Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Discuss articles and commentaries from our recent issues!
User avatar
Ben Sobieck
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:29 am

Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby Ben Sobieck » Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:06 am

In a recent article in Deer & Deer Hunting (read excerpt here), Ted Nugent stated his views on what it means to be ethical.

Do you agree or disagree with Nugent's comments? Do you think game laws in your area are ethical? What does it mean to be ethical? Should hunters need to point out their ethical behavior? We look forward to hearing from you.

Disclaimer

These are tough questions that hunters everywhere confront each season. They spark some strong emotions. When posting in this discussion, remember that every view is welcome here. As such, every view is open for debate. But that debate must remain respectful. This forum has long prided itself on intelligent, open, honest and civil discussion. That is the only kind allowed.

If you absolutely must air grievances with another poster, conduct it in private. Posters who hijack any thread with back-and-forth attacks will have their posts deleted and/or be banned from the forum.

User avatar
El Conquistador
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:56 am
Location: Nebraska

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby El Conquistador » Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:29 am

I fully agree with Ted's article.  He hit on a number of important issues regarding the way our wildlife is managed, and they way it should be managed. 

I live in Nebraska, and although Nebraska is making some VERY PROACTIVE steps, such as lifting the ban on crossbows during the archery season, recently lowering the youth tags to $5.00, the state-wide season choice whitetail tag, and lifting the ridiculous ban on scopes for muzzle loaders, there is much more that they need to look at.   Allowing hunting over bait is one.

One thing that Ted mentioned is that there is a daily bag limit on ducks of 5, but a restriction on the number of shells in a shotgun of 3.  That may not be unethical, but it certainly is illogical.  In Nebraska, you are allowed two tags that permit you to kill 2 bucks, yet you can have 6 cartridges in your gun.

Your ethics should be determined by how you feel after what you did.  You have no right to chastise someone for their own methods.  If someone is doing something illegal, by all means turn them in to the proper authorities.  You also of course have the right to set your own rules on your own property.

Projecting personal ethics upon others is counter-productive and sometimes hurtful.  It can turn people away from our sport.  Why would someone want to go afield with another who talks down on them?

hunter480
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:44 am

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby hunter480 » Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:30 am

Clearly, I don`t agree with nugent on his, so called ethics. I never had any use for the guy even before he was an arrested poacher.

As to the Indiana DNR game laws, yes, I do believe they`re ethical, they don`t allow baiting, they prohibit the shooting into a squirrels nest for example, (and yes, I`ve heard some talk about having done that), and I believe that overall, our state has a good handle on ethics while in the field.

By your last question, should hunters need to point out their ethical behavior, I`m guessing you mean, should we as hunters, need, to discuss ethics......after hearing some of the defiant posts here, and especially after having had to listen to the mindless nugent rants for years, it`s painfully obvious that yes, we do need to discuss ethics. As a group, hunters need to police their own, as well as our publications.....D&DH has had a video of someone shooting at a deer at 1000 yards.......extremely unethical.........D&DH has nugent as a writer regularly..........since he now has a record as a game violator, I believe it`s not in the best interests of hunting to have anyone who so obviously disregards game laws, to be a contributor in such an, otherwise, fine, hunting magazine.

I`m picky about who I hunt with. My buddy and I take a lot of pride in making, mostly one-shot-kills. None of that, shooting until the smoking gun is empty crap. We know what time legal shooting time begins and ends, and we just won`t shoot one minute before, or after. I never have to worry about looking down the muzzle of my buddy`s gun, and the same for him. I`m also picky about where I spend my money. I only subscribe to magazines that reflect my values and ethics; that includes the people they print on the inside of that magazine.

Ethics are vital to everything we do, and they`re critical in every aspect of life. They`re even moreso when we`re participating in the taking of a wild animals life, as that`s what defines exactly who and what we are, and not just while we`re afield. If a guy will shoot early just to get his venison, I have no idea what else he`s likely capable of, but I won`t trust my back to him. Same with who I allow to speak for me, or represent me. I want someone who carry`s himself with dignity, and speaks with an air of calm and reason. Someone who doesn`t go out of their way to offend, but, still, doesn`t back down a bit, in defending my lifestyle. It isn`t simply the message, it`s the delivery as well, and it`s the image.

I just don`t trust anyone who tells me, to just look the other way, don`t worry about what the next guy is doing, and implys that, by me doing what comes naturaly to me, insisting on a solid code of ethics, that I`m somehow part of the problem.
Greg Russell

The Second Amendment, America`s Original Homeland Security

Huntingdad
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:06 pm

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby Huntingdad » Tue Jan 11, 2011 1:17 pm

Thanks Ben.  As I said before I feel if it is legal and you are safe have at it. But if it is not and you are not go directly to jail or pay the fine. Ethics are an intensly personal choice we make for ourselves. Point being for ourselves not others!!! As Forrest said "That is all I have to say about that"

Dan Salmon
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 7:52 am

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby Dan Salmon » Tue Jan 11, 2011 1:57 pm

I agree with a lot of Ted's points.  I disagree with some.

