Being a meat hunter, I don't shoot animals that I don't eat.
Although I've been accused of eating weird "stuff" and will always try something first before "condemning" it, there are limits as to what I'll eat. My limits are usually parts of animals that aren't normally utilized, except in sausages where they're hidden and then are acceptable....but, "you don't want to see the sausage making process".
In my younger days I shot a lot of woodchucks and one late afternoon, shot 3 and hauled them back to the barnyard, Immediately, approx. a dozen cats investigated the carcasses but were puzzled as to where they should start, so to lend them a helping hand, I partially skinned them out. They proceeded to have a peaceful feast for 2 days. Evidently word got out because there were unrecognized cats 'round the clock.
At the time I was 12 yrs old and actually felt a sigh of relief that my day's "catch" wasn't going to be wasted. This has always stuck w/ me through out my hunting life.
Woodchuck {marmot} has dark, purplish meat and it should taste good because their diet is solely plant life....I just have never eaten it.
I saw a program on TV where sandbagged tables were rented out close to prairie dog colonies and long range, super accurate 'scoped CFs were used to kill them. Every time a "hit" was made, laughter, backslapping and congratulations took place. It definitely is not my "kind of sport".
I've hunted since 7 yrs old and I admit in my "foolish" beginning yrs, I shot nearly every animal that was seen....but then after the "woodchuck" realization, I grew up.
So....although I'm not telling people what they should do, rationalization, allows people to do what they will....rightly or wrongly and if in fact,can these 2 words even be applied morally or otherwise to killing animals just for sport?.......Fred
