Our Responsibilty to the Game We Hunt?

[Glenn Newell]

How much are the animals we hunt worth to us. Are they just worthy of a point system that says that a pig is worth X amount of points and a goat is worth so many points? I am not talking about the Douglas points system for measuring animals I am talking about a point system that is awarded to hunters for killing so many rabbits, pigs, goats and so on in a year.
I never gave this system much thought before because when it was introduced over twenty five years ago it was relevant but is it today and what has years of this system done to the way some Australian bowhunters who are part of this system view the game they hunt.
A couple of years ago I was hunting with some bowhunters I had never hunted with before and after the first day I realized that they did not hunt for the same reasons that I did. They saw the game as being worth points to them and to kill so many in a year they could get Master Bowhunter or whatever the award was. A large boar was shot by one of the other hunters but he took off into some thick cover where we followed him up so I nocked an arrow thinking that one of us might get a chance to finish him off if the original shooter was not presented with a shot, but I was quickly told to put my arrow away because if I finished the animal off would not be able to claim the pig for his bowhunter points.
This is the first time in 30 years of bowhunting that I have ever run across this attitude, which I must say I was disgusted with. Surely as responsible bowhunters our first responsibility the welfare of the animal. I just can’t comprehend the mentality of a hunter that says that he is willing to take the chance of an animal being wounded and lost just because he wanted to get his bowhunter points.
I would like to know what other hunters think, and I am talking about marginal shots not dead set killing shots, would you shoot an animal to stop it from getting away if you had the chance to that has already been shot by another hunter or would you just let it go?

[erron]

Glenn,

I have very little acquaintance with the points system, but the way you describe it I don't want to know any more than I do anyway!

I hunt for the pleasure of being there, doing something my ancestors did to survive. It gives me a reality check on the crazy, city-based world we now live in. That world increasingly ensnares people, who thereby become detached from the natural world, and are less happy and stable as a result, I truly feel.

Beyond that quasi-mystical connection with nature thing, I hunt and fish for food, and maybe skins or whatever else I can salvage and use from the animal. I do this also because it's fun, and any points system is pointless to someone like me because, after god knows how many years of school - yech! - I don't want to be quantified, measured and certified by anyone any more, thanks very much! I have my own measure of success, and it has more to do with hunting in an ethical, conscious manner than collecting points.

Once we start seeing game as points, I think we run the risk of encouraging bad attitudes that lead to the 'whack em and stack em' mentality that some hunters display. And that mindless, kill for the sake of killing behaviour does more to destroy our right to hunt than anything else I can think of.

That's what I think about this. I'll be interested to hear other's opinions. Maybe I'm missing soemthing: as I say I know very little of the points system.

Great post, thanks.

Erron

[Stickbow Hunter]

Glenn,

My answer - Yes I would shoot any wounded animal to avoid it being lost. As hunters we have an ethical obligation to dispatch game in a quick humane manner.

I think the annual bowhunting points system you are talking about Glenn fosters the 'have to get the animal at all costs mentality.' I think it is also responsible for bowhunters wanting to kill game as opposed to hunting game.

The killing of the game in some cases becomes more important than the hunt. This leads to some hunters breaking ethical and legal rules just so they can kill some trophy game animal and get the recognition as a so called great bowhunter. Sadly some bow shooters (as opposed to hunters) have become so obsessed with personal recognition that the animals they kill appear to be only the means to that end.

It 's very easy for those new to bowhunting to get caught up in this type of hype. In all honesty I was caught up in the "points thing" when I was introduced to bowhunting. However, after some years I realized that there were certain ethical requirements - both legal and personal - that I was not willing to put aside just to kill something. In fact, I came to understand that if any leagal requirment, rule of fair chase, bowhunting ethic or any of my own personal ethics were not adhered to at the time, then the hunt and kill had no meaning to me at all.

I learned that the hunt was far more important to me than the killing of any game!

I feel that this is the message we should be passing on to those new to bowhunting.

Good topic. Jeff

[MarkP]

I once grassed a boar that had a nice set of ivory - just a touch over 25DP. At the time I thought "I'll get these on the list". I carried those tusks around in the glovebox of my car for months until I finally caught up with someone who had been appointed as an official measurer. He measured them carefully and they came up short of 25 - they has shrunk in the heat of the car. Lesson learnt !!

