What John Q. Public thinks of hunters.....

This weekend I encountered a citizen bird watching, and he asked to be allowed on my property (combo defunct farm/cottage/hunting camp). I agreed, but asked that he only come on when I am there. He said he understood, as he had "hunters trespass" on his own property. Another time someone approached him to retrieve a dead deer. He said it turned out that deer had been shot from the road, and the guy was charged.
I explained that I am a hunter, and hate to hear stories like that. The bird watcher then said he does allow hunting, and has no problem with that part, just that he really doesn't like trespassers, for any reason. I guess he and I have the same point of view.
The reason for this post is that it reminded me how the average citizen is really on our (the hunters) side, but it is very easy to put people off with bad behavior. Something to keep in mind.

Generally,I've found the same positive outlook by most people I speak to. The frustration with trespassers seems to be all-encompassing. One fellow mentioned that he hated "hunters at night" down his concession which really piqued my attention. I asked if he had called Police or CO's. He said he knew hunting was a legal activity,so,he thought it would be a waste of time because he'd called before and they kind of blew him off about it. I nearly flipped out when I heard that. I didn't waste any time cluing him in that they weren't hunters by any stretch. They were armed criminals and should be regarded accordingly.

I use the term "muggle" stolen from Harry Potter to refer to someone outside my activities. If I'm geocaching, not catchers are muggles. If I'm hunting, non-hunters are muggles and so on.

Anyway, when hunting I always try and be stealthy. You never know if that muggle who sees you park on huntable public land will come back and slash your tires. I generally assume muggles are anti-hunter unless I talk to them and find out otherwise.

That said, we are all ambassadors for our sport. We need to be polite and respectful and always condone illegal behavior!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

I don't believe for a second that the "average citizen" is on the side of hunters. Although some may be there is still a large contingency of people/public that honestly dislike the pastime.
It is based on many misconceptions including not understanding why "we" must kill defenceless animals when you can simply go to the store to buy your meat !!!!
As I hunter who doesn't own land I would say that if you knocked on 10 doors for permission the success rate is 20-30%. The reasons for refusals would be many but along with these misconceptions, which are simply ridiculous, we suffer for the few fools, poachers and general idiots that the public base their opinions on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smokin'stoegie

I don't believe for a second that the "average citizen" is on the side of hunters. Although some may be there is still a large contingency of people/public that honestly dislike the pastime.
It is based on many misconceptions including not understanding why "we" must kill defenceless animals when you can simply go to the store to buy your meat !!!!
As I hunter who doesn't own land I would say that if you knocked on 10 doors for permission the success rate is 20-30%. The reasons for refusals would be many but along with these misconceptions, which are simply ridiculous, we suffer for the few fools, poachers and general idiots that the public base their opinions on.

---

There have actually been a number of surveys, the majority does not hunt but does not get offended by it, the number of anti-hunters and hunters are about even.

You have a 20-30% success rate for permission because people hunt without asking and ruin it for the rest of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smokin'stoegie

As I hunter who doesn't own land I would say that if you knocked on 10 doors for permission the success rate is 20-30%.

---

Those numbers might hold true in rural areas, where people understand the need for and benefits of hunting. But in the general population, you will not find much support for hunting from those that aren't exposed to it.

I remember during the institution of the Gun Registry a survey was conducted of the general population and there was less than 5% support for the need for hunting in today's society. They don't buy the 'meat' theory and see it only as killing wildlife for sport.

It all comes down to how the question is asked and where it is asked. If you ask 1000 people in Sudbury and another 1000 people in Toronto about hunting you will get different answers to questions. Do you see a need for guns vs Do you have an issue with people hunting.

Heck ask my wife about guns, she doesn't like them but tolerates them she new I owned guns before we got married. My son now has his PAL and she still doesn't like guns or hunting but eats meat (She also didn't like me putting names on the Meat Hens I raised when they were in the freezer). Stats can be construed so many ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

I remember during the institution of the Gun Registry a survey was conducted of the general population and there was less than 5% support for the need for hunting in today's society. They don't buy the 'meat' theory and see it only as killing wildlife for sport.

---

In fact, surveys show over 80% of the general public support hunting for food.

Support drops off rapidly when hunting is characterized as "trophy hunting."

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

In fact, surveys show over 80% of the general public support hunting for food.

Support drops off rapidly when hunting is characterized as "trophy hunting."

---

What hurts us the most are the dimwits who post pictures of their African trophies on Facebook. Worst are the losers who kill giraffes. I've worked in southern Africa and giraffe are easy to find, not particularly wary (lions excepted) and not in great demand as food. Shooting a giraffe would require the same degree of hunting acumen as shooting a Canada goose waddling around a municipal park in Ontario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

In fact, surveys show over 80% of the general public support hunting for food.

Support drops off rapidly when hunting is characterized as "trophy hunting."

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

Trophy hunting usually gets a very adverse reaction among Canadian hunters,too,until the intricacies and nuances of African game preserve hunts with professional outfitters are explained in detail by those who have had that experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What hurts us the most are the dimwits who post pictures of their African trophies on Facebook. Worst are the losers who kill giraffes. I've worked in southern Africa and giraffe are easy to find, not particularly wary (lions excepted) and not in great demand as food. Shooting a giraffe would require the same degree of hunting acumen as shooting a Canada goose waddling around a municipal park in Ontario.

---

Interesting how you seem to pick an animal that 99% of Anti-Hunters never even think about. Care to fill us in as to why?

