Are we ethical?

[Deleted member 38069]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

Some of you are taking this too personally and are getting defensive. I'm just saying call a spade a spade!

 

[Wildabeest]

There has to be a better term.

Way of life.

 

[SAJ-99]

I don't have a problem with lighted nocks.
I don't have a problem with range finders.
I don't have a problem with drone use the day before a hunt.
I do have a problem with people who believe their ethics must be forced upon others.
If its legal then people must hold themselves to their own standards of what they find ethically fitting their own decisions.
Kinda along the lines of religion. To each his/her own.

But that is not how Ethics work. Ethics is a moral principle that guides behavior of the group. Majority has to agree before anything becomes ethical or unethical. If we let people set their own individual standards there are no ethics, it's a free for all. I agree with your list, but I think you are trying to say that ethics are malleable. I guess I'm disagreeing that each person gets to set their own definition implied by "to each their own". I guess? not really sure, but a good discussion.

 

[Sytes]

Majority agreed (via representation or individual vote) to what is "legal". That is our base point. From that point as I commented, ethics are no one's business other than their own. Of course, in my opinion.

 

[geetar]

To me a lot of ethics related to trophy hunting are situational. If it’s an otc area I’d be inclined to shoot the first legal raghorn bull I see but if I spent 20 years accumulating points for the tag I’m gonna spend a little more time behind the spotter. Same goes for sheep. I’m not gonna spend 20+ years applying for sheep and pop the first legal ram I see. To me it’s really a deeper personal thing knowing that you are happy with the decision you are making and it goes along with what you believe at your core. I don’t consider myself a trophy hunter in most situations usually being content taking a nice representative of the species I’m pursuing but there are certain tags that would change that. I do understand how to the folks outside the hunting circle that the idea of trophy hunting could turn stomachs. I think it’s up to each individual to decide what’s right for them and keep it within the boundaries of the law.

 

[mtmuley]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

Some of you are taking this too personally and are getting defensive. I'm just saying call a spade a spade!

I wasn't gonna touch this. It's hunting. Searching out and killing an animal. For hide, horns, fur or meat and some for enjoyment. It's where people try to read more into it that the problems start. Like trying to rationalize ethics. It's personal. mtmuley

 

[Shangobango]

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

To answer the first question, absolutely yes.

The second question is harder for me.
I just can’t imagine shooting something solely for the antlers. I have shot a lot of animals and thought “ that is going to be some fine eating” but I never recall shooting an animal and thinking
“that is going to look nice on the wall”.

I am glad I don’t have to chose between them. I like big racks as much as the next hunter.

Very thought provoking topic.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

Some of you are taking this too personally and are getting defensive. I'm just saying call a spade a spade!

Good question, trying to be honest here.

If I just got to take the meat... yes for pronghorn, elk, mule deer, no for bears.
If I just got to keep the other stuff... maybe... if it was the first of something. Like my first bison/moose/ sheep. I don't know for sure I'd be conflicted. At this point, no for elk/deer/pronghorn/bear, etc. Birds? Maybe.

To the last point, part of why I hunt is the adventure, though I don't like the connotations of that word. I hunt a new elk spot every year to make each trip something new, it's what makes it fun for me.
So to that end I'd go even if I wasn't actually hunting and didn't get to keep any meat or horns and was just there to help on a lot of hunts.

There are in fact a number of hunts that I'd like to see but don't want to be the hunter, whales, lots of the African stuff.

I do feel like antlers and hides provide you with a durable memory of an animal, has felt a bit weird at times only taking meat home on cow/doe hunts.

 

[Gerald Martin]

So I am basing my answer off of reading the OP and responding to that.
Ethics, by and large are a personal responsibility. They are not to be confused with preferences which are also personal and opinion based and are going to be fickle and changing. Ethics are a reflection of character and are generally applied in how we interact with our quarry and other people as we hunt.

My personal ethics have grown in maturity as I have aged. I have always been a law abiding hunter but now my desire to pull the trigger or fill a tag is tempered by my honest assessment of my ability and sometimes by less tangible things like whether I need the meat or the satisfaction of a kill to complete my hunt.

The ethics I expect other hunters to abide by are generally in regards to fair chase methods, proper salvage of edible meat, respect for other hunters who are hunting at the same time, taking a responsible shot and following up the consequences of every shot till all avenues of recovery of wounded game are legally or practically exhausted.