By the time I had my next set I'd had time to think about things and had already decided not to pursue having them recognised - a position I still maintain. You guys would be familiar with the debate in the overseas literature concerning this matter - particularly the a suggestion that bowhunters be encouraged to record animal details - but that there be no recording or publishing of 'names on a list'. I think this idea is worthy of wider discussion here in Australia.

Perhaps there should be a change in focus in awards - moving away from awards for those with the biggest tally - and introduce some inovative new awards. How about - best game receipe, best presented home tanned hide, best hunting photo, best mount, archery craft award, .........

One of my fondest hunting memories was to have a solid boar race past me at about 5 yards broadside, giving me an opportunity to lob my bright red feathered and crested arrow right into the spot. The boar kept running - straight past my hunting partner who was about 30 yards away. He drove his own white feathered arrow straight in about an inch behind mine. I have a vivid memory of that boar disappearing into the grass with one red and one white arrow side by side in his chest. The boar died shortly thereafter - and a couple of the photos I have with the three of us feature prominantly in my hunting albumn. Many parts of bowhunting are a team effort - an if the opportunity presents, or is necessary, - so to the kill.

I would think that being told by your hunting partner not to take any follow-up shots because of a desire to accumulate points should be answered with a reply something along the lines of... "Mate, if it runs past and the shot's on - I'll give it one anyway"

Good discussion topic Glenn.

MarkP

[Mark]

Couple of good points Mark P!
If you leave out the name you leave out the ego's which in my opinion are at the root of most of that goes wrong in bowhunting (or any hunting for that mater).
Replace the name with your quipment set-up and still recognise the animals details (only more details than just "points")

To my limited understanding this would eliminate the"numbers" approach. What would be the point of any focus of numbers with out a name next to them?

This brings to mind a suggestion that Steve Whiting mentioned a while back, a traditional harvest regester, with out names of corse. Would that work?

Mark K.

[Jackrat]

Glen,I just finished reading your post and I agree with how you feel about the points system,It is also used in NZ by the NZBHS.I will and have shot an animal wounded by another hunter,I have also had an animal shot by a mate after it was shot by me.This bothered me not at all.I have never belived the old saying that any animal taken with a bow is a trophy.I,ve seen one week old goats shot useing that as an excuse.Hell at that age they will walk right up to you,but some clown has claimed game points by doing it.I left the NZBHS due to this type of thing,Plus the shooting of stingrays from boats to claim big game points,Wallabys as a big game aniimal ?? Give me a break.Now I have mates who are members of the NZBHS and they are good blokes but the old school need a good kick,The old kill any thing that moves attitude, MUST stop or it will cost us eveything.Your post has hit a real sore point with me as I got sick of the blood a long time ago.I was raised on the farm and have been killing house meat for a lot of years.I can appeciate a nice trophy but thats not what it,s about for me.I get my kicks from being out there doing it,Rivers,Hills,Camp fires,Young people learning the skills,This all means much more than points or wearing some tacky badge.Well I better leave it at that, but needless to say you are right.We owe the animal respect.
Thanks,,Jack.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Erron and others,

I am writing this rather longish post in response to some of the opinions expressed on this thread (I believe that is what these sites are referred to).

Happily, I find that most of them express a concern for the animals that we hunt which is refreshing in today's perverted hunting scene where the only worth of an animal is its values as a collection of points as Glen Newell so aptly put it in his earlier post.

In the scramble for hunting awards, the animals we hunt have been reduced to little more than hunting "fly-bys".

I once read a book by a remarkably decent American hunter who referred to today's obsession with trophy scores and the public aggrandisement of the shooter as "horn porn" . . . and that about sums up the attitude which now prevails throughout most of the hunting scene, both bow and firearms hunting.

I do not believe that it is immoral to kill animals. I believe that it is part of the normal evolved relationship between animals and humans which has co-existed between ourselves and the animals of this world and which has made us both what we are. It only become immoral to hunt animals when hunting has clear adverse impacts upon species survival. Abundant species such as the feral populations, which are the normal hunted game in this country, suffer from no such problem.