I am not sure as to your level of experience with the systematic removal of animals for the purpose of Population control or Conservation. With the exception of Plains Game( Wilder Beast, Zebra, and the other smaller African animals with a high reproduction rate) only older members of game species are taken. The older animals are taken for many reasons although the most common reasons would be they will become a danger to people( lions attacking people because they can not hunt), they no longer would be able to contribute to the health of their Species, the area can not support the number of animals in it, or they are lame and are suffering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Trophy hunting usually gets a very adverse reaction among Canadian hunters,too,until the intricacies and nuances of African game preserve hunts with professional outfitters are explained in detail by those who have had that experience.

---

Too often the nuances are a fatass who has read too much Capstick and Hemingway is taken in a bakkie to a hide adjacent to a waterhole where he promptly shoots a zebra, warthog and a giraffe. He is hauled back to the camp where everyone calls him "Bwana." Then he goes home to wait until the hides arrive and boast to his friends about his "African Experience."

The PHs like him because he's easy picking and as one told me, "If some silly bugger wants to pay me to help him shoot an effing zebra then I'm happy to take his money."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Trophy hunting usually gets a very adverse reaction among Canadian hunters,too,until the intricacies and nuances of African game preserve hunts with professional outfitters are explained in detail by those who have had that experience.

---

Being naive is what hurts us in all cases. Teaching people about what trophy hunting is and how it works in this country really helps. The number of people who thought you did not have to take the meat is amazing to me, they just do not know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Interesting how you seem to pick an animal that 99% of Anti-Hunters never even think about. Care to fill us in as to why?

I am not sure as to your level of experience with the systematic removal of animals for the purpose of Population control or Conservation. With the exception of Plains Game( Wilder Beast, Zebra, and the other smaller African animals with a high reproduction rate) only older members of game species are taken. The older animals are taken for many reasons although the most common reasons would be they will become a danger to people( lions attacking people because they can not hunt), they no longer would be able to contribute to the health of their Species, the area can not support the number of animals in it, or they are lame and are suffering.

---

My experience comes from working in southern Africa and getting to know PHs and safari outfitters. Don't fall for the myth. "Yes mighty Bwana, our poor little village needs you to fly from far away to protect us from the old lion! Yes, mighty Bwana we would starve to death if you did not provide meat to our little village! Thank-you so much mighty white hunter!"

Get the client out, drop the best animal you can find, get back to the lodge before cocktail hour. It's a business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

My experience comes from working in southern Africa and getting to know PHs and safari outfitters. Don't fall for the myth. "Yes mighty Bwana, our poor little village needs you to fly from far away to protect us from the old lion! Yes, mighty Bwana we would starve to death if you did not provide meat to our little village! Thank-you so much mighty white hunter!"

Get the client out, drop the best animal you can find, get back to the lodge before cocktail hour. It's a business.

---

You did not answer the question.

You sound like you have an axe to grind. when it comes to Phs and Safari operators. Please do tell,
what troubles you so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

It's a business.

---

Which is why I would support someone who wants to legally indulge in a fantasy. Bottom line is if keeping animals on the landscape is more profitable than clearing it and farming guess what I'd choose.
Here in southern Ontario habitat loss is the fall of most upland and game. Lets face it its more profitable to clear land than hunt it. Had there been profit in hunting there would be a lot more critters out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ouzel

This weekend I encountered a citizen bird watching, and he asked to be allowed on my property (combo defunct farm/cottage/hunting camp). I agreed, but asked that he only come on when I am there. He said he understood, as he had "hunters trespass" on his own property. Another time someone approached him to retrieve a dead deer. He said it turned out that deer had been shot from the road, and the guy was charged.
I explained that I am a hunter, and hate to hear stories like that. The bird watcher then said he does allow hunting, and has no problem with that part, just that he really doesn't like trespassers, for any reason. I guess he and I have the same point of view.
The reason for this post is that it reminded me how the average citizen is really on our (the hunters) side, but it is very easy to put people off with bad behavior. Something to keep in mind.

---

Its no surprise land owners are put off. Heck there are threads about tresspassing here on hunting forum. Some on here believe as long as theres no signage or fencing you have the right to tresspass until your told to leave. Sad as these are the people that ruin it for so many others as many land owners want nothing to do with hunters because of tresspassing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

You did not answer the question.

You sound like you have an axe to grind. when it comes to Phs and Safari operators. Please do tell,
what troubles you so.

---

PHs and safari outfitters are decent people for the most part who are making a living. No different than guides in Canada. It's a legal activity and profitable business.

What hurts the image of hunting around the world are "trophy" hunters who go to Africa and boast about animals that are not hard to find or take. Stalk a kudu or square off against a Cape Buffalo and you deserve respect. Shoot a giraffe, zebra or warthog and post it on Facebook and you're an asswipe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

PHs and safari outfitters are decent people for the most part who are making a living. No different than guides in Canada. It's a legal activity and profitable business.

What hurts the image of hunting around the world are "trophy" hunters who go to Africa and boast about animals that are not hard to find or take. Stalk a kudu or square off against a Cape Buffalo and you deserve respect. Shoot a giraffe, zebra or warthog and post it on Facebook and you're an asswipe.

---

Who needs enemies with hunters like you. What hurts the image of hunting is when other hunters hate on each other because of what and how they choose to legally hunt......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What hurts the image of hunting around the world are "trophy" hunters who go to Africa and boast about animals that are not hard to find or take. Stalk a kudu or square off against a Cape Buffalo and you deserve respect. Shoot a giraffe, zebra or warthog and post it on Facebook and you're an asswipe.

