This is one of my columns that I wrote more than 25 years ago.

Last Shot

What's Ethical?

Ethics have been major news lately. In the last few months, both the printed and electronic media have bombarded us with words and pictures of the "Keating 5," a group of senators embroiled in the current savings and loan fiasco. Unfortunately, Arizona's two senate members, Dennis DeConcini and John McCain, comprise two of the key players now being investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee.

A less publicized incident, which some folks point to as a hunter's ethical behavior, recently occurred in the state, too. The man sent $450 in cash to Duane Shroufe, the director of the Arizona Game & Fish Department.
The unsigned letter accompanying the money explained the reason for his unsolicited generosity.

"Early one morning a few days ago, I crouched, watching some deer through my rifle scope. I found one with a small set of forked antlers -- a better rack than on my last deer. I slipped off the safety and fought the adrenaline, panting and trembling as I aimed and squeezed off the shot. The roar was unreal in the morning silence, and volleys of echoes reverberated through the canyon for a long time.

"The deer dropped and slid down the hill out of sight. I marked the spot from nearby landmarks and climbed up to my kill. She had no antlers at all; I had shot a doe.

"I didn't know what to do. Briefly, I considered shooting myself. I suppose the gesture would have been dramatic, but it seemed disproportionate. I hated to waste the meat, but it seemed wrong to benefit from an illegal kill. In the end, I left her for the lions and bears and scavengers, trudged back to camp and went home for the season.

"I vaguely remembered seeing in the regulations the list of fines and thinking that it served the bastards right; now that I'm one of the bastards it would be hypocritical not to pay up. Please accept the enclosed $450; it should square me with the law. The real punishment will be my vision of the dead doe every time I line up a shot from here on."

The letter was certainly poignant, and the hunter's action somewhat laudable, but it still begs a few questions. Obviously, the incident was accidental if he had told the truth in his letter. Was it really an ethical reaction, or was it simply a twinge of conscious? More importantly, did the man do the right thing to start?

I experienced a somewhat similar situation when I lived in Colorado during the mid-1970s. The difference between that one and this hunter's was one of intention, however; I knowingly committed a violation. Now before you get all excited, let me explain.

I had arrived home a day earlier after guiding other hunters on a 7-day hunt. I decided to try and fill my own deer or elk tag the next day -- the last of the season. So I went to an area near my home at Vallecito Lake, about 20 miles from Durango. Less than an hour into my outing, I found a fresh blood trail. My curiosity made me follow it.

A half-hour later, I spooked a cow elk that had bedded beneath some scrub oak. She quickly disappeared over a ridge, but I had enough time to notice her strange gait. A pool of blood covered the ground where she had bedded. I walked in the direction the cow had fled. She had gone down again a short distance away. Right then and there, I decided she was hurt bad. I also realized ending her suffering was the humane course to take. To do it, though, meant breaking the law; that specific area allowed the killing of bull elk only.

I made the choice.

When she stumbled from her bed, I put a bullet into her neck. Someone else had shot her in the left ham, and the bullet had passed into the paunch.

Now the real dilemma of the situation hit. I mulled over my options. Do I leave her lay for the bears and other scavengers to feast on, or do I field dress her and take my chances by trying to get the meat home?

After thinking about it, I finally settled on a third option; I would field dress the elk, go home and report what I had done to Gene Basset, the local warden. I would also ask if we could give the meat to the Bayfield School District, just as he did with fresh road kills.

I had known Basset for a while and served as the chief hunter safety instructor in his district for two years. Yet I knew our friendship would mean little if he felt I was guilty of an intentional violation. I often told others that Basset would write his mother a citation if she violated a game or fish law. I still decided the truth was the best approach.

I called Basset as soon as I walked into the house. When I told him the circumstances, his reply was quick and simple. "I'll load my horses in the morning and pick you up about seven. We'll haul it right to the school."
We did as he suggested the next day, and Basset never asked another question about the incident. Thinking about it now, I get a good feeling and realize I did the right thing, even though it could have proved costly.

So back to the questions I asked about the Arizona hunter.

His options were about the same as I had, and his choice was just as tough. Yet, I believe he made the wrong decision. A truly ethical choice would have meant turning the meat and himself over to the game department. He probably would have received a citation, of course, but from there the man's outcome would have been in the hands of a judge. He could have been found not guilty.

But ethical behavior is a subjective thing. Everyone's might differ to a degree. Still, I would be willing to bet the man would have felt a great deal better years from now when he remembered the incident if he had confessed to his accidental violation and accepted the consequences when it happened. If nothing else, though, he can feel good, knowing his $450 went to the Adobe Wildlife Center for the care of injured animals.

----- 30 -----

Another relevant column that was written 25 years ago.


LAST SHOT

AN ANSWER FOR NANCY

A few weeks ago I invited a new acquaintance and his wife over to my house for dinner. They live in Scottsdale, but we had met Jim and Nancy in Mazatlan last October when my wife and I celebrated our 30th wedding anniversary at the Mexican resort city.

The invitation to my house was a big mistake. I didn't know Nancy's feelings about hunting at the time. Having a few dozen big-game and fish mounts scattered throughout the house, I surely would have preferred meeting at a "neutral" site had I known what was in store.

Nancy's first reaction upon walking in the front door and being greeted by a flying pheasant mount in the entry way was sort of sedate. It changed quickly, though, when she walked into the living room an saw the life-size coyote mount, complete with quail in mouth, sitting on the oak coffee table. I spent the rest of the night defending hunting and why I do it. Nancy never did understand.

