[Skunkabilly]

When I took my hunter's safety course, a good portion was on 'makin like an Indi..er...Native American/Alaskan Native' and putting the aminal to use by eating the whole darned thing, etc. etc. etc.

Varmint huntin' (which is why me and my old roommate wanted our licenses in the first place, that and hawg huntin') wasn't mentioned at all.

Do hunters see varmint poppin' as unethical? Pretty much wastin' the animal because it's fun to waste them, and/or need to be wasted?

Reconnoitering the bezel of a Sure-Fire M3 Combatlight (tactically seeking enlightenment)

[Monkeyleg]

People need cows to eat beef. Ranchers often need horses to move the cows/cattle around to get the raw beef to the people that feed the people the beef.

Varmints make holes in the ground that cause cows/cattle/horses to step in them and break their legs. That requires the ranchers to dispose of said injured animals before market. At a loss. Ranchers hate those little hole-diggers.

No different than if you owned a wooden house and found termites in it.

[musher]

Yeah, except the last time I took a 22-250 to a bunch of termites, my neighbors started talking about me behind my back. :eek:

[Jim March]

I want to try hog hunting, but I don't think I'd enjoy killing something I couldn't eat.

I'd do it if I had to, but the operative bit here is "I had to". I once built a non-lethal mousetrap out of an empty nachos back, and set it with a bit of food and water for the resulting "prisoners", who were released to the wild the next day :).

Not condemning others, just saying how my own head is wired.

[Sactown]

Those varmints are vermin. Leave the carcass out there for the hawks. If you didn't shoot them, the rancher would have to poison them, then the birds get to the poisoned animals and kills the birds. Besides, rather than dying a slow death from poison, the varmint will explode....er expire faster, it's actually more humane.

[Skunkabilly]

Jim, are a you a vegetarian?

I wouldn't mind whacking a turkey, I like turkey. I like sushi but hate fishing. Salad's good but don't have the patience to grow lettuce and carrots, and shooting them is just unfair.

I certain as heck wouldn't be eating the varmint, though having a skunk fur boonie hat would be ultra twotonetactical :D

[Jim March]

No. I just don't enjoy killin' for it's own sake. It's a personal thing. For food? Sure. Personally or on my behalf. Although there's a few very high-level critters I'd have a VERY tough time chowin' down on regardless. Chimps, Gorillas, dolphins, etc.

I'd prefer not to eat or hunt carnivores, they tend to be a lot more alert and..."close to us" than herbivores.

I think the line between "human" and "critter" is a bit fuzzy in some places. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong...but I've had animals literally try and lie to me. I've seen them invent gestures to try and ask for a specific human behavior. I've seen an African Gray Parrot carry out what sure as hell appears to be "conversation".

I'm still sorting out where my head is. I don't claim it all makes sense, or that I have "moral superiority".

[twoblink]

Skunk, you are Cantonese! You are suppose to eat EVERYTHING!!

That said, I know a few farmers that do a BBQ about twice a year, and invite the local hunters, to "go wrabbit huntin'" as Elmer Fudd would say... My friend called me one time getting back; he said, total on 4 farmlands, like over 300 rabbit!! ??!!

WOW, considering 24 rabbits eat = to an elephant (so the Discovery channel says) that's a lot of crops being eaten! No wonder the farmers hate Var'mints..

Shoot shoot shoot! Shoot yourself a hat!

[roscoe]

The only real problem I have is with people hunting predators just for fun. Unless you are a sheepherder, you have no real reason to fear a coyote, and running down predator numbers has caused plenty of problems with deer overpopulation. I have noticed that people will come up with for all sorts of justification to kill coyotes, none of them any good.

Prarie dogs? Seems like a waste to me, and I won't kill anything unless I eat it. Shooting an animal just to watch it explode seems a bit self-indulgent to me. Maybe if you were a rancher, you might have justification, to save cattle from broken legs, but few on this forum are.

[SteelyDan]

I'm kinda with Jim on this one. Shooting the varmints would be fun, and I could probably find a way to rationalize it, but it's just something I choose not to do. Now, if they were eating my food, or if there were some other reason, that's a whole different story.

But if somebody else enjoys it, that's fine, it's not my place to tell someone else how to run their life (unless it crosses some moral line that shooting varmints does not). I've got a hunting buddy who went to Australia a few years ago for the Olympics, and took a side trip where he shot something like 290 donkeys. I kid you not. They're apparently a huge nuisance in certain places and it's all legal if you go through the proper channels. Maybe they were mules, I think he said they measured his shooting in m.p.g., which referred to the number of dead mules per gallon container of expended cartridge cases.

I just couldn't do something like that, but the guy is still a friend. But to be perfectly honest, there is a part of me that will always remember his choice.

[fallingblock]

because they have no natural predators and breed very rapidly-they also tend to hang around and 'monopolize' the available water, thus denying stock and native wildlife a drink.

When non-native animals are introduced into a unique and vulnerable ecosystem such as Australia, the devastation is appalling. Rabbits, foxes, cats, pigs, goats, donkeys, camels, sheep, cattle, horses and even cane toads have been severely disrupting the balance of natural Australia.

The destruction of habitat and even the contribution to extinction of native animals by rabbits and foxes here is almost inconceivable to someone from Europe or North America.

While I don't enjoy killing animals 'for fun', there are certainly situations where animals, and lots of them, must be killed to prevent serious damage to the habitat. If the choice is between possibly non-specific poison baits and humans with guns, I'd prefer the latter.

I know guys who can shoot dozens of camels in a day without hesitation; but I'm not one of them. I am, however, glad they are available to do the job, or the very successful camels will eat the vegetation (which hasn't evolved to resist such an effective herbivore) down to nothing.

So, depending on the 'varmint'...why not enjoy a job that has to be done?

[jmbg29]

Yeah, except the last time I took a 22-250 to a bunch of termites, my neighbors started talking about me behind my back.That's cause every idjit knows you're s'pposed to use the 10 gauge! #12 shot ;) :evil:

Maybe if you were a rancher, you might have justification, to save cattle from broken legs, but few on this forum are.So what other activities or items should be banned in accordance with a person's occupation?

[soup nazi]You're not cop! No target practice for you![/soup nazi]

Would that be one?

How about

[soup nazi]You're not soldier! No black rifle for you![/soup nazi]

Would that be one?

Must one own a granary in order to have the "justification" to trap rats? Unless of course one promises to eat the little varmints.:rolleyes: How about mice? Moles?:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I hear that the young mice are tender if one marinates them correctly.:p

[Skunkabilly]

You know. Instead of having animal control do everything in this city can't they just call me and I'll do it for free.

[Jim March]

Steelydan and Fallingblock bring up a good point: predator populations vary based on food supply, breeding less when the parents are hungry.

Herbivores aren't like that! They'll breed right up to the limits of the available food supply and THEN some, with their population rates controllable ONLY by predation or starvation.

So if there's no predators, it can come down to a choice between seeing 'em starve, or shooting 'em. Which puts the varminters or the guy shooting donkeys in a considerably more favorable light.

The reason I want to eventually handgun-hunt wild boar in California:

1) I can eat 'em (as long as they're taken during the right part of the season - flavor varies by food supply :)).

2) They're a non-native pest herbivore with no natural enemies! Native predators are either unavailable in the coastal scrub-brush areas (black bear) or just ain't tough enough to take 'em reliably (cougar!).

3) It's good tactical training - failure to stop one o' these suckers leads to injury or worse :eek:. So you're duplicating "actual combat conditions" as well as is morally possible.

[Porter Rockwell]

Hello, I'm a murderer that wantonly kills prairie dogs, crows, coyotes, rats and the occasional wolf.
Humans are carnivores and bloodletting is our history, I can't make any mental judgement on an animals cuteness before killing it or eating it.
Why are there no mass protests for the lowly Tuna?
This has the making of a VERY informative thread!
I can't help but question a person that plans on killing another human being in self defence that shys from hunting?

[Jim March]

There's a LOT of non-hunters who are 100% ready to defend against human predators.

Ever heard of Clayton Cramer? Great guy, a gun-rights activist, the historian who torpedoed Bell-liar's "Arming America", author of "The Racist Roots of Gun Control", a pile of pro-gun books, etc. He's done more for our rights than 99.999999% of the pro-gun people in America. I'd rank him among the top 20 most effective gun rights activists today, and can make a strong case for him being in the top 10.

Guy has a pet duck in his back yard. Cutest dang thing you've ever seen. Completely tame, waddles right up to you, enjoys being petted and tolerates being picked up.

It's a female duck. He knows because of the eggs :). Which he won't eat for some reason :D.

He's never hunted in his life.

Neither have I. Driven off street thugs at knifepoint, you bet.

I'm not completely useless as a gun rights activist myself...along with a lady name of Nadja Adolf, I took down the Million Mom March national gun control org, and I deal with the California CCW mess as a specialty. Now, I'm saying this because you'd have a very hard time judging my level of pro-gun commitment based on my lack of hunting or relatively pro-critter stance.

Well you could, but you wouldn't be taken seriously...a lot of people here on THR know I'm not blowing smoke.

[fallingblock]

I certainly am aware of and appreciate your contributions to RKBA.
Perhaps Porter Rockwell was thinking of the anti-hunting sort for whom taking of any life for any reason is reprehensible? For one of that belief, self defense would seem to be a problem.

You sure did put a kink in those 'million' mommies:D

I still smile when I recall that saga unfolding:)

[hipower22]

Depends on what you mean by varmints.

Fallingblock put the case pretty well, I thought. In the State of South Australia, the National Parks Service encourages the culling of feral animals so that native species (both flore and fauna) can survive.

The unfortunate part is that large numbers of introduced animals, whose only crime is the fact that they were born, must die to achieve this.

There are said to be 300,000 wild camels in this country and hundreds of thousands of wild donkeys, not to mention all the other species Fallingblock mentioned. But he forgot one other - Ostriches. Even they subsist here not 50 miles from where I live. There was an Ostrich farm there about 1905. It failed and the birds were released, but they are possibly the least destructive of introduced species.

So, yes, I do believe it is necessary to shoot them from time to time and it's ethical if done humanely.

Each to his own.

[Tamara]

Maybe if you were a rancher, you might have justification, to save cattle from broken legs, but few on this forum are.

The problem with that is that most ranchers are too busy doing ranch-type stuff to spend a whole day or two squinting through a scope and thinning out a prairie dog village. They're only too happy for someone else to do it for 'em.

[Bainx]

Varmint shootin sometimes help to balance things out.
I LOVE to sit around our barnyard every so often for a couple of hours and pick-off rats. The rats, if unchecked, will eat more feed than our chickens and peacocks!

Have scoped 22 ready, rat sneaks out of hole, one shot one kill and the hawks chow down. Great fun.

[meathammer]

This thread reminds me of the time my dad found a couple of birds I had popped with my pellet gun when I was younger.

He told me, "Matt, you can shoot any animal you want to, as long as you're going to eat it." He told me this did not apply to critters that were being a nuisance. (I believe prairie dogs fall under this category.) What he was trying to teach me was animals are not just for target practice.

I enjoy hunting. I enjoy eating animals. I also like making a clean kill. No animal deserves to suffer in my opinion. If I can't make a decent shot, I won't take it. If you have ever seen a wounded deer dragging its hind legs behind it you would probably agree with me. I have heard too many "hunting" stories of guys who are bragging about how many holes they made in said creature. Not cool. Besides, it is a waste of meat! I know things can happen beyond our control, but hunters should TRY to be as precise as possible.

I don't want to preach to other hunters, but I'm sure MOST hunters would agree with me.

Those of you that are considering hog hunting, you have got to try it. I went hog hunting for the first time last spring, down in Missouri. I had a great time. First time hunting with a handgun. These suckers will come at you! I used a Ruger Redhawk .44mag. It did the job. I still prefer hunting with a rifle.

Hogs taste a lot better than they look. Trust me. :D

Sorry about the length of this post!

[publius]

So how did you cook the birds, meathammer? ;)

Seriously, great post. Animals are not for target practice, but sometimes good resource stewardship demands varmint plinking. I live and farm in a rural area, and I have to shoot various animals that I don't eat from time to time. Some pests are also yummy. :)

Want to see what a professional prairie dog plinker says about the new 17 HMR round? Click here (http://www.cctrap.com/~varmint/17hmr.htm).

For the aspiring hog hunter, click here (http://www.lewrockwell.com/fontova/fontova19.html).

[TallPine]

Prarie dogs? Seems like a waste to me,

The big waste is how prairie dogs completely devastate range land.

It's not just a "few holes" - they turn grass land into an open pit mine, then move on to destroy yet more ground.

A lot like people, I guess .... :eek:

[Dave P]

Hungry wild hogs ravage Florida lawns

Copyright © 2003 AP Online

PALM CITY, Fla. (February 18, 2003 9:16 p.m. EST) - Palm City has gone hog wild. Hordes of huge, hungry, wild hogs have been running rampant in this town 35 miles north of West Palm Beach, scarring yards as they search for worms and roots and causing thousands of dollars in damage.

The hogs, which can weigh up to 400 pounds, come out in the middle of the night and can wipe out an entire lawn in a few nights.

Len Hoag says the hogs caused about $3,000 in damage in three nights of destruction. She's upset that the county and the state both insist that trapping the havoc-causing swine is not their job.

"When you see the kind of damage those things do to a yard, you wonder what they can do to a young child," Hoag said. "This is a major problem, but nobody wants to deal with it."

Martin County animal control officials say trapping should be left to state wildlife regulators. But the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission said it only responds to calls for nuisance alligators and captive animals that have escaped, such as lions or tigers.

Fish and Wildlife Lt. Chris Sella said homeowners groups can hire private trappers to control the pests.

So, the Martin Downs Homeowners Association hired trappers to remove about 10 hogs from Hoag's neighborhood.

"It's been somewhat alleviated right now," said Hoag. "If we got hundreds of them now, what are we going to have 10 years from now?"

[Harold Mayo]

Ethics?

Why even ask that question? Good, Lord, they're just rodents!!!!!

:banghead:

Call me cold, but I just don't think that the word "ethics" applies when you're talking about varmints (not just rodents but coyotes, beavers, etc.).

Is it ethical to shoot people for sport? Hell, no!

Do animals have rights? Not in my eyes.

Do I hunt varmints? No, not really, but I'll take a shot if I see one somewhere and I have a gun with me...and my dream vacation is me, a few rifles, a lot of ammo, some optics, and a prairie dog town.

[Jack T.]

Concerning hunting coyotes for fun: according to the State of Pennsylvania, 70% of the coyote population would have to be removed annually before there would be any population decline. Other studies say that 75% would have to be removed annually for 50 years before there was any decline. . .

[Art Eatman]

Ever since I got old enough to get past the youthful reflex of "Shoot it! Shoot it!", I've thought about the ethics and morals of most all my outdoor stuff. Huntin' and fishin', together.

The deal about cows and horses stepping in PD holes just doesn't sound real, to me. I've spent too much time ranching in country with burrow-holes from other critters, and we never, ever had a problem.

Prairie dogs eat grass. Lotsa PDs means lotsa grass. That mean a rancher is paying taxes on unproductive land that is unusable for his cows.

Coyotes and I compete for quail. They don't do enough damage to the quail crop that I get all excited against them, but I'll pop one from time to time. If I were in the sheep/goat business, I'd have a different attitude. A goat-raising friend of mine had a 60% kid crop. He went on a varmint-trapping ramage for a year. Next spring, he had a 90% kid crop. That's 300 more marketable goats, at (back then) some $40 each. Left him a little extra after paying his $4,500 a year school taxes.

