I hope some coyote hunters have ethics

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sissyhunter

Inactive
I have hunted all my life, and as a teenager hunted some coyotes with mouth calls in Idaho. This despite my father's unique ethic of never shooting a predator of any kind. He had an indian-like respect for certain fellow creatures. But whatever your ethical viewpoint, there has to be a limit. I just watched my first episode of Foxpro Furtakers where three hunters, one a Ruger company executive testing out a new gun, were hunting coyotes with one of Foxpro's artificial recording calls. The first coyote was a big beautiful thing. The Ruger guy shot at it on the trot, with no real need, and obviously hit it in the right rear thigh. The coyote reacted like one of my dogs would, spinning in a circle biting at the bloody wound. They tried to track the wounded animal but gave up after 3 to 500 yards. But what really bothered me is that not one of these humans made any comment about the suffering they inflicted on this animal that, like a human, can enjoy life, have fun, have a family, and otherwise live a life. Instead they commented about what a bummer it was that the Ruger guy didn't get the varmint. Thats another thing that bothers me about humans when hunting something that has feelings. The try to de-animalize animals by calling them derogatory names. We have a whole "varmint" rifle industry out there advocating killing these incredibly intelligent creatures. Anyway, these three hunters got right back to hunting, bemoaning their "bad luck" and again called in (with their recording gadget they sell on the show) and shot a huge coyote in the rear quarters. This one again spun around in circles and then gave the most horrible open-mouthed cry up into the air that I have ever seen an animal make. Please understand that if you choose to kill these animals you should take standing shots, you should make sure the animal is killed more or less instantly with your new hyper-velocity rifle. And please leave true wilderness areas alone (this was not one). What is the purpose of flying into a wilderness area of Canada to shoot wolves or grizzlies that are doing nothing more than participating in a complex ecosystem? Shoot coyotes where they are obviously too numerous because their natural predator -- the wolf -- has been slaughtered by humans and their past reckless stewardship of nature. But do it humanely, and like the indians, acknowledge you have taken the life of a fellow intelligent creature.
 
Coyote in some areas (like mine) are considered a nuisance to livestock. Killing them humane or not is not typically a concern in my neck of the woods. Dead is dead no matter how it is brought about. I am sure that If given the choice a hunter would shoot for the vital or head. However if you've hunted much coyote you'd know they aren't animals to move slowly. Sometimes a shot on the move is all you are presented with and so the opportunity is taken. As opposed to a deer where if the shot doesn't present itself you don't take it. Not taking that shot on a coyote might cost the landowner hundreds of dollars.

Your beliefs are your own and mine are mine. The country I live in allows me to believe differently than others. I understand your logic and stance on the subject but try and understand that of others as well.
 
Rip. I couldn't have said it any better myself. I agree to a tee with you. I run 60 head of cattle on a small family farm. Last year we lost 4 calves and 1 cow do to coyotes. I don't care where I shoot them. As long as they die. When it comes to my living or a dog.... Sorry the dogs gone.
 
Coyotes and ethics

You might check the thread, "My Coyote Jihad". Some hunters, perhaps with some ethical reluctance, see the personal damage done to pets, kids, and domesticated animals in general as a serious nuisance, and take appropriate steps. Ecosystems change in ways that require human intervention to minimize the aforementioned damage as well as the bigger problem or disease and starvation.

These factors can and have decimated coyote populations, just as with other species. In the west, where I live, rabbits and hares can over-populate an area and diseased varmint carcass's will damage other species. As you'll see in the pictures, predation by coyote packs can be problematic for deer populations.

I agree with the concept of the 'sanctity of life'. I avoid shooting 'varmints' unless there is a need - for food or reasonable population control.

Without wishing to stir a political pot too much in a shooting forum, I can only hope that those who's moral position demands that others respect the life of a rabbit, groundhog, or coyote also show equal respect and concern for the defenseless among the human species.

(EDIT - Paragraphs added...! There, Ya Happy?!?)
 
Last edited:
this animal that, like a human, can enjoy life, have fun, have a family, and otherwise live a life.
Click to expand...

Thats another thing that bothers me about humans when hunting something that has feelings. The try to de-animalize animals by calling them derogatory names.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of anthropomorphism? That is just what you are doing here!

Coyotes do not have "feelings" like people. The ethics of the TV show you cite aside, maybe you should not be a hunter?

Oh, and BTW, don't lecture me about hunting in wilderness areas.
 
You are preaching to the wrong crowed. Many of us live and hunt in wilderness areas. And as far as the wolf goes you take all you want and shove them where the sun don't shine. Many of us are sick of out of state people, many of which never even visit here, tell us in the west how to manage our wild life.

We used to have some really good elk and deer populations. Now we don't have hardly squat thanks to those **** who think they need to mind others business and affairs.
 
Spinners, as they are called, are very common on predator hunting shows.


I kill many coyotes, yes it's fun, but the main reason is: they are brutal killers. Once you find a prized animal that you helped bottle raise with its guts strewn about, you stop admiring their beauty real quick.

The fact of the matter is, coyote populations continue to grow as we make more favorable conditions for them to flourish.

Coyote and pig control has no place for sportsmen.

That being said, I have never had a "spinner" because I will never take a long shot on them. Coyote hunting for sport is about making long shots. I tend to get close to them to shoot them. I shoot near livestock, so missing is not an option. Many coyotes suffer from mange so killing them before winter is doing them a favor.
 
I would like to add that, coyote like canines are in every land around the world and we have been competing with them since the dawn of man, and hunting them is old as time.
 
Why do we say things like "Animals kill for FUN"?

Animals don't kill for fun, they just kill! It is all instinct. They have absolutly no idea what "fun" means.

Other than that, I agree with you, freedom475.
 
Wile E. Coyote may be the last man standing whenever we manage to obliterate ourselves God forbid. The Coyote has pretty much sneered at all efforts to contain his number. He has expanded his range across the continent. He has bred domesticated dogs and the Red Wolf. He is thriving in New York City and the rural heartland. It is really a quite admirable accomplishment by any measure. None of this justifies animal cruelty. Nor do I think that any stockkiller should be spared. As far as him being obliterated. I doubt we need worry.
 
If I get woken up at 03:00 one more time, I am going on a Jihad.

Between them howling and the dogs barking at them, it is next to impossible to sleep.

Since I can't kill the dogs, my wife won't let me, I will have to kill the coyotes.

They aren't native here anyway.

I shoot nuisance animals all the time.

Squirrels for chewing on my roof and getting into bird feeders, muskrats for digging in my dike, crows for waking me up in the morning, mice for just being mice, rabbits for eating garden flowers, ground hogs for digging up fields.

BECAUSE they are a nuisance.:eek:
 
Wile E. Coyote may be the last man standing whenever we manage to obliterate ourselves God forbid. The Coyote has pretty much sneered at all efforts to contain his number.
Click to expand...

I dunno 'bout that: when they were offering a $1 bounty for a set of ears back in the Depression, they got right scarce in my G'Pa's AO ......
 
sissyhunter, maybe you should look up this guy. I think he is somewhere in Utah.

yotes.jpg
 
Higher mammals like coyotes, wolves and bears don't think like humans and can't use a keyboard, so we should kill them by any means? Anthopomophic? Animals that prey on the cows and sheep should be killed no matter what the method or suffering imposed? Coyotes are hard to hit so just shoot away -- hey, you can't eat them anyway. These are common beliefs, passed down by the varmint industry and unscientific and untruthful ranchers -- the same ranchers who won't let the public on their land to shoot all the varmints eating up their cattle. We all have dogs, so I noticed no one tried to say coyotes don't have fun or don't enjoy life. I think we were all born with a conscience that told us that inflicting unnecessary suffering was bad. What is wrong with allowing that conscience to take root again, even though all the unscientific, biased, knee-jerk reactionarys try to convince us that having a conscience is for fairyland. Am I anti-human? No. I've heard that term from unscientific, creationist zealots who point to their god after killing an animal. I'm not anti anything but meaness and stupidity. When humans say and do things I'm ashamed of, I'm entitled to call them what they are. Who do the animals have advocating for them? Why is it so bad that some humans will acknowledge the reckless stewardship that defines the European relationshp with nature and animals. When humans wise up and take responsibility, I'll stop advocating for ethical shots. I'm not anti-hunting. In fact, I believe hunting results in "ethical meat", which is the opposite of "unethical meat". Ethical meat comes from animals killed quickly and humanely after having an opportunity to have a decent quality of life. An elk shot through the lungs, which dies within minutes, creates ethical meat. A pig forced to live in a metal cage in which it can not turn, artificially inseminated, fed hormones and antibiotics and having its teeth and hooves cut to prevent it from hurting itself when it is driven insane, is an example of an unethical meat source. A pig raised in a barnyard where it sees the sun, socializes with its own kind, and has a decent quality of life before being butchered is a source of ethical meat. We allowed a class of Harvard 1970s-80s consultants (I can point to the actual names of the consulting companies) convince us that "sum zero" (profit above all else) ethics were good for us. This created State Farm, Enron, and Exxon-type companies. Those in the goods market, like Walmart, not only sold Chinese goods, but affirmatively went to China to make everything they could get made there, abusing the people already working for slave wages in the process. But the sum zero mentality flowed over into mechanized meat production, fogetting that we were dealing with living, feeling fellow creatures with no natural defense against greed. If we paid an extra nickel or two a pound so that creatures did not have to suffer, would we be so financially devastated. Would it be so bad if we ate 20 lbs less of unethical pork every year. I advocate for any higher mammal made to suffer by human meaness and greed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top