Pot Hunter?

[LoneWolf]

hmmm, what I see is alot of people who belive in mostly the same thing arguing about stupid things.
If ya'll want a peeing match head on over to Obama and the pig lips .com.
Other wise --- if it is in season and the gun is legal, it tastes good

[rattus58]

Why is it anyones responsibility to be critical of legal behavior? You talk about situations where being legal is not being ethical. So far I've had two examples that were ludicrous even in the example.

See here is why I don't suggest you comment on ethics when you have no idea of what you're speaking, and you alluded just now to it yourself. If YOU, had confidence, hours on the range, were competant, and were able to deliver the shot where you want it, and you wanted to hunt with that gun on deer or whatever, why is it up to anyone to say... "gee.. he's hunting deer or pronhorn or whatever with a 218Bee... isn't that unethical"? What do they know of how proficient someone is? You don't and YOU DON'T, nor Skeet or anyone else.

If you see specific examples of either illegal or unethical behavior that is one thing, and gut shooting a deer DELIBERATEY I agree, would be unethical. Hunting with a 22 is not, in states that permit that kind of stuff.

I agree with you, some rules just don't make sense. If you find a wounded deer you can put your tag on it or not. If not and your state says you cannot shoot it, puts you into a moral delimma, doesn't it.

Aloha...

[YoungBuck14]

Most people do not deliberately gut shoot a deer. But people do take perfectly legal but very difficult shots. I believe it is our responisbility as ethical hunters to call these people out and openly stand against it. i think there is a fine line between what can be done and what should be done. I'm a pretty good shoot nothing amazing but decent. Do i think i can make a good enough shot with a small caliber gun to kill a deer. Yes i do but i choose not to because i know i am human and can make mistakes. and out of respect for the animals i hunt i do my best to make the cleanest kill possible. Does this mean that i'm going to hunt with a 50 BMG no because i believe that i can make just as clean of a kill with my 308 as i can with the higher calibers but with less lost meat. I believe i could make clean kills with small calibers but the chances go way up that i will would that animal and why should i hunt with this 218 when i also own a 308? I think it IS our job as hunters to question each other. and to make sure that everyone we enjoy the outdoors with is giving all of us a good image.

[rattus58]

Youngbuck... while I admire your enthusiasm, and don't fault your thinking a bit, you can only apply your opinions to yourself. Ethical hunters are concerned about shot placement. Caliber doesn't matter. You can drop an elephant with a .22, as has been done. To say that ground sluicing is unethical, on the other hand, is beyond your scope of opinion until you witness something that you deem unethical and if you want to call out someone YOU HAVE SEEN... fine, but to say, for example that ground sluicing is unethical is not only not true, its none of your business if legal.

You can tell a sportsman by how he conducts himself in the field. It has nothing to do with caliber, with style, or with his competance. Sportsmanship, on the other hand, has nothing to do with hunting, other than letting a geezer shoot first out of consideration of age or letting the ladies shoot first. Some people think sportsmanship has to do letting a bird fly first before shooting, or stalking bears rather than over bait, but wait.... what about cow calls or Bull elk roars... is that sportsmanship? Luring in a lovesick elk, moose or deer? Many many questions that for some they feel isn't a challenge and therefor not ethical.

well gotta go ... but I'll be back....

[rattus58]

Sportsmanship and ethics are entirely different. Ethics is a measure of your belief system. A kid taught jack-lighting by his parent believes that to be ethical. When one is taught to hunt within the boundaries of what is legal, that too is ethical behavior. Now taken in a vacuum, which is more ethical than the other?

My perspective of people discussing ethics, is that they need to confine that conversation to their circle of experience and refrain from making pronouncements that may affect others when they have no right in the first place to call any legal hunting activity anything but legal, and ethical.

A sportsman behaves in a legal and ethical manner. A sportsman will take shots that he knows he can accomplish. A sportsman is not driven by the need to kill, but more by the need to challenge himself. A sportsman shares his self with others to further the "sport" of hunting. A sportsman will try to council those that he sees are less gifted or experienced that he. A sportsman will certainly not belittle or criticize hunters fresh into the ranks, nor will he criticize legal behavior. He might, when he sees a shot for example that he wouldn't take being taken want to find out more about why that individual took that shot. The answer's sometimes can be humbling.

If one doesn't like ground sluicing, in MY OPINION, the way to present that is IN MY OPINION, is to say something like, "while shooting birds on the ground is certainly legal and maybe an assured way to harvest dinner, I prefer to flush the birds or have the birds fly from under our dogs as I think it is more of a challenge for me and helps me develop my shooting skills more so than does shooting birds on the ground. You make your point.

Aloha...

[GoodOlBoy]

Youngbuck14 I believe you have a pretty firm grasp on the realities of the situation. Don't let a few lunatics every spoil hunting for you. Be they tree huggers, eviromentalists, or others. Hunting responsibly is hunting responsibly and there are some things that just are respinsible and somethings that aren't.

Like I said YB14 I think you have a good grasp on it already. It IS our jobs as hunters to question each other. Otherwise we cannot grow. To not say anything is to let hunters, and hunting become stagnant as old pond water. A good discussion is healthy, but sometimes you are arguing with a post. You also have to know when it is the discussion is productive, and when the post is just gonna be a post.



GoodOlBoy

[DogYeller]

If someone hunting with me shot a bird on the ground in front of my dog they would probably never do it again. I know they would never hunt with me again.

[rattus58]

"If someone hunting with me shot a bird on the ground in front of my dog they would probably never do it again. I know they would never hunt with me again."

What exactly does "in front of my dog" mean.... If I shot anything in front of my wife, she'd freak out probably... Is your dog sensitive in some way?