Completely missing from almost every one of the published hunting stories and videos is any respect for the animal itself.

I am not referring to respect for its natural cunning or ability to evade the hunter which is often confused with respect. I am referring to the respect that any animal is due when we take upon ourselves the responsibility which we owe to any hunted animal to kill it without any unreasonable or unnecessary suffering.

Each and every one of us who considers themselves to be an ethical (meaning morally principled) hunter should be able to say at the death of an animal we have killed - that if I were to be killed by an arrow, then that is the way I would rather it happened to me.

If we cannot say that, then we are morally obliged to stop hunting.

To that end, I consider that there are certain basic ethical principles to which we are all bound. I consider myself bound by them above and beyond any law of the land or club/association rule of fair chase, and they determine whether or not I will ever take a shot at any animal. They have nothing to do with obeying the laws of the land or of asking permission of the landowner to hunt his property. These are legal requirements which all of us are required to follow anyway and are only a minor part of the ethics by which we conduct ourselves when hunting.

There is a set of guiding principles which set a standard of behaviour which compels me to act in a certain manner irrespective of whether others are present or not, or whether I am ever likely to be caught out or not.

These are:
1. That I will never take a shot at any animal where there is a reasonable possibility of wounding;
2. That I will never take a shot at any animal where the shot is a "challenge"
3. That the only morally defensible shot is one where a humane killing shot is probable;
4. That I will never take a shot where I do not have control over the outcome;
5. That the only morally defensible situation where a wounded animal occurs is when the circumstances were completely beyond my ability to predict the outcome.
6. That the animal I hunt is never entrapped or that escape is prevented.

With the above ethical principles in mind, when I was involved with the campaign to try to get legalised bowhunting for fallow deer in Tasmania, we proposed to the Tasmanian Government that there should be the legal adoption of the following -

"Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals in Bowhunting"

1. A bowhunter should have marksmanship skills good enough to be able to shoot an arrow/s into a circle of 25cm at a distance of 15 metres.

2. A bow of adequate draw weight together with arrows of adequate mass should be used which allow a high probability of lethal penetration into life sustaining organs such that unconsciousness or death will quickly result.

3. To facilitate lethal arrow penetration, only broadhead arrows should be used which have cutting edges sharp enough to shave body hair or cut through a taught rubber band with a single slice.

4. An animal should only be shot at when:
(a) It can be clearly seen and recognised;
(b) a clear and uninterrupted shot is presented;
(c) It is within the effective range of the bowhunter and his/her equipment, but in any case never more than 30 metres;
(d) A humane and lethal hit is probable.

5. To produce a quick and painless death a bowhunter should only shoot to hit the heart/lung area.

6. No shot should be taken at animals that are walking or running.

7. Shots should only be taken at animals that are relaxed and unaware of the presence of the hunter. Shooting at animals that are disturbed and moving should be avoided.

8. Shots should not be taken at animals that are facing or quartering towards the bowhunter.

9. Any animal which has been shot should be examined as soon as possible to ensure it is dead, and killed immediately if not.

10. If an animal is wounded every reasonable attempt must be made to locate it and kill it humanely. No further hunting should be undertaken until the wounded animal has been proven killed, lost or not seriously wounded. Other bowhunters in the vicinity should assist in the search for a wounded animal if requested to do so.

The rather generous allowance for the area of 25cm as a killing area in the first rule above is completely reasonable for the thoracic area of a fallow deer at 15m and was a minimum standard of marksmanship. Clearly smaller animals require better marksmanship, but none of this overrides the absolute responsibility of all hunters to forgo any shot where we have the slightest doubt about whether we can kill an animal humanely, ie without unnecessary or unreasonable suffering, irrespective of distance.

If the above set of 6 ethical principles is read in conjunction with the 10 rules of the Code above, it can be seen why they were devised. All of them are the result of the respect for the hunted animal, which commands us to ensure that we kill it humanely as a first principle. Everything else follows from that first principle.

As I have remarked in other places, the opportunity of the trophy of a lifetime never excuses us from that fundamental obligation, and I for one will never submit any animal I shoot for any kind of award scheme ever again. To do so is to be part of the of horn porn problem.

