Ethics and Legality?

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.

The quote (sorry I am not being original) " Doing the right thing when no one is looking even if doing the wrong thing is completely legal" comes to mind every time ethics comes up.

Royal you are off course completely right n saying there are grey areas to each and every single way of hunting,just depends what angle you look at it from.
Some folks may find it unethical to sit in a hide with a bow and shoot animals,personally I don't have a issue with it.Now here is were I do have a issue with it,knowing you have clients coming to bow hunt and blocking access to other waterpoints so game have to drink at hunting hides,or turning off the water at night and running crips dry so animals have to drink in the day.

Hunting trophies at night with a light for nocturnal species may offend some folks,but I am happy to do this. Just as happy to shoot them over a legitimate bait. Don't agree with harvesting trophy antilope at night unless they are known to be nocturnal,I don't count Kudu and Bushbuck as nocturnal.

The use of any aircraft or drone unless to track a wounded animal is also a no no to me.

Sitting in a high seat in Europe is common and also the only way to hunt some areas.

Too many other things to mention right now,but if it offends my sense of fair chase I won't do it.

Very tough. I have feelings both ways. Many hunters don't support trophy hunting. Along the same lines here in the US with gun control. The are some guns that I find questionable. If you give an inch that will open a door we could not close. With that said there are things I wouldn't do and if someone else does and it's legal then to each his own.

Everyone's "ethics" or "moral code" will be different......that's because we, as human beings, will all be shaped & influenced by outside forces, other people in our lives, experiences, etc. For example, I had one Uncle who was a poacher....pretty much flaunted the law where ever and when ever he could. My other Uncle followed the law to the letter, and to see his reaction to my other Uncle (the poacher) activity....well, let's just say that I loved and respected my Uncle, and I didn't want him thinking that way about me. Would I have turned my Uncle in if I new he had done something illegal? Hard to say, but I think I would have made an "annonymous" phone call to the proper authorities......fortunately, distance was on my side (I lived 250 miles away).
I think what we support goes back to those "basic" roots.......it's illegal to have a loaded rifle in a vehicle in MI, but in WY it's not. Where we hunting/shooting from the vehicle? No....when we spotted game, we drove to an area where we could safely park the car, then make our way back to where we spotted the game. Sometimes it was still in the area, other times we spooked it from our approach, and still other times we saw them running for the hills after being disturbed from some other source (hunters, ranchers checking fence lines, coyotes, etc).
However, driving up and shooting from a vehicle? Might be legal, but I won't do it......and I can't support it.

There may be things that I might find distasteful, such as hunting deer with dogs. Illegal here in MI, yet popular down south. Would I try it? Maybe......depends on whom I'm hunting with, conditions, etc. Might even like doing it.....I've chased rabbits with hounds before, and liked that. Would I support a hunters right in this instance, even though I find it distasteful? Probably.........depends on the circumstances. Are the dogs relayed, so that the deer don't get a break and are basically run to death? Then no, I wouldn't support it.
Royal mentioned night hunting. It is legal here in MI for raccoons and some predator species, and there are restrictions in place re: time, season, weapons, lights, etc. I know is some places hogs are shot at night.....I say "shot" because setting up a pile of corn under a bunch of spotlights which are turned on at the moment just prior to shooting isn't what I consider "hunting'. I do realize, however, that wild hogs can over populate their range rather quickly and need to be controlled, and that daytime hunting of these species can be next to impossible.......so while I wouldn't necessarily do it myself, I can support the activity.
However, if it causes undo suffering (such as not checking traps on a regular basis) or takes unfair advantage of the animal (such as spotting from an airplane, or using "sensor" to tell when/where game is at any particular moment), then no............I won't support it, even though it may be legal. I guess those are the two criteria that I use the most (undo suffering/unfair advantage) as to whether or not I will support something I don't necessarily agree with.
....and the fact that it's "legal" doesn't mean that I will support it. Marijuana is "legal"; doesn't mean I want everyone toking up on it.....esp. if they are taking out my appendix or working on the airplane that I'm flying out on the next day.
On other thing I would like to mention: For a lot of us "old farts", we learned from people: Uncles, fathers, grandfather's, brothers, ....even moms and grandmoms. We also read a lot of essays (well, some of us did) by people like Ding Darling, Aldo Leupold, etc., as well as other "sources" (i.e. the bible, boy scout handbook, etc). This helped us to develop our 'moral compass". Nowadays, you have all sorts of videos on youtube and other social media; some of it is not so good........I've seen promotions for 80 yard shots with buckshot on deer, long range shooting at live animals, littering, etc. There is no one there to tell a youngster that "this is acceptable" or "this is unacceptable". The videos/social media posts are usually because someone is trying to "sell something": a product, an idea, a thought, or whatever. Again, there is no one there to help a youngster/newbie to interpret this behaviour/attitude as being "right" or "wrong", so I forsee a lot more of these disturbing posts on websites in the future.

anyway..................enough of my rambling.

