|
[ Return to Contents
| Post a Reply
| Post a new message
]
salvage
Posted by twodux on Dec 06 2005
My point of view would be that if you're going to kill something, you should keep the edible parts. If you start allowing head hunting (leaving the meat behind) you open up a whole new can of worms. In nature of course, not much goes to waste. Something eats just about everything. But if we allow shooting something to prove our "manhood" with the trophy and leaving the meat behind, how would you justify predator control? (We're killing off bears and wolves so we can have more antlers hanging on our walls? And leaving the meat behind for the birds and other scavengers?) Some want to kill predators because they kill more than they eat. Does that mean we should open season on trophy hunters?
Getting meat out can be hard work, that in it's self makes hunting self limiting to an extent. If you could go shoot an animal and just keep the head more people might do it thus increasing the pressure on the herd, limiting hunting opportunities.
Hunting is already frowned upon by many people. We don't need to add to the cry to end hunting by becoming so arrogant that we shoot at will and leave the meat for some other animal to clean up.
The laws we have on salvage are mostly good ones and I think strike a reasonable balance. If anything, I think they are lenient as far as salvaging hearts and livers, and the legs and giblets of game birds.
If you want something to show off or brag about without the work, take up shed hunting or photography.
If nothing else Michael, your post was thought provoking.
Previous: Can of worms! Marlin Dec 07 2005
Next: Great topic-Excellent post! Byron_Lamb Dec 06 2005
 Message Thread:
|
