fogie:

Not sure I understand this thread... you're original question was whether 59% of people could possibly be in favor of hunting. You made no mention of fox hunting, and yet there were a lot of responses that singled out fox hunting. I too question the percentage. If you polled people in many rural areas, the percentage would probably be much higher.

When I was growing up, we were poor and didn't have food stamps or government support to fall back on (which I am in favor of, too.) Half the food we ate came from hunting, fishing or harvesting wild plants, from asparagus and several different nuts, to mushrooms. Most families I knew back then survived in the same way. Hunting wasn't a "sport," and in most rural communities, it still isn't.

Living in built-up Connecticut, I wish there were MORE people hunting deer. I'd rather somebody shot one than hit it with their car (for their sake, and the sake of the deer.) I've seen deer hit by cars who die a slow, agonizing death in the woods. We've also had a rabies epidemic the last few years and that would probably have been less of a problem if raccoons were hunted in season.

I don't hunt, myself, and have no desire to. But, I see many benefits of hunting, in controlling wildlife populations. You can put me down as one of the 59% or higher of people who are in favor of hunting... not as a sport, but as a means of putting meat on the table, and in a controlled way, keeping wildlife populations in hand.

On Mudcat, the percentage is probably 2%.

Jerry