Originally posted by Husqvarna:
the problems with ethics in hunting is that they are not set by the ones hunting.
we cannot bait bear here but that is the best way to distinguish a solitary bear from one with cubs.
Find Animal.
Shoot Animal.
Butcher Animal.
Eat Animal.
Legal isn't always ethical, but it generally tends to be.
Joe Public has no business participating in the decision making that the Game and Fish are experts at.
G&F Biologists are not elected officials. I am not calling them politicians, you are.
I would call it "imposed ethics" that come by allowing non-hunters to vote on feel good measures to limit hunters opportunities. Joe Public has no business participating in the decision making that the Game and Fish are experts at.
All I am saying is that G&F biologist are waaay more qualified to assess herd conditions than anyone. If anyone thinks they know better, they should be employed by the state. There is nothing political about hunting and managing game, until the PC police get involved or there is financial gain in play. I tend to be optomistic and believe - at least in my state - G&F have the best interest of both the hunter and the hunted in mind and not the special interest groups.
Joe Public has no business participating in the decision making that the Game and Fish are experts at.
G&F Biologists are not elected officials. I am not calling them politicians, you are.
Not at all. I called them Bureaucrats. Different cat altogether.