---

I could ask you about Baboons, but lets talk about Local Game. Am I an Asswipe, for shooting Groundhogs, Ground Squirrels, Squirrels? How about thinning out a few Coyotes?

You seem to be stuck not only on the word "Trophy", but have a strange belief that if one does not walk hundreds of miles in primitive conditions to kill a lion with a pebble from a sling it's not a "real" hunt.

A hunt is not a success because of the size or type of game taken, nor the hardship endured to find it. No matter if the game has Fins, Feathers or fur ALL game taken is a "TROPHY".

I am guessing you would not be impressed with the photos of my TROPHY size 26 Oz grey Squirrel or my TROPHY size 1.8 Pound Fox Squirrel. You know because they "are not hard to find or take".

Now Glen and his friends may not have been calling me "Bwana", they did call me a few things I can't write on the forum well the handshakes and back slaps were going on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

What hurts us the most are the dimwits who post pictures of their African trophies on Facebook. Worst are the losers who kill giraffes. I've worked in southern Africa and giraffe are easy to find, not particularly wary (lions excepted) and not in great demand as food. Shooting a giraffe would require the same degree of hunting acumen as shooting a Canada goose waddling around a municipal park in Ontario.

---

Badenoch, well count me in as one of those losers who has hunted giraffe. Thanks to the misinformed we actually have to conduct cull hunts to keep Giraffe numbers down in order that they don't damage the canopy too much and therefore the graze of the plains game animals. We use to have hunters and more importantly hunting dollar revenue come in from this, which keeps the very land that the game animals are on from becoming farm land. As for the meat, it isn't my favourite to eat ill give you that (personal preference only, give me bushbuck/impala anyday) but rest assured it sells quickly to market and never goes wasted. Giraffe that are in an area that allows hunting are wary and you will have to pay attention to the wind and your approach if you want to get close enough. Of course any animal in a park (goose included) isn't hunting in my book either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Am I an Asswipe, for shooting Groundhogs, Ground Squirrels, Squirrels?

I am guessing you would not be impressed with the photos of my TROPHY size 26 Oz grey Squirrel or my TROPHY size 1.8 Pound Fox Squirrel. You know because they "are not hard to find or take".

---

To fully qualify as an asswipe please post the facebook link of above noted pics. :joker:

Seriously though would like to see them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Fins, Feathers or fur ALL game taken is a "TROPHY".

---

You called?
My number 1 hunt is woodcock. With quail off the list it is now the smallest game in town so what's my title? Am I worthy of the title of hunter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Species8472

To fully qualify as an asswipe please post the facebook link of above noted pics. :joker:

Seriously though would like to see them.

---

I am not on Facebook so I guess I can't qualify.

But here is what it felt like....
Attachment 38547

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KMG Canada

Badenoch, well count me in as one of those losers who has hunted giraffe. Thanks to the misinformed we actually have to conduct cull hunts to keep Giraffe numbers down in order that they don't damage the canopy too much and therefore the graze of the plains game animals. We use to have hunters and more importantly hunting dollar revenue come in from this, which keeps the very land that the game animals are on from becoming farm land. As for the meat, it isn't my favourite to eat ill give you that (personal preference only, give me bushbuck/impala anyday) but rest assured it sells quickly to market and never goes wasted. Giraffe that are in an area that allows hunting are wary and you will have to pay attention to the wind and your approach if you want to get close enough. Of course any animal in a park (goose included) isn't hunting in my book either.

---

Sure. It's a nice business for KMG Hunting. Take fatass North American or European out. Fine big, slow, unwary giraffe. Shoot from the truck and whisk your client back to the camp for sundowners. Another day's fees taken care of without much sweat. Easier than hunting a buffalo right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Sure. It's a nice business for KMG Hunting. Take fatass North American or European out. Fine big, slow, unwary giraffe. Shoot from the truck and whisk your client back to the camp for sundowners. Another day's fees taken care of without much sweat. Easier than hunting a buffalo right?

---

Funny... you like to refer to the pro-gun crowd as "wild eyed lunatics" or something similar, yet you do a fine job of if yourself on other topics.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to get across to us other than how superior your ethics and methods are to everyone else's. If nothing else your sanctimony will entertain everyone here throughout the summer months.

Carry on...

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

Funny... you like to refer to the pro-gun crowd as "wild eyed lunatics" or something similar, yet you do a fine job of if yourself on other topics.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to get across to us other than how superior your ethics and methods are to everyone else's. If nothing else your sanctimony will entertain everyone here throughout the summer months.

Carry on...

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

---

Until which time hunters start making an effort to improve their public image then it's only a matter of time. The douchebags who parade their African trophies just to elicit a reaction make it tougher for the rest of us. Either you face that fact or can keep your head in the sand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Until which time hunters start making an effort to improve their public image then it's only a matter of time. The douchebags who parade their African trophies just to elicit a reaction make it tougher for the rest of us. Either you face that fact or can keep your head in the sand.

---

It's poor a judgment call on any hunter's part to share pictures and stories of their success with the wrong people. African game, North American game or any game for that matter. What you decide to hunt and how you choose to go about it shouldn't be a major issue to other hunters as long as it's legal, although plenty make it an issue, as you are here.

People just need to be more careful about who they share things with and what they decide to post.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Morale of the story-us hunters,and those who represent us(OFAH comes to my mind)we do not do a good reach out to the public about :why we hunt,what are the benefits of hunting ,and that legal hunting is not a bloodthirsty wanton killing.Actually many times may help the nature by keeping species in check.

