Hold on. I fail to see your statement as a rebuttal. You asked me to have an open mind. Ok, I opened my mind and suggested how feeding deer could be acceptable in a fair chase model.

If you disagree with that assessment then say how. Take musk ox. I have never hunted them, but if someone targets them from snow mobile and shots from the snow mobile. I have no qualms calling that behavior wrong, unethical, and asking it be made illegal.

A good rule would be no shooting within 200 yards of a vehicle. This is the rule in Tanzania. A rule folks tell me is often ignored and not enforced. That is worng.

You say you have issues with what hunting in Texas has become say what they are.

I think you are a good guy too. But you agreeed with a earlier post that if the reaction of a majority of hunters is that is wrong as a good standard/test if legislation was needed to stop that obvious wrong. The post I am referring to is Cable68's post in the captive lion thread.

Have you watched? It is free on ITunes. I am willing to bet you would not accept that behavior in your fraternity. It is obvious, wrong, and I would add evil. I have thoroughly explained why so in other post.

quote:

This is the rule in Tanzania. A rule folks tell me is often ignored and not enforced. That is worng.

Ignored and not enforced is putting it lightly in context of reality.

I think there is good reason to be optimistic. We now have reputable hunting organizations calling out PHASA over its embracing of canned lion hunting and abandonment of ethics as an underpinning. DSC, the Wild Sheep Foundation, ZPHGA, and Boone and Crockett all rebuked PHASA. That is a great sign. Hunting organizations drawing a line in the sand in favor of ethical principles. Perhaps the message is starting to sink in . . . if we cannot get our own act in order we have no one to blame but ourselves.

All I see in this thread is more divid and conquer. The croc hunt was bad based on the actions of the actor. The fact is the put and take operations raising croc increase the total number of croc and that was the point the film makers were pointing out with the good Doctor even as most find the conduct the "hunter"less then desirable. Beer and guns don't mix.

The Ele hunt, the Mr. Glass says the film makers use editing to make than death scene seem longer then it was. We can second guess Mr. Glass all day long, but the fact is was the PH who made the call for the final shot in the chest and not the head. Quite frankly, which shot to you think would be worst in the movie for the masses: A brain shot or a chest shot.

In regard to Texas Hunting and using feeder and the back of truck or box blind to hunt. I would suggest that you come down to deep South Texas and try to walk and stalk in the uncleared brush. You can't.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I think there is good reason to be optimistic. We now have reputable hunting organizations calling out PHASA over its embracing of canned lion hunting and abandonment of ethics as an underpinning. DSC, the Wild Sheep Foundation, ZPHGA, and Boone and Crockett all rebuked PHASA. That is a great sign. Hunting organizations drawing a line in the sand in favor of ethical principles. Perhaps the message is starting to sink in . . . if we cannot get our own act in order we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Add PHAZ to the list Mr. Jines

Most of us here...have a whole lot more in common than we have dissimilar. While I am not really optimistic about the future as I have seen nothing but a negative trend in African Hunting for the last 15 years, I am all for bandiing together and trying to preserve what is left.

My only point with my comments are this: ‘The reason’ the LCTF failed to stop the uplist of the lion was because we failed to deliver SCI. SCI was seen by the scientific community as the “commander-in-chief” (for lack of a better term) and a must have. Thus to win this battle...we must do away with SCI as Mike J suggests and rally in a new org and make them the New CIC or we must bring SCI to different standards.

From my experience...SCI is unreasonable thus I agreed with Mike J in his thread. But as Baretta Mike stated...we need the people and money from SCI.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

This is the rule in Tanzania. A rule folks tell me is often ignored and not enforced. That is worng.

Ignored and not enforced is putting it lightly in context of reality.

I have no other words to describe it. It is a law designed to allow an animal to escape or evade. It should be strongly enforced.

Remember the YouTube post of the Arab shooters in Tanzinia shooting game in mass fro the truck among other things that was posted here and rightly condemned.

That had been on YouTube for years.

Ledvm: You did not fail to deliver SCI. You asked SCI to fundamentally change, to move away from a profit first, award, socialite club to a true conservation mindful organization. They refused. The failure, the alienation is their brand to where.

SCI could not accept your scientific, ecosystem benefiting regulation because it would have effected the monetary goals created by their awards and convention. SCI still uses the tag line first for hunters. SCI is first for SCI.

