Okay, new ethics thread that Art can close. :D

[MCgunner]

So, that "ethical shot" thread and the "shotguns on carp" thread and the "shooting coyotes" thread all merged in my head just now. I'm thinkin' some folks who don't wanna kill fur seals might not see ANYTHING wrong with shooting carp and letting 'em rot.

So, what's the difference here? Carp are animals, I spent four years at Texas A&M studying all about fish and how to manage fisheries. I owned an aquarium store for a while. I'm a fish guy or as one of my terrestrial professors used to say, an "aquatic type". They're not furry, nor "cute" to anyone except some species are to ME. I mean, ya gotta love a blue discus, right?

Anyway, bow fishing for a guy like me that doesn't eat the meat would be considered a depredation of the resource if it were a game bird. You just shoot it for the fun of shooting it. I ain't going to eat a carp, don't wanna deal with the bones. I have shot buffalo suckers in the past for trotline bait. That's a legit use of the resource, but I don't see USING that resource as necessary. Buffalo suckers are not game fish, thus the laws on fishing do not apply to them, THAT is the reason bow fishing them in Texas is allowed in the first place! But, if they looked like little fur seals, would some of you guys be crying foul over shooting them for the fun of it?

Just a thought to expand upon. I see predator hunting, even though I personally don't do it and don't think I'd get anything out of it, as no worse than bow fishing. And, well, those little prairie dogs are danged cute, ain't they? Guys can wipe out a whole prairie dog town in an afternoon, I'm told, shooting them at long range with .22 centerfires. Again, I'm not interested in it, but I don't think it's any worse than the bow fishing I've done, right?

Think logically, now. Don't be a liberal Democrat and think with emotion.

 

[hogshead]

Carp are an non-native invasive species.However I do see your point.

 

[MCgunner]

Okay, then, even though I do eat garfish, some don't. AND, buffalo suckers are native. Too many bones in that thing for ME to mess with.

 

[Loosedhorse]

You just shoot it for the fun of shooting it.

Just me personally, but I don't shoot anything "just for the fun of shooting it."

What I like about hunting is hunting: the challenge. If gets to be too routine, I can make it more challenging: switch from scoped rifle to handgun, or to black-powder, or bow; switch to a more difficult animal. The key is always going to be: finding the game, getting close (or getting it close to you), and then deciding whether or not you can take the shot. Heck, I can have a lot of challenge in VT hunting squirrels with an open-sighted .22 revolver.

I guess a lot of things get called hunting that I don't consider hunting. You want to shoot invasive carp, or prarie dogs that are a hazard to cattle, or destructive feral pigs, fine. Heck, get a helicopter and shoot at them with a Ma Deuce. And don't forget the hand-grenades.

But that's pest control, not hunting. The point of pest control is eliminating the pest. By definition, a pest animal is not wanted or respected.

The point of sport hunting is the hunting, and we should respect the game we hunt and the traditions of hunting.

If any of you are involved in commercial hunting or sustenance hunting, then the point of the hunt is for you is money or food, respectively--I don't think we're going to see a lot of wastage there. And I would think that respect for your quarry and for tradition would still come into play.

 

[Weedy]

Hey MC

I can totally see your point. Kind of similar to the guy who told me killing a coyote is like swatting a wasp, or whatever, on the "coyote" thread.

I feel like (I think) you do...taking a life is taking a life, whether it's big or small or ugly or cute or whatever else. However, I do think that a coyote's life, or a wolf or bear or even a pig, is more significant to me because of the level of intelligence of the animal, and whether that animal has the brain capacity to possibly get some enjoyment from its life. When I see every day how my dogs behave, I swear that they can think and they have thoughts going through those little brains. So yeah shooting a dog-like animal would bother me a lot. I will never hunt bears (unless they're hunting me).

I know that if you look at it from a purely logical standpoint, in the grand scheme of the universe, a human being's existence is really no more significant than that of a single bacteria. That may be a contoversial statement depending on your religious beliefs and whatnot, but it's what I believe and that can't be changed. And I do respect people who have different beliefs than I do.

I'm a fish guy as well, and I tend to pretty much release all fish I catch as well. Suffering has a lot to do with it too...I can't stand to even see a nightcrawler writhing on a hot sidewalk, I either put it in the grass or, if that's not possible, step on it to put it out of its misery. I have a hard time impaling one on a hook so I use artificial bait. So that's me I guess. Unfortunately its pretty hard to convince people to be nicer to animals without seeming like a big hypocrite, since I do eat them. And swat them when they bite me.

Anyway sorry for the long post. I firmly believe in treating animals humanely, and I sure as HELL am not a liberal. Having some compassion for life has nothing to do with politics.