A high crow population can put serious hurt on a corn crop. So can raccoons.

These beloved wild burros and wild horses that the animal lovers go all goo-goo over are immensely destructive of all their habitat, to the detriment of the native species...

The thing is, there are no cut-and-dried "good" or "bad" judgements which can be made without a fairly thorough understanding of wildlife dynamics and homo sap's needs.

I imagine all these judgements would be real easy if we just got rid of some 275 million people from this country. But, who decides?

:D, Art

[M1911]

You know the old saying about how most predators are more afraid of man than we should be of them? Personally, I believe that's been caused by natural selection. The curious mountain lion who was not afraid of man quickly became someone's rug. Now that there's a lot less hunting of mountain lions (due to less hunters and also to bunny-hugger laws), the mountain lions are less afraid of man. And some of them are deciding that man is prey, resulting in some dead hikers and joggers in CA, CO and other western states.

I love cats too much to hunt mountain lions. But I'm thankful that some people do hunt mountain lions as I'm the beneficiary of their work at keeping the fear of man in the breed.

[jmbg29]

Skunk,

I ended up going off on a Soup Nazi tangent last night, so back to your original question.

As usual, what Art said is right on the money. Some other good things to read would be:

"A Sand County Almanac" Aldo Leupold

"Beyond Fair Chase" Jim Posewitz

"Bloodties - Nature, Culture, and the Hunt" Ted Kerasote


Posewitz' "Beyond Fair Chase" may be hard to find.

You can get it through Falcon Press 1-800-582-2665

I teach the ethics portion of our local Hunter Ed. class. It takes me a week to prepare (just for that part of the class) and I can barely get the point across in the 45 minutes that we are able to alot for it.

Ethics are totally conceptual. Most of the kids we teach are barely teenagers. Not to mention that 99% of them have attended public schools. :barf:

Very difficult stuff.

[Joe Demko]

Let's ignore protection of income, as in Mr. Eatman's example, for a moment and consider those shooters who go varmint hunting strictly for recreation. We have plenty of them here in PA , where the preferred target animal is the groundhog. I've known several people who actually paid to go out west just to shoot prarie dogs. I'm curious about their motivations. What is it that they find enjoyable about killing these animals? As a biologist, I'm not the least sentimental about the animals themselves. It is the shooters that I wonder about. Frankly, I find it creepy that they can take day-long enjoyment in killing for its own sake. I've never bought into a lot of the rationalizations. If you're that concerned about the ecosystem, why aren't you out doing something about kudzu, or japanese beetles, or zebra mussels? Because it isn't fun like bursting a rodent with a shot from a rifle is?

[TallPine]

Golgo-13:

So what caliber do you recommend for japanese beetles?

:D

[Joe Demko]

Are we talking wing-shooting or stalking?

[TallPine]

Probably stalking ...

[Joe Demko]

For wing shooting, I like a NAA ninny-revolver stoked with .22 shotshells. A man who can limit out with this rig is an impressive shot.
For stalking, I prefer the Daisy Red Ryder. The smoothbore forces you to really hone your stalking skills.

[MrAcheson]

Personally I don't believe in killing solely for enjoyment. In my opinion you should have a good reason like Land/Population Management or Protection. I knew people in junior high school who would pop squirrels with a .30-30 just to see them explode.

*shudder*

Not for me, thanks. Not gonna be a Nazi and ban it or something, but I have the freedoms to say *shudder* in this country.

[SaintofKillers]

Nothing in the world like hitting a P dog at 250 meters with a 55gr hollowpoint, probably shot in the neighborhood of a few thousand and that doesnt make a dent in the population. P dog was going to go on the threatened list after they used a poison a few years ago that really wiped them out. I dont believe in predator hunting, had a chance to go on a black bear hunt years ago, had to decline just cant shoot a bear unless its self defense. Same goes for a mountain Lion and such. Just dont believe in it. Will hunt herding animals all day, any and all varmits(coyotes are considered varmits-they killed my damn chickens). :cuss:

[waynzwld]

One of reasons people pop varmints (especially P-dogs) is to have more of a challenge than shooting tacked up, stand-still targets while helping keep nature in balance. When you shoot varmints, you not only have the responsibility of taking the animal humanely, but you have to overcome all of the variables that are associated with shooting in the field. It really tests your skill and the quality of your equipment.

(editited for bad typing)

[coonan357]

Jim you catching mice in a nachos bag is kind of inhumane on the grounds of the amount of sugar present in the cheese , (not joking ) I would recommend regular tortilla cips without flavoring , mice have a very low tolereance for processed sugars , grand father used to kill mice and rats with corn syrup , they would litterly die from diabetes , I used to hunt rats and mice with my pellet gun and .22 ,a rat could consume so much corn or beans from our grain bins and the damage they would cause around the farm is amazing to say the least , they eat anything , we lost a farm building to a rat that decided to eat a 208 volt feed line in one of our out buildings, he short circuited the feed lines and started the fire ( we found the remains hooked into the wires) they would eat thru steel silos to get at the popcorn we grew , they would attack our pigs while they fed , and spread disease ,so killing vermin isn't unjust , also the rats I would kill i would let the hawks or coyotes have , we also go after the coyotes but they stayed away after awhile . in one night I got over 75 rats by the grain bins , needless to say in a month the population was back up again , I got paid a penny a rat , but my ammo was free .

[Frohickey]

There are people that do not hunt (varmint or others) and are okay with other people doing so. And then, there are people that do not hunt, and are NOT okay with other people hunting.

Its this 2nd type of person that is the nascent tyrant. These are the people that try and understand the motivations of other people in order for them to make a judgement if this type of human behavior fits into their idea of how a human should behave. :uhoh:

Okay, the above paragraph is not meant to be inflamatory to some of you that have expressed a disdain for varmint hunting.

As for me, I'm fine with varmint hunting. In fact, I would like to go varminting. Varminting gets you more triggertime than hunting, allows you to practice target shooting at multiple distances, at different shooting conditions, and gets you outdoors, unlike the regimented known distances of some rifle shooting ranges.

Depending on the varmint, you are also helping out the landowner.

Ground squirrels burrow, and during the rainy season their holes are flooded, and turn the ground into mush. Groundhogs are pretty much the same. Also, they make holes which can injure cattle or other livestock.
Crows can eat farmers crops, though hunting these are regulated by an international treaty (migratory bird treaty with Mexico).
Coyotes can kill livestock. I've personally seen a downed cow that recently gave birth to a calf. The calf was about 10 feet away, with the rump portion eaten away by coyotes. Thats at least $3000 for the rancher. Not to mention, coyotes hurt quail populations too.

In doing varmint hunting, I understand that that even though varminting can be done year-round, that I, personally, would not do it year-round. I want the varmints that I hunt to be around the next year, the year after that, and the year after that. That means giving the varmints a period of rest. For coyotes, that is the time when the bitches are rearing their newborn pups.

As far as leaving the dead varmints where they lay, it depends on the varmint. A coyote's pelt can be harvested and sold. A tree squirrel can be eaten, so can crows and probably other varmints, but even if I do not use it, mother Nature will use it. Old toothless coyotes have to eat too. :neener:

Others have already said how varmint populations can be controlled without hunting. Its usually done with poison, that turns the varmint's inside into blue mush. The varmint dies of a bad stomachache, and hawks and other birds of prey eat these varmints, and themselves die too. Poison does not species-discriminate. Varmint hunters on the other hand... we are species-racists! ;)

[Freedom in theSkies]

We did a similar one on TFL awile back...It was pretty good...

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=110083 (http://)

[sm]

Art and others make good points. I do assist with some predator/nuisance control on some farms. I also use this opportunity to sharpen skills and have some fun. Handguns-primarily a 1911- used to rid a pack of rabid dogs and racoons. Educational insofar as platforms, caliber, shot placement...etc. Something about a 80# rabid dog running straight at you...a different take on the Tueller drill I'll say.

