That is just nutty.

It is all your conditioning.

Some people think 'hunted' or 'wild' meat of all forms is creepy or undesirable and then they grab their factory farmed meat from the grocery store.

We are all conditioned based on our biases of what we were introduced to and got used to growing up.

It is like saying eating bugs is gross, but slaughtering a cow, dealing will all the hair, blood, guts and fecal material to eventually get to a steak is not more gross from any objective standard.

the healthiest thing you could do for homeless shelters and for the poor would be to educate them on 'hunted' or 'wild' meats and then provide via food banks, etc all the meat culled.

Deer and goose sausage would almost certainly be delicious.

The deer cull in England provides expensive meat that ends up in the bellies of rich people.

Dunno about geese but it's hard to believe the venison in the usa is going to waste.

Totally disagree.

I know of municipalities who give out these 'cull' licenses to certain hunters each year and there are a lineup of hunters happy to do it.

Spec'ing the ammo as a requirement would not be an issue at all.

Heck hunters enjoy this stuff so much you could make a requirement of these 'cull licenses' that you must field dress all kills and provide the meat to the provided 'cooler trucks, left on location'.

Then just like with any meat product on a farm, you send it thru a visual inspection station, before getting it to the end user.

I never hunted but I had a lot of friends that did and I would love the bounty they would bring back to me from what they field dressed and got prepped for return home with them when the appropriate license was available.

Hunters live for that sh*t. It is like Disneyland for them.

Not surprising as it should more desirable than farmer meat in every regard.

As far as I know political activism, has kept most 'culled' meat from being sold or utilized, I think, outside some being very quietly shipped off for animal feed.

The 'anti-hunt' 'never kill an animal ever' activists shame any politician who wants to put any positive spin on 'killing' and as such 'positive uses' ('Food banks' 'Gourmet food') type narratives are not what they want getting out.

I recall in Canada the uproar when a Deer population had gotten so unchecked and sick and yet the activists still fought tooth and nail against the cull. They wanted to find ways to supplement the 'feeding' since they said it was 'man's intervention and take over of much grazing lands that caused the problem'.

That was a part of the problem but mostly it is man driving away or killing all natural predators. But they don't want to talk about predators as that then leads back to some type of 'cull' being the answer, animal or human.

Non-lead based ammo is pretty standard now I thought? I haven't been to an outdoor shooting range in a long time but they checked to make sure it was all lead-free.

It doesn't really matter that you disagree, the point is merely that you would be spending a lot of money to deliver a lot less food. It's simply a cumbersome way to gather large amounts of food.

For that matter, it wouldn't be healthier either.

It's still the ammunition of choice for most hunters, it's pretty well established that if you eat a lot of game meat, you'll likely have elevated lead levels. Various countries probably enforce this in different ways, I'm no expert.

But there are other difficulties too, like checking for diseases, handling the meat, transport and such that would be challenging when you go from small scale to large scale. The big advantage of agriculture in this regard being that that you know where your animals will be, which makes logistics easy to scale.

Well I would need to see where you are getting your data from before I can contest.

I don't accept it out of hand as just proclaimed to be so, but I do generally respect that you know of what you speak, so I am happy to see.

I have never seen anyone argue prior though that hunted meat is less healthy than Factory farmed meat.

And I cannot see how meat hunted and field dressed and just provided to meat processing facilities for finishing, all for free by Hunters would be more expensive than raising meat and the entire process of butchering it.

Please share?

Hunting is not a tiny niche thing though.

They deal with handling the meat, transport, etc and bring all sorts of meats to market. Farmers markets, restaurants and of course the hunter and friends tables all often have 'wild game' meats on the menu.

I feel you are massively over estimating the challenges.

I am not talking about shipping it all across the world. I am talking about local culls (and they give the license for exactly the areas they can take place) with a refrigeration truck or two rolled in. The Hunter, as a price to get the license (plus many LIKE doing it) have to bring the field dressed carcass to the truck and hang it on a hook inside. Trucks once full drive off to nearest Meat Processor.

The costs in this system is the 'refrigeration trucks' and then processor inspecting the meat as they turn in to 'cuts' or 'ground'.


Like I said, the Hunters I knew lined up for cull licenses. They would auction off a few each few seasons when they were doing one, and you would have thousands of hunters vying for a few select licenses. They will do the work. They love to rationalize/substantiate that their hunting is doing a social good.

.

Just experience. I grew up on a farm and I've hunted. Hunting can be a fun hobby and it can definitely do a lot of good when done right, but as means of gathering food it is inefficient and time-consuming, and the logistics of it simply does fit not large scale food production. You don't need many treks with the game on your back back home or to your cabin / car to see that.

Agriculture brings animals to where the people and logistics are, hunting brings people and logistics to where the animals are; analogous to driving the bus to every passenger's house and picking them up.

​Which is why game meat is expensive when you find it on the menu and in shops.

There is nothing inherently healthier about hunted meat, it's just meat. But hunting is less regulated, involves less formal training in handling meat, less formal training in recognizing diseases and pollution and the challenges of proper transport of storage and transport are definitely real (game not necessarily being particularly picky about being near human hubs or roads). Generally these risks are not very prevalent, because not too many people eat game meat regularly enough for pollutants to be a problem, but your suggestion would subject more people to such a diet more regularly.

Fun story. When I was about 20, a flat mate bought a pair of pheasants on special offer at the markert. The first was fine but some days later he cooked the second. I was in my room with a (very effective) door closed. On opening to an urgent knock, the most sickening stench rushed in. The leg was green with gangrine, the nauseating smell beyond description.

We opened every door and window and abandoned the flat for the pub. Many pints later we returned and ate the breast meat.

