A Death Of Ethics: Is “Hunting” Destroying Itself?

[Doug Hamilton]

Using the “I do it because it’s legal” is a very one dimensional and counterproductive argument, in my humble opinion.

It‘s basically an invitation to the antis to pressurize the government to make any particular forms of hunting illegal.

Rather, hunting should be defended on moral/environmental and socio-economical grounds.

All animals (even problem animals/predators/livestock killers) should be hunted with the objective of ending their lives as quickly and cleanly as possible.

Terming anything as a “Killing Contest” is a mark of crass tastelessness on the part of the hunter.

Now, on the other hand… It’s abundantly clear to me that this Mr. Sutton fellow is a pompous self righteous coarse fool who thinks that he is entitled to talk about trophy hunting without actually knowing anything in-depth about it. In my humble experience, “Hunters” like him are the true threat to hunting. Just because he practices one form of hunting, he thinks that he has a right to condemn hunting practices which are conducted by other hunters.

When he doesn’t realize that his boot licking of the anti hunting brigade (regardless of how eloquently it‘s written) will do him no good in the long run. Those who are seeking to ban hunting of the lion in Africa today, will seek to ban the hunting of the whitetail deer in the USA tomorrow.

Photographic safaris never can or will replace hunting safaris. Let me ask you all something. When a tourist has come to Africa (for instance) and taken his nice photograph of a lion, will he ever return to Africa again ? No, because he has taken his photograph and next year, he will spend his money elsewhere. A hunter though, will keep returning to the forests to hunt wild game on a relatively consistent frequency. Because hunting is his food for the soul. And he will keep paying for it. He is the better long term consumer of wildlife. Ergo, he is the reason why wildlife must exist.

One of these days, I also have a bone to pick with whatever muttonhead thought up the name “Trophy Hunting“. It’s such a one dimensional & shallow title. The name infers that we shoot a lion (for instance) solely for the purposes of lopping it’s head off to mount on our walls or skinning his hide to adorn our floors while the rest of the animal lies rotting… whereas nothing could be further from the truth. Big game hunting is so much more than that. As a matter of fact, I’ve hunted several lions over the years (to date) & I only retained the hide from the first male.

I have been a hunter for almost all of my life. I most certainly have no.problem with.the.killing of an animal. I did learn from my father and grandfather that any animal that you remove, even.mice or coyotes, are to be Killed with the least amount of pain or suffering possible. Cruelty is to be avoided if only because it's stupid. One of the things I think we can take pride in is that a large animal taken cleanly with a bullet, suffers far less than those that die by "natural" means. The fawn that dies in the jaws of a coyote suffers far more than the deer that falls to a Hunter's bullet. By that logic, I feel no guilt on calling in a coyote and shooting him, and I like knowing that a deer.will not suffer due to the way coyotes kill deer. That would not, however, make it alright for me to run over a coyote repeatedly with a snow mobile

 

[Tom Leoni]

Re: the "hunting for ego" claim. This is what I say to non-hunters who ask me why I like to hunt.

It's not ego. It's not misplaced "manliness." It's not an unlikely physical contest with the animal (which debunks the "why don't you make it fair and use a knife/spear" argument).

It's what we evolved to do. That and reproducing. Since a quarter-million years ago (and arguably before that) this is what our specie has had programmed in our DNA. So the reason why I hunt is the same reason why we derive pleasure in being with the opposite sex, even without reproduction being the direct goal.

When they ask me "but then why not just photographing the animals," you can easily guess what my response is, in the form of an analogy.

 

[Saul]

Re: the "hunting for ego" claim. This is what I say to non-hunters who ask me why I like to hunt.

It's not ego. It's not misplaced "manliness." It's not an unlikely physical contest with the animal (which debunks the "why don't you make it fair and use a knife/spear" argument).

It's what we evolved to do. That and reproducing. Since a quarter-million years ago (and arguably before that) this is what our specie has had programmed in our DNA. So the reason why I hunt is the same reason why we derive pleasure in being with the opposite sex, even without reproduction being the direct goal.

When they ask me "but then why not just photographing the animals," you can easily guess what my response is, in the form of an analogy.

The way I like to explain it is that we are so disconnected from the natural world these days, and hunting puts you back into the food chain.

 

[HankBuck]

Re: the "hunting for ego" claim. This is what I say to non-hunters who ask me why I like to hunt.

It's not ego. It's not misplaced "manliness." It's not an unlikely physical contest with the animal (which debunks the "why don't you make it fair and use a knife/spear" argument).

It's what we evolved to do. That and reproducing. Since a quarter-million years ago (and arguably before that) this is what our specie has had programmed in our DNA. So the reason why I hunt is the same reason why we derive pleasure in being with the opposite sex, even without reproduction being the direct goal.

When they ask me "but then why not just photographing the animals," you can easily guess what my response is, in the form of an analogy.

Tom: I’m very impressed and Not with your answer - but that you even bother to waste time answering a Question that is NOT really a question…it’s seeking to criticize whatever your response is and the “fake question” just opens the door. You sir are a very nice and patient man….better then Most !

 

[tigris115]

Ok, I wanna say this though

Hunting predators like cougars with hounds is something I heavily agree with for the reason that it allows you to take animals very selectively; a good thing.

For example, if I got a cougar treed with my team of hounds up in the Rockies, I can glass it for a bit and say

"Ok it's kinda big but oops, just saw the rear end and there are no testicles. Alright team, this one's a lady cougar, fall back and we'll try for a tom later"

It's kinda like how lion hunters use bait and camera traps; they don't wanna shoot just any lion but a particular individual.

 

[HankBuck]

Ok, I wanna say this though

Hunting predators like cougars with hounds is something I heavily agree with for the reason that it allows you to take animals very selectively; a good thing.

For example, if I got a cougar treed with my team of hounds up in the Rockies, I can glass it for a bit and say

"Ok it's kinda big but oops, just saw the rear end and there are no testicles. Alright team, this one's a lady cougar, fall back and we'll try for a tom later"

It's kinda like how lion hunters use bait and camera traps; they don't wanna shoot just any lion but a particular individual.

@tigris115 - yes selective AND you get to see some fine Hound work - the dogs and the chase are everything (for me) the actual kill is similar to shooting a big squirrel…so the Cat better be BIG otherwsie its disappointing (unless they were using your Hounds and then again it’s all about the dogs). Most times when treed you can’t see the nuts so they judge by the Head size…and some Big females occasionally get shot (130-140 lbs.)