Tension between hunting ethics?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My son is 12 and I do not allow him to shoot running Deer

Back when my oldest son was 14, I did, or more like didn't argue when he took that liberty himself. An impala - much smaller and faster than a whitetail - at absolutely full speed, ranged later at 165 yards, with a borrowed .375H&H Magnum he had only shot one round with earlier. The Impala was dead before it hit the ground. There was some luck involved, of course, but at that time he had already had several years and (tens of) thousands of rounds of practise shooting rimfire; improvised targets, flying birds, running rabbits and so on, having accompanied me to grouse hunting trips since he was six, not to mention a member of IPSC + three gun junior team in a full training program.

The huge difference is practise. Tom Knapp once mentioned in an interview that it took him one million rounds to reach his skill level and another million rounds to maintain it. After you've spent your summers since an early age shooting a trashbag full of seagulls from flight, week after week with a rimfire rifle, it's bound to give you quite a bit of insight in regard to lead, shot placement and confidence in taking a difficult shot.

I've shot quite a few running deer, wild boar, jackals etc. In driven hunts they are by default running, they won't stop for you and unless you take the shot when you can, they're gone in a matter of seconds.
 
I appreciate the hunters who prepare themselves to make good shots, however they may be. Plenty of guys wait for good shots with a bow, plenty of guys can shoot deer on the run, plenty of guys can shoot past 300 yards cleanly. And of course plenty of them can't.
 
AND I have the knowledge that it didn't come from China tainted with some poison.

Maybe, maybe not. If the animal has been feeding in crop fields where pesticides, herbicides, etc. were used, they can be easily "tainted".

Personally, I don't get the running deer with dogs as the meat is usually nasty from an animal whose adrenaline is spiked to the max
 
Part of one's own package of ethics, then, is not taking a shot where your odds of a clean kill are very low. Easy enough...

Where I differ on the possum/armadillo thing comes from knowing that buzzards and coyotes will recycle them. :) I generally don't bother them, though, since they don't bother my little chunk of world. Armadillos on golf-course greens are a problem, as are possums in the henhouse as egg-eaters. Otherwise? Nah...
 
Personally, I don't get the running deer with dogs as the meat is usually nasty from an animal whose adrenaline is spiked to the max

Not really. I have yet to meet someone who can actually taste the difference, double-blind. If a deer has been running for its life for miles is one thing, especially when wounded. Being just slightly spooked and alert after having been driven out of the thickets has little if any effect on adrenaline level in muscle tissue.

I've shot a couple of young bucks during the peak of rut, too. That's something else entirely, one of them smelled excessively like urine, which rendered the meat more or less unusable. Our dogs were happy, though. They didn't mind the stench.
 
HQ - practice is everything and skill level has a lot to do with what is ethical.

GSPN-- I don't want to hijack this thread but since you asked, I skinned the Buck out this morning. I wish I had inspected the internals more when I gutted him out, but I didn't. My FIL helped me track him and he was ready to be done when we finally found him. My fist shot entered low right behind the shoulder between the ribs and exited directly behind the opposite shoulder. The bullet was in the skin on the opposite side. The second shot-- he ran another 20 yards or so and he faced towards me so he was about 75 yards away. I thought I missed him on this one, it was a low percentage shot but since I had already hit him I keep shooting until I see them go down ( part of my personal ethics but drives my FIL crazy) . This second bullet entered high chest but just off center enough so that the bullet did not penetrate the ribs and ended up cumming out just under the skin behind the shoulder. The rounds were hand loaded .44 mags 200gn xtp traveling about 1500fps. They both expanded to about 7/8 of an inch.

Was this an ethical harvest? I am still questioning myself. Like I said in a previous post he went about 600 yards and I had to finish him when I found him.
 
I am pretty handy at running shots on big game. Not only have I killed a double truck load of game with running shots. The skill has actually saved me from getting sorted on dangerous game on several occasions. It is a learned skill and your rifle needs to be properly set up. Low power variable, mounted as close to the bore as possible. Most scooped hunting rifles I see in America are not set up for shooting running game. The scopes are mounted to high and they are to high of a minimum magnification.