 

[Loosedhorse]

its pretty hard to convince people to be nicer to animals without seeming like a big hypocrite, since I do eat them. And swat them when they bite me.

Not hypocritical at all, IMHO.

 

[Mike1234567]

Killing to harvest the meat or to minimize damage to one's property and livestock or to decrease invasive species is one thing... okay, it's three things. But to intentionally choose a method which allows or causes unnecessary suffering when other viable options are available is an entirely different thing and is simple cruelty.

Okay... time for my tree hugging session followed by my granola and milk snack. Where's my huggy bear?!?

 

[Ankeny]

Okay, new ethics thread that Art can close.

The thing about ethics threads is they almost always get closed on any hunting forum. FWIW, I used to shoot carp with a bow...it's a lot of fun. I have shot literally thousands of p-dogs through the decades. I stack coyotes up like cord wood, and I used to sell dead jack rabbits that I "spotlighted" by the hordes to a mink farm. But I try to avoid head and neck shots on big game animals.

Did I mention I have ripped the lips on a bazzilion fish then winched them along behind the boat?

 

[MCgunner]

Did I mention I have ripped the lips on a bazzilion fish then winched them along behind the boat?

LOL.

However, I do think that a coyote's life, or a wolf or bear or even a pig, is more significant to me because of the level of intelligence of the animal, and whether that animal has the brain capacity to possibly get some enjoyment from its life.

Now, I used to feed earth worms to my Oscars in the aquarium store. Those things are neat, very aggressive, and one can almost bond with them. BUT, just like with my cats or dog, this is anthropomorphizing. But, I've always figured that ALL cephalic organisms (eliminates the cnidarians and such) could "think" or even have emotion in one form or another. Just because we as humans can't recognize it means nothing.

Shooting a fish with a bow is done in an area of the fishes body that is not immediately lethal. Even catching a fish on rod and real, I toss 'em on ice to die a cold death without thinkin' about it. If you are such a carrying person (any of you, not being specific), can you do that to a living organism that does have a cephalic nervous system and CAN feel pain? Do you freak when the frog legs you're frying jump out of the pan? All these human emotions are illogical IMHO. They're total emotion brought upon by a human's tendency to anthropomorphize. Heck, I do that with motorcycles. My motorcycles have names, "Red" (a red 01 SV650S) and Booger (a booger colored faded green 2000 KLR 650). I often come home telling the wife how Booger enjoyed the ride. Of course, that's all joking, but it's human nature. Heck, Davy Crockett called his rifle "Ol' Betsy". This tendency gets muddled into reality when humans think of animals, though, animals where they can SEE some sign of intelligence, mammals in particular. BUt, it's my contention that just because you cannot SEE signs that an animal such as a fish has any sort of thought or feeling, doesn't mean it's not there. How could one tell? Animal behaviorists have been wrong many times on these things and they're the so called "experts".

How many here have taken racoons in a trap? How many have known a pet racoon? Those are one "smart" critter, cuter than a dog or cat IMHO. Yet, I've trapped 'em for the pelts back when the pelts were bringing 40 bucks a pop in top shape. That was late '70s, early '80s. I used spring traps on 'em. Could YOU do that? Is that unethical?

Just trying to get people to think with their minds, that's all. Seems to me there might be a bit of hypocrisy going around on all this ethics of hunting stuff.

 

[Mike1234567]

Where's the hypocrisy you speak of? I don't eat much meat and what I do consume is from a kosher butcher... much more humane kills than a typical slaughter house. I don't wear fur of any kind. I don't hunt nor fish. Don't get me wrong... if I had to I would. All I'm saying is that I'd use every viable humane tactic at my disposal before I would resort to other options because I very strongly believe that intentionally choosing methods with increased suffering is cruel. What's hypocritical about that?

I agree that just because we can't always see a certain degree of intelligence or emotion it doesn't mean it's not there. The real conundrum here, and what really troubles my mind, is why would you or anyone else realize this and still choose crueler methods of animal dispatchment?

 

[MCgunner]

Where's the hypocrisy you speak of? I don't eat much meat and what I do consume is from a kosher butcher... much more humane kills than a typical slaughter house. I don't wear fur of any kind. I don't hunt nor fish. Don't get me wrong... if I had to I would. All I'm saying is that I'd use every viable humane tactic at my disposal before I would resort to other options because I very strongly believe that intentionally choosing methods with increased suffering is cruel. What's hypocritical about that?

So, you're a PETA troll? I'm confused. You're on a hunting board, you don't hunt. Hmmmmm.....

How do they kill FISH to make it Kosher?

 

[Wes Mantooth]

Feral pigs, p-dogs and Asian carp and some other species need population control.

