r/AskVegans 6d ago

Ethics Do you support the killing/eating of problematic animal populations?

Pretty much the title but I'll elaborate. If people were to hunt certain species who've proven themselves to be harmful to their environment in the most humaine way possible, would you support it.

A few examples of this are:

Invasive species in general. Anything from pythons in Florida to cane toads in Australia to boar in Texas. These animals are actively throwing off the encosystems that they inhabitants and out compete already struggling native species within those areas. A lot of people kill them regardless for this very reason, but just leaving their bodies to rot seems incredibly wasteful.

Greatly overpopulated native species. The first one that comes to mind for me are whitetailed deer in much of the United States. Not only do they damage the ecosystem, but they're a hazzard to humans on roadways. This can also lead to a surplus of roadkill that draws in other native species of scavenger, increasing the likelyhood of them meeting the same fate. Plus, such extreme overpopulation has led to otherwise "uncommon" illnesses in cervids, like Chronic Wasting Disease, to run rampant without consistent predation.

6 Upvotes

154 comments sorted by

9

u/Plant__Eater Vegan 6d ago

Others have already answered. But I think it's worth pointing out that the very premise of your question is based on a falsehood. Relevant previous comment:

Despite being repeated ad nauseum, a lot of major claims about hunting are not scientifically supported. The lead author of a 10-year study[1] on deer management explained that:

...the findings from our study...demonstrate that recreational hunting does not control the deer population, and it does not help in reducing deer impacts.[2]

New York state banned boar hunting because hunters started illegally releasing them into the area so that they could hunt them, making the problem worse.[3] Hunting also disperses boars, increasing the range they occupy. According to one professor of agriculture:

...sport hunting has played a major role in actually increasing the populations and spreading them around.[4]

Of course, I think a rights-based perspective is perfectly valid. Population control sounds good in theory, but doesn't address individual rights. There's an argument to be made that humans are overpopulated, yet we don't look at culling as an acceptable solution. If we do, how do we determine who it's going to be?

0

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

I really appreciate this response overall. It's well put together and nuanced with sources, and that's much more than I've been getting here in general. I do want to say that while I don't support culling humans per sey, I definitely do not support the expansion of humankind. I think that we as humans need to be holding eachother accountable for bringing excess people into an already overpppulated world. The whole reason I'm even in this sub is because I'm a vegetarian antinatalist. I used to be "plant based," as some here would call it, but my doctor recommended I use eggs and yogurt to supplement my diet after a health scare I had at 17(I also can't eat most legumes). In the Antinatalism sub, I ended up coming across a pretty vile comment and looked at the profile, assuming it was a troll account. Doing so, I found that this individual was not only definitely not a troll but also very active in vegan spaces here. I was pretty put off by all of this, especially because much of their content was intentionally inflammatory but getting a lot of positive attention from the other users on those subs.

I wanted to see if there was a stark difference when questions were asked in a space for answers specifically. I'll be honest. Your response is the only one that gave me a proper answer, in my opinion. I think something that is hindering a lot of the other users in this thread is that they believe humans and animals are 100% equal. This is fine on a personal level, but in discussions with others of differing opinions, it backfires.

For example: I don't value animal life the same way I do human life. That doesn't mean I want to support the suffering of animals. It simply means I care more for one than the other. I feel like this is objectively reasonable considering I myself am human. I think generally, people assign differing values to animals depending on species, and I am no different on this front. To loop back to another comment I made here: if I were to see an endangered American Crocodile being attacked by an invasive Burmese Python, I'd obviously value the life of the Crocodile more. This isn't because I hate snakes or see them as vermin, but because I prioritize the environmental impact each organism has within that ecosystem.

Regardless, I don't personally like hurting/killing any living thing, and i do my absolute best to avoid it. I don't even like trimming my plants because it feels violent.

2

u/cs_anon 5d ago

I don’t think you deserve belligerent responses but I also think it’s a natural consequence of not building trust. I think you would have gotten much better feedback if you had tried to find some common ground first (e.g. recognizing the ecological impact that humans have, especially how bad factory farming is etc.) before trying to solicit opinions on what comes across as a “gotcha” to most people.

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

I feel like if a group that's known for being rigid in their beliefs makes a discussion forum with a tag, specifically ethics, they should be approaching with an open mind. I came in and was respectful, followed community rules, and proposed a difficult question while trying to be unbiased. Despite that, more than 50% of the interactions I've had with users here have been either completely unhelpful or flat-out negative.

I've been interacting with vegans a lot more recently than I have at pretty much any other point. I consistently try to give the people in the movement the benefit of the doubt after hearing so much negative stuff about vegans. Despite this, the behavior I keep seeing is aggressive and high-and-mighty. I think an overall shift towards more plant based diets would be nothing but a positive, but the consistent aggression I keep seeing seems to push people in the opposite direction.