Then a few days later, while going through some old photos, I found one of my grandfather and one of my boys with a nice North Kaibab buck. Right then I realized what I had forgot to tell Nancy. Something I wrote a few years ago for another publication on the afternoon my grandfather died says it all. So here it is.

Sometimes, even professional writers labor over putting words on paper. This column embodies one such struggle. Although the words flowed easily, the subject matter made it the most difficult piece I've ever written; painful might describe it better.

At some point in nearly everyone's life, another person ultimately will influence one's behavior --- conduct, morals, principles, ethics, whatever. My life was no different. Early on, my grandfather became that person.

Born in Sicily in 1891, Pop came to New Jersey as a teenager and worked construction jobs for most of his life. He battled through the Depression, saved enough money to build a house and eventually retired in the late 1950s.

Although the hunting opportunities close to home were meager, Pop made the best of them. Each year he hunted for deer in the hardwoods and farm fields of upper New York state, and on Thanksgiving Day custom dictated that he and the other men in the family spend a cool, autumn morning searching for a few rabbits, squirrels or upland birds.

The outings into the brightly-hued woods were only for grown-ups, so I never went until I was 16. Yet, in spite of that, I spent a lot of time with my grandfather; weekend visits and Sunday dinners typified Italian tradition. Because I was the first and only grandson, Pop might have played favorites, but I'm uncertain of that. I do know we were close.

Pop moved to Arizona in 1960, and my wife and I followed a few months later. He was already in his 60s at the time, and I had just turned 20. The hunting opportunities in our new home state excited us both. We immediately began a new relationship. In addition to being grandfather and grandson, we became hunting buddies.

During the time we spent together, Pop taught me things that my urban upbringing precluded. He showed me the fundamentals, such as the proper way to sharpen a knife, pluck a bird and field dress a deer.

I retained it all. But the philosophical things --- matters dealing with the moral or ethical side of hunting --- are what I remember most. Pop always said obey the law and only do what you feel is right. If there's a doubt, don't do it.

To my two son Pop was Papa. When they started hunting, their Papa taught them, as well. Sometimes, they did things contrary to what Pop felt was right. When that happened, he corrected them. His favorite reprimand was short and to the point --- "Shame on you."

Like most youngsters growing up, my sons and daughter often shed tears as a result of a scolding or an insignificant hurt. Pop always chided them. His "Big boys (or girls) don't cry," usually stemmed the flow of tears. And, as I remember, it did the same for me throughout my childhood.

For fifteen years, Pop accompanied me on every hunting trip. We scatter-gunned for fast-flying doves and quail, crawled through the sage for speedy pronghorns, climbed the foothills for the elusive javelina and stalked through the pines for the majestic elk. And yes, we hunted mule deer, too; Pop relished it.

The North Kaibab usually always produced venison for the freezer, so it became Pop's favorite hunting spot. I took him there whenever possible. In the early 1960s, Kaibab deer permits came easy. Later, however, after the drawing system went into effect, our hunting trips to the North Rim dwindled. If we failed to get a permit, Pop showed great disappointment.

Pop rarely was sick, but the years eventually took their toll. A strenuous day in the field often caused him to experience severe leg cramps in the middle of the night. When this happened, I'd get out of bed and rub the baseball-sized knots until the pain subsided. It never discouraged him, though; he endured the hurts rather than miss the thing he cherished most. Despite the fact that his physical ability lessened, his love for hunting persevered.

While I spent my days stalking through the woods, Pop sat in one place for hours, waiting in ambush for a not-so-wary prey to appear. I made a point of ending my day by circling toward his position, hoping to spook something toward him. Sometimes it worked, other times it didn't. I could always count on finding Pop where I had left him, --- usually leaning up against a tree or sitting on a stump, watching and waiting. He marveled at the fact that I covered many miles in a day's hunting.

Pop moved back to New Jersey in 1976, and quit hunting about four years ago. He visited every summer, and if I had killed some game the previous fall, he went home with a box of meat. But in spite of that, his heart remained in Arizona; he longed to return for good. Last July, he got his wish.

His stay was brief. On October 12, 1985, three months after he returned to the place he loved most, my hunting partner made his last stalk.

Without a doubt, he's probably watching me struggle through this column and saying, "Shame on you. Big boys don't cry."

Pop was rarely wrong. He would be this time.



So maybe if Nancy had read this, she would have understood hunting involves a lot more than killing.



----- 30 -----

quote:

Crazy,
What you don't seem to understand is that Mike is not saying that some huge segment of hunting should be outlawed. It is simply that some detestable practices that are carried out by a few "hunters" should be corrected by the larger hunting community. This will make hunting more acceptable to the majority of the non hunting public.

I understand what you are getting at, and I actually do understand what Jines is getting at, but just exactly how do you equate the total number of hunters in Texas alone that have basically grown up hunting white tails from a blind over a timed feeder, as being "A Few Hunters"?

I would like a realistic answer to that!

Would you or Jines care to make any sort of guess as to the actual numbers of hunters in Texas alone that are in blind opening morning of rifle season waiting for Legal Shooting time ands how much $$$$ they put into the economy to be there?

What Non-Hunters question is the whole aspect of Sport Hunting/Killing Animals for a Trophy or just the ability to claim you killed the animal!

Those are the concepts that the majority of Non-Hunters have a problem with, and with many Americans, including non-hunters, White Tailed deer are viewed as pests and most folks have No Problem with their numbers being reduced, and if the meat is used or given to those in need, there Is NO Problem.

What is your thoughts on Long Range hunting? 800 to over 1000 yards, do you or Jines view that as ETHICAL????