I leave all this with the group. I have a new rifle to shoot.

quote:

You say you have issues with what hunting in Texas has become say what they are.

The biggest problem I have with hunting in Texas and basically with hunting World Wide has been the importance that has been placed on "TROPHIES" and the emphasis on awards. in short form turning huntiong into a Competition.

When I first started deer hunting in 1970 and until about 1993 all or nearly all of the deer I killed was done by spot and stalk and I loved it.

By the mid/late 80's however it became more difficult to find places where landowners would let a hunter wander around on their property due to growing numbers of law suits because pof hunters getting hurt.

Also the mid 80's saw an increase in the numbers of people wanting to hunt deer, which coincided with the concept of Trophy deer with landowners able to make a few or several thousand dollars off their properties from a resource they had no $$$$ invested in.

Did not mean to come across with my comments about some of my other hunts as I did, I apologise as it is not my intention to derail this discussion.

The problem I have with "Ethics" is that people go to far on both ends of the spectrum.

Either they are too strict or there aren't any, there are just too many differences in the way humans approach life and any activity they get involved with.

Some folks hold themselves to a higher standard than others, while some have no standards, there has to be a middle ground but even then it is not going to impress those that are out to end hunting.

With the Lion, Leopard, Elephant, Rhino and Giraffe it is not just the antis wanting stopped. They are the most vocal, but there are a lot of folks, ordinary everyday citizens that have nothing against hunting that arer asking why people are wanting to kill those 5 species in particular whenm their numbers are dwindling.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
We don’t need that type even if our numbers dwindle as a result.

Well said, Larry. I have recommended this documentary to several hunting and non-hunting friends, each time I have made it clear how despicable I find the croc shooter. I told friends last night that calling the croc shooter a hunter is akin to calling Anthony Weiner a photographer.

That's funny and accurate.

quote:

With the Lion, Leopard, Elephant, Rhino and Giraffe it is not just the antis wanting stopped. They are the most vocal, but there are a lot of folks, ordinary everyday citizens that have nothing against hunting that arer asking why people are wanting to kill those 5 species in particular whenm their numbers are dwindling.

And the answer is to save them.

That is the message that has to be put forth. These species require vast tracts of land dedicated to them.

That land must be in best use economically for the people of the country to be OK with that.

Thus, these animals need value. Hunting gives value and if practiced properly...it adds to conservation of the species in other ways...such as limiting overall population numbers and preventing spill-out into the community.

I we are to survive and more importantly these animals are to survive...MUST get this message to resonate.

People like Craig Packer and orgs like Panthera will concede if done properly that hunting has a seat at the table of conservation.

With the unchecked human population growth and instability of goverments in Africa and poaching has hunting really got a future in Africa especially for lion and elephant.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
With the unchecked human population growth and instability of goverments in Africa and poaching has hunting really got a future in Africa especially for lion and elephant.

It does...as long as it brings in revenue.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
With the unchecked human population growth and instability of goverments in Africa and poaching has hunting really got a future in Africa especially for lion and elephant.

It does...as long as it brings in revenue.

Well, more revenue than the bribes paid to shut it all down....

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

With the Lion, Leopard, Elephant, Rhino and Giraffe it is not just the antis wanting stopped. They are the most vocal, but there are a lot of folks, ordinary everyday citizens that have nothing against hunting that arer asking why people are wanting to kill those 5 species in particular whenm their numbers are dwindling.

And the answer is to save them.

That is the message that has to be put forth. These species require vast tracts of land dedicated to them.

That land must be in best use economically for the people of the country to be OK with that.

Thus, these animals need value. Hunting gives value and if practiced properly...it adds to conservation of the species in other ways...such as limiting overall population numbers and preventing spill-out into the community.

I we are to survive and more importantly these animals are to survive...MUST get this message to resonate.

People like Craig Packer and orgs like Panthera will concede if done properly that hunting has a seat at the table of conservation.

Agree again and that is why we as hunters have to police ourselves. If we let the "croc hunter" be one of us because we have to support every idot with a rifle, we wil lose the people that are neutral to the antis. There was a survey in Norway that said that 86 % of people believe that hunting in orway is done in a good way. I belive 0 % of the asked would say they support the "croc hunter". We have to have a certain standard of ethics to survive in the future!

quote:

We have to have a certain standard of ethics to survive in the future!

