Slugless
Member
So how many of the "yes" respondents hunt coyote for fun?
Yes, there are some good comments. And you are right. I reacted angrily to what I saw as a rude reply, and I shouldn't have. I apologize. I shouldn't have reacted that way. And as I said, I am NOT looking for an amen choir. Look, in my opening post, I said:akodo said:Umm, when I look at those posts, I see a fair amount of discussion, as well as some amens.
Seems to me an amen choir was exactly what you were looking for, sorry if a few of us do not cooperate.
In my eyes, asking/suggesting to the mods to close seems a lot like "I want to take my ball and go home"
I'm NEW at this, and yes I have opinions, but I am also seeking to understand it better, and that's why I'm interested in the opinions of others, even if they disagree with me. I'm trying to learn here. I just don't want to deal with rudeness, and I'm trying hard not to be rude in return, but I admit that I'm feeling a little bit defensive here.I started out by saying that the accused's actions were illegal based on my (admittedly possibly incomplete) knowledge of Texas hunting laws. I do have a recently paid for hunting license, but my upcoming white tail hunt will also be my first hunting experience since I shot a rabbit as a boy with an air rifle back in 1965.
My answer - for ME - would be yes, if I had good reason to believe that the hunter who shot it had abandoned the search for it or was not interested in searching for it, I would finish it off. My question to you would be, would that be an unethical thing for me to do in the world of hunting ethics? I sincerely want to know.akodo said:Do you think it there a moral imperative to prevent unnecessary suffering when someone else has shot and wounded an animal? To what degree do we interfere with the harshness that is mother nature because death is messy and painful out there?
At what range, on what kind of game, with what rifle and caliber? I would probably prefer a head shot, but I also know what my own limitations are as a marksman. I'm not averse to shooting an animal though the heart/lungs if that will ensure the kill, but I'm also going to hope that it dies fairly quickly. If it is still alive by the time I get to it, I'm going to shoot it again, and regret that it took so long for me to get there. But for sure I'm not going to abandon the search for it because it's "too far to walk" or some such nonsense. Also, if I shot an animal that got away from me and I could not find it, I would sincerely hope that someone else does find it and dispatches it.akodo said:I'd also like to hear your moral stance on choosing the lungs/heart shot vs the head shot, whereas one is more reliable but usually a bit longer, while the other is much more quick...except it is much more likely to go wrong and really leave a mess.
Absolutely not. I have no reason to have anything but the utmost respect for you, and I am struck by how much it matters to you that you be able to recover your hits, even when you don't always succeed. That is admirable.bensdad said:Are you proclaiming us all insane?
I do, and add prairie dogs to the list, also.So how many of the "yes" respondents hunt coyote for fun?
A lung shot is usually considered to be a humane way to kill an animal, and it's standard practice, when hunting, not to follow up an animal for several minutes after it's hit. Which means that by your standard, many hunters are causing unnecessary suffering.the idea of lung shooting it, and then leaving it to die slowly
A lung shot is usually considered to be a humane way to kill an animal, and it's standard practice, when hunting, not to follow up an animal for several minutes after it's hit. Which means that by your standard, many hunters are causing unnecessary suffering.
The same goes for animals you do not have a tag for that you defend yourself against. A bear, or any game that requires self defense. You are allowed to defend yourself, not end the suffering of the wounded creature. When it is injured, in pain lying there dying and you are no longer in danger that is the end of your shooting.
There are many experts who recommend not following game for a half hour or more.what do you do when you make the shot, the animal runs, and you find it, say 10-15 minutes later (I have no idea if that is actually a realistic possibility), still alive, but dying?
Your assumption that coyotes and prairie dogs do not pose a threat to livestock & livelihood is incorrect.So why do people who claim "humane" killing styles shoot coyotes and, yes, prairie dogs that pose no harm or threat to livestock or livelihood?
Again, the presence of motion does not automatically indicate agony or even consciousness. Often brain shots result in seizure like activity due to the residual random activity of the destroyed brain being transmitted to the muscles.I've seen the videos that people post of prairie dogs twitching and thrashing in their death agonies.
So why do people who claim "humane" killing styles shoot coyotes and, yes, prairie dogs that pose no harm or threat to livestock or livelihood? [Chicken killers gotta be put down as best can] They're shooting for the boilerworks, right? I've seen the videos that people post of prairie dogs twitching and thrashing in their death agonies. Those videos are sick.
Killing an animal for fun isn't humane. The definition of humane is "kind and sympathetic". What part of killing an animal who's minding its own business is kind or sympathetic? Sympathetic is live and let live.
If you shoot it, eat it. Pests, sick, or dangerous animals are exempt.
I get the part about lung and chest shots, but let me ask you a few followup questions then. Assuming that in most situations shooting through the heart/lungs is the best target and standard practice, what do you do when you make the shot, the animal runs, and you find it, say 10-15 minutes later (I have no idea if that is actually a realistic possibility), still alive, but dying? Do you wait for it to die, or do you put an end to it? If you put an end to it, what is the best way to do it? And lastly, is there ever a good argument for not putting an end to it, say like spoiling too much meat, or something like that?
Again, I'm trying to learn as much as I can here before I actually have to apply any of it in the field.
Your assumption that coyotes and prairie dogs do not pose a threat to livestock & livelihood is incorrect.
Coyotes have been known to spread rabies and other disease, kill a large number of deer in winter (not necessarily for food), and have even tried to grab babies off porches in at least 3 different states I recall reading about on this forum. They are varmints, and if people opt to shoot them when they have the chance, more power to them.
As for prairie dogs, they tend to breed at a pretty high rate, and can destroy farm or range land if left unchecked.
How much "countryside" do you think there is that isn't someone's farm or range? Ain't much in TX, that's for sure!If it's your farm or range, kill them. I'd rather them shot than poisoned.
I'm talking about going out into the countryside, calling in a yote and killing it.
Personally, I think you're going out of your way to find a problem where none exists. I don't mean this in an insulting way, but to be frank, most of what you have posted on this thread seems to be based on a lack of information about varmint hunting in specific and hunting in general.My point is that some people claim they kill animals "humanely" when they go out of their way to kill animals that don't need killing.
How much "countryside" do you think there is that isn't someone's farm or range? Ain't much in TX, that's for sure!
most of what you have posted on this thread seems to be based on a lack of information about varmint hunting in specific and hunting in general.
I think you're going out of your way to find a problem where none exists. I don't mean this in an insulting way, but to be frank...
I don't know much about government owned land, how it's regulated or what (if any) livestock activity is allowed on it.I'm thinking about out west where I have property - BLM, Federal Lands,
I agree. I would add "nuisance" as a valid reason in at least some cases since the law usually does.If you're going to kill an animal, you'd better have a valid reason to do it (hunting, pest control, protection) and at least minimize the pain.
I have yet to meet the pheasant, grouse, duck, goose, quail, dove, (name some other sport birds) hunter who can vote "yes" on this one.