|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 15, 2017 8:40:21 GMT -5
Is there any such thing as ethics, in hunting or in other matters? Ethics is a deeply personal thing. We all have our own set of ethical standards. You live by yours. Others will live by theirs.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 15, 2017 8:44:02 GMT -5
Maybe it would be better to ask if there is any method, or technology, that hunters would agree is unethical. The cameras with live feeds to a hunters cell phone, especially during open season? Drones? Night hunting? It's a question, not an attack. As I said before, ethics is a personal thing. I have my set, others have theirs. It would always be tough to get a group to agree on ethical standards. Probably most would agree that a swift, humane kill would be a good standard.
|
|
|
Post by cspot on Oct 15, 2017 9:13:10 GMT -5
Maybe it would be better to ask if there is any method, or technology, that hunters would agree is unethical. The cameras with live feeds to a hunters cell phone, especially during open season? Drones? Night hunting? It's a question, not an attack. As I said before, ethics is a personal thing. I have my set, others have theirs. It would always be tough to get a group to agree on ethical standards. Probably most would agree that a swift, humane kill would be a good standard. Yes I agree. Also people's ethics will change over time. I know my personal code of ethics has. Only difference is I don't think everyone should have the same ethics as me.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 15, 2017 9:58:11 GMT -5
The question is answered;What is ethical is simply a personal choice. So, sportsmen and the animals we hunt are very lucky there is a game commission to limits our methods. A quick, clean kill being the standard certainly makes the argument for inline rifles replacing flintlocks. It's a certainty that "more participation" and "giving more choices" are valid points in the discussion.
Some view shooting a spring gobbler out of it's roost as unethical. That is invalid as it almost ensures a quick, clean kill. One group of bear hunters has been known, on at least two occasions to shoot cubs out of a tree they climbed when their mother was killed. I can't see that as ethical, but the kills were quick and clean. And, to listen to their argument that the cubs would probably never had made it through winter, the hunter are darn near heroes.
If it is, indeed, all abut personal choice and quick, clean kills, there should be a single season set. Allow all weapons, and set the season length with the sole purpose of meeting management goals. Everything else should be a matter of choice left to the hunter. How can an argument be made against such an idea? It would be the best way to protect the resource and meet the goals of those charged with managing it....Now there's a cause for a rebel who is looking for one.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 15, 2017 10:29:31 GMT -5
Part of the role of game agencies is too provide opportunities to sportsman while managing the resource. Having various seasons allows for additional opportunities and a longer period of time for everyone to enjoy their chosen methods. Within that framework, we all decide what and where based on our personal code of ethics.
When proposals come up for discussion, the commissions must decide of it is a good fit for each particular state by weighing all positives and negatives. And yes, personal ethics come into play there as well.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 15, 2017 11:03:59 GMT -5
But rifle hunters are not given a longer period of time. If the season ran concurrently most hunters would be totting a rifle because, as the popular personal attacks often claims, they would be afraid that "somebody would shoot their deer".
Personal choice, swift clean kills, all ethics are a personal choice, more opportunity for all,- an all weapons season is something no hunter should oppose. Equality for all should be the goal. Anyone who would oppose such a season would have to be considered an elitist, or given one of the other labels that are handed out when somebody dares to ask about the spirit of a special season, or voice opposition to a change.
The one thing that would keep this logical season from ever being put in place is lost revenue.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Oct 15, 2017 11:55:05 GMT -5
We have an all weapons season, it begins the Monday after Thanksgiving.
|
|
|
Post by davet on Oct 15, 2017 15:09:11 GMT -5
We have an all weapons season, it begins the Monday after Thanksgiving. Thank you. There is nothing to hold you back from taking a recurve or longbow out the first day of rifle season. You can also use a flintlock, in-line an in all but special reg's areas, you can use a flintlock pistol of 50 caliber or greater.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 15, 2017 16:35:41 GMT -5
We have an all weapons season, it begins the Monday after Thanksgiving. Yep, and it runs for only 12 days. That certainly makes the point that, since it is the only time the majority of rifle hunters get to hunt, they are being treated very unfairly. When we point out that as weapon technology advances and closes the effectiveness gap, some guys get all hot and bothered believing it is a personal attack. We are told such talk divides hunters. But talk is cheap, and it's proven by the response that show that dividing hunters is fine as long as the division favors the views of some. The hypocrisy of some hunters is as bad as that of the political party worshipers. Again, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 15, 2017 18:25:01 GMT -5
But talk is cheap, and it's proven by the response that show that dividing hunters is fine as long as the division favors the views of some. The hypocrisy of some hunters is as bad as that of the political party worshipers. Again, IMHO. No idea who you are referring to but I hunt all seasons so nothing favors me. Again, no idea who "some guys" are but I don't get hot and bothering when someone simply points out technological advancements. In fact, I use those advancements to show how hypocritical you and others are. I am happy to discuss how much all equipment has progressed and I am also very happy to point out that many of those that complain about it also benefit from it on their hunts. Pointing out that a new piece of equipment offers an advantage is not a personal attack. Trying to claim that those that use it are welfare recipients is.