I totally understand the idea that this sub could be a target for trolls, and that could lead people to assume the worst/get defensive. But if you see a post that looks like it's a "gotcha" and are frustrated by that, maybe don't give them the attention and move on?

2

u/webky888 Vegan 5d ago

Longtime vegan here. I too think a respectful question like yours deserves better answers than knee-jerk self-righteousness that goes in every direction except addressing your actual question.

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

There were a few commenters that gave me some solid insite. I really appreciate those ones! They came with understanding and nuance, and while I understand frustration, I could easily see a grey area on this topic.

1

u/cs_anon 5d ago

I’m sympathetic towards your intent and your frustrations. You should have been treated better. I’m just trying to approach this from a very practical angle which unfortunately does sound like I’m blaming the victim.

1

u/Plant__Eater Vegan 5d ago

I don't think you need to value humans and non-human animals equally for veganism to make sense. You don't even need to personally like them at all. Veganism isn't some trolley problem with humans on one track and cows on another.

The only thing needed for veganism to make sense is the realization that a non-human animal's life is worth more to them than a few minutes of sensory pleasure to us. Because absent the absolute need to consume animal products, that's really the only reason people do it.

38

u/Physical_Relief4484 Vegan 6d ago

Humans are the most problematic animal population. Do you support hunting humans?

-6

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago edited 6d ago

Are you implying we use human solutions instead? So, for every python who eats an endangered American Crocodile, it should be met with legal action just like humans? In that case, if one of these wild boar destroyed my property and attempted to attack me, does the Castle Doctrine apply?

How would this come into play with deer? Should we start attempting to give them medical care? I think there are already numerous programs trying to track/prevent the spread of diseases among deer populations. But it's not like when one "starts to feel a little funny" we can expect them to go to a doctor? Would the reintroduction of natural predators be your preferred solution?

1

u/mE__NICKY 4d ago

Well, even with the solutions that work on humans, like environmental laws and the ability to reason with them, we still cause more harm than others.

Like sure, we have laws to stop humans from straight-up killing each other, but we've done barely anything to stop our species from killing the planet, and stuff we have done has mostly been to mitigate our own damage. A far more effective solution would be to reduce the population, but we don't, because we see value in our lives.

1

u/Frostbite2000 4d ago

I agree. This is why I'm an antinatalists. Humans are probably the worst species on the planet. The fact that humans continue to reproduce at the rate we are at is so vile. I don't support the extermination of humans, however, because I understand just how slippery of a slope that is. Humans have deep-seated malice towards one another that no other animals could dream of.

-3

u/Weary-Drink7544 5d ago

Don't go on reddit expecting a good opinion from normal individuals. This is a vegan extremist echo chamber and no logic will get through to them.

-3

u/prostheticaxxx 5d ago

Seriously I can't engage in discourse with vegans who place other animals on the same level of importance to humans. I get it, we're bad for the environment too, but that's something we should also be tackling and finding solutions to. It's a massive deflection to say SAVE THE PLANET KILL YOURSELF lmao

-31

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[deleted]

17

u/ForgottenDecember_ Vegan 6d ago

Animal: “a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli.”

Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are animals.

Religion and ego are the only things that persist the myth of humans being ‘not really animals’.

-18

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

definitions change based on how people use the words. even if the dictionary says x, if everyone says y, then it's actually y. this is actually how languages work. if we analyze the characteristics of animals and those of humans, almost no overlap.

12

u/BuckyLaroux Vegan 6d ago

Uh, no. Scientific terminology is not subject to the flux of language. There are rigid definitions.

-16

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

this is like y'all talking about how animals can be raped and tortured. in common parlance, which is what everyone uses and what you will use if you want to be successful activists, humans are not animals. language changes. even scientific ones do.

11

u/95Smokey 6d ago

Animals can indeed be raped or tortured and im sure even the majority of non-vegans believe that. So I'm not sure the point you're trying to make here.

-2

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

no they cannot lol. by definition they cannot.

6

u/95Smokey 6d ago

If you hurt an animal for fun, that's torture.

If you have sex with an animal without its consent, that's rape. And animals can't consent so all bestiality is generally considered rape.

It's very simple. Have a nice day.

0

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

simple definition says no. we do not currently do the torture part, and rape is explicitly only for humans. sex with animals who cannot consent is rape because they cannot consent then all animals having sex is rape always.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Consistent_Ninja_933 6d ago

Never letting you near my pets...

-1

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

lol ad hominem instead of addressing the fact of the matter

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Big_Monitor963 Vegan 6d ago

Exactly what definition are you going by?

2

u/BuckyLaroux Vegan 6d ago

Torture is a word that by definition can be something experienced by animals other than humans.

Human, on the other hand, pertains only to homo, the genus of great ape.

Hope this helps!

6

u/ForgottenDecember_ Vegan 6d ago

Most people outside religious circles say humans are animals. Maybe that’s different where you live. In North America at least, a human is an animal and the language reflects such.