Mr. 16 gauge . . . it was a good ramble and here's another "old fart" in agreement.

It's a tough line to draw to get everyone in agreement and I think it's clear there will never be complete unanimity between all hunters.
We all have our own moral compass and decide for ourselves what is right or wrong according to how we view things within the legal boundaries of hunting.

For example, I personally wouldn't want to sit over a waterhole or feeding site to shoot an animal in Africa. Note the word 'shoot' as opposed to 'hunt'. To me, this isn't what hunting in Africa is about. For another person it might be perfectly acceptable and I am talking about rifle hunting here. For bow hunters there may be no other choice.

I can't see how looking at a 60" kudu on the wall knowing you haven't really hunted it - you have after all just sat there and waited for it - can give the same memories, satisfaction and feelings that a kudu you've stalked over many miles or hours will do. But that's just my opinion.

It's legal but to me, just not right.

By contrast, I would happily sit in a high seat on my shooting ground here in England to shoot a roe deer.
It's a strange juxtaposition.
On the UK I have a high seat on the edge of a woodland, no waterhole or feeding area, just a place where I am likely to see a deer as it comes from cover. Due to the overpopulation of the UK, boundaries and getting a safe shot, this is the only option I have to shoot in that area of ground.

So what makes it acceptable for me in one situation over another? I actually have no idea, it's just my personal thoughts on what is right on one situation may not be in another.

Any unsporting behaviour should be called out and as hunters we should disassociate ourselves from it but then what constitutes unsporting? Is hunting in an enclosed area unsporting? To me, yes it is but to another it isn't so we as hunters need to be careful about how we go about policing ourselves. I don't think we ever will because there will always be counter argument against it.

We all have to be our own judge, juries and executioners and apply our personal moral code within the legal confines of our sport and stand against whatever brings our sport and pastime into disrepute. I believe these are easy to distinguish and while we will always disagree on the vagaries of our individual points of view but I think we agree on the whole what is a danger to our hunting activities.

hunthardsafaris said:

Hunting trophies at night with a light for nocturnal species may offend some folks,but I am happy to do this. Just as happy to shoot them over a legitimate bait. Don't agree with harvesting trophy antilope at night unless they are known to be nocturnal,I don't count Kudu and Bushbuck as nocturnal.

Click to expand...

Perfect example of a gray area!!!

Mr. 16 gauge said:

However, driving up and shooting from a vehicle? Might be legal, but I won't do it......and I can't support it.

Click to expand...

Growing up in Texas we did this for meat hunting, and it was legal as long as you took the keys out of the ignition first. Would I do this in Africa while trophy hunting? Nope! Would I do it to fill a freezer where legal? Yeah, I think I still would. But this also gets back to the gray area of what is ethical, and for that matter what is hunting? Some would argue that it isn't hunting. I personally think it is hunting, but not trophy hunting. Now if someone says that is culling and not hunting I'm fine with that too.

Big5 said:

Mr. 16 gauge . . . it was a good ramble and here's another "old fart" in agreement.

Click to expand...

It was a good ramble! I must be an old fart too!

A lot of things may be legal, but that doesn't make them ethically and morally right. I also do not buy into the idea that we must support all forms and practices of hunting to 'fight as one' against anti-hunters. I would like to think a mans moral groundings dictates how he conducts himself while hunting and in life. I am not a smoker, but it is legal to smoke around a child or new born baby, is that morally acceptable? No!

A lot of this comes down to a persons perspective and views on how to act in different situations.

