More ethics discussions?
I know, ethics discussions are hard. They make us question stuff that we may take for granted, and sometimes challenge our convictions and preconceived notions with alternate perspectives.
But nevertheless, here are a couple of other places where these discussions are going on.
First, there’s the Hunt Fair Chase website. It’s an interesting site with some discussion of ethics and fair chase. I didn’t find any new answers there, but maybe that’s because most of what is said there has been addressed before. Still, it’s a pretty good resource for folks interested in some information and perspectives.
Next up is a blog I found while cruising around at Base Camp Legends. This website, Heritage Hunter, has created a section called Ethics Check, where scenarios are introduced and discussed as to ethics and the choices that hunters should make. So far the blogger, Bob Peck, has tried to keep the scenarios based on true situations. While I’m not opposed to hypothetical discussions, I think that using reality can make the commenters take some time and consider beyond the ideal, and temper their answers with the understanding that we don’t live in a perfect world… and often the right thing and the easiest thing are not the same.
By the way, I also like that he prefaces the first edition with one of my favorite quotes from Aldo Leopold that I’ll repeat here:
“A peculiar virtue in wildlife ethics is that the hunter ordinarily has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. Whatever his acts, they are dictated by his own conscience, rather than by a mob of onlookers. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of this fact.”
Anybody that reads and understands Leopold’s work gets an extra notice from me… even if the only thing they ever read is A Sand County Almanac. If you’re a hunter and you haven’t read it, you’d be doing yourself a favor to reconcile that deficiency.
Another site I want to highlight right now is the Orion Hunters’ Institute. Now, honestly, I’m not sure I see completely eye-to-eye with the site founder, Jim Posewitz on everything he has to say about hunting ethics and fair chase. Not that I don’t think he’s doing a good thing with his site, his book Beyond Fair Chase (full disclosure… a book which I have not read in its entirety), and his lectures, but I think he does tend to promote that idealistic approach I was talking about in the recent Fair Chase discussion. They’re great ideas and an excellent model against which to weigh your personal ethics, but I just don’t know how practicable they are across the spectrum of hunters.
The site is really good though, and he offers excerpts from his book that are definitely worth the time to read. (I keep meaning to get a copy myself, and read the whole thing… but best intentions and all that… just haven’t got around to it.)
Finally, there’s James Swan’s homesite. Dr. Swan has been around a while, and while his writing has covered a pretty wide gamut, his discussion of hunting ethics is what caught my attention. I picked up a copy of his In Defense of Hunting a few years ago, and it’s some pretty well-written and thought provoking stuff. He invokes many of the better known voices in the hunting discussion, such as Ortega y Gassett and Aldo Leopold, but also addresses things like the anti-hunting movement from a modern perspective.
Anyway, based on what I saw in our own discussions, and the one over at NorCal Cazadora, it seems that most of you are really interested in this topic. Enjoy these sites, and if you wanna come back here and talk about any of them, feel free.
Ethics are always a good conversation starter, sometimes for the good, and sometimes for the bad.
I’m going to check all of these out though, and see what they have to say.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
I will also try and get a copy of Aldo Leopolds book sometime today Phillip.
I have read his quotes for years and have never bought a book, go figure!
As far as I can perceive there is such a wide gamut to run when conversing upon the subject of ethics and fair chase.
If I lived where I used to as a youngster, back in the pre-Disney era in the rural swamps of Florida, how many of todays hunters would condemn me for running a “trot line” in order to sustain my family’s daily food requirements?
As a youthful and impulsive hunter, how many would condemn me of indulging in the first stage of a maturing hunter as I make hail mary shots and obviously am still enamored with the shooting more than the hunting?
Then, as an adult hunter who is just starting to understand the important role which we humans play in the environment and our impact upon it and, even though I know of the possible consequences of harvesting that big buck before he has had a chance to pass on his genetics to the next generation.
I take the shot anyway because it will be my first trophy buck and my youthful impetuousness clouded my good judgement momentarily.
How many people would condemn me for that action?
It seems to me that the ethic’s standards which are currently being set are definitely something to which we can all aspire to.
But, we also aspire to be closer to God and as such we try and emulate a certain individual (Jesus Christ) who also set the ethical standards to do so.
These set of ethics can never humanly be fully achieved, although we do try, but they can never be fully adhered to because of each individuals circumstantial living conditions.