So your telling me that there are invasive species that are threatening to destroy your way of life and ecosystem and you do not take up arms to defeat them?

Why are some species of animals extinct but not these? Because we haven't madethem extinct...yet.

 

[MCgunner]

There's a cowbird control program in TP&W. They try to control invasive species even in non-game birds! Hey, it ain't ME. Also, european collard doves are an invasive species that are taking on like gang busters, no limit or season on 'em I'm told, but haven't looked the season thing up. They're all over my place. They're fun to shoot, bigger than mourning or white wing doves. Hell, I'm hoping they take over like the hogs have. ROFL! That right there is not very PC with the wildlife biologists, but I like hogs and ringneck doves.

 

[jmr40]

I don't have any problems killing mice or roaches in my home to prevent them from causing damage or harming my family. I feel the same about shooting some larger animals such as rabid racoon's crow's, coyotes, feral hogs, dogs, or cats. They cause crop damage, kill wildlife and domestic pets and could harm my family either by spreading disease or attacking my grandkids.

No one seems to mind paying someone else to exterminate pests, but take offense when others shoot them.

 

[Weedy]

I agree with population control, or complete elimination of, invasive species. Feral hogs, asian carp, snakeheads, etc. I would try to be as humane as possible but if it threatens the native species, yeah, take out as many as you can! Then again, when the Bering land bridge was exposed during the ice age, I guess all the animals that came here from Asia were invasive....not trying to start another THING, but man this could go on and on (and it has, and it will). We all have different opinions, we all like guns, I value ALL you guys opinions on everything I ask about on this site!

You know, speaking of animals that that could not show emotions...whales/dolphins are some of the very smartest mammals and can't show emotions, at least via facial expressions.

 

[Loosedhorse]

You're on a hunting board, you don't hunt.

What would be the problem with that? And what's with calling everyone a PETA troll?

I agree that just because we can't always see a certain degree of intelligence or emotion it doesn't mean it's not there.

I think it is easy to WAY over-anthropomorphize animals.

still choose crueler methods

I think we should be careful about assigning a "cruelness" scale to culling methods. No one has suggested a method intended to cause pain--to me, cruelness is mostly a question of intent.

I have in general been more concerned that incompetent or careless attempts to kill an animal (by whatever method) can result in a prolonged death. I'd consider that result always undesirable.

 

[12gaugeTim]

I try to see everything as God's test of my moral integrity, and congratulations, my sir, for you have proved yourself to be one of the most grueling assessments yet. For those of you just tuning in, this MCGunner character recently incited a debate in another thread with a similar topic by twisting the subject matter into an opportunity to display his controversial opinions on how, as he mentions here, his "ethics" extend only to the point of saving him the trouble of blood-trails and other such inconveniences, and he further mentions here that evidently he sees the lives of animals as objects of his amusement, which exist only to the point of a notion of boredom, at which point he ends in a manner that entertains him.

In an attempt to put a premature end to the inevitable calamity I, in a somewhat admittedly sarcastic tone, make a mention of how clubbing seals and skinning them alive for their fur is reproachable. This effort to unite the thread's participants behind a common agreement was in vain, for MCEristicGunner makes the bold claim that he would participate in the seasonly slaughter if he could, and he further notes that it would be with a club, even though his membership in this forum indicates that he almost assuredly owns firearms, which would prove a more humane way of dispatching the seal. I give my opinions and abort all attempts to save the thread. I check up on it, but stay true to my word and post no more. MC makes the same claim as me, but later rejoins the thread.

Now, in this thread MCGunner makes a direct stab at me, probably hoping I will take the bait, which I so weakly have. I cannot sit by and have myself ridiculed by this man so void of passion. I make my case starting with the first notable quote.

But, if they looked like little fur seals, would some of you guys be crying foul over shooting them for the fun of it?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I would, likely along with anybody else who can see how killing something for kicks is wrong. When you're out shooting, if some animal walks out in front of you, do you just kill it there because it's more interesting to watch animals die than it is to watch a can bounce? What for, stress relief? Maybe something happened to you in your past that makes you feel wholesome every time you injure something lower than you. You accosted me on my point of clubbing baby seals and I expect you to respond to my inquiry as well. Quote two.

Think logically, now. Don't be a liberal Democrat and think with emotion.

So you're saying that anyone who thinks with emotion is a "liberal Democrat"? That's the most blatant bifurcation I've ever heard. Either you're a liberal Democrat or you don't have emotion. Yeah, we're thinking logically now. Emotion is one of the many wonderful things that set us apart from the insuperior species, whom we are supposed to be good stewards of, as ordained in Genesis. Are you saying that when we make decisions about humane aspects of hunting (or killing for fun) we are supposed to remove the "human" part from it? But I guess since I don't have the compassion of a stone I belong in PETA, as you told anyone who disagreed with you in the conflagration of a thread that started this nonsense.

