Joe
City-dweller
Posts: 170
|
Post by Joe on Feb 23, 2022 13:07:40 GMT -7
Shoot Salt and Sear
|
|
|
|
Post by bushfire on Oct 11, 2022 18:37:44 GMT -7
I would add a couple of things to this.
I believe there is a difference in morals and ethics. Ethics are a set of rules or ideals we agree upon as a community. Morals are our personal views further to this e.g. trophy hunting, acceptable weapons etc.
One thing I have wondered on for a while, I think we can agree that most people collectively are opposed to poaching. Yet many of us idolise or justify people such as Simon Kenton, Daniel Boone, Jim Bridger etc. Who in reality were nothing but poachers themselves. I know some would argue it was a different time, to that I would agree in that you would be less likely to be shot now like you were then. But is there really any difference between those guys and someone who poaches now? I don't have the answer myself.
My biggest issue with hunting in contemporary times is social media. I'm of the social media generation (31) but hate it and what it has done for hunting. Everyone wants to be famous now and I've seen a direct correlation between that and the rise in pure trophy hunting. What I mean by pure trophy hunting is guys/girls who are purely hunting to shoot the biggest deer they can for popularity and adulation. I spend some time chasing big antlered deer, but what I shoot is for me and my business and the meat takes priority. In Australia most hunters don't eat venison, they'll just shoot a deer, cut its head off and leave the rest. I know one fella that posts up photos of himself cutting off meat in the field from deer he shoots because it gets social media likes. He then goes home and throws it in the bin.
I mostly hunt with my flintlock these days, I've had friends question why I'd make it harder for myself as they're going the other direction by putting thermal scopes on their guns. They can't understand I hunt for a lot more than killing something and simply love the hunt and the experience more than the kill.
All I can do is bring my boys up respecting nature and the weight and responsibility of killing. Unfortunately many are not.
|
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Oct 12, 2022 4:32:42 GMT -7
Excellent post Bushfire, and welcome.
If it isn't illegal,,, is it "poaching?"
This is not to suggest that just because something is legal that it is also ethical, moral, or right. Nor to suggest that just because something is illegal that it is wrong.
"Poaching," is kind of a unique thing in regards to law, morality, ethics, right and wrong. Waste of game is wrong, most would agree. Shooting game out of season and rising wiping the species out os generally wrong I think we could agree. Killing too many of a species would be wrong. And I'm sure we can all come up with some exceptions to these.
However, is, "shooting the king's deer, or rabbit, or pheasant, etc" wrong, unethical, or immoral? It would/is considered "poaching?" Or, is it wrong, unethical, and immoral, for the royalty, or other privileged entity to make such claims on the land and animals on it?
|
|
Joe
City-dweller
Posts: 170
|
Post by Joe on Oct 14, 2022 9:04:41 GMT -7
Commercialization, trophy hunting, private hunts, canned hunts, hunting tournaments, Seasons created by manufacturers, the introduction of species for the purposes of said hunting, and a whole lot more. .............I'm hard pressed to find any ethics or morality in any of it. None of it it is about "hunting" anymore, it's all about money. We all know the affect money has on ethics and morality.
|
|
|
|
Post by spence on Oct 14, 2022 9:51:07 GMT -7
Commercialization, trophy hunting, private hunts, canned hunts, hunting tournaments, Seasons created by manufacturers, the introduction of species for the purposes of said hunting, and a whole lot more. .............I'm hard pressed to find any ethics or morality in any of it. None of it it is about "hunting" anymore, it's all about money. We all know the affect money has on ethics and morality. Well put. As I said in my opening post, "As with many other old folks, I feel I have outlived my value system. It no longer fits the world of today." And the fit gets worse every day. As if "fishing contests" weren't ridiculous enough, I see where two guys stuffed their bass with lead weights to win the prize. I have gained a better understanding of the mindset of hermits over the last few years. Spence |
|
|
|
Post by bushfire on Oct 14, 2022 16:45:40 GMT -7
Commercialization, trophy hunting, private hunts, canned hunts, hunting tournaments, Seasons created by manufacturers, the introduction of species for the purposes of said hunting, and a whole lot more. .............I'm hard pressed to find any ethics or morality in any of it. None of it it is about "hunting" anymore, it's all about money. We all know the affect money has on ethics and morality. With respect I'd disagree on a couple of points. It's well established through archaeological evidence that humans have valued the aesthetics of animals as trophies for thousands of years. I believe one of the earliest extant examples is from the Star Carr Mesolithic archaeological site that contained a red stag skull and antlers turned into a crown or mask. Dated to 11,000 years ago. I think it comes down to what you want it for. I like to use antler for powder measures, knife scales etc. And also like to have them as decorative pieces. To me that's different than someone who's shooting them to score or get a pat on the back. And here at least, if we didn't have introduced species we wouldn't hunt. All native mammals are protected in my country. |