I think, for the most part, yes, game laws in the state of Wisconsin are ethical, but some are contradictory.  For instance, baiting is only legal in certain areas and with certain amounts of bait legal to put out, but gardening (food plots) for deer is legal statewide.   This is baiting, plain and simple in my mind anyway.  And I'm not going to get into the argument about crop fields, because it is not the same situation, I don't care how you try justifying your gardening. 

At the same time, I'm not out petitioning the state to change any laws or to outright ban baiting.  It is the way some people hunt and I don't have a problem with it, I choose not to hunt that way myself.

No, hunters should not need to point out their ethical behavior any more than farmers, lawyers, doctors, etc. need to point out their ethical behavior. 

There is nothing unethical about hunting.  Hunting is providing food for your family, nothing more nothing less.  Do we need to hunt to live, no, but it is a choice that we make and that choice doesn't subject us to higher ethical standard. 

Why are wild animals not held to an ethical standard?  They hunt, they kill and I'll tell you from experience, it isn't pretty to watch, but it is real and animals sometime waste as much or more of an animal than humans do. 

I don't know a hunter alive that purposely aims to wound an animal.  If there are people out there that do this, they certainly are not hunters and shouldn't be called a hunter just because they are seen to be going though the motions.

I think Ted is correct on the big picture.  Hunters do no service to themselves by talking about what they do in ethical terms to those that do not hunt.  It's the same reason you'll not hear a lawyer talking about ethics to non-lawyers.  If you are not intimately familiar with what a person is talking about you will never understand the experience nor the emotions involved and are not in anyway able to make any kind of judgment, ethical or not, about the subject.

Are hunters ever going to agree with each other about everything, no, but the constant picking back and forth from within our ranks will ultimately be our undoing.  The antis and treehuggers  see this and this is how they are going about their business now.  We'll instigate the supposed problem and let hunters dig their own grave.  I think they are doing pretty good.

NC Deer Hunter
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:00 am

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby NC Deer Hunter » Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:38 pm

Sometimes Ted can get on my nerves like when he gets to deep in the spirit world but I also have good friends and also a Wife that get on my nerves sometimes but in general I think alot of these people, I am sure you guys feel the same about some of your friends at times. With that said, I like Ted and I agree with most of what he says and to answer the question at hand, I agree with the article mentioned.

User avatar
El Conquistador
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:56 am
Location: Nebraska

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby El Conquistador » Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:34 pm

Also, I have been receiving the online newsletter from D&DH for a long time now.  I subscribed to the magazine after reading Ted's article.

Highlander Archery
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:29 pm

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby Highlander Archery » Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:05 pm

I purchase my needed tags, I obey the rules and laws of my state to the best of my ability and knowledge, I practice diligently with the tools I choose to use, I aim small and miss small keeping myself well within my capabilities and the capabilities of my weapon, I aim to make the quickest most humane kill that I can, when I get a bad shot I diligently follow up, for hours if need be, to claim my kill and if needed quickly dispatch it.

When the laws depart from scientific management principles it becomes a confusing mess and drives people away from the sport. Another thing  that burns my butt is that agencies and legislators will make the laws and regulations threatening felony and high misdemeanor charges while at the same time slapping people on the wrist who we trust with our personal information when they misuse and or profit from it. PA is a prime example since they recently increased their penalties on "poaching" and joined the Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact.

Title 34 section 325:

Sec. 325. Limitation on disclosure of certain records.
(a) General rule.--It is unlawful for any game protector, deputy game protector, hunting license issuing agent, or any officer, employee or agent of any Commonwealth agency, or any other private business or agency which makes or receives records of hunting and trapping licenses, or applications for obtaining hunting and trapping licenses of any type received pursuant to this title, to sell, publish or disclose in any manner whatsoever those records or affiliations to any person except as necessary to carry out the functions and business of the commission, or for any person to purchase, secure, procure or disclose any records or affiliations as described herein.
(b) Publications.--It is unlawful for the commission, the director, any game protector or deputy game protector, any officer, employee or agent of the commission or any private business or agency to sell, publish or disclose in any manner any subscription lists or mailing lists for publications issued under section 302(e) (relating to publications).
(c) Nonapplication.--The provisions of this section shall not apply to records and reports:
(1) Required for prosecutions of any violations of this title.
(2) Required for administrative proceedings held pursuant to the laws of this Commonwealth.
(3) Required for the prosecution of any violation of any Federal laws or the laws of any state of the United States.
(4) Required to be published to enforce the suspension or revocation of hunting and trapping privileges by the commission.
(5) Authorized by action of the commission for the sole purpose of exercising legitimate governmental function or duty.
(6) Required to determine the identification of a trapper under Section 2361(a)(12) (relating to unlawful acts concerning taking of furbearers), when such information is requested by a landowner, an agent of a landowner or a lessee of land. When such records and reports are made available by the commission for the limited purposes set forth in paragraphs (1) through (6), they shall not be published, circulated or disclosed by the receiving agency for any purposes.
23
(d) Penalty.--Any person violating any provision of this section commits a summary offense of the fifth degree. The record or report or name of each individual person shall constitute a separate offense.
Cross References. Section 325 is referred to in section 302 of this title