And just exactly WHO is going to police and enforce those ethics, and don't say hunters will because they never have.

Humans by nature are designed to take shortcuts when and where possible.

Before anyone says it or thinks it, yes I do have ethics concerning hunting or how I hunt but I do not try to impose my standards on another hunter and I really do not want another hunter to impose their standards on me.

Discussing a Standard of Ethics is fine, I just do not believe enforcing them in the field is doable, as getting people to do what is Legal is hard enough in way too many cases.

One that was mentioned earlier in the discussion was being 200 yards away from a vehicle before shooting. What purpose does that serve.

Why not just limit vehicles to the camp once the hunt starts and only use them to retrieve game and limit hunting to being done on foot?

Crazyhorse: You keep asking who will police? I keep telling you we have to police and enforce. Each of us individually. Each hunting organization. Each PH and his or her regional PH Association, Each Game Warden or Game Scout in Africa.

If any of these entities betray fair chase hunting (defined as openly minded and simply as I can as let the animal have the ability to evade and escape. Take animals that are not a net loss to the local ecosystem). Then they need to be held accountable professionally ie loss of liscines or hunting privileges, legally crimiusanctions that deter future behavior, and commercially ie allowed to exhibit at the shows, or have their animals qualify for records or medals.

We have to police, or let others do it to and for us. If we won’t, then I do not blame them.

The folks who made Trophy were hard shell, activist antis who said we were going to torpedo the hunting industry. Half way through they realized the value of ethical and fair chase hunting was providing for locals and wildlife. Principals matter. Folks can be reached. I have reached professional, college educated non hunters to support international hunting with my ethics, and the help of many here in providing details to my hunting ethic. I never said one could not hunt from a stand or use a vehicle to acess an area. I even tried to offer a solution or a staring point for discussion on how timed feeders may be used in a fair chase and ethical manner. I really, just piggybacked off Levdm. But I tried to reach across the issue to find common ground.

Principals and ethics matter.

I ask you one last time as a friend, watch Trophy it is free on ITunes. I think it will change your perspective that if it is legal all is well.

Otherwise, we ( your camp and my camp on this issue) are simply at an end pass, and I cannot convince you. You have made me think. I appreciate that and thank you for that.

This thread has over 2000 views. I doubt most who be viewed commented. I hope I was more successful with them.

Be well.

I do not see that we are at an end pass, I just do not agree with EITHER OF US forcing our values/ethics on each other!

Can you tell me what is wrong with that? Since I am not hunting with you nor you with me either of us can CLAIM a high standard of ETHICAL behavior, but who really knows what actually happened?

What was it that Fuertes said about hunters? There is usually no gallery present to comment on our actions or something like that?

You seem to have developed the belief that I do not support Ethical Hunting practices, but I do, 20th. and 21st. Century Ethics which translates out to as long as it is LEGAL, that is what matters most to ME.

If we can just get hunters to LEGALLY pursue game I will be happy. If you check around that is hard enough to expect.

As I have said on here in the past humans really cannot "Fair Chase" hunt anything!

God gave us a brain, and we are going to pick up a stick or a rock and give ourselves an advantage, and if that is not accurate, we would NEVER have became the DOMINANT SPECIES on the Planet.

Humans are the PHYSICALLY WEAKEST form of mammalian life on this planet. Were it not for our brains and ability to adapt, as a species we would have died out early in the game.

I have absolutely No Problem with you or anyone else conducting your hunts in what you consider an ETHICAL manner, that is your business.

Do not expect me to adhere to your beliefs, because I Do Not expect ANYONE to adhere to mine!

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Crazyhorse: You keep asking who will police? I keep telling you we have to police and enforce. Each of us individually. Each hunting organization. Each PH and his or her regional PH Association, Each Game Warden or Game Scout in Africa.

If any of these entities betray fair chase hunting (defined as openly minded and simply as I can as let the animal have the ability to evade and escape. Take animals that are not a net loss to the local ecosystem). Then they need to be held accountable professionally ie loss of liscines or hunting privileges, legally crimiusanctions that deter future behavior, and commercially ie allowed to exhibit at the shows, or have their animals qualify for records or medals.

We have to police, or let others do it to and for us. If we won’t, then I do not blame them.

