Ethics, vegetarianism, and the treatment of farm animals.

[hazelmoo]

I understand hunting for food and necessary (at this point) population control... but I'll never understand hunting for fun. I don't see killing any other living being as being "fun", but I realize and respect that not everyone is like me in that regard.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[battie]

And of course we all think of the big game hunters posing with the dead lion or whatever, and that makes any of us uncomfortable on some level.

If it's poaching or illegal in any way, this pisses me off. If it's all legal beagle, then this doesn't bother me at all. A decent chunk of the expensive big game hunts have the money go directly to the animal preserve (rather than through the government via organization donations where corruption skims from the top) and the animal itself is used to feed local people. In those cases, the animal was a danger to local people or was old and no longer breeding (as per info from the preserve). Those cases, I'm totally fine with.

 

[love2hunt]

If it's poaching or illegal in any way, this pisses me off. If it's all legal beagle, then this doesn't bother me at all. A decent chunk of the expensive big game hunts have the money go directly to the animal preserve (rather than through the government via organization donations where corruption skims from the top) and the animal itself is used to feed local people. In those cases, the animal was a danger to local people or was old and no longer breeding (as per info from the preserve). Those cases, I'm totally fine with.

Yep. The picture is not the issue. How and why the animal was killed is the issue.

I understand hunting for food and necessary (at this point) population control... but I'll never understand hunting for fun. I don't see killing any other living being as being "fun", but I realize and respect that not everyone is like me in that regard.

Define "hunting for fun." If you mean someone who kills an animal, cuts off its head and leaves the meat to rot, that's not hunting; that's poaching. Most (if not all) states have very strict regulations on how an animal that has been killed has to be treated. Anything that falls outside the legal boundaries is poaching, and every hunter I know abhors those who kill and waste in the name of "fun."

However, if the animal is killed legally, I think there is no problem having fun doing so. As I mentioned in my previous post, though, the kill is not the fun part. Believe it or not, I do feel very sad when I've killed an animal (and am all the more motivated to treat it respectfully because of it). The fun is in the anticipation, the planning, the camaraderie, and sharing meals with friends.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

Yep. The picture is not the issue. How and why the animal was killed is the issue.



Define "hunting for fun." If you mean someone who kills an animal, cuts off its head and leaves the meat to rot, that's not hunting; that's poaching. Most (if not all) states have very strict regulations on how an animal that has been killed has to be treated. Anything that falls outside the legal boundaries is poaching, and every hunter I know abhors those who kill and waste in the name of "fun."

However, if the animal is killed legally, I think there is no problem having fun doing so. As I mentioned in my previous post, though, the kill is not the fun part. Believe it or not, I do feel very sad when I've killed an animal (and am all the more motivated to treat it respectfully because of it). The fun is in the anticipation, the planning, the camaraderie, and sharing meals with friends.

If it's poaching or illegal in any way, this pisses me off. If it's all legal beagle, then this doesn't bother me at all. A decent chunk of the expensive big game hunts have the money go directly to the animal preserve (rather than through the government via organization donations where corruption skims from the top) and the animal itself is used to feed local people. In those cases, the animal was a danger to local people or was old and no longer breeding (as per info from the preserve). Those cases, I'm totally fine with.

Exotic big game hunting in 'exotic' countries is hunting for fun. You don't eat it, so you don't need it. Some people argue 'But it helps with conservation!' In reality, most farmers who operate those exotic game ranches are doing so just for their own personal income. You are hunting on a farmer's property more often than not and helping them maintain their land for their livestock. It's all about how you market it. I think a lot of people are under the impression that their trophy fees are going to conservation funds or whatever....that may be true for some hunt programs, but absolutely not all of them. Often times, the valuable bits of the carcass are harvested and the meat is left to rot.

There is little to no conservation benefit of breeding semi-captive animals solely for the goal of selling their death to the highest bidder. Then the fact that wild but unprotected animals are hunted is an entirely different story, although equally unproductive in my eyes.

