As much as the kill is only a small part of the hunt and and even smaller fraction of why I hunt, I don't beat around the bush. My hunts often end in or include a kill or kills. I don't have any problem with that. I eat what I kill.

When you harvest a plant to eat it, you kill it. When I want some meat, I kill it. When you buy a cheeseburger, it came from a cow that was killed.

The animals I kill for food got to live a free, natural, and possibly happy life. They died as quickly and painlessly as is possible. They had all the room in the world to roam, and could eat whatever they wanted whenever they wanted to. The chickens, cows, pigs, etc. that people eat can't say the same. Their life was cramped and crappy, and their death was no fun at all.

I personally prefer "shoot", not to gloss over anything, but because it gets the message across without the edge that "kill" puts on the act. The things we do in the crapper can be described in less graphic terms as well.
On the other hand, if we're trying to gross out the non-hunters and maybe convert them into anti-hunters, the more graphic the decription the more effective it will be.

To not use the word "kill" is like hiding behind the fact that that is indeed, exactly what you are doing when you "harvest" an animal. I say it is better to use the word "kill" wrather than "harvest" just because it helps you remember what you are doing. Taking the life of an animal is a very spiritual thing and you should honor it by not forgetting about it. Killing an animal cleanly and humanly is the whole objective of hunting and it should not be forgotten by those who do so. I always say a prayer for each animal I kill and thank God for the meat and ask his blessing on the spirit of the animal. I do not take killing animal lightly.

Semantics and political correctness in my book.

I sometimes say harvest othertimes kill, but we are killing the animals, they are dead. If we had a conversation you using the word harvest would be ok by me.
My major concerns are; fair chase and hunting ethically, regardless of the wording.

Would we make another word for when a Soldier kills a combatant on the battlefield. That is a human and we say KIA etc. Surely human lives are worth more in the grand scheme of things.
So Semantics

Im going to go with kill, Harvesting to me is something you do with plants you can harvest apples but the tree still lives. I am takeing the animals life, I am killing it. I don't see the need to put the pig in a skirt... its still a pig

FOR MYSELF THE WORD KILL DOESN'T BOTHER ME OR THE PEOPLE I NORMALLY ASSOCIATE WITH.BUT IN SURTEN COMPANIE(LIKE WOMAN,CHILDREN OR IN SITUATION ITS JUST NOT CALL FOR)I WILL SUBSTITUTE KILL WITH HARVEST OR TAKEN.BUT IN THE SAME LIGHT IF I'M SOME PLACE AND THERE'S AN OVER OPINIONATED ANTI HUNTING BOZO I'LL DROP IN THE TERM (BLOW THE LIVING SH#T OUT OF IT)OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY NOT HELPING THE SITUATION BUT FROM TIME TO TIME IT JUST CAN'T BE HELPED.I WONDER HOW MANY -1'S I'M GOING TO GET FOR POSTING THIS ONE...

I usually use the word kill when I'm describing something I've done. I don't present it as a big deal, but I don't make myself look like a two-faced idiot by trying to dance around it. I think shoot is also a good term, but I tend to think it's more graphic than kill. (This probably has more to do with peoples' personal experience, and so I'm probably making a useless judgment here. For example, a fish with a pithed brain, or allowed to expire from lack of water, has been killed. When I hear shot, I tend to think of geese finished at close-range with a 12.)
I tend to use take or harvest only once in a while, usually when I'm talking about this stuff in agregate, in terms of total statewide take last year, or whatever.

If you can "take" or "harvest" game without killing it I'd love to know more about that technique. A fisherman can catch and release fish. Hunters kill their game. We are what we are and do what we do. PC semantics won't change that.

if you can't say kill, don't hunt, take pictures instead.

I totally agree with BioGuy, the word choice should be dependent upon who the audience is. Killing is what hunting is, harvesting is what farmers do to plants.

maybe this is just me but does this sound like peta, i will say kill and thats me. harvest is apeasing peta and hsus in my opinion. sry if this offends you.

I agree that there is a huge difference between the terms "hunter" and "killer". I agree with the words take or harvest. Well put question, by the way.

i us the word killed because that is the fact of it
but a degree of cander needs to be used when around childeren as for adults it is what it is i killed a deer or ect . no need to hide from it or to be ashamed of it and if thats the case by a camera and hunt and its really fun in the off season when not hunting deer but thats my op
but to each thier own

see i have a hard time saying harvest i when i think of harvest i think of the fields that are stripped each fall from standing corn and uniform to deathly and barren flat it kind of makes the area feel very empty. But when you kill a deer you do not wipe out the whole field/ herd only a portion.

buckhunter hit the nail on the head. It's different when you're witht the boys.

I can only be PC so much. Why should I worry about every little thing and how it will effect every single person, when most of the people that it would truly offend don't give it a second thought when they tell me I'm a "disgusting, vile piece of s#!* that's headed straight for hell" just because I eat meat or hunt?

Still, I make sure that I am mindfull of how I say some things around certain people. After all, my momma raised me right and taught me to be respectful of others. Not like some jerks out there...

This is much ado about ways of describing "hunter success", which is not such a big deal that it calls for enhanced dramatic effect. We can do without the end zone celebrations.

I believe in being respectful of the animal's life, and I also say a prayer of thanks immediately after killing an animal. That being said, I like it when the guys in camp call me "The Slayer." It's all about context, time and place.

The trouble with the word "harvest" is that it is more properly applied to reductions of animal populations as a whole, and not to individual animals. The annual apple harvest is one thing but the picking of an individual apple is another. It just doesn't sound right to harvest one apple or one deer.

Get over it. If you Hunt, then YOU KILL! Never waste any of What You Kill. But you can't get through the day without killing something. Go to the store, and your dollar requires that something dies. And it gets more abstract. Go buy shoes or a belt. Buying gas implies that you've killed more animals than you'll ever see by pollution. Us Indians apologize to the critter before killing, and promise not to waste anything.