One thing that gets me is the long range 'target' hunters. Who are happy to shoot animals from extreme distances, having worked out where to shoot using all the latest equipment, etc. A lot can happen by the time you pull the trigger and the bullet strikes. The animal can move, another can move behind it, etc. If you want to shoot at those ranges, fine, but punch paper targets.

if it is within the law then i won't speak out about it, i may choose not to participate in it though, just like i won't ask for someone against what i do to participate in it.
Poaching is poaching that i think we all agree, i once told a non hunter when we were discussing a poaching sting, she kept calling them hunters. Easy to change their mind with this simple statement - Poaching is to hunting as rape is to love making

Some hunting shows i won't watch due to me not agreeing with their methods, ethics or morals call it what you will, but would rather switch the channel

Good thread @Royal27. I read the OP this morning and been working in my head between NASCAR and a nap my response. I would agree with you that you do not need to "support" a hunting activity that is legal but violates your own ethical standards. To expect or ask one to do so, is expecting that person to compromise their beliefs. I would never do that.

I also believe that ethical standards are highly subjective. There are times when things are just black and white and in such cases where there's vast agreement, the laws/rules/regulations regarding hunting reflect this greatly. But there's that pesky gray area where things can get dicy between hunters.

Now as to your question of how to react when in the face of an ethical dilemma, that's a good question to which I think there are lots of correct answers depending on the situation. What I'm certain of is that how one reacts will be very important as to how the situation ultimately ends. I can only speak for myself, but if a person wishes for me to come around to their way of thinking, i.e. he/she things I'm wrong and they're correct, you need to present your case to me respectfully. As soon as a person starts with the insults, they've lost the argument. They simply don't have an argument from my point of view else they would've not resorted to the trash talking.

But sometimes when it comes to ethics it is highly subjective. What one person finds wrong, another doesn't. There's no rhyme or reason to it, it's just how two different people think about things. For example in some places in this country the use of bait to hunt black bears is legal and plenty of hunters use this method to hunt bear. But there are those who wouldn't even think of doing such a hunt. Who is right, who is wrong? I'd argue neither is right or wrong as there's just no factual basis to judge this on, only your subjective emotions.

So how to react to these gray situations? A few options I can think of:

1. Accept that you're not the center of the universe, the decider for all as to what is right and wrong and leave that person alone who has a different opinion than you.

2. If option 1 is not acceptable, then you can of course decide to confront that person. If that person happens to be me, all I ask is that you present your argument based on facts or if there aren't any than just explain your feelings on the matter. You'll stand a much better chance at convincing me to your thinking this way. If you resort to degrading me, you've already lost any chance of persuasion.

3. If number 2 still does not satisfy you and you still feel so strongly that my legal yet unethical in your eyes behavior needs to be stopped, then do what you can to make it illegal.

I say all of this as in the last few weeks there's been a few threads both here on AH and over on another forum that have been.....well to be blunt, rather ridiculous. The topics of the threads were fine, but the postings of some have in my opinion made the behavior of two kids on a playground fighting over who was supposed to go down the slide first seem a shining model of maturity. An insult is hurled over the great cyber wall which is returned by another zinger, which is countered with yet another and back/forth we go. And where does this get us? Do we resolve the differences or do we exacerbate them? I'd argue the latter and it's quite an easy argument to make.

Imagine someone calling you an a--hole with a small penis because you see things differently than they do? Are you suddenly going to say "Oh my word, I had no idea, I do believe I'll change my mind and come around to your side?" Will you suddenly take that person more seriously or will you just blow them off and in fact just stand by your position that much more strongly?

I'll end this with a couple of quotes:

"We have the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo the 'Possum

And this particular piece of wisdom from dear old Sgt. Hulka:


@Mr. 16 gauge, how's that for a ramble!

@Royal27 excellent post, thank you. I agree with pretty much everything posted so far.
The gray areas pose a real challenge for us as a group. There are so many facets of hunting in which local culture is a huge influencing factor, makes for quite a sticky wicket as y'all might say over there on the far side of the pond
For me, I don't have any desire to shoot from a vehicle or hunt "day critters" at night. I will happily hunt "night critters" at night. I also don't want to hunt small high fence properties (less than a few thousand acres).
But just because I don't personally care to engage in any of these activities doesn't mean I think it is beneficial to criticize those who do.
Some things are clearly out of bounds, meaning illegal, such as taking an animal out of season or without proper tag or license. It is the what is "in-bounds" that seems to get us all at odds with one another.
To me there is a huge difference between feeling like something is just not for me and being outwardly critical and vocal about it. I hate to see hunters turning on other hunters. It really bothers and frustrates me. We get attacked every day by the anti's, if we are attacking each other we are making their job so much easier. It has a feel of fratricide and it just sucks.
Having said that, I vehemently support and defend everyone's right to speak their mind regardless of their position, here or anywhere else. And when something is just plain wrong and needs to be changed, well I believe we have a responsibility there too.
I hope we all stick together as much as possible and find tolerance everywhere we can. Even when we disagree we may be the best friends we're ever going to find.
God bless you all.