The folks who made Trophy were hard shell, activist antis who said we were going to torpedo the hunting industry. Half way through they realized the value of ethical and fair chase hunting was providing for locals and wildlife. Principals matter. Folks can be reached. I have reached professional, college educated non hunters to support international hunting with my ethics, and the help of many here in providing details to my hunting ethic. I never said one could not hunt from a stand or use a vehicle to acess an area. I even tried to offer a solution or a staring point for discussion on how timed feeders may be used in a fair chase and ethical manner. I really, just piggybacked off Levdm. But I tried to reach across the issue to find common ground.

Principals and ethics matter.

I ask you one last time as a friend, watch Trophy it is free on ITunes. I think it will change your perspective that if it is legal all is well.

Otherwise, we ( your camp and my camp on this issue) are simply at an end pass, and I cannot convince you. You have made me think. I appreciate that and thank you for that.

This thread has over 2000 views. I doubt most who be viewed commented. I hope I was more successful with them.

Be well.

Good post.

As long as "its legal" I'll do it my way, any which way I choose, appears to be the line of thinking to a number of persons.

Truly a sad chapter in the philosophy of hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I do not see that we are at an end pass, I just do not agree with EITHER OF US forcing our values/ethics on each other!

Can you tell me what is wrong with that? Since I am not hunting with you nor you with me either of us can CLAIM a high standard of ETHICAL behavior, but who really knows what actually happened?

What was it that Fuertes said about hunters? There is usually no gallery present to comment on our actions or something like that?

You seem to have developed the belief that I do not support Ethical Hunting practices, but I do, 20th. and 21st. Century Ethics which translates out to as long as it is LEGAL, that is what matters most to ME.

If we can just get hunters to LEGALLY pursue game I will be happy. If you check around that is hard enough to expect.

As I have said on here in the past humans really cannot "Fair Chase" hunt anything!

God gave us a brain, and we are going to pick up a stick or a rock and give ourselves an advantage, and if that is not accurate, we would NEVER have became the DOMINANT SPECIES on the Planet.

Humans are the PHYSICALLY WEAKEST form of mammalian life on this planet. Were it not for our brains and ability to adapt, as a species we would have died out early in the game.

I have absolutely No Problem with you or anyone else conducting your hunts in what you consider an ETHICAL manner, that is your business.

Do not expect me to adhere to your beliefs, because I Do Not expect ANYONE to adhere to mine!

Crazyhorse,

I take the time to read most of what you post on these pages as you are a hunter and a level headed man.

What most are stating here is that our sport would be more acceptable if the game that we pursue is not to be disadvantaged. What is a fairly interesting statistic is that a large percent of the masses readily accept hunting for food and the total utilisation of a carcass. We need to adapt and prove to those of this mindset that our hunting is acceptable as not only is it sustainable but designed to enhance and conserve species. We can only achieve this by 'fairchase' practises and setting standards that are deemed acceptable to others.

Animals put behind cages or bullied into submission has no place in contemporary hunting thus we as sportsmen have a duty to set standards and regulations. Ultimately to come together as a democratic body that outlines the acceptable practises of our industry.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:
As long as "its legal" I'll do it my way, any which way I choose, appears to be the line of thinking to a number of persons.

Truly a sad chapter in the philosophy of hunting.

+1

I have repeated this quote by Potter Stewart a former US Supreme Court Justice many times, "Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do." There can be an ocean of difference between the two. While the crocodile hunter had the right to do what he did, what he did was absolutely not the right thing to do. The tragedy would be if hunters sat by silently and said nothing, the tragedy is not condemning him for acting inappropriately. This is particularly the case given the crossroads facing hunting today.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:
As long as "its legal" I'll do it my way, any which way I choose, appears to be the line of thinking to a number of persons.

Truly a sad chapter in the philosophy of hunting.

More like correct your mistakes before trying to correct those of others.That and stop going about life looking for people to beat up on.

The “croc shooter” was just a vile person...no doubt about it.

But let me ask this:

The lady that wanted a crocodile purse...does anyone begrudge her of having a croc purse?

If so...do you wear leather?

If not...what if she had just gone to the holding area and picked out the one she liked and had the guys fish it out, shoot it in the brain with a .22 and skin it for her? Is that reprehensible as well?

The bottom line is that those crocs were farm animals. They have nothing to do with actual hunting and that is distinction we need to make.

