Im writing an article about our italian hunting magazine "CACCIARE A PALLA" about the ethical rules in big game hunting and would be interesting to have the AR members opinion. Some important rules I think should be observed are as follows:

1)do not shoot from a vehicle or from boat or (worst) helicopter. Someone told me that the shooter must be at least 200 meters from the car (maybe too much);
2)do not hunt at night (except Leopard);
3)do not shoot on the water;
4)limited hunting with hounds (Leopard, mountain lion, caracal etc);
5)shooting at long distances (over 300 meters) only in limited cases and when it is absolutely necessary;
6)recover the meat (when possible).

your opinion?

Abiding by both game laws and local customs & traditions seems to sum up 99% of hunting 'ethics' for me.

1. Follow the laws

2. Follow your own bliss

Know your weapon of choice as well as possible so that you may be able to make a clean & quick killing shot.
PRACTICE-PRACTICE-PRACTICE

Follow safe gun handling practice - this is the MOST important ethical principle when hunting with others.

Secondly don't try to take first shot at everything. Give others the opportunity to shoot first.

Thirdly don't just shoot for the record or for numbers but hunt for the pleasure of hunting. Enjoy the hunt with others.

quote:

Originally posted by bwana cecil:
Know your weapon of choice as well as possible so that you may be able to make a clean & quick killing shot.
PRACTICE-PRACTICE-PRACTICE

+1 on this great post.

quote:

Originally posted by Mario:

1)do not shoot from a vehicle or from boat or (worst) helicopter. Someone told me that the shooter must be at least 200 meters from the car (maybe too much);
2)do not hunt at night (except Leopard);
3)do not shoot on the water;
4)limited hunting with hounds (Leopard, mountain lion, caracal etc);
5)shooting at long distances (over 300 meters) only in limited cases and when it is absolutely necessary;

Mario
You and I have done some similar hunting(unguided in Cameroon) so I would guess that we have a lot in common regarding our desires in hunting.

In my opinion hunting "ethics" is just some garbage we make up to make ourselves feel good. Does the leopard refrain from hunting near water? Does the lion not hunt at night. Do eagles not hunt from the air? Why is it OK to hunt leopards and mountain lions with dogs, but not other game?

I will ask you, what is more sporting: the guy who rides in the vehicle all week then spots his animal and jumps out and waits for the car to move 200 yards before shooting or the hunter who climbs the hills all week unsuccessfully looking for a his animal, then on the way out spots his animal from the car and makes a 100 yard stalk before delivering the kill shot?

As one wise old gray beard once said here on AR: "In hunting, ethics is nothing more than esthetics."

Unethical to shoot game at water[holes?],
..but somehow 'ethical' to set baits up that draw the same game in.
both seem much the same thing to me.

Drifting down a river and taking game in the vacinity of the shore, I dont mind.
In the age of; high quality hunting optics for lowlight shooting,laser range finders, illuminated reticles,thermal imaging, etc,
I find the use of the primitive concept of a canoe, quite acceptable for hunting.
People use a blind to gain advantage/become inconspicuous,..so why not a canoe?

If you really want to give primitive animals a 'sporting chance', put down your modern loaded thunderous uber bigbore
and use something more risky & challenging.

Keep in the mind the difference between:
- recreational hunting,
- professional/income hunting..and
- hunting purely for human wilderness survival.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

I will ask you, what is more sporting: the guy who rides in the vehicle all week then spots his animal and jumps out and waits for the car to move 200 yards before shooting or the hunter who climbs the hills all week unsuccessfully looking for a his animal, then on the way out spots his animal from the car and makes a 100 yard stalk before delivering the kill shot?

To the person just interest in getting their name into the SCI record books, it most likely dont matter...