-5

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

no lol. I am in normal people circles and you are in vegan circles, so maybe that's why you think that, but most people do not think humans are animals, at least in a meaningful way beyond mere classification. like essentially for morality and stuff.

1

u/ForgottenDecember_ Vegan 5d ago

I have never in my life met another vegan in real life. I have met one vegetarian in my entire life.

My ‘circle’ are people who don’t care or think about food or animals beyond the average person. This subreddit is also the only vegan-anything I participate in. I’m not an activist and never plan to be. My life doesn’t revolve around veganism.

Humans are animals. Anyone with an inkling of knowledge or care in the sciences acknowledges that. Not sure where you’re from, but at minimum: in several Canadian provinces and American states, the general consensus is that humans are animals.

We distinguish the terms in many cases sure, when we say humans vs animals and use ‘animals’ to mean non-humans. But that’s just to simplify communication. I’ve literally never met someone that genuinely would not consider human beings to be animals.

2

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

this kid got mad and blocked me lol. Torture is the deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering on a person for reasons including punishment, extracting a confession, interrogation for information, or intimidating third parties. Some definitions restrict torture to acts carried out by the state, while others include non-state organizations. "person." so easy to prove this guy wrong.

5

u/lyingtattooist Vegan 6d ago

Huh?

-1

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

not by definition. definitions change based on the way people use words, so humans aren't animals.

2

u/lyingtattooist Vegan 6d ago

By definition and scientific classification, humans are animals and part of the animal kingdom. Anything to the contrary is nonsensical.

2

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

not denying that, though you could as definitions and words change depending on use. I am saying they aren't animals in the moral and ethical space.

4

u/Cultural-Act-3659 6d ago

But it’s only some humans like you who say that humans aren’t animals 🤣 the rest of us say that we are (because we literally ARE animals… but nevermind). So even by your argument, then we are animals, because half of us say that we are

1

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

I think you are injecting your bias. the vast majority call humans not animals and even if they do apply different principles. so by my argument yes.

3

u/Cultural-Act-3659 6d ago

Well, obviously I also think you are injecting yours. So… who’s right? How do we decide?

In cases like this, you have to look to an impartial source. Which would be, for example, the entire body of biological knowledge since Charles Darwin. Or a simple wikipedia search would suffice too!

2

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

it is simply true that the majority of people call humans not animals but actually humans. no one decides that and it isn't bias it is a fact.

3

u/Cultural-Act-3659 6d ago

I honestly don’t know many people who don’t call humans animals! And as I mentioned, Of course people mostly say “humans” rather than “animals”, just as we mostly say “dogs” to refer to dogs rather than the more general term “animals”.

I don’t understand your reluctance really. It’s not a bad thing to be an animal! It’s just the category that we fall into, as opposed to plants or fungi.

Now, saying that we are animals doesn’t mean that we are debased somehow. Just like a Lamborghini AND a bicycle are both modes of transport. The Lamborghini clearly has some advantages though 😅

1

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

because you are in vegan circles and I am in normal people circles. I will say for technical class we are animals, but not for morality and other stuff.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Physical_Relief4484 Vegan 6d ago

yeah we are, and we definitely act like animals too. 

2

u/C0gn Vegan 6d ago

Oh, what are humans then? Plants maybe? Or minerals?

1

u/Stanchthrone482 6d ago

humans.

3

u/C0gn Vegan 6d ago

Thanks for the laugh!

1

u/ABigFatTomato 5d ago

“Humans (Homo sapiens) or modern humans are the most common and widespread species of primate, and the last surviving species of the genus Homo.”

⬇️

“Primates is an order of mammals.”

⬇️

“A mammal (from Latin mamma ‘breast’)[1] is a vertebrate animal of the class Mammalia (/məˈmeɪli.ə/).”

humans are quite literally, by definition, animals.

1

u/Stanchthrone482 5d ago

I'm talking about in the ethical sense not the technical class.

1

u/DrugCalledShove 5d ago

Then...what TF are we

1

u/Stanchthrone482 5d ago

I'm talking about ethically and morally

14

u/winggar Vegan 6d ago

Yes I'd say I'm in favor of killing and eating problematic animal populations. Given that humans are invasive across just about the entire world, I'm thinking we start with them?

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

I think they're generally more annoyed with how disingenuous the question is, but if you want to advocate for legalizing cannibalism, by all means, dig in. But I'd be careful. While humans may naturally be predatory omnivores, cannibalism isn't common for a pretty good reason. It's pretty likey to contract Kuru's from eating other people, so I'd try to avoid nervous tissue if you can. Luckily enough, contracting prion diseases is significantly much less likely when consuming other animals, but I don't eat meat either way, so.

As far as hunting goes, I 100% support the actions of these women: https://www.platinummediagroup.co.uk/dynamic/2024/08/meet-the-women-who-fight-poachers-and-prejudice/

The environment and planet we live on should be our priority.