I think just in the few post made already it shows how hard ethics are to decide. Everyone has there own and they all dont fit everyone. In the end as hunters we will never have a one size fits all set of rules that will make everyone happy. Not liking or doing something is one thing but taking it to the point we have gone to lately has been crazy.

I guess I may just be different in not seeing how going after other hunters is the right way. I guess my main problem is doing so so publicly as I only think that helps the anti's. Going after hunter by going to the source seems better to me. Again I did not see the video of that giraffe hunt and will not watch it. But to me those that did and have a problem should have contacted the outfitter and told them there thoughts. Bringing it up here just seems like no help to our side of the battle we have going on now. We can police ourselves just need to watch how much we show the other side as we do it.

Here's my rule (which may interest no one but me).

If it's legal, I can agree with it or not, because my ethics don't (just) depend on what's legal, but if I don't agree with it, I keep my mouth shut about the ethics of those who do agree with it.

If it's illegal it's wrong and that's pretty much that.

Hank2211 said:

Here's my rule (which may interest no one but me).

If it's legal, I can agree with it or not, because my ethics don't (just) depend on what's legal, but if I don't agree with it, I keep my mouth shut about the ethics of those who do agree with it.

If it's illegal it's wrong and that's pretty much that.

Click to expand...

Good rule Hank.

And if it is so bad that someone can't keep their mouth shut then see Phil's point number three above, instead of hurling insults. It is a more fruitful option in so many ways.

Adrian said:

I can't see how looking at a 60" kudu on the wall knowing you haven't really hunted it - you have after all just sat there and waited for it - can give the same memories, satisfaction and feelings that a kudu you've stalked over many miles or hours will do. But that's just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Following the law first and the above ideal is a good starting point.

Hank, I fully agree with your point, often I see things that I detest, but prefer to just keep my mouth shut.

Another point. When I travel to hunt, I make a point to learn about the culture, customs and lifestyle of the locals. Not just the hunting "rules". I think we all can learn about other cultures and their hunting ethics. We do not have to agree with the techniques and ways other people hunt. I also do not have to violate my own hunting standards while I am there, but I am not there to change their culture. If I don't like the way they hunt there, I DON'T HAVE TO GO. They don't get my money, I don't complain about their ways. If you don't want to hunt high fence, go somewhere else. It does not make anyone "better".

I find it funny people think that because they believe it is unethical it has to be. I was raise to believe drinking alcohol was unethical. Does that mean everyone that does is unethical. I believe you can only really judge yourself by your ethics and everyone else by the law.

billc said:

I think just in the few post made already it shows how hard ethics are to decide. Everyone has there own and they all dont fit everyone. In the end as hunters we will never have a one size fits all set of rules that will make everyone happy. Not liking or doing something is one thing but taking it to the point we have gone to lately has been crazy.

I guess I may just be different in not seeing how going after other hunters is the right way. I guess my main problem is doing so so publicly as I only think that helps the anti's. Going after hunter by going to the source seems better to me. Again I did not see the video of that giraffe hunt and will not watch it. But to me those that did and have a problem should have contacted the outfitter and told them there thoughts. Bringing it up here just seems like no help to our side of the battle we have going on now. We can police ourselves just need to watch how much we show the other side as we do it.

Click to expand...

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

billc said:

Again I did not see the video of that giraffe hunt and will not watch it. But to me those that did and have a problem should have contacted the outfitter and told them there thoughts. Bringing it up here just seems like no help to our side of the battle we have going on now. We can police ourselves just need to watch how much we show the other side as we do it.

Click to expand...

Billc,what video? There was no video concerning that particular post?
I quote this not because I don't have words to put it in,but my words won't be as nice. "For bad things to happen all it takes is for good men to do nothing"
Legal or not if it drums up against my ethics or what I believe are my ethics I will have no part of it and will say as much. Now if we as hunters cannot discuss a issue as with the Giraffe we are sticking our heads in the sand and saying it does not happen or it does not concern me,which is BS. The actions of a few will affect the many,that is and always will be the way of the world.
Last time I checked AH is there to discuss and get opinions on topics just like these,similar to hunt report were things went for a loop. It does not mean we will agree,but to get the sh@t smell out of the sheets you need to air them.