The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 15, 2005, 04:10 AM   #51
Guns Is Are Da Good
Member
 
Join Date: September 14, 2005
Location: Indianpolis, Indiana
Posts: 24
To each his own I guess, as long as you have fun. I do not bait. I do not hunt food plots. I do not hunt with a guide. I do not use camera's. And most of the time, I hunt public land. To me, thats hunting. The stuff these guys do on the video's produces deer for them the likes of which i'll never even see in real life, but to me, thats just not hunting. A doe taken my way to me, is much more satisfieing then a 12 point buck their way.
Guns Is Are Da Good is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 06:33 AM   #52
MicroBalrog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2002
Posts: 1,165
Quote:
he just wants to score points on the antler scale regardless of tradition or hunting ethics
Hunting ethics are a matter of personal choice.

Personally, I oppose the states banning this technique.

Why? Because the purpose of the hunting license/tag system is to ensure only X deer are killed per year, so as to preserve the population. Long as that is ensured, I believe the method of the kill is none of the legislature's businesss.

The NRA is right to be defending those people.
__________________
NFAOA Repeal 922(o)!
MicroBalrog is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 08:12 AM   #53
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Well David, for someone making the accusation of ducking issues you really answered those questions boldly.

I am aware that I don't get to choose how others hunt. I am aware that people choose their own hunting ethics, and that as long as they remain within the bounds of the law, they can do pretty much as they please.

I am also aware that slob hunters are increasing annually, and that the sport of hunting is becoming or has already become, a poor shadow of it's former self.

You may choose to accept that without regret, that is your right. In opposition to the way that you feel, I feel that the deterioration of the sport is most regrettable.

Unfortunately your point of view is the classic prevailing one, and because of that point of view the sport will continue its deterioration; until some day even you may become digusted with some of it's participants.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 10:04 AM   #54
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
Quote:
Unfortunately your point of view is the classic prevailing one, and because of that point of view the sport will continue its deterioration; until some day even you may become digusted with some of it's participants.
You are right. Hopefully one day we will return to the glory days of the buffalo hide hunters or the great railway hunts.
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 10:35 AM   #55
Ben Swenson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2000
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
I am also aware that slob hunters are increasing annually, and that the sport of hunting is becoming or has already become, a poor shadow of it's former self.
I don't buy this for a second, but I bet an old hunter (or someone who wants to be an old hunter) has said the same thing for the past few thousand years. "Why back in my day, we did things the traditional way and chipped our arrowheads out of flint, not dented it out of this newfangled bronze stuff. Every year there are more slob hunters." As fisherman pointed out, hunting's history isn't the romantic ideal where fifty or a hundred years ago everyone did everything ethically and followed your ideas of fair chase and were such cuddly good hunters. There have always been bad hunters and there will always be bad hunters. There have always been the traditionalists (whose opinion on what is traditional varies and will continue to change) and the people who want to try the newfangled gadgets.

You wouldn't be taking your precision rifle into the field if it weren't for some "slob hunter" in the years past "blastin' around with that godawful loud rifle that throws a tiny little pellet when he should be usin' what I'm usin'".

By the way, you keep making a big deal about the number of pictures. As someone who has built several trail-cameras (as I said, I've never used one where I hunt so there's no need to saddle up your high horse) I'd bet that most of those 4600 or however many pictures were taken for the pure pleasure of seeing the deer (and other critters) and showing them off to friends. I don't get the idea this whole setup was just to kill them, but to study them and learn about them and see them when they're alone. Just like when I go hunting it isn't all about slaughtering the first deer I see. I like to watch them, study them and darn it if I had 4600 pictures to look through after a hunt, I'd be pretty happy about it.

Placing trail-cameras isn't just hanging them on every tree you pass, either. You've got to find where the deer are running or sleeping, hang it so that it is facing the right direction, positoin the motion detector. In short, you've got to know an awful lot about them to start out with.
__________________
News, opinion, pictures and more.
(formerly known as Cordex)
Ben Swenson is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 12:19 PM   #56
Trip20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2005
Location: WI
Posts: 2,181
^+1 to the last two posts.
Trip20 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 12:23 PM   #57
Capt Charlie
Staff
 