A person entrusted with our personal information gets a ticket if they misuse it? You make 3 mistakes in 7 years and you lose your 2nd Amendment Rights? In this day and age of ID theft, credit card fraud, and the attacks we continuously face from HSUS and others how can it be that ANYONE charged with handling personal information is held to a standard equivalent to a speeding ticket instead of a standard of at least high misdemeanor or felony?
Especially when we are held midemeanor or higher if we do the exact same thing.
 

Utah cheesehead
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:25 pm

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby Utah cheesehead » Tue Jan 11, 2011 6:26 pm

Teds stance on ethics is spot on. There are plenty of states that don't allow party hunting, but that doesn't mean it doesn't go on. Take waterfowl hunting, how often do people hunt until all bag limits are met? How often are fishing creels maxed out? I'm not saying I practice this, but an arguement can be made that this rule should go away if the resource is way above objective. A case in point is Wisconsin where years ago they removed the party hunting rule on deer. They were not meeting their harvest objectives, and they realized this rule was wrong. Hard to believe they would admit this, but they did. Some here would still say it is unethical. Not me. My stand is that if the state sells a tag, they should expext that tag to be filled. Tags should be issued on the basis of surplus animals, not how much money they can put in the coffer. Again sound management practices come into play, not emotions or perceptions.

MikeinMO
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:30 am

RE: Discuss Ted Nugent's Article, "Ethics...Schmethics!"

Postby MikeinMO » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:19 pm

ORIGINAL: Ben Sobieck

In a recent article in Deer & Deer Hunting (read excerpt here), Ted Nugent stated his views on what it means to be ethical.

Do you agree or disagree with Nugent's comments? Do you think game laws in your area are ethical? What does it mean to be ethical? Should hunters need to point out their ethical behavior? We look forward to hearing from you.

Disclaimer

These are tough questions that hunters everywhere confront each season. They spark some strong emotions. When posting in this discussion, remember that every view is welcome here. As such, every view is open for debate. But that debate must remain respectful. This forum has long prided itself on intelligent, open, honest and civil discussion. That is the only kind allowed.

If you absolutely must air grievances with another poster, conduct it in private. Posters who hijack any thread with back-and-forth attacks will have their posts deleted and/or be banned from the forum.


I generally agree with Nugent's comments.

In my state the original game laws were developed primarily to enforce wildlife management practices that were thought to be effective. They were effective, and to a much greater extent than anybody dared hope. Now, because of malicious obedience to those original principles, we find ourselves with areas that are dangerously overpopulated with deer. Our state has liberalized bag limits and extended seasons to try to limit or contain the deer population, but it has not worked and will not work until they allow methods that will enable deer to be attracted from areas where they are not hunted and on to areas where they can be killed. the reality of modern life is that very very few hunters can spend an entire season afield. They get a few weekends or sometimes a single weekend to hunt. Increasing their productivity by allowing use of bait stations would be more helpful than longer seasons and higher limits. Increasing hunter success would also keep more hunters involved. Success breeds success, and too many days afield with no game tends to discourage the occasional, and the one season hunters. So yes. not using methods that actually achieve the necessary management result can be called unethical. Also, the specious and scientifically unfounded arguments that have been used to justify prohibiting use of feed and baits for deer are certainly an example of unethical behavior.

Now to give you a fresh example of anti-hunting ethics, today we learned that the liberal Mayor of a local community that is overrun with deer due to hunting prohibitions, has been censured for sending an email under a created identity stating that city council members who supported deer hunting "ought to be shot".

We can feel as self righteous and be as self congratulatory as we want about our "ethics" as hunters, but we need to realize that our opponents neither share, nor care about those ethics. We won't win them over with ethical behavior because in their lexicon there is no such thing as ethical hunting. Finally, we may actually be endangering our game populations as well as the future of hunting with malicious adherence to an ethical standard that precludes us from achieving management objectives, and keeps people who might otherwise hunt from having the success that would bring them back to the field.

Next

Return to Deer & Deer Hunting Features

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest