well heres my 2 cents on this.
i grew up and live in NY city, so there isnt alot of hunting except upstate and over in PA maybe.

but i say you should still learn to hunt i think, even if its learning a little at a time its something valuable to learn.
like the others said find a experienced hunter(s) you can learn with.

hunting isnt only shooting, it can also be bowhunting, snares traps etc.

think of the peripheral skills you would pick up with hunting, if you take up bow hunting you will get great exercise (especially upper body) you can also learn about foraging, plant identification and even tracking.
of course hunting with a gun would teach you proper weapon safety and probably how to clean and maintain your gun as well.

so im all for people learing how to hunt for many reasons.

Take things in order, learn to use the tools you will use to hunt, learn how to take care of any game that you will be hunting then decide what you want to do. I tought my children how to shoot and how to prepare what they shot so that it is usable. That was was 25 years ago and I doubt that they have used those skills yet, but they have them if needed

Christina,
If you learn to hunt that will be a more responsible person and you will learn the value of a life and true cost of a meal. You will learn more about our existence and a truer relationship between nature and humans.. You might even strip yourself of the false images that society conjures up and forces on us when we are young. There is a big difference between hunting for sport and hunting to survive!

The big moral dilema for me is (and I have been through this with trapping which can be quite crude and seemingly cruel) that in order to survive on the skill you must practice it, which means hunting (or trapping) when you do not actually have to do so in order to survive.

The honest truth is that right now, I don't have to hunt to survive. That still doesn't mean that I kill for no reason. I eat every game animal I kill. Even if you hunt and you can't use all the meat, maybe you could donate it to a local shelter or give to someone who could use the help. I know that there are programs around here that allow hunters to share their animals with charities, so there may be one in your area as well. You might also learn to fish. Learning to fish is a little easier than learning to hunt (IMO), and I have found that it is sometimes more productive than hunting (at least as far as getting something), but you can also throw them back. I release almost all the fish I catch, only keeping those that I want to eat or the few that get injured. I use slightly large hooks so that the fish has a harder time swallowing it.

The hard part of hunting is to know where to set the snare or how to come close enough for a shot (I shot roe deer at less than 30 m but it isn´t easy to come that close). Even if you decide that you can´t kill an animal, it may be worth aquiring the other skills. You will learn to observe your environment which can spare you a lot of trouble.
Apart from hunting you could learn how to prepare game or fish for eating. As others said, having one more skill can´t hurt.

I stand corrected, but there are limitations:

From:Steven B. Harris
Newsgroups: sci.med.nursing,sci.med
Subject: Re: very low blood sugar level

"All cells - even the brain - can also use ketones, intermediates in the oxidation of fats. But there's a limit (about 50%) as to what extent the brain can switch from sugars to ketones, even in starvation."

"And maybe most important, it takes days for the brain to switch to using ketonbodies in the first place. Wich excludes them from saving the brain in any acute episodes."

"Yes, but even weeks of starvation and maximal brain switch to ketone metabolism will not save you from blackout and brain damage if your blood glucose falls to very low levels. They key to the danger is that the changeover is not ever complete, not that it takes too long."

I resisted getting back into this thread- I even deleted one message I entered, because of the seemingly-religious ferver it stirs up, but...

I won't try to press on issue of food for short-term survival, but I can tell you for sure that the "fear of fasting" (however institutionalized it seems to have become) is pretty much ridiculous. I've fasted for up to 7 days (a little longer, actually), once or twice for 5, and several times for 3 or 4 days. I know people who have gone for MUCH longer without any apparent ill effects.

Do you seriously think that humans are the only animal on the planet that has somehow evolved to the point where they keel over dead if not fed each and every day of their lives? Sorry, that's just nonsense. Probably starting with your grandparents back, your ancestors missed a whole lot of meals, and more than a few generations back probably took periods of hunger for granted, going back for millions of years. Your body is not fundamentally different from theirs. From an evolutionary (or statistical) standpoint, you're probably at much more risk from NEVER missing any meals than from fasting. It's remotely possible you will die or suffer injury from exercise, too... it's just more likely you will suffer from the lack of it.

Most of the effects of fasting, in fact, are beneficial... up to a point, of course... but that point is MUCH further out than most people think. Most, and just possibly all, of the negative effects of missing a few meals are imagined, pure and simple.

I'm not trying to win people over, even though it just seems like common sense to me, but, IMHO, implying that people are in danger of health problems or death from missing a few meals, or even a few days' meals, is just silly, and a bit irresponsible. No wonder folks think they're dying if they go 12 hours without being fed.

For those at all interested, and not really terrified of slight discomfort, I recommend trying it for youself. It IS a survival skill. Like knowing you won't die if you spend a night outdoors, knowing you won't die from not eating for a couple of days is inherently empowering. Once you've done it a couple of times, the fear of a little hunger just seems... silly. EXACTLY like the fear of sleeping outdoors once you've been camping a few times.

Disclaimers: I am not a doctor- I'm sure you can find one to back any position you care to take on the issue if you try. It might be relevant that I also eat no sweets, at all, period... and am also very skeptical of the "survival" value of glorified candy bars, whatever they call themselves. Fasting is NOT a good way to lose weight, and in fact can sabotage some other efforts in that direction. Addiction to other substances- such as caffiene (and, IMHO, sugar), can cause real withdrawal symptoms that are easily confused with the effects of doing without food. Your mileage may vary. Consult a qualified astrologer before adopting any diet. Three out of five traditional shamans surveyed on the island of Tonga disagreed with my position, and said that a person will die in a few days without beetle nuts.

Make up your own minds, but don't let someone who's never tried it scare you with their own imagined hobgoblins.

I agree with you completely PL. Yes, you're going to be uncomfortable for awhile without food, but you're not going to die. After all, this site is "Equipped To Survive" not "Equipped To Be Comfortable".

I don't know. Deliberately going without food in a survival situation when food is readily available just seems counterintuitive to me. I mean, if it's available why not eat? And has been mentioned, it also seems logical to assume that fasting would result in increased risk of hypothermia in cold weather. Have there been any studies done on this?

You make a great point about testing your limits prior to an emergency. And shelter, water, and rescue all come before food. But once those are taken care of, what's the harm in trying to stock up the larder?

Regards, Vince