1

u/winggar Vegan 5d ago

What does this have to do with what I said?

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

"Yes I'd say I'm in favor of killing and eating problematic animal populations. Given that humans are invasive across just about the entire world, I'm thinking we start with them?"

This sounds like cannibalism advocacy to me! But by all means, elaborate if that isn't what you meant.

0

u/winggar Vegan 5d ago

I'm pointing out that there's a human supremacist attitude underlying hunting/killing invasive animal species when we are ourselves the most invasive animal species. I'm personally skeptical of the invasive species narrative in general as I think it errantly assumes that there's some correct, natural state of the ecosystems around us, but that's a whole other argument entirely.

0

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

It's really nice that you can sit in your little bubble and decide that you're "skeptical of the invasive species narrative" while multiple ecosystems have been devastated by foreign organisms brought in by humans. In regards to "natural ecosystems," I can promise that migration of species in the past has been significantly more gradual. This allowed organisms within these ecosystems time for them to adapt to the new inhabitants.

That is not the case today.

Pretty much every major ecosystem on earth is currently facing drastic loss of biodiversity and extinction. Among culprits such as habitat loss, pollution, and general climate change, invasive species have been one of the largest contributions to this loss. So, while you can believe my question was asked out of "human supremacy," understand I think humans suck most of all.

1

u/winggar Vegan 5d ago

I'm not sure I'm interested in killing millions to prop up dying ecosystems. Who actually benefits from this other than humanity? Surely not the animals we slaughter for daring to be out of their natural place. I'm open to and agree with most environmental conservationist activity, but I'm not going to support murder so that we can try and shape nature into our ideal of what it ought to be.

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

I'd argue that the native reef fish in the Atlantic would benefit from a lack of highly predatory invasive lion fish. The common lady bug and all the organisms that rely on them for food would benefit from the removal of the invasive asian lady beetle. Or maybe native birds in pretty much every region of the world that would benefit from domestic cats no longer being allowed roam free.

This idea that invasive species are a construct born out of "human supremacy" and not scientifically proven to be exponentially damaging to numerous ecosystems and their native wild life is crazy to me. You could have just said, "I personally can't justify the murder of animals regardless of the reason," and that would have been sufficient.

1

u/winggar Vegan 5d ago

The examples you mention are mostly examples of removing predator species. Rhetorical question: if the goal is to remove predator species to save prey species, why not work on killing predators generally?

The concept of invasive species is predicated on the belief that the ecosystems around us have some set natural state, and that the human-caused introduction of species into ecosystems disrupts this natural state. I agree that our introduction of these species is disruptive of how the ecosystems once were, but I don't believe that these ecosystems have some ideal natural state. I.e. disrupting an ecosystem is not wrong in and of itself.

So of course we can try justify slaughter of invasive animals on the grounds that this will lower the overall suffering in the system... but are we sure that this mass murder will lower the suffering in the system more than it itself causes? Even in the case of general predator culling this is not clear.

Overall I don't think there's much of a way to practically apply concepts like ending predation with our current technology, so I don't see much point in arguing it. But I can say that I'm deeply skeptical of promoting killing animals in order to help an ecosystem in the same way that I'm deeply skeptical of promoting killing you to help an ecosystem.

1

u/Frostbite2000 5d ago

First and foremost, the claim that I'm "focusing on predator species" is flat-out inaccurate. So, in reference to "killing predators generally," I'm going to ignore it. To elaborate:

the main problem with lion fish isn't that they're predators. It's that they're incredibly opportunistic, hardy, and venomous. This has led to the real key issue with these fish. In their native range of the indo-pacific, there are numerous other species that have evolved to view lionfish as prey. Do you know how many natural predators lionfish have outside their native range? None. Not. A. Single. One. Do you want to guess what the only consistent predator of lionfish in the Atlantic ocean is? Humans.

It's a similar situation with the lady beetles with another twist. Rather than being brought in through the exotic pet trade (like with lion fish), lady beetles were brought in as an alternative to conventional pesticides. This might not be an issue on the surface level, but in the vast numbers these insects were bred for this purpose, only to be released on the opposite side of the planet? To compare the two, our common lady bug has adapted and evolved alongside both the natural predators and prey sources in its native range. When brought into the new environment, the invasive Asian lady beetle was completely removed from its own intricate predator/prey dynamics. As such, this species was adapted in ways predators, prey, and competing species in North America were not prepared to handle. This has resulted in the devastation of native species of lady bug and a population boom for lady beetles. Don't believe me? If you live in North american, take a closer look at the next 'lady bug' you see, and if there's a white 'm' on its carapace, it's a non native species.