Join Date: March 24, 2005
Location: Steubenville, OH
Posts: 4,314
Gentlemen, you aren't seeing the forest for the trees. It's not about fancy equipment or techniques. It IS about hunting ETHICS! An ethical hunter can have all the bells and whistles, and still keep the sport clean. Somebody without it? Won't matter what he has; a jerk is a jerk, whether he's in an office building or in a tree stand, and you won't change most of 'em. Things have a way of taking care of themselves though. I gave up (sport) hunting years ago, but here's a parable in fishing: My cousin and I are fishing buddies, but the boat is mine. It's a modern day bass boat that's fast and has all the toys. Good sonar, GPS, Water temp., clarity, and pH sensors, UV lights, underwater TV, you name it. I find the fish and my cousin tries to see how many casts he can get in in a day. He cusses and fusses, and spends the day in hyperdrive. He checks the sonar every few minutes and wants to move if the water pH isn't just right. If he gets skunked, he's a grumpy old man all the way home. I, on the other hand, will make a few casts, maybe catch a few (maybe not, don't really care), then put the rod down, pour myself a cup of joe, play a tape of light classical like Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata, and enjoy the sunset. The point? The next day, cuz is still agitated, has sore muscles, and acts generally drained. Me? I'm relaxed and happy. My spiritual batteries have been recharged. I think that I'll probably outlive cuz, and will still be fishing years after he gives it up. I suspect it's the same with hunters as well.
__________________
TFL Members are ambassadors to the world for firearm owners. What kind of ambassador does your post make you?

I train in earnest, to do the things that I pray in earnest, I'll never have to do.

--Capt. Charlie
Capt Charlie is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 12:35 PM   #58
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
Ah, a bad day on the lake beats a good day in the office every time!

fish'n, not catch'n.

When I take kids fish'n (several times a year) I do everything I can to make them successful. Chum the water, rig live bait,.... When I go fish'n...nut'n fancy. Plastic worm, no electronics.

I wan't them in the sport. To get them in the sport they must catch fish. Later they will calm down and see it has nothing to do with fish (or not, but that doen't concern me.)
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 01:53 PM   #59
DimitriS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2005
Location: Anywhere in Ontario, Canada
Posts: 626
+1 for Charlie.

That is how I am when I go fishing with others. We fish off the shore though so Sonar and stuff we dont use but they work hard the whole time to try and catch fish while I am sitting on my chair (one of thouse chairs that open up) and drinking a cold Dr. Pepper while enjoying my quite time. And maybe I take a couple of naps while my line is in the water

Funnest thing is that I caught my largest fish while I was napping and my line was in the water

Dimitri
DimitriS is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 06:38 PM   #60
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
There have always been bad hunters and there will always be bad hunters.
Armed with heat seeking motion detecting infrared sensors? Besides, when did the fact that there have always been bad...fill in the blank....make it OK for more of the same?

Quote:
By the way, you keep making a big deal about the number of pictures.,,,,I like to watch them, study them and darn it if I had 4600 pictures to look through after a hunt, I'd be pretty happy about it.
He uses cameras to scout deer in his absence, 4,600 per year. To me that is extreme, but so that I have some comparison, how many do you take a year? Any guess as to what is average for hunters who use cameras?

Quote:
You are right. Hopefully one day we will return to the glory days of the buffalo hide hunters or the great railway hunts.
Sarcasm replaces discourse - how cool is that? Hopefully we will return to hunting by fair chase methods, but reality is that we won't - we will continue down this slippery slope until people are saying it is just fine to put transmitters on the deer so that they can be tracked down at will.....

Capt Charlie: Funny that you should mention relaxed fishing. My Brother and I have a planned fishing trip for two weeks from now. We decided that we are going to fish from the bank, with el-cheapo spincast reels, plastic bobbers and minnows. That's it, nothing else. I think we are going to have a great day. If we are lucky we might catch a fish, if we do it will get released. I am looking forward to this fishing trip much more than I have ever looked forward to any other.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 08:11 PM   #61
Ben Swenson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2000
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Armed with heat seeking motion detecting infrared sensors? Besides, when did the fact that there have always been bad...fill in the blank....make it OK for more of the same?
Sorry, I'm not getting the connection here. Are you saying use of technology makes a bad hunter? We have different definitions of bad hunters, I guess. If hunter A uses heat-seeking motion-detecting infrared sensors and they kill one deer cleanly and safely and hunter B doesn't use any "bad" technology and they gut-shoot a deer that gets away and dies six hours later three miles away ... is hunter A the bad hunter? Are they both?
I'd say that the fixation on technology as the defining point of whether you're a "bad" hunter or not is misdirected.

