Ethics and Legality?

[TokkieM]

" As I stand with the blood dripping off my hands and slowly seeping into mother earth giving back to her which belongs to her,I have time to reflect. Every drop of blood that explodes into the dust at my feet a heartbeat of the animal I have just killed.Every heartbeat a thought on why I do this time and time again.

It's not about the trophy,though it's a part of it.

Neither is it about the clean protein that will feed my body,but it's a part of it.

Neither is it about glory or boasting,or what I wear or drive or how much money I make.

It's not about the rifle I use that has been a friend over more miles than I can remember,it's only metal and wood,but it's part of it.

It's not about the hard miles and even harder conditions,though I relish the challange of it.

It's not about the rush of seeing a animal step out that triggers your heart to race a million miles a minute,even though that is also a part of it.

It's not about spending time alone in God's creation but that is also a part of it.

It's more than the primal urge that beats inside of me like drum,it's more than the killing,even though killing is also part of it.

Testing my skill,abillity and dedication to outsmart,outlast and in the end kill a animal is also a part of it,yes done right it will be the hardest and most exhilarating thing you can do,but it's only part of it.

As the last drop of blood slowly starts it's slippery slide into the dust,I feel sadness,elation and respect.

You will never understand why I hunt,because you don't get ALL OF IT!!! "

 

[Hank2211]

What this thread, like so many others, seems to be about is the fact that some people cannot help but condem what they don't agree with. They can't stand diversity of opinion - everyone should believe what I do, and if they don't, they're not only wrong, they're evil.

Nothing wrong with trying to get people to see your perspective, but doing it by example might be more effective than attacking people's characters and opinions.

 

[ActionBob]

I feel sadness,elation and respect.

You will never understand why I hunt,because you don't get ALL OF IT!!! "

Now that whole thing was very eloquently written.

And summed up at the end such that truer words could not be spoken.

Thanks for posting that!

 

[Scott Slough]

I agree with the MUCH more positive tone of this discussion and would hope that we could maintain decorum at all times. There is NO acceptable reason to post attacks on individuals or call them names – even if they attack or call names first (falls under the general rules from when I was a middle school science teacher).

I also generally agree with premise of using my own morals to judge my own actions and not to judge others based solely on my morals – especially those who have grown up in different hunting or societal cultures. But, I do think I have a moral responsibility as a participating member of a community (AH) to RESPECTFULLY present my personal views when building/discussion the norms of my community. I think that we can/must discuss hard topics on AH and in the hunting community.

 

[Nyati]

Ethics are personal, I agree.

The problem comes when the behavior of some hunters reflect badly on our whole community.

 

[johnnyblues]

There have been several very interesting threads here lately that basically invoked discussion, sometimes heated, around what is "OK" to hunt, or how it is "OK" to hunt something. And how we should all react to those situations in order to protect hunting in general.

So I'd like to take this a slightly different direction. My real question here is not what particular hunt/activity is "OK," but rather how we should react when we determine that something is wrong and what constitutes "wrong." In other words, should we support any activity that is legal at the time it took place regardless of our ethical belief?

For me personally, there is some gray area in the decision making process itself when it comes to how we should react to a particular situation. It is not always cut and dry and especially from the ethical point of view. I believe this because I don't think that ethics, for the group, are cut and dry like a law is. But I also don't think they should be discounted, which seems to happen quite often.

First, to address the legal aspect. This one is cut and dry to me. If it is illegal in a particular area we shouldn't do it, or support it (for that area), period. Examples of this are hunting at night with lights, or hunting dangerous game with a below legal size caliber. If you do these things, where illegal, you are in the wrong in my book, period. I've seen the excuse used that it is legal elsewhere and that makes it OK, because someone thinks the law in question is wrong. I don't agree with this belief at all. It is against my personal ethics.

Now here is where the gray area comes in, for me personally. Is night hunting ethical just because it is legal, or is hunting a lion OK with a .243 (extreme example on purpose) because there is no legal restriction in a particular area? The ethics of these questions are to me partially a personal decision and there is no black and white answer. One of the definitions for ethics is as follows:

moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior

So my ethics may be, and probably are, different from yours. Or, the ethics of Texas hunters as a group may be dfferent than those raised in South Africa. If my personal ethics are not supported should I then overlook them in order to support the "greater good" of hunting because an act is legal? I don't believe I should, and I don't. There are many though that clearly state that if it is legal we must support it, period. I believe that position leaves ethics out altogether as there are many laws on the books in many countries over many different subjects that I don't believe are ethical. Am I to support them just because they are legal, or because they are part of something else I do support?

This is a very complex subject in my mind. Not so much because of the legality that always seems to be the first thing that people point to, but because of ethics. I won't blindly support something I don't agree with in order to help something I do. If my team loses because I did the right thing (in my mind) then so be it. I won't "cheat to win." Whether I like it or not, there are shades of gray.

