Harvesting vs Killing
09-27-2005, 02:14 PM
#11
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location:
Posts: 208
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
For me it depends on who I am talking to, if I'm talking to other hunters, I use kill, stuck, blasted, downed, whatever, when I'm around non-hunters it's a courtesy to use harvested or "took". It's like dropping an F-Bomb in front of your preacher or Grandma.
09-27-2005, 02:35 PM
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KY
Posts: 1,230
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
Like it or not. When you end the life of something you are KILLING it. 'Harvesting' showsless disrespect imo. You categorizing it with corn and beans. Like it was never breathing or anything.
09-27-2005, 02:39 PM
#15
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blossvale, New York
Posts: 21,199
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
It's a rediculous smoke screen to appear politically correct. Even the guys on PTI were laughing about someone(maybe Larry Szonka) using the term. Their remarks, do they(the hunters) really think the antis are that stupid. Do they really think it makes it more politically correct. They thought it was an absurd use of the word and mentioned it insulted the intelligence of people. When I was in Vietnam I never once "Harvested" a dink, no matter how much nitrates I put on them. The use of harvest in NO way shows more or less respect for an animal.You kill them for petes sake. There isn't any way to sugar coat that. If you can't live with that you're in the wrong game. Calling it something else than what it is is foolishness. Why don't we call it "Inviting them to dinner". That makes more sense.
09-27-2005, 02:50 PM
#17
New Sheriff
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 4,591
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
ORIGINAL: davidmil
It's a rediculous smoke screen to appear politically correct. Even the guys on PTI were laughing about someone(maybe Larry Szonka) using the term. Their remarks, do they(the hunters) really think the antis are that stupid. Do they really think it makes it more politically correct. They thought it was an absurd use of the word and mentioned it insulted the intelligence of people. When I was in Vietnam I never once "Harvested" a dink, no matter how much nitrates I put on them. The use of harvest in NO way shows more or less respect for an animal.You kill them for petes sake. There isn't any way to sugar coat that. If you can't live with that you're in the wrong game. Calling it something else than what it is is foolishness. Why don't we call it "Inviting them to dinner". That makes more sense.
It's a rediculous smoke screen to appear politically correct. Even the guys on PTI were laughing about someone(maybe Larry Szonka) using the term. Their remarks, do they(the hunters) really think the antis are that stupid. Do they really think it makes it more politically correct. They thought it was an absurd use of the word and mentioned it insulted the intelligence of people. When I was in Vietnam I never once "Harvested" a dink, no matter how much nitrates I put on them. The use of harvest in NO way shows more or less respect for an animal.You kill them for petes sake. There isn't any way to sugar coat that. If you can't live with that you're in the wrong game. Calling it something else than what it is is foolishness. Why don't we call it "Inviting them to dinner". That makes more sense.
Scary, I know
09-27-2005, 02:50 PM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Almost Heaven. Boone Co. WV
Posts: 1,003
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
Glad to see the majority still have there feet on the ground!
Yes we kill them, pull there guts out, pull their skin off, cut them into peices, freeze them and eat them with our potatoes and gravy!
I cannot stand for people to water down the nuts and bolts of what a hunt consists of. Harvesting is for what grown in the garden IMO!
Yes we kill them, pull there guts out, pull their skin off, cut them into peices, freeze them and eat them with our potatoes and gravy!
I cannot stand for people to water down the nuts and bolts of what a hunt consists of. Harvesting is for what grown in the garden IMO!
09-27-2005, 02:56 PM
#20
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: On an Island in Vermont
Posts: 22,607
RE: Harvesting vs Killing
ORIGINAL: MQ1shooter
I understand where you're coming from. I think the difference lies in the attitude with which the act itself is carried out, and the intentions of what is to be done with the animal afterwards.
Case in point: I responded to a thread about a gentleman taking a raccoon earlier and said that I had been tempted to loose an arrow at one of those critters, especially when bordeom had sunk in, but had never done so because I couldn't bear the thought of wasting a broadhead on one. In reality, that's only a partial truth; the other reason I haven't done so is because I know I'll never gut it, take it home, clean it and eat it. To me, if I shot a raccoon (or any other such animal) it would be merely killing it because I never planned on using it to fortify my family with. I know there are those that love the taste of raccoon; that's not the point. The point is, I myself would never go to all the trouble with one. And, yes, I've tasted raccoon before. That's exactly why I wouldn't go to the trouble.
Deer, and other game animals, like that provide substenance for my family. Do I enjoy the act of hunting? Absolutely. Is the act born out of necessity to feed my family? No way. But -- I know that after I get to enjoy the thrill of the hunt, the animal will also serve a useful purpose later down the road. Hence, a sense of harvesting as opposed to merely killing.
Hope that helps.
I understand where you're coming from. I think the difference lies in the attitude with which the act itself is carried out, and the intentions of what is to be done with the animal afterwards.
Case in point: I responded to a thread about a gentleman taking a raccoon earlier and said that I had been tempted to loose an arrow at one of those critters, especially when bordeom had sunk in, but had never done so because I couldn't bear the thought of wasting a broadhead on one. In reality, that's only a partial truth; the other reason I haven't done so is because I know I'll never gut it, take it home, clean it and eat it. To me, if I shot a raccoon (or any other such animal) it would be merely killing it because I never planned on using it to fortify my family with. I know there are those that love the taste of raccoon; that's not the point. The point is, I myself would never go to all the trouble with one. And, yes, I've tasted raccoon before. That's exactly why I wouldn't go to the trouble.
Deer, and other game animals, like that provide substenance for my family. Do I enjoy the act of hunting? Absolutely. Is the act born out of necessity to feed my family? No way. But -- I know that after I get to enjoy the thrill of the hunt, the animal will also serve a useful purpose later down the road. Hence, a sense of harvesting as opposed to merely killing.
Hope that helps.