|
Where Things Stand - Shooting helpless animals not part of ethical hunting
Mac Olsen
South Peace News
A few weeks ago, I wrote a column about “throwing the book” at the perpetrator(s) who illegally shot three caribou 70 km north of Slave Lake Feb. 8.
This is also called poaching and I find it repugnant somebody would do such as thing, as the caribou are a protected species.
If the authorities ever catch the perpetrator(s), not only should they serve life imprisonment, they should make a documentary for schools and the hunter education course offered by the Alberta Hunter Education Instructors’ Association. They must explain their wrongdoing, admit their guilt and emphasize the importance of hunter ethics, including not poaching.
The AHEIA has a small booklet regarding hunting access and ethics. On one page it describes a personal code of ethics which says, “ethics are standards of behaviour or conduct, which are considered to be morally right.”
It also says personal ethics are unwritten laws which govern a person’s behaviour all the time, including when they are alone and with others.
“Your personal code of ethics is based upon your respect for other people and their property, for all living things, their environment and your self image. The basis of a personal code of ethics is a ‘sense of decency.’”
High Prairie resident Bob Rohloff teaches the AHEIA’s hunter education course. I took it last fall and found it to be very informative. For instance, some people may not be aware a moose cannot be shot while it is swimming – not that I would have, just because it is contrary to my sensibilities. However, someone who has not taken the course and may not be aware of this, I wonder how they would feel if they shot it in that circumstance.
I have no doubt the vast majority of hunters – those who are new to the sport and those with many years of experience – follow a code of ethics. This is not to say there are no “grey areas” in hunting, but if such a scenario comes up, I would err on the side of caution and not follow through.
I can point to an episode of a series on the channel Wild TV as a case in point. The episode featured a bear hunt and someone noticed a black bear climbing a tree. To my horror, a hunter shot that bear and it fell to the ground.
If the bullet did not kill the bear, the fall no doubt would have, but this is not the point. I argue what the hunter did is unethical because they did not kill the bear as part of a fair chase. The animal was trapped in a tree – it had no ability of escape. There was also a small chance it could have survived both the bullet and the impact of the fall, which would have prolonged its suffering.
I plan to go on a black bear hunt this spring and I have said to myself, if I see a bear up a tree, I will not shoot it because it would be unethical. I might come across one of the biggest and best bears to shoot, but I will turn down the opportunity if it goes up a tree.
I do not consider myself morally superior or arrogant, I am simply putting forth a position about hunter ethics.
This is a topic which should be taught in school. Even if the students do not become hunters, it would still give them the opportunity to learn about ethical behaviour and nature.
Copyright © 1999-2009 South Peace News. All Rights Reserved.
No part may be reproduced without written permission.
View our Privacy Statement.
Send website suggestions to the Webmaster
|