[pax]

Herbivores aren't like that! They'll breed right up to the limits of the available food supply and THEN some, with their population rates controllable ONLY by predation or starvation.

So if there's no predators, it can come down to a choice between seeing 'em starve, or shooting 'em. Which puts the varminters or the guy shooting donkeys in a considerably more favorable light.
Jim, I think you meant to say that if there are no non-human predators ...

Human beings are predators, you know? It's built right into the system. That's why so many people just flat-out enjoy hunting -- even if they have no intention of eating the prey and no conceivable use for the bodies.

My kitty cats enjoy stalking a piece of string they have no intention of eating, too -- and all of them have been known to stalk and kill mice that they never intended to eat. Sometimes they leave the bodies on the back porch as a love-gift just for me (How sweet... :uhoh: ) That's the sort of thing that predators do and there's no shame in it.

As for the ethics of hunting, I know people who:
Enjoy hunting for food, but think trapping for fur is abominable.

Never kill anything they can't eat. Well, except for ants and bugs and flies and mice and ... hmmm. Amend that. Never kill anything with a gun that they can't eat. Some of these people are vegetarians but most of them are just squeamish.

Shoot everything that's legal and in-season, and don't worry too much about wasting the extra meat, either. Some of these would even kill a deer and leave the carcass in the woods, taking only the antlers if they are trophy size (though one of them has since agreed to drag it out and give it to me, if it happens again).

Kill what they need, and never worry about what's in-season or legal. These folks eat everything they kill and are "too broke" to buy tags like more conscientious folks.

Kill only things that someone will eat, and give the spare meat to the homeless shelters and food banks (who are mostly forced, because of gov't regulations, to throw the stuff away anyhow).

Or with varmints, kill only things that are causing someone a specific problem -- eg, won't kill a coyote just because they spotted one, but will kill a coyote if the farmer next door asks them to do so.

Kill only things that they are either going to eat, or varmints which are causing some specific problem (e.g. killing the coyotes which are killing their livestock, or the crows which are destroying their corn crop, or the bunny rabbits which killed their garden).

Heck, I even know a complete vegetarian who fills deer tags every year -- to feed family and friends.

I don't have a problem with any of these people, except maybe the poachers. The only problem I have with them is that it makes the rest of us look bad (or would, if they got caught). But they hunt on their own land and they feed their family that way; I'd rather see them do that, than to feed their kids on our tax dollars.

pax

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will go out and buy expensive fishing equipment, stupid looking clothes, a sports utility vehicle, travel 1,000 miles to the "hottest" fishing hole, and stand waist deep in cold water just so he can outsmart a fish. (Average cost per fish: $395.68) -- John Grater

[Larry Ashcraft]

Never thought much about the ethics. I shoot (at) every coyote within range. I have also seen them pull out and kill a calf when the cow was down and hip-locked. I have seen them kill an old dog in his doghouse. I have lost countless cats to them.

Some people tell that it is just the coyote's nature. Well, it is MY nature to shoot them with a 25-06 :D

Prairie dogs cause a lot of problems. Cows usually won't step in the holes, but a horse will. What grass they don't eat, they bury with their mounds. Shooting isn't the best way to get rid of them, but its the most fun :D . Also, it costs the rancher nothing to allow hunters to kill them.

Pax: Some of these would even kill a deer and leave the carcass in the woods, taking only the antlers if they are trophy size

In Colorado, that's a felony. It would cost them their rifle and vehicle, and their right to hunt for at least 5 years.

[bogie]

Had a groundhog dig out under the corner of a barn. A $35,000 barn. I don't like groundhogs.

Don't like possums either. They eat chickens, ducks, etc..

Wouldn't eat either of 'em.

I figure that if I can hit a sage rat at 3-400 yards, that's giving 'em a sporting chance, and creating a bit of owl/ferret food without makin' those critters have to work for it.

[Jim March]

Pax said:

>> Jim, I think you meant to say that if there are no non-human predators ...

Human beings are predators, you know? It's built right into the system. That's why so many people just flat-out enjoy hunting -- even if they have no intention of eating the prey and no conceivable use for the bodies. <<

I meant *predators* when I said predators, and I see no meaningful distinction whatsoever in the species of said predators...including us "nekkid apes" :).

That said, the guy shooting burros is NOT acting as a "predator" in the same sense as the guy shooting deer for the table. I'm no expert, but I wouldn't think burro is anybody's idea of "fine dining". Ditto the guy shooting coyote, or prairie dog...

Those guys doing "pest control", which may indeed be necessary, are doing something other than "predation".

----------

On poaching:

In many areas, animal predators are depleted and the only thing controlling deer population is starvation and auto collisions :eek:. There's still a "deer tag" and other permit system mainly to put money into government coffers. If a guy is broke, shooting deer for food and he *knows* for certain there's a ton of deer out there, I have no moral complaint. The very fact that it's illegal means he'll shoot well away from populated areas and will if anything be safer to others as a result.

In California, boar "tags" are dirt cheap...the only reason there's "tags" at all is so they can force somebody through an official hunter's safety program. If someone IS safe and has been well-trained already..."poaching" seems like too strong a term for what's going on.

Now, if the critters are somewhat rare and hunting them is carefully controlled and expensive with the money making sure that the habitat can be maintained, poaching is morally reprehensible. Esp. if the goal is a bear's gall bladder or a Rhino horn for massive profit :rolleyes:.

[Smoke]

Coyotes:

In my county they are prolific but not a large problem to me They are a problem to others. Sheep and goat producers are particularly troubled by predation of flocks. Thats why we have a government trapper employed here. The varmint hunters almost have free rein to go hunt where ever they want if they'll just ask. I withhold judgement on those that help others with predator control, I don't ask their motives or ethics. (Quail population is down here too Art, Coyotes are only part of the problem)

Prairie Dogs:

Here again they are not much of a problem. Local "drive thru" wildlife park imported and established a colony. They leaked out. 2 were sighted on my land, they were immediately killed. I go out to west Texas regularly to shoot prairie dogs and have seen first hand the destruction they do. I love to shoot praire dogs, its fun. I don't even consider ethics when I gleefully watch them die. I don't think that makes me a bad person.

Feral Hogs:

Tear up fences, crops, rangeland. Will kill calves, kids, and lambs if they can them in the birthing process. I HATE hogs. I shoot them all on sight. I bear no remorse for killing them. I take pride in their destruction. I will not fell guilty for being at the top of the food chain, and dispatching varmints which causes me financial loss. I tried to eat one....I won't make that mistake again. I used to leavve them laying where they fell until I realized I was feeding the others. Now carcasses are buried.

Turtles:

We addressed that in another thread......http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8945&perpage=25&highlight=turtle&pagenumber=1

Ethics? I don't think the word should really come up when were talking Varmint hunting. I'm all for clean kills and think you shouldn't take iffy shots for fear of a wounded animal suffering needlessly. But if you have a good shot; take it and don't think twice.

Another aspect from a ranching point of view is that some people will pay the rancher to help with the ranchers predator problem. Its like the Orkin man paying you to spray your home. (Or South American Dove hunts...pick your own analogy) Ranchers can use all the income they can get.

[standingbear]

groundhogs will eat beans and often destroy several acres per summer.they burrow under farm buildings,destroying the foundations.ive had farmers calling me up mid july offering me 5 bucks a groundhog to just thin them out some,sometimes more.groundhogs do alot of damage to farm machinery too.they get into the field tiles and cause them to collapse,creating sinkholes.ive heard of some people who eat these rodents and claim that they are good as long as you get a young one.not for me.ive even heard of some folks who try to make "pets" out of them-until they turn on them and bite.worth a rabies shot and several stitches.me,i just shoot em and leave them for the scavengers.

[Shalako]

My name is Tim and I have shot things.

[Everyone: Hi Tim!]

