Prof Young
New member
Forum Friends:
Yours truly got a commentary published in the winter edition of the Illinois Shooter. See pic. Pasted in text below
Ta da.
Life is good.
Prof Young
What is Fair Chase?
“The only truly fair way to hunt would be to walk into the woods naked and wrestle the animal down with my bare hands.”
I spoke these words to an artist colleague at a college faculty dinner. At a small rural college it wasn’t unusual to have a handful of faculty who owned guns and did some hunting, but I was nonetheless a paradox. I was a theatre artist. Gun owner, hunter, theatre artist . . . one of these things I not like the others. Once I had a college president tell me that one of the reasons he supported my hire was just that. His words were something like “I wanted to get to know a guy who is a theatre artist and a hunter.”
The comment about walking into the woods naked elicited a nice giggle from my colleague’s wife. And for part of the remainder of the evening we had a good conversation about what is “fair chase” when it comes to hunting. I pointed out that hunting is not a competition between the animal and the man. The animal is not looking to “win the game.” I’m not even sure that, while the animal is acting on survival instincts, it’s conscious of the idea of survival. Nor is hunting a combat. Unless I’m hunting seriously dangerous game like a giant bear or a rhinoceros, I’m in no danger of the animal hurting me. Even if the animal does hurt me it’s not because that creature sees me as the enemy. I’m pretty sure animals don’t get into that kind of abstract thought. (By the way, I’ve not hunted bear or rhinoceros.)
Originally hunting was part of survival, and in that case “fair chase” be damned. If my survival depends on what I can kill in the woods then I’ll take every advantage I can. If technology makes it more likely that I’ll be able to feed my family, my tribe, then I’ll use every bit of technology available to me. But the vast majority of us in the USA don’t hunt for survival.
The first time I bow hunted it was with a wooden recurve bow and wooden arrows. I never killed anything with that set up, but it wasn’t for lack of trying. The closest I came to a kill was when a turkey came into range and I made the mistake of shooting an arrow slightly heavier than what I’d practiced with. The arrow slid under the bird and that was the only shot I got.
Jump ahead a few years. Now, by hunting with a crossbow made of magnesium alloys, with an adjustable-power scope on it and carbon fiber arrows that have mechanical broad heads which expand to five inches wide on impact, I can kill any turkey that comes within forty yards.
Is the wooden recurve more “fair chase” then the high tech crossbow? My heart says “yes” but my head says “no.” My heart says the wooden recurve gives the animal a better chance of surviving. My heart says I have to become a more skillful archer, a better hunter, to kill a deer when I use a recurve bow.
My head says, “Don’t be ridiculous.” The whole point of hunting is to kill the animal. If I wanted the animal to survive, I wouldn’t hunt.
Anytime I walk into the woods with more than just my bare hands . . . I’m taking advantage of technology. And taking advantage of all the technology available to me does make me a better hunter. All that technology helps make me more likely to kill an animal. And part of being a good hunter is making a successful and quick kill. Modern technology helps me do that.
So what is fair chase?
I think the idea of “fair chase” has a lot to do with respecting the animal. I’m sure animals feel pain. My very first kill was a squirrel. I picked up it’s “lifeless” body and was shocked to feel it’s heart still beating. I had to dispatch it with a second shot to the chest. Inflicting pain is not respect, but hard to completely avoid when hunting. It bothers me when a deer doesn’t go down immediately after the shot. In most cases the deer lives on for a while after I pull the trigger. Lots of pain there.
I gave up handgun hunting for a while after I saw the bullet hit the shoulder, but never found the deer. Hours and hours of looking only found one small spot of blood. I think I only wounded that deer. That’s not respecting the animal. So does the idea of “fair chase” include the responsibility for a “clean” kill? I think it does.
I don’t know for sure that animals have emotions, but they certainly act like they do. When my dogs have done some mischief my query of “WHO DID THIS?” elicits a response that looks fearful to me. When I get home they celebrate as if they are glad to see me. They “show” emotions.
So if I cause an animal pain, is that negative compounded by the emotion of fear? Does the fear that comes along with the pain compound my potential to dis-respect the animals I hunt?
If I want to show respect for the animal then should I hunt at all? Yet modern biology has helped us figure out what a healthy herd size is and hunting helps maintain that health. Hunting becomes a way for animal and man to share the space in healthy ways. Eighty thousand plus deer were killed in the fire arm season alone last year in the state of Illinois. Imagine what would happen to the Illinois deer herd if hunting shut down?
