Personal ethics, laws and hating on other hunters

[Fox]

I read most of Fox's posts and I have never seen an abusive post from him, me on the other hand I have in the past many years ago.

I agree with you Fox,s posts are always very respectful.

Thank you

[Fox]

Here are examples of a legal practice that deserves condemnation and an illegal practice that that doesn't.

Hunting big game with inadequate rounds. Any centerfire is legal under the regulations so a .25-20 rifle would be a legal moose rifle in Ontario. Hardly ethical.

The flip side is hunting small game with a rifle having a bore larger than .275 in a county or township where they are prohibited. If a person used a 32-20 for small game instead of a .270 Weatherby they'd be breaking the law but would hardly be unethical. The same could be said having a couple of slugs with you while bird hunting during an open big game season.

Personally, I won't defend hounding deer or bear even though it is "legal." Letting loose a pack of dogs to tree a bear or run a deer to exhaustion is well outside my definition of fair chase.

This is where you need to choose not to do things that you do not want to do and let others hunt as they have within the restrictions of the law based on sound wildlife management.

If the population is healthy there is no problem using dogs to hunt, you are down in Wellington County, not sure if you have ever hunted with dogs but it is not easy and it is no where near a sure thing. Saying that is it not fair chase is akin to a bow hunter saying that hunting them with a rifle should be banned as it is too easy.

[Badenoch]

This is where you need to choose not to do things that you do not want to do and let others hunt as they have within the restrictions of the law based on sound wildlife management.

If the population is healthy there is no problem using dogs to hunt, you are down in Wellington County, not sure if you have ever hunted with dogs but it is not easy and it is no where near a sure thing. Saying that is it not fair chase is akin to a bow hunter saying that hunting them with a rifle should be banned as it is too easy.

Except that in your original post you demand that we "should be standing up for all legal methods of hunting and all legal practices." I am not going to stand up for a practice I consider objectionable simply because it is legal. My opinion will not be suppressed because of your appeals to "fraternity" and nor should anyone else's.

[Snip]

Apparently I took the original post different than some. We all have different opinions on topics but bashing someone for something that wasn't really part of the original comment or questions should maybe be avoided, maybe start a new thread if you feel strongly about something. I know how I hunt and fish has changed over the last 30 years, I could easily see present self having disagreeing conversations with previous self and most likely with future self, like has been said before take into consideration others position but that doesn't mean you have to agree with it. We are all on a similar journey just at different spots along the way, enjoy the trip!

[finsfurfeathers]

Except that in your original post you demand that we "should be standing up for all legal methods of hunting and all legal practices." I am not going to stand up for a practice I consider objectionable simply because it is legal. My opinion will not be suppressed because of your appeals to "fraternity" and nor should anyone else's.

It would be an awfully boring forum if we all agreed on every subject.
Think the point here is respectful debate of opposing views.
Either defend your point of view or contrast your opponents point of view.
However if you can do neither don't resort to name calling or character assassination to "win" your point.

[krakadawn]

This is where you need to choose not to do things that you do not want to do and let others hunt as they have within the restrictions of the law based on sound wildlife management.

If the population is healthy there is no problem using dogs to hunt, you are down in Wellington County, not sure if you have ever hunted with dogs but it is not easy and it is no where near a sure thing. Saying that is it not fair chase is akin to a bow hunter saying that hunting them with a rifle should be banned as it is too easy.

Fox, I think your initial post was well stated and food for thought for many. Unfortunately we have folks within the hunting/fishing fraternity that choose to take issues with others within same.

Gun hunting/bow hunting, dogs vs no dogs are issues brought up that tend to polarize individuals.

Are we asking everyone to get on the same side.....I think not and hope there is always room for reasonable debate and respect for opinions. I would hope though that folks not take on elements of the 'anti' side simply because they disagree with current practise.........it's kind of like the old saying of 'be careful what you wish for'

[Badenoch]

It would be an awfully boring forum if we all agreed on every subject.
Think the point here is respectful debate of opposing views.
Either defend your point of view or contrast your opponents point of view.
However if you can do neither don't resort to name calling or character assassination to "win" your point.

A respectful debate on views is one thing. A demand that I "stand up" for behavior I consider unethical doesn't fall within that definition.

[greatwhite]

When I was a kid in NB it was considered unethical to bait deer. Do you know anyone who baits deer?

What is Unethical to one person may not be to someone else. Who decides what is Unethical if it is legal is it you, me or someone else?

Except that in your original post you demand that we "should be standing up for all legal methods of hunting and all legal practices." I am not going to stand up for a practice I consider objectionable simply because it is legal. My opinion will not be suppressed because of your appeals to "fraternity" and nor should anyone else's.

[redd foxx]

What is Unethical to one person may not be to someone else. Who decides what is Unethical if it is legal is it you, me or someone else?

I don't think it matters who if anyone decides what is ethical or not, as long as the difference of opinions are debated in a friendly. respectful manner. I think this is what the OP was getting at.

[greatwhite]

It is what the OP was getting at. But some on here have insinuated that they will decide what is Unethical and Ethical regardless if it is legal.

I don't think it matters who if anyone decides what is ethical or not, as long as the difference of opinions are debated in a friendly. respectful manner. I think this is what the OP was getting at.