A situation comes to my mind-when once asked in a public place,by a public figure,who was a friendly stranger to me-why to kill a moose?My reply was:to save a cow!!!
After settling down with the meaning of the reply,she actually understood, by not harvesting a moose the moose meat would be replaced by another animal killed by a butcher for food .

The Government could also pitch in by helping dealing with trespassing more efficiently,thus discouraging the bad apples from trespassing.
Just my 2 cents.

Bunch of real self righteous sanctimonious a-holes in this thread. Nice to see hunters sticking together. Not.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Another so called hunter slamming hunters?? Wonders never cease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Until which time hunters start making an effort to improve their public image then it's only a matter of time. The douchebags who parade their African trophies just to elicit a reaction make it tougher for the rest of us. Either you face that fact or can keep your head in the sand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Easier than hunting a buffalo right?

---

Not sure what you mean but the last Buffalo I shot, was on a three day trek by snow shoe in February.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Another so called hunter slamming hunters?? Wonders never cease.

---

The real "wonder" is the so-called hunters who blindly defend the unethical, the illegal and the stupid that damage the image of hunting around the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The real "wonder" is the so-called hunters who blindly defend the unethical, the illegal and the stupid that damage the image of hunting around the world.

---

Ethics are personal, if it is illegal it is poaching and not hunting.

Showing off your African trophy is no different than a picture with a whitetail buck, heck, you are aware that many people shoot does and yearlings eh, the also take pictures of them and are proud of their hunt and their animal.

When we speak of medical ethics, legal ethics, professional ethics, ethics are not personal.

Unfortunately it seems the strong sense of hunting ethics that once existed has collapsed to the point at which the only unethical act is to suggest something is unethical.

Bad news: if hunters win't discuss ethical questions, others will discuss them for us.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

When we speak of medical ethics, legal ethics, professional ethics, ethics are not personal.

Unfortunately it seems the strong sense of hunting ethics that once existed has collapsed to the point at which the only unethical act is to suggest something is unethical.

Bad news: if hunters win't discuss ethical questions, others will discuss them for us.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

noun
plural noun: ethics; noun: ethics

1.
moral principles that govern a person's behavior or the conducting of an activity.

Ethics are personal, there are codes of ethics that groups have agreed on, like those that occur when you become a professional engineer, a nurse, a doctor, etc, but that does not change the definition of ethics.

There are no code of ethics that defines hunting, we have laws that have been built around ethics, hence why we have hunting regulations, these are built up by a large enough group wanting to put their ethics into law.

I laugh at your "sense of hunting ethics", I call total BS on this, the amount or crap and borderline/totally illegal practices that have been joked about by older generations is ridiculous.

We have higher populations of game now than ever in Ontario, in Africa the places that allow controlled hunting have increased their animal numbers, it is better for them to have animals to hunt than not, yet the hunting ethics are all screwed up, ha ha ha ha ha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Ethics are personal, there are codes of ethics that groups have agreed on, like those that occur when you become a professional engineer, a nurse, a doctor, etc, but that does not change the definition of ethics.

---

Then I suggest you rely on the definition of ethics.

No definition I have found suggests ethics is primarily personal and individual. Quite the opposite: definitions of ethics tend to stress the idea that ethics are widely accepted or universally shared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

I laugh at your "sense of hunting ethics", I call total BS on this, the amount or crap and borderline/totally illegal practices that have been joked about by older generations is ridiculous.

---

That various people have done unethical things in the past does not suggest that an ethical understanding was absent.

There is a rich body of work on hunting ethics. We see for example notions of what is "sporting," the Rooseveltian ideal of fair chase, etc. This has been around for decades, if not centuries -- as has been disagreement re what ought to be seen as ethical.

On the other hand, the notion that ethics are personal and individual is new. This claim argues, in essence, that ethics do not exist: if ethics are individual, then no individual act can be open to ethical criticism, and ethics becomes a nullity.

Unsurprisingly, this idea is advanced by people arguing against ethical criticism: instead of making a case that an act is ethical, they deny that ethics exist.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The real "wonder" is the so-called hunters who blindly defend the unethical, the illegal and the stupid that damage the image of hunting around the world.

---

Welcome to the list Of CONFIRMED ANTI's among the Forum members.


Got three questions for you.
Hunter shoots an old Elephant that can barely walk in the middle of a crop field were it's been for two or three days. When the hunter approaches the animal can not run away. The hunter walks around till he is in front of the elephant and slowly and carefully places a perfectly aimed round in the animal's brain.
So now I ask you for your three answers and your reasons for each answer.
Unethical?
Illegal?
Stupid?

How about you start, by making the case that this is actually hunting, rather than pest control or veterinary euthanasia?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

In fact, surveys show over 80% of the general public support hunting for food.

---

'Hunting for Food' in context of surveys means sustenance hunting by the Indigenous. The rest of us are considered "Sport' hunters by the general public, it's not a necessity and support by the general population drops off substantially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

When we speak of medical ethics, legal ethics, professional ethics, ethics are not personal.

---

Everyone of those you mentioned have special 'Ethics' committees that review reported behavior of their members for breaches in ethics because many of the rules/laws, as written, aren't sufficient in defining how different people interpret them...no different than with hunters.

Popular Lawyer Joke on Ethics:

After drafting a will for an elderly client, the lawyer announced a fee of $100.
The client gave the lawyer a $100 bill.
After the client left, the lawyer saw that the client had in fact paid $200, as two of the client's $100 bills had stuck together.