But I digress. Let’s take it as a given that “fair chase” has to do with respecting the animal and that there are good reasons to show that respect.
I typed “fair chase” into an internet search engine. I found a number of definitions and they all went something like this . . . “Fair chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal.” Lots of ambiguous words in that sentence. We could spend hours (days?) digging into the definitions and subtle meanings of “ethical” and “sportsmanlike.” I’d like to focus on that last part. “ . . . a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal.” Anytime we hunt with more than our bare hands we have an advantage over the animal. When does that advantage become “improper or unfair?”
I think some would say that if it’s too “easy” to kill that animal then it’s not a fair chase hunt. When a wealthy person has a hired “guide” drive him out on to the game-ranch where he has his pick of a dozen or so bucks that he can take down from about 100 yard with a rifle and scope . . . I don’t think that’s fair chase.
But how different is that than when I walk into the woods, climb into a deer stand and an hour later am gutting a two year old doe that I took at forty yards with a 12 gauge slug? A major difference here is that the deer I take is free-range and wild, not raised and confined on a game ranch. And yet the person who owns the game ranch has exercised their freedom and created a legal business. Not my cup of tea, but can I really say it’s “wrong?”
Last season I waited in a ground blind about ten hours to kill a deer. Is my kill more fair chase than the wealthy game ranch guy’s? I like to think so, but a lot of it is semantics.
I can’t afford to hunt on a game ranch, but I fish for trout in the well-stocked “trout parks” of neighboring Missouri. I catch trout specifically bred for me to catch. They aren’t wild trout, just like the game ranch deer are not wild deer. Lot’s to ponder here.
Imagine a guy on a snowmobile. He chases a deer through the snow until it is exhausted, then shoots it. I think that’s despicable. It crosses the line into intentional cruelty to the animal. That’s about as far as one can get from what we all agree is fair chase.
Where does all that leave us? I may have raised more questions than I’ve answered. But when one gets right down to it, fair chase is about the choices I make as a hunter. For me that means making a kill that is quick and causes as little suffering and fear as possible. For me that means taking advantage of the best legal technology that I can afford. For me, a modern well-crafted cross bow is fair chase. If that’s not the case for you then stick with your compound or recurve, and more power to ya. In fact if you can kill a deer with a recurve bow, I gotta admire that skill.
Yours truly got a commentary published in the winter edition of the Illinois Shooter. See pic. Pasted in text below
Ta da.
Life is good.
Prof Young
What is Fair Chase?
“The only truly fair way to hunt would be to walk into the woods naked and wrestle the animal down with my bare hands.”
I spoke these words to an artist colleague at a college faculty dinner. At a small rural college it wasn’t unusual to have a handful of faculty who owned guns and did some hunting, but I was nonetheless a paradox. I was a theatre artist. Gun owner, hunter, theatre artist . . . one of these things I not like the others. Once I had a college president tell me that one of the reasons he supported my hire was just that. His words were something like “I wanted to get to know a guy who is a theatre artist and a hunter.”
The comment about walking into the woods naked elicited a nice giggle from my colleague’s wife. And for part of the remainder of the evening we had a good conversation about what is “fair chase” when it comes to hunting. I pointed out that hunting is not a competition between the animal and the man. The animal is not looking to “win the game.” I’m not even sure that, while the animal is acting on survival instincts, it’s conscious of the idea of survival. Nor is hunting a combat. Unless I’m hunting seriously dangerous game like a giant bear or a rhinoceros, I’m in no danger of the animal hurting me. Even if the animal does hurt me it’s not because that creature sees me as the enemy. I’m pretty sure animals don’t get into that kind of abstract thought. (By the way, I’ve not hunted bear or rhinoceros.)
Originally hunting was part of survival, and in that case “fair chase” be damned. If my survival depends on what I can kill in the woods then I’ll take every advantage I can. If technology makes it more likely that I’ll be able to feed my family, my tribe, then I’ll use every bit of technology available to me. But the vast majority of us in the USA don’t hunt for survival.
The first time I bow hunted it was with a wooden recurve bow and wooden arrows. I never killed anything with that set up, but it wasn’t for lack of trying. The closest I came to a kill was when a turkey came into range and I made the mistake of shooting an arrow slightly heavier than what I’d practiced with. The arrow slid under the bird and that was the only shot I got.
Jump ahead a few years. Now, by hunting with a crossbow made of magnesium alloys, with an adjustable-power scope on it and carbon fiber arrows that have mechanical broad heads which expand to five inches wide on impact, I can kill any turkey that comes within forty yards.