As...the above is the fate of those crocs anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
The “croc shooter” was just a vile person...no doubt about it.

But let me ask this:

The lady that wanted a crocodile purse...does anyone begrudge her of having a croc purse?

If so...do you wear leather?

If not...what if she had just gone to the holding area and picked out the one she liked and had the guys fish it out, shoot it in the brain with a .22 and skin it for her? Is that reprehensible as well?

The bottom line is that those crocs were farm animals. They have nothing to do with actual hunting and that is distinction we need to make.

As...the above is the fate of those crocs anyway.

I am willing to bet that crocs killed for leather are not killed in the same manner. I am willing to bet they are killed a lot more humanely. I am also willing to bet the people killing crocs for leather are not aware of when oil goes up $2 a barrel.

quote:

would be more acceptable if the game that we pursue is not to be disadvantaged.

That is something I have to diosagree with.

All of us that hunt share some basic beliefs concerning our conduct when doing a hunt.

One thing all of us need to keep in mind is that those that want hunting stopped, are never going to find any type of hunting acceptable.

How much advantage does a lion or leopard have when it is feeding on a carcass that has been placed conveniently within "X" number of yards from a brush blind and for leopards aren't spotlights sometimes part of the equation?

How much advantage does an antelope have when a hunter 200 or 300 and now with the popularity of "Long Range" shooting 600 yards or more away pulls the trigger?

Animals raised in High Fenced enclosures, regardless if it is whitetails or lions are basically livestock people understand this and do not view the "Hunting" of those animals in the same light as they view hunting Free Range animals.

When hunters, ALL hunters realize that we will never ALL be on the same page concerning our PERSONAL beliefs about hunting we will not be able to unite and provide reasoned rebuttal to those that want to end hunting.

The FIRTST thing ALL of us need to do is to stop alienating each othetr over suppositions and minutiae.

Hunting Free Range Whitetails from a stand overlooking a timed feeder is different HOW then baiting a lion or leopard and shooting it from a blind?

One other thought, even though this discussion is taking place in the African Hunting topic area, the folks wanting to end hunting are not just wanting too sdtop hunting in Africa! They want it all stopped everywhere.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
I do not see that we are at an end pass, I just do not agree with EITHER OF US forcing our values/ethics on each other!

Can you tell me what is wrong with that? Since I am not hunting with you nor you with me either of us can CLAIM a high standard of ETHICAL behavior, but who really knows what actually happened?

What was it that Fuertes said about hunters? There is usually no gallery present to comment on our actions or something like that?

You seem to have developed the belief that I do not support Ethical Hunting practices, but I do, 20th. and 21st. Century Ethics which translates out to as long as it is LEGAL, that is what matters most to ME.

If we can just get hunters to LEGALLY pursue game I will be happy. If you check around that is hard enough to expect.

As I have said on here in the past humans really cannot "Fair Chase" hunt anything!

God gave us a brain, and we are going to pick up a stick or a rock and give ourselves an advantage, and if that is not accurate, we would NEVER have became the DOMINANT SPECIES on the Planet.

Humans are the PHYSICALLY WEAKEST form of mammalian life on this planet. Were it not for our brains and ability to adapt, as a species we would have died out early in the game.

I have absolutely No Problem with you or anyone else conducting your hunts in what you consider an ETHICAL manner, that is your business.

Do not expect me to adhere to your beliefs, because I Do Not expect ANYONE to adhere to mine!

Crazyhorse,

I take the time to read most of what you post on these pages as you are a hunter and a level headed man.

What most are stating here is that our sport would be more acceptable if the game that we pursue is not to be disadvantaged. What is a fairly interesting statistic is that a large percent of the masses readily accept hunting for food and the total utilisation of a carcass. We need to adapt and prove to those of this mindset that our hunting is acceptable as not only is it sustainable but designed to enhance and conserve species. We can only achieve this by 'fairchase' practises and setting standards that are deemed acceptable to others.

Animals put behind cages or bullied into submission has no place in contemporary hunting thus we as sportsmen have a duty to set standards and regulations. Ultimately to come together as a democratic body that outlines the acceptable practises of our industry.

It was a noble and admirable effort . . . to try and illuminate a room without a light bulb . . . but was destined to failure from the outset.