 

[love2hunt]

Exotic big game hunting in 'exotic' countries is hunting for fun. You don't eat it, so you don't need it. Some people argue 'But it helps with conservation!' In reality, most farmers who operate those exotic game ranches are doing so just for their own personal income. You are hunting on a farmer's property more often than not and helping them maintain their land for their livestock. It's all about how you market it. I think a lot of people are under the impression that their trophy fees are going to conservation funds or whatever....that may be true for some hunt programs, but absolutely not all of them. Often times, the valuable bits of the carcass are harvested and the meat is left to rot.

There is little to no conservation benefit of breeding semi-captive animals solely for the goal of selling their death to the highest bidder. Then the fact that wild but unprotected animals are hunted is an entirely different story, although equally unproductive in my eyes.

If someone is arguing that there is a conservation benefit, they are likely talking about wild animals, not so much the ranch animals. Tag and license fees are by-and-large the primary source of funding for government-managed wildlife conservation programs worldwide. But hunting private ranches where the animals are fenced in and sold for money? No conservation benefit there that I am aware of, so as you pointed out, there has to be a distinction made between the two.

Still, if someone wants to fly to Africa to shoot a fenced-in animal, take home the head, and see that the meat goes to local people? I don't see anything immoral or wrong about that. Unsporting and lame? Definitely, but that's just my opinion. If it's left to rot, then I'd argue it is immoral and wrong (as eluded to in my previous posts). I would definitely disagree that the meat is "often times... left to rot." I'm open to being proven wrong, but the majority of hunting stories I've read about such hunts specifically mention the meat going to locals. It being left to rot is the minority end result, and again, falls within the lines of poaching in most locales.

Here's a video that I like (even though it steps on my toes more than once) to use to explain some of this stuff for the uninitiated.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

If someone is arguing that there is a conservation benefit, they are likely talking about wild animals, not so much the ranch animals. Tag and license fees are by-and-large the primary source of funding for government-managed wildlife conservation programs worldwide. But hunting private ranches where the animals are fenced in and sold for money? No conservation benefit there that I am aware of, so as you pointed out, there has to be a distinction made between the two. And no...it's not just the jerk animals who are hunted as your video makes it seem.

Still, if someone wants to fly to Africa to shoot a fenced-in animal, take home the head, and see that the meat goes to local people? I don't see anything immoral or wrong about that. Unsporting and lame? Definitely, but that's just my opinion. If it's left to rot, then I'd argue it is immoral and wrong (as eluded to in my previous posts). I would definitely disagree that the meat is "often times... left to rot." I'm open to being proven wrong, but the majority of hunting stories I've read about such hunts specifically mention the meat going to locals. It being left to rot is the minority end result, and again, falls within the lines of poaching in most locales.

Here's a video that I like (even though it steps on my toes more than once) to use to explain some of this stuff for the uninitiated.

Many are under the assumption (primarily the people that can afford to do these hunts) that their trophy fees are essentially 'donations' to conservation efforts, whether they are hunting wild or not. This is often the justification they use. It's simply not true in many cases. There is no conservation benefit to hunting already poached wild animals and animals already in decline. It just doesn't make any sense. You're conserving livestock herds/crops and the land needed to support that, not the animals you hunt. Farmers want elephants dead because they trample crops, for example. A lot of these fees just end up in the pockets of the people who made the hunt possible (the farmer who operates the land, the guide who took you, etc.) and in no way shape or form are doing anything for conservation efforts. And no...it's not just the jerk animals who are hunted as your video makes it seem.

The public health issue of eating the meat is another conversation (one you could have regarding hunting here in the US as well). My boyfriend/his dad hunt and I was surprised to hear that they never really considered the risks, they just do what their family has always done. Plus, given the parasitism in wild animals...I know you cook the meat, but still. A lot of hunters are handling carcasses bare handed. I think deer hunting is going to have a lot of public health concerns in the coming years to do the severe disease the midwest herds are starting to experience. You can't cook out prions, and a lot of contamination happens when you're gutting a carcass out in the field.

I'm definitely not against hunting, I'm just against how many people go about it. Bait piles are asinine from an epidemiology POV. A bad shot (although usually not intentional) is a pretty inhumane way to end a life. People are desperate to literally exterminate all predators to protect the ability to get a deer or two in their freezer each year? Seriously, wtf. I know not all hunters are like that, but many are willing to overrun a state with deer just so they can get their venison craving taken care of. Very few hunters I know consider anything beyond getting meat in their freezer each year. If you're going to be a hunter, you need to be aware of the ecological ramifications of your actions, whether it be voting to support predator hunts or choosing to use a bait pile. I'd say the same thing to anyone who buys meat at the grocery store.

 

[love2hunt]

Many are under the assumption (primarily the people that can afford to do these hunts) that their trophy fees are essentially 'donations' to conservation efforts, whether they are hunting wild or not. This is often the justification they use. It's simply not true in many cases. There is no conservation benefit to hunting already poached wild animals and animals already in decline. It just doesn't make any sense. You're conserving livestock herds/crops and the land needed to support that, not the animals you hunt. Farmers want elephants dead because they trample crops, for example. A lot of these fees just end up in the pockets of the people who made the hunt possible (the farmer who operates the land, the guide who took you, etc.) and in no way shape or form are doing anything for conservation efforts. And no...it's not just the jerk animals who are hunted as your video makes it seem.

The public health issue of eating the meat is another conversation (one you could have regarding hunting here in the US as well). My boyfriend/his dad hunt and I was surprised to hear that they never really considered the risks, they just do what their family has always done. Plus, given the parasitism in wild animals...I know you cook the meat, but still. A lot of hunters are handling carcasses bare handed. I think deer hunting is going to have a lot of public health concerns in the coming years to do the severe disease the midwest herds are starting to experience. You can't cook out prions, and a lot of contamination happens when you're gutting a carcass out in the field.

I'm definitely not against hunting, I'm just against how many people go about it. Bait piles are asinine from an epidemiology POV. A bad shot (although usually not intentional) is a pretty inhumane way to end a life. People are desperate to literally exterminate all predators to protect the ability to get a deer or two in their freezer each year? Seriously, wtf. I know not all hunters are like that, but many are willing to overrun a state with deer just so they can get their venison craving taken care of. Very few hunters I know consider anything beyond getting meat in their freezer each year. If you're going to be a hunter, you need to be aware of the ecological ramifications of your actions, whether it be voting to support predator hunts or choosing to use a bait pile. I'd say the same thing to anyone who buys meat at the grocery store.

Got any sources for your first paragraph? Overall, the video explained why the "trophy hunting doesn't help conservation" argument is invalid. He obviously uses lots of hyperbole to make his points, but the sources he quotes are solid. I'm very open to being wrong, but I've never seen anything academic that disputed the claims made in the video.

I do agree that hunters need to consider the ramifications of their decisions in the same way people buying meat at the store do. Just know that there are conscientious hunters out there that do so!

 

[that redhead]

The public health issue of eating the meat is another conversation (one you could have regarding hunting here in the US as well). My boyfriend/his dad hunt and I was surprised to hear that they never really considered the risks, they just do what their family has always done. Plus, given the parasitism in wild animals...I know you cook the meat, but still. A lot of hunters are handling carcasses bare handed. I think deer hunting is going to have a lot of public health concerns in the coming years to do the severe disease the midwest herds are starting to experience. You can't cook out prions, and a lot of contamination happens when you're gutting a carcass out in the field.

I think the risk of disease transmission to hunters is quite low, honestly. Infectious agents like parasites and bacteria should be pretty easily cooked off. Prions (I assume you're referring to CWD) are certainly of more concern but there has been no evidence to support that CWD would affect humans. We all know how prions like to be, so fair enough to be careful but I wouldn't use this as an argument against hunting. (Link here for those interested.)

 

[pinkpuppy9]

I think the risk of disease transmission to hunters is quite low, honestly. Infectious agents like parasites and bacteria should be pretty easily cooked off. Prions (I assume you're referring to CWD) are certainly of more concern but there has been no evidence to support that CWD would affect humans. We all know how prions like to be, so fair enough to be careful but I wouldn't use this as an argument against hunting. (Link here for those interested.)

I'm not saying that's a reason to stop hunting. I'm saying that if you're hunting, you need to be aware of what's out there and how your hunting practices are actually contributing to disease transmission.

Got any sources for your first paragraph? Overall, the video explained why the "trophy hunting doesn't help conservation" argument is invalid. He obviously uses lots of hyperbole to make his points, but the sources he quotes are solid. I'm very open to being wrong, but I've never seen anything academic that disputed the claims made in the video.

I do agree that hunters need to consider the ramifications of their decisions in the same way people buying meat at the store do. Just know that there are conscientious hunters out there that do so!

I could give you the lectures I've attended by the veterinarians who actually deal with this kind of stuff firsthand (both the conservation and public health parts), but it's not really my property to share unfortunately (like, we're specifically asked not to share their lectures). There are a few papers in the works right now that should be published in the next year or two, so some of the lectures aren't even accessible yet beyond being physically present. This is a pretty hot topic in conservation medicine so I suspect it will be getting a lot of attention in the years to come. Is Trophy Hunting Helping Save African Elephants? more or less covers what these same lectures did, and delves more into the exploitation of local communities than most vets on the forefront tend to deal with.

I think the exotic game ranches in Texas might be a more appropriate location to shoot a lion if you feel you must do that, but the people interested in these activities tend to want the thrill of the chase rather than a pre-cooked experience I guess.

 

[that redhead]

I'm not saying that's a reason to stop hunting. I'm saying that if you're hunting, you need to be aware of what's out there and how your hunting practices are actually contributing to disease transmission.

How does hunting contribute to disease transmission? Honest question.

 

[battie]

Exotic big game hunting in 'exotic' countries is hunting for fun. You don't eat it, so you don't need it. Some people argue 'But it helps with conservation!' In reality, most farmers who operate those exotic game ranches are doing so just for their own personal income. You are hunting on a farmer's property more often than not and helping them maintain their land for their livestock. It's all about how you market it. I think a lot of people are under the impression that their trophy fees are going to conservation funds or whatever....that may be true for some hunt programs, but absolutely not all of them. Often times, the valuable bits of the carcass are harvested and the meat is left to rot.

There is little to no conservation benefit of breeding semi-captive animals solely for the goal of selling their death to the highest bidder. Then the fact that wild but unprotected animals are hunted is an entirely different story, although equally unproductive in my eyes.

This is why I specified the hunts managed and run by preserves or animal organizations themselves. Hence mentioning the animals specifically hunted aren't part of the breeding population.

I think the risk of disease transmission to hunters is quite low, honestly. Infectious agents like parasites and bacteria should be pretty easily cooked off. Prions (I assume you're referring to CWD) are certainly of more concern but there has been no evidence to support that CWD would affect humans. We all know how prions like to be, so fair enough to be careful but I wouldn't use this as an argument against hunting. (Link here for those interested.)

This. Again, knowing so many people who hunt, not a single person has ever actually gotten sick in relation to a hunt that I know of. They hardly ever get sick. If any thing, I could see an argument that people who hunt would have greater exposure, and would probably be less susceptible to bacteria and parasites.

And most, if not all, deer hunters I know don't eat CWD or blue tongue deer. I think they mentioned 1) concern of not knowing if it's transferable and 2) it messes with the meat and it doesn't taste good. If they tag such a deer, they then dispose of the body through other means and keep the hide. Maybe mount the head if it's still in decent shape.

 

[dyachei]

i saw someone get tapes from hunting bear on Monsters Inside Me once. But they didn't cook the meat well

 

[DVMDream]

i saw someone get tapes from hunting bear on Monsters Inside Me once. But they didn't cook the meat well

Mmmmm.... tapeworms.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

How does hunting contribute to disease transmission? Honest question.

Not so much the actual act of killing the animal (obviously) but the methods some hunters use to attract prey. Bait piles are horrendous as are salt licks. If you set bait/salt licks, you're encouraging the gathering of deer as well as every other animal in the forest. It only takes one sick animal to urinate/defecate/leave saliva behind to get the rest of the visiting animals sick.

This is why I specified the hunts managed and run by preserves or animal organizations themselves. Hence mentioning the animals specifically hunted aren't part of the breeding population.



This. Again, knowing so many people who hunt, not a single person has ever actually gotten sick in relation to a hunt that I know of. They hardly ever get sick. If any thing, I could see an argument that people who hunt would have greater exposure, and would probably be less susceptible to bacteria and parasites.

And most, if not all, deer hunters I know don't eat CWD or blue tongue deer. I think they mentioned 1) concern of not knowing if it's transferable and 2) it messes with the meat and it doesn't taste good. If they tag such a deer, they then dispose of the body through other means and keep the hide. Maybe mount the head if it's still in decent shape.

Some deer hunters I know don't know what these diseases are, and Michigan is getting hit hard with CWD right now. or there's "well if part of the meat looks bad I just cut that bit off and leave it behind." yeah, they can tell when an animal has been chronically sick, but can you tell when the infection is still acute? Not always, unless you submit samples (which isn't always going to happen if there are no clinical signs). Also, I think we'd be surprised how many people have had/do have a parasitic infection with no symptoms. Extrapolate that to anything from STDs to a subclinical infection of well....anything. You can't really say you're free of disease until you've been tested for it (there's my epi class shining through...help me).

And even those preserves and animal organizations for exotic hunts can be quite corrupt. It's not unheard of for animals to be caught from the wild and transported to different areas solely to be hunted, either. All in all, conservation money just isn't a reliable justification for the practice.

Edit: I should clarify that by Michigan being "hit hard" I mean that the powers that be estimate we're going to see a significant die out in our deer in the coming years due to CWD.

 

[twelvetigers]

i saw someone get tapes from hunting bear on Monsters Inside Me once. But they didn't cook the meat well

Also a good way to get Trichinella spiralis, which actually encysts and lives within muscle cells in the body...

 

[dyachei]

Also a good way to get Trichinella spiralis, which actually encysts and lives within muscle cells in the body...

isn't that the nematode that made the law have to change so you had to feed your pigs cooked trash, not just trash?

 

[twelvetigers]

isn't that the nematode that made the law have to change so you had to feed your pigs cooked trash, not just trash?

Ew, maybe.

* Googles "Trichinella pig garbage" *

Yep. Ew.

The dramatic declines in trichinae in pigs reflect changes in the industry. Historically, trichinae infection in pigs was associated with feeding of raw garbage. Major inroads were made into trichinae infection with the advent of garbage cooking laws passed for vesicular exanthema (1953-1954) and the hog cholera eradication program (1962). Of equal importance has been the movement to high levels of biosecurity and hygiene under which most pigs are now raised. Still, opportunities for exposure of pigs exist and some precautions should be implemented (see below).

 

[dyachei]

Ew, maybe.

* Googles "Trichinella pig garbage" *

Yep. Ew.

the things I remember from vet school. I swear most of them have no impact on how I practice medicine

 

[Baer]

Many are under the assumption (primarily the people that can afford to do these hunts) that their trophy fees are essentially 'donations' to conservation efforts, whether they are hunting wild or not. This is often the justification they use. It's simply not true in many cases. There is no conservation benefit to hunting already poached wild animals and animals already in decline. It just doesn't make any sense. You're conserving livestock herds/crops and the land needed to support that, not the animals you hunt. Farmers want elephants dead because they trample crops, for example. A lot of these fees just end up in the pockets of the people who made the hunt possible (the farmer who operates the land, the guide who took you, etc.) and in no way shape or form are doing anything for conservation efforts. And no...it's not just the jerk animals who are hunted as your video makes it seem.

If you take the time to look into it there is quite a bit of research done on if hunting for conservation is beneficial or not. Most agree that it is pretty beneficial. Even if some of they money does end up in the hands of the corrupt, you are still giving an incentive for them to keep land available for the animals. Without the trophy hunting they would just use the land for farming or something else.

Here's a good paper on it:

http://www.africanwildlifeconservat...09/Economic-and-conservation-significance.pdf

 

[Mad Jack]

I understand hunting for food and necessary (at this point) population control... but I'll never understand hunting for fun. I don't see killing any other living being as being "fun", but I realize and respect that not everyone is like me in that regard.

It's not fun, per se, but rather a desire to fulfill the natural drive to hunt. Think cats or snakes- they're much happier if you fulfill their natural desire to hunt live prey. Some humans are basically the same way.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

If you take the time to look into it there is quite a bit of research done on if hunting for conservation is beneficial or not. Most agree that it is pretty beneficial. Even if some of they money does end up in the hands of the corrupt, you are still giving an incentive for them to keep land available for the animals. Without the trophy hunting they would just use the land for farming or something else.

Here's a good paper on it:

http://www.africanwildlifeconservat...09/Economic-and-conservation-significance.pdf

I have taken the time to look, that's the thing. I've been fortunate enough to meet and talk to veterinarians in conservation med who have actually been to these places/are from these places and work with these people and animals (edit: and have presented convincing research). I think I'm pretty well convinced that they know what they're talking about, but agree to disagree. There are 'good' papers supporting both sides, and a lot of papers regarding the disastrous effects trophy hunting has on population genetics.

I say as long as you're aware of the facts and not following misconceptions ('hunt fees are given to conservation!' or 'the land is reserved just for the exotic game!' or 'The meat goes to the starving children!' to start), your decision is your own. I'm not here to convince anyone to change their mind, just to point out the fact that some of these arguments have been based off of things that just aren't true (or aren't true all the time).

 

[battie]

I understand hunting for food and necessary (at this point) population control... but I'll never understand hunting for fun. I don't see killing any other living being as being "fun", but I realize and respect that not everyone is like me in that regard.

I think the best way I could describe it is like playing videogames. I play Halo online whenever I can and I specifically play the swat ranked list. There's a couple maps where campers can set up shop and pick off spawn points. When that happens I get an immense amount of satisfaction from being able to survive spawning, getting around to the side or back, and getting that head shot. I get that it's different because living beings vs fake super soldiers, but the basic drive is the same.

 

[Jess Monster]

Even if some of they money does end up in the hands of the corrupt, you are still giving an incentive for them to keep land available for the animals. Without the trophy hunting they would just use the land for farming or something else.

Hunting is not the only economic activity that encourages local people to conserve wild species and land. Ecotourism is often a more profitable venture that benefits a much wider range of businesses and people (hoteliers, cleaners, drivers, safari guides, private security, artisans, etc.) while conserving and commoditizing wildlife through non-consumptive activities.

In Kenya, where consumptive uses of wild animals have been prohibited countrywide since the 1970's, the economic sectors that support tourism are very robust to the tune of a billion dollars in revenue. So, while Kenya may have lost out on tens of millions a year in hunting revenue, it gained hundreds of millions more in revenue re-branding itself as the premier wildlife tourism destination of East Africa.

 

[that redhead]

Hunting is not the only economic activity that encourages local people to conserve wild species and land. Ecotourism is often a more profitable venture that benefits a much wider range of businesses and people (hoteliers, cleaners, drivers, safari guides, private security, artisans, etc.) while conserving and commoditizing wildlife through non-consumptive activities.

In Kenya, where consumptive uses of wild animals have been prohibited countrywide since the 1970's, the economic sectors that support tourism are very robust to the tune of a billion dollars in revenue. So, while Kenya may have lost out on tens of millions a year in hunting revenue, it gained hundreds of millions more in revenue re-branding itself as the premier wildlife tourism destination of East Africa.

There are also a lot of people who think Ecotourism is a terrible thing for local communities, too.

 

[Jess Monster]

There are also a lot of people who think Ecotourism is a terrible thing for local communities, too.

Any activity used by humans to generate profit will experience issues with greed and exploitation eventually. Gotta pick your devil I guess.

 

[pinkpuppy9]

There are also a lot of people who think Ecotourism is a terrible thing for local communities, too.

Any activity used by humans to generate profit will experience issues with greed and exploitation eventually. Gotta pick your devil I guess.

I think a lot of the same arguments apply-not all organizations are actually doing any single thing to help conservation efforts, some exploit the local communities, there are some ethical/cruelty concerns in certain situations, etc. Plus there are a lot of behavioral issues that have developed from things like whale watching that I don't think anyone necessarily predicted. In order for ecotourism to work, there also has to be a significant educational component and it's not always there.

I think if you need to shoot an animal or ride an elephant in an exotic locale just to be able to connect with nature and feel like you're helping conservation, then that's the real issue at hand.

 

[love2hunt]

I'm not saying that's a reason to stop hunting. I'm saying that if you're hunting, you need to be aware of what's out there and how your hunting practices are actually contributing to disease transmission.

I could give you the lectures I've attended by the veterinarians who actually deal with this kind of stuff firsthand (both the conservation and public health parts), but it's not really my property to share unfortunately (like, we're specifically asked not to share their lectures). There are a few papers in the works right now that should be published in the next year or two, so some of the lectures aren't even accessible yet beyond being physically present. This is a pretty hot topic in conservation medicine so I suspect it will be getting a lot of attention in the years to come. Is Trophy Hunting Helping Save African Elephants? more or less covers what these same lectures did, and delves more into the exploitation of local communities than most vets on the forefront tend to deal with.

I think the exotic game ranches in Texas might be a more appropriate location to shoot a lion if you feel you must do that, but the people interested in these activities tend to want the thrill of the chase rather than a pre-cooked experience I guess.

According to the article, Namibia is using the model successfully, while corruption is preventing it from working in Zimbabwe and Tanzania. Corruption is the problem, not the model of using hunting as a means of providing conservation funds.

And if we're being intellectually honest, this really is a tangential topic when it comes to the ethics of hunting. If you believe that hunting is acceptable, you will find the arguments that support it. Vice versa for those against it.

Not so much the actual act of killing the animal (obviously) but the methods some hunters use to attract prey. Bait piles are horrendous as are salt licks. If you set bait/salt licks, you're encouraging the gathering of deer as well as every other animal in the forest. It only takes one sick animal to urinate/defecate/leave saliva behind to get the rest of the visiting animals sick.

Some deer hunters I know don't know what these diseases are, and Michigan is getting hit hard with CWD right now. or there's "well if part of the meat looks bad I just cut that bit off and leave it behind." yeah, they can tell when an animal has been chronically sick, but can you tell when the infection is still acute? Not always, unless you submit samples (which isn't always going to happen if there are no clinical signs). Also, I think we'd be surprised how many people have had/do have a parasitic infection with no symptoms. Extrapolate that to anything from STDs to a subclinical infection of well....anything. You can't really say you're free of disease until you've been tested for it (there's my epi class shining through...help me).

And even those preserves and animal organizations for exotic hunts can be quite corrupt. It's not unheard of for animals to be caught from the wild and transported to different areas solely to be hunted, either. All in all, conservation money just isn't a reliable justification for the practice.

Edit: I should clarify that by Michigan being "hit hard" I mean that the powers that be estimate we're going to see a significant die out in our deer in the coming years due to CWD.

There is definitely some merit to the arguments against baiting and disease prevention. Here in VA, we are not allowed to hunt over bait. Most of the reasoning is specifically to limit disease transmission. It's common sense to me.

As far as the safety of eating meat from hunted animals goes, I've heard far fewer instances of someone getting sick from deer meat than store bought or restaurant food. Hunters are universally encouraged to wear gloves while processing game, keep it properly temped, throw it out if it looks or smells bad, etc. Do all hunters follow those guidelines? Of course not. It is common knowledge in the hunting community, however.