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 15, 2017 18:37:14 GMT -5
It favors you most of all then. I'm not surprised you don't see it.
Allowing rifle hunters only 12 days divides hunters. Add the number of bucks already taken by archers and now the crossbow users, and they are being shortchanges drastically. It should surprise no one that hunter numbers are declining; shortest season, fewest bucks available save flintlock season. It take reasonable thought to see the problem.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 15, 2017 18:43:52 GMT -5
It favors you most of all then. I'm not surprised you don't see it. Everyone has more opportunity to hunt than they ever did before. Even rifle hunters. Doe season used to be 3 days. Now it is a full week, including 2 Saturdays. Bucks was always 2 weeks. Now we have a early muzzleloader season as well, plus crossbows. Which is why I favor adding more rifle or muzzleloader opportunity if opportunity arises. How has that changed? Archery hunters always shot bucks before rifle season and that is pretty much uniform across the country. That is not why hunter numbers are declining. When hunter numbers were stronger, archery was still longer than rifle. Plus, there are less bucks available to archery hunters now as well. Less deer is not just a rifle thing. There is no doubt that there are false perceptions among the rifle only crowd. You seem to be willing to fuel perceptions instead of working to ease those false perceptions with good data because you hate crossbows.
|
|
|
Post by 3212 on Oct 15, 2017 19:07:30 GMT -5
Now that I can play in Muzzleloader,Centerfire and Flintlock seasons I'm happy.But I'm an old rifle hunter who remembers how it was.At 74 I appreciate the october hunt.Especially with this weeks weather forecast!
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Oct 15, 2017 19:17:06 GMT -5
Now that I can play in Muzzleloader,Centerfire and Flintlock seasons I'm happy.But I'm an old rifle hunter who remembers how it was.At 74 I appreciate the october hunt.Especially with this weeks weather forecast! You aren't old, maybe well seasoned..... like a few on here!
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 15, 2017 19:46:32 GMT -5
Ridge, archers are killing more bucks than ever before. It funny to hear the argument that the rifle hunters have the choice to hunter the other season. When I said xbow users always had the choice to be archer hunters you claimed they needed more opportunity than vertical bows-even though handicapped always were allowed their use.
You pick and choose your much of what you claim is true.......and to say we aren't losing rifle hunters because of the the number of buck gone before their season starts is either naive or another bending of "facts" to suit your claims.--- I doubt you should take part of any discussion of ethics.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 16, 2017 6:53:39 GMT -5
Ridge, archers are killing more bucks than ever before. They are. I have never denied that? Not only have archers become better at what they do, but the percent take of the total has been increasing. That began way before crossbow inclusion. What I have said is the largest reason the percent take in archery has climbed is decreasing participation in rifle. Not increasing success in archery. That is simply fact. We have lost 250,000 rifle deer hunters and have gained some archery hunters. Percentages have to change. Not sure why it is funny? Archery hunters also have a choice to hunt other seasons. The reason I supported crossbows in archery season is because I believe they are bows, the belong in archery season, and inclusion would not harm the resource. I don't pick and choose anything. I use facts to counter assumptions, stereotypes, lies, and innuendo. I am happy to agree with you that decreasing deer numbers are part of the reason why rifle participation is declining. That also began before crossbows. The fact is there are less deer available to archers hunters as well, and it is also well documented the main reason why rifle participation is declining across this country which is lack of time. We must remember that many rifle hunters are casual hunters that deer hunt just a few days a year. Another point that has been raised which you have failed to see or accept is that archery hunting is removing a very small percentage of the available buck from the herd prior to rifle season. This has been backed up by studies in this state and in others. The percent total harvest by archery has nothing to do with the percent removed by archery from the herd. You seem more willing to fuel perceptions than to counter them with good data. Of course you do the same thing with Sunday hunting and semis so why should we expect differently. Why? Is something I do unethical in your mind?