What is so enjoyable about discussions on here is that if a person has a different pov they are some form of sub humanoid simply because they view the subject differently.

Why should any of us expect to be able to put up any real resistance against those that want to take hunting away from us, when all we can do is pass judgement on people we have never met.

Yes I can see a rosy future for hunting, especially when hunters only want to find reasons to malign each other.

Perhaps just one modest request, please stop repeating that anti-hunting groups want to eliminate all hunting . . . we all already understand and accept that. Nothing we do or say will ever appease those groups or convince them that hunting is acceptable. So to be clear we all agree on that point. Repeating it as if some believe to the contrary is simply tiresome.

The difference of opinion relates to how do we convince the vast majority of the public that are neither anti- nor pro-hunting that hunting is okay to accept or at least tolerate and be allowed to continue. Some believe that we should just tell them to mind their own business and leave us alone. Others believe that we should hold our noses and allow some hunters to act in a manner detrimental to the interests of hunting because unity is more important than holding folks accountable for bad behavior. Still others believe that we ought to try and conduct ourselves in a manner that sets a high standard for the sport in an effort to (i) convince that segment of the population that is neither anti- nor pro-hunting that we are responsible sportsmen, and (ii) avoid arming anti-hunting groups with blatant examples of why we should be condemned.

So now I am guilty of trying the same thing Andrew did . . .

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
The “croc shooter” was just a vile person...no doubt about it.

But let me ask this:

The lady that wanted a crocodile purse...does anyone begrudge her of having a croc purse?

If so...do you wear leather?

If not...what if she had just gone to the holding area and picked out the one she liked and had the guys fish it out, shoot it in the brain with a .22 and skin it for her? Is that reprehensible as well?

The bottom line is that those crocs were farm animals. They have nothing to do with actual hunting and that is distinction we need to make.

As...the above is the fate of those crocs anyway.

I am willing to bet that crocs killed for leather are not killed in the same manner. I am willing to bet they are killed a lot more humanely. I am also willing to bet the people killing crocs for leather are not aware of when oil goes up $2 a barrel.

As I said, the croc shooter is a vile person but I wouldn’t make the bet on the killing of the leather crocs...at least not across the board.

Even just going to Mexico to see livestock slaughter where a lot of our bovine leather comes from as compared to US standards would appall most...not that I am defending it but just saying.

The croc killing in that movie was a poor agricultural practice that had nothing to do with hunting.

quote:

So now I am guilty of trying the same thing Andrew did

So instead of finding reasons to chastise other hunters because they have a different concept of what is and isn't ethical behavior when hunting, we all work at weeding out the "Outdoor Shows" that show the "End Zone" celerbrations!

How about we work at discouraging the growing interest in long range hunting where animals are being shot at ranges well beyond what is reasonable or is shooting at an animal 800 or 1000 yards away not putting the animal at a disadvantage.

I have just as much at stake trying to keep the anti's from taking hunting away from us as any of the rest of you.

As far as convincing non-hunters, that is pretty easy to do, set and talk to them, take them some fresh venison, drop the emphasis on trophies and put the emphasis on the hunt, not what "Book" the animal will be entered into.

We cannot accomplish anything until we set aside our personal animosities toward each other, we are our own worst enemies and tpoo many of us simply want to hide our heads in the sand and not really look at the whole problem.

The average non hunter really does not care about hunters going after what the non hunting public considers "Game Animals".

But non-hunters and some hunters really do not understand why a person wants to shoot a lion or leopard or elephant, rhino or giraffe.

I can understand it, I would not want to do it. although I would kill a mountain lion if I ever get the chance, but there are just some animals that strike a different emotion in people and that will not change.

The five I listed are the ones that a lot of folks ask why.

It does not matter how much hunters try to "Clean Up Their Act" or even establish a Code Of Ethics and force everyone to have an "Ethics Enforcer" with them on each hunt, anyone who hunts/kills any of those five are merely going to add to the problem.

I wish things had not reached this point but so many humans have been raised away from the natural world and an understanding of humans place in that world and it is only going to get worse as those of us that do hunt die off.

But one thing I can pretty well guaratee everyone, the Personal Ethics of a few hunters cannot be forced uppon everyone else.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

. . . we all work at weeding out the "Outdoor Shows" that show the "End Zone" celebrations!