This guy has it figured out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOgXcffC3ow

Oh and I'm pretty handy with those same rifle out at fairly long range too.:)
 
Personally, I see the deer/bird situation as being dissimiliar instead of alike. In most jurisdictions, deer are hunted using weapons firing a single projectile. Common sense, and experience, will quickly demonstrate that its easier to hit a standing target than a running target with a single projectile. Birds are hunted with shotguns, and one isn't considered the least bit proficient in wing-shooting UNLESS they can routinely hit moving targets with consistency. The difference,IMO, is the difference between a single projectile, and a large column of shot. Its much easier to make a lethal shot on a flying pheasant with a 12 gauge than it would be to do the same with a .22 rifle(not to mention safer).


edited to add, never noticed any difference in meat quality from a deer that was shot where he stop and dropped, or one that was busted from cover, ran a 1/2 mile, then was killed....it just doesn't make the difference some peoople seem to think it does, at least in my experience spanning 25 years
 
Forget the whole running deer vs. sitting duck thing. ;) The point I was trying to illustrate was that principle of takng the "surest shot" is inherently at odds with fair chase. Exactly how much those principles conflict of course depends on the situation, but I've never heard of a situation where these principles weren't at least slightly at odds.

Perhaps getting personal will help...

The one deer I've shot so far was a young buck, and evidently far from being "the sharpest knife in the drawer." He came trotting along in a harvested cornfield, coming from upwind, traveling parallel to, and 60 yards away from, the tree line I was sitting in. Everything about his demeanor shouted "I have no situational awareness whatsoever." If he'd been a human in a shopping mall, the pickpockets would have had him in seconds. I made a horrible impression of a deer call, he stopped to listen, and I shot him.

Some would say that was fair chase because even though my purpose in calling to the deer was to make him stop, it did at least let him know I was there before I shot him. Others would say I took an unfair advantage of his youth and inexperience. Speaking for myself, I have a clean conscience but kind of feel like I played him a dirty trick. The main regret I have from the hunt was that I misjudged where the "high shoulder shot" should have been placed and only hit him in the spine, requiring a follow-up shot. So even though I had a totally broadside shot on a stock-still animal, he still suffered more than he should have had to.

Does this make the tension I'm describing a little more clear? I'm not looking for a simple, hard and fast rule regarding this topic - merely perspectives on how different hunters handle it for themselves. The main takeaway seems to be to only take shots one is confident with, yet some of the stories even in this thread show that confidence can be misplaced.
 
The difference,IMO, is the difference between a single projectile, and a large column of shot.

That's why I've kept a habit of shooting running and flying targets with rifles and pistols for the last 40 odd years. Both live and inanimate and while most ranges strictly prohibit using a rifle (much less a pistol) at skeet/trap/compak/sporting range, having a couple of throwers of your own is a good alternative. Ranges with ISSF style moose target tracks are also very common so there's no shortage of opportunities to practise with a rifle on a moving target.

Additionally, wingshooting is very much instinctive while rifle shooting relies more on sights so the two don't support each other that much as practise methods. The vast majority of european hunters practise both on at least somewhat regular basis and put the skills to good use while hunting.
 
A blanket list of rules for what shots are ethical, and what shots are not is foolish. Ethics is a matter of knowing your own capabilities with your particular weapon at hand, and confining your shots to those that are within YOUR capabilities for a clean kill with the weapon you are using.

The only thing that sickens me is someone who would purposely cause unnecessary suffering.
 
Others would say I took an unfair advantage of his youth and inexperience. Speaking for myself, I have a clean conscience but kind of feel like I played him a dirty trick.
Wait. You shot him with a FIREARM? A human-designed tool specifically created to launch a projectile at a great distance and kill a creature that can't possibly outrun it or even realize it is coming?

And you shot him from an hidden position in a treeline? You took complete advantage of an ambush situation. There's nothing "fair" about that! What's he supposed to do? Avoid all places a human might possibly choose to hide, in his own "house and home?" The equivalent would be some alien creature stepping out of your own bedroom closet in the middle of the night and shooting you with a purple death ray!

You bushwhacked him from an ambush and killed him with a weapon he couldn't possibly even comprehend, let alone counter. If you wanted fair chase you'd have had to meet that deer face-to-face and engage in mutual combat. Mano-a-mano, using the tools you're born with. Like this: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=5108231#post5108231

The universe sits back and laughs at our neurotic self-induced, self-referential concerns over "fair chase" and "hunting ethics." :)

In other words, you use any and all advantages you can find to procure good sustenance with the least amount of "chase," risk, and expended energy to get it.
 
