What Do You?

Turkeygirl · May 30, 2010

I'll throw a curve here and add that I don't always see something that is illegal as unethical. One example: In IL the law indicates a deer that is hit by a car and dieing on the road can not be finished off by any means unless it is a police officer (maybe conservation as well). If I had a knife I'd finish of a dieing deer to put it out of its missery. I'd also be fined.

Ditto! I had to do it this spring...I will not let an animal suffer if I can help it....it's not right to the animal.

Dawg · May 30, 2010

On the dying deer scenario, I agree, I will not let a deer suffer. Whether it be legal or not, it's not ethical to me to pass a deer on the side of the road that has been hit and is suffering.

Brings to mind one day after work. I was headed home, seen a doe over on the shoulder of the road, as I passed by I saw it's hind legs kick. I turned around and dialed the Sheriff's office, they "said" they were going to dispatch a game warden. I sat there for almost 30 mins waiting. This elderly man pulls up in an old beat up car. He asked if I was going to take the deer and I told him I had been waiting for the game warden but evidently he wasn't coming. So the old man said "If I take the deer are you going to call it in on me?" I said "No sir, here let me help you load the deer in the trunk of your car." He writes down his name and phone number and tells me to call him the next day and I can have some of the meat.

The game warden never showed up, while we were there.

Why did I do that? To me the old man looked like he needed the meat, I made a decision and do not feel one bit guilty about it. I never did go get any meat either, he needed it more than me.

Unethical because I broke a law? Not to me.

elkoholic · May 31, 2010

I will stick with my believe that if you break the law it is unethical. That brings up another question. If one does something that is unethical, does that make one an unethical person? To those of you who would finish off a wounded/injured deer illegally so that it would not suffer have the slightest apprehension about putting out rat poison or "sticky" traps? Are you against leg-hold traps or trapping in general? Would you try to stop a wolf pack from feeding on a still very much alive deer? Can you really "justify" breaking the law? If you did not start out your day to intentionally break any laws or to do unethical things then one can not hold you to a hard line when situations arise that call for an ethical judgment. At those times only the person(s) involved can make the decision that is "right" for them.

Back to the original question again, the use of electronic surveillance devises, especially those that transmit signals to your home or cell phone if not illegal is certainly none too ethical when used during or within several weeks of the hunting season. I personally feel that technology is giving us humans way too much of an advantage and enabling us to allow our real hunting skills to erode. Remember, it is no longer a matter of life or death if we kill something, and although many of us relish the taste of venison, killing something is more of a bragging rights thing and this big antler craze is just stroking our egos.

elkoholic · May 31, 2010

I will stick with my believe that if you break the law it is unethical. That brings up another question. If one does something that is unethical, does that make one an unethical person? To those of you who would finish off a wounded/injured deer illegally so that it would not suffer have the slightest apprehension about putting out rat poison or "sticky" traps? Are you against leg-hold traps or trapping in general? Would you try to stop a wolf pack from feeding on a still very much alive deer? Can you really "justify" breaking the law? If you did not start out your day to intentionally break any laws or to do unethical things then one can not hold you to a hard line when situations arise that call for an ethical judgment. At those times only the person(s) involved can make the decision that is "right" for them.

Back to the original question again, the use of electronic surveillance devises, especially those that transmit signals to your home or cell phone if not illegal is certainly none too ethical when used during or within several weeks of the hunting season. I personally feel that technology is giving us humans way too much of an advantage and enabling us to allow our real hunting skills to erode. Remember, it is no longer a matter of life or death if we kill something, and although many of us relish the taste of venison, killing something is more of a bragging rights thing and this big antler craze is just stroking our egos.

johnf · May 31, 2010

I'm not sure just how I feel about hunters deciding what laws are to be observed and which ones should not. It seems that that kind of attitude could probably be twisted around to justify almost any violation. Example: A hunter has convinced himself that the herd density is way too high and so justifies grabbing the rifle and a light and thinning the herd a bit at night. I think it is better to simply adopt the attitude that the law may not be totally in accordance with my thinking, but it is the law. If I don't like it, I should be working to change it, not simply ignoring it. Doesn't that sound more reasonable? I know it would sound pretty reasonable to the local game warden and the judge that he might drag me in front of if I decided to pick and choose which laws to obey.
Doc

I don't think your getting our point on this Doc. I think the spirit of the law should be followed. Why shouldn't we carry a gun during bow season, becuase it's bow season, fairly simple. But in the case of that gutshot dying deer what's the more ethical thing for that animal right then, right there? As for the night time thinning of the herd, I think that's a pretty big stretch on what we're saying here. In Arkansas we can carry a handgun during bow season if we have a CCW permit. I made a bit of a bad shot on a buck this year. I found it 4 hours later still alive but in bad shape. I pulled my pistol and almost pulled the trigger on it. Would have put him down quick. A spot opened up and gave me the ability to take a clean 20 yard broadside shot with my bow and I took it (withthe bow).