Well I would agree to disagree on this.

I think communities that are ALREADY organizing the cull and getting the hunters have solved most of the issues you refer to which would be applicable if we were hiring hunters to get game meat for restaurants but not when the hunters are paying (for their licenses) to get to take part in the cull.


That it is time consuming is the point for hunters. They will spend hours on end and days on end doing it because they love it.

If the hunters can get in, then the logistics are not so bad you can't get a freezer truck in or nearby.

And when I lived in Alberta I would buy a ton of wild game meat and always prefer it to store bought, factory farmed stuff.

Maybe I am wrong but in my hierarchy it is Wild > Free range >>>> factory farmed in terms of more healthy meat eating a better diet.

And i am not so sure I put any corporate line worker in a slaughter house over a Hunters eye in terms of identifying issues with the animal or meat. How about this. How about we agree there are statistically no incidents in either meat that would make any stand out as dangerous, outside rare exceptions.

The health thing is just a myth of scarcity I reckon, it's rarer and more expensive, so people presume it therefore holds superior qualities. Of course, taste is a debate of its own, and if someone prefers the taste of game then that can't be argued with. That agriculture is far, far more efficient than hunting in terms of producing quantity I see no reason to "agree to disagree" on, it's pretty much given. But we don't need to continue the debate, as it is probably not the most interesting of debates.

I'd put the combined eyes of farms and slaughterhouse of the eyes of hunters pretty much any day of the week, which doesn't mean I have an overly big trust in farms and slaughterhouses (as I don't), merely that hunting has even less oversight and regulation surrounding it.

Lol qp calling me nutty. Now that's rich!

The health thing comes more from the known abuses of factory farming, of which the poor (food banks, etc) would be getting the lowest of low price meats. We are talking about the proliferation of anti biotics and other abuses in that area. Not sure if you have ever seen a fish farm and the issue with fleas and pesticides. I do not think I am buying a CT in saying I would rather pay for hunter based (fisherman) caught wild fish then the factory farmed stuff as it IS generally healthier.

And Agree to Disagree is the only answer as you are creating a false dichotomy there.

Yes scale matters on costs generally. That is a truism. What that does not mean, is that I cannot buy vegetables cheaper from my neighbour who is a hobby farmer who puts no value on her labour and only wants me to pay for my portion of seeds.

In that case the small scale farming can be and IS far cheaper for me as the buyer refuting this absolute rule you seem to be trying to establish.

In the case of 'culls' where Hunters may be willing to provide all the labour of, capture, field dress, and transport to areas where they then just get 'inspected and packaged' before being sent to local food banks, I have not seen any case that a comparable analysis (turkey vs wild Goose) with all the costs of rearing, feeding, and slaughter to get to the exact same point of 'inspection and packaging' shows the Turkey is more cost effective for recipient.

So I just sent one of my best buddies from a high school a text.

He is an avid hunter who is part of a few hunting groups that meet many times a year for hunting exertions. He believes himself to be an 'ethical' hunter and believes you eat what you kill ('whole animal' or 'nose to tail' usage).

I've known, as i have benefited via him bringing me back wild boar and other meats, that he has a almost yearly 'big trip' down to Texas on to a massive property owned by the Navarro Pecan family people. The hunts they allow are tied to exploding populations of certain animals that breed proliferously and sometimes problematically on the lands.

He has said that the requirement is that they never purposely leave a kill in the field and that is either entirely used by them or donated to local food bank/church that gladly takes it in and distributes it out to those in need in the community. It is mostly wild boar and he says what are called Axis deer. He says between all the hunting groups that visit this farm and others coming from around the world, they process tons of meat for the local and greater community.

i have never heard of the latter but he says they are considered invasive and they threaten local populations and Texas is active in trying to control BOTH populations.

I struggle to see any argument against the 'healthiness' of either of these burgeoning populations. Sure once over populated to the extend food is scarce that does become a problem but that has not been reached.

I also struggle to see any argument that the church/food bank would find it cheaper to buy and provide local 'turkeys' or 'hogs' from factory farms.

The church/food bank is literally getting free meat and the land owners are using free labour to manage invasive species that tend to have exploding populations and do harm, if not culled.

I am not poor nor desperate, but I have been the very happy beneficiary of my friend, in the story above, always bringing me back some of the fruits of cull on that Texas land. Wild Boar and deer blend sausage frozen and shipped was the most common thing I got

So ya, it is kind of nutty to feel it is 'creepy' to receive and eat that when it is considered a high end delicacy you would pay a pretty big premium for at many restaurants.

I absolutely think some of the prejudices and beliefs that associate hunted meat with 'not healthy' or 'creepy' or other are successful indoctrination campaigns from advocates on the all killing is evil side. I think people are taking, some if not all of what they hear on that front to heart.

I think homeless people should be able to eat all the geese they want but only if they beat them in a fair fight first.

From what I've read it seems like Texas will never be able to get rid of their feral pigs. Even what they're doing now is a losing battle.

How big would a pig have to be before a homeless person couldn't beat it in a fight?

And would monetising the spectacle be unethical if the homeless people were compensated bacon-wise?

GOP blocks Capitol riot probe, displaying loyalty to Trump

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...?ocid=msedgntp

Man walks on the moon

Armstrong and Aldrin become the first men on the moon

https://www.theguardian.com/theguard...nal-newspapers

Some of Kubrick's best work!

https://9axes.github.io/index.html
Political ideology quiz. I've taken it three times and keep getting 'religious socialist'. Has the same limitations all ideology quizzes have but doesn't seem awful.

Did the short version and I got "libertarian socialism".

Not exatly sure what that is but sounds ok.