The Ethics of Hunting
The ethical questions surrounding the pursuit and consumption of game can be complex, but there is no denying the excitement of the flavors and textures found in wild animals. Something about the untamed nature of their habitats is reflected in their taste—a distinct “gaminess” that sets them apart. Diet plays a role, whether the animal feeds on wild grains, grasses, grubs, insects, or berries, but so does the physical reality of life in the wild. Game animals must constantly expend energy avoiding predators, resulting in leaner, denser muscles, particularly in the breasts and wings. Exercise may, in fact, be the defining factor in what we describe as gaminess. “Game” refers to birds and mammals hunted both for sport and for the table. Only a small proportion of this meat is truly wild, and these animals are generally regarded as the most sporting. Managed shoots and reared birds are secondary to truly wild species—such as ducks, geese, and upland grouse—that largely resist raise-and-release efforts. This is not a judgment on their value in the kitchen, where game, wild or managed, offers something wholly distinct from the ordinary. Ultimately, the consumer must answer two questions: do I want to participate in the sport known as hunting, and do I want to support it by purchasing its end product? In this respect, hunters are not so different from those who choose only organically sourced foods at places like Whole Foods. The goal is the same: organic, free-range vegetables and meats. I eat game with pleasure not because it is a God-given right, but because it represents good husbandry. Through our engagement with the wild—or semi-wild—we remain connected to the land. Our lives are intertwined with the lives of