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
It has been said at least five dozen times that no one believes that anything hunters do or do not do will change the views of PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting. It has been said at least five dozen times that no one is trying to convince PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting of a damn thing, zip, nada. It has been said at least five dozen times that the fight we are in today is a fight for the vast segment of the population that is largely indifferent to hunting, that are neither strongly opposed to or supportive of hunting. To those folks what we do and how we do it can influence their views of hunting and hunters . . . and it is that group that will determine whether or not hunting is allowed to continue

Mike,
You and I have butted heads in the past on some issues but recently I have found myself agreeing with you on just about every position you take. On the above I could not agree with you more....

Crazy,
What you don't seem to understand is that Mike is not saying that some huge segment of hunting should be outlawed. It is simply that some detestable practices that are carried out by a few "hunters" should be corrected by the larger hunting community. This will make hunting more acceptable to the majority of the non hunting public.

If we defend the practices of the few "bad apples" we make hunting look far worse to the eyes of the general public.

Excellent posts and I'm in your guy's camp and always have been on this subject!

quote:

Excellent posts and I'm in your guy's camp and always have been on this subject!

So you believe that shooting at deer/elk at 800 to 1000 yards is perfectly ethical and you support such practices?

quote:

Originally posted by Navaluk:
For those here who are not Crazy, there is an interesting article in the latest B & C magazine (Spring 2018). "Talking about ethics only divides hunters?" Many thought provoking points, including:

"All you're doing is dividing hunters when hunters should be united" is an interesting position, but one that doesn't hold much water, especially if you understand the reason for having ethics in the first place. In any human activity, ethics are the guiding principles people agree upon as the right and responsible approach."


Fish and Game departments as well as state legislatures are not substantially influenced by hunting ethics.

Exactly. Someone should give a copy to CHC.

quote:

Originally posted by Jason P:
I see no reason to worry about someone who wants to hunt a penned lion, from a timed feeder. I am not interested in it but that does not matter.

What I find ironic is that people actually believe that if the ways of hunting are changed, "if we do it really nicely", and be apologetic to anti idiots, that they will in some way relent. This will never happen and it does not matter if you hunt with a bow and loin cloth, and donate all of your meat to the homeless, THEY HATE HUNTERS!

I do not have to agree with CHC, or half of the other nut job attorneys on this site that tell me about "ethics". I will hunt how I want, legally, and it will not make a difference.

What will make a difference (maybe) if hunters unite and not worry about their methods.

PS: Facebook is stupid!!

Ah, I feel better now

It is not about doing it really nicely for the antis. It is about doing it really respectfully to the animal one is hunting. Respectful includes rules that allow the animal to win.

Crazyhorse: Bone and Crocket was established in 1887, and its model of fair chase saved wildlife in this country after game and fowl populations were decimated due to market hunting.

Here I am beating my head into the wall again.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
It has been said at least five dozen times that no one believes that anything hunters do or do not do will change the views of PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting. It has been said at least five dozen times that no one is trying to convince PETA, HSUS and other groups opposed to hunting of a damn thing, zip, nada. It has been said at least five dozen times that the fight we are in today is a fight for the vast segment of the population that is largely indifferent to hunting, that are neither strongly opposed to or supportive of hunting. To those folks what we do and how we do it can influence their views of hunting and hunters . . . and it is that group that will determine whether or not hunting is allowed to continue

Mike,
You and I have butted heads in the past on some issues but recently I have found myself agreeing with you on just about every position you take. On the above I could not agree with you more....

Crazy,
What you don't seem to understand is that Mike is not saying that some huge segment of hunting should be outlawed. It is simply that some detestable practices that are carried out by a few "hunters" should be corrected by the larger hunting community. This will make hunting more acceptable to the majority of the non hunting public.

If we defend the practices of the few "bad apples" we make hunting look far worse to the eyes of the general public.

Excellent posts and I'm in your guy's camp and always have been on this subject!

Agree as well....

Shooting at a deer/elk at 800 to 10000 yards is like a tree falling in the woods- if no one is there to witness it did it really happen? Probably not, until of course they just have to get on facebook or youtube and bask in their own glory. As hunters we should obviously support other rights to shoot as animals as far as they possibly can, we would certainly be misinformed to question this legal activity. (sarcasm)

CHC you have been playing whack-a-mole this whole topic. You have not engaged in a "discussion." The only constant from you has been, "if you don't agree with me you are wrong- hunters need to stand up for what ever other hunters are doing as long as it is legal." (Paraphrase)

What I have learned from this long topic is that once a person has made up there mind it is hard if not impossible to change it. No matter how much reason and logic one puts forth.

So as hunters we need to do our very best to show hunting in the best light so those who are initially forming opinions about hunting get it right. Most of the time you only have one chance to make a good impression.

So CHC I am proposing a spotted fawn contest. The hunter who bags the fawn with the most spots wins, if there is a tie we will go by the lowest weight. If one gets out early in the season in my neck of the woods there are still a few around. Heck we could use it as a recruiting tool to get people into the field earlier. I look forward to your support supporting this legal hunting opportunity. I would hope hunters would go out of there way to support this - we must support each others legal hunting activities, right? I will invite veterans of course to make it even more legit.

I do enjoy a lively "discussion."

No Slim buttes, I have tried my best to engage in a discussion.

For 25 years I worked at an occupation where I dealt with both Non Hunters and Anti-Hunters on a daily basis.

I engaged them in conversations about hunting daily and learned a lot about how both groups think.

