Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Ethical question

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,010

    Default Ethical question

    Ok we're having a discussion on Homerdave's thread about the board of game proposal. Here's a true scenario about how conveluted laws and ethics can get.

    Is shooting from the road legal or ethical? One would think No to either, but in Washington state, there is an exception, and I don't know, maybe in Alaska too.
    In Washington, if you are disabled, you can get a permit to shoot from your vehicle. Now let's take this a bit farther. The State has spent a lot of effort to condem this practice as unsafe, illegal and unethical. Then it makes an exception like this. Why? because it's the "feel good" thing to do. But why is it any more safe or ethical for an invalid to shoot from a vehicle than for a healthy hunter? There is no good answer to that question.

    And let's go a little farther. Say the invalid hunter shoots and wounds an animal and it gets away, how is he going to be able to follow up if he's so incapacitated he has to shoot from his vehicle? It's legal, but is it moral? Who's responsible for that animal? The invalid hunter? or the state that let him go hunting in the first place?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,927

    Default

    Alaska has similar provisions as far aas shooting from a boat in Units 1-5 and 6D as well as from a motorized vehicle in portions of Units 7 and 15.

    All the handicapped hunters I know do not hunt by themselves but with a fully functional hunter so if an animals was wounded, there is someone to take care of the situation.
    Now is allowing them to shoot from a vehicle more safe or ethical? No, its not more safe but ethical? If the person is handicapped in such a way as to make getting out of the vehicle and moving out into the field or woods impossible, why would it be unethical? What's the ethical difference between shooting from a stopped vehicle or stopping, getting out and moving two feet onto the shoulder of the road and then shooting? Maybe its a feel good things to allow handicapped hunters the oppurtunity to take an animal, even in ways I can't. I see it as giving them the oppurtunity to participate in hunting rather than a "feel good" thing.

  3. #3
    Member jeff p's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    370

    Default If its not broke

    dont fix it. Disabled hunters make up it such a small % of hunters I would believe. Personaly I dont see how in a remote area it is unethical to shoot from a roadway the game doesnt know it from any other area is it unethical to the game animal to shoot from a powerline right of way or abanded railroad grade? I dont hunt from roads so kinda a non issue for me.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Deep in Hllary country NY
    Posts
    446

    Red face

    It sure would be nice if a friend would try to take the disabled hunter to a field or safer/ better acess area to hunt. Sound's to me that such a law had better have all the legal definitions ironed out. What constutes disabled? Is it a doctors note toward the permit. Or an obvious injury? I can't see many people getting upset over a truly handycaped person getting a break. It's not any safer to me, in fact it may be more dangerous if the said person has less control over a weapon. I don't know how one is issued a permit in your States, but it's not hard to find a doctor today that would issue a handIcaped permit based on say a back, leg injury. Pass the law , and people find the loophole if there is a way.Look at the problems mentioned on this web site involving some subsistence hunting, permits ect.Some folks know how to bend laws in directions that they were never intended to go. Bill

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,010

    Default here's some from Alaska

    Alaska has it's fair share of contradictory laws, some in the name of ethics. The point I was trying to make above is do some ethics over rule other ethics? what happens when ethics collide? It's considered dangerous and unethical to shoot from a road. Why isn't it still dangerous and unethical if you're handicapped? Is it because it's considered more ethical to say, "hey let's give these people a chance to hunt too." ?

    Here are some of Alaska's mixed up ethics and laws. Snagging isn't allowed in fresh water, but it's allowed in salt water. Is it because it's considered easier to snag in the confines of fresh water? Let me tell you, when salmon are schooled up in salt water, it's easy enough to snag them. Why is it Unethical in fresh water , but not salt water? Shooting deer from a boat is legal and considered ethical in Kodiak and Prince William Sound as long as your boat is not under power or drifting from it's momentum from being under power, but it's considered illegal and unethical in Southeast. How can the state consider it differently in two different areas? They're sending a mixed message. Is it wrong, or is it OK? Most areas you can't shoot an animal that is swimming, but there are areas up north where it's allowed. There are plenty more examples if anyone would care to mention their favorites.

    Who is more ethical, a hunter who drives the roads looking for an easy animal to shoot where he can easily get the meat out, or someone who hikes in 4 or five miles, then can't get it out before some of it spoils?