When I read hunting stories nowadays, I judge the ethics of the hunter by those 6 principles above and sadly, most fail dismally. I do this despite some believing that I should not judge others by my own standards.

They cannot get off so easily with this lame copout simply because if they cannot answer the question positively that if they were to die by arrow, they would wish that it were the same as what they do to the animals they hunt, then they are the hypocrites I believe them to be, and as unethical in their hunting as I therefore know them to be.

Too many of the stories we read are of the detailed miserable deaths some hunters inflict on the animals they shoot and the way that they die rather than how well they were able to employ their training, tracking and hunting skills to get so close to the hunted animal that a humane kill was an inevitability.

One famous trophy shooter of whom I once complained to the editor of a magazine did an entire article on the benefits of deliberately wounding animals as a means of preventing them running into cover on a hot day and having to search them out. His obviously superb marksmanship was criminally abused in one of the most deliberately cruel exercises of shooting animals that I have ever read and I was surprised that he was not charged and gaoled on his own written admission with aggravated cruelty by his State's Animal Welfare authority.

We need to devise among ourselves some kind of ethical standards by which we judge hunting stories in print, video and websites like this one so that we are clearly seen to put an ethical concern and respect for the animals we hunt above all else in our hunting publications.

[Glenn Newell]

Everybody has had plenty of good points and ideas to put across. That story you were talking about Dennis was an unbelievable story and even more unbelievable was that it made it to print when the story should have been shredded for the rubbish it was. All the anti have to do to prove their case about the crulety inflicted on animals by hunters all they will have to do is produce stories like the one we are talking about and even worse the terrible vidoe this same individual made about the same hunt.
Maybe there is a good opportunity here for an educational video to be made about what should be shown on a hunting video, content of stories and even how to take photos of the game taken.[/u]

[Griffo]

Spot on Dennis...spot on...I can't ever remember reading such a comprehensive, precise and all-encompassing 'article' as what you have written!

Great work!!!!


Griffo

[erron]

Well,

first, welcome Dennis and Griffo, our latest 2 registered members.

Dennis, I second what Griffo said about your post, and with your permission, would like to somehow run it on, or from, the front page of Ozbow. It's that important an issue, and that good a post. Too good to have sink to the bottom of the 'thread' list, as all posts eventually do.

Dennis, I would also like you to upload that article you sent me on canned hunts, or I could do it for you if you like. It certainly deserves a read by all here, and their comments.

Glenn, you said:

Maybe there is a good opportunity here for an educational video to be made about what should be shown on a hunting video, content of stories and even how to take photos of the game taken

A mate of mine makes videos for a living. He's done a few for the Police, Government and so on, and is quite good. One he did on East Timor won an award of some sort. He is about to start classes for video making. It's given me ideas, I can tell you. Oh, so many projects, so little time...



Cheers all,

Erron

[Dennis La Varenne]

Erron, Griffo, Glen and others,

Thank you for your kind thoughts on my post.

Erron, do what you think is appropriate in regard to it, including the other material.

One or two of the sentences are a bit cumbersome and need rewriting for clarity, but obviously, it seems to have been understood. I did it a bit quickly as I have the dreaded lurgy and am mostly bed-bound for the present.

I hope that it makes everyone think about things a bit. However, the bowhunter that Glen Newell and I know of will probably never get it.

Bowhunters of that ilk use the codes of practice and rules of fair chase of their respective organizations merely as a qualification for accumulating their hunting award fly-bys. It never seems to occur to them that they have a higher obligation to hunted animals.

If bowhunter awards were abolished tomorrow, they would almost certainly be the first to exit the tradition.

Erron, how do you show your location in the top left corner of a post?

[erron]

Dennis,

you have to edit your profile. Just click on the word 'profile' at the top of any page (it's under 'album'). There are all the usual things you can enter: location, signature, etc.

I've put your article on the 'to do' list; thanks. I'll upload your other article tonight.

Now get back to bed/the sofa and rest up!