Peoples personal motives for hunting whether trophy or meat aren’t my business. I might have some preferences and that will color my decision of who I will hunt with or not, but I certainly won’t make a judgment of their ethics based on preference.

 

[huntnpack]

Maybe we can come up with an equation:

(Fair chase or hunt difficulty / amount of suffering caused) x yield of meat or fur = ethical?

Looks like I'm brain shooting elephants and whales with something VERY LARGE from now on. Who would object to that?

 

[SAJ-99]

Majority agreed (via representation or individual vote) to what is "legal". That is our base point. From that point as I commented, ethics are no one's business other than their own. Of course, in my opinion.

But do ethics lead to laws or the other way around? The difference between what is ethical vs what is legal would be that something illegal has a defined punishment while something unethical is just looked at by others shamefully. The two are involved in a dance. To the OP ?, if people drive or ride ATVs in areas where they shouldn't and there are prohibition signs (albeit scattered) but no one to enforce, they are technically illegal but no one is there to enforce it so it leads to others doing the same. It leads to people viewing it as ok (ethical). It's almost ethics in reverse. Apply the same to mask wearing. Do we need to have penalties for people to do things that benefit the whole? I would hope not, but walking into a store wearing a mask when almost no one else has one can make me think like it is ok not to wear one. That is how ethics work. Once you pass the point of majority, people tend to fall in line. And then there is integrity, which is following accepted ethics when no one else is around to judge.

 

[Islander]

My step dad started taking me night poaching around age 8 and didn't blink an eye when he shot a spotlighted doe in a farmer's field.

I as an adult hunt 100% legal. 100% fair chase. No shot? I don't shoot. So definitely not even same ballpark ethically compared to how I was raised.

My dad was technically legally blind, but could still shoot pretty good. He fed the family with the venison we shot. I don't hold it against him.

 

[mtmuley]

C'mon hunting season.
mtmuley

 

[beginnerhunter]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

Some of you are taking this too personally and are getting defensive. I'm just saying call a spade a spade!

I mean, I eat squirrels and ducks and other game and save nothing but the memories so yeah, I'd hunt deer if I couldn't keep the antlers.

However, there is no way all of humanity could survive on wild game, and there's no way I've spent less money on guns/ammo/gear/time to justify the cost vs buying meat at the store.

Hunting, for me, is more of a sacred reminder of our place in nature and that it must be protected, lest we bulldoze it all for another shopping mall or solar farm or oil well, etc etc. Not to mention the mental, physical, and spiritual health benefits.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Maybe we can come up with an equation:

(Fair chase or hunt difficulty / amount of suffering caused) x yield of meat or fur = ethical?

Looks like I'm brain shooting elephants and whales with something VERY LARGE from now on. Who would object to that?

Sounds fun!

 

[SAJ-99]

This is starting to derail a bit.

Through the replies so far, my revised question is not about ethics but more about why we don't call one way sport hunting and the other way sustenance hunting, and not try to combine the two? Is it to make it more tolerable to society?

Or rather, if you took antlers/horns out of hunting but kept the meat would you still go?

If you took meat out but kept the antlers would you still go?

Some of you are taking this too personally and are getting defensive. I'm just saying call a spade a spade!

I have always wondered about the “meat hunters” argument. If I am unsuccessful at hunting I can buy my meat at the local Costco, like most of the local cattle ranchers do. Part of civilization is about eliminating the need to worry about where your next meal comes from. That said, more power to those that find a sage-brushed-nourished, 10yr old, mule deer doe worth the DIY effort. There is no accounting for taste. There is no ethical question involved. Simply a matter of preference and circumstances.

 

[Tiredofthebickering]

This is a great point, as I think of it mostly when the "more ethical" argument get's lobbed around with method of take it's in regards to why one group should have more access or be elevated over another.
I've certainly heard people preach about how great whatever they do is and then turn around and make some comment about letting the air out of someones tires for being in "their spot". Yep... ethical purity there guy.

The FOIA thing is a entirely different level...

This thought terrifies me honestly. Being that far from home and potentially stuck in the woods.... Geez

 

[Deleted member 38069]

C'mon hunting season.
mtmuley

Better than arguing politics! Its a distraction until Saturday.

 

[Jape]

How do you watch this documentary? Looks good.

I bought it on Vimeo. One of the best I’ve seen in a long time.

 

[Deleted member 38069]

I bought it on Vimeo. One of the best I’ve seen in a long time.

Good to know, thanks for the suggestion!