Duckear and Grafton just about summed it up.

thanks guys for your opinion.I know that is a delicate matter... I understand your objections and I agree with many of them. Bwana Cecil gave me a very good suggestion. Keep in mind that the article is written for a magazine sold everywhere in Italy (50.000 copies) and most are not experienced hunters how we are here in AR. What we want explain is that ther'are behaviors that is better avoid otherwise is not hunting. The example is shooting from the motor vehicles. I think we can agree that shooting from the helicopter is not hunting but just shooting. Same story shoot an animal, specially an elephant or a lion, from the car. Of course, as JBronw suggest, this can happen and cant be considered unethical. But if this is the rule, like driving around day and night with a loaded gun, again I think is not hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Duckear and Grafton just about summed it up.

+1, I do not live my life by someone else's rules or "ethics", so as long as the law of the land is followed I have no problems.

Lots of great answers. Just some observations on the whole concept of ethics.

1. Internet/media/printed publication ethics are always much higher/stricter than real time in the field ethics.

2. It is pretty easy to try and hold other people to an ethical standard that we may or often do not hold ourselves to.

3. If it is legal in the hunting location, and the hunter has no problems in any way with doing business in that manner, go for it and don't concern yourself with other individuals self proclaimed ethics.

4. To me this is the most important, even if the method or situation is perfectly legal in the area being hunted, and this puts the onus on the hunter themselves, if the hunter is not comfortable with shooting an animal under those conditions, that is a personal choice because they are the one having to live with that choice. If it bothers you, simply do not take the shot.

Two situations I have noticed repeatedly during my hunting career as a guided hunter or when working as a guide, is that depending on how much time is left for a hunt and no game has been killed, or the size of the game seen play a major role for most hunters concerning ethical actions in the field.

Everyone has different ethics. Even people that live in the same house.

Scrupously follow the respective laws of the country. Try and follow the advice given by your PH.

Crazyhorse, I appreciate very much your answer. I'm agree with you.

quote:

4)limited hunting with hounds (Leopard, mountain lion, caracal etc);

Dont forget the Bushpig over hounds.
It is the ultimate quarry over hounds and is a hell of a hunt to go on.

Laws are universal...ethics should be personal.

Seeing as you asked....My opinion is keep your ethics to yourself and don't write the article. It can lead no where good other to drive a wedge further between hunters and further confuse those that don't hunt.

of course bushpig (like wildboar) over hounds is a great and sporting hunt.
Sheephunterab,
sorry but I do not presume to teach MY ethics. I just put together some historical principles of the big game hunting.

I don't mean to be a jerk Mario but those are your interpretation of history and are far from universal ethics. Likely one of the only universal ethics that all hunters could agree on is a quick/humane kill.....after that it all becomes personal.

At what point in history did shooting from a boat become unethical? Why is shooting 299 meters okay but shooting 300 is unethical? Why are leopards okay to shoot at night and nothing else is? Why isn't it okay to hunt bears with hounds...or bongo? So a 9 year old on his first African safari is an unethical slob because he shoots an impala from the car? See the dilemma here?

Put 50 hunters in a room and allow each of them to convert their personal ethics into law and at the end of the session, all hunting would be outlawed. Your article can be nothing but your personal interpretation of ethics because ethics are personal.

Mario I think your suggestions are going to be marred by their shortsightedness. You might be onto something with this piece but not with these examples as you've stated them. They are too divisive within the hunting community because laws and ethics are nothing alike.

1. Your not shooting near vehicles of any sort is ethical. But it is only the law in certain places. Be clear about that in your article but don't preach your views on it to your readers.

2. Being European, I am surprised by this one. Night hunting is legal for many species in many countries (i.e. bear/Romania, wolf/Macedonia, boar/Turkey, predators/many African countries)

3. This is predominantly an African matter (more so Tanzania). But look at all of the bow hunts in southern Africa...Have you ever (or watched on tv/read about) hunted moose? Or caribou? Or any sort of deer taking a drink?

4. This one is bogus all together. While hound hunting isn't popular or legal everywhere, it is in many places for many species. Bears and lynx and European moose are all hunted by dogs. All of them completely legal and they are also steeped in tradition.

5. Another bogus point. While many hunters will never be faced with a 300 yard shot in their lives, lots of hunters can make that shot without any issues (quick kill). I don't agree with the latest craze of shooting stuff as far as you can get from them, but I am skilled enough too make long distance shots at game animals under good conditions. 300 yards is also not a long shot in many areas of the world. Deeming a shot at any range necessary or unnecessary is just plain ridiculous. Justifying it with limited instances is just as absurd.

6. This is probably your only good point. When possible is very questionable. What circumstances would you justify the recovery of meat not being possible with?

I'm sorry if this seems like a bit of an attack but it isn't. I expected a lot better suggestions from a professional writer and I think you should hit the delete button if that's the kind of article you are going to attempt to set an impression with. You have a big audience with a readership of 50,000. Them being novices for the most part is a big deal. Don't steer them down the wrong path with your attempt at talking about ethics.

Some of the guys here have given you some good suggestions. Get rid of your list and start over. As for my suggestions:

1. Practise with your weapon of choice and become knowledgeable and confident with it before hunting.
2. Ensure you know your quarry well. Learn about it to improve your skills as a hunter. Know its anatomy to ensure you deliver a quick, clean kill.
3. Recover your meat (when possible). The only instances when it should not be possible is when a large predator has claimed your kill (a bear or lion for example), when you are unable to recover your animal, if the animal is ill (worms, CWD, gangrene) and the meat is questionable, and if it is not legally required (bear in many places for example). There are other scenarios but never should "it was too heavy" or "it was too far from the trail" be an excuse.
4. Most importantly, enjoy yourself. Hunting isn't about killing. It is about the experiences that we allow ourselves to have within the means of the law.

Do what is legal and abide by your own ethics. I cannot stand someone telling me how to be ethical (I do not think you are Mario).

Good shooting, enjoying the hunt, and not worrying about impressing someone else is what matters.

1. Follow the local laws regulating hunting.
2. Show respect for and follow the local customs.
3. Hunt and shoot within your abilities.
4. Do not take unnecessary risks that put your colleagues in harms way or risk causing a wounded and lost animal.
5. Recover the meat as prescribed by local customs and laws.
6. Clean-up after yourself and leave the habitat as pristine as you found it...even more pristine, if possible.
7. Pay your bills - as agreed upon beforehand - and depart on good terms with as many as possible.

quote:

1. Follow the local laws regulating hunting.2. Show respect for and follow the local customs.3. Hunt and shoot within your abilities.4. Do not take unnecessary risks that put your colleagues in harms way or risk causing a wounded and lost animal.5. Recover the meat as prescribed by local customs and laws.6. Clean-up after yourself and leave the habitat as pristine as you found it.7. Pay your bills - as agree upon beforehand - and depart on good terms with as many as possible

That Sir, is as good as it gets in my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Mario:
.. What we want explain is that ther'are behaviors that is better avoid otherwise is not hunting. The example is shooting from the motor vehicles. I think we can agree that shooting from the helicopter is not hunting but just shooting. Same story shoot an animal, specially an elephant or a lion,from the car.

Mankind has gone to all kinds of efforts employing methods [and devising new or better 'more convenient' ones] to gain
more/better advantage over an animal, and it is [by many] still considered 'hunting'.

How much convenience or advantage is too much?

That is determined only by the Laws imposed on the area you are persueing game,..and/or by ones personal values/ethics.

The rich,privileged,influential recreational hunters and also the outright poachers, from another era-century,
once regularly pursued DG from horseback,Elephantback and motor vehicle [and shot them at waterholes]...and thought nothing of it.
Im sure if they had the ease and convenience of a helicopter available,they would have employed that also.

So, today, is perusing wounded DG into long grass,from the back of a Toyota still hunting, or is it just shooting?

