Critical Mass

R

roy reali

New member
I started another thread the other day about handgun shooting. I mentioned a certain target I hit to indicate how well my shooting with a certain handugn was going. The creature I shot was fully legal as far as the state of Nevada is concerned.

There are certain animals I will not hunt for personal reasons. I will not hunt for wolves. They are too dog-like. I am a bleeding heart dog lover. Now, if my life, my family's life, or my pet's lives were in danger due to a wolf, I would not hesitate to use some high speed lead poisoning. I guess that wolves are becoming pests in ceratin areas. I will not criticize those that hunt them, I just won't join them.

My cousin's daughter is a bit of a tom-boy. She hunts just about anything. There is one animal she won't shoot though, it is the dove. She thinks they are too cute to kill. She will kill deer, she will kill pheasants, she will kill ducks, but no doves no way. A friend of mine will also hunt and kill any feathered creature, including doves. But he will not hunt anything with fur. What I like about these two folks is that they don't criticize others that partake in hunting that they don't.

Why is it that some hunters have to be openly critical, if not hostile, to other hunters? If a person shoots and kills any of God's creatures, for whatever reason, doesn't that person become hypercritical if they demean any other hunter of any creature for whatever reason. In fact, even if a complete nonhunter is a meat eater or leather wearer, should they not complain about those of us that do hunt?

There are some Americans that want all hunters stopped. When we fight amongst ourselves, are we not helping their cause?
 
Good question, roy. Why do people attack or ridicule anyone who has personal code of ethics? Because they themselves do not? Because they use their own behavior as the acceptable standard? Because it is easier to point fingers than to change yourself? I say keep doing what you do and turn a deaf ear to the scoffers.
 
Hi Roy,

I saw your other thread, and though I felt no real need to respond, I figured some negative comments would come. They did, or at least one did. I didn't go back after that.

There was a time in my life, when I was younger and more foolish, that I thought much the way you're thinking now. Killing an animal or bird is killing an animal or bird, and the reasons are irrelevant.

However, as I matured as an adult, I began to realize that it really does matter. If all of us who hunt simply shot animals and birds indiscriminately, how long would it take to cause problems for their survival?

That's why we have seasons on birds and animals that are hunted for food. If we didn't, their numbers would dwindle, and the chances for that species' survival wouldn't be good.

It's not whether you kill an animal or bird or not that really matters. I kill the same critters you mentioned killing when they're damaging the fruit in my trees. I don't mind if they get a few (they will anyway), and I'll leave the fruit that's pecked for them to finish, but I'll thin them a bit to minimize the damage. That said, I don't shoot them in the fall and winter when there's no fruit, even though they're legal to shoot year 'round. If there's a reason, then do what needs done.

I kill a lot of coyotes that are after chickens and such these days. For me, it's a matter of protecting what's mine, and I'll do it at any time of year if they pose a threat. Even so, I only "hunt" those same animals during the winter when the fur is prime, and I'll skin them to utilize the fur. If I see a summertime coyote while out 'n about, I'll leave it alone if it's not hurting anything. I'm not out to exterminate the population; I'm only out to "hunt", or limit the damage that is done by some of them, even though they're legal to shoot year 'round.

I've hunted and killed deer, antelope, elk, javalina, bear, rabbits, quail, dove, and lots of other critters for food and "sport" (for lack of a better term), all within legal seasons. The animals/birds were cared for accordingly, and were utilized as food. I also don't take more than I can and will use. IMO, there is a difference between this, and a person who kills the same animals and leaves them to rot. The animal is just as dead either way, but one is utilized, and the other wasted. The difference lies in "why" it was killed.

The "whys" behind what we do is, in many cases, the primary difference between being morally and/or legally right, and being morally and/or legally wrong. If a man breaks into my home in the middle of the night and kills me, it's considered murder. This would be morally and legally wrong in the eyes of most folks. If he breaks into my home in the middle of the night and I kill him, it's considered justifiable homicide. Either way someone is killed, and the primary difference is in why they were killed.

Now, I didn't criticize you in the other thread, and I'm not doing it now. You asked a question (or, implied several) that I'm attempting to explain my own views on. Shooting what you did was not illegal, yet it's considered "wrong" in some people's eyes.

My advice? Think about what you do, and why you do it. Then, act according to the dictates of your own conscience, within lawful guidelines, and don't look for or depend on comfort or justification from others. As long as you are not disappointed in yourself, and you've done nothing illegal, then all is likely well.
 
As long as it's legal I don't see a problem

If there are animals you refuse to hunt, fine, good for you. If you don't have that compunction and will hunt anything, then good for you too. Finally if you don't want to hunt and kill anything, fine and dandy by me.

There are more animals that I don't hunt than not. Mostly that's because of time constraints or cost. In the case of some, such as bears, I don't care for the taste. In the case of other top predators I just don't like the idea of killing them.

I actually don't mind criticism from people who choose not to hunt. I disagree with them, but they have taken an ethical stand that is understandable.
I am surprised by people who hunt yet criticize others hunters for hunting game they choose not to hunt or criticize others for refusing to hunt game they choose to hunt.
In the case of hunting or not hunting wolves, opinions can get quite heated.
 
There are some Americans that want all hunters stopped. When we fight amongst ourselves, are we not helping their cause?
Click to expand...

That sort of depends. What sort of benefit do you see to them via the fights amongst ourselves? Do you really think it is an all or nothing deal, that we can't have hunters with certain reservations about hunting?