If you need $10,000 worth of high tech to get a deer, you're probably not very talented, but if you kill your deer cleanly and according to the laws of your state, and use the meat, I won't complain a bit.
Quote:
He uses cameras to scout deer in his absence, 4,600 per year. To me that is extreme, but so that I have some comparison, how many do you take a year? Any guess as to what is average for hunters who use cameras?
Maybe a couple rolls. If I had money to burn, I think it would be awesome to take a few thousand pictures a year. More pictures would mean I'd be more likely to get some really good ones. Keep in mind that a camera might take ten pictures of the same deer within a few minutes. Out of those, I might get one or two that are neat enough to show off. If he's got several cameras out there, he might get a few hundred of the same deer in the same day.

I guess my big issue with you is the way you try to make "fair chase" out to be an objective regulation that you define personally. Ain't so. And you don't have "tradition" to back you up, either. "Traditionally" hunters drove herds of bison of cliffs. "Traditionally", as fisherman was so kind to point out, the wealthy would hunt random animals from trains. "Traditionally", deer would be run down by dogs. The development of the concept of fair chase is a new one. A good one, but a new one - and not nearly the hard-and-fast concept that you proclaim it to be.

I don't think Mr. Drury violated any state laws in doing what he did. Indeed, to my knowledge he made clean kills on the number of tags he had lawfully purchased. How he tracked them doesn't matter to me. If he can crouch by his kill and feel good about it - feel honest about it - then that's good enough for me. If for you to feel good about your kill you have to walk blindfolded into unfamiliar woods, that's fine too. If my mentor has to use a bow and pass anything but the biggest bucks, that's great.

Drury didn't manipulate the actions of the deer. They weren't fenced or forced to stay in the area. He observed them and harvested a couple. That he used cameras to do some of the observation is utterly immaterial. It is absolutely equivalent to someone asking another person who is familiar with the land where the deer are most likely to be. He is not a bad hunter because he does things differently than you.
__________________
News, opinion, pictures and more.
(formerly known as Cordex)
Ben Swenson is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 08:20 PM   #62
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
Quote:
Funny that you should mention relaxed fishing. My Brother and I have a planned fishing trip for two weeks from now. We decided that we are going to fish from the bank, with el-cheapo spincast reels, plastic bobbers and minnows.
You're using live bait??? How unethical!! I'd expect a traditionalist such as yourself to carve a plug from balsa.

Quote:
Sarcasm replaces discourse - how cool is that? Hopefully we will return to hunting by fair chase methods, but reality is that we won't - we will continue down this slippery slope until people are saying it is just fine to put transmitters on the deer so that they can be tracked down at will.....
The truth is I admire your hunting style and I would like to emulate it as I become more skilled. I also think you are riding a nose bleed high horse when you suggest everyone behave such as yourself.
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 08:47 PM   #63
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Sorry, I'm not getting the connection here.
What is fair chase hunting? It certainly can not be strictly and narrowly defined, but it can be reasonably well defined. Only a decade ago, two at the most, the only advantage the average hunter had over deer was his own brain, and how far away he could kill from. Correct me if I am wrong about that. The average hunter did not have any advantage over the deer except those two things. Generally the deer retained the advantage over the hunter because of it's superior senses, it's well honed defense mechanisms, and it's superlative knowledge of it's home terrain. Uncommon was the hunter who killed a deer every season.

Then along comes technology, and the hunter is gaining more and more advantages over deer every year. At the pace that technology is advancing, and the uses that technology is being put to for hunting purposes, the deer will someday be at a complete disadvantage to the new age techno-gadget equipped hunter. We are in the early to middle stages of a technology creep that is ruining hunting. We are much like the frog in the slowly heated water.

Should we just sit by and watch as technology takes over hunting? Don't any of those gadgets that I listed early on in this thread at least make you wonder what is going on here?

There is another whole fair chase issue dealing with high fences and feeders that I don't want to go into on this thread. This one is about technology.

Quote:
You're using live bait??? How unethical!! I'd expect a traditionalist such as yourself to carve a plug from balsa.
Live bait, you bet. I haven't used live bait since I was 10 years old - that is really returning to tradition.