Would it have been illigal to put a bullet in it? Yes, but if there was not a good shot with the bow, I think it would have been ethical to shoot it with my gun.

clrj3514 · May 31, 2010

I feel like I'm the only one here who thinks dog hunting is ethical but then again I grew up on up.

johnf · May 31, 2010

Think John has probably got a pretty good point on some instances, and in saying that I am in no way condoning breaking any game laws, but I can understand where he is coming from. Of course shooting after legal shooting hours is a no no, but what would you do if you shot an animal within legal shooting time and upon tracking the animal you find it 15 to 20 minutes after legal shooting light has ended and you see it is still very well alive and suffering. Do you let it lay overnight and run the risk of it getting up or pushed by finished off by yotes, or do you finish it off and take care of it? Hard to say what you would do in those situations until you are actually in the situation.
On what Doc had to say on conditioning the animals, we unfortunately have been dealing with baiters using feeders on neighboring property immediately behind us, not legal here and those participating in that activity are cheats in my book.

Baiting is legal here on private land. Everyone does it. If you don't you won't see deer. Lots of guys won't hunt over it, but will admit if they don't bait, they don't see deer.

johnf · May 31, 2010

I feel like I'm the only one here who thinks dog hunting is ethical but then again I grew up on up.

So do you thing that running your dogs across someone elses land that you don't have permission to be on is ethical. That's one of the very mild examples I've had to deal with.

clrj3514 · May 31, 2010

So do you thing that running your dogs across someone elses land that you don't have permission to be on is ethical. That's one of the very mild examples I've had to deal with.

See, the place I run my dogs is surrounded by other clubs that dog-hunt so if our dogs get on their land, or if theirs get on ours, we just catch them and return them.

Edited May 31, 2010 by clrj3514

Doc · May 31, 2010

I don't think your getting our point on this Doc. I think the spirit of the law should be followed. Why shouldn't we carry a gun during bow season, becuase it's bow season, fairly simple. But in the case of that gutshot dying deer what's the more ethical thing for that animal right then, right there? As for the night time thinning of the herd, I think that's a pretty big stretch on what we're saying here. In Arkansas we can carry a handgun during bow season if we have a CCW permit. I made a bit of a bad shot on a buck this year. I found it 4 hours later still alive but in bad shape. I pulled my pistol and almost pulled the trigger on it. Would have put him down quick. A spot opened up and gave me the ability to take a clean 20 yard broadside shot with my bow and I took it (withthe bow).
Would it have been illigal to put a bullet in it? Yes, but if there was not a good shot with the bow, I think it would have been ethical to shoot it with my gun.

And my point is that the legal system was not designed to be interpreted and acted on differently depending on whether you can justify it or not. Like I say, anybody can rationalize anything and make their actions feel better (as in the jack-lighting example), but we do have a system of laws that supposedly keeps people from making up their own rules as they go along.

I think we can all come up with an example or two where the legal system conflicts with our own personal code of ethics. And yes this does pose a bit of a dilemma. The question is, do we have the right to try to make the law fit our own personal ethics. In my opinion the answer is usually "no". In the opinion of most game wardens, the answer is "no" and in the opinion of the judge that hands down the sentence, the answer will be "no". So perhaps the only resolution in your mind is to that rare dilemma is to take the law into your own hands and then sneak around like some kind of criminal, covering up or denying the deed. Is that ethical behavior? It still leaves you with feelings and reactions of wrong-doing. Probably the best test of whether an illegal act is truly an ethical act of conscience or simply a convenient end-run around the law is whether or not you could follow through and put the issue in the hands of the authorities afterward. Anyone who can break the law for personal ethical reasons and then turn himself in will certainly have satisfied both his own ethics as well as demonstrated his respect for the law (another ethical choice). And by the way, I have seen that done.

Doc

Doc · May 31, 2010

Back to the original question again, the use of electronic surveillance devises, especially those that transmit signals to your home or cell phone if not illegal is certainly none too ethical when used during or within several weeks of the hunting season. I personally feel that technology is giving us humans way too much of an advantage and enabling us to allow our real hunting skills to erode. Remember, it is no longer a matter of life or death if we kill something, and although many of us relish the taste of venison, killing something is more of a bragging rights thing and this big antler craze is just stroking our egos.

