There have been many posts and comments here that touched on this subject, but I'm still trying to develop an informed conscience on the issue. My recent RSA hunt was on a fenced farm and we used a bakkie for spotting. But it took four days of hard work and many unsuccessful stalks (see "Thorn of Plenty") to get to get what we politely describe as a "good representative sample". The monsters that we saw always eluded us. I'm satisfied.

Some folks will say that the use of certain techniques like hunting fenced land, or spotting from a truck, or using a radio, or waiting by a water hole, or using bait; automatically makes the hunt unethical. But what about the guy who used one or all of those techniques and still has to hunt hard for a week or a month before he gets his trophy?

Some folks will say that the determining factor is how hard and long the hunter has to work. That sounds a little closer, but what about the hunter who gets lucky and nails his animal on the first morning, when he just as easily could have gone home empty handed after a week? Is it appropriate to expect that an elephant hunter need a week-long hunt, but not expect a rabbit hunter to do the same?

Danger to the hunter can be an element of fairness, but most game is not a hazard unless you do something bad enough to win a Darwin award (certain animals excepted). Danger from disease, bandits, and generally primitive travel conditions should count for something but is difficult to quantify.

The odds of your actually getting the desired animal could be a factor, but that is greatly influenced by your hunting time. Someone hunting in a good area for elephant has a pretty low chance of scoring in one day but is virtually guaranteed a good animal if he hunts well for a year. Is the day-long hunt more ethical than the year-long hunt?

Well, those are some of the questions. As always, your comments are appreciated.

Fenced in hunts on huge tracts of land in themself do not constitute unethical hunting, after all even public lands have boundaries.
However when hunters are guided usually after long periods or days chasing down trophy animlas they are never meant to bag, then eventually after the per diem fee desired by the outfitter has been met they hunter is usually brought (unbeknownst) to a small contained area where something inferior is then hunted and killed in a way where the hunter can't miss.
This is just one example of many types of unethical hunting going on. CHOOSE YOUR OUTFITTERS CAREFULL AVOID SCAMS AND SCOUTS
Check out the new forum coming soon. There will be plenty of info on this topic there.
C

Jim,

Ethical is one of those wonderful words in the English language that should have a simple definition, but does not. Personally, I define ethical as:

1. Legal. This is a no-brainer.
2. Responsible. There should be a definite reason why you are hunting something. Is it a danger to people? (ala the occaisional Alsakan Grizzley) Are you planning on eating it? (Whitetail deer) Is it a form of vermin that needs population control. (P-Dog) Or does the hunt itself bring much needed financial help to an under-developed nation? (read most of Africa) Or is it some combination of these things?

Beyond that, it's up to the individual hunter. Some people have no problems baiting an animal. Some have no problems using airplanes and GPS to locate a herd. It's a question of how many modern convienences you feel you need. I know some people who swear the only way hunt a deer is with a "traditional" muzzle loader. No shotguns or rifles for these guys. But that stuff is all personal choice, not really a matter of ethics.

Just my two cents.

Rick

Jim,

I correspond with an international group of hunters; one of our main pursuits is investigation of hunting ethics. I take ethics to be a set of principles that embodies "doing right", to put it simply.

We also discuss the aesthetics of hunting around the world; aesthetics is the beauty of hunting, or hunting practice as it were.

I notice that a lot of threads get wrapped around the aesthetics axle while trying to make "how we do it here" the definition of hunting ethics.

jim dodd

Rick about said it all....If I feel the hunt is fair chase then thats good enough for me and I could care less what someone else thinks about it....

Anyone who condems hunting behind a high fence then shoots a bear over bait or a deer from a blind is a hypocrite IMO..

I will not set in judgement of any man unless he pisses me off!!

Not too shabby of a response Mac, you've impressed me.
You have elevated yourself to the status of Non-Mope.
C

Who cares about your judgements or if you get pissed off.
You don't seem to mind who you piss off.
Ya Mope!
C

Well, I care about Ray's judgements. Just like I care about the honest and thoughtful opinion of anyone else who posts here. Let's leave the name calling somewhere else.

What our resident "expert" with no experience describes above indeed could and certainly has happened, but it would take a pretty naive hunter not to recognize it. Of course it also doesn't take into consideration that most hunts aren't paid for by the day, rather by the duration, i.e. a guy that contracts a 10 day hunt at $350 a day has actually contracted for $3500, and if he chooses to leave for whatever reason after 5 days, he still pays (paid) $3500, so the PH gains nothing by supposedly generating x number of per dium days.

One scam that many are probably aware of, and which I believe has pretty much been brought under control, is regarding Stone Sheep in BC. A few unscrupulous outfitters used to book more hunters that they had tags for, hence a few had to be led around on goose chases to avoid shooting more sheep than there were tags for. The hunting community pretty much through word of mouth rooted these types out, although there may still be some of it going on.

Hunting behind a fence, per se, is not unethical. It becomes perhaps less than ethical if the game hunted is significantly restricted as to prevent or significantly reduce their ability to hide and or escape. Of course drugged or cage released animals fits the "unethical" definition of most people that are sportsmen, but contrary to the beliefs of the local expert, that is quite rare, and virtually non-existant among true hunters, as it is very easily recognized. There are those that are willing to subscribe to such "hunts", or killings, but few would equate them with sportsmen.

Physical condition has a lot to do with "ehtics or lack there of", that said for the past few years I have had trouble walking for long distances and have shot some game from a truck of which I am not ashamed of. I was to have that problem worked on (replaced knee) a couple of weeks ago but some other problems arose and now I am hopeful for the week of the 10th. I don't know how someone that uses the finest high powered rifle with the finest scoped sights and a range finder can find fault with others. I wouldn't chase deer with dogs or gather togeather 25 to 30 hunters and suround a small area and drive for deer, but that is just me. Ethics are a lot liked beauty.

.

So don't mention names and it will be dropped.C

Little Doggie, I am sure you are quite the expert at finding those naieve hunters and assisting in the parting of them form their cash
c

Yea, what he said!

I really hate to actually address you, carmello, but what in the world are you trying to say?

What am I trying to say? Like you would understand. The graet carnelo speaks in riddles and conveluted thoughts! You lowly mopes would never understand my superior thought processes! Now leave me be! I require a burpy and a nappy.

� The exemplary moral spirit of the sporting hunter, that manner of feeling, of taking up and practicing hunting, is a very precise line, below which fall all innumerable forms of hunting that are deficient modes of this occupation; deficient in the aspect of dexterity, boldness and effort or simply in the moral aspect. Without doubt, above that line do occur, greater refinements; but if we examian them carefully we will discover they are mannerisms and excrescencies. Hunting like every human activity, has an ethic which distinguishes virtues from vices. There is such a thing as a rouge hunter, but also there is an effected piety of hunting.�
Jose Ortega Y Gasset

This is the acid test I use for my personal hunting ethic.
Draw the line stay above it, don�t be to proud of my self

Welcome to my "ignore list" again. Bye!

Rick

I just did the same.