Thoughts on "alternative hunting methods"

[Bruno747]

Just looking for your thoughts on people that hunt with spears or atlatls now that more states seem to be approving seasons for this.

I have to admit, it seems to me that humans have come full circle with hunting. We have made such reliable easy to use weapons and have food so easy to acquire that we resort to hunting methods of distant ancestors.

Most of the videos I have seen of this type of hunting seem to be less than ethical kills. Am i missing something or are hunters actually trying to give peta more to complain about?

[sqlbullet]

I haven't watched alot of videos on hunting.  Not a big hunter.  I got my fill of killing stuff growing up on a farm where we slaughtered out own chickens, pigs and cows.

You do bring up a good point.  However, it can head into an interesting philosophical debate.  It can even start with the core ethical question of eating animals at all.

I tend to fall on the side of a fast, clean kill, but have no problem eating animals.  If they didn't want to be eaten, they shouldn't be so tasty

I get frustrated personally with some of the distant shots I see on Youtube from time to time.  If the bullet travel time is long enough for the animal to move from clean kill to wounded then I think the shot should be skipped.  Realistically, that limits you to a few hundred yards.

But my opinion isn't the only one and I am fine with others behaving how they feel is appropriate.

I personally am not gonna go spear hunting.  I can learn to stalk to very close range and then take the kill with a rifle, and learn atlatl marksmanship in my backyard.  I then have the skills to hunt with an atlatl if needed.

But hey, I don't hunt at all.  I take the lazy path these days and eat the flesh of beasts others have killed for me.

On a side note, I had zebra, ostrich and kangaroo last week in Germany.  The kangaroo was a bit gamey, but still good.  Others just tasted like beef to me.

[DM1906]

There's nothing wrong with alternative hunting methods, IMO, but an ethical kill is an important factor. The definition of "ethical" should only be broadened by the level of necessity (such as survival). Of all the animals I've hunted, only the 2-legged species, in some cases, may be deserving of a "less than ethical kill" (not talking about ducks).

[Geeman]

I think there is something about getting extremely close to game that drives it.

Most that I run with use bows almost exclusively.  I'm not that much into that type of hunting (and I suck with a bow), but I sometimes get very close with cameras, to the point that you are nearly eyeball to eyeball and any movement or the slightest sound will betray what you are.  That is a rush every time, and its even more so when you keep from getting busted after an extremely close encounter.

Greg

[spaniel]

If you filmed all of the guys who hunt and never shoot except opening day, you'd give PETA plenty to work with.  A handful of well-meaning guys with primitive weapons are the least of our worries.

In this day of people feeling the need to use uber magnums for average deer and slap a scope on everything, I'm afraid our idea of "ethical" has become a bit warped.

While there are bad apples who are just trying to notch the longest shot possible, in general, the long range crowd doesn't necessarily concern me either.  I am one of them and know firsthand that there are advantages.  Long range animals have no idea anything is wrong and typically just stand there after being shot until they fall over because the rifle report is too far away to scare them.  Close animals are much more likely to sense the hunter and spook at the last moment.  I've never had an animal over 200 yards move during the shot.  Yet just last year I spined a doe on an 80 yard shot because she sensed me and coiled to flee right as the trigger broke.  Some claim it is unethical not to get as close as possible, but if it gives a better chance to shoot a calm animal and make a clean kill why is that less ethical? 

[Rojo27]

Just looking for your thoughts on people that hunt with spears or atlatls now that more states seem to be approving seasons for this.

I have to admit, it seems to me that humans have come full circle with hunting. We have made such reliable easy to use weapons and have food so easy to acquire that we resort to hunting methods of distant ancestors.

Most of the videos I have seen of this type of hunting seem to be less than ethical kills. Am i missing something or are hunters actually trying to give peta more to complain about?

Interesting question, although important point to stipulate right up front (and with all due respect): Try as I may but can't summon the slightest give a damn about what PITA thinks.  We're all entitled to our own opinions and if some Libtard idiot considers a feral hog as some kind of co-equal child of the universe..."Party on Garth".  I absolutely support PITA members individual right to decide to live their own lives however the hell suits them...  So long as they extend the same courtesy, but therein usually lies the rub....

Your view on the topic appears pretty solidified so it's unlikely anything someone could tell you in this forum would cast things in a different light that resonates. But sense you asked, here's my .02 cents:

Don't condone animal cruelty in any form and ethical hunting of game is important to me.  Within the law, each hunter's personal ethical and moral code if different.  Seen things done legally with high powered rifles and modern hunting gear, I personally found irresponsible, objectionable and unethical.   However, I've hunted medium sized game with rifle, pistol & once (feral hog) with dogs and a knife.  It's cool if that doesn't float your boat.  I found the hands on hunting experience to be very unique and one I'll never forget.  Be assured, won't be selling my firearms and converting full time to spear, atlatls, knife hunting.  I walked away from the experience with a keener appreciation for modern technology and of how our ancestors survived in an unforgiving world. 
I presume that to some, hunting in this manner is a visceral connection to nature and the struggle for life and death. 

