News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Republicans move to sell off 3.3m acres of national land,... by erikpukinskis on Wednesday February 01, 2017 @05:05PM (#13545812)
> (deer) hunting is a particularly unefficient way to feed a lot of people.

That's an empirical claim. What's your evidence?

I suspect hunted venison has lower animal cruelty impact than the equivalent amount of this stuff: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?field-keywords=vegan... I wouldn't advocate serving pounds of it to a person every week, but in small doses I would be surprised if "no venison" is the level of venison which creates the lowest level of animal cruelty.

That's just a suspicion though. I would love to see the studies done. Vegans will never do them because they don't want to consider the possibility that their "plant-based" food has non-negligible animal cruelty costs.

> please do not say that people do it for altruism. Or because this is "what ill ecosystems need". Is not true. People hunt for the money.

We sort of agree. People hunt for the food, at a certain price, the same reason vegans buy Field Roast patties. My assertion is: we must kill to survive. Vegan food is the result of killing animals. Vegans refuse to count those animals.

> Now the main goal has changed to "how we can have more deers in this place and make hunters happy?"

I think this is where I realize we're having slightly different conversations. I think maybe you're saying that not all hunting is good. Agreed. And perhaps you are saying any hunting allowed is a slippery slope that leads to overhunting. That's an interesting argument, I would be happy to follow.

My argument is just that some hunting is virtuous. You say:

> There are lots, and lots, and lots of places saved for cattle and agriculture.

"Saved" in this sentence is a euphemism for "cleared by killing or destroying the habitat of all the animals who might interfere." Regardless of whether it's cattle or corn, animals die to make your food. Vegan food often involves less killing, but it's not no killing, and sometimes venison or an egg involves less than plant-based equivalents. Especially "typical" equivalents in your average Whole Foods basket. Although of course there is an ultimate level of low-impact eating which is vegan, seen practices by buddhist monks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_temple_cuisine

Most vegans don't eat that way. Yet they'll disparage conscientious hunters who are closer to that ideal than they are.

Re:Republicans move to sell off 3.3m acres of national land,... by pvaldes on Wednesday February 01, 2017 @08:52PM (#13547383)
> "Saved" in this sentence is a euphemism for...

Saved in this sencence means reserved (yet). Not more, not less.

> animals die to make your food.

I'm perfectly aware of that

> Vegan food often involves...

Again, I'm not talking about animal cruelty or veganism. This is not about "we or them". Is not about moral decisions. I'm talking about ecosystem management for conservation purposes, that is a theme in a totally different galaxy than food personal choices