Yes, most hunters prefer the term "harvesting," because it emphasizes the fact that they aren't hunting for sport, but to feed their families, many of whom are just above the poverty line. None of the animal is wasted - what the family doesn't eat is made into feed for their animals, many of which are working cattle dogs, livestock guardian dogs, etc.
Water fountain?
Hunters prefer the term “harvesting” when it comes to deer as the deer population needs to be thinned in order to preserve the herds (thanks, in part, to encroachment of humans on their space, thus reducing their available livable territory). So they consider herd thinning “harvesting”. There are also limits set as to how many/what age/ what sex of deer can be taken.
I'd call that culling.
Me too
Yeah they seem gross, don’t they? I use the water bottle filler things though.
People are using personal bottles now-designer style & everything.
I stay clear of bubblers and water filling stations, just as much potential bacteria from others using them.
In my opinion, "harvesting animals" is a recent euphemism for hunting and/or butchering animals. I first saw the term in Mother Earth magazine in reference to butchering chickens, probably 10 - 20 years ago. I find it a little silly, as like @Relle, I was raised with the definitions that harvesting was bringing in the plant crops and hunting/butchering was bringing in the meat. (I was born in the 50s.) I have no qualms about the idea of hunting for meat. I certainly buy meat already butchered. But I do find the term "harvesting animals" rather a silly euphemism. I feel like if the terms hunting or butchering bothers someone so much, they should become a vegetarian. Just my 2 cents, since the subject is being discussed.