Looking at the $100 overpayment, an ethical question arose in the lawyer's mind: "Do I tell my partner?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

'Hunting for Food' in context of surveys means sustenance hunting by the Indigenous. The rest of us are considered "Sport' hunters by the general public....

---

Unsubstantiated and, as it happens, incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Everyone of those you mentioned have special 'Ethics' committees that review reported behavior of their members....

---

Also incorrect. True of lawyers, doctors, etc. but not true in many other areas where ethics are understood to apply. The existence of ethics does not rely on an enforcement mechanism: that is like arguing that morality cannot exist without hell.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

How about you start, by making the case that this is actually hunting, rather than pest control or veterinary euthanasia?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

I will fill in the story after he answers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Unsubstantiated and, as it happens, incorrect.

---

Well since you quoted a survey that provides 80% acceptance of Hunters by the general public how about you provide the link so we can read it for ourselves....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Also incorrect. True of lawyers, doctors, etc. but not true in many other areas where ethics are understood to apply. The existence of ethics does not rely on an enforcement mechanism: that is like arguing that morality cannot exist without hell.

---

Balderdash !! (Almost) every profession that has a licensing body has strictly defined ramifications for failure to uphold the perceived ethics of the profession. You can lose you license/job over an activity ruled unethical by committee...

Morality still exists with no fear of 'hell' with in everyone in the world that doesn't believe in Heaven.....silly analogy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

I will fill in the story after he answers.

---

Oh.

So you're withholding pertinent details?

Again, your challenge is pointless, because you have not made the case that this scenario is even hunting. If I euthanize an injured animal, that's not hunting. If I dispatch a pest animal, that's not hunting. And your scenario would seem to fit these categories more accurately.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

(Almost) every profession that has a licensing body has strictly defined ramifications for failure to uphold the perceived ethics of the profession.

---

The question concerns whether ethics exist in the absence of licensing bodies.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

The question concerns whether ethics exist in the absence of licensing bodies.



Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

In the absence of licensing bodies,"ethics" seems to have evolved along with society in general. Where society has evolved from is easy. Where society will evolve in future is like pushing a chain. Crystal ball,anyone?

I am a professional engineer. The last time I read the PEO's code of ethics was when I wrote the exam over two decades ago. Application of ethics can be driven by desire to do good or the right thing. However, there may be times when your choice of what "right" thing to do is not obvious. This is where there should be some mechanism for people to fall back on to assist them in determining what the right choice is. I've just never personally had a situation where the decision was that tough.

Here's an example ... you research something and discover a cure to some disease. Government doesn't approve. Your cure could save 100's if not thousands of children from dying ... but you have not received approval to administrate. Does your duty to the public trump your duty to Government? Code will say follow the laws. But does that really mean it's the right thing to do? That is why I indicate there should be a mechanism to help you understand what the right thing to do is ... the mechanism may rely on the code, but I think the mechanism should also include debate with colleagues to reach consensus on the right approach.

Now, if we want to get philosophical or even theological ... human nature isn't that great ... especially nowadays. The law and the code of ethics is pretty much the minimum you should apply in your life to avoid jail. That isn't a really noble objective is it ... avoid jail? Unfortunately being truly a good person in today's times means operating with principles that are FAR above the law and code of ethics. But none-the-less, it's unfortunate but true, we need to spell out what is right and wrong ... and here's even worse news. As our moral compass becomes more broken, the laws themselves are changed for the worse, so the standard becomes less and less ethical.

Anyhow, just some thoughts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Oh.

So you're withholding pertinent details?
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

I have provided the details needed by Badenoch. Everything he has based his augments on is there. The animal can't or does not run away, the hunter walked up and shot it in the head. Now all he has to do is answer the questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

In the absence of licensing bodies,"ethics" seems to have evolved along with society in general. Where society has evolved from is easy. Where society will evolve in future is like pushing a chain. Crystal ball,anyone?

---

It seems for many of the younger folk, ethics is rooted in how their actions will be perceived on Social Media....and how immediate and brutal violators are dealt with.

Maybe the new yard stick ...the evolution from the old Public Shaming of being put in stocks in front of the town hall :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

I have provided the details needed by Badenoch. Everything he has based his augments on is there. The animal can't or does not run away, the hunter walked up and shot it in the head. Now all he has to do is answer the questions.

---

So again, you're tacitly admitting here that you're holding something back.

In any case, you still haven't answered the question: is this scenario hunting?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

The question concerns whether ethics exist in the absence of licensing bodies.

---

Of course it does and has been pointed by others, and yes it's personal...simple example; shooting a Turkey while is roosting is not ethical by some but OK by others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

How about you start, by making the case that this is actually hunting, rather than pest control or veterinary euthanasia?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

If he's stopped by authorities, what license do you think he needs to show?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Until which time hunters start making an effort to improve their public image then it's only a matter of time. The douchebags who parade their African trophies just to elicit a reaction make it tougher for the rest of us. Either you face that fact or can keep your head in the sand.

---

I work my azz off to get the easiest shot possible. If you want to judge me based on the end result photo, go ahead.
It makes you look like the douche bag, not me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

is this scenario hunting?
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

You decide...
1) The hunter paid about $20,000 US for his permit.
2) A Ph from an outfitter drive the hunter to the Farm which was about 80 to 90Km from the Lodge.
3) The Farmer had a quota for Elephants.