Antis want it all stopped, Period! There is No reasoning/No middle ground with them, they have one single goal in mind and they are going to keep working toward acxhieving that goal no matter how long it takes.

Non Hunters are a different story, many of them do not want to hunt but have no problem accepting or eating game meat if it is offered to them.

But Non-hunters do want to know why hunters want to shoot species that are really nothing more than a "Trophy/Prize"!

Why don't you try to engage in a discussion and explain why or how you do not believe people are shooting deer and elk at the ranges I listed, when there are shows and videos that have been made showing those individuals making those shots.

Just because you or I won't attempt such shots does not mean others won't.

What would your discussion be if I stated that I openly oppose Spring Turkey season and the use of calls should be banned?

How ethical is it to use decoys when hunting ducks? What about scoped rifles for hunting deer is that really ethical?

Each and every hunter can find things wrong with the manner and equipment used by other hunters, If It Does Not Fit Our So-called Ethical Standards!

As the title of the discussion states, Hunters versus Hunters and anyone with any sort of an open mind can clearly see that American hunters are ready to sell each other out over minutiae.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Excellent posts and I'm in your guy's camp and always have been on this subject!

So you believe that shooting at deer/elk at 800 to 1000 yards is perfectly ethical and you support such practices?

***How in the hell did you come up with that after reading my post? You must be just as he said in his earlier post with his stupid or obtuse comment! Hell no, I think shooting anything at 800 to 1000 yards is nothing but shooting and has nothing to do with ethical hunting! These comments by slim buttes are right on the button about you:

CHC you have been playing whack-a-mole this whole topic. You have not engaged in a "discussion." The only constant from you has been, "if you don't agree with me you are wrong- hunters need to stand up for what ever other hunters are doing as long as it is legal." (Paraphrase)

What I have learned from this long topic is that once a person has made up there mind it is hard if not impossible to change it. No matter how much reason and logic one puts forth.

So as hunters we need to do our very best to show hunting in the best light so those who are initially forming opinions about hunting get it right. Most of the time you only have one chance to make a good impression.

You are wrong topgun, I have engaged in a discussion during the whole 4 pages now and my origal premise and the whole point of my OP has been illustrated.

quote:

I am curious as to how many hunters on AR believe that some forms/methods of "Hunting" here in America should be banned/outlawed.

1. Hunters are divided to the point that some of us actually want and would willingly support the outlawing/banning of certain legal and accepted hunting methods.

2. Too many hunters are totally in the dark concerning the attitudes/thinking of non-hunters, BELIEVING that actions attitudes among hunters are viewed the same way by non-hunters. They are not, what non-hunters look at is that we kill stuff. If we are eating the stuff we kill and not emphasizing the killing just for a trophy or bragging rights, non-hunters have fewer problems with that. Another problem non-hunters have issues with concerns the species that are hunted, very few of them have problems with hunters that go after deer or feral hogs and I rarely see or hear anyone complaing about people going after dove/quail/waterfowl or turkey. Yes as with any other group of humans there are or will be a few that complain but from personal experience they are in the minority.

3. Too many hunters believe that thetre is going to be some great Armageddon where each state will hold an election and the issiue will be whether all hunting should be outlawed or just certain types "Cherry Picked" by hunters/non-hunters. That is not going to happen, never will.

The end of hunting is simply going to take place slowly and is going to happen one or two species at a time and hunters are not going to be able to stop it. The concept too many of us do not want to look at is that in the eyes and minds of way too many people in this day in time, has nothing to do with the ethical standards of hunters or how hunters hunt, all they are looking at/thinking about is people are going out and killing animals when there is No Actual NEED for that to be being done.

Those of us that feel or believe that some or certain forms should be banned/outlawed simply because we do not agree with them are only helping the cause of the anti's.

Non hunters are not watching us the way a few too many want to believe, they do not watch what hunting programs are televised, if hunters want to clean up our image, stop posting pictures or videos on FB or if a person simply "Has To", make sure the piocture is respectful of both the game killed and the audience that will be looking at it.

Discussions have to be two sided and Yes, I do not agree that certain forms of hunting should be shut down simply because some or a few hunters that Do Not view them as Ethical and have never participated in that method or had one bad experience.

I still and will always maintain as a group, hunters at this point in time should be more concerned with getting everyone is obeying the established laws and not taking shortcuts or totally disrearding those rules/regulations.

The main thing this discussion has glaringly illustrated is that as a group hunters are their own worst enemies.

quote:

The invitation to my house was a big mistake. I didn't know Nancy's feelings about hunting at the time. Having a few dozen big-game and fish mounts scattered throughout the house, I surely would have preferred meeting at a "neutral" site had I known what was in store. Nancy's first reaction upon walking in the front door and being greeted by a flying pheasant mount in the entry way was sort of sedate. It changed quickly, though, when she walked into the living room an saw the life-size coyote mount, complete with quail in mouth, sitting on the oak coffee table. I spent the rest of the night defending hunting and why I do it. Nancy never did understand

And people ask me why I don't have anti' gun and anti hunting friends.

I well and have helped a lot of people learned how to hunt and shoot.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
You are wrong topgun, I have engaged in a discussion during the whole 4 pages now and my origal premise and the whole point of my OP has been illustrated.


Do you realize that almost every person on this thread has received a "you're wrong" response from you?! Yep, you're the only one right on this entire thread. Just ask you, LOL!

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
You are wrong topgun, I have engaged in a discussion during the whole 4 pages now and my origal premise and the whole point of my OP has been illustrated.