Quote:
I also think you are riding a nose bleed high horse when you suggest everyone behave such as yourself
I hate it that I come of as you characterize me - but I don't know how else to try and get my point across. I am shouting as loud as I can at you that hunting is degenerating, technology is becoming TOO GOOD for hunting.

Here is a science fiction hunt for you to consider: I have 100 acres to hunt on. I make a grid of the area and mount thermal-mass-sensor/transmitter on a grid over the entire 100 acres. Say I mount 200 thermal-mass-sensor/transmitters. These things are programmed to pick up on deer, by sensing body heat (they are effective at long distances) and measuring it against the mass of that heat - then when it does "sense" a deer, it transmits a signal to a computer that is back at the deer camp. The computer takes in data from all of the sensors and can plot the location of every deer in that 100 acres, in real time. The computer tracks past position and current position, and can even project where each deer is going as well, if I bought the add on software that has an AI based decision making tree from data base information collected nation wide. When I get up in the morning I check the computer to decide where I will hunt that morning, and using a palm pilot like device, (and a hand held thermal-mass sensor for the final stalk) I can stay in constant touch with the computer to stay current with all the deer.

Far fetched? I hope so, although I suspect the technology is already available. That is one simple scenario.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 09:13 PM   #64
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
You have gotten you point across. I think most people believe what you are saying. I do for sure. I just think you make a poor advocate when you mix personal freedoms in.

If I own the land I should be able to manage the deer population as I see fit; within the boundries of the law, using the tools of my choice.

Is that more like ranching than hunting? Absolutely.

I'll call it that. "Honey, have you seen the rifle, I'm going ranching."

My issue is with personal freedoms, not the method you encourage.
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 09:19 PM   #65
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
If I own the land I should be able to manage the deer population as I see fit; within the boundries of the law, using the tools of my choice.
That leads into that whole high fence thing I don't want to go into.

But, could we not pass hunting regulations that restrict the use of technological aids? Remeber when those electronic fish caller gizmos came on the market a long time ago? They were apparently so effective that they were made illegal very quickly. Why not make electronic ears and infra-red sensors, and automatic cameras and robot decoys illegal too?
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 15, 2005, 09:24 PM   #66
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
You have a problem with all those gadgets for RANCHING?

I thought we finally could meet in the middle.
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 08:04 AM   #67
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
OK, here we go.

If you own land, and you want to raise deer as alternative livestock, then as far as I am concerned the game laws and the game seasons should not apply to what you do on your land, with certain stipulations up front.

First: You hve to high fence your land so that your deer stay on your land, and wild deer do not wander onto your land.

Second: Right after high fencing your land you should call in the State wildlife biologists to make a survey of the deer trapped inside.

Third: You write a check to your State Wildlife management fund of $2,500 for each deer trapped inside your land, to pay the State for the resource that you are now commandeering.

Alternatively you can fence it in, and remove all wild deer to outside your fence; then stock it with deer that you can buy at the San Antonio alternative live stock auction.

After that what you do on your land inside your high fence with the deer that you have purchased is 100% your business, just as it is with cows and horses and goats and pigs and sheep.

But if you are hunting on private property for wild deer that can roam across your land at their will, then I say you should be hunting under the laws of the land, and hopefully under the ethics of fair chase.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 08:56 AM   #68
Trip20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2005
Location: WI
Posts: 2,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by butch50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip20
As someone pointed out, a lot of urbanites are involved in hunting which require them to take off from work, plan an expensive mini-vacation...etc. They want to bag a deer. Period.
That is true and so WRONG! Hunting isn't about bagging a deer every trip. In fact, these same people spend so much money on hunting that they feel that they MUST bag a deer. The instant gratification group sucks. Pure and simple sucks.
See, this is why your gettin the "holier than thou" and "nose-bleed high horse" comments. You think you have the right to tell people like the guy in the above scenerio he should not expect to come home with meat just because due to his lifestyle he's turned to high-tech camo, a tree stand, a trail camera, and the latest bow technology.

Like a pimp giving a swift backhand to a hooker, fisherman66 said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisherman66
Yes, gizmos and gadgets are rediculious at some point. And the more you use the further it takes you from nature and fair chase. Who gets to draw that line? The answer to that question is beautiful: You get to draw the line for you.
*bolding added*
Trip20 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 09:46 AM   #69
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Like a pimp giving a swift backhand to a hooker, fisherman66 said:
So Fisherman66 is a pimp and I am a hooker? This in a discussion about hunting ethics? Lovely, just delightfully lovely.

