Back in the depression, homestead years, settlers in the boon docks lived on wild meat. Rabbits, snowshoe hare, were at a tremendous high in their cycle for a few years. They were everywhere. But, the wild meat eating homesteaders looked on rabbits as a starvation diet! If you couldn't get any big game, some lived for a while on rabbits, but they knew it was a starvation diet. There is very little food value in them.
Natives that ate rabbits ate the whole rabbit, thus getting food value from what is discarded by white people.
Now, I read of all the people on here singing the praises of rabbits! The disease carrying little buggers are not for me.
Blaze away.
It may be true that it was "looked upon" as a starvation diet, but I would say that this has more to do with the fact that often it takes more calories to hunt rabbits than the rabbits offer as food. The net result is often a negative caloric benefit, which puts them into the category of "starvation food". Snaring or trapping them changes this ratio dramatically, however we are not discussing rabbits as a sole source of food here.
Furthermore, to say there is "very little food value" in a rabbit or hare is patently false. They are extremely high in protein and B12 and contain very high amounts of other essential minerals; eg. merely 100g of stewed wild rabbit/hare contains 27% of the recommended daily intake of iron. Compared to chicken, the rabbit's protein/fat ratio is much healthier (unless you really need the fat calories, like the homesteaders would have). In fact, the only negative thing to say about the nutrition offered by a rabbit/hare is that they are relatively high in cholesterol. Oddly enough though, "big game" meat is also generally quite high in cholesterol and offers higher total fat and higher saturated fat than rabbit/hare. Anyone who eats a portion of cheese, egg yolks, beef, pork, poultry, fish, or shrimp is consuming as much cholesterol or more than someone who consumes a portion of rabbit/hare.
Based on the above nutritional information, I would say that rabbit is in some respects a better meal for a modern eater than some other game meats, and most domestic meats. Certainly no worse, for sure. Europeans have known this for centuries, of course. The French, Italians, English, Germans, etc. have been eating rabbit/hare since time immemorial and there are countless excellent recipes; there as many ways to cook a rabbit as any other meat. Mark Gilchrist runs a very successful gourmet catering company in England called "Game for Everything" and a large portion of the game he uses in his recipes is rabbit/hare (much of which he hunts himself).
With respect to disease; I have done extensive reading about the safety of game meat and not once have I read anything that indicated that rabbit/hare posed any more of a disease threat than any other wild game. Like any game, the animal should be checked for obvious signs of disease, gloves should be worn while gutting/cleaning, and the meat should be cooked well-done. Beyond that, there is no need for any concern and no extra precautions taken for rabbit/hare that you wouldn't take with a bear or a deer.
Certainly hunting them and eating them is not for everyone. This works out well for me, since I look forward to many years of rabbit pate, hasenpfeffer, rabbit linguini alfredo, etc.
To each (eat) his own, as they say.
P.S. Stalking them with a .22 is some of the best fun hunting out there, IMO, and great exercise.
