hunting cryptids - bad idea??

[parsimonious_instead]

Mods: Let me preface by saying that I do not intend this to be a wacky paranormal thread.

One of the paranormal shows I listen to via podcast has a description of a hunter who saw a strange creature walking away from him in the woods. He shot and killed it, and had a number of clinical labs analyze tissue samples - with some surprising results.

Here's what bothers me about this (if any of it is true) - someone in the woods presumably looking for in-season game saw something walking away that they couldn't identify. He didn't feel threatened in any way, but the fact that he admits not knowing what it was meant that he very literally broke rule#4 - know what your target is, and what is behind it.
His target could have been a goofball hunting in a full ghillie suit. It could have been a prankster pretending to be Bigfoot. It could have been a game animal not in-season, and for some reason it had an unusual appearance.

 

[lowerunit411]

im too busy fighting off the Chupacabras to deal with Bigfoot

 

[Hit_Factor]

Here in Michigan, the only game animal I can't shoot is a Buck or turkey. I'm licensed for everything else ( including varmints ). Identifying what it isn't is faster. Buck season ended last weekend.

The four safety rules work in pairs to prevent an accident. In my opinion he intended to harvest the animal so no violation occurred.

Ethically, there may be concerns about harvesting that animal.

Edit to add: we can what if the scenario for many post, I've seen it happen. Bottom line is it wasn't a guy in a ghillie suit.

I also suspect this story to be questionable in its veracity.

 

[Bobson]

Supposing there actually are unidentified beings/animals living in the woods around us is a long shot, IMO, but I'll play along anyway.

It seems like a very bad idea to me. Unethical, possibly illegal. Unless you happen to have a license that says you can kill "anything except a human being," I guess that might include "Cryptids," though I doubt such a vague license exists.

I see no benefit to hunting any sort of unidentified species. There are a few blaring dangers, and I'm sure some others that I can't think of right off the top of my head. As you said, the thing that stands out is the possibility that it's a person hunting in a ghillie suit or something, or even a prankster in a monkey suit. You'd have to be an idiot to be in the woods in a monkey suit during hunting season, but still.

 

[Art Eatman]

Hunting ethics demand that you have some sort of purpose for killing any sort of critter, whether deer or predator or nuisance. There is no real purpose in killing something just because you're curious as to what it is, or, "Well, it was different."

And, yeah, I readily go along with the notion that there might be somebody lacking common sense who would play Bigfoot or some such foolishness.

 

[Sam1911]

...saw something walking away that they couldn't identify. He didn't feel threatened in any way, but the fact that he admits not knowing what it was meant that he very literally broke rule#4 - know what your target is, and what is behind it.

This is a self-concluding premise. Anyone, pretty much anywhere, who admits that "I didn't know what it was so I shot it," should be fined, have their "hunting" priviledges revoked, and then be ceremoniously kicked in the cloches de tintement.

 

[Art Eatman]

Trouble is, Sam, I don't think that there is any Texas law which protects "Bigfoot". Such a critter is not human, so lacks such--not to mention the issue of myth.

It comes back to ethics and common sense. "What's the point?" or, "What purpose is served?"

I strongly recommend reading Ruark's "The Old Man and the Boy". There is probably a stronger theme of ethics running through all those vignettes than in any other book--while being highly entertaining and having quite a bit of humor. There is one segment about a mockingbird which would apply to this thread...

 

[CoRoMo]

He shot and killed it, and had a number of clinical labs analyze tissue samples - with some surprising results.

Okay. Yeah. Sure.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

Okay. Yeah. Sure.

Not saying I believed any of this, but there is a lot of copycatting in the "paranormal investigation" field, and however fictitious, this guy's "success in the field" could lead others to attempt something like that.

As far am I'm concerned, as played out, he committed a rule#4 violation. Period.

As I understand it, when you get tags/licenses to hunt you are authorized to pursue those animals only.

If you're shooting at strange things in the woods, you're setting yourself up for the negligent injuring or killing of another human being. Or the accidental shooting of an animal that isn't your quarry.

If you shot a bear standing on its hindquarters from 100 yards away that wasn't threatening you while you were deer hunting, thinking it was a Bigfoot, do you think that a game warden would accept "I thought it was a Sasquatch!" as an affirmative defense?

Sometimes you have goofy pseudo-hunters, bored after seeing no game hoving into view, start popping off rounds. That to me is an ND, too - do you think that if caught, we want people claiming "I was shooting at Bigfoot" as an affirmative defense for that, either?

And what if there are such creatures? Is it even remotely ethical to kill one that isn't threatening human life, especially if it's some sort of primate that's fairly intelligent, possibly sentient, too? And on top of that, to take it home for one's own personal "use" and not at least take it right to a local zoologist for study and classification?

In any event, when I heard the story, I neither disbelieved nor believed. I posted about it simply because I felt this was an egregious violation of basic firearm safety rules and hunting safety and ethics, if it did occur as the hunter claimed. I posted my thoughts on this here, because I was curious to sort of check on my own thought process.

 

[Zombiphobia]

I have only two concverns with this story-

1: The idiot didn't know what he was shooting at. Which is not only unethical, it's extremely STUPID.

2: If any of these so called "cryptids" actually exist, I'd rather have one alive to study, than a dead one to study. Plenty of odd-ball, unidentified creatures have been found, and there are scientific explantions for all of them, but they're worth more alive than dead.

And yeah, this guy is in direct violation of shooting safety rules and the rules of ethical hunting. Had it been an endangered species, and it probably IS, he really should go to jail.

 

[CoRoMo]

I didn't mean to be saying that you were spreading a ridiculous story, just that the story you heard was ridiculous.

This was an interesting thread back when we had this very discussion...

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=385539

 

[BCCL]

"I didn't know what it was so I shot it,"..........is a very good way to end up hearing another phrase..."will the defendant please rise for the reading of the verdict".

It's something fools do.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

You guys are soooo cynical! Heck, my ol' Momma got some dang FINE cryptid & gravy recipes. They taste a lot like spotted owl & bald eagle. We try to only eat animals that are either joining or leaving the known food chain.

 

[Art Eatman]

Not nearly as good as whooping crane, however.