Based on how I have seen some folks hunt, one thing I know for certain is that they are people that should not be hunting. I have no problem about complaining about hunters who don't check zeros on their scopes before hunting, who take shots they have no business taking, who don't attempt to track down wounded animals, and who shoot across fence lines at animals they know they can't recover.

Of course, I feel that there are drivers who should not be allowed to drive because of their obvious disregard for other drivers, pedestrians, and traffic laws.
 
If it's legal then that's the end of it. People have opinions on what is ethical or not, well, they're just opinion's. They can follow them for themselves and maybe pass them on to someone who they mentor but that is it.

Let's remember that when anyone writes down some action they've done on a forum such as the Internet SOMEONE will find fault or criticize.

Whats with all this wolf hunting? Is hunting wolfs legal anywhere?
 
Wolf hunting has been open in Idaho for a while, it became legal last year.:D:eek:

If someone doesn't want to hunt a particular animal, great.
The problem comes when they expect everyone else to do the same.
 
The animal planet fairies would have us believe that they have souls. Animals are not people. Keep your conviction, stay in the minority, and be satisfied with your friends. I only have a couple and one is my wife.
 
robhof

I've hunted prairie dogs and don't eat them, I actually got paid or permission to hunt as a teen by killing feral dogs and cats on farms that good hearted people dumped on farmers, who already had enough mouths to feed. I shoot grackles and English sparrows just because they crap on my patio and it's good practice for hunting season. To each his own, I might be criticised for not being a sportsman, but I am a hunter and I enjoy it and I'll defend your right to hunt as well as mine, which should unite us and not devide us. The NRA fights all antigun legislation, because any loss is a foot in the door for all our gun rights being taken, so yes it's all or none, as hunting should be, hunt what you want, but don't begrudge others their likes.
 
roy reali said:
Why is it that some hunters have to be openly critical, if not hostile, to other hunters? If a person shoots and kills any of God's creatures, for whatever reason, doesn't that person become hypercritical if they demean any other hunter of any creature for whatever reason. In fact, even if a complete nonhunter is a meat eater or leather wearer, should they not complain about those of us that do hunt?

There are some Americans that want all hunters stopped. When we fight amongst ourselves, are we not helping their cause?
Click to expand...

I choose to only hunt or fish for animals that I wish to use for food. I don't particularly care what anyone else chooses to do, if it's not a species I care to fish for or hunt, but is legal, then have at it. I may not go along with you if invited, but have a blast and do it safely.

The only issue I have is people posting videos or pictures that provide ammunition to the anti-hunting crowd. I enjoy a good prairie dog blowing up video as much as the next guy, but do we really need to be posting this stuff? Same goes for the deer/elk/whatever pictures with gore everywhere and the rifle leaned up on the animal, usually pointing right at the hunter's head.

I'm not against posting trophy pictures, just think a little bit and maybe try not to look like some sort of bloodthirsty pirate.

The number of hunters is steadily declining, and our future depends on us being looked at as responsible, ethical people, not a bunch blood-crazy fools.
 
I don't criticize anybody for hunting whatever they choose. I hunt any legal game animal and varmint I can and respect others beleifs. The only thing I can think of that I have a problem with is Indian subsistance hunting in Alaska. There is not nearly enough restrictions on this. Alaska is part of the United States, sorry you lost (a long time ago), join us or not, your choice.
 
Sometimes I hunt for meat, sometimes I hunt to control populations of less-than-desirable critters, when hunting hogs I do both! I could care less about wingshooting (maybe because I'm lousy @ it!) but I buy the stamps anyway. We can't all hunt hogs, deer, ducks, bear or even prairie dogs and we shouldn't criticize our brother hunters that don't have the same tastes we do.
I won't shoot a critter just to watch it die, however, and feel anti-gunners would love to paint us all with that brush.
 
TXGunNut summed it up pretty well for me.

I do not think a lot of these people understand how the ecosystem works. To a lot of people, the animals look like cute little things that are to be protected. When you remove one animal from it, but leave another, you run the chance of having one animal get out of control.

The dove and rabbit are a good example. If you were to remove all the birds of prey, that would leave only the canine type animals (for the most part) to control the population.

A dove will have three - five two egg clutches a year in the wild. The young are capable of breeding in six months. A wild rabbit will have between three and six kits a litter, with three - five litters a year. Over population is a real possibility.

With the over-population comes disease and possible malnutrition.

Then you have what is commonly called the slob-hunter. Someone who shoots anything that moves and does not care how he/she hunts. It is all about the now and having their fun, reguardless of the rules and common sense.

I know we have all complained about the rules and regulations and the cost of the licenses to hunt, but if there were no guidelines to our activities, we would be over-run by certain critters and have others we would never have a chance to hunt.

If it is legal to hunt a certain species, I keep my opinions (mostly :D) to myself about what you do.
 
I missed the first posting, but get the drift from this one. I don't hunt doves or geese. Other people have given me both. There is nothing on them worth eating. If you want to hunt them, fine, just don't pawn them off on me. I will hunt and eat squirrels. They make a fine pie even though they are a pain to clean. But, same thing, don't give me squirrels undressed so you can justify running around and shooting them. I really don't want that deer you shot and drove around with for 3 days in 70* weather to show it off. I don't care what you shoot legally, just don't use me to ease your conscience.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top