The Morals and Ethics of Hunting - Why Should We All Agree?

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Now if there is a legit hunting argument that does not have anything to do with sovereign ownsership of land and animals then maybe we can have a civil discussion!

I don't understand why the subject drives the civility or lack thereof of the discussion.

 

[JGRaider]

As long as human beings are involved, it's going to be a screwed up mess. Been that way since Adam and Eve screwed up God's perfect creation. I will say though, and I've been guilty of it myself, that when disagreements arise, there is no need for grown men to start hurling personal insults. That's sure to send the discussion straight to the gutter.

 

[billc]

There is a big difference in trying to police ourselves and trying to win the war with the antis over bashing other hunters because we don't like how they hunt.

As soon as people decide to take a side based on there likes or dislikes we are no different then the government pushing there ideas down our throat. To me it is very dangerous ground to go down in so many ways. When almost all are disagreement come down to a way a hunt happen or if it is still hunting in someones eyes because the animal was raised to hunt. There will always be someone not happy but why help the other side to try and prove your point.

If you don't like laws on the books there is people you can write or try and get laws changed. Does that mean you need to make that complaint public for the anti's to see as a hunter vs hunter argument? Is it worth the risk of trying to change something you don't like but others do for your ethics?

Think how much better it would be if we all fight one group to save our hunting right over fighting within because are ethics think someone else is wrong.

 

[Red Leg]

I think this has been a very civil discussion and a worthwhile one. Let me add one more twist. I believe there are legal activities in our sport which are not only unethical, but because of their publicity help turn members of the non hunting public against us. Keep in mind it is they, neither the anti's or us, who hold the keys to the future of our sport. One can already see in places like California and New Jersey where ballot initiatives are all too often being used to manage wildlife, that the non-hunting block already tends not to side with us. Giving them actions to point to of questionable ethics is self destructive behavior regardless of the legality of that particular action.

 

[sheephunterab]

I think the biggest fallacy is that antis can somehow be placated. They can't. They aren't anti hound hunting or anti baiting or anti spear hunting....they are anti hunting! Each piece we give up brings us closer to the end!

 

[billc]

To many people act like the antis are switching people to there side in record numbers when overall there is more hunters nationwide then anti's. Yes some states may have more antis but overall more hunters then antis. So many people don't care either way as they have more to worry about then if someone is hunting.

We start worrying more about making all hunters one group we can win. But as of now we have so many groups of hunters and so many don't care about the other. The hunters we need to help us get over looked because they just worry about putting meat on the table and don't care about all the rest. There still hunters that need a voice and all because they don't do the same hunting as many of us here they get lost in the mix.

I myself think are numbers are way bigger then those wanting to stop hunting. They just push harder and don't fight publicly with each other. They look to have the better plan but we all no they don't. But how do we fight the fight? We let are ethics decide we need to fight other hunters.

As soon as we decide to put the true facts out and show them for the money hungry groups they are and how little they do we will win. Most people will never have a problem if a few of any kind of animals die to save more of them.

 

[BRICKBURN]

I've always said that if you put a group of hunters in a room and told them to come up with an agreed upon set of hunting ethics that the outcome would be all hunting would be abolished.

Only your kind of hunting. Not mine.

Mine is better!

 

[billc]

Only your kind of hunting. Not mine.

Mine is better!

Your both wrong my way is so much better. Ask me I will tell you

 

[BRICKBURN]

Your both wrong my way is so much better. Ask me I will tell you

See, we all agree. We just have to head in three different directions on the property and hunt our own way.
Then come back and tell all the lies at the campfire over a drink and enjoy ourselves.
Should be fun.

 

[billc]

See, we all agree. We just have to head in three different directions on the property and hunt our own way.
Then come back and tell all the lies at the campfire over a drink and enjoy ourselves.
Should be fun.

Yup and enjoy it all because we are hunting.

 

[JGRaider]

I think this has been a very civil discussion and a worthwhile one. Let me add one more twist. I believe there are legal activities in our sport which are not only unethical, but because of their publicity help turn members of the non hunting public against us. Keep in mind it is they, neither the anti's or us, who hold the keys to the future of our sport. One can already see in places like California and New Jersey where ballot initiatives are all too often being used to manage wildlife, that the non-hunting block already tends not to side with us. Giving them actions to point to of questionable ethics is self destructive behavior regardless of the legality of that particular action.

I could not agree more. We are our own worst enemy in many cases.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Where I live hunting behind a fence is outlawed.
It took me some significant time to get educated on another culture to be able to address this issue in my own mind before heading to Africa.

Hunting over bait is outlawed (except for Bears)
So seeing animals being taken at a feed trough or watering hole was a complete shift for me.

Elephants, Hippos, Lions, Leopards etc are all in zoos or circuses or on National Geographic channel.. They don't hurt me, eat my stuff or in any other way impact my life directly. They are entertainment and zoological studies. Not so in their country of origin. Another reality check.

Game/Wildlife is held in right of the crown where I live. Not private property.
That took some time to wrap my head around.