And if ones personal ethics tell you that employing the advantage & convenience of a Toyota to persue wounded DG, is ok,
[lets say your argument is that it helps better ensure the safety of the hunting party and to finish the beast in quicker time/more humane way.
...then why not the added advantage and convenience of a different vehicle/machine, like the Helicopter,
to do the same thing?

AsI asked earlier-[ and purely from an personal ethics point of view]
how much added convenience and advantage over an animal, is too much?

HOw do we know when/which of our game persueing methods employing modern machines and tech devices,
make it just shooting and no longer hunting?

I really see no difference[apart from possible legal ones] between:

A./ driving around then ensuring one is a short minimum distance from vehicle to setup shooting sticks to drill the animal.
or
B./ driving around and stopping to drill the animal, but from the bar of the vehicle.

If the roof bar shooting position clearly offers advantage/superior view for the shot and what then unfolds,
it probably makes more practical sense to use it.

Ok. How about physical infirmities that prevent one from walking. Shooting from the vehicle, unethical?

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by nopride2:
Ok. How about physical infirmities that prevent one from walking. Shooting from the vehicle, unethical?

Dave

Or how about the single dad(me) who takes his 4 year old daughter out hunting because I have no one to watch her. I'm I allowed to make a Goodyear stalk every now and then?

It is a rhetorical question as I have and will continue to do so.

Dead animals is what this game is about. How that happens is of little importance except to the hunter. We only need to place the rules of "ethics" on our sport when it becomes a competition between hunters.

Why is it my business what another hunter does as long as it is legal?

First thing to bear in mind is follow the laws in the country you are hunting in.

After that, do whatever pleases you within the laws. And don't pay any attention to anyone else's opinion.

Mario, I like your idea of the article for an Italian magazine. You have many opinions here on AR and most are great ones.

I would humbly suggest that you focus your article ONLY for hunting in Italy & give some examples. That way your readers (both experienced and new hunters) can relate to the issues and you are likely to get some agreement among them that it is useful and relevant to them.

Mario

I also write for magazines and have published a number of articles.

Something which I find to be lacking in this age is "Journalistic Integrity". In days past journalists and writers held themselves to the highest level of integrity. Ensuring that they merely reported the facts rather than embellish them and put a slant on them.

In the modern era where anything goes and there is very little recourse I find that there is a lot of irresponsible journalism, largely because the profession has become the "public soapbox" of anyone with reasonable language skills and an axe to grind.

Something like the "ethical Debate" is a weighty issue in hunting circles. I would like to suggest that if nothing else you hold off on publishing anything until such time as you have immersed yourself in the subject and spent enough time looking at it from both sides of every coin. This may hurt your publishing deadline. But from what you have posted above I think that you need time to work each of these angles suitably.

Until you have exhaustively looked at all issues relating to the Ethics of hunting I would hold off.

I would also suggest getting hold of Shakari, he has vastly more experience than most and has written many articles and indeed published a lot of work. He also has in the past been the voice of reason when things get nasty here and has shown himself to have the restraint needed to ensure that emotion does not override fact, something which I believe to be critical to the publishing of anything relating to ethics.

Good luck with your writing and I look forward to reading the article.
Kind regards
Ian

Thanks for those kind words Ian.

John Steinbeck (amongst others) wrote that one should only write about what one knows and the problem with ethics and ethical standards is they're different for everyone so whatever you write, a number of people are going to feel insulted and will take issue with it.

As an example, some very experienced and respected hunters have posted here that (in their opinion) "if it's legal it's ethical" but canned lion shooting is legal and I'd bet a pound to a pinch of the brown stuff that most of them wouldn't even consider taking part in such an exercise.

Then you have to consider how much space the editor is willing to give you and whether you can adequately address all the issues in that amount of space and my guess is you couldn't even begin to do justice to all the relevant issues in an entire magazine, let alone in a single article.