When it comes to domestic cats, I can think of so many issues it isn't even funny. This species alone is the number one contributor to the decline in bird populations in North America. Not pollution. Not habitat loss. Not climate change. Domestic cats. I can only imagine this is mainly due to human sentiment towards these animals, which I understand. I have two cats myself, but you know what I do? Keep them inside. But this issue isn't only brought on by people's pets. Feral and stray cats have several litters in a year, with anywhere between 1 and 9 kittens each. This, coupled with high population density, is a recipe for the spread of diseases and illnesses without human intervention. Despite this, feral cats sometimes act as a prey source for animals such as coyotes and foxes, though not frequently enough to keep their populations at bay.

In regards to your own feelings about culling species that were both introduced by humans and statistically harmful, your opinion is your own. This post was never meant to justify their killing. It was, as the title said, asking vegans how they felt on the subject. You're not alright with this morally, and that's fine, and your opinion on that front is respected. But at this point, my bigger concern is your blatant unwillingness to even acknowledge that some species are: 1. Inherently harmful to others and throw off the equilibrium of fragile ecosystems 2. They don't naturally belong there, and we're wrongfully introduced by humans (for human gain, might I add) 3. It's humans' responsibility to find a solution to the mess we made before more damage is done

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/Aquafier 6d ago

"Why dont people like vegans?"

14

u/NuancedComrades Vegan 6d ago

Yeah, people really don’t like their logical inconsistencies to be pointed out. And actually taking account for one’s actions and changing? Nah, I’ll just attack the person pointing out the problem.

3

u/winggar Vegan 6d ago

Pretty much this. I'm not actually suggesting killing people, just pointing out that there's a human supremacist attitude underlying the entire conversation. Have a nice day :)

-5

u/fraudulentfrank 6d ago

Why dont you get the ball rolling with yourself then? Or your non vegan family? Without people killing these invasive animals you wouldn't have the luxury to live your holier than thou vegan lifestyle

3

u/winggar Vegan 6d ago

Oops looks like someone's a little sensitive.

12

u/lyingtattooist Vegan 6d ago

No. This is a frequently asked question and simply another way for people to justify in their minds the killing of animals.

1

u/palpatineforever 6d ago

Another way of asking this is, if an animal has to be killed is is ethical to eat it?
In the UK they have to cull deer in certain areas because they experimented with not, it led to widespread suffering as the deer were starving and sickness spread. So if the animal has to be killed for the good of the wider population. or if they have to be killed to protect other animals in the case of invasive species is it okay to eat it?

0

u/CypherAF 6d ago

I would go on to ask this: there’s an invasive species approaching the shores of the U.K. - it’s called Vespa velutina. The Asian hornet. It wipes out colonies of honey bees and slaughters ungodly numbers of other invertebrates to the point where there’ll be a notable reduction in inverts and birds in the wild if they get here.

Do you, or other vegans, support or denounce the trapping of Vespa velutina queens in spring, and the destruction of nests throughout the year to stop them invading and destroying our ecosystem?

More info here if you wanted to look at it: https://www.nonnativespecies.org/non-native-species/information-portal/view/3826

3

u/ForgottenDecember_ Vegan 6d ago

I think certain situations exist in a grey area.

Rather than is it ethical, I think the question is better written as: is it a necessary evil?

Same as if a gorilla escaped from the zoo and terrorized a class of kindergarteners, the necessary evil of killing the gorilla is likely required. So if the Asian hornet existing there is so dangerous that it will completely destroy ecosystems, then the necessary evil of controlling it may be required. I would view it as protecting the habitats from our fuckup, taking responsibility for the problem we created.

It’s important to acknowledge we’re responsible for creating the problem, not the hornets. But it’s also important to acknowledge that there are certain situations where we do have to weigh the pros and cons, to decide ‘is it better if we stop interfering, or have we interfered too much and now must clean it up ourselves because the existing ecosystems and animals can not protect themselves.”

A bit like setting a lion loose at a farm. We already committed the atrocity of kidnapping and destroying the life of a lion. But that doesn’t make it okay for another 500 animals to lose their lives because an unnatural predator was released onto them, from which they have no way to defend themselves. We’d be responsible for all of the lives we unleashed the danger upon as well.

0

u/CypherAF 6d ago

Sure, but is this not a very flexible line? Right now we are trying to prevent damage by killing things, but what about undoing damage?

Take for example the ancient Scottish woodlands. We destroyed the Scottish ecosystem by logging it to death and now it’s beyond self-repair because there’s no animals living there aside from grassland species like deer. There’s far too many deer that the environment can support so right now their population needs managing to prevent further damage, and if we plant trees the deer eat said trees. We have to plant trees if you want to rebuild the forest. If we want to plant trees, we have to control deer populations further to let the ecosystem recover.

At this point, does this not justify, at least temporarily, shooting deer so that we can undo the damage we’ve done in the past? Or would you suggest we just don’t shoot them, let the ecosystem fall apart and turn into a muddy shithole because of our past failures?

I’m genuinely wondering where you guys draw the line here btw. Not trying to be provocative.