I am here today to admit that I used to hunt lizzards with my pellet gun as a little kid and I did not eat them. This type of hunting/shooting did make me a pretty good shot though. I currently hunt rabbits every year and as many other upland game species I can. I eat all of those. Every year I also try to hunt deer. I never get one. Therefore, I manage to shoot one or two ground squirrels just because. I do not eat those. I am a little unsure that my nerve will hold when the time comes I get a good shot on a large mammal. Therefore I blast a few small mammals to duplicate what I assume would be the circumstances before me when it comes time to dispatch a large living breathing creature that tastes really good.

[Everyone: Ohh! ]

Its odd that I have no qualms about blasting a rabbit for the pot or limiting out on dove, but shooting those ground squirrels leaves me a little creepy. I need to get over that if I ever expect to shoot a forkhorn or some other splendid creature.

[roscoe]

I don't buy this routine about how ethics does not apply to varmint hunting. Ethics applies to everything. If you can justify varmint hunting on ethical grounds, as a rancher might, so be it. But to me it is the intent that matters. If you are blasting prarie dogs just because you like to see them explode, that, to me, is unethical. They are, after all, a native species, and if there is no livestock to save from broken legs in the area, then there really is no justification other than personal pleasure.

And as to the my being a nascent tyrant, well, I am not trying to stop anyone from shooting varmints. But I reserve the right to make judgements about it.

My feeling is, if you kill something, you should have a good reason to do it.

[Frohickey]

What if I like shooting at prarie dogs in order to sharpen my range estimation and rifle shooting skills? Would that pass your 'ethical' test?

What's that good book quote about 'judging'?

[QKRTHNU]

I could shoot Rats without thinking twice. Squirrels are too cute.

Crows probally but no other birds that I can think of.

I like dogs & wolves too much to shoot coyotes.

Raccoons piss me off when they tip my trash cans over and spread garbage all over my driveway, but I don't think that I could shoot one. Just trap & release.

Possoms are mean, ugly and look like giant rats. I could shoot one no problem.

Rabbits are too cute to just kill for no reason. They're Tasty though so as long as I was going to eat it there's no problem.

[jmbg29]

Hi Tim!

Pax,

If this person(s)Shoot everything that's legal and in-season, and don't worry too much about wasting the extra meat, either. Some of these would even kill a deer and leave the carcass in the woods, taking only the antlers if they are trophy size (though one of them has since agreed to drag it out and give it to me, if it happens again). is in Wa St., you might tell them

RCW 77.15.170
Waste of fish and wildlife -- Penalty.
(1) A person is guilty of waste of fish and wildlife in the second degree if:
(a) The person kills, takes, or possesses fish, shellfish, or wildlife and the value of the fish, shellfish, or wildlife is greater than twenty dollars but less than two hundred fifty dollars; and

(b) The person recklessly allows such fish, shellfish, or wildlife to be wasted.

(2) A person is guilty of waste of fish and wildlife in the first degree if:

(a) The person kills, takes, or possesses fish, shellfish, or wildlife having a value of two hundred fifty dollars or more or wildlife classified as big game; and

(b) The person recklessly allows such fish, shellfish, or wildlife to be wasted.

(3)(a) Waste of fish and wildlife in the second degree is a misdemeanor.

(b) Waste of fish and wildlife in the first degree is a gross misdemeanor. Upon conviction, the department shall revoke any license or tag used in the crime and shall order suspension of the person's privileges to engage in the activity in which the person committed waste of fish and wildlife in the first degree for a period of one year.

(4) It is prima facie evidence of waste if a processor purchases or engages a quantity of food fish, shellfish, or game fish that cannot be processed within sixty hours after the food fish, game fish, or shellfish are taken from the water, unless the food fish, game fish, or shellfish are preserved in good marketable condition. In case they didn't know.:rolleyes:

As for these folksKill what they need, and never worry about what's in-season or legal. These folks eat everything they kill and are "too broke" to buy tags like more conscientious folks.there is an old joke (parable if you will) that runs along these lines.

A game warden stops a logger that he knows to be on the down and out side. The warden gives the big stack of cord wood a sideways glance as he walks up to the truck to say a few words to the driver. He notices that the guy has his two rather scrawny kids in the truck with him. The logger says something like "What'd ya stop me for?" And the warden says "I just wanted to tell you to hurry home with your kids before that woodpile bleeds to death."

Situational ethics.

If I catch the first person (call him "rack" guy), I'll do everything I can as a volunteer for WA St. dept. of Fish and Wildlife to see him convicted.

The "too broke" folks probably wouldn't have too much to worry about. More than once in my youth, a deer or pheasant helped our food money stretch a bit further.

[Jim March]

Something to ponder:

My "animal ethics" are based on the idea that preserving entire ecosystems is the highest priority in conservation, followed by species, followed by individual critters. If keeping an ecosystem in balance means some critters die, cool.

I also believe these goals can be accomplished under the free market versus using gov't force. African game preserves which pay for themselves with high-bux hunts, or "wetlands" in the US paid for by duck blind rentals are good examples.

[fallingblock]

That's about where I am on the issue as well:)

As hipower22 mentioned earlier, South Australia actually established a working agreement with the Sporting Shooters to keep the feral goat population at a manageable level in the Flinders Ranges. The hunters get to hunt and the state gets the goats culled without the taxpayers hiring 'professionals'. The money saved can be used on other habitat protection programs.
Of course there are the anti-hunting lobbies who, despite the incontrovertible evidence that the goats are damaging the habitat, demand that 'professional' cullers be used because no one should 'enjoy' killing the goats:rolleyes:

Sometimes reason just struggles to prevail:(

[Bruce H]

Ground hogs are really decent eating, Beaver are very good IF done properly. Muskrat isn't bad but the prep is very important. Possum lists with rat as a last resort. Seven or eight coyotes running together in a pack are just a few too many for a small area. Prairie dogs evolved for the process of marksmanship. Everything has a purpose, the real question is what happens when the human race reaches critical population levels? We don't have dark ages plagues and epidemics anymore to remove large parts of the population.

[Art Eatman]

Luv Drift.

Hunters can only hunt if there is a surplus population in the species of choice. We are thus forced to work to preserve habitat and control predation and disease. The only direct source of money for the maintenance of wildlife species are the self-imposed taxes and the donations from hunters. In general, benefits to game species accrue as well to non-game species--since they share habitat.

"Non-consumptive" users of wildlife--birders, etc.--can be thrilled at the sight of one of the last members of an endangered species. They can take a photo and then make no further effort on behalf of the species. Many non-hunters won't even buy a hunting license; it's one of the few ways to get money to wildlife agencies.

I cannot help but compare the morals and ethics of hunters and non- or anti-hunters--to the detriment of the latter.

One does not have to hunt, shoot or kill in order to support organizations such as Ducks Unlimited and the host of other groups which work to enhance wildlife populations.

Art

[Frohickey]

How about when Henry Coe state park was being damaged by the wild hogs. Instead of opening up the park for some hunts, they are mulling over hiring a professional hunter. I would pay to be allowed to hunt in Henry Coe.

As far as humans and no more plagues epidemics. All they have to do is stop selling beer and wine. That should be good for at least a 50% population dip. :D

[NewShooter78]

Art:
I was actually thinking of buying a hunting license this year just for the reason of giving some money to wildlife management. I fish, but throw back everything unless I have unfourtunately hooked it too deeply or in the gills. Then I find a friend who will eat it. Licensing is one way to get money to the state gov, but I don't think that there is enough of it to go around.

I have never been hunting, but I am not against it. I am a bit torn on the idea of varminting though. I know there are plenty of good reasons to do it, and I know there are plenty of people who do it just for fun. I guess I might feel differently if I had ever been hunting though.

[Poodleshooter]

If it's legal to kill, and I dislike it's presence,like the taste of its meat, or find that it damages my property, I will kill an animal. I need little provocation and have very little compunction against it, as I feel that animals are in no way morally similar to humans. There is no ethical comparison. Killing a wild dog, dingo, ground squirrel etc is, in my mind, no different from chopping down a tree, digging up carrots and potatoes or clearing brush.

