View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 131. You may not vote on this poll
Kill or Harvest?
09-26-2006, 08:39 PM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Monroe County, IL
Posts: 1,188
RE: Kill or Harvest?
I do say both and I'm not aggrivated by either one.. I use harvest quite a bit but also refer to it in a general manner as "shooting" or "taking"... Just depends I guess...
09-26-2006, 08:57 PM
#15
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,435
RE: Kill or Harvest?
There is nothing incorrect about using either word. It really depends on what flavor you want to bring to the conversation. Personally I use the term kill when I'm talking about what I do as an individual but if I'm talking about the total kill in my region I'll typically talk about the harvest numbers. Each word certainly carries with it a certain connotation. If you are talking with non hunters and you are trying to impress upon them that hunters control the population and without hunters the herd population would quickly get out of control then harvest is certainly a good choice. If you look it up you will find population control is one of its useages. It also connotates taking something of value as opposed to something like killing off pests to control their numbers. You wouldn't use the term harvest when it comes to wiping out termites for example but it's certainly appropriate to use the term when talking about triming the deer population and putting x metric tons of valuable venison in private freezers.
All in all I'd say use the term that best applies. I wouldn't consider it a verry mature attitude if you are using the term kill for the sole pupose of irritating some non hunter or using the term harvest for the sole purpose of making what you do "sound" nicer. Each term has it's place, use each in it's appropriate place and don't worry about how it sounds. JMHO.
All in all I'd say use the term that best applies. I wouldn't consider it a verry mature attitude if you are using the term kill for the sole pupose of irritating some non hunter or using the term harvest for the sole purpose of making what you do "sound" nicer. Each term has it's place, use each in it's appropriate place and don't worry about how it sounds. JMHO.
09-26-2006, 09:19 PM
#18
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,435
RE: Kill or Harvest?
I forgot to mention... I think the term "kill" can be just as much of a politically correct term as harvest. It just depends on the audience. I think if you are using the term kill to simply make a point then that's no better than using the term harvest to make a point. And if you simply won't use the term harvest under any circumstance then I think you need to grow up. [and i'm not refering to anyone here. I don't think anybody here is that immature] Again, I say use the terms for what they are intended, not to make political statements.
09-26-2006, 11:07 PM
#20
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Kill or Harvest?
IMO it depends on the animal that was killed.
If it was a deer, elk, moose or what ever that lived its life wild and free, grew up on its own, grew its antlers on its own with out the aid of humans feeding it somehow, lived to be the age it was all on its own and not let walk just because it's antlers wouldn't score enough P&Y, etc...thenI killed it.
If it is a deer that was raised, managed, fenced in, fed artificially (yes those huge biologic plots count here), allowed to walk numerous times just for the score it would receive in the record books, etc... then it ws harvested. Becasue in my eyes hunting and killing isn't about artificially growing or raising book bucks. IMO these bucks are more like a crop to be harvested when it is "ripe".
Nope but I would dang sure killthe@#$%&if I lived 200 years ago. 
If it was a deer, elk, moose or what ever that lived its life wild and free, grew up on its own, grew its antlers on its own with out the aid of humans feeding it somehow, lived to be the age it was all on its own and not let walk just because it's antlers wouldn't score enough P&Y, etc...thenI killed it.
If it is a deer that was raised, managed, fenced in, fed artificially (yes those huge biologic plots count here), allowed to walk numerous times just for the score it would receive in the record books, etc... then it ws harvested. Becasue in my eyes hunting and killing isn't about artificially growing or raising book bucks. IMO these bucks are more like a crop to be harvested when it is "ripe".
You wouldn't harvestyour mother-in-law, would you?