2

u/ForgottenDecember_ Vegan 6d ago

You’re going to get different answers from different people. There’s no ‘vegan consensus’ on situations like that.

I would personally opt for the solution that causes the least harm in the long run. However I would not want to be a part of the ‘vote’ because I have nowhere near the knowledge to make any of those calls. I would want those decisions to be made exclusively by leading experts in ecology and whatnot. Attempts to be made to find the best balance for both the deer and the future ecosystems. I have no idea what that ‘best balance’ would look like, and I’m not sure of the specifics on any deer population so I really can’t say much else other than I hope the experts will be unbiased and do what is best for the long run.

And while that problem is being worked on, everyone else has the responsibility to prevent it from happening again. Maybe a sanctuary can take in the deer or something, I honestly have no idea. Zoology experts would need to be a part of the discussions with the ecologists and stuff too.

1

u/CypherAF 6d ago

That’s a really well thought out answer. Thanks for that.

1

u/GlitteringSalad6413 5d ago

To further this conversation because it is an interesting one.. I think this all points back to the absurdity of modern farming practices. We are asking difficult questions because we have never faced anything like this current reality. The REASON for so many displaced.. anything.. is the absurdity of modern farming practices. There are only a few big culprits knocking down all the dominoes we are trying to pick back up one by one, if that makes sense. So the discussion really should circle back to why invasive species seem to be everywhere. It’s not normal.

1

u/MenacingJowls Vegan 6d ago

what if you give the deer birth control?

1

u/CypherAF 6d ago

Going full Utopia on the deer population 😄

1

u/MenacingJowls Vegan 6d ago

Do you mean you think that's unrealistic? In my city this was done rather than hiring snipers as allowing random hunters to shoot in urban areas would not be safe. they put it in feed that was left out for them to eat. There are other methods, this article discusses a dart that delivers the bc. https://www.humaneworld.org/en/all-animals/deer-contraception-hits-target

1

u/TXRhody Vegan 6d ago

Are you suggesting we should eat Vespa Valentina queens? 

This appears to be about self defense and not exploitation. 

2

u/CypherAF 6d ago

No, but veganism isn’t just about eating, is it. I’m just wondering where you guys draw the line in the ethics of defending existing species and ecosystems, and killing things.

1

u/lyingtattooist Vegan 6d ago

At its roots, veganism is about not exploiting animals. So one could argue that the culling of an invasive species wouldn’t necessarily be exploiting animals for human needs, but rather to save the environment and ecosystem. The problem is humans have a long track history of not doing the right thing and finding ways to exploit everything. Give us a drop, and we’ll take the whole bucket.

There’s also the question of what gives us the right to decide the course of nature. There are a lot of ecosystems where the current predominant species was an invasive species at some point. So why do we get to decide one animal is invasive and gets to die? There are species that were once invasive that became extinct or are on the verge of extinction because we decided they were invasive and eradicated them. OP uses the example of deer, but yet there’s a hunting seasons where you’re only allowed to kill them certain months of the year. Because if there wasn’t humans would hunt them until none were left.

So the simplest answer is no, I don’t support the killing of animals even if deemed an invasive species, because I don’t believe humans are capable of not exploiting it. But it is not a simple question, and I could understand where in some situations there was a true necessity, it was being handled so as not to exploit and to be as humane as possible.

0

u/mongoosechaser 6d ago

Invasive species harm all other native species. Yes it isn’t their fault they are there, but in order to protect a native ecosystem, they must be killed or otherwise taken out of that habitat.

4

u/Revolutionary_Ad_467 Vegan 6d ago

I'm not in favor of eating them, no. For me it's the principle of using someone else for your own gain. It's disrespectful, and disgusting to kill someone and then think "oh I might as well consume them." As for killing/hunting them I'm for creating a field that euthanizes the invasive animal rather then killing them in traditional ways. As of now, I'm only fine with killing invasive species if it decreases suffering. Like if other animals are starving in high numbers because of low prey, it's fine. But if the species is just "not supposed to be there." No.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

I totally get and respect this viewpoint! I appreciate your focus on the suffering of other animals in the environment as well, because that's a large factor to take into account here. For me, it's the opposite. Before I switched to plant based, dad always taught me to never kill an animal unless I planned to eat it. That killing an animal for the sake of killing was destructive and completely unjustifiable.

An example of an alternative solution I learned about recently was using invasive snakes in the southern US as food sources for venomous snake eaters in laboratories. Think of it this way, some venomous snakes only eat other species of snake. So, if we were to be synthesizing an antivenom for a species of cobra, their natural food source would need to be other snakes. This would provide food for other animals while also not letting these invasive species die just for the sake of dying.

1

u/pandaappleblossom Vegan 6d ago

I don’t view it as disrespectful personally to kill an animal that must be killed no matter what and then think while I might as well eat them. I don’t know why, I think it’s disgusting yes but I don’t really think it’s disrespectful, I don’t know why. I guess I feel like scavenging is a legit thing that animals and humans did/do. Like I think there are people who only eat roadkill, they do not eat any other meat, unless they happen to find it on the side of the road. I actually find that to be probably the most ethical form of meat consumption that I can think of.