[Bruno747]

Your view on the topic appears pretty solidified so it's unlikely anything someone could tell you in this forum would cast things in a different light that resonates. But sense you asked, here's my .02 cents:

No no, don't take it that way, I don't mean to start a fight, I was asking for honest opinions on the topic to see if there might be something that sways me or that I am missing. While fairly solidified, I am very open to new understanding when presented with reasonable ideas.

I can appreciate the wish to get in tune with older styles of hunting, but for many of these ways of hunting the possibility of unnecessary extended suffering of your game far outweighs any benefit gained. At least so it seems to me. For example, you mentioned hunting hogs with a knife and dogs. That sounds like an unbelievable experience that I imagine you wouldn't trade for the world. However; I can't imagine you stabbed the hog in the hind quarters several times before dispatching it with a hit to its heart. Imagine the scenario with a spear at 15 yards. Would your strikes have been nearly so accurate or quick in dealing death?

Please keep in mind that below is not directed at anyone in particular.

I genuinely like the idea that the term ethical is broadened by the necessity of the kill such as a survival situation. Should I be in a survival situation with only a hatchet and a deer that doesn't realize i'm there only 20 yards away you better believe I am going full lumberjack hatchet throw on that deer. But should that be allowed as a season? In my book not a chance. Given the current path we are on though, it wouldn't surprise me in the least to hear it is allowed in just a few years.


Someone else mentioned filming those that only shoot on opening day. Amen, there are plenty of unethical hunters in this world. I can distinctly remember several cases of this, once where the weather was just right on opening morning that every sound seemed to be amplified. I could hear people talking on the other side of the farm several hundred yards away. It was crazy. On that day, there were 11 shots fired from a single location and single rifle in the span of a few moments. With the distinct sound of a reload somewhere in there. Point being we have all encountered or heard unethical hunters in our own hunting experiences.

That said, I was ingrained from the start with a heavier ethical burden than many hunters I know. I have passed this on to the younger members that I have mentored in hunting. The rule passed on to me by my father was that of one shot, one quick clean kill. If you didn't achieve that it was all on you for your failures as a hunter. He made it clear that when I couldn't drive, didn't have my own weapons, and was under his supervision while hunting that any problems would take me out of the woods are require much range time to gain his trust again. That burden has guided me through all my years of hunting leaving me with only one kill I feel was unethical and it was my fault I wasn't more stern and clear for the person I was hunting with that day.

As for PETA, I mostly ignore them, (im the people eating tasty animals camp) but make enough noise and they do finally change things at times. I would be less than happy to find out that hunting season was suspended due to all the videos of primitive weapons taking significantly longer to kill game than a well placed bow or rifle shot. But that's just it, any well placed shot of nearly any weapon will ethically kill. Its the likelihood of an unethical kill a weapon or scenario presents that bothers me.


To sum up my feeling in another form, it seems that we have progressed to such easy hunting that we feel the need to step back and find more difficult methods. Would there be an outcry if slaughterhouses went back to using clubs or a hammer to kill animals rather than the typical bolt gun to the brain or stun gun just to get in touch with how old butchers did it? How primitive of a weapon or scenario should be allowed before it's not okay? Would you place the limit at taunting a bear into attacking so that you can raise a pike at the last second for it to fall on?

To take part of a line from one of my favorite movies. It seem these people are so preoccupied with whether or not they could they didn't stop to think if they should.

[blaster]

I live to hunt and like ALL types of weapons. I would use a ball peen hammer if they had a special season where I could get in the woods for a few more days. that being said, I prefer to hunt with modern firearms. I am particularly fond on DRT shots on game and those are rare with primitive weapons. I started bow hunting in the mid '60s before compound bows. there were times I wished I could sneak my pistol out after either missing or wounding & losing an animal. today, with my compound bow equipped with sights & a release, I can shoot it more accurately than my pistol. : and my in line muzzleloader is as accurate as my .30/06 deer rifle with none of the problems of a primitive cap lock or flint lock. so I have kinda lost the excitement & challenge of hunting with them. (but I still do it ) I have never tried an atlatal and would like to learn it. my first wild hog was killed with a thrown ax and I have killed an armadillo with a throwing knife. both were pretty clean kills. I have slings, sling shots, bolas  & spears that I play around with but have never really hunted with. although I do use my spear when I pole my jon boat in the swamp to fend off gators.   i have no problem wit other people wanting to try primitive weapons. they just have to be prepared for a not so clean kill. it does give more appreciation of what our ancestors had to use and the benefits of modern weaponry. as far as what the PETA and bunny hugger types think, *&^% them!