk]

I hunt and fish both. I have often wondered that it is more cruel to take a fish and throw it on the ice to die(which takes a while) over putting a bullet or arrow in a deer and them dieing within a minute?

[Water Wolf]

I'm sorry, I can't follow you. I checked the definition of my post again and I stand by it. Where in any post I made did I say that a fish was a mammal? I think that most who read my post understood what I was trying to say. If you did not, so be it. You are just nit picking. Done.

Please allow me to help you to follow. In Post#1 you stated, "I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish." In Post#24 you stated, "I did a Bing search on the definition of 'animal.' It listed three...#2 definition was a 'mammal.' That is the definition I was referring to." You are asking if there is a distinction between killing a deer and a fish. I am asking you if you think there is a distinction between an animal and a fish. There isn't!!! A fish is an animal. Then you appeared to say that a fish is mammal. What? These are your words, not mine. You may call it nit picking. I call it accuracy, logic, and basic biology 101. Stating that you don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish makes no sense.

[walleyewall]

follow laws and regulations of your state and

happy eating

by wild i mean no store bought meat

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[ffishman]

In hunting season a whole bunch of farmers paint, on the side of their cows, in big red paint COW. I wonder why?

[JerryA]

Ha,ha. I never saw one of those cows. You are high jacking this fine discussion by pushing your apparent anti-hunting feelings. Just answer the original question or go bother someone else.

BTW, they paint cow on them so they can pick them up, transport them to the slaughter house and make Mickey D double cheeseburgers out of them.

[ffishman]

Actually I am not against hunting. I did some in my younger years, but gave it up. Some years ago there was an article in some mag I was reading. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it went something like this. Hunters in Wis shot 30,000 deer in a year. In that same year something like 80,000 were killed by vehicles. Don't quote me on the numbers, they may be wrong. But, acutally hunters do a good job of helping keep the deer population in check.

[JerryA]

Now you've got it, bro. It's all about stewardship of a natural resource.

Don't get me wrong. There are slob hunters just like there are slob fisherman - always will be unfortunately. If I had cows grazing that were worth a couple of grand each and a bunch of yahoos runing around with guns, I might paint'em too.

BTW, if I ever catch a walleye with "sheephead" painted on his side, I may have to think that maybe they are smarter than deer.

[ffishman]

Now you've got it, bro. It's all about stewardship of a natural resource.



BTW, if I ever catch a walleye with "sheephead" painted on his side, I may have to think that maybe they are smarter than deer.

Now that would be a classic.

[Crappie Kid]

I was just thinking... I hunt for Musky and will always be a CPR Musky hunter.

I dont hunt for deer but would like to try deer hunting CPR. I need some ideas on how to accomplish that.

[Mr.Seaguar]

I'll go it alone here. Killing stuff is my favorite thing to do. I have 2 hobbies. They are variations of the theme 'Killing Stuff'. Do I think there is a difference between killing fish and deer? A mile from the truck, you bet there is. I`ve never had to drag fish or stop and rest while carrying them either. Fish arent cuddly, thats why we dont call them Sea Kittens. I have High-Fived a kill. My buddy and I walked 15 miles chasing antelope. When we finally got close and filled our tags, I have never been so happy. Shooting a double on pheasants with a witness is hard to beat. I really enjoy outdoor pursuits and I enjoy taking new folks and kids.

[Catch'nRelease]

In the end, hunting and fishing are pretty much the same. In both sports people can selectively harvest what they want. If I have a 18" walleye dangling on my line, he's gonna go in the livewell and get the knife. I don't usually feel much remorse for it. If I didn't eat it, I'd be grilling a steak in my fridge instead. If I catch a 28" walleye, she's going back into the lake. Similarly for deer I suppose you can choose your shot.

I don't hunt deer (or even own a gun for that matter). It's not because I am against it, I just wasn't brought up with it. My Dad never hunted either (his Dad had an early stroke). If it was a family event, then I would probably get my hunting gear put together right now. That's the part that looks like fun to me; getting together with close friends, generational gatherings, card games, beer, etc. Actually shooting a deer would not be my idea of fun, but I fully respect those that do. If we didn't have hunting there would be a lot of starvation some winters, and that's not something to be taken lightly.

I'm glad we have opportunities to hunt and fish, and I hope the youth of this country carry on these traditions for generations to come.

I could have written this - pretty much sums up my situation and feelings on the subject.

[ffishman]

I was just thinking... I hunt for Musky and will always be a CPR Musky hunter.

I dont hunt for deer but would like to try deer hunting CPR. I need some ideas on how to accomplish that.
"Hunt" for them using a camera. It will sharpen your hunting/camo skills. You will need to get close to get a good picture. Get your picture, the deer goes on his happy way, and you mount the picture.

[Hollis ULed]

Usta hunt,.after a while I stopped. Like Juls statement, it just wasn't me. I think I did it in the first place to please my father who thought a boy should hunt. There WERE parts I liked about it, but it was mostly everything else BUT pulling the trigger.

Yes I still eat meat although not nearly as much as I used to as I don't think its all that healthy in the long run.

I also always had a problem with the wrong "harvesting" when it came to killing. Yes ,...I suppose it can be used,..but just like PITA to keep trying to have the term "Sea Kittens" to be accepted to be in common use,.. harvesting seems like a buzz word now. I don't know when people started to use the term in hunting but I don't think I ever heard it used as a boy.

But in the morning I guess I'm going to harvest some eggs from the supermarket,..maybe some bacon too,..or maybe some Morning Star farms meatless sausage,...depending on how I feel,....

[Further North]

I was just thinking... I hunt for Musky and will always be a CPR Musky hunter.

I dont hunt for deer but would like to try deer hunting CPR. I need some ideas on how to accomplish that.

Easy: use a camera.

[Further North]

Hey, from an existentialist view point...what if a fish kills a deer?

[Juls]

Hey, from an existentialist view point...what if a fish kills a deer?

:phatyo::rotfl: :popc1:

[fireboat]

Biology 101, NOTHING GOES TO WASTE IN NATURE and nature can be more cruel than man. Big fish eat little fish. Coyotes eat deer. There's a predator or scavenger out there for everything that lives. Man didn't get to the top of the food chain just to eat veggies.

[sjunlogged]

Biology 101, NOTHING GOES TO WASTE IN NATURE and nature can be more cruel than man. Big fish eat little fish. Coyotes eat deer. There's a predator or scavenger out there for everything that lives. Man didn't get to the top of the food chain just to eat veggies.

So you are saying man evolved, as in evolution? I am just curious, as perhaps if Man is different than animals eating veggies might not be an issue...however if Man is an animal I see your point and agree...sj

[Juls]

So you are saying man evolved, as in evolution? I am just curious, as perhaps if Man is different than animals eating veggies might not be an issue...however if Man is an animal I see your point and agree...sj

Careful there sj....don't go down that path. Religion is not allowed on the message boards either. Same as politics...stay on topic please.

Juls

[sjunlogged]

Careful there sj....don't go down that path. Religion is not allowed on the message boards either. Same as politics...stay on topic please.

Juls

Seemed a logical response to the post I quoted...sj

[Juls]

Seemed a logical response to the post I quoted...sj

Yep...just say'n...:)

thanks!

[fireboat]

Careful there sj....don't go down that path. Religion is not allowed on the message boards either. Same as politics...stay on topic please.

Juls

So you are saying man evolved, as in evolution? I am just curious, as perhaps if Man is different than animals eating veggies might not be an issue...however if Man is an animal I see your point and agree...sj

It's amazing how far off track these discussions can get. "Evolved" was NOT mentioned in my post. Some men get to the top of the food chain by being smarter than others. Man is continually learning how to hunt and fish more successfully. We can learn at school , from others or by trial and error. I have learned how to hunt and fish and I don't have a problem pulling the trigger or setting the hook. I eat what I kill, I like to eat , therefore I have to kill. All my friends hunt or fish. I don't know any vegetarians.

[ED333]

Difference between killing either species: Physically, no. Mentally, yes. Why? I think its more of a social thing.

Do whatever you want so long as its legal and dont ram your views down my throat.

[tshot]

This is really an interesting topic. I have pondered this over in my mind many times. What I feel is that the intelligence level of the creature plays an important role to me.
I always feel more sadness when I kill a whitetail than when I box a fish. I believe most people would agree with that. We are the apex predator, we have to eat, and one life is as important as the next but we certainly have different feelings about each individual species. This is normal because we are human and we have the ability to rationalize things. Make sense? Tshot.

[walleyedmike]

Well, might as well add my $.02 as well, right or wrong.

I love to fish, have no problem harvesting anything that we want to eat. I've never hunted, really had no desire.

I guess my moral problem is that the fish has a choice: It can either bite my crankbait, or not bite my crankbait. It seems like sitting in a tree with a rifle, and waiting for and shooting a deer that has been walking through that area every day for a month doesn't really have a choice as to either getting shot or not getting shot.

Just my feelings on the subject.

[fireboat]

Well, might as well add my $.02 as well, right or wrong.

I love to fish, have no problem harvesting anything that we want to eat. I've never hunted, really had no desire.

I guess my moral problem is that the fish has a choice: It can either bite my crankbait, or not bite my crankbait. It seems like sitting in a tree with a rifle, and waiting for and shooting a deer that has been walking through that area every day for a month doesn't really have a choice as to either getting shot or not getting shot.

Just my feelings on the subject.

Cattle, hogs, chickens and the turkey we eat for Thanksgiving have no choice. If you have a moral problem shooting a wild deer then you need to visit a slaughter house. At least the deer are able to live and roam free for a while. Your right, animals don't have a choice but we make that choice for them every time we eat meat.

[walleyedmike]

Cattle, hogs, chickens and the turkey we eat for Thanksgiving have no choice. If you have a moral problem shooting a wild deer then you need to visit a slaughter house. At least the deer are able to live and roam free for a while. Your right, animals don't have a choice but we make that choice for them every time we eat meat.
That wasn't the topic of the original post, was it?

The question was whether it was the same to kill a fish or a deer.

[fireboat]

That wasn't the topic of the original post, was it?

The question was whether it was the same to kill a fish or a deer.

I thought I was answering your statement about the deer's "choice". And your right the original post was about killing a deer or a killing a fish. Since you don't hunt and have never killed a deer it's obvious the original post wasn't directed to you but to the sportsman that have killed both deer and fish. I stand corrected.

[Further North]

This is getting way to serious...

What if you kill a deer with a fish?

Howzat for moral relativism?:cookoo:

[walleyedmike]

I thought I was answering your statement about the deer's "choice". And your right the original post was about killing a deer or a killing a fish. Since you don't hunt and have never killed a deer it's obvious the original post wasn't directed to you but to the sportsman that have killed both deer and fish. I stand corrected.
The original post never stated anything about whether anyone has hunted or fished. In fact, the original post states "fishermen who do not hunt."

The original post asked about the "moral difference in my mind," and I've given that. I'm not saying its wrong to hunt, just stating why I choose not to.

[1625rebel]

What if you kill a deer with a fish?


-OR-

:fishhit:

[Further North]

-OR-

:fishhit:

Right...I mean can you imagine the emotional damage inflicted upon that poor icon?

He'll (she'll?) prolly never hold a real job, will probably be typecast into the roll of victim and will never get the chance to show his true depth for being able to properly convey the nebulous field of internet BBS emotions...

I think a nation wide support system needs to be worked out...you can send your money here...