Do you realize that almost every person on this thread has received a "you're wrong" response from you?! Yep, you're the only one right on this entire thread. Just ask you, LOL!

Or, “you are stupid”.
That is not a discussion. Each time a discussion starts, them name calling rolls in and the differing person is “stupid”.

Could have been a good thread, but is now a waste of time. I am out.

Hunting will not be killed by PETA or divisions in our ranks. It will die with a whimper, killed by fat assed kids (now grown men raising theier own fat assed kids)sitting on the sofa playing game boys in simulated battles where they kill dozens but would get sick to their stomachs if you asked them to clean a fish.

quote:

Do you realize that almost every person on this thread has received a "you're wrong" response from you?!

Topgun, maybe you need to do a little research, I went back and looked at EVERY response I made, re-read them ALL and the ONLY person I said
"you're Wrong' too was you, No One else, just you!

Everyone else I simply disagreed with and I still disagree with many of them and as I have repeatedly pointed out, while there are some forms of hunting I disagree with along with some species that I do not think should be hunted alpong with some types of firearms private citizens should not own, as long as any of that is LEGAL, I Will Not Oppose it!

There appear to be quite a few on here that would or will openly support the outlawing of forms/types/methods of hunting that do not meet their high standards!

I think I am pretty safe in stating that if or when those people get their wish, they can kiss the types hunting they approve of Good Bye because anyone that loses the ability to do something that is legal and they enjoy because of the wishes of some elitists
, damn sure will make those folks pay.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Do you realize that almost every person on this thread has received a "you're wrong" response from you?!

Topgun, maybe you need to do a little research, I went back and looked at EVERY response I made, re-read them ALL and the ONLY person I said
"you're Wrong' too was you, No One else, just you!

Everyone else I simply disagreed with and I still disagree with many of them and as I have repeatedly pointed out, while there are some forms of hunting I disagree with along with some species that I do not think should be hunted alpong with some types of firearms private citizens should not own, as long as any of that is LEGAL, I Will Not Oppose it!

There appear to be quite a few on here that would or will openly support the outlawing of forms/types/methods of hunting that do not meet their high standards!

I think I am pretty safe in stating that if or when those people get their wish, they can kiss the types hunting they approve of Good Bye because anyone that loses the ability to do something that is legal and they enjoy because of the wishes of some elitists
, damn sure will make those folks pay.

LOL at that reply and it certainly solidifies our member's remark that you're either stupid or obtuse. I hate to call anyone stupid, but it's getting close with these remarks you are making and that last one was a real dilly! You obviously don't think that disagreeing with people is saying they are wrong, but let me clue you in because there is right and there is wrong. If you don't think they're right and "disagree" with them, then you're saying they are wrong by using another word that essentially means the same thing!

Addon: You're also "wrong" in your assumption that any of us would outlaw forms/types/methods of hunting that don't meet their high standards" from what was said on this thread. What was stated was that we need to curb way out stuff that makes hunting look bad to the non-hunting public. I'm not talking about PETA and other people that outright want to ban ALL hunting or ALL guns. I'm talking about the people that were mentioned by another member that can be swayed by this crap that gets posted on Facebook and Youtube or any other social media that the general non-hunting public has easy access too. An example is a bunch of us on another website were all over a guy that posted two videos of friends of his head shooting two bull elk at ranges of 600+ and 800+ yards and saying that's where they were aiming. The one bull was standing broadside and the first shot the guy took clipped hair high on it's ass. The bull turned and ran straight away and a second shot hit it in the back of the head and high fives were given and comments made about how accurate the shot was, LOL! We jumped all over his ass and told him to quit posting shit like that or to take up knitting!

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

LOL at that reply and it certainly solidifies our member's remark that you're either stupid or obtuse. I hate to call anyone stupid, but it's getting close with these remarks you are making and that last one was a real dilly! You obviously don't think that disagreeing with people is saying they are wrong, but let me clue you in because there is right and wrong and if you don't think they're right then you're saying they are wrong with another word that essentially means the same thing is used!

If ever anyone deserved the "stupid" label, it's CHC.

Very entertaining watching multiple people try to reason with CHC and every time no matter what you try, CHC just says "Timmy".

Just let it go and move on to talk to a different fence post.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

So you believe that shooting at deer/elk at 800 to 1000 yards is perfectly ethical and you support such practices?

CHC, thank you for the civil reply.

I don't know why you brought this up. I will tell you that I'm not much of a rifleman and my rifles are not super accurate but I can make clean kills at 300-400 yards without any problem under the right conditions. Knowing that there are hunters with far more skill and far better equipment than myself I would guess that they can make shots consistently at much longer ranges. Do I like that type of shooting? No. Would I like to see it outlawed. No.

OTOH, do I think that the "hunting" of privately owned/raised animals inside fenced enclosures should be outlawed? Yes I do.(It's not hunting and it makes hunters look bad in the eyes of the general public)

Do I think that the "hunting" of privately owned/raised animals that are released to be shot should be outlawed? Yes I do.(It's not hunting and it makes hunters look bad in the eyes of the general public)

Now a question for you: If timed feeders were outlawed do you believe the hunters who now utilize them would quit hunting? Would Texas see hunting revenue crash?

This discussion reminds me of a couple adages that have been around for a while.

One man's trash is another man's treasure.

One person's perversion is another's normality. (or...where normal sexuality ends and perversion begins)



As I said in an earlier reply, until someone can step up to the slippery slope and make a list of all the "unethical" practices as opposed to those that are just less sporting practices or merely boorish behavior (see croc segment in TROPHY), there will never be mass agreement. Because unlike laws which are objective, the above are all subjective.