    Are we to equate legal with ethical? Some people would say shooting a brownie with a .243 is unethical, but it's legal. Does that imply it's ethical?
    If you kill an animal or fish and take home all the meat and process it, then don't eat it, but throw it out in the spring. Is that ethical? It's legal. You can't combine the two, unless you're consistant in the way you apply the rules.

  6. #6
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bethel, Cantwell, Fort Yukon, Skagway, Chevak and Point Hope
    Posts
    967

    Default

    How is a disabled hunter hunting from a vehicle anymore unethical than a perfectly healthy hunter hunting from a stand over a bait station?

  7. #7
    Member GreginAlaska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twodux View Post
    "...Are we to equate legal with ethical?..."
    I would say not all the time.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    wasilla
    Posts
    26

    Angry feel good thing to do ....

    what do you mean feel good thing ,my dad cant do that any more he has to hunt from the road system he was paralized protecting this country.yes me or my brother go with him .and yes it is a feel good thing,he would
    do any thing to be able to walk and go hunting,you probly ride youre four wheeler up and down the trails thinken youre hunting because its a feel good thing.sorry for the ranting but people like this really piss me off.

  9. #9
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,768

    Default illegal and unethical are NOT analogous

    if shooting from a boat under power were not illegal, would it therefore become ethical?
    if jacklighting deer on the beach were legal would it be ethical?
    are there differences between illegal,unethical and unsportsmanlike?
    are non-hunters more "offended" by unethical or illegal...or how as non-hunters do they perceive the differences? or do they?
    what is "unsportsmanlike" anyway, as it relates to the bloodsports?
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  10. #10

    Default

    What is so unethical about hunting the road system? I am not saying that is how I hunt but I am curious as far as how this would be explained. I have seen many people hunt the road system and it doesn bug me one bit. Actually I have never heard of this complaint until I started reading this forum.

    To take your question even further into depth, why is ethics so important to mankind when every other forum of life on this earth, until proven otherwise, lives without ethics in mind?

    ...I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern without any superhuman authority behind it.
    Guess who I am quoting?

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,010

    Default up wind

    Up wind, my intention is not to denigrate your father or what he has or hasn't done for his country. It's too point out that sometimes we have to recognize our limitations and accept them. If your father was a pro hockey player before he was paralized, would he still expect to suit up and play with his old team? No, because he doesn't have the ability to get out there and do what needs to be done on the ice anymore. Or what if he was a concert pianist and his hands were crushed? Would he still expect to play Beethoven concertos for concertgoers? No, but he can still enjoy the music. It's just not him playing it anymore.

    The same goes for hunting. He can enjoy just about everything that goes along with hunting but why is it so imperative that he kills something, that the rules and saftey regulations have to be bent so he can succeed? I'll bet what he enjoys most is being out with you and your brother spending time in the outdoors passing on his wisdom. If shooting from a vehicle or a road is considered unsafe it is still unsafe for handicapped hunters. Otherwise what you are saying is, It's really not unsafe. If speeding in a car in unsafe, should a handicapped driver be allowed to speed just because they're handicapped?

    Sorry, but you got the wrong guy when you talk about hunting from 4-wheelers. I'm the guy who hikes in for miles in mountainous terrain to hunt. I am slowing down a bit in my old age tho. And when I can't do it by myself, I'll give it up.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    1,094

    Default ethics

    I'll bet what he enjoys most is being out with you and your brother spending time in the outdoors passing on his wisdom.

    Well said TD. But I do think that handicapped hunters can benefit from some assistance. How they do it here on the Kenai is cool. They allow handicapped hunters access to the oil field roads and they have several areas to park where they can hunt. The bummer is I have only once seen a hunter use this opportunity. I agree that shooting on the actual road is dangerous for everybody. But they do need some assistance such as being able to shoot off their four wheeler. If everyone I saw in the woods shooting off their four wheeler had a handicapped sticker and actually needed it I would have no problem at all.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Eagle River,AK
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    I have a friend that fell out of my bear stand while climbing down eleven years ago, severed his spinal cord, and now has no feeling below his chest.I take him every chance I can hunting and he has the permit to be able to shoot from a boat(valdez bear hunting)and also has taken a moose(spike/fork) and a caribou right from the cab of the truck.I see nothing wrong with it and to tell you the truth,some of our hunts have been the best hunts I've been on(along with all the hard work).The permit is not easy to get either.You must be 70% disabled and have a letter from your doctor saying so,then send your application to Juneau where it either gets approved or denied by a board.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    wasilla
    Posts
    26