That being said how do we define legal and ethics when it comes to fenced lion hunts? Again that is a very touchy subject for hunters and antis alike. For me I hope by god's will to hunt lion one day in the near future and for me it has to be fenced simply because of cost's. Would I prefer to hunt free ranging lion?, yes absolutely. I would not care even if a free range lion's mane was not as good as a fenced lion. For me it's just the lore of it all. We all here know just how dangerous ANY lion can be Reinhart can attest to that. What you've said here Royal is interesting and I think it will and has always come down to the person. For me if it's legal I would participate I think in just about any hunting adventure. I would not club a baby seal...But I would hunt a fenced lion.

 

[Nyati]

It´s up to you Johnny !

I have visited a lion breeding farm, and I have been right next to a friend of mine when he hunted a captive bred lioness, so I know how it feels, even if it was not me pulling the trigger.

Not for me.

 

[Pheroze]

I dont think there is one ethical way to hunt because "hunting" means different things in different situations.

If it is an activity to feed our families, with the animal itself or through the value its parts have to others, then there is only one reason for it. We do not have to be as constrained about how we do it. If I lived in a small impoverished village, trying not to let my childten die from malnutrition, this may be all I am doing.

If the definition includes using the natural environment to secure a sustainable source of food or products, then conservation is a part of the definition, and how we hunt is important. However, using a plane to find food may not be all bad. While hunting for just the trophy may not be good.

If we define hunting as a way of participating in the natural world in order to benefit both ourselves, physically and emotionally, as well as benefit the natural environment, then how we hunt becomes even more significant. We are regulating our activity to make us better. Creating an industry that benefits the natural environment is part of the goal, and doing it in a particular way enhances the experience for us. In this case trophy hunting is fine but using a plane is questionable.

So, how do we define the activity? What is "hunting" for one may not be hunting for another. To paraphrase: "is the activity the message?"

For me, just because we can kill any animal in any manner does not mean we should. If it is not making me healthier, putting food on my plate, or money towards conservation, then it isn't "hunting", it's just killing. By that definition, I would have to take a long look at a commercial operation designed to allow me to kill an animal in a controlled environment. But, perhaps the profits will help with conservation? Perhaps the area is so big that it will challenge me properly? In the end, what message do I send by my activity?

 

[billc]

I see no problem at all with raising the issue on here. The hunting reports page is full of people praising outfitters for a good trip, as well as some raising issues. Im not quite sure why we should hide the negatives? It educates ourselves over certain actions and outfitters who support and promote unethical (In my mind) hunting. Maybe 'said' outfitter, or any outfitter and potential client for that matter read the thread are educated about peoples perceptions of what is and isn't fair chase hunting.

I believe what helps the anti's more is those hunters and outfitters who do not support fair chase hunting, and employ unethical methods to achieve success. If we can solve it amongst ourselves then I believe it is a much better way than brushing it under the rug and waiting for it to be found out

Ok I have no problem if guys want to post there thoughts. But no one has said who the outfitter was so we are just battling back and forth on a giraffe hunt with out much more details. The hunter or outfitter is not named so what are we making right. To make it right we could all be emailing the guys saying how in bad taste it was. That is talking about the problem and doing something about it.

I am just saying I find it better to not beat up on any hunting on any open forum unless it is something illegal. Or if we can fix the problem by talking on an open forum.

I just dont think I need to hear myself talk about something like this unless it helps us as a group of hunters. Why hurt ourselves more by just the need to hear ourselves talk. A big bunch of are problems as hunters is everyone has to have a word on everything if it helps or not. i have already said more then I wanted to because it really helped no one.

We all know that social networks normally dont help us hunter. We all complain about the dumb u-tube video or this or that. Then we make post about the same dumb videos we complain about. Talk share stuff about hunting but be smart about it and give no more ammo to the anti's. Police ourselves without feeling we need to bring up everything to show how we feel on everything that happens.

Again this is just how I feel and everyone is free to think and do as they want. But it seems we should start thinking about helping ourselves as hunter over having to hear ourselves talk on stuff we dont always like.

 

[Hank2211]

It´s up to you Johnny !

I have visited a lion breeding farm, and I have been right next to a friend of mine when he hunted a captive bred lioness, so I know how it feels, even if it was not me pulling the trigger.

Not for me.

I have hunted leopard over bait, restricted to daylight. I have hunted lion and lioness on large high fenced areas. Both legal.

I would have you guess which one was more exciting, but I will save you the effort. The lions.

I would have you guess which one seemed more sporting, but again, I will save you the effort. The lions.

You can have a different perspective than me, but please, let's try to be reasonable. Of the people who are against high fenced lion hunts (on 40 sq miles in my case), most, if not all, argue that "wild" hunts which are almost always baited, are the ethical choice.