The hunters and lawmakers who propose these “Fair Chase” standards generally are wealthy enough to be able to afford the luxury of: “Passing Up Shots” “Hunting Only Within Legal Shooting Hours” “Missing Shots” “Not Hunting Out Of Season” “Not Needing To Run A Trot Line” “Traveling to far away and exotic locations To Hunt” “Being Able To Hunt Private Areas Where Game Is Plentiful” “Not Having To Share Their Hunting Space With Thousands Of Other Hunters Who Are All Bent Upon The Same Quarry” “Using The Best Equipment That Money Will Buy So That They Can Possess Every Technological Advantage To Insure Their Hunt is successful”
Each individual has their very own set of reasons for what they do while experiencing the hunt.
Another individuals ethical standards and idea of fair chase, might not apply to their own unique situation in life and what they are looking to achieve and bring home with them concerning that special and unique hunting experience!
It also appears to me that there is a large majority of individuals who are focusing and spending way too much time worrying about what the other guy is dong, and not spending enough quality time with their own conscience.
Because when the day is done and you lay your head upon that pillow, you should be able to sleep soundly knowing that you did your best with the tools at hand and you did not intentionally trample upon the blessings of liberty of another individual.
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:54 am
I would like to think that we all have the luxury of “not Hunting out of season” and “hunting only within legal shooting hours.”
You can mock these all you like, but they are rules created for species management and for human safety, not to exclude the common man from hunting. Most of us would love to have access to far more (or any) private ground than we do, but in my angst over that topic, I won’t be baiting a dove field or shooting a deer on a warm April night.
And if you say that “some can afford to only eat wild game,” I’d like to meet those folks. Since pork and beef often get down to about $1.50 a pound, and hunting licenses to take large game cost hundreds or thousands of dollars, plus the cost of even a semi-reliable arsenal, plus your time off of work, plus the ridiculous cost of ammo…..unless you’re proposing that hunting licenses are a luxury of the rich as well, and true hunters should be able to steal the Rich Man’s gear and poach to survive.
Seriously?
December 6th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
I’m sorry I rambled there. But in all sincerity, people “following their own conscience” is how we’ve had almost every game species management disaster in the history of our nation.
People “following their own conscience” is why the game departments find piles of hundreds of dead birds (not cleaned), wanton waste of trophy deer where the hunter (next to his truck) sawed the head off a 10-pointer, etc, etc, etc. How many of those crimes (read any game department crime blotter) were crimes of necessity? Few to none. How many hungry families are fed as a result? Few to none.
None of those folks may have intentionally harmed our liberties. However, when that anti-hunter sees the headless buck, and when the liberal lawmaker sees 2 dumptrucks full of dead geese (killed out of season and dumped on public land), your liberty and my liberty will be harmed as a result. Game management/harvest rules and regulations will not be the death of hunting. Media frenzies over unethical hunters WILL. So forgive me if I disagree with a philosophy to not teach hunters ethics and “just let them find their own way.”
If we wish to continue our hunting heritage, we have an OBLIGATION to spread the word on ethics and fair chase. While you raise an interesting point - occasionally you’ll hear of the poor Vietnamese family who was arrested with 200 undersize striped bass - sadly it’s often the wealthy who can afford to commit these atrocities.
Last year I was talking with some guys who joked that they had shot 3 birds with “Negative $350 bands.” The birds were swans (closed season), and they were fined $350 a piece for them. The follow up quote, “Ha ha, if you only get caught every other time, then it’s cheaper than a goose hunt!”
December 6th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Hi Swamp Thing,
There was no intention to mock anything here I was only trying to point out the fact that each individual and according to his/her geographical situation, has the right to enjoy their own personal and spiritual experience when it comes to hunting.
For example, the hunters on the east coast of the U.S.A. must utilize tree stands and shotguns because of the heavy under brush and they are legally allowed to bait and shoot over their bait.
We here in the west are not legally allowed to do so but, we here in the west should not talk disparagingly about the Tree Stand and shoot over Bait Hunters because that is their own personal and spiritual hunting experience.
A lot of rural people will shoot out of season simply because they are subsistence hunting (Alaska) one of many. We should not condemn them for this practice either!
If we continue to allow the H.S.U.S. and P.e.T.A. to divide hunters over silly things like subsistence hunting vs. sport hunting or the high fence controversy and to continue throwing a “blanket set of ethics” which “not everyone can or wants to follow” then the sport of hunting is doomed to cease existence.
We have to get past: “My way of hunting is better and more ethical than your way of hunting” mentality.
If we do not do this the above mentioned organizations will surely have their way!
December 6th, 2008 at 3:13 pm