I realize this is probably forum suicide and I'll be banned for this post. But to be honest, I got my point across, so I don't care. Requiescat in pax, 12gaugeTim.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Well, Tim, that's a lot of style to lavish on this thread, and it may be wasted...

But I sure liked it.

There is a very viable branch of ethics that claims that our beliefs about what is "right" start with an emotion, a feeling that some action is good or bad; just or unjust. And then we attempt to use logic to figure out why we feel that way.

In other words, it may be that thinking with emotion is the very heart of ethics.

 

[Hunterdad]

I used to fish for carp professionally and I always cringed at the thought of bow fishing. During my outings on the water banks, I have seen thousands of dead carp with holes through them just dumped on the shore to rot.

Carp have gotten blamed for a lot of things due to misinformation. For example, less than a mile from my house is one of the most polluted lakes (Onondaga Lake) in the country. For a while, there were only 3-4 surviving species of fish in the lake and carp was one of them. People were convinced that the carp killed all the other fish since carp can and do thrive in some of the worse water conditions. The bow "fisherman" were cruzing and killing hundreds of them in a single outing. Its just a waste and unethical too me. I asked a bow fisherman why he did it and he told me "its good practice. I'm tired of shooting at targets in my backyard." That just rubbed me the wrong way.

Anyways, for anyone going out to shoot these, try hooking up with a 40# carp and go for the ride. It really is some of the best fishing anyone could ask for. The fight they give is truly impressive.

EDIT: Apparently I should have read the post about shooting carp with a shotgun before posting this. I was referring to the "common carp" not the "Asian carp". I am all for eradicating the Asian carp. If they get into our great lakes, the entire fishery is as good as gone.

 

[sugarmaker]

I'm comfortable with my position near the top of the food chain. I try not to have animals suffer more than necessary. I feel kinda sorry for the worm I break in half to go fishing and probably the mice I feed D-con to die a miserable death. Things I consider pests die and get thrown inrto a hole. I am at least as compassionate as any other carnivore, and my thoughts stop there.

 

[T Bran]

Heck down here carp are an introduced and protected species. You shoot one and if the law dont get you the neighbors are likely to bludgeon you to death.
Two years ago it was colder than normal and the iguanas were falling from the trees like rain some as large as 6' long. These are invasive species as well. The people were taking them into their homes to warm them up so they didnt croak. Pythons have taken over the glades but you cant hunt them unless you have a PHD and a permit.
I hear a lot of if it's legal so those are the rules I follow. Problem is the folks writing the rules couldnt find their hiney with both hands and an anatomy book.

 

[Weedy]

I am at least as compassionate as any other carnivore, and my thoughts stop there.

There is a difference between humans and every other carnivore on the planet. The difference is that we are more intelligent than other carnivores, and therefore we have the mental capacity to know what ethics are in the first place.

Watching a pride of lions slowly kill a cape buffalo can make one say "nature is cruel, just look at the misery that buffalo went through. So if inflict misery upon some animal, I am no worse than the lions."

The lions don't know any better, they are just trying to eat the only food that is an option for them. Coyotes don't know any better. We do.

I can't believe this thread isn't closed yet...

 

[12gaugeTim]

Well, Tim, that's a lot of style to lavish on this thread, and it may be wasted...

But I sure liked it.

Even if it is pearls unto swine, at least I had pearls to throw in the first place. I should show this to my literature teacher from the 10th grade; he'd get a kick out of it.

 

[MCgunner]

Quote:
You're on a hunting board, you don't hunt.


What would be the problem with that? And what's with calling everyone a PETA troll?

It's not the least bit odd to you that someone hates the thought of hunting, doesn't even FISH, claims he buys his meat blessed and killed by a Rabbi or something, and is prodding the crowd on a hunting board with anti-hunting arguments? I don't KNOW, just seems, er, fishy. Seems like a nice guy, just sayin'.....

There is a difference between humans and every other carnivore on the planet. The difference is that we are more intelligent than other carnivores, and therefore we have the mental capacity to know what ethics are in the first place.

With some, I'm beginning to wonder.

I can't believe this thread isn't closed yet...

Yep, it's down to name calling and personal attacks. Art must be asleep. At least now I know that some even think bowfishing is immoral. Weird. Don't turn on the Outdoor Channel. They're killing coyotes, fish, all sorts of stuff on there. Even a show called "predator nation".

 

[baylorattorney]

I'll kill anything that can kill me or mine, such as rattlers. I then hang them on the fence so it will bring rain.