As for with holding Info, you and other would want to know more details before making a judgment about things, Badenoch does not seem to need any facts at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Of course it does and has been pointed by others, and yes it's personal...simple example; shooting a Turkey while is roosting is not ethical by some but OK by others.

---

Exactly. Shooting a fawn or a doe with fawns, baiting, shooting at running deer, grouse on the ground, long range shooting... the list goes on. All legal, all things I would personally do under the right circumstances, yet all could be (and have been) called unethical by other hunters.

The idea that some standardized set of ethics exists amongst hunters is absurd.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

1) The hunter paid about $20,000 US for his permit.

---

Interesting point. Tell me, at what dollar value does hunting become hunting? Is it still hunting if the permit costs $6?

Again: what differentiates hunting from pest control or euthanasia? Or, to approach this from another angle, what is the meaning of the verb "to hunt?"


Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

If he's stopped by authorities, what license do you think he needs to show?

---

Badenoch has of yet to answer the questions. As I have said to Welsh, he and other would want more info. Badenoch seems to only need " Hunter Shot Elephant, that did not run away" .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Interesting point. Tell me, at what dollar value does hunting become hunting? Is it still hunting if the permit costs $6?
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

Without the permit it's not hunting...that would be called "POACHING". Since the cost of the permit for an Elephant is about $20,000 that is what he would have had to pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Without the permit it's not hunting...that would be called "POACHING". Since the cost of the permit for an Elephant is about $20,000 that is what he would have had to pay.

---

ROFL OK.

Any thoughts on the meaning of "to hunt?"

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

In fact, surveys show over 80% of the general public support hunting for food

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Well since you quoted a survey that provides 80% acceptance of Hunters by the general public how about you provide the link so we can read it for ourselves..

---

Let's try to get back on point...do you have a link to your source that supports the premise that 80% of the general public support hunters. ?

I've posted those surveys here previously. It's been discussed before. This is not a controversial claim.

Are you familiar with the expression "sea lioning?"


Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

ROFL OK.

Any thoughts on the meaning of "to hunt?"

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

It's printed in the Regulations for you and everyone to read. With that said I will be heading outnow to the store to "hunt" up some Groceries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

I've posted those surveys here previously. It's been discussed before. This is not a controversial claim.

---

No, you've made the same claim on numerous occasions and each time your asked to provide a source and you have never provided anything to substantiates your claim....

You instead, like now, try to divert away from the question with nonsense ..

By devolving into that tactic you’ve revealed the bankruptcy of your position.

Thanks for making my point for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

No, you've made the same claim on numerous occasions and each time your asked to provide a source and you never provided anything to that substantiates your claim...

---

OK.

US, 2017. 87% support hunting for food.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5704112/

US, 2008. 85% support hunting for food.

https://www.humansandnature.org/hunt...drea-criscione

Canada, 2015. 73% in BC, 81% in Alberta support hunting for food.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/...ticle26640089/

There you go.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

ROFL OK.

Any thoughts on the meaning of "to hunt?"

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

Depends on what your hunting for...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

The real "wonder" is the so-called hunters who blindly defend the unethical, the illegal and the stupid that damage the image of hunting around the world.

---

So your Ethics are right and mine are wrong??? Who are you to judge? Who made you God. I would beg to differ.
Who said anything about shooting illegal game?
I would say people like you are the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

So your Ethics are right and mine are wrong??? Who are you to judge? Who made you God. I would beg to differ.
Who said anything about shooting illegal game?
I would say people like you are the issue.

---

Context, and target of your scorn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

There you go.

---

So you post surveys done in the US.. HaHa......largely irrelevant in comparison to the the views of Canadians..like their views about gun ownership, they differ greatly than Canadians....but you knew that :)

One of those surveys even cautions: "Caution should be used in interpreting these results for countries other than the U.S. because the system of wildlife management is very different in other countries."

But you could argue the overall survey results are comparable....Sport Hunters don't have huge public support.

As I pointed in an earlier post...hunting for meat means "sustainability" ...and you disagreed...but your posted survey agrees with exactly what I had posted.

Quote:

---

"The highest levels of public support for hunting occur when we ask specifically about hunting for reasons related to historic hunting for survival: 85 percent of adult Americans approve of hunting for the meat and 85 percent approve of hunting to protect humans from harm.[13] While majorities also support hunting for reasons related to wildlife management and animal control, approval starts to drop dramatically for reasons not related to survival"

---

The actual results of how the public support is for hunters in Canada rest with the fact that few hunters here hunt for survival or protection....support for 'Sport Hunting' here garners a much lower level of support and Trophy hunting the lowest levels of support.

Guys who go as a 'group' to Norther Ontario to hunt moose for a week, spend about $1K and might come home with 50-60 lbs of meat each, if they are successful. Many come home empty hand year after year. Pretty hard to be argue it's about the meat.. HaHa...

Your comment that "80% of Canadians support hunting meat" is misleading without a disclaimer of what that really means.

In general terms, Hunting these days isn't supported by the vast percentage of Canadians or apparently Americans either :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Let's try to get back on point..

---

As the original poster, I would agree. Get back on the point of this thread -not, well, whatever it is you guys are talking about.

I also posted a comparable Canadian survey. But don't let that keep you from your usual dishonest crap.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

What does John Q. Public think of hunters... ?

Geezuz, apparently much more highly than we think of each other !!
Another judgement thread.
Night, night

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smokin'stoegie

What does John Q. Public think of hunters... ?