In Canada, where I live, bathing animals is illegal and always considered unethical.

You do what you think is right. As will I.

 

[Jfet]

In Canada, where I live, bathing animals is illegal and always considered unethical.

And there you go, in Texas its completely opposite.

Both our legal and ethical perspective on life are based on our culture. Ya'll know what happens when you try to tell a Texas his culture is wrong.

With the advent of forums like this our cultures, ethics, and legalities come into close contact.

So why is it illegal to bait animals in Canada? Why is it legal to hunt animals in Texas over bait?

In Texas, I believe (code word for my opinion) hunting over bait came from times when corn was plentiful but not protein. Corn was used by early settlers to bring both livestock and wild game out of the bush without having to go put oneself in danger. "So great grandpa put out a pile of corn and thus grandpa did it and its good enough for me," mentality has a strong foothold in Texas. Now combine that with the vast deer feeder industry that has developed and it quickly becomes legal and ethical.

So what happened in Canada?

Why do you hunt lions in South Africa one way and a different way in Tanzania?

Unless Jaco has to break out his stop an argument picture, this thread could be used often in my Outdoor Adventure Classes that I am getting to teach this year.

 

[Hank2211]

And there you go, in Texas its completely opposite.

Both our legal and ethical perspective on life are based on our culture. Ya'll know what happens when you try to tell a Texas his culture is wrong.

With the advent of forums like this our cultures, ethics, and legalities come into close contact.

So why is it illegal to bait animals in Canada? Why is it legal to hunt animals in Texas over bait?

In Texas, I believe (code word for my opinion) hunting over bait came from times when corn was plentiful but not protein. Corn was used by early settlers to bring both livestock and wild game out of the bush without having to go put oneself in danger. "So great grandpa put out a pile of corn and thus grandpa did it and its good enough for me," mentality has a strong foothold in Texas. Now combine that with the vast deer feeder industry that has developed and it quickly becomes legal and ethical.

So what happened in Canada?

Why do you hunt lions in South Africa one way and a different way in Tanzania?

Unless Jaco has to break out his stop an argument picture, this thread could be used often in my Outdoor Adventure Classes that I am getting to teach this year.

My understanding - and it's no more than what I was told in my hunter training and conservation course many years ago - is that it was considered "unsporting" to bait animals (and birds). So you can sit over a wheat field to shoot geese, but you can't deposit wheat in a field. In Canada.

This of course just proves the point - ethics are (at least) situational and cultural. Which makes it a bit silly to get on a high horse about what we would and wouldn't do, and how anyone who does things differently is unethical or giving the "antis" ammunition to use against us.

Might be nice if we stuck together for a change!

 

[Jfet]

is that it was considered "unsporting" to bait animals

LOL when I read that line I went right into my proper British accent and ya'll know what we did with the British.

Because Canada remained closer to its British roots you have more of that "Proper" sporting attitude. Because of our "Rebellious Attitudes" and in Texas we have an extra dose of it we are just going to hunt differently.

Now let's look at our wildlife populations. In Texas wildlife is thriving and I suspect in Canada the story is the same but I shall wait upon confirmation from our neighbors.

 

[Jfet]

My understanding - and it's no more than what I was told in my hunter training and conservation course many years ago - is that it was considered "unsporting" to bait animals (and birds). So you can sit over a wheat field to shoot geese, but you can't deposit wheat in a field. In Canada.

This of course just proves the point - ethics are (at least) situational and cultural. Which makes it a bit silly to get on a high horse about what we would and wouldn't do, and how anyone who does things differently is unethical or giving the "antis" ammunition to use against us.

Might be nice if we stuck together for a change!

That what fires me up about this thread. Hunting has the ability to allow us to have common ground and a common cause because it is instinctual.

 

[Royal27]

I just dont think I need to hear myself talk about something like this unless it helps us as a group of hunters. Why hurt ourselves more by just the need to hear ourselves talk. A big bunch of are problems as hunters is everyone has to have a word on everything if it helps or not. i have already said more then I wanted to because it really helped no one.

This of course just proves the point - ethics are (at least) situational and cultural. Which makes it a bit silly to get on a high horse about what we would and wouldn't do, and how anyone who does things differently is unethical or giving the "antis" ammunition to use against us.

Might be nice if we stuck together for a change!

Now this is getting interesting. I view the two above statements from Bill and Hank to be saying the same basic thing. That we need to quit arguing amongst ourselves and stick together (at least as much as we can). I agree with that wholeheartedly.

What this boils down to, I think, is that personal ethics are, well, very personal. And since they are personal we have a tendency to get very emotional about ethics, especially our own. And because of that we have a hard time seeing another's point and are more likely to lash out I think. And THAT is where we get in trouble!!! It isn't that we share. It is how we share that makes us look divided. And don't think this doesn't happen on the anti side too. I don't personally believe that most antis really believe we should all be killed just because a few radicals put that up on social media, even if it sure seems that way some days!

Now why is sharing important? I think Jfet said it a minute ago.

Both our legal and ethical perspective on life are based on our culture. Ya'll know what happens when you try to tell a Texas his culture is wrong.

With the advent of forums like this our cultures, ethics, and legalities come into close contact.

Our cultures comes into conflict with others in ways it never has before. And I think that is both a good and bad thing, but that is a post for another day. I think the real point here is that tolerance is more important than it ever has been. If we aren't a little tolerant then we don't have the opportunity to learn and maybe, just maybe, do things better than Grandpa did! And having an informed opinion and wanting to do things better is a large part of why I come here, and even read the opposing view, once in a while at least.

 

[UKHunter]

Ok I have no problem if guys want to post there thoughts. But no one has said who the outfitter was so we are just battling back and forth on a giraffe hunt with out much more details. The hunter or outfitter is not named so what are we making right. To make it right we could all be emailing the guys saying how in bad taste it was. That is talking about the problem and doing something about it.

I am just saying I find it better to not beat up on any hunting on any open forum unless it is something illegal. Or if we can fix the problem by talking on an open forum.

I just dont think I need to hear myself talk about something like this unless it helps us as a group of hunters. Why hurt ourselves more by just the need to hear ourselves talk. A big bunch of are problems as hunters is everyone has to have a word on everything if it helps or not. i have already said more then I wanted to because it really helped no one.

We all know that social networks normally dont help us hunter. We all complain about the dumb u-tube video or this or that. Then we make post about the same dumb videos we complain about. Talk share stuff about hunting but be smart about it and give no more ammo to the anti's. Police ourselves without feeling we need to bring up everything to show how we feel on everything that happens.

Again this is just how I feel and everyone is free to think and do as they want. But it seems we should start thinking about helping ourselves as hunter over having to hear ourselves talk on stuff we dont always like.

Ok I have no problem if guys want to post there thoughts. But no one has said who the outfitter was so we are just battling back and forth on a giraffe hunt with out much more details. The hunter or outfitter is not named so what are we making right. To make it right we could all be emailing the guys saying how in bad taste it was. That is talking about the problem and doing something about it.

I am just saying I find it better to not beat up on any hunting on any open forum unless it is something illegal. Or if we can fix the problem by talking on an open forum.

I just dont think I need to hear myself talk about something like this unless it helps us as a group of hunters. Why hurt ourselves more by just the need to hear ourselves talk. A big bunch of are problems as hunters is everyone has to have a word on everything if it helps or not. i have already said more then I wanted to because it really helped no one.

We all know that social networks normally dont help us hunter. We all complain about the dumb u-tube video or this or that. Then we make post about the same dumb videos we complain about. Talk share stuff about hunting but be smart about it and give no more ammo to the anti's. Police ourselves without feeling we need to bring up everything to show how we feel on everything that happens.

Again this is just how I feel and everyone is free to think and do as they want. But it seems we should start thinking about helping ourselves as hunter over having to hear ourselves talk on stuff we dont always like.

billc,

I think your posts have been interesting and added to the debate developing here. We cant all agree on everything, which I believe is a good thing. Having different views and ideas makes for a good conversation and debate, so long as we respect each others views, it leads to great discussion

I completely agree that we need to be more savvy about the way we present ourselves and hunting on social media, etc.

 

[Pheroze]

...In Canada, where I live, bathing animals is illegal and always considered unethical...

And a good thing too! I think we can all agree that bathing of wild animals is really unacceptable! All it would take would be for the soap to get in their eyes and some poor wounded creature would be staggering around blind in the wilderness. I, for one, am against it!

 

[Jfet]

And a good thing too! I think we can all agree that bathing of wild animals is really unacceptable! All it would take would be for the soap to get in their eyes and some poor wounded creature would be staggering around blind in the wilderness. I, for one, am against it!

I know your type. Class is going great. The kids are really into it. Its a magical moment. Learning is happening, and then somebody like you opens their mouth.

 

[Royal27]

And a good thing too! I think we can all agree that bathing of wild animals is really unacceptable! All it would take would be for the soap to get in their eyes and some poor wounded creature would be staggering around blind in the wilderness. I, for one, am against it!

Wait just a dang minute here!!!

It is easy for YOU to say don't bathe the wild animals when you live in Canada, where it is cold.

Down here in the South it is hot and they begin to stink if we don't bathe them regular. ...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

And a good thing too! I think we can all agree that bathing of wild animals is really unacceptable! All it would take would be for the soap to get in their eyes and some poor wounded creature would be staggering around blind in the wilderness. I, for one, am against it!