[TallPine]

YOU CARROT KILLER !

Vegetables have rights too, you know :D

[DaveB]

I went back to the original post:

Do hunters see varmint poppin' as unethical? Pretty much wastin' the animal because it's fun to waste them, and/or need to be wasted?

I believe that killing animals for 'fun' is the thing that may eventually make it possible for the anti-hunting types to finally get their way - that is to make hunting illegal.

I suspect most people find 'wasting animals for fun' to be as repugnant as I do.

I did that sort of shooting when I was a child. I grew up.

db

[Pheonix]

Yes, never kill unless you are going to eat it. That goes for rats, mosquitos, flies, mice, spiders and every other critter that even gun grabbers kill just because they are there.:rolleyes:

[Shalako]

Is there such thing as Ethical Relativism?

______________________________________
A boy is a rat is a mosquito is a carrot.

[Art Eatman]

NewShooter78, there are really only two ways to maintain the health of some species: Either go out and buy a tract of land and work with wildlife biologists for habitat improvement; or, get involved with any of the numerous groups which do exactly that sort of thing.

For instance, Ducks Unlimited has spent over $100 million--private-sector money, mind you--to buy land in Canada and the northern U.S. for the sole purpose of providing nesting habitat for ducks and geese. Farmers and Agricultural Agencies no longer can drain pothole country to create more farmland; it now "belongs to the ducks".

For all of Ted Turner's politics, he's doing habitat improvement on his lands in New Mexico and in Montana. Re-introducing native grasses, stopping erosion..."Our" public lands get no such investment in the future.

DaveB and Shalako: Say a farmer really wants to reduce the population of prairie dogs from his alfalfa field, so he can make enough profit to pay his ad valorem taxes, feed his family, all that stuff that a farmer must do to stay out of a city and off welfare. Say I go out there to shoot. Let's stipulate I don't care about that farmer's problems, I just want to KILL!

So: Should I be denied my blood-lust, but a person who's full of sympathy for both the farmer and the PD be allowed to shoot? Is there some higher moral value to hiring an "Official Person" to do such shooting? If that OP enjoys the work, should he be replaced?

Is it really worth worrying about?

:D, Art

[TallPine]

Of course, we all know that the varmits that most need poppin' aren't out in the fields, woods, and ranges ...

:neener:

[Shalako]

What got me to thinking was Pheonix's post about people openly squashing spiders and rats and bugs and that's OK. So what if some guy has as much or more disdain for Pasture Poodles? Shouldn't shooting them be as much or more OK than squashing bugs in that guy's mind? That's why I asked about Ethical Relativism. It is all relative to your own personal preferences or dislikes.

It is also odd how the Endangered Species Act applies to all creatures except the nuisance ones that no one likes. Like ticks. Who decides whats a nuisance and what is cuddly? If there were football sized ticks that popped up out of holes in the pasture you couldn't give me enough ammo to pop them all day and into the night.

[cratz2]

I think varmints are, by definition, not desirable to have around. What good do mangy coyotes serve? What bad can come from reducing the crow population? Do orchard owners like raccoons?

Nasty, nasty things. Kill every one of 'em you see. ;)

[publius]

Do orchard owners like raccoons?


No, we don't, but not for the reason you might think. Yes, coons will try to eat some of my fruit, but I have dogs to handle that problem. The dogs are also the problem I have with coons. My dogs kill coons, but this has been known to cost me upwards of $200 in vet bills. Usually, when I shoot a coon, it's because my dogs are trying to kill it, or they have it treed and will bark at it all night. Same for possums and armadillos. I don't bother hunting for the nocturnal pests, but if my dogs find one, I end it.

The only ones I grab a gun and go out intending to shoot are squirrels. A local hawk has caught on to my activity, and eats them.

[Art Eatman]

Well, I don't reckon as how I've seen all that many coyotes who were mangy. They've more often been in pretty good shape.

Coyotes, snakes and raptors control the population of field mice, which is good for grain farmers...

And coyotes sing real purty, too.

My uncle had a big old crazy red Doberman who had his own unique way of dealing with raccoons: He just ran up and grabbed the whole head in his mouth. Gave a whole new meaning to "crunch time".

:), Art

[Uncle Ethan]

Art, that must have been one cyborg of a red Dobie- I've seen an old Boar 'Coon tear up three hounds when they cornered him. He wiped the ground with them so good nobody shot him- we all admired that kind of tough. He looked like he was deciding whether to give us a lesson, too.:D

[CAP]

Skunk, hate fishing? You gotta be kidding.
The only thing better than being in the field or woods is being on the WATER.
Gosh I love the sound of an outboard in the morning.
Almost as much as the smell of powder burning.

[cratz2]

Art: Up around these parts, most every one I've seen and certainly everyone I've ever taken has been pretty nasty looking. I'd love to take one that could be mounted but I've yet to take one. One friend (the one that hunts with the 357 Winchester) takes care of a golf course and he sees them in nice condition all the time.

Publius: My wife's fathe has a mostly apple orchard. It's fenced off to keep deer out but the racoon damage is considerable. I kill everyone I see (which isn't really that many these days since I rarely get down there) and he traps them. There are so many of them down there it's unbelievable. At dawn, you can look outside the cabin and there are just oodles of them. We used to catch bluegills, throw them in this certain area then go up in one of the deerstands and pick off the racoons eating the fish.

[tyme]

(jim march) I think the line between "human" and "critter" is a bit fuzzy in some places. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong...but I've had animals literally try and lie to me. I've seen them invent gestures to try and ask for a specific human behavior. I've seen an African Gray Parrot carry out what sure as hell appears to be "conversation".I don't think there's a line. People make lines as a society to let them feel good, morally, about eating animals. Animals clearly have reasoning ability, and can clearly communicate. They might not be able to communicate as accurately due to genetic differences allowing us to speak and to form wider varieties of sounds. They might not have had the opportunity to evolve in language to the point where they can discuss philosophy or mathematics, but does that lower their status? I don't think so. Has discussion of philosophy lead to any breakthroughs in human existence? We just happen to be in possession of genes allowing us to develop our intelligence to a degree that varmints and other animals do not. We're legally protected from each other. They are not legally protected from us. We have the ball, the bat, and most of the gloves. It's our ball game except for the occassional animal that gets upset, "antisocial," or hungry, and kills one of us. It's amusing that when an animal kills a human it's considered a moron and usually put to death, but humans killing most animals is usually okay. As if the odd animal who kills a human has any more of a social bond with us than we do with them.
(golgo-13) Frankly, I find it creepy that they can take day-long enjoyment in killing for its own sake. I've never bought into a lot of the rationalizations. If you're that concerned about the ecosystem, why aren't you out doing something about kudzu, or japanese beetles, or zebra mussels? Because it isn't fun like bursting a rodent with a shot from a rifle is?If you can make a good dent in the very lowest layers of the ecosystem, that's a noble goal. If you aren't a research biologist, you probably don't have the resources and may not have the knowledge to do anything about it, and varmint hunting might be the only thing you can do for the ecosystem. Why should people avoid varmint hunting simply because there's an alternative? I don't see anything in the Constitution about inalienable rights of animals.
(roscoe) If you are blasting prarie dogs just because you like to see them explode, that, to me, is unethical. They are, after all, a native species, and if there is no livestock to save from broken legs in the area, then there really is no justification other than personal pleasure.So how many ants have you killed? Roaches? Spiders? Any snakes, fish, rodents, or small mammals? Geez, where's that bright line? As Art said, does the fact that someone might enjoy it matter? Is that enjoyment going to change anything as long as they confine their violent behavior to legally unprotected species?
(jim march) My "animal ethics" are based on the idea that preserving entire ecosystems is the highest priority in conservation, followed by species, followed by individual critters. If keeping an ecosystem in balance means some critters die, cool.Hmm... I suppose an alien society following that principle would probably have killed humans off when we first evolved enough significant differences from our biological ancenstors to represent a new threat to other species. And what about making significant dents in varmint populations to control disease? Certainly a few humans dead here and there (from disease, in this case) wouldn't be a disaster for the ecosystem. I think the first item on your animal ethics flowchart is probably "preservation of human life."
(tallpine) Of course, we all know that the varmits that most need poppin' aren't out in the fields, woods, and ranges ...I dunno about varmints, but I just saw some critters on c-span's coverage of the winter Democratic National Committee meeting.