Geezuz, apparently much more highly than we think of each other !!
Another judgement thread.
Night, night

---

Yep,personal pissin' contests between posters really is getting quite tiresome. Maybe,that's why the forum is becoming more and more "quiet"? This stuff really needs to stop or the Liberals will ban all firearms and hunting in Canada will be a thing of the past. Oh well,I guess there's always Euchre and Golf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smokin'stoegie

What does John Q. Public think of hunters... ?

---

The truth of the matter...Not much;

Quote:

---

In an online survey conducted by Insights West, 91 per cent of British Columbians and 84 per cent of Albertans said they opposed hunting animals for sport.

“There is a clear distinction between hunting for food and hunting for sport,” said Mario Canseco, vice president of public affairs at Insights West.

“The level of animosity when it comes to a practice like hunting for sport, it’s the highest I’ve ever seen. But if they feel the animal is going to be used in other ways, like food, then the numbers shift.”

---

The problem is 'John Q' , thru Social Media etc, only see Hunters in the worst light..crouched behind a dead animal for the "Trophy ' pic.

That is the image they have and it's because it's the image we've provided them with..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

The problem is 'John Q' , thru Social Media etc, only see Hunters in the worst light..crouched behind a dead animal for the "Trophy ' pic.

That is the image they have and it's because it's the image we've provided them with..

---

Education, education, education, as I stated before, people are not aware of the laws. They think that people go out and hunt a deer for its head and that bears are left in the bush to rot. I was able to talk to vegans, vegetarians and non-hunters and talk with them about how we raise our domestic food on our farm and how hunting is legal in Ontario and all of them told me that they had no idea, that they would eat meat from me or consider hunting for their meat rather than eat meat from a factory farm.

There is a difference between high fence and free run but if high fence operations help the overall population (think Africa) then is it really that bad? When native wildlife populations go up due to the ability to hunt them, the financial value on them then is "Trophy" hunting a bad thing?

The people on here who complain about African Trophy hunting are the same ones who were crying that we needed the spring bear hunt back for economic reasons, how is this any different than what goes on in Africa? The truth is it does not, there is no difference, but a black bear on Facebook does not draw as much attention as a lion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Education, education, education, as I stated before, people are not aware of the laws. They think that people go out and hunt a deer for its head and that bears are left in the bush to rot. I was able to talk to vegans, vegetarians and non-hunters and talk with them about how we raise our domestic food on our farm and how hunting is legal in Ontario and all of them told me that they had no idea, that they would eat meat from me or consider hunting for their meat rather than eat meat from a factory farm.

There is a difference between high fence and free run but if high fence operations help the overall population (think Africa) then is it really that bad? When native wildlife populations go up due to the ability to hunt them, the financial value on them then is "Trophy" hunting a bad thing?

The people on here who complain about African Trophy hunting are the same ones who were crying that we needed the spring bear hunt back for economic reasons, how is this any different than what goes on in Africa? The truth is it does not, there is no difference, but a black bear on Facebook does not draw as much attention as a lion.

---

Absolutely. As I've tried to point out, whether people support hunting depends entirely on how hunting is presented.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

We live in an era where we put labels on everything, whether it makes sense or not. Hunting for sport sound or implies like you're just hunting for fun. Sport fishing is defined as you can take the maximum limit allowed. Go figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

We live in an era where we put labels on everything, whether it makes sense or not. Hunting for sport sound or implies like you're just hunting for fun. Sport fishing is defined as you can take the maximum limit allowed. Go figure.

---

The term trophy hunting is much like the term hate speech in today's day and age.

Everyone loves to throw the term around but truth is that it's not something that is cut and dried or easy to necessarily define except perhaps at the very farthest extreme.

In all the provinces in Canada it's illegal to waste any usable part of an animal so by that definition there is no such thing as trophy hunting in Canada.

If someone draws a once in a lifetime tag, even though they are eating the meat, is that trophy hunting? Is it in immoral?

Now let's look at hunting in Africa. Regardless of how hard or easy the hunt might be, if you're paying to hunt an animal and the local population benefit from the money and the meat and you take home a head or just photos is that trophy hunting? Is that immoral? Is it any more wrong or right compared to the first example because it happens to be in another country?

I believe that what most people label as trophy hunting is actually poaching. It's the concept of going out and killing an animal and just taking its head with no other point, which is generally illegal, that people call trophy hunting but really oh, it's just poaching.





Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

30 Years ago it was normal to see a deer on the front of a car or in the back of a pickup in NB and I assume probably the same in Ontario. The reason so many people are offended is because we were forced to hide over time. Heck mom use to take her gun to school right into the classroom in the 1950's and I use to keep mine in the car in highschool in the 1980's as well hunter safety was a course in school. Over time the anti's slowly forced these things out to isolate hunters and they succeeded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Education, education, education, .

---

True, but not so much in trying to educate the general public to understand hunting, but more effort put into educating Hunters on what the public sees as offensive about our sport and stop posting stuff on Social media and Youtube that exacerbates the negative attitude towards the sport.

Remember that 1.50 minute Youtube video of the grizzly bear in B.C. rolling down the mountain, the white snow covered in blood, as the hunters repeatedly took shots at it. It not only single handily entrenched 91% of the general public in B.C. to oppose hunting animals for sport, it was also instrumental in cancelling the bear hunt in B.C.