I think this whole discussion of shooting birds on the ground is ridiculous... and this is MY ENTITLED OPINION. Lot of snobbery goin on in MY PERSONALLY DEVELOPED OPINION.

[DogYeller]

I would never hunt with you.

[skeet]

Originally posted by DogYeller
I would never hunt with you.

Can't be said any better

[rattus58]

Well that's fine... you still didn't answer the question I was asking about shooting birds on the ground "in front of your dog"... meaning... if you missed the context.. what does the dog have to do with it?

And for the sake of conversation... Do you discuss your shooting parameters with your hunting partners before you hunt or do you just ASSUME everyone does it YOUR WAY? How often do you hunt with new people?

[skeet]

I'm just goint to try to explain. Not saying you aren't an ethical , safe or legal hunter. So don't get your panties all wadded up. Just try to read and understand.

Hunting where many of us grew up was an entry into manhood for a young'un. It was something where we were expected to LEARN(Emphasis is intentional) safety and certain rules. NOT rules of law or ethics or anything. Hunting was a social sport as well as something to put food on the table. As kids we all did things that were not socially acceptable to the people we hunted with. Everyone had their own pet peeves..but we lived within their guidelines ..Heck we were kids..to go hunting with the adults we would do anything. It was being accepted into their group. Most of these people were farmers and we knew if we were accepted into the circle of friends we had Thousands of acres of land to hunt. Now as to a man that hunted with dogs..especially quail or other critters you just didn't ground swat. It wasn't SOCIALLY acceptable. If you didn't want to live within the social rules you just didn't get to hunt with those people..or get to hunt their land. You can say these social rules aren't "fair" of right or whatever. It was the way we were raised and the way we as adults try to conduct ourselves to this day. I'm sorry you didn't get the opportunities to enjoy the sport and comraderie that we did(it just seems by your posts that you didn't). Nobody has said you are an illegal unethical or unsafe hunter. You are entitled to hunt by yourself in whatever manner you choose. But when you hunt with others..ya just gotta fit in. If you think that is wrong..well...I'm sorry but that is the way it is. So I may post more in this thread but nothing else will be addressed to you. Please stop arguing about semantics.

Oh and another thing..we learned when hunting with a new "friend" that we asked what they expected of us. especially a
when we were kids. Still do it today. 12 of us are getting together this Saturday to discuss our elk hunting foray..guess we'll get the major stuff settled then such as camp chores etc.

[rattus58]

Skeet... I appreciate all that and is no different than what I wrote you, posted here or whatever.... and this is NOT ABOUT ME skeet. It's amazing how you seem to either NOT READ what I've sent you, or just blindly assume things not in evidence.

What I specifically told you if I remember rightly.. but then it was about 20 minutes or so ago, so my memory might be faulty by now, but I seem to remember telling you that what you are taught are your ethics. Didn't I say that somewhere along the line to you... maybe several times? No matter.. if you are taught that ground sluicing is not acceptable then those become your "ethics" if that is what you want to call it. I agree with that.

If you are taught that ground sluicing is ok and its legal, then those teachings are the ethics as you are taught. Are your ethics more important than someone elses?

If someone new comes into your circle, do you take the time to explain what your practices are... IE... we don't shoot birds on the ground... or conversely, shoot birds on the ground but not over my dog... whatever.. rules are established for the game.

I gave you an example of effective range, or did you not read that part... if one has an effective range of 50 yards, is accurate at 50 yards, and kills 100% at 50 yards... does that individual have a right to impose that limitation on others or they are "unethical" as has been suggested is the attitude of some on this forum?

If you go out and shoot constantly throughout the year and get ready for hunting with your pet loads etc, is your guest who hasn't shot at all since last season unethical because he hasn't practiced to assure himself to as accurate as he could be? Would some folks consider that to be unethical skeet?

Now as for the gist of your last post... Please don't patronize me skeet. You've done that enough already besides calling me stupid. I don't go around insulting peoples intelligence as you do skeet and it is right into the playbook of my "criticism" of those who consider their way the only way and everyone else is "unethical".

Please don't ASSUME anything of my childhood skeet or how "disadvantaged" I may have been. The more you do it the more your ignorance is paraded in front of the forum. I NEVER SAID ANY OF THIS WAS ABOUT ME.... so let's get off that theme too could we.

By the way skeet... how was I supposed to take that "panties" reference skeet... and you wonder why I posted what I did? Like I said skeet, its one thing to grow up with a certain practice or "ethics" and a completely different thing to suggest in an open ended manner to assign as unethical the practices of others just because they don't "fit" your mold.

And then there is the flip flop ethic... this is ok if you're new to hunting to get confident, but as you gain confidence its not. Hello?? We have thought police here? We certainly have some squirrel police here, which I found to be really a big haha and points out exactly what I'm saying. Some people have too much time on their hands yet still don't bother to actually think about what they are saying. And I'm still waiting for the list of "unethicals"... I believe there were about 50?

You said it correctly skeet... finally... you practice your hunting style and your friends who are in your circle have certain practices that YOU all accept as how you hunt. Those in YOUR circle who would not subscribe to YOUR "ethics" should be asked to leave. Who's got a problem with that? I certainly don't. But that is not at all what started this conversation.

If it is legal, there are no unethicals. If you know and stick to your effective range in your hunting gear and have studied your quarry as to where to shoot to kill it, you're ready to hunt.

Aloha..

[skeet]

Sheesh..Some people are so disadvantaged they don't even realize it. I guess I just don't understand...Ladies and gentlemen..Rattus IS exactly what he portrays himself to be.

[rattus58]

Yes ladies and gentlemen... Rattus is exactly what he portrays himself to be.. a prohunter advocate who doesn't preach divisiveness by deriding how other people hunt as others here on this forum seem to relish.

Rattus is a guy who actually participates in preserving, protecting and promoting public hunting.