A friend enjoyed the novelty of his Bushpig hunt for a variety of reasons that would seem strange to the folks in the country where he hunted.
Where he lives there would be so many aspects that were completely illegal:
Hunting at Night
Hunting with the small caliber used
Hunting with a light
Hunting with a firearm using a suppressor. (possessing a suppressor is a criminal offence here)

He just shook his head and chuckled and quoted Dorothy: "We are not in Kansas anymore Toto."

I have never counted the number of jurisdictions that would be encompassed by the membership of AH.
Can you fathom all the differences in life experience and backgrounds facilitated by those vast differences?

There are members who live in countries where it is illegal to do many things that I take for granted on a daily basis.
This is literally a global community and I can only imagine the breadth of the belief systems that are held my the membership.

I won't agree with everything every member says, I understand and accept that.

I have now hunted private property (animals) behind a high fence at a waterhole in Africa and waited over bait for a Leopard to walk up to within 18 inches of my grass blind.
Glad I got over the differences and went hunting!

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

To many people act like the antis are switching people to there side in record numbers when overall there is more hunters nationwide then anti's. Yes some states may have more antis but overall more hunters then antis. So many people don't care either way as they have more to worry about then if someone is hunting.

We start worrying more about making all hunters one group we can win. But as of now we have so many groups of hunters and so many don't care about the other. The hunters we need to help us get over looked because they just worry about putting meat on the table and don't care about all the rest. There still hunters that need a voice and all because they don't do the same hunting as many of us here they get lost in the mix.

I myself think are numbers are way bigger then those wanting to stop hunting. They just push harder and don't fight publicly with each other. They look to have the better plan but we all no they don't. But how do we fight the fight? We let are ethics decide we need to fight other hunters.

As soon as we decide to put the true facts out and show them for the money hungry groups they are and how little they do we will win. Most people will never have a problem if a few of any kind of animals die to save more of them.

I'm not sure where you get your numbers to support your first sentence, but for sake of discussion I'll presume you're correct. When I started hunting some 31 years ago in the state of Maryland, I'm sure there were some anti-hunters in this country, I even dated one (very briefly). But really they were in such a minority that I didn't give them a second thought. Now on some of those public land hunts the anti's routinely do what they can to disturb/disrupt hunts. There efforts and numbers have increased. So I don't like the trend.

As mentioned I don't really believe anti-hunters will spend much time trying to convert hunters to their side, they realize it's a waste of time. Just as we realize it's a waste to think we'll get them over to our side. So once again the anti's target the non-hunters, shouldn't we?

In so doing I think it best to educate non-hunters as best we can but I think it is also very important to keep our own house clean. If we don't, our integrity can rightfully be questioned.

 

[sheephunterab]

In so doing I think it best to educate non-hunters as best we can but I think it is also very important to keep our own house clean. If we don't, our integrity can rightfully be questioned.

And the million dollar question begs asking....what is a clean house?

 

[billc]

Phil the numbers are a guess on my part but if you look at all the hunting permit that get sold it is in the millions. I have yet to see but maybe a few thousand at anyone protest or anti event. Even with what you say about them causing trouble as we hunt it is a few nut jobs as there is thousands of hunters out in the field.

I just ask how guys think an every day person not a hunter or an anti will tell or care what the difference is of say this point. Two lion hunts one a raised lion tracked and hunt in south Africa or a hunt is the wild of tanz. over a bait pile. Both are killed and pictures taken. One better then the other in there eyes? What is the difference in them both how the public sees it. We as hunters complain about the one not the other. Why is that because a few guys don't like the fact it is a raised lion not caring at all the hunter doing the hunter is ok with it.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

And the million dollar question begs asking....what is a clean house?

Indeed. I think the intent of this thread was that we be able to discuss and disagree as to what that means. What may be "clean" today or here, may not be tomorrow or over there.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Phil the numbers are a guess on my part but if you look at all the hunting permit that get sold it is in the millions. I have yet to see but maybe a few thousand at anyone protest or anti event. Even with what you say about them causing trouble as we hunt it is a few nut jobs as there is thousands of hunters out in the field.

Perhaps, but as I say I'm not really questioning the numbers. My concern is the trend as I've observed over 30 plus years and I don't like what I see. What will it 30 years from now when my sons are hopefully passing the tradition on to there kids?

 

[sheephunterab]

Indeed. I think the intent of this thread was that we be able to discuss and disagree as to what that means. What may be "clean" today or here, may not be tomorrow or over there.

True but let's not forget that in the mind of the antis, the only clean house is a house that does not include hunting. At what point to we stop giving pieces away before we realize this?

 

[Royal27]

Perhaps, but as I say I'm not really questioning the numbers. My concern is the trend as I've observed over 30 plus years and I don't like what I see. What will it 30 years from now when my sons are hopefully passing the tradition on to there kids?

Great point Phil. LOTS of companies have gone out of business because they weren't able to adjust to trends. Lots of really good strong companies. If we think we are any different we're fooling ourselves.

True but let's not forget that in the mind of the antis, the only clean house is a house that does not include hunting. At what point to we stop giving pieces away before we realize this?

I agree, but man is it a difficult question on the point. One to which I don't know the answer. We do have to adapt in order to survive. That I do know....

 

[sheephunterab]

I always look to the NRA as a success story for staying the course. Perhaps we don't need to adapt to survive? Perhaps adapting will be our demise?