Hello, Toreador
You write:
"The use of snares has been quite common throughout history and I am sure it was a common means of killing animals in bible times. Most of the time the animal would have died because of being strangled as the trap was set so as to catch the animal around the neck and tighten."
Hunters and merchants used, and still use, strangulation to kill animals. Hunters would use snare traps and merchants would strangle their animals with snaring devises. Merchants would sometimes club their animals before strangling them. The advantages of strangulation for a merchant were several. Customers that did not want the task of killing the animal could let the merchant do it and be assured of the freshest flesh. Strangulation was also safer than other methods and less mess. To this very day in third-world countries you will find strangled flesh sold in markets.
When it comes to Wrench's premise that "things strangled" included more than animals dead for whatever reason (i.e., that it included animals that died of themselves as is the case at Deut. 14:21) he forgets one fundamental fact based on WTS teachings. Namely that dead flesh is not "animal" anymore -- it is "dust." Why, and what is the relevancy of this?
The WTS teaches that as man did so too animals "came to be a living soul." Because of this the WTS teaches that a man is a soul, and that an animal is a soul. What happens to the man (or animal) at death? The WTS teaches that at death a man (or animal) ceases to exist. If at death an animal ceases to exist then it is impossible to eat a dead animal. Based on this teaching we can therefore eat a dead animal's flesh, but not a dead animal. This is because at death the animal ceases to exist with its flesh returning to dust. If this teaching is correct then there was no reason for God to address already dead animals to Noah because in God's eye the dead animal is no longer an animal but rather it is dirt. Since God said that Adam was to expand his garden home then to use dirt to further life is God-ordained. Using/eating the flesh of dead animals would be consistent with this ordination. But what about making food from dust/dirt by intentionally killing animals? That is, killing an animal and using the flesh ("dust") as food?
After the flood of Noah this question God addressed to humankind by means of the Noachian Decree. The Noachian Decree tells us if we kill an animal to use its flesh as food then God prohibits us from eating the blood of the animal. But what about the blood of animals that died of themselves and therefore did not require killing to turn into dirt? Based on the WTS' teaching that an animal (or man) ceases to exist at death and becomes dust then there is no soul to relieve the animal of and therefore no animal! There is but "dust." Noah did not need permission to make food from dust. By divine ordination Noah should have made use of dust to make food. This is why the Noachian Decree addresses making food from killing. Making food from dust/dirt was already answered and permitted. Noah did not need permission to make food from animals that had died of themselves and therefore did not exist and therefore did not require killing.
Saying apologists like Wrench have their work cut out is a gross understatement!
Marvin Shilmer