|
Joe
City-dweller
Posts: 170
|
Post by Joe on Oct 15, 2022 10:32:43 GMT -7
Commercialization, trophy hunting, private hunts, canned hunts, hunting tournaments, Seasons created by manufacturers, the introduction of species for the purposes of said hunting, and a whole lot more. .............I'm hard pressed to find any ethics or morality in any of it. None of it it is about "hunting" anymore, it's all about money. We all know the affect money has on ethics and morality. With respect I'd disagree on a couple of points. It's well established through archaeological evidence that humans have valued the aesthetics of animals as trophies for thousands of years. I believe one of the earliest extant examples is from the Star Carr Mesolithic archaeological site that contained a red stag skull and antlers turned into a crown or mask. Dated to 11,000 years ago. I think it comes down to what you want it for. I like to use antler for powder measures, knife scales etc. And also like to have them as decorative pieces. To me that's different than someone who's shooting them to score or get a pat on the back. And here at least, if we didn't have introduced species we wouldn't hunt. All native mammals are protected in my country. I don't think you are disagreeing at all. In fact, I think you are adding emphasis to the points I was trying to make. From cave paintings to ceremonial head gear animals were revered for their sustenance, shelter, and sometimes out of fear or envy. The hunting situation in your country is a bit different, as the introduced species threatened the native ones and changed the ecological balance. Hence, hunting one and not the other. It's a prime example of the perils of species introduction, whether it's intentional or accidental. Humans are great at screwing up the balance of nature. as a result, hunting becomes a necessity for wildlife management. It's when we try to forego hunting and try to solve the problems by introducing predators, or injecting commerce into the equation, that's when we really screw things up. |
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Oct 15, 2022 16:31:22 GMT -7
I grew up hunting squirrels, rabbits, quail, pheasant, ducks, geese and racoon in Iowa. Except for the Coon, we ate everything we took or gave it away to folks even poorer than we for them to eat. (My Maternal Grandmother once asked me to bring a Coon home to cook as she had eaten them growing up. I didn't care for it, but if I had been as poor as she growing up, I can see why her family ate them.) Fishing and hunting provided additional meat protein we otherwise couldn't afford as often. We didn't hunt deer only because the tags were on a statewide lottery and we couldn't afford to hunt outside our county.
Dad taught us to respect the game laws and the only thing we did that was a bit iffy was when they brought a point system on hunting ducks. You could take a high point duck as the last point of your points, even if it brought the total number of points over the maximum point number. I laugh now at how we did ongoing point calculations as we took more ducks in a day. We did stop when even if we fudged on what order we took the ducks, the points were used up, though.
Of course it probably helped that Ole Dan the Head Game Warden of our county knew my Dad and Uncle by sight, and you didn't get anything past Dan, nor would we want to be publicly shamed by not following the hunting regulations. Dad actually mistakenly shot a monkey (thinking it was a grey squirrel) that had escaped two years earlier (don't know how it survived an Iowa winter) and that story hit our county newspaper. Dad was still getting ribbed about it years later and my sister has the cut out article in the family papers.
When I got transferred to Virginia on active duty, I really looked forward to hunting deer. Dad took a position as Plant Manager below Richmond and quickly got involved with a GOOD Hunt Club for Deer. My Brother and I hunted as guests with the club for a few years, but later joined ourselves.
Our club had firm rules against drinking even a beer and hunting. We strictly enforced safety rules. They also instituted the "Dollar for every missed shot Rule." Dad was the club secretary/treasurer and the common gripe/joke was that the minute the scheduled drive was over, Dad came up and collected the dollar/s if one didn't have a deer on the ground. Some almost got to believing Dad could read minds. LOL. Hunting laws were strictly enforced by our own club members, so we never had a problem with the game wardens.
The only poaching I ever saw and agreed with was where the Game Wardens in Virginia looked the other way was when really poor folks took one or two more deer per year than allowed. As long as they fed their families with them, no problem. However, if they tried to sell the venison, then the law came crashing down on them and I definitely agreed with that. Each year for many years, hunters routinely took 40,000 to 60,000 LESS deer than game management said could and should be taken. So some extra deer to feed poor families didn't hurt anything.
Gus
|
|