[John Galt]

My Grandpa stopped by a Taco Bell years ago for lunch. He was eating his taco and thought to himself, "Darn, that sure is good horse".

He had eaten horse in the army. He busted Taco Bell big time.

[EJ]

I think you should shoot what you want -- within the bounds of legality. If the legality defies logic then within the bounds of logic--

I'm pretty much non-judgemental--

That said-- I was a bit concerned about comments by "real" hunters as to their concern for the mental // emotional stability of varmint hunters--

Isn't it more unreasonable // illogical to spend thousands of dollars on an out of state "hunt" than to varmint hunt for pleasure?

[publius]

Well, I just killed two squirrels with my Beeman R-10. I fail to see the fun in it, but those are two mango-munching orchid-diggers who won't be bothering my stuff any more.

[Uncle Ethan]

Skin those suckers out and dress'em, stuff them with cornbread and bake them over coals. Good eating. And it will stop the animal "ethicists" from saying, shame.:p

[publius]

Two words: Hawk food.

Shame? The only shame was that one of them was not exactly a clean kill. It took a second shot. I really, really don't see the fun in that. At the same time, if I'd really wanted to avoid that, I have a gun that would have caused a squirrel explosion, and I didn't use it.

[Uncle Ethan]

I agree- I do a little bit of varmint shooting myself- mostly coyotes, but crows when I can get them. The problem with coyotes is you can't shoot where they live- which is the semi-rural areas around cities- I see the signs on the telephone poles everywhere- "lost dog [or cat]"- smookeys is a small ---- and he is missing. If I were cruel I would gather up some coyote droppings in a bag and give them to the people- "here's smookey":what:

[Art Eatman]

"Society" can do just so much to blunt genetic impulses. That is, since homo sap is a natural predator, our society is so-structured that the more predatorially aggressive among us either rise to the top of business empires or run dope gangs.

For us who "mess with" guns'n'huntin', the hunting ethic of "fair chase, clean kill" serves as an adequate rationalization to deal with both our predatory instincts and our societal "softness".

To me, then, killing varmints involves that mix of helping farmers/ranchers; enjoyment of the instinct to kill; population control for the benefit of some faction within an ecosystem, and there's probably something else that somebody can think of...

Just thought of an oddity in my shooting: I'm more likely to use "overkill" in a varmint gun than in my deer hunting. I'll use a .243 on a coyote, for instance, which is very destructive and instantly deadly. If I use that on a deer, I'll be very specific about a neck shot if at all possible. To minimize damage to edible meat of a deer, I could easily be in need of a second shot.

Art

[jmbg29]

Well, I just killed two squirrels with my Beeman R-10. I fail to see the fun in it, but those are two mango-munching orchid-diggers who won't be bothering my stuff any more. :D :cool:

[TexasVet]

-----------------------------------------------------------
I suspect most people find 'wasting animals for fun' to be as repugnant as I do.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I suspect it is the other way around. Unless you are talking about middle class and above lifetime city dwellers who have no idea what actually trying to earn a living on the land is all about.
They are called "varmints" for a sound and meaningful reason.

And they ARE fun to cap.:neener:

[EJ]

This post has really turned around----:D

[NewShooter78]

I know some people who consider themselves "real" hunters probably use dear stands and duck blinds. Isn't this sort of cheating ethically? Wouldn't it be more "ethical" to stalk your prey instead of senting an area and then waiting up in a tree or laying out decoys and sitting in a camo covered blind? And if you don't stalk, but "bait" your prey then is that any more ethical than shooting varmints for pleasure, so to speak?

Just something I want to throw out there that's been bouncing around my head.

[roscoe]

It seems so me the question about varmints is about the ethics of killing something you aren't going to eat, just for your gratification. The issue of using blinds, or baiting, is about what they call in mountaineering the "style", or the elegance of the hunt. As long as you put the deer down with a clean shot, it is pretty much as ethical as slaughtering a cow. It may just be less elegant than stalking, and maybe you can't claim the same bragging rights. But either way, hopefully, the deer is killed cleanly and eaten.

[publius]

I have a question for you, NewShooter. If making a kill more difficult makes it more ethical, what does that make a slaughterhouse? Is it better to kill a deer, or to contract a hit on a cow or pig?

OK, that's two questions. Here's one man's answer (http://www.lewrockwell.com/fontova/fontova19.html). :D

I don't fully share his opinion. Had some pig just last night, in fact, thanks to some bored drone. ;) Nothing unethical about that, IMO.

[Art Eatman]

roscoe, I guess some of us predators are more like cats--which little critters will kill just for the fun of it.

NewShooter78, there are many areas where if you don't sit in a stand and ambush, you ain't gonna eat no deer! And, I dunno if you ever tried being a walking duck-hunter, but that's not productive worth a hoot--or a quack.

A question I've often asked somebody who worries about the evils of hunting is, "How is a deer somehow more noble than a cow?" This is particularly effective when at dinner, and everybody is enjoying a steak. :D

Art

[Joe Demko]

For me the issue isn't the death of animals. Everything dies anyway. The issue is in the mindset of the shooter. What is the difference between killing a prairie dog or a deer or a horse or a cat or peacock or a cow or any animal (whether it is conveniently labeled as a varmint or not) when your purpose was simply to enjoy killing it?

[TexasVet]

_________________________________________
when your purpose was simply to enjoy killing it?
_________________________________________

I must be one of those sociopaths or something, because I see nothing wrong with using vermin as target practice. How does someone get this far into this thread without noticing that what we are talking about killing are in fact, injurious animals to other livestock, farm equipment or food supplies? If an animal is in competition with me for food, profit or just the enjoyment of my land, he, she or it is toast. The fact that it is FUN to shoot them is a freebie side benefit. And the bunny huggers can go play in their own backyards with the rats.

[NewShooter78]

I was just wondering out loud with my last post. I have no qualms with hunting. I don't do it but I do eat meat from a slaughter house. I really don't hold a grudge against people who hunt in any manner. It was just a question I thought I'd throw out there because we were discusing "ethics". Hunting is hunting, and I don't really have a problems with it. Things that do bother me are those that go out and over hunt, or...game wardens that can't adhear to limit laws that they are supposed to enforce, but that's a different arguement for a different time.

A pest is a pest, and since I kill little domestic critters I can't pass judgment on others doing the same on larger domestic or rural critters. I know farmers and livestock keepers have pest problems, so they need to be delt with. I also know that most of them aren't becoming wealthy people, and that any threat to their livelyhood should be dealt with accordingly.

[Joe Demko]

How does someone get this far into this thread without noticing that what we are talking about killing are in fact, injurious animals to other livestock, farm equipment or food supplies?

One might just as validly say that those are the freebie benefits that just happen to come along with killing the animals in question for fun. Would you still take enjoyment from killing them if they weren't "injurious?" Is labelling them as "injurious" perhaps a way to rationalize taking enjoyment from the act of killing them? Kill them or not, as you please, they are only animals. It is you that I am clinically curious about, if you can take hours of enjoyment in killing for its own sake.

[Art Eatman]

Aw, Golgo, when you get this far into a thread, there are a lot of just-stray thoughts start popping up. The sorta-casual stuff that doesn't really indicate any bunch of deep meaning.