    Default twodux

    why is it not safe for my dad to hunt from the road he is on private property he overlooks a big swamp and is very safe with a gun infact
    taught hunter safety coarces in nevada for years in my opionion he is
    safer than the many raod hunters up knick goose bay ,and for you say
    to some one to sit in the truck or watch other people do something he
    loves to do is very selfish as long as their doing in a safe place you should
    worry about something important .you sound like a spoiled kid who cant do something somebody else is doing.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,010

    Default up wind

    Where did I say I wanted to shoot from my vehicle? I have no desire for that. I like to get out in the woods.

    I was pointing out the inconsistancies of the government making laws concerning ethical conduct. My friend Mark, "Bush Rat", thinks that all ethical concerns should be enforced by laws. I disagree, because when it comes down to ethics, who's ethics do we use? Do we use the people's who think it's OK to shoot swimming animals, or those who don't? Do we use those who think it's OK to shoot from vehicles or roads or those who don't? Do we use those who think it's ok to keep hunting after you wound an animal that gets away or those who don't? Do we use those who think it's all about antlers or those who think it's all about the meat? No matter who's we use, we should be consistant. And safety, and biological concerns shouldn't be compromised.

  16. #16
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,288

    Default Hey, I didn't say that!

    Whoa there, hold on Rick, I never said "all" ethical concerns should be enforced by laws. But that doesn't mean that I am opposed to many "ethics" laws already on the books.

    I'm not sure if there is one hunting "ethics" law that won't in some cases have exceptions or extenuating circumstances. In the case of it being illegal for able-bodied hunters to shoot from a roadbed, yet legal for a disabled hunter, I think you're mixing up "inconsistent" with "exception." I think we should make exceptions for disabled hunters, and most hunters agree. So we make the exception. Safety is only one aspect of the "may not shoot from roadbed" law. Bottom line on that is that most hunters don't want all hunters to be able to shoot from a roadbed, for a variety of reasons: unsafe, promotes unethical behavior, and could hurt the image of hunting etc.

    I don't think we can have 100% consistency, either, as Alaska is both vast and encompasses many different ecosystems and even cultural differences, so exceptions will occur and laws may not appear consistent. You don't need an IBEP certificate, for instance, to bowhunt in every unit. To you, that may seem inconsistent, or unfair, just as this exception for disabled hunters.

    Yeah, ethics are what we do when no one is looking. And some ethics laws may only be enforceable 1% of the time. Nowadays, moreso than in the past when hunters widely practiced a different code of ethics, I think some new ethics laws are proposed for reasons homerdave mentioned in the other thread...something about morons...I forget <grin>. Who decides? Our Board of Game, our legislature, our judges, society, me, you. If hunters don't clean up their own act, others will eventually do it for us. If we don't give the appearance of being concerned with ethics, and come down against unethical practices, whether by law or words, we will lose hunting privileges in future.

    Best, Mark

  17. #17
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    106

    Default Endless situations

    Ethics (from the Ancient Greek "ethikos", meaning "arising from habit"), a major branch of philosophy, is the study of value or quality. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right, wrong, good, evil, and responsibility. It is divided into three primary areas: meta-ethics (the study of what ethicality is), normative ethics (the study of what ethical truths there are and how they are known), and applied ethics (the study of the use of ethical knowledge).

    The issue addressed here seems to point to judgment, and not what is right or wrong. Misusing or confusing the word "ethics" has become popular on many of our threads. It the case given, there are so many unmentioned variables affecting how each individual, depending on their situation at that moment, might view the actions described, the point is neutered. For instance, taking people who are challenged out to kill game, road or no road, for sport, would be viewed as wrong by many people, simply because it was done for sport. Taking those same challenged people out to participate in the gathering of food, in order to survive; road or no road might be viewed as right by the same group. This line of thinking could go on and on, because there are an endless number of situations where anything you do could be viewed by someone else as either right or wrong. I have come to believe hunting from roadways in Alaska has more political implications than either safety or judgment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •