I think its fine for animals whose population has to be controlled through hunting. The absolute worst way of consuming meat is through mass production. Best case would be we remove ourselves (humanity) from the chain, but thats a long process and cant be done without properly reintroducing predators etc.

Hunting with a valid reason (for food, population control, etc.) is acceptable and/or a necessity.

Hunting for funsies only - including all the BS safari hunting that are essentially glorified high tech fishing trips - is disgusting

Shooting a deer that’s lived wild and free, making every effort to make the kill as quick and painless as possible seems like just about the most ethical way to get meat that I can think of. And especially in areas where the deer population is too high, it’s really important for managing the ecosystem. Plus, ammo and equipment sales get taxed specifically to fund conservation, which is important.

I also feel like if you can’t stomach the process of killing and cleaning an animal, maybe you shouldn’t eat meat at all?

By and large, I think hunting for food is a great way to get more in touch with where your food comes from, one of the most ethical ways to acquire meat, and a nice excuse to sit quietly in the woods without interruption. Trophy hunters can fuck off tho.

if I couldn’t handle killing and gutting an animal I shouldn’t be eating meat

I had this exact line of thinking. But for me that means I don’t eat meat anymore. Killing really turns my stomach, and I don’t actually need meat to be healthy.

But I love hiking and camping, I just bring my own food instead of a gun or fishing pole.

Depends on the type. Hunting pests like rabbits possums pigs, inseason game like ducks, pheasant and deer is all great. I dont like hunting rare endangered animals or helicopter hunting with a machine gun except if its a pest culling like feral pigs.

For the activity I really enjoy it. Its a great outdoor activity to do with friends and family. I like getting up early and heading out across the paddocks in the crisp morning and seeing the sun come out. I dont like butchering because im pretty odd about textures and smells but i’ll do it when i have to. I dont find it to be inhumane at all.

Hunting for food is fine.

Hunting for trophies is not.

I’ve worked in wildlife conservation, and I’m all for it. With a few caveats.

• Be a fucking good shot. Practice. Don’t slop and wound. Humane kills to the greatest extent possible. Know what the fuck you’re doing.
• Eat the meat. Venison is delicious. Harvest, don’t just take a trophy.
• No spears. Holy shit, please. See point 1. Why is this still a thing? Even a niche thing, but still.
• Don’t scoff at tag prices. Be proud of your contribution. Donate to the crunchy granola hippies that ensure you have game to hunt.

I’m pretty simple.

Hunting to eat it? Great. I love me some deer sausage.

Hunting to chopoff its head and mount it on your wall like some ghoulish asshole? Go fuck yourself.

I feel like trophy hunters don’t show any respect to the animal, while hunters for eating do.

As long as it’s done responsibly and legally I have no issues with it.

not the answer you’re looking for, but: i haven’t eaten meat in five years, am the healthiest I’ve ever been, and no longer feel guilty about eating

It’s cool and good, but where I live it’s becoming increasingly expensive. Yes to locals/workers hunting their own food on communal land. No to upper class bastards flying in to hunt, getting themselves and their setters airlifted back to a lodge for lunch, etc. And trophy hunting should not be a thing.

Hunting for food is OK, as long as proper technique is observed (safe, humane, environmentally responsible).

Hunting for fun is a sociopath’s pastime.

I’m from Finland, which has a 1340km border with Russia.

When my grandad grew up you’d either hunt or fish if you wantes to eat. My dad hunted. I’m the only one of my siblings with a hunting license. I was raised with a lot of “when the Russians come”-mentality.

I’ve been moving countries, so I’ve had to give up my rifles and I’m not that passionate about it that I’d figure out where to go do it. But I do think it’s a good skill to have, and I keep my license active.

And my two spaniels would love it.

I don’t think the solution to the predators being gone is for humans to fill the gap, rather to let the predators make a return.

Here in Sweden we’re looking to shoot most of our wolves for no good reason. That is after a considerable effort to stabilise the population and bring genetic diversity back to it.

As a hunter myself, here are a few thoughts that come to mind on the subject:

1. As is almost always the case, “hunters” are not a homogeneous group. There are many reasonable hunters who hunt, among other reasons, because it’s an honest, nature-oriented, and animal-welfare-conscious way to obtain meat for their own consumption. But there are also idiots who are just eager to kill and/or want to bag big trophies (perhaps because they need to compensate for personal shortcomings). In my experience, however, that’s only a tiny minority of the hunters I’ve met so far. Especially because of the pandemic, many people have been thinking about this topic, and I hope that young people will bring a breath of fresh air and sensible ideas to the community in this area as well. In my experience, the stereotype of the psychopathic gun nut is simply not true in the vast majority of cases.

2. We live in a cultural landscape. We must live in a cultural landscape because our survival (yes, even after we’re gone if we’re vegan) depends on our ability to grow enough crops to feed ourselves. In a cultural landscape heavily shaped by human activity, natural regulatory mechanisms (more on this below) do not function, or function only to a very limited extent, because, for example, wild boars find much more food than they would in a natural (forest) ecosystem, which results in correspondingly high reproduction rates (up to 200% for wild boars). So I don’t think we can manage in the long term without some form of regulation. (It should be noted here that I am a big fan of predators like wolves and bears, and that we should reintroduce them wherever possible if we can manage to coexist with them… Wolves and lynx, for example, are much better at regulating roe deer populations (or preventing overgrazing of young trees) than human hunters.) Furthermore, wildlife populations are only partially regulated by predators. For many species, disease and weather conditions play a more decisive role. These are, in and of themselves, natural processes that ensure populations do not get out of control and/or cannot permanently overuse local resources. In both cases, however, “natural regulation” is accompanied by an agonizing death for the individual, and it is this death itself that seems to be the main point of contention for some opponents of hunting, more on this below.

3. Ethical Considerations. Assuming I do my job as a hunter correctly, the animal (let’s say a deer) dies on the spot within seconds without suffering for long. If I don’t shoot the animal (and, as is currently the case in many countries, there are no large predators because they have been exterminated), it dies after about 15 years “of old age,” as the saying goes. What does that mean for the individual in practice? Eventually, its teeth become so worn down that it can no longer feed itself properly; it grows weaker, will likely fall ill at some point because its immune system weakens, and will either be strangled by a red fox, starve to death, freeze to death, or succumb to disease. In any case, the agony is significantly longer than if it were killed by a clean shot. So no matter how you look at it: There is no chance that the roe deer will not die, and (at least from my perspective) death by a well-placed bullet is the quickest, least stressful, and most painless death a roe deer can expect in the wild.

/edit: removed some dashed because I’m not a native english speaker and use an AI translator for more elaborate answers.