Last edited:
The main takeaway seems to be to only take shots one is confident with, yet some of the stories even in this thread show that confidence can be misplaced.

A man's got to know his limitations, but with the knowledge that he's not perfect also.
 
Forget the whole running deer vs. sitting duck thing. ;) The point I was trying to illustrate was that principle of takng the "surest shot" is inherently at odds with fair chase. Exactly how much those principles conflict of course depends on the situation, but I've never heard of a situation where these principles weren't at least slightly at odds.

Perhaps getting personal will help...

The one deer I've shot so far was a young buck, and evidently far from being "the sharpest knife in the drawer." He came trotting along in a harvested cornfield, coming from upwind, traveling parallel to, and 60 yards away from, the tree line I was sitting in. Everything about his demeanor shouted "I have no situational awareness whatsoever." If he'd been a human in a shopping mall, the pickpockets would have had him in seconds. I made a horrible impression of a deer call, he stopped to listen, and I shot him.

Some would say that was fair chase because even though my purpose in calling to the deer was to make him stop, it did at least let him know I was there before I shot him. Others would say I took an unfair advantage of his youth and inexperience. Speaking for myself, I have a clean conscience but kind of feel like I played him a dirty trick. The main regret I have from the hunt was that I misjudged where the "high shoulder shot" should have been placed and only hit him in the spine, requiring a follow-up shot. So even though I had a totally broadside shot on a stock-still animal, he still suffered more than he should have had to.

From my experience, the term "fair chase" is viewed differently depending on the critter you are hunting.

Generally speaking, "fair chase" when it comes to deer has nothing to do with whether the animal is standing or running, but whether he has the ability to leave the area...ie no high fencing keeping him contained where you can get at him. If a wild deer busts me, he's gone, and there won't be much I can do about it.

When it comes to birds...it's a little different. The "sporting" thing to do is shoot them in flight. That is, after all, the essence of being a wing shooter.
The only migratory birds I've shot on the ground were ones that were previously wounded.

Here are a few examples:

Fair Chase deer - The area I hunt in MS is 1,000 acres of private land with no containment system to keep deer on the property. I go to the woods with my skill set, and I hunt a deer that has his own skill set. There is no fence to keep him inside the boundaries where only I can get him. He is wild, he is not used to people and won't tolerate their presence...once he detects you...he is gone. How I kill him is up to me. Many times I won't be able to as he'll give me the slip. I shoot almost every deer while they are standing still...and that does not in any way violate the principle of fair chase...it maximizes my odds of delivering a quick, humane kill. In one or two jumps that deer can be over a ridge or in a thicket to where I'll never see him again.

Not fair chase deer - We once had a customer come in for a duck hunt. He's a wealthy dude from west Texas. He has a big "game farm" where people can come hunt exotic animals. While he was out with us he told a story about a guy that came down to bow hunt a red stag. This guy wanted to stalk and kill a red stag, which he did. The hunter came back to the lodge telling the story about how awesome it was to get so close to the animal before releasing his arrow. He spoke of how stealthy he was in executing the stalk.

Then our guest began to ridicule the hunter in the story. He said the reason he was able to get so close was because the animal was tame. They feed it by hand...it had no fear of humans, and was inside a high fence operation. That is not fair chase.

There's nothing wrong with hunting in a high fenced area, it's just not necessarily a fair chase deal. In that particular case it certainly wasn't fair chase, and in my view the hunter should have been told the animal was tame and you could walk up an pet it if you wanted to...he might have passed on hunting there if he had known all the facts.

Fair chase birds - When I hunt pheasant in SD we hunt huge parcels of rolling ground. it's not uncommon for the birds to flush 40 or 50 yards ahead of us at times. It can be tricky getting shots because they are wild birds and they do not want to be around you. They are wild birds, and shot on the fly...they have a very good chance of escaping the hunter.

Not fair chase birds - There is a place east of where I live where a guy has a bird hunting operation. You call and tell him how many birds you want to kill and he goes out and "plants" them.

The guy I work for joined this club and he relies on me for a lot of his hunting advice. I went out there before he did just to see how the operation was run.