Cheers,

Erron

[Butch Speer]

Glenn,
I don't understand how your point system works. I believe the only point system in the States is for duck hunting. I think the way it works is that different ducks are worth differing amounts of points. You're only allowed a certain number of points in a days hunt.

I do agree with everyone here. The animal you hunt shot be killed as quickly & humanely as possible. If I were to shoot an animal & my hunting partner were to see it & it were still alive, if he didn't shoot the animal also, I wouldn't be hunting with him any longer.

Markp,
Sounds like a great hunt.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Butch Speer, the points system we are talking about is the Douglas measuring (trophy scoring system) similar to the Pope and Young or the Boon and Crockett systems in the USA.

For some trophy (bone) collectors, their accumulation for the Weatherby trophy or a bowhunting equivalent over there becomes the sole object of hunting. It is the same over here.

[Butch Speer]

Dennis,
Thanks a lot for the info.

[Jackrat]

Butch,The points system that is practiced by the NZBHS here in NewZealand is not based on the Douglas scoring system,It is an allocation
of points for any animal shot with a bow,IE a Pig is worth 5 points,a deer
is worth ten points,a rabbit is worth 1 point.The guy who has the most points at the end of year gets a badge.Or if he gains a certain number of points over time he is then given a master bowhunters award.It has nothing to do with quality as considered from the douglas scoring system
or a pope and young type system.
It is a simple numbers game,IE he who slaughters the most wins.
No consideration is given the animal.When some guys come across a herd
of goats they will try to kill every one of them,Take some photo,s and then
leave them to rot.
If this makes some of NZs bow hunters seem like a pack of unthinking ego
freaks ,Its the truth.
Jack.

[Butch Speer]

Jackrat,
Thanks for the info. At the risk of making people mad, that is a Hell of a system! I guess I'm old fashioned but, I always thought that is was the enjoyment of the hunt rather than the quantity of game killed.

I'm glad that system isn't used in the States. We have enough self centered, egotistical horesesa**es around.

[Silverfox.]

G'day All,

I'm sort of new around these parts, but my better half has been on here she tells me!
I like the site Erron, well done , keep up the good work. Hopefully this site and the Trad club can work hand in hand.

As for the points system, I'm not a fan of it and even the people that run it but thats my HO. I have never put anything in to be "Claimed" and I do not even run a tape over things now days. I hunt for me and the people with me. Not to see my name up in Neon lights or in ink! A very good friend to me once said" anyone could make Master bowhunter , if he had the time and money, but why sell your soul". And I really love the tacky badges that one can sew on a shirt to to show all how good one is! I call 'em Boy scout shirts! Once again JMHO.

For a short time only, Alan M. Kidner.

[Jackrat]

Butch,You are correct it is a hell of a system,Basicly it harks back to the days when NZ was over run with animals and the Govenment employed
pro hunters to get the numbers down.Back then and I am talking up until
the early 70s it was possible to see a hundred deer a day in some places.
The NZBHS was formed during this time and they are yet to get out of the
old ways.There are other hunting groups in NZ that have a more civilized
approch but the NZBHS is the only bowhunting group in NZ.their attitude costs them a lot of members. I am a member of the NZ deer stalkers asso, we are the oldest hunting organisation in NZ.Most of the members are rifle hunters but bow hunters are made welcome,All of our bowhunting members would join NZBHS if it wasn,t for their backward award system.I personaly will not hunt with a member of NZBHS,or atend
any of their shoots.You don,t have to worry about upsetting me with your comment as I fully agree with you.
Cheers,,Jack.

[erron]

Alan (Silverfox),

welcome to Ozbow mate, and thanks for the kind words. Are you back for long? Hope to see you here often. Doesn't East Timor have Internet cafe's?



Or are things a bit rough and ready still over there?

Seriously, I'm thankful our country has folks like yourself to do service like that, and it's an honour to have you here. Come back soon, and often!

And yes, hennypenny has been here, but after an early promising start, she's failed utterly to keep us ratbags in line!



I wouldn't know what a points system is, and don't really want to. I just hunt because it feels like me being me when I hunt.

god, that made a lot of sense heh?

Erron

[Glenn Newell]

G'day Alan good to see you here. I you will be based a home for a while before you get out for a hunt...Glenn...