Quite honestly, I'd suggest you look for something else to write about because (at the risk of sounding undiplomatic) that particular subject is almost certainly going to land you in a sea of shit and make you look like a fool. (No offense intended)

hahaha seems I inserted a stick in a hornet's nest...
Do not worry guys. The article will be based on humor and will finish with the words: "you must think very well before criticizing"

Having written the odd article or two in my day, I'm interested to see how you can tackle a very divisive subject like hunting ethics in a humorous manner without hunters coming off looking like total idiots. Good luck with the piece and hopefully you take some of the suggestions here to heart and abandon your original notions.

How about this one:

Don't claim to have taken an animal with a bow that you actually took with a rifle.

Against my better judgment, I'm going to put a chip on this table.

By all means, obey the local laws and regulations scrupulously
Be quite sure that you are able to make a clean kill. Probably the primary ethical consideration. (Do your homework - on your rifle, yourself, the quarry, local conditions etc)
If you do take the shot and it doesn't work out, understand that you are accountable for the animal's suffering. The ethical hunter will not rest until he has put the animal out of its suffering, or knows that it has in fact succumbed to its wounds.

1. Don't lie about your hunt.

1: Follow the laws where you are hunting

2: Don't try to impose your ethics onto someone else.

Whether or not an activity is quote/unquote "hunting" has nothing to do with whether or not it's ethical.

Anything that causes the animal undue suffering is unethical.

Anything that makes the hunt more "sporting" but increases the risk of causing the animal undue suffering is unethical.

Anything that threatens the future survivability of the subject species is unethical.

Anything that contributes to or prolongs poverty or other human suffering is unethical (underpaid staff).

The inequitable distribution of hunting revenues to stakeholder communities is unethical. ... ...

... ... and so on ...


There's no such thing as hunting ethics, only ethics.

http://www.byseewah.com/ethical.htm
what about that? (just found in the web)

If you want to belong to their club you obey their rules but the rules of one club hardly set ethics for the world.....I'm sure Google will turn up dozens more such clubs and lists of rules. Is that what you really want to present in your article...a biased look at hunting ethics?

Gentlemen, IMHO, The rules set by the game people for their areas will usually be what works best. In most cases the laws follow the ethics of the country you are hunting. That fact, in no way, limits you from exercising your own ethics as long as they are not illegal where you are hunting.

There are many places where shooting at a watering hole is frowned on by land owners, but in my experience it has nothing to do with ethics, but is because it makes livestock shy of watering there, and so land owners do not allow it. In my state it is legal to hunt over water, with the exception of from a moving boat on navigable waterway, but we don’t do it for the reason in sentence above. Not ethics but respect for the land owner’s wishes or the law. Even though the state sets the rules for hunting it has nothing to do with a land/concession owner setting more rules above the letter of the law on his property or concession.

In Africa everyone uses water, or lack there of, to concentrate game one way or another. The best time to hunt is when the water is getting scarce and water pans are far apart. The use of known pans, at any time, are used to find game on their way to, or from water. Nothing unethical about that!

The only ethics one needs to follow, above the game laws are set by his own conscience. If something in the game laws is legal but you consider it unethical, you are not forced to do it, your call!

We all have thing we do not like to see others do in the field, but as long as they are following the game laws we have no say in it, nor do they have a say in your methods as long as they are legal as well.

It all boils down to one’s conscience and laws where one hunts and how one hunts! Ethics are a personal thing, that is mostly proper if legal, and follows the old rule that reads “When in Rome, do as the Romans do!”

Saeed shoots Cape buffalo at some very long ranges, I like to get in close! How are my buffalo any more ethical than Saeeds? Both are just as dead, no matter the range, and it has nothing to do with ethics, but simply personal choice! Either one would be unethical if only wounded and allowed to escape on a regular basis because of the distance, but Saeed’s buffalo always drop like a rock no matter how far he shoots!

Far more important than so called ETHICS is gun safe handling! Bad gun handling becomes everyone’s business!

.........................................................................