When I got there the guy asked if I wanted to go out with him to set the birds. "Sure" I replied, and we jumped in the buggy. We drove around the property with a cage full of birds. Every now and then we'd stop at a pre-planned location and he'd take a bird out of the cage. He'd hold it with both hands, and then swing his hands around in circles real fast. Then he'd pick up a piece of wood or trash and stick the bird under it.

I asked "what are you doing?"

He replied "I'm getting em drunk!"

"What do you mean?"

He said "I get em real dizzy so they stay right here. Then when the hunter comes out they'll be here for him."

I'd never seen anything like it. Later, my buddy came out, and I walked with him as he "hunted". We got to a place where the guy planted a Hun and nothing happened. The dog was trying to flush something, but nothing was happening. Eventually the redneck that runs the place walked over there and lifted the piece of plywood and hay the bird had been placed under earlier. Out walked the bird in front of three people and a dog...it didn't fly. Eventually he kicked it to get it in the air.

It was a sad display, and not what one would call "fair chase."

These are just a few examples that might help you start seeing the "lines" if you will between fair chase, and something that isn't fair chase.

It has much more to do with whether the animal is moving or still when you pull the trigger.

I'm sure others here can provide additional examples.
 
I thought it might be useful to post the Boone and Crocket Fair Chase statement to use as a benchmark as well:



FAIR CHASE STATEMENT
FAIR CHASE, as defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.

HUNTER ETHICS
Fundamental to all hunting is the concept of conservation of natural resources. Hunting in today's world involves the regulated harvest of individual animals in a manner that conserves, protects, and perpetuates the hunted population. The hunter engages in a one-to-one relationship with the quarry and his or her hunting should be guided by a hierarchy of ethics related to hunting, which includes the following tenets:




1. Obey all applicable laws and regulations.

2. Respect the customs of the locale where the hunting occurs.

3. Exercise a personal code of behavior that reflects favorably on your abilities and sensibilities as a hunter.

4. Attain and maintain the skills necessary to make the kill as certain and quick as possible.

5. Behave in a way that will bring no dishonor to either the hunter, the hunted, or the environment.

6. Recognize that these tenets are intended to enhance the hunter's experience of the relationship between predator and prey, which is one of the most fundamental relationships of humans and their environment.
 
A small side-note about high fences: Many of the game ranches in Texas have high fences around multi-thousand-acre pastures. Lots of mesquite brush and cactus. A deer becomes totally unshootable within only a few yards of movement. Obvious question: Just how free is free? A buck's evasion of a hunter is quite easy for the buck, which is what fair chase is all about.

"Planted" birds are totally out of "chase", much less "hunting"; forget fair chase. Small pens aren't hunting at all, either.

Basically, threads about ethics and fair chase, all these years, have had a general consensus about the game animal having a fair chance of not getting killed and hunters not over-estimating their skills in achieving a clean kill.
 
Basically, threads about ethics and fair chase, all these years, have had a general consensus about the game animal having a fair chance of not getting killed and hunters not over-estimating their skills in achieving a clean kill.

A very reasonable consensus.
 
Personally, I don't get the running deer with dogs as the meat is usually nasty from an animal whose adrenaline is spiked to the max

At one time I'd have thought using dogs was unethical. It isn't legal here and like a lot of folks just assume others who do so where it is legal are unethical.

But I got a chance to hunt with dogs many years ago where legal. It was nothing like I expected. The dogs were beagles. The deer didn't have to run to stay ahead of the dogs which just barked and prevented the deer from holing up in some thick swamps. All that I saw were moving at a steady walk, but kept looking over their shoulders toward the sound of the dogs. Nothing more than a deer drive.
 
On this side of the pond these threads tend to get closed pretty quickly as they invoke emotion. My personal sense of ethic is as follows, and in no order of importance as a rifle hunter;

1. Never take a shot you cannot make count, never, just walk away or get closer.
2. Never shoot when the animal is over a feedlot or water.
3. Never shoot at night under spotlight.
4. Never shoot from a vehicle.
5. Never under or marginally calibre for you intended game.
6. No alcohol on a hunt. Around the fire nothing wrong with a fine single malt.
7. Respect nature, take out what you take into the field, leave nothing but your footprints.
8. Respect the landowner, cultures involved in the area.
9. Respect the animal by using as much of the carcass as you can.
10. Never hunt with idiots, select your hunting buddies with the greatest of care.
11. Always ensure that your rifle is in the safest condition for you while hunting, when you return to camp that you ensure that the rifle is not "live" when entering camp.
12. Never shoot from a blind. Cover yes but not a blind.
13. Always check what is behind the animal before shooting.
14. Hunting is a holistic experience, enjoy every thing about the hunt, the scenery, the other wildlife, the camp life. This way you can pass on the love of sustainable nature for years to come.
15. Find someone to mentor so that we can sustain what we love.