Quote:
You think you have the right to tell people like the guy in the above scenerio he should not expect to come home with meat just because due to his lifestyle he's turned to high-tech camo, a tree stand, a trail camera, and the latest bow technology.
I can not respond to your comment because it is a non sequitur (non se·qui·tur NOUN: An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.)

Try again, harder this time.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 10:01 AM   #70
Ben Swenson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2000
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Only a decade ago, two at the most, the only advantage the average hunter had over deer was his own brain, and how far away he could kill from. Correct me if I am wrong about that. The average hunter did not have any advantage over the deer except those two things. Generally the deer retained the advantage over the hunter because of it's superior senses, it's well honed defense mechanisms, and it's superlative knowledge of it's home terrain. Uncommon was the hunter who killed a deer every season.
That's an interesting theory.
Perhaps some of the older hunters would like to comment.
Several I've spoken to have told me that human hunters have always used whatever advantages they could ... even ones we might consider unethical today.
In the state of Indiana, it is illegal to hunt over bait (anything you bring to the area for animal consumption). In the past, many hunters itching for an advantage would ignore this regulation. Many still do, for that matter. Some years ago, I went hunting with a friend at a cabin his family owns. Some distant friend of the family had gotten the idea he could hunt there and decided to bring along several friends of his (2 of them police officers, at that). There were about six people there when we drove up to the cabin. Those hunters didn't have a bit of electronic equipment with them except cheap two-way radios. They ended up leaving without problem, but when we started walking away from the cabin we noticed that they had cut up apples and scattered corn all around the back porch. We hunted farther out, but it was obvious that the intent was to sit on the porch and blast a deer when it walked up.

People who want an advantage will find it. If you make it illegal to bait, people will develop (for instance) a DeerTrak5000 electronic sign reader. If you make it illegal to use that electronic tracking system, they'll develop some unbelievably effective scent lure - the SnortMaster Killit binary scent bomb. If you make the scent lures illegal, they'll make a man-portable hunting lodge with all the comforts of home and gun ports and they'll hike it out a ways, sleep in it and be ready to kill deer as soon as they wake up. If you make it illegal to use the HuntSleepKill kit, they'll come up with a DeerStunner hand grenade or a SoooperSniffer electronic scent reader. If you ban that, they'll develop something else.

You said that ten or twenty years ago a hunter had only his own brain. That's not true. A hunter had a powerful rifle, possibly some optics, effective camoflauge and insulated clothing. They had scents and lures and baits and decoys and all manner of little tricks both legal and illegal. Hunters use their brain to seek out other advantages, and as sure as you outlaw one advantage they'll either seek out another legal advantage or resort to more effective illegal advantages.

If someone does decide to use real-time thermal imaging to hunt on their own property, and they take the legal number of allowed deer, that's fine with me. It wouldn't make for a hunt that I would enjoy, but their hunting like that doesn't affect me. I don't think the SoooperSniffer/DeerStunner/HuntSleepKill/SnortMaster/DeerTrak 5000 equipped hunter is getting as much from the hunt as I am (even if he's successful and I'm not) but his enjoyment and connection (call it spiritual if you want) to the hunt is not my business.

And here is the true sticking point for us. I'm not militant about the techniques that other hunters use. I don't suffer by other hunters using technology - they do. It isn't my duty to make sure they have a good hunt, or a hunt they'll tell their kids about, a hunt they'll be proud of. Their problem, not mine. You see "your" sport degenerating because someone else doesn't do things the way you want them to. Is it affecting how you hunt? Is it affecting how your kids hunt? Is it affecting how your grandkids will hunt? Well now, that depends on you, doesn't it? But as long as you are hunting with good methods and whatever your definition of "fair chase" is, and as long as you're bringing up people to hunt like you do - don't worry about it. It isn't your job to make sure everyone hunts "the Butch way".
__________________
News, opinion, pictures and more.
(formerly known as Cordex)
Ben Swenson is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 11:24 AM   #71
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
Several I've spoken to have told me that human hunters have always used whatever advantages they could ... even ones we might consider unethical today.
No doubt of that. Subsitence hunters did what they had to do to survive and commercial hunters killed as much as the possibly could. If I was hunting for survival, I wouldn't be talking about hunting ethics - I would drive the deer over a cliff if I had to.

I want the sport to be based upon a nearly level playing field between the hunter and the deer. With strong ethics. Technology is too good now to be using against deer, it tilts the playing field too much.

For example: At one time spot lighting deer wasn't illegal. It wasn't illegal because there weren't any portable lights good enough for it to have even come to anyones awareness to make it illegal. Then portable lights reached a point of development to where spotlighting deer was not only feasible, but people were doing it. Eventually spotlighting deer was made illegal. That is an example of a technology that came into being, was misused, and was outlawed. I am saying the same thing about a lot of the new technology. A lot of these new technological edges are too much, they ruin the sport, and they should not be used.

Quote:
If you make it illegal to use the HuntSleepKill kit, they'll come up with a DeerStunner hand grenade or a SoooperSniffer electronic scent reader. If you ban that, they'll develop something else.
Agreed, they will, but that is no reason to accept what they are doing either.

Quote:
You said that ten or twenty years ago a hunter had only his own brain. That's not true. A hunter had a powerful rifle, possibly some optics, effective camoflauge and insulated clothing. They had scents and lures and baits and decoys and all manner of little tricks both legal and illegal.
OK I over-generalized, my error. I did say they had their brain, and the ability to kill from distance which means a rifle. Yes, they also had binoculars, and some very crude and rather ineffective scent products compared to what is available today. I am not aware of any decoys being used until recently, and even those decoys have only recently become very lifelike and robotic. The tricks they had came from their brain, and I imagine that it is possible that some of those tricks were illegal - but illegal is illegal, then or now.
Quote:
And here is the true sticking point for us. I'm not militant about the techniques that other hunters use. I don't suffer by other hunters using technology - they do. It isn't my duty to make sure they have a good hunt, or a hunt they'll tell their kids about, a hunt they'll be proud of. Their problem, not mine. You see "your" sport degenerating because someone else doesn't do things the way you want them to. Is it affecting how you hunt? Is it affecting how your kids hunt? Is it affecting how your grandkids will hunt? Well now, that depends on you, doesn't it? But as long as you are hunting with good methods and whatever your definition of "fair chase" is, and as long as you're bringing up people to hunt like you do - don't worry about it. It isn't your job to make sure everyone hunts "the Butch way".
Whose duty was it to protest the use of portable lights to spot light deer with? If you were a hunter when that was becoming a problem, would you have had the same response?
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 11:36 AM   #72
454c
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2002
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 229
Man I should've known better than to click on this thread.I just should've.

I gotta ask,what exactly does an electronic fish call sound like?

And when did hookers become part of hunting?I missed that chapter in the hunting regs.Is this included in the price of the tags?

As far as high tech gizmos,why does anybody need them?We just load up in the jeep and shoot anything that jumps up.Oooops!Sorry Butch.I should've asked if you was sitting down before I typed that one.(J/K)

Back on topic,every hunter has his/her own ethics.
454c is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 11:46 AM   #73
fisherman66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Location: Rhome, TX
Posts: 4,641
Quote:
This in a discussion about hunting ethics?
NO, for you this is a discussion about morals.

For me it is a discussion about ethics.

I agree that hunters OUGHT to act ethically. You pass JUDGEMENT on on how they act.


When you understand the difference between morals and ethics we will be on the same page.
fisherman66 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 11:50 AM   #74
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
The fish call sounded like a worm snoring. IIRC it made a clicking or buzzing kind of sound. From what I heard it worked great on Cottonmouths too!

Quote:
Back on topic,every hunter has his/her own ethics.
Here is a definition for ethics that I will throw out for you to think about:
The standards for behavior expected of and by hunters and commonly followed throughout the sport, whether expressly communicated by hunting laws or not.
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Old September 16, 2005, 12:04 PM   #75
butch50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 1,403
Quote:
When you understand the difference between morals and ethics we will be on the same page.
Well, let's discuss that.

Morals definition: The accepted standards of right and wrong that are usually applied to personal behavior.
http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/site.../glossary.html

Ethics definition: The philosophical study of moral values and rules.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...=define:ethics

As I understand it then, morals are the individual building blocks for personal beliefs of right and wrong, and ethics is a branch of philosophy dedicated to the study of those building blocks and their final assemblies. What's your take on it?
__________________
‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’ ~ Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

‘‘The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.’’ ~ Patrick Henry
butch50 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15687 seconds with 8 queries