Personally, I don't have much experience from hunting in 32 states, seven Canadian provinces, S. Africa, Mexico and New Zealand over the past 60 years.

BUT...I think I have a pretty good idea what is or isn't ethical and will go so far as to say that I've never been guilty of doing something unethical according to hunting ethics in general (see above adages) and my personal ethics.

I also have a good idea what types of hunting are less sporting than others for me personally, and on this count I'm guilty. Like thousands --- no millions -- of others, I've hunted planted birds, over bait, with dogs, in high-fenced areas, over feeders and from a blind. But see, I knew what it was, and I just never had the feeling I had to justify any of it to anyone, much less other "holier than thou" hunters who not only want to dictate how others hunt but what size or age the animals they take MUST be to make the cut. Unless it is detrimental to the species, it's no one else's business if a hunter takes a LEGAL animal.

Right now in AZ, flunkies from the HSUS are gathering signatures to get an initative on the Nov. ballot. It will effectively shut down the killing of mountain lions and bobcats, ala CA's law. And I predict it will become law because the majority of NON-hunters...along with the anti-hunters...will vote in favor when the TV ads blurt out they are killed merely for trophies.

This move has absolutely nothing to do with UNETHICAL hunting practices in the eyes of hunters. Yet the anti-huntng crowd and and lots of non-hunters consider the use of dogs and killing lions for trophies unethical.

As an aside, while on mt. lion hunting, a couple decades back, a practice known as "will-call" lion hunting was taking place here in AZ. The guide would take his dogs, go hunt up a decent lion, tree it and have the dogs hold it at bay. Then the guide would call a paying client to come shoot the cat. Sometimes, it would be an overnight operation. The AZG&FD finally outlawed it, mandating that a hunter must be part of the actual chase.

For me, this is a prime example of an unethical practice, both on the guide's and the hunter's part.

That last thing Tony mentioned about AZ outlawing a guy shooting a treed cat unless he's part of the chase sounds about like Mossback in Utah having his paid people camp out on a big buck or bull and then calling the hunter to come shoot it. That's about how the Spider Bull was killed by Denny big bucks!

I recall a day and age when we were not burdened with laws and gun control, The average day was about the same as today, folks just doing their thing, and as happy as a pig in shit!
I have no dog in this fight, Ive lived it both ways and live in a glass house..I have tried to be ethical my whole life, sometimes Ive failed, sometimes not..I won't judge another person.

If I had trailed hounds horseback then on foot for 8 or 9 hours and some monkey walked up and shot that cat, the law wouldn't save his ass! I would declare it a good law..his rights stop where my nose begins..

quote:

Now a question for you: If timed feeders were outlawed do you believe the hunters who now utilize them would quit hunting? Would Texas see hunting revenue crash?

Straight answer, No BS involved, None of us will live long enough to see that happen!

The hunting of White Tail deer in Texas is an ANNUAL Multi-Million dollar business.

Between lease fees, $$$ spent by hunters traveling to and from their leases during the year, working on their stands/filling feeders/putting out game cameras/changing camera cards/clearing shooting lanes/maintaining their camps/working on the roads going to their stands, etc. etc. etc.

Now, do I like what has happened?

To see how the interest in deer hunting has helped the economies in a lot of small towns/communities all over Texas, yes, I am Thankful for that and the added income ferral hogs have brought in, although some of that is negated by the damage hogs do.

Now, does it bother me that deer hunting nationwide has became a competetive sport, Hell Yes, because I have seen it force people in local areas out of hunting.

I killed my first deer in November of 1970 on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving. I had turned 20 that September and I was offered a chance to sublease for $25.00 on a 160 acre pasture with one other hunter.

That was well before the days of blinds and feeders and very much camoflage, I went out and scouted the place on Tuesday afternoon, went in the next morning and eased around in an area that looked promising and about 8 a.m. I looked down from the ridge I was on and saw something moving.

I actually thought it was a coyote, but when I put the scope on it, I saw antlers. The third time the crosshairs passed across its shoulder on the circle it was making I fired.

I am still proud of that buck, but seeing how peoples attitudes have changed because of the competetiveness, I never show anyone pictures of it, because too many folks would laugh.

But at NO POINT would I/will I want to see ANYONE lose the ability to hunt the animals of their choice in the manner they choose, As Long As It Is Legal.

But this discussion and the one concerning Lion Hunting In Africa has shown quite clearly and sadly that some hunters are more than willing to see other hunters lose their ability to hunt the species of their choice, In Perfectly LEGAL Manners/Methods!

If I am the ONLY hunter that does not see the problem with that type attitude, then I hope and pray that I do not live long enough to see hunting taken away from people over Ethical differences.

quote:

Originally posted by Topgun 30-06:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:


There appear to be quite a few on here that would or will openly support the outlawing of forms/types/methods of hunting that do not meet their high standards!

Addon: You're also "wrong" in your assumption that any of us would outlaw forms/types/methods of hunting that don't meet their high standards" from what was said on this thread. What was stated was that we need to curb way out stuff that makes hunting look bad to the non-hunting public. I'm not talking about PETA and other people that outright want to ban ALL hunting or ALL guns. I'm talking about the people that were mentioned by another member that can be swayed by this crap that gets posted on Facebook and Youtube or any other social media that the general non-hunting public has easy access too. An example is a bunch of us on another website were all over a guy that posted two videos of friends of his head shooting two bull elk at ranges of 600+ and 800+ yards and saying that's where they were aiming. The one bull was standing broadside and the first shot the guy took clipped hair high on it's ass. The bull turned and ran straight away and a second shot hit it in the back of the head and high fives were given and comments made about how accurate the shot was, LOL! We jumped all over his ass and told him to quit posting shit like that or to take up knitting!