These are most my personal ones. You may disagree as is your right but these make me feel comfortable in my hunt.
 
@ Henri,

About taking running shots , reminds me of the story once heard around the campfire.

Said individuals uncle, who had an old unkempt for .303, took a shoot at a fleeing Kudu Bull at circa 400yds. Kudu did not fall kept on running, uncle took shot number two with the same result, on the third shot the Kudu finally fell.

On approaching the Kudu they found that the shots were perfectly placed on the shoulder and formed a perfect triangular grouping of an inch .........

Like I said choose your hunting mates wisely.
 
Not all hunters are ethical . There are a lot of "bandits" who call themselves.
hunters.

looks like your instructors are drilling you with the ethical part. Good for
them.
 
Andrew, I agree and live by most of the items on your list. I won't bring up the ones I differ on because it would be nitpicking.

#10 is a good one. I've been invited from time to time to join a hunting lease or go hunting with a group of folks and have turned them down because they violated this rule (and several others on your list).

My core group that I hunt with I've known for 30+ years. We enjoy each others company. The hunting is just the excuse for us getting together.
 
It's great that you are interested in hunting, but I think you might not have a full understanding of the different types of hunting we do, thus the varying methods of taking. Now in that respect, birds and big game or 4 legged animals, as it were, are two completely different types of hunting, which utilize different tactics.

When bird hunting, generally we are not supposed to shoot at a grounded bird. This is because it can be dangerous if hunting over dogs, and it's not all that safe a practice considering other hunters could be out of view, yet in the path of the shot flying through the brush. And also, in some states it's actually illegal to shoot at birds that aren't in flight.

Also of consideration, type of bird being hunted, water fowl, migratory birds such as dove, or upland game birds will often dictate what method of hunting can be ethically and legally utilized.

I totally agree with the ethics involved to not shoot at a fleeing deer or other big game animals. But a flying bird is a totally different story, which is why bird hunters will commonly practice shooting clays to hone their skills. Birds are hunted with a shotgun shooting shot. This doesn't always apply to turkey hunting though, in some states it is legal to shoot them with a rifle.

So, to sum it up, there is no hard fast single ethic that can apply, the type of game being pursued can and will often dictate what hunting methods and weapons are both legal, and ethical.

GS
 
This applies to any type of hunting, and is often the one violation most responsible for turkey hunting accidents, and was also a rule I taught as a G&F hunter safety instructor.

#11 Never shoot at a sound. Always make a positive visual identification of the game, and what's beyond and behind it.

Find a good mentor if possible, or enlist the services of a respected outfitter. You'll learn a lot about safe and ethical hunting tactics, and usually have a really great hunting experience that will start you on the right track, pun intended of course.

GS
 
Kind of a broad stroke with the topic. Sometimes I care very little for and have little respect for the death what I am "hunting", sometimes my feelings are opposite.

I have fired (or stomped, hacked at with hoe or shovel) at "varmints" or other "bad" critters without an instant kill being a concern. While I have also watched Dove chicks grow in flower pots outside my windows. That later that year I might shoot at without "a kill shot" (hate to say I am not 100%).

Fair? Not real sure what that means, only caught a few fish with my bare hands. Caught a lot more calves that way but not sure that's fair either, not really concerned about killing them but either trying to help them or cut their nuts off.

Is hunting rabbits in the snow fair? How about deer from a feeder? How about from a green field in an area where there is nothing else to eat? What about picking out an Oak tree in the woods to hunt by?

I guess if you sleep well with your decision and don't go to bed hungry, your doing it right or maybe your not.

It's going to depend on where you hunt/trap and who you talk to. The hard part will be deciding for yourself if "it's right".

Pretty hard to argue a "skillet shot" on a bird is "bad" if your also going to argue against anything but a standing still shot on another animal though IMO. As the differences are just differences in opinion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top