Tweet
I really don’t have a question, but more of a comment. I was looking through all the deer pictures on the site and noticed numerous deer were photographed with their tongues lolling out. Even worse, there are many hunters sitting on deer. I feel this is the ultimate disrespect to the deer and a person should never sit on an animal they’ve killed. I think a tasteful picture is the second most important shot of the hunt. It takes very little time to clean them up, put the tongue back in and create an image that shows regard for the animal. Also, how about trading the glare for a little smile? You killed a deer; you didn’t thwart a terrorist plot. Anybody have any thoughts?
-
-
-I don't mind the tongue hanging out or blood coming out of the entrance/exit hole. You shot and killed the deer, so I do not see the point of trying to hide it.
-For the most part, I agree that sitting on the deer is disrespectful. I don't have much of a problem when a child sits on a deer though as long as it is not to make it look bigger.
-I've always smiled in pictures of animals I have killed/fish I have caught, but I doesn't bother me if other people don't. I get your point though that people should. -
I'm a photographer, so I cringe every time I see a trophy photo with the tongue hanging out, the animal covered with blood, etc. It only takes a few minutes to make the animal look nice folks, and the photos will be your memories for a lifetime.
I'm not sure if I would so far as to say it's disrespectful to sit on the animal though, and I'm certainly not going to tell anyone that they must smile for the photos, that's strictly a personal thing as far as I'm concerned.Comment
-
I agree that it is a huge disrespect to sit on the animal after it's harvested. And yes, that is another common complaint of mine that's a pet peeve. Hunters do NOT kill animals; we are not murderers; animals are harvested.Comment
-
@officerdom,
Harvesting is what farmers do. Killing is what happens when you shoot an animal. Sometimes I use the word "harvest" when referring to shooting an animal, but only when around people that I do not know because it does not sound very bad.Comment
-
I would agree. All good points. One of the bloggers had aa similar discussion about a year ago.Comment
-
Deer aren’t soybeans and they don’t get harvested. We hunt and therefore, we kill animals. The more euphemisms we use to describe what we do gives the impression that we have something to hide. Of course we are not murderers. Murder defines the killing of another human, not an animal.Comment
-
Yes, we kill animals. We take their life, but we in no way should take their dignity. Stay off of the animals, clean ‘em up and treat them with the respect they deserve.Comment
-
Hunters who use the term kill demonstrate they are comfortable in their own skin & they understand the seriousness of taking an animal's life. This attitude should naturally lead to respectful pictures along with reverence at the point of kill.
Good hunting guys.
later,
charlieComment
-
On the topic of pictures, to each his own. I'll admit I've become conscious of the tongue hanging out over the years, but it happens. Blood is a part of our pursuit. It's not what draws me in, but there will be blood on the animal and sometimes it makes it into the photos.
On the phrasing of the act. I fell into the "harvest" trap years ago. It bothered me as intellectually dishonest but I agree that depending on the crowd stating that you "killed" a deer over the weekend just opens a can of worms. I don't think I made a conscious decision on this, but I've noticed that lately I seem to have settled on "take or took". As in "I took 3 deer this year, two of them with a bow."Comment
-
I usually do not hesitate to say I "killed" an animal, because I am not ashamed of being a hunter, and am proud of the accomplishment of cleanly killing my quarry. The only time I don't use the word "killed" is when I am talking with someone who I know to be anti-hunting, and I would rather not get into an argument with them.Comment
-
In no way do I disagree with everyone in the use of the word "kill" for the animals as long as it was taken ethically and taken for consumption. I guess I just find myself dealing with anti-hunters so I have to tip toe using the word harvested instead. Kinda like when they say police "killed" the armed suspect. Well no, they didn't. They stopped the threat. My next question then to open up a can of worms is in PA people have really had a problem with people displaying or even transporting their animal on hitch racks or hitch hangars. I never understood why this is so offensive. Any thoughts and i'm sure strong disagreements will be appreciated.Comment
-
@officerdom,
A long time ago(10-15yrs) one of my uncles drove a honda and after getting all of the gear into his car there was no room to put the deer so he decided to tie it on top. He even went a bit further and did his best to cover the deer with a tarp. On the way home someone pulled up next to him at a stoplight and threw a 44oz QuikTrip fountain drink into his car calling him a murderer. And I have heard stories from strangers that were much worse than that. Personally I would not mind people transporting deer this way, but I would never do it. It is not the healthiest way to do it(emissions and other crud from cars all over your deer).Comment
-
Hi...
I have to concur with Charlie, Camohat and huntfishtrap.
A little extra diligence on the part of the hunter and/or photog could go a long ways.
Comment
Comment