CHC, you are simply too dense for civil conversation. As pointed out above, no one has called for anything to be outlawed. No one wants anything outlawed. To the contrary, folks like myself would like for hunters to conduct themselves in such a way so as to prevent (and obviate) any changes in the law. What I would like is for responsible hunters to condemn the crocodile hunter in Trophy and the outfitter and make it known in no uncertain terms that such conduct is unacceptable and reprehensible for any hunter. If that happens enough times with enough people, most folks will learn to conform their conduct to a more appropriate standard of behavior. Just like you repeating that those calling for ethical hunting were off base since they would not convert anti-hunters when no one was arguing that the objective was to convert anti-hunters, instead of listening to what anyone says you just mischaracterize the comments and rant. I have beat my head against your brick wall of a noggin long enough. Go ahead and post whatever rubbish you choose.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Now a question for you: If timed feeders were outlawed do you believe the hunters who now utilize them would quit hunting? Would Texas see hunting revenue crash?

Straight answer, No BS involved, None of us will live long enough to see that happen!

That was a "straight BS" answer. You side-stepped my question. Why?

Randall, I enjoy your posts and I respect your opinions but I am beginning to see why people get so frustrated with you. I ask a simple question and you reply, "None of us will live long enough to see that happen". You really don't seem interested in having a discussion on this topic.


Here is another question for you(why do I waste my time...): assuming it is legal, do you support the "hunting" of privately raised animals that are released for a person to "hunt"? I am specifically referring to animals like Cubby the performing bear that was "hunted" by the guy from the band Montgomery Gentry and the black panther(leopard?) that was released from a cage in the back of a pick-up while the guide and hunter stood by with a pack of hounds at the ready(as seen on 20/20).

Personally I believe that these shenanigans should be condemned by true hunters and the guys who partake in them should be ostracized.

Jines, all anyone has to do is go back thru this discussion and the one about Hunting Lions and several peopel such as Dogcat, openly stated the types of hunting he would like to see outlawed.

Others have made the same basic statement, including you. If you cannot understasnd that, it is because you are blinding yourself to your own comments.

Just answer this one thing HONESTLY, if it came up on the ballot, Would You Vote To End Hunting Deer At Timed Feeders In Texas?

Simple question, only requires a Yes or No answer, No discussion, no explanations, no reasoning, just Yes you would or No you wouldn't!

In fact anyone/everyone that has contributed to this discussion, PLEASE answer that question so this can all be cleared up!

How many of you are willing or capable of simply giving a Yes or No answer. I have my doubts, except for Myself and my answer is NO and that applies to ANY/ALL legally recognised methods/forms/manners of hunting!

I may not agree with someones personal choice or methods, but if the Law says it is Legal and the person has no problem doing it, it is their business, not mine and God did not put me in charge of judging anyone.

After 4 pages, each of you have a choice between two easy answers, let us see how many of you, after making the comments on the subject you have made are willing to actually answer.

Head meet wall. Over and out.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Head meet wall. Over and out.

Yep, me too, as it's useless trying to deal with him!

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Now a question for you: If timed feeders were outlawed do you believe the hunters who now utilize them would quit hunting? Would Texas see hunting revenue crash?

Straight answer, No BS involved, None of us will live long enough to see that happen!

That was a "straight BS" answer. You side-stepped my question. Why?

Randall, I enjoy your posts and I respect your opinions but I am beginning to see why people get so frustrated with you. I ask a simple question and you reply, "None of us will live long enough to see that happen". You really don't seem interested in having a discussion on this topic.


Here is another question for you(why do I waste my time...): assuming it is legal, do you support the "hunting" of privately raised animals that are released for a person to "hunt"? I am specifically referring to animals like Cubby the performing bear that was "hunted" by the guy from the band Montgomery Gentry and the black panther(leopard?) that was released from a cage in the back of a pick-up while the guide and hunter stood by with a pack of hounds at the ready(as seen on 20/20).

Personally I believe that these shenanigans should be condemned by true hunters and the guys who partake in them should be ostracized.

Randall, will you answer this question?

My thing is I do not think time feeders are necessary to kill deer in these high density Texas properties.

What they do appear to do is insure “the” deer becomes habituated to a particular spot so he may be shot in 3-5 day hunt.

If one is strictly shooting pigs over timed feeders ok. Pigs are heavily out of balance if not in need of out right eradication.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
My thing is I do not think time feeders are necessary to kill deer in these high density Texas properties.

What they do appear to do is insure “the” deer becomes habituated to a particular spot so he may be shot in 3-5 day hunt.

If one is strictly shooting pigs over timed feeders ok. Pigs are heavily out of balance if not in need of out right eradication.

Welcome to the slippery slope.

Why is one live critter deserving of more concern (respect?) than another live critter? And why is it anyone's business to define which ones are and are not?

I for one think Randall is very good “ Devil’s advocate “ who makes us take a good look at ethical/nonethical hunting in general and makes us think out of the box by questioning all our comments

Isn’t that what is this all about?

quote:

Straight answer, No BS involved, None of us will live long enough to see that happen!

Jason that is as straight and honestv an answer to your question as can be given.

It will not happen precisely because it is a Multi-Million dollar industry and it brought more hunters into hunting than anything else ever has here in Texas.

quote:

Now a question for you: If timed feeders were outlawed do you believe the hunters who now utilize them would quit hunting? Would Texas see hunting revenue crash?