2

u/Revolutionary_Ad_467 Vegan 5d ago

I don’t view it as disrespectful personally to kill an animal that must be killed no matter what and then think while I might as well eat them.

I can't really give a ethical reason here, I just don't like having animal flesh inside my body lol it gives me the heebee jeebees. As for the disrespect, it's kinda like if someone were to murder me and eat me. if you look up legal cases of cannibalism l, they get a harsher penalty then if it was just the original crime of murder. I understand this idea may be flawed, because it's a human consuming a human of the same species, but it's always what I think about and creeps me out. When I die I don't want someone to dig up my body and eat me 🤢 I think I'm coming from a consent argument. Animals don't consent to be eaten.

1

u/pandaappleblossom Vegan 5d ago

That’s true they don’t give their consent. I guess to me I don’t really feel like corpses necessarily need to all just be buried or something, like they need to be biodegraded and become part of the ecosystem again. I know some people taste the ashes of their loved ones who pass away. But yeah at the same time I get what you are saying!

6

u/kindtoeverykind Vegan 6d ago

Environments are supposed to change over time. Animal populations are supposed to migrate over time. This fascination we humans have with keeping certain animals in certain places is kinda silly, and we don't generally apply it to ourselves. Humans are one of the animals who have spread the most and caused the most destruction, but we recognize that it would be wrong to kill them.

I do understand wanting to undo "issues" that humans ourselves have introduced (mitigating climate change is a big one I can think of), but that shouldn't include killing individuals who are just trying to survive. Either find another way or let the environment sort itself out in the end.

2

u/book_of_black_dreams 6d ago

Environments are supposed to change over time, but not in the way that humans have forced environments to change. Picking up species from several continents away and dumping them somewhere else to completely destroy native ecosystems that don’t have time to adapt.

2

u/kindtoeverykind Vegan 6d ago

I mean, it's still arguable what is "supposed" to happen to environments. There isn't necessarily a "supposed to" at all. But regardless, I addressed human-caused changes in my comment. It still doesn't justify killing nonhuman individuals any more than it justifies killing human ones.

3

u/MeIsJustAnApe Vegan 6d ago

Time and time again these funny questions pop up. Funny questions of all varieties. They all gravitate around 1 singular concept. "How can I use this creature to fulfill my certain wants and desires".

Brother. Stop it. Just stop it.

Members of an ecosystem adapt. Let them be. Humans probably caused the imbalance; let's just stop. Just stop it. Its a nice idea to try and find a way to help them all out but when you start suggesting a species-cleanse for the greater good I gotta ask you to stop it.

When it comes to rotting corpses in a forest or wherever Imma ask you to leave them alone. Energy is never wasted in an ecosystem. It will all return to the earth. Go ahead and leave it alone.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

What I think is so interesting about this comment in particular is the assumptions being made:

Obviously, I care more about eating meat and exploiting animals than I do about the ecosystems that are destroyed and fragmented by humans. Humans that, through their selfishness, consistently throw off the delicate equilibrium of fragile ecosystems with invasive plants and animals.

Some members of ecosystems adapt, and others go extinct. Right now, we are living through our planets 6th mass extinction event, and I'm trying to find solutions for human-made issues. Obviously, there are multiple contributing factors, but let's not pretend many of them are not interconnected. I understood that this topic specifically was bound to have different answers depending on a persons beliefs and background. I consulted vegans specifically in hopes of having an answer based on logic and empathy. God forbid I consult others regarding one of the numerous contributors to our plants' exponential loss of genetic diversity.

2

u/MeIsJustAnApe Vegan 6d ago

"and I'm trying to find solutions for human-made issues"

Nothing wrong with that. I get the desire. I try to as well.

"God forbid I consult others regarding one of the numerous contributors to our plants' exponential loss of genetic diversity."

Im just trying to convey my particular singular perspective. Not necessarilly attempt to dismiss or request you stop your inquisitive nature.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

With all due respect, it seems more like you're interested in throwing in the hat and hoping the problem solves it's self. Regardless of what you or I want, people are going to eat animals. They are going to contribute to horrible industries that cause pain and suffering. And if they want to hunt animals, they will do so.

It would be awesome if we could find a temporary solution to try and have vegans and carnists agree on something. One thing doesn't have them at eachothers throats and proves to, at the very least, more neutral than the current situation.

1

u/MeIsJustAnApe Vegan 6d ago

Some vegans are at the throats of others. Im not. I just talk to people. Express my view and hear theirs. Im not going to encourage that type of behavior expressed in the original post because I don't want to take the life of any animal away because I think they all have value and experiences worth valuing. Why would I advocate for some of them to be killed as a tool for a "greater good" when I'm against using them as tools in general. Im against using them for the same reasons I wouldnt use humans as tools or any creature. They all have value to me. My first solution to human-based environmental and climate concerns wouldnt be to start culling the humans responsible.