Ah the old ethical controversy about hunting vs. technology. How far is too far? I fight this battle everytime I pick up my compound. Truly, I am a little bit bothered that years ago, I put down my recurve in favor of that gosh-awful ugly old Bear Whitetail with the cables and pulleys hanging all over it. I still have not completely reconciled that decision. However, even more disconcerting is the way that technology has begun to take over the lion's share of hunting success. And even worse is when I contemplate just where all this is going to lead in the not to distant future. Already we have had the threat of computerized remote controlled hunting. Apparently that was such an insult to our collective set of hunting ethics that it was turned back (for the time being). So, apparently the hunting community does agree that there are some ethical limits to hunting methods, or at least there should be.

The problem is that everyone has a different limit on this. Who is right? How do you establish just when technology has gone too far and now poses an ethical problem. I contend that in a lot of areas, we have already gone too far, but that's just one hunter's opinion. This is one area where there will always be disagreement as it goes back to the emotional core of our individual reasons for hunting. And that is different for every hunter. What technology is ethical for hunting use? Ask 100 hunters and you will get 100 different answers.

Doc

Doc · May 31, 2010

Baiting is legal here on private land. Everyone does it. If you don't you won't see deer. Lots of guys won't hunt over it, but will admit if they don't bait, they don't see deer.

This is the argument I have seen that justifies baiting in Texas. It's a tough thing to try to visualize when you are hunting way off in some other state. I try to understand what it could be that is so unique about these states that the deer would become invisible without the aid of bait. Why is it that we can hunt deer without bait, but there are other places that can't? There may be some unique difference in the species, or the population density, or the habitat that isn't being explained and that is probably why I don't get it. Maybe somebody could explain it all to me.

Doc

redkneck · May 31, 2010

To those of you who would finish off a wounded/injured deer illegally so that it would not suffer have the slightest apprehension about putting out rat poison or "sticky" traps? Are you against leg-hold traps or trapping in general? Would you try to stop a wolf pack from feeding on a still very much alive deer?

Well, as for my post, the 2-3 times in my life I have carried a rifle to finish a deer (including last bow season) was only after trying to get the deer and having it get up just ahead of me a couple of times. The main reason I did it was to try to retrieve the animal for food in 80 degree heat, not to end pain and suffering, though that is always a noble cause. As far as trapping, I think it can be done in an ethical manner, just check your sets often.

These threads always get a lot of responses. What is totally ethical to one person is unthinkable to the next guy. I think most of it has to do with our upbringing I guess as it should. I try to keep an open mind on these things.

Rhino · May 31, 2010

Here's a few things that bug me.

It really bugs me when a neighbor hangs a stand near our line (sometimes right on it) with the stand facing our property. Whoever hunts it obviously intends to shoot across our line. Although it's probably illegal in some states I can't find a law where it's illegal here. In my view this practice is very unethical. I don't have a problem with a stand being close to the property line as long as it faces their property.

Another thing that is unethical to me is for a hunter to hang a stand right by another hunters stand so they can exploit the effort the first hunter made to clip shooting lanes, etc. ahead of time. To exploit the efforts of another hunter because you're too lazy to do it yourself just isn't right. There's a hunter or 2 in our club that will hang a stand by mine if they know it's mine just for that reason. These same hunters won't do a thing when it comes to doing their homework before the season starts; well they won't do much during the season either.

A hunter that doesn't make a valid effort to recover game he's hit is unethical. I doubt anyone here disagrees with this. I have forced a guy to go back out and recover a deer he hit during bow season before. My eyes aren't what they used to be when it comes to tracking but I had no problem finding that deer.

BTW...just so you'll know John...this year in MS it's legal to remove your hunter orange if you're hunting in an enclosed stand or blind when you get in it.

johnf · May 31, 2010

This is the argument I have seen that justifies baiting in Texas. It's a tough thing to try to visualize when you are hunting way off in some other state. I try to understand what it could be that is so unique about these states that the deer would become invisible without the aid of bait. Why is it that we can hunt deer without bait, but there are other places that can't? There may be some unique difference in the species, or the population density, or the habitat that isn't being explained and that is probably why I don't get it. Maybe somebody could explain it all to me.
Doc

Come on Doc you can figure this one out. Deer are just like every other animal, they go to the best and easiest food sourse. If they can go to a big pile of corn, oats or bran for a quick easy meal why walk a mile to graze grass or twiggs.

I'm sure if baiting were illigal here that we would see as many deer as we do now with it. The fact that everyone does it makes it neccessary for everyone to do it. I do hunt some public land here where it is not legal to bait. You have to drive about 3 miles into it before you start seeing many deer (except when the acorns are dropping) when you do, you see as many deer as you do where the baiting is taking place.

johnf · May 31, 2010

BTW...just so you'll know John...this year in MS it's legal to remove your hunter orange if you're hunting in an enclosed stand or blind when you get in it.