YES ON BOTH COUNTS!!!!

Now you want to have a discussion, okay I will oblige you, do me the favor of paying attention.

Going back to my comment jus before I quoted your question, I started hunting deer in 1969. In north Texas deer numbers were not all that great and the concept of lease hunting really had not caught on, the limit was one deer/buck only and the season did not open until the Saturday closest to the 15th. of November, does were not on the menu and there were few if any feral hogs in this area.

Leasing land to hunt deer on was taking place in a few iosolated areas in this part of the state, mainly down around Possum Kingdom Lake and some over in Jack county.

Leasing already was fairly well established down in the Texas Hill Country as was stocking exotic hoofstock on some ranches.

Deer really didn't become numerous up in this area of Texas until the mid 1980's, only rarely were hogs seen and that began to change in the late 80's/early 90's.

Leasing for deer really began taking off in the mid to late 80's in this area and thing really took off after Texas Trophy Hunters Association came on the scene and basically, and I damn sure blame them for this, turned deer hunting into a Competitive Sport on EVERY level, from the size of a bucks antlers to the equipment used/"Needed" to accomplish it.

Texas Parks and Wildlife realized the potential and encouraged the growth of the activity and it did not hurt one damn thing that in the period from 1945 to about 2000, white tail deer went from just being residents of about 1/3 of the counties in the state, approximately 150 to being found in ALL 254 counties.

Why did the use of stands and timed feeders become so integral with deer hunting here in Texas, two reasons, Land Owner Liability Issues and Trespassing Issues.

Landowners began realizing early on having one or several hunters that Did Not grow up with any knowledge of still hunting/spot and stalk wandering aroiund their property all keyed up readsy to shoot something was not a good situation on dozens of levels, from lawsuits because some idiot broke his leg climbing a boundary fence to having livestock shot by accident/misidentification.

Trespass issues are a whole other kettle of fish that the majority of land owners work overtime to keep from hppening.

Nearly every small town/rural area, statewide has benefitted in many ways with the increased interest in deer hunting, from increased gas sales at local convenience stores, to increased sales of associated produts, groceries for camp, electricity to the camps, corn/protein/mineral supplements from local feed stores and grocery stores that now stock and sell those items, income thru the lease fees that hunters pay, processing fees to those that have their facilities open just during deer season, meals puchased in local cafes and fast food outlets etc. etc. etc., and not to forget increased alcohol sales at the businesses that deal in that merchandise.

Jason, why do you think I have made the out of states hunts I have made over the years?????

So I could actually get out and hunt, but if I want to get some fresh deer meat, I have no problem what so ever getting in a stand before the feeder goes off, picking out to me the best looking doe of the 3 to 20+ that have came in, shooting her, packing up, driving around to pick her up and going to the house.

Here is one of my major issues with the so-called Higher Plane ethics, what about people with little or no hunting/shooting experience, people whose health, for whatever reason does not allow them the mobility to get out and walk their ass off, older folks that still want to hunt but their age is working on them, I am fastly getting into that boat, and there are other examples such as our Wounded Veterans that are wheel chair bound?

I could go on with plenty of other examples, but Bottom Line is, were it come to pass that hunting deer in Texas from a stand overlooking a timed feeder was outlawed it would devestate a large portion of the Texas population, monetarily wise.

As I stated in my first answer, the one that was not good enough for you, it will not happen in Texas simply because it is Texas and Texans simply on so many levels makes too much money to change things.

Jason that is the best I can discuss it with you or anyone. Private Land Owner Rights are too strong , our TP&W Commission is made up of Governor Appointees that are land owners-businessmen AND sportsmen. All have vested interests at one level or another in the Deer Hunting iondustry in Texas.

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
My thing is I do not think time feeders are necessary to kill deer in these high density Texas properties.

What they do appear to do is insure “the” deer becomes habituated to a particular spot so he may be shot in 3-5 day hunt.

If one is strictly shooting pigs over timed feeders ok. Pigs are heavily out of balance if not in need of out right eradication.

Welcome to the slippery slope.

Why is one live critter deserving of more concern (respect?) than another live critter? And why is it anyone's business to define which ones are and are not?

One is an invasive species that professional wildlife biologists tell us should not be here.

Jines, Topgun, I notice neither of you are mannerly enough to simply answer yes or no to the question, Why is that, cowardness, because if folks look back they can find where you have stated that you would support some forms of hunting being outlawed, if not by those very words by innuendo?

quote:

One is an invasive species that professional wildlife biologists tell us should not be here.

Heym, white tail deer are an invasive species in Texas. I am not asking you to believe me, all I ask is that you take time to read this information from Texas Parks and Wildlife concerning white tail deer.

quote:

Aesthetically and emotionally, the whitetail holds a place of distinction in the hearts and minds of many Texans. The Texas white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus texana, occurs almost statewide. The white-tailed deer is now the most numerous big game animal in Texas and in the United States. Texas has more white-tailed deer than any other state. Population estimates in recent year range from three to four million. An estimated 430,000-500,000 whitetails are harvested by sportsmen in Texas annually – more than any other state. Harvest limits for bucks and antlerless deer vary by county and many counties have antler restrictions.

CHC are you saying whitetail deer are not native to TX?

This is whack-a-mole 2.0.

The fact that there are millions of whitetails in TX is directly related to the million of bushels of corn scattered thought out TX. Just because they are beyond natural carrying capacity, due to artificial feeding, does not make them invasive.