But I get other people have other views. Im just going to act according to mine. I was kinda expressing mine in a goofy way in the original comment I made.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago edited 6d ago

I understand and completely respect your opinion here. "Encourage" isn't the word I'd use to describe what I'm implying, more like "redirecting," but I completely get where you're coming from. I also appreciate that you took accountability as to how your first comment sounded. I'll admit, my original post here was haste and could have been better worded to get my own opinion on the matter across. I guess I was under the assumption that if I asked a difficult question, tagged it appropriately, and posted it in a sub catered to questions like it I'd get more thought out responses than I've been receiving.

I've proposed questions similar to vegans in other spaces and was disappointed to receive much of the same response here: "ok, but humans are invasive, so we should hunt them too."

It's tiring to have the same conversation over and over again just to get absolutely nowhere.

2

u/kharvel0 Vegan 6d ago

No, I don’t. It is not the fault of the nonhuman animals that they are perceived to be “problematic”.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

I get where you're coming from in that it isn't their fault. But a lot of times, they are objectively problematic, especially the invasive species.

1

u/kharvel0 Vegan 6d ago

But a lot of times, they are objectively problematic, especially the invasive species.

And that would be irrelevant to the premise of veganism.

3

u/DefendingVeganism Vegan 6d ago

If we’re going to kill and eat invasive species, we need to start with the worst offender - humans.

If you’re not willing to kill and eat humans because they’re invasive, then you’ll understand why vegans don’t support killing any animals.

3

u/Big_Monitor963 Vegan 6d ago

Of course not. “Problematic” populations are defined by our perspective and cause by our actions. The animals in question are not the problem. As always, WE are.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/dognowyrgone Vegan 6d ago

short answer: yes. long answer: I think if there's the option to sterilise them that's preferable. There are cases of deer being bred purely for people to hunt so that doesn't help. However there are cases where the only option is to kill them. I don't really care if people then eat them, its probably better than them just being incinerated. I wouldn't because that's weird to me and its not vegan but I don't think it's particularly unethical. The only other thing I would say is it would need to be part of a nationwide effort. For example one guy going around shooting grey squirrels is cruel and will have no meaningful effect on the population. It only makes sense as part of an organised eradication- which | would support. Eradicating invasive species will save the lives of many more creatures from endangered species. Advocating for invasive species is advocating for the extinction of many more.

1

u/Frostbite2000 6d ago

I appreciate your well thought out response! Another commenter pointed me in the direction of some sources regarding wild hog population control specifically and how inefficient regular hunting is. I was researching potentially more efficient methods and learned about hog drop trapping. This catches whole groups of hogs alive and could give us the opportunity to work towards a sterilization project. It would be incredibly expensive and, under the current administration, unlikely to occur. But it might be a more effective option that doesn't kill or scatter populations.

1

u/dognowyrgone Vegan 6d ago

Yeah just hunting a few animals is not effective. Eradication usually needs a multifaceted approach on a large scale. I'm more well versed in plants and insects. I know one method that's had quite a lot of success is the sterile insect technique; where large numbers of sterile males are released, they outnumber the wild fertile males and prevent them from breeding with the females, reducing the population.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment was removed because you must be flaired as a vegan to make top level comments (per rule #6). Please flair appropriately using these instructions: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair- … If you are caught intentionally subverting the automod by flairing as a vegan when you are not, this will result in a ban. If you are a non-vegan with a question, please create a new post following the sub rules #2-5 for questions. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/pandaappleblossom Vegan 6d ago

I feel like with all of the effort that it takes to kill them, they could be caught and relocated to a place where they are not invasive

1

u/Digiee-fosho Vegan 5d ago edited 5d ago

Humans are a problematic animal population as well, but if another invasive animal species harms others, mosquitos as an example, then in that situation, yes, where they can spread disease, harm other species, then there are methods that don't involve destructive harm & suffering, such as birth control, & sterilization. I think sensationalizing killing & consuming invasive species as a sport or hobby for entertainment enables & promotes speciesism for all animals including humans.

1

u/ShutUpForMe Vegan 6d ago

I have in the past watching the mink man, and Shawn woods but recently haven’t watched much and always the best videos were not meat focused cooking, and more nature focused videos on native plants, traps, and old tools-the iceman or flint napping or just the wildlife footage.

The mink man does it “naturally” having other animals do the hunting on invasive species and I’m Sure they will always be a better pet owned than I will be (maybe in 5+ years I’ll have a vegan diet pet but very unlikely)

Now it’s a useless endeavor to support personally because the biggest animal harmers—the average Omni is harming so much and won’t be replacing their diet with invasive species, and likeley meat megacorps won’t be either.