How about we work at discouraging the growing interest in long range hunting where animals are being shot at ranges well beyond what is reasonable or is shooting at an animal 800 or 1000 yards away not putting the animal at a disadvantage.

. . . of course neither of those would involve any personal ethical judgments.

Did not say they wouldn't, but I can guarantee you that your not going to get many hunters to buy into your personal code of ethics.

All this emphasis on a Higher Ethical Standard among hunters, when so many "Hunters" have a real hard time just obeying the written laws.

Arguing and making accusations/assertions about people a person has never met, simply because they have a different viewpoint really goes a long way in uniting hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Did not say they wouldn't, but I can guarantee you that your not going to get many hunters to buy into your personal code of ethics.

All this emphasis on a Higher Ethical Standard among hunters, when so many "Hunters" have a real hard time just obeying the written laws.

Arguing and making accusations/assertions about people a person has never met, simply because they have a different viewpoint really goes a long way in uniting hunters.

If you ever get the opportunity to hunt Africa as a visitor you would fall into the "client" category and as such would hunt your animals under the auspices of a registered guide commonly known as a professional Hunter.

This person will be telling you what and what not to do assuming he follows "the rules of engagement" which are based on strict ethical standards, down to the letter and in most African states such hunts also foresee the presence of a Government Official who is there to ensure fair play from all points of view.

You seem to have a "Bee in your bonnet" about long range shooting and refer to it as unethical.

For the life of me, other than popping off prairie dogs at those distances, who shoots at game at over 400 yards other than the occasional (rare) shot at a mountain goat in the craggy peaks of the Rockies, Alps or Urals, or possibly at a Thomson's Gazelle on a plain in North Tanzania?

If that is the only chance you get at hunting such species and you are capable of consistently hitting the gong at 600 there is no law that says you can't nor is it considered unethical, except to you.

I suppose wearing Maasai garb or the use of a black umbrella to help shorten the distance to your quarry would also be unethical.

So much for all the camo, scents, etc. on sale.

quote:

If you ever get the opportunity to hunt Africa as a visitor you would fall into the "client" category and as such would hunt your animals under the auspices of a registered guide commonly known as a professional Hunter.

I will never hunt Africa for two reasons.

A. I am too old.

B. And this one is the most important to me. I would LOVE to shoot a Buffalo, but I cannot bring any of the meat back to Texas. The very reason I have hunted in Canada twice, is because I could bring the meat home. Hunting in Africa is a "Trophy Only" proposition!

I do not care how many natives can make a meal off of a buffalo/kudu/gemsbok/oryx/waterbuck I might shoot, I cannot bring any of the meat back to Texas and share it with family and friends!

Hunting in Africa is a "Trophy Only" situation.

I do not have any problem at all with those that want to do that, but personally, I will not do it!

Crazyhorse: You could eat/sup off of it while incamped.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Crazyhorse: You could eat/sup off of it while incamped.

Not good enough, Sorry.

I have brought the meat from two caribou, a moose and a Musk Ox back from Canada. I do NOT hunt anything that I cannot bring meat home!

Let us talk about REAL ETHICS here, humans hunted for food/protection or shelter, that is how we evolved, killing animals merely for a trophy was NOT part of the equation!

Everything is eaten and eaten by needy folks. And like LHeym says, you can eat your fill while there.

I can actually see where you are coming from here CHC, because that is your preference. But I believe the most important for most people is that the meat is eaten by someone. In africa not a speck of meat is thrown away. I`m lucky. I have a kind of family in South Africa, so we always have a spit braai with an animal I hunted with all family and friends before I go home Sharing a warthog on the Spit on a sunny day in Africa with family and frineds is important, but it would not lessen the experience the day I hunt a buffalo in Zimbabwe, Zambia etc and the meat goes to the locals, maybe even better!

Yes, I am aware the meat does not go to waste. Anyone that hunts knows that the meat does not go to waste.

What does the HUNTER bring home?????

A TROPHY! That is all the anti element see and focus on.

Does ANYONE going to Africa do so to supply the natives with meat???? No, let us do not kid an old kidder.

They are after a trophy. That the locals make use of the meat is sort of like collateral damage. If the locals did not use the meat would that stop hunters from going and shooting the animals?

Anyone want to answer that truthfully?

When planning a safari does what happens to the meat actually enter into the equation?