Dunno if this is a good for-instance, or not: I doubt that any notable number of us who have discussed self-defense really look forward with eager anticipation to a shoot-out. We'd have regret, afterwards, at having been forced into such a deal. Yet, at that one instant of a successful shot, there could not help but be satisfaction. Seems to me it would be absolutely normal to think, "Great! I'm here; he's not!" The proverbial sigh of relief at having survived a hazard...

What the heck. If somebody is all happified at shooting prairie dogs, I don't care. Odds are, he's never gonna be interested in shooting at me. The "why" of it all is of trivial importance.

:D, Art

[Frohickey]

Golgo-13...

Yes. I thoroughly enjoy killing for killings sake. Give me a can of Raid, or some WD-40, and an ants nest near my garage or backyard close to the kitchen, and I'm happy as a clam. I gleefully hoot and holler each time one of those ants get a big wiff of Raid and put their head/antennae down on the ground trying to wipe the chemical off their chitinous shells, and then end up as a small ball of dead ant material. :evil:

Roaches, weevils, flies, snails, slugs, all the same.

[TexasVet]

Leave it to a yankee to take a statement that the main reason for shooting the vermin is property protection and that "fun" is a secondary side benefit and twist it to mean that "killing for its own sake" is the real meaning of the statement. Get an education in logic, then get an education in real life, then go join PETA.

[Joe Demko]

Leave it to a yankee

Check for pm

[12GA]

Destructive varmints should be killed. I kill coyotes because they reduce the delicious bunny population that I so enjoy. Here's another good reason to kill them.

Snow Helps Coyote Jump Fence (http://www.syracuse.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?n0946_BC_NY--CoyoteKillsPet&&news&nystatenews)

Snow helps coyote jump fence

The Associated Press
2/26/03 8:29 AM


NANUET, N.Y. (AP) -- A pet dog named Mandy, released into a yard surrounded by a 4-foot-high chain link fence, was killed by a hungry coyote in Rockland County, police said.

They said that while coyotes rarely go after dogs, recent snowfalls have made it harder to hunt -- and easier to jump fences.

Administrative Sgt. Harry Baumann of the Clarkstown police said the coyote was probably attracted to the Newport Drive area in Nanuet by food that was being put out for stray cats by a neighbor, then noticed the 5-year-old, 9-pound bichon frise.

Animal control officer Pat McCoy-Coleman said the coyote likely tracked the dog's movements for days.

Mandy's owner discovered the dog outside the fence Monday night. Its neck had been broken, Baumann said. The coyote most likely dropped the 9-pound dog when its owner came outside to check on it, he said.

No attempts will be made to capture the animal because coyotes are too smart for the cage-type traps that are legal to use in Rockland, Baumann said. Leg traps, which have been used more successfully in capturing coyotes, are illegal in Rockland because they are considered inhumane.

[Art Eatman]

"...5-year-old, 9-pound bichon frise."

Hmmm. About the right size for coyote bait. Probably the highest and best use for a dog like that. :) Well, maybe even better when you're trolling for sharks. :D

Art

[Steel]

I equate such varmints to rats -- let them serve their friggin "useful" purpose somewhere else!

[Uncle Ethan]

Or Alligators.:D

[Intune]

I deer hunt every year in TX. One of the popular methods there is to have a feeder with a box blind nearby. My father in law takes his deer management very seriously and expects me to do the same. Buck/doe ratio, defects, injured or sub-par animals are culled. This would be very difficult without the ability to observe these animals for extended periods of time. When/if the shot is actually taken, it is from a rest, animal is in the optimum position and all factors lean towards a quick, humane kill. Some folks frown on this type of hunting. They're entitled to their opinion. Just don't gut shoot a fine animal from your treestand because he was trotting and you think that you shoot better than you actually do. BTW, my favorite way is to still-hunt on the ground when I hunt deer. No better, no worse, just my choice when I go. Dead is dead.

As hunters, we are stewards of this land every time we go afield. The varmint hunters that I shoot with would no more think of shooting an owl or hawk perched right above a ground hog than they would of shooting an animal out of season. We shooters/hunters get a bad enough rap from the anti's, NEVER do anything to justify that rap. My 1.5 cents.

[4v50 Gary]

Supporting what Larry Ashcroft said about horses stepping into Prarie Dog holes, here's an excerpt from the memoirs of Sgt. John Ryan, 7th Cav, who luckily was with Maj. Reno and survived Custer's little affair at Little Big Horn ;)

It is very dangerous for troops when mounted on the prairie as they are likely to strike a prairie dog town. The grass grows over these holes and conceals them and a trooper's horse is liable to put his foot into one of these holes and either break his leg or receive some other injuries and the rider is liable to be seriously hurt. As this happened to me once, the particulars of which I have previously mentioned, I know what it is and can feel the effects of it at the present writing. The prarie-dogs usually occupy one of these villages until all the grass roots are eaten up and then they remove to new fields where there is more grass.

From Sgt. John Ryan's Ten Years with Custer: A 7th Cavalryman's Memoirs

[Khornet]

-Some wag once defined Puritans (unfairly, I might add) as people who couldn't sleep thinking someone, somewhere, was having a good time.

Those who condemn the varminter for enjoying the killing could be called (not entirely fairly, either) hunting Puritans.

-What's the one thing you can count on hearing in a philosophical defense of hunting?

"It's not all about killing, though we do try to kill. The point is the hunt, the studying of nature, the immersing of oneself in it, the skills we develop, the friends we make, the experiences we share, the whisky in the old tin cup in camp at the end of the day."

So varminting conflicts with the philosophical defense of hunting, and critics of varminting are being ungenerous in spirit.

You do have to wonder about an activity that can leave both its proponents and its critics with egg on their faces.

[Art Eatman]

I can see where the 7th Cav Sgt could have problems in tall grass country--of which there is little remaining. Nowadays, most PD towns are readily seen, with the holes being in the centers of small bald areas, each surrounded by short grass...

Art

[Joe Demko]

Well, even the term "varminting" is a construct. No animal is useless. Whether you are a creationist or believe things randomly evolved, each creature has a niche in a functioning ecosystem. Animals (and plants too) become problems most often as a result of our own activity. Sometimes that conflict could have been avoided, other times not. If prairie dogs are overpopulating, I guarantee you that it is as a direct result of something else we did that removed a limiting factor from their environment, most likely destruction of the predators that kept them in check in the first place. So, if prairie dogs are "varmints" it is because we made them so. Same with coyotes. How did the coyote expand its range so dramatically? Easy. We eliminated the wolf and allowed the coyote to fill that open niche.
What's my point? I still say they are only animals and waste no grief over their deaths, whether for as food or to supply enjoyment to one who enjoys killing. I also still say that it is, at best, disingenuous to cite the needs of ranchers and farmers and so on as a justification for the activity if you are not, yourself, in one of those businesses. Just come right out and say "I kill these animals because it pleasures me to do so." The truth will set you free.

[LifeNRA]

I shoot groundhogs, crows, and rats here. They are all pest in my eyes. My Grandma calls me to remove groundhogs, or whistle pigs as she calls them sometimes, that destroy her garden and dig holes in the pasture. And I just love shooting them with my little 10/22. I killed 6 groundhogs this year, all clean head shots, and loved every minute of it. And no I did not eat any of them but our dogs love it.

[Dave R]

Do hunters see varmint poppin' as unethical? Pretty much wastin' the animal because it's fun to waste them, and/or need to be wasted?

My battle cry is "SAVE THE PRAIRIE!"

A prairie that has been worked over by P-dogs is an ugly place. Muddy when wet. Fulla holes and mounds. Dangerous to walk on. I dunno about cows & horses, but I have had several close calls with the bones in my lower extremeties when walking in prairie that the dogs have overtaken.

Just look a the pristine prairie around a 'dog town. Then look at what used to be prairie in the town. They just chew it up and turn it into a dirt pile.

That works for me as justification.