[jet man]

Please allow me to help you to follow. In Post#1 you stated, "I don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish." In Post#24 you stated, "I did a Bing search on the definition of 'animal.' It listed three...#2 definition was a 'mammal.' That is the definition I was referring to." You are asking if there is a distinction between killing a deer and a fish. I am asking you if you think there is a distinction between an animal and a fish. There isn't!!! A fish is an animal. Then you appeared to say that a fish is mammal. What? These are your words, not mine. You may call it nit picking. I call it accuracy, logic, and basic biology 101. Stating that you don't put an animal on a higher plane than a fish makes no sense.

Interesting that our "friend" PA starts a controversial post then just disappears when it is pointed out to him that he contradicts himself.

I myself see no difference and I do both. We make personal choices every day in our lives. Emphasis on the personal. Be ethical and law abiding and not wasteful.

[PA Man]

Interesting that our "friend" PA starts a controversial post then just disappears when it is pointed out to him that he contradicts himself.

I didn't disappear. I saw no reason to continue the back and forth with Water Wolf. I started the thread just to hear others opinion, not to argue with them. You must have liked the topic, you posted on it. There is no controversy as far as I'm concerned. Everyone has a right to feel the way they feel on the topic, no right or wrong, good or bad. That was the point of the topic. To hear peoples reasons for the way they feel on the topic and why. All that I did was pose the question, gave my take on it, and got out of the way until Water Wolf took exception to the manner in which I gave my opinion. If people think that I contradict myself, so what? That's it.....That's all there is.

[tzonetom]

Nope. I use a gun for both.

[jet man]

I didn't disappear. I saw no reason to continue the back and forth with Water Wolf. I started the thread just to hear others opinion, not to argue with them. You must have liked the topic, you posted on it. There is no controversy as far as I'm concerned. Everyone has a right to feel the way they feel on the topic, no right or wrong, good or bad. That was the point of the topic. To hear peoples reasons for the way they feel on the topic and why. All that I did was pose the question, gave my take on it, and got out of the way until Water Wolf took exception to the manner in which I gave my opinion. If people think that I contradict myself, so what? That's it.....That's all there is.

You took a shot cuz he pointed out a contradiction in your arguement and you brought the arguement back to him. . There is no "thinking" you contradict yourself; the evidence is there in black and white.

Never said I liked the topic; only pointed out I considered it controversial and then gave my take.

[Pezman38]

Well, might as well add my $.02 as well, right or wrong.

I love to fish, have no problem harvesting anything that we want to eat. I've never hunted, really had no desire.

I guess my moral problem is that the fish has a choice: It can either bite my crankbait, or not bite my crankbait. It seems like sitting in a tree with a rifle, and waiting for and shooting a deer that has been walking through that area every day for a month doesn't really have a choice as to either getting shot or not getting shot.

Just my feelings on the subject.


I just wanted to add a couple opinions based on the quote you made.

I think killing a fish and killing a deer are the same, as I have done both. The deer being a mammal I think made it slightly harder.

The other quote about fish having a choice to bite is true, but you "lured it in", which to me is close to the same as baiting a Bear or Deer. Instinct for fish and mammals is to go eat it, you are just useing that in your favor. If those are havested the end result was the same. Just take a camera if you didn't want to harvest either.
This arguement is completely seperate than this post is asking, we are not discussing what is "sporting" here.

[PA Man]

You took a shot cuz he pointed out a contradiction in your arguement and you brought the arguement back to him. . There is no "thinking" you contradict yourself; the evidence is there in black and white.

Never said I liked the topic; only pointed out I considered it controversial and then gave my take.

OK, Your story, tell it like you want to. Like with Water Wolf, I see no value in going back and forth with you. Done.

[jet man]

OK, Your story, tell it like you want to. Like with Water Wolf, I see no value in going back and forth with you. Done.

LOL hey if you don't have the ability to admit that you made a error and contradicted yourself that is your problem, not mine LOL

Later