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 16, 2017 20:21:09 GMT -5
Yep. Especially your habit of pulling small parts of a post out so that the context can be interpreted in a way that allows come up with a dishonest response......and it is dishonest because of your efforts to make posts say something they do not. You can ask for examples, but you do it so often there is no way it is done unknowingly.
|
|
|
Post by 3212 on Oct 16, 2017 20:23:54 GMT -5
Maybe take it to PM's?
|
|
|
Post by redarrow on Oct 16, 2017 20:29:33 GMT -5
Better to just end it just end it.😞
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 17, 2017 6:31:07 GMT -5
Yep. Especially your habit of pulling small parts of a post out so that the context can be interpreted in a way that allows come up with a dishonest response......and it is dishonest because of your efforts to make posts say something they do not. You can ask for examples, but you do it so often there is no way it is done unknowingly. As is usually the case, you got nothing. This is why crossbow inclusion is spreading, not shrinking. The facts are on the pro side and we use them to our advantage.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 17, 2017 6:48:06 GMT -5
I guess that's an option but this is a forum. " a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." Some threads here don't interest me. I have never read them.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 17, 2017 8:43:10 GMT -5
LOL.Gene,you're like the energizer bunny.Some people want to make it as easy as possible so they can get their hero shot,meat,stroke their ego or whatever motivates them.Other want more of a challenge and others are somewhere in the middle and draw the line with certain methods and technology.In the end,unless it directly impacts you,who gives a frog's fat arse?That's my take on it.It can be interesting to watch however.I took my son on his first pheasant hunt on the youth day.Before we started I said,you know I'll beat you like an unwanted step-child if you shoot a bird on the ground.He laughed and said he knew that.Quite a few people have no issue with that,others find it distasteful.I fall in the latter category but if a guy ground pounds a bird,that's his decision.I won't respect the guy as a hunter but do you really think he'd care?
You should read through archery talk some time.lot's of experts on Sitka gear,ozonics,go pro's and all kinds of gizmos I would think of carrying in the woods.It's clear that most either want their own hunting show,crave the selfie in a tree or just want a hero shot of their "hitlist" buck.I find it comical because you can tell that most of those guys never get out of sight of their Toyota prius but they need attention.Peronally I can't think they're really missing the true meaning of being out there but to each their own.I went down to feed horses this morning and there was a big doe milling around below my barn that never knew I was there.I could have grabbed a weapon or brought my kid down and legally killed that deer with a dmap tag.Why would I do that?There's more hunting than killing.Some people get it and some people never will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 9:09:05 GMT -5
Boy you nailed it. I'm mid 30's and may dad taught me to hunt the old way. A compass and topo map were all the gizzmo's he had. Reading sign in the woods is a fading skill, now just strap a few dozen camera's to the trees and have at it. But that's the way things are and will continue too be. And like you say if it dosen't bother my hunting style I could care less.
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Oct 17, 2017 9:29:58 GMT -5
LOL.Gene,you're like the energizer bunny. Its just passion about certain issues. I agree. To each their own. What I will keep defending is attacks against fellow hunters simply because others don't agree with their chosen legal tactics. You must remember that hunting originally came to be to provide food. There are still hunters that hunt purely to put food on the table. They are perfectly content to shoot the first game they see using the easiest method possible cause their goal is food and not sport. There is nothing wrong with that and no one should judge anyone that does so. For them, hunting is all about killing and that is fine.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Oct 17, 2017 11:15:28 GMT -5
Nothin wrong with that at all Gene.If you're killing for food,any legal method is fine.I personally don't know a single person who hunts strictly for food although I'm sure those people are out there.Yes,most of us eat game but that's not why most of us hunt.It's a by-product.
I shouldn't say I don't judge because,well I guess I do.I just don't care enough to worry about it.I'm not writing letters in protest or lobbying for or against anything and I never have.I will say that I don't care what anyone shoots or what they shoot it with.I will admit that some tactics and gadgets make me shake my head but I can't help the way I feel and again,to each his own.I don't think we have enough hunters that any of it will really make a difference.
|
|