When that thread ran on here a great deal of the guys..fellow hunters, continued to defend the actions of the hunters. Completely tone deaf to how it was being perceived by the general public. We are most of the time our own worse enemies when it comes to public perception of Hunters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob Stewart

I believe that what most people label as trophy hunting is actually poaching. It's the concept of going out and killing an animal and just taking its head with no other point, which is generally illegal, that people call trophy hunting but really oh, it's just poaching.

---

I think how a Hunter understands 'Trophy' hunting differs in how John Q. Public sees 'Trophy' hunting. They do not see it being about taking parts of the animal as keepsakes..they see it merely as killing an animal (exotic especially) for sport.

I recent times, all it takes for a celebrity to be tarnished on social media is to be seen kneeling behind a dead animal with a big smile on their face. Worse if it's an animal that garners public sympathy. Remember Cecil the Lion who was shoot back in 2015, the outrage had nothing to do with what would happen to him after in regards to a 'Trophy'.

It's about killing animals for sport that the vast amount of the general public have a hard time with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Sure. It's a nice business for KMG Hunting. Take fatass North American or European out. Fine big, slow, unwary giraffe. Shoot from the truck and whisk your client back to the camp for sundowners. Another day's fees taken care of without much sweat. Easier than hunting a buffalo right?

---

Badenoch, not sure how much you have hunted in RSA, but I get all kinds of folks hunting with us, big/small, young/old, male/female, fit/unfit, who are from all over the world, different religions, ethnicity, culture and walks of life. The one thing they have in common is that they enjoy hunting. I have hunted buff that were actually easier to stalk than a wary giraffe. Shoot from the truck? Never have never will. Unethical hunting can happen anywhere and is only unethical if the law states it as so. I would love to know where you formed your opinion of hunting in RSA .... doesn't sound like anyplace I would want to hunt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KMG Canada

Badenoch, not sure how much you have hunted in RSA, but I get all kinds of folks hunting with us, big/small, young/old, male/female, fit/unfit, who are from all over the world, different religions, ethnicity, culture and walks of life. The one thing they have in common is that they enjoy hunting. I have hunted buff that were actually easier to stalk than a wary giraffe. Shoot from the truck? Never have never will. Unethical hunting can happen anywhere and is only unethical if the law states it as so. I would love to know where you formed your opinion of hunting in RSA .... doesn't sound like anyplace I would want to hunt.

---

He's well informed, he read about it in a "News Paper "-- fake news:rolleye:

Further to that Giraffe that was discussed, it provided to the natives a lot of meat, " According to Babaz, Talley ate some of the giraffe’s meat during her hunting trip but gave most of it away to feed more than 200 local villagers, including children at an orphanage. " He was over 18 years old and provided over 2000 lbs. of meat.

" An American hunter is pushing back against her critics, after photos of her next to a giraffe she killed in South Africa triggered outrage. Tess Thompson Talley told CBS News in a statement she killed the old bull giraffe to prevent it from attacking younger giraffes. She said, “This is called conservation through game management.”

"In a statement, Talley said the giraffe she killed last year was more than 18 years old and “beyond breeding age, yet had killed 3 younger bulls… Now that the giraffe is gone, the younger bulls are able to breed.”
According to Babaz, the trophy fee for a giraffe is about $2,000 to $3,000 per animal. He said because money from legal hunting helps support the local community, it provides an incentive to make sure big game animals don’t become extinct."

jaycee, I hunted one a few years ago who was killing all the younger bulls and calves, it is quite something to see a giraffe take a disliking to another giraffe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KMG Canada

jaycee, I hunted one a few years ago who was killing all the younger bulls and calves, it is quite something to see a giraffe take a disliking to another giraffe.

---

They are the animal equivalent of a Serial killer, but they don't stop at other giraffes, other animals and people also can and will become victims to a "ROGUE" animal.

How about the problems created by transfering only young bull elephants to new areas to reintroduce elephants, because they are easier to transport. They started attacking and killing Cape Buffalo and Rhinos. Rangers moved a few older bulls into the area the problems stop. Well they stopped after the older bulls kick the stuffing out of a couple of the young bulls.....;)

Attachment 38561

Sorry just could not resist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Attachment 38561

Sorry just could not resist.

---

Would you need a migratory license for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dythbringer

Would you need a migratory license for that?

---

I am pretty sure I would swear off the whiskey if I saw an elephant fly ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dythbringer

Would you need a migratory license for that?

---

No.

But an 88 may come in handy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KMG Canada

I am pretty sure I would swear off the whiskey if I saw an elephant fly ....

---

Operation Dumbo drop......

Just don't post that you shot Dumbo....you'll be drawn and quartered and have to flee to South America :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Just don't post that you shot Dumbo....you'll be drawn and quartered and have to flee to South America :)

---

I am ok with being drawn and quartered. I need to lose weight.

Anything good to hunt in South America? I could sell the house and wife. Ecuador looks nice good weather, cheap living anything good to hunt there? Can I own guns? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Just don't post that you shot Dumbo....you'll be drawn and quartered and have to flee to South America :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Just don't post that you shot Dumbo....you'll be drawn and quartered and have to flee to South America :)

---

Well doing a couple quick mathematics guessamations as to the terminal velocity of an 12 to 18 ton Elephant.......I would have to say the biggest problem would NOT be the impact on social media.:sad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Well doing a couple quick mathematics guessamations as to the terminal velocity of an 12 to 18 ton Elephant.......I would have to say the biggest problem would NOT be the impact on social media.:sad:

---

With a little planning hopefully it will land on Rideau Cottage :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

With a little planning hopefully it will land on Rideau Cottage :)

---

Why would you want to punish the cottage? Lol