There are roumors that the AG&F (Arkanasas Game and Fish) are talking about requireing a hunter orange drape over all enclosed stands less than 6' off the ground. Not sure how I feel about that. Of course I don't think deer can see the orange.

Rhino · May 31, 2010

There are roumors that the AG&F (Arkanasas Game and Fish) are talking about requireing a hunter orange drape over all enclosed stands less than 6' off the ground. Not sure how I feel about that. Of course I don't think deer can see the orange.

I understand their reasoning John but on a windy day there's a good chance it would be blown off without you ever knowing it happened. JMO, but the company's that sell the camo blinds should include an orange piece that could be attached to the roof with velcro for that purpose.

Dawg · May 31, 2010

This is the argument I have seen that justifies baiting in Texas. It's a tough thing to try to visualize when you are hunting way off in some other state. I try to understand what it could be that is so unique about these states that the deer would become invisible without the aid of bait. Why is it that we can hunt deer without bait, but there are other places that can't? There may be some unique difference in the species, or the population density, or the habitat that isn't being explained and that is probably why I don't get it. Maybe somebody could explain it all to me.
Doc

I have pondered the same thing Doc. Even with me throwing out corn last year and planting a small food plot, I still didn't see a single deer while on my stand. In the 3 years that I have leased this land, this past season was the worse I have seen.

I wish we had a big enough deer population to where I didn't have to use cord/food plots, not because I see it as unethical but because it gets too darn expensive but we don't so I will continue to use bait.

Running Dogs/Deer Drives:

It use to be legal in Texas to run dogs, but that was before I was old enough to go hunting. My dad grew up running dogs and I can vaguely remember being at the camp and him and his friends having their dogs tied up outside. I don't see it as being unethical, nor do I see making deer drives as unethical. Now we can get into the shot placement on a running deer and so on but I will say this, out of the 100's of deer drives I have been on, I have shot more deer slipping through the brush, some at a stand still, than I have at running deer. Just because you push a deer, doesn't mean it's gonna blow through the woods at 90 mph. In my experience of deer drives, the bucks seemed to want to slip through the woods rather than run. My biggest buck to date was taken while on a deer drive. He was standing still when I shot him. I killed 2 more bucks in that same spot over the years and they too were standing still when I shot them.

Technology:

I can't say here or there on technology. I haven't used a trail cam at all. I would like to, just haven't.

redkneck · May 31, 2010

BTW...just so you'll know John...this year in MS it's legal to remove your hunter orange if you're hunting in an enclosed stand or blind when you get in it.

Man, it's awesome when the laws finally come around to accomodate what I've been doing for years

I'm with you Al on the recovery. I feel we owe it to the animal to make every reasonable effort to do this, and I know everyone here can agree on that. I've had to urge guys to go back and sometimes ended with a deer, sometimes not, it always pays to look a second time with fresh eyes. Few days down in MS we get the luxury of waiting overnight and still have some backstraps to eat.

Bob LeBlanc · May 31, 2010

I wonder if some people are confusing ‘ethical’ with ‘appropriate’?...or perhaps even ‘humane’?

A crippled deer due to a poor shot?…Is it the ethical thing to do, to dispatch it, with a rifle, after dark?...or is it the humane thing to do?

What if the deer would have survived, albeit in poor shape for the recuperation period? Who’s to know, since it would have been ‘jacked’ by a hunter trying to do the right thing.

Running deer with hounds?...how is that any different than running rabbits with beagles ?

Shooting at running deer?...how is that any different than shooting at a flying duck?

We get conditioned / raised into the ‘appropriate’ behavior for any one type of hunting…and they are all, pretty much, regionally disparaging.

There are lots of hunters who find it unethical to shoot a deer with a bow…let alone a turkey on the roost…or a duck on the water.

Always obey the law. The law is what differentiates us from the criminals.

No matter how grey the area between the law and what we feel is right, the law, over all, needs to prevail.

Yes, there are times that we question the law’s validity. But it is there for a reason. It is not up to us, as hunters, to choose to ‘finish off’ a deer, with a firearm, during a bow-only season, as example.

If the deer is lost, or lost to coyote’s?...so be it. The deer has not gone to waste…it will feed many, many other creatures. It sticks in the craw that we’re responsible, and we feel it a loss…but the fact of the matter is, we need to stay within the law, and not to take it upon ourselves to decide which laws we obey and which ones we don’t. There are already enough poachers out there doing that.

Bob.

Bob LeBlanc · May 31, 2010