Well, I can't speak for any other person but myself..., I can relate lessons learned from my father, and I can relate what I've tried to teach my offspring.
One side argues that some animals, typically Game animals, require/deserve a higher level of care and effort when being harvested that they are killed quickly and humanely. Conversely some animals deemed Varmints, Pests, and/or invasive species did not warrant the same level of care in their harvest and taking shots with a lower percentage chance of being a quick and human kill was more acceptable due to that status.
Another side argues that if you are going to intentionally kill an animal then it should receive a quick and humane kill independent of such labels as Game, Predators, Varmint/Pest etc.
For myself, I understand how some folks look upon varmints as pests, not deserving of respect. Since those people are not "hunting" on my land, but are on another's land, albeit where they have permission OR the land that they own, they are free to make that distinction.
I for one will do my best when I pull a trigger, to cleanly harvest whatever animal I am shooting at. I am not looking to inflict pain over a period of time on such an animal. I get no pleasure of seeing such suffering, nor of imagining such. The idea of the infliction of a long, lingering wound simply makes me feel bad, and since I can do my best to choose a method that is not intended to inflict such a wound, this is what I choose. Being the cause of an animal suffering does no actual "good" in the world, while harvesting a game animal in a quick, humane manner provides me with nourishment, or others with nourishment when I share what I have harvested, as well as controls the population which ensures the species will continue to thrive.
Sport hunting also provides some economic input and thus others benefit beyond when I share game. The ammunition component maker, the gun maker, the DNR employee, and funds that some part of my license fees feed, all benefit. Although this paragraph would also be true for the person who does not agree with my distinction, so this is not a benefit purely from those of my way of thinking.
Killing a non-game animal in a quick, humane manner, helps me to maintain my shooting skill, and provides a food source for scavenger species, which are part of the same ecosystem that sustains my game animals, and also keeps the varments/pests in check, which ultimately, actually helps them too, for the same reasons it helps game animals.
When it comes to pure pests, again, I don't like an eradication method that does not kill quick. I don't like poison, nor drowning, nor "sticky traps" for rodents like mice and rats and moles and gophers. I prefer the trap which kills quite quick. For groundhogs I prefer the rifle to poison, or even a
Rodenator tool, which kills quick, rather than poison.
There are exceptions to some rules, so I cannot say that my situation will never change, nor that I will avoid problems where the solution is likely to be other than what I currently write. Although I will not hesitate to end a feral animal on public land set aside for hunting, I confess I do not worry nor search hard for the animal if it makes its escape while being wounded, while for a game animal I am quite diligent on the odd times when this has happened. For another example, had I a farm where a feral hog population, or even a javalina game population were ravaging my crops..., I could be brought to the use of bait, tannerite, and ball bearings to bring down their numbers in an explosive moment. While the idea is to end all that would be hit in a quick manner...., it would likely mean some escaped with bad wounds.
Also interesting is who defines what animals fit under the various labels like Game, Predators, Fur-bearing, Varmint/Pest? I am sure we can probably even come up of a few examples of animals that are considered Game animal in some parts of the country but Varmint/Pest in other parts, even setting invasive species aside.
This is quite true, even for something like the Gray Squirrel. There is a season for squirrels in my state, but one does not need a hunting license to kill one or more who have decided to nest in one's attic, nor does one need to wait for hunting season, for example. The "Pest Control" companies do not need permission or a hunting license either, to eradicate squirrels.
So the person who harvests squirrels with quick clean trapping, in a suburban setting, is a poacher for taking game in an area where that is prohibited, OR is that person merely eradicating pests?
Some would argue that IF the person merely disposes of the squirrel in the garbage, then they are eliminating pests, but..., if one takes the trap-harvested squirrel (or air rifle harvested squirrel) and turns the squirrel into Brunswick stew..., they are poaching. I would question why does the manner of disposal of the rodent matter?
YET..., when one switches the topic animal to deer..., and one fellow can point to a great deal of damage done to his landscaped garden by the suburban deer, who are not hunted due to geography, so they are pests..., BUT IF the same fellow was to harvest those deer in his back yard with something...quiet...like a bow or a legally owned suppressed rifle, some would call that poaching. THEN the State turns around and sets aside a day when a company of marksmen with suppressed rifles will enter the local park, and harvest the deer herd, and the meat is then given to the homeless shelter, and this is considered good, but don't act and do that for even one deer that has wandered into your back yard from the park property adjacent to your own.....
LD