Is the wooden recurve more “fair chase” then the high tech crossbow? My heart says “yes” but my head says “no.” My heart says the wooden recurve gives the animal a better chance of surviving. My heart says I have to become a more skillful archer, a better hunter, to kill a deer when I use a recurve bow.
My head says, “Don’t be ridiculous.” The whole point of hunting is to kill the animal. If I wanted the animal to survive, I wouldn’t hunt.
Anytime I walk into the woods with more than just my bare hands . . . I’m taking advantage of technology. And taking advantage of all the technology available to me does make me a better hunter. All that technology helps make me more likely to kill an animal. And part of being a good hunter is making a successful and quick kill. Modern technology helps me do that.
So what is fair chase?
I think the idea of “fair chase” has a lot to do with respecting the animal. I’m sure animals feel pain. My very first kill was a squirrel. I picked up it’s “lifeless” body and was shocked to feel it’s heart still beating. I had to dispatch it with a second shot to the chest. Inflicting pain is not respect, but hard to completely avoid when hunting. It bothers me when a deer doesn’t go down immediately after the shot. In most cases the deer lives on for a while after I pull the trigger. Lots of pain there.
I gave up handgun hunting for a while after I saw the bullet hit the shoulder, but never found the deer. Hours and hours of looking only found one small spot of blood. I think I only wounded that deer. That’s not respecting the animal. So does the idea of “fair chase” include the responsibility for a “clean” kill? I think it does.
I don’t know for sure that animals have emotions, but they certainly act like they do. When my dogs have done some mischief my query of “WHO DID THIS?” elicits a response that looks fearful to me. When I get home they celebrate as if they are glad to see me. They “show” emotions.
So if I cause an animal pain, is that negative compounded by the emotion of fear? Does the fear that comes along with the pain compound my potential to dis-respect the animals I hunt?
If I want to show respect for the animal then should I hunt at all? Yet modern biology has helped us figure out what a healthy herd size is and hunting helps maintain that health. Hunting becomes a way for animal and man to share the space in healthy ways. Eighty thousand plus deer were killed in the fire arm season alone last year in the state of Illinois. Imagine what would happen to the Illinois deer herd if hunting shut down?
But I digress. Let’s take it as a given that “fair chase” has to do with respecting the animal and that there are good reasons to show that respect.
I typed “fair chase” into an internet search engine. I found a number of definitions and they all went something like this . . . “Fair chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal.” Lots of ambiguous words in that sentence. We could spend hours (days?) digging into the definitions and subtle meanings of “ethical” and “sportsmanlike.” I’d like to focus on that last part. “ . . . a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal.” Anytime we hunt with more than our bare hands we have an advantage over the animal. When does that advantage become “improper or unfair?”
I think some would say that if it’s too “easy” to kill that animal then it’s not a fair chase hunt. When a wealthy person has a hired “guide” drive him out on to the game-ranch where he has his pick of a dozen or so bucks that he can take down from about 100 yard with a rifle and scope . . . I don’t think that’s fair chase.
But how different is that than when I walk into the woods, climb into a deer stand and an hour later am gutting a two year old doe that I took at forty yards with a 12 gauge slug? A major difference here is that the deer I take is free-range and wild, not raised and confined on a game ranch. And yet the person who owns the game ranch has exercised their freedom and created a legal business. Not my cup of tea, but can I really say it’s “wrong?”
Last season I waited in a ground blind about ten hours to kill a deer. Is my kill more fair chase than the wealthy game ranch guy’s? I like to think so, but a lot of it is semantics.
I can’t afford to hunt on a game ranch, but I fish for trout in the well-stocked “trout parks” of neighboring Missouri. I catch trout specifically bred for me to catch. They aren’t wild trout, just like the game ranch deer are not wild deer. Lot’s to ponder here.
Imagine a guy on a snowmobile. He chases a deer through the snow until it is exhausted, then shoots it. I think that’s despicable. It crosses the line into intentional cruelty to the animal. That’s about as far as one can get from what we all agree is fair chase.
Where does all that leave us? I may have raised more questions than I’ve answered. But when one gets right down to it, fair chase is about the choices I make as a hunter. For me that means making a kill that is quick and causes as little suffering and fear as possible. For me that means taking advantage of the best legal technology that I can afford. For me, a modern well-crafted cross bow is fair chase. If that’s not the case for you then stick with your compound or recurve, and more power to ya. In fact if you can kill a deer with a recurve bow, I gotta admire that skill.
