No clear answer to all ethics scenarios

MOSES LAKE - This is the second of a two-part series about hunting ethics.

The entire idea about hunting deer with a spear came to the limelight because a Montana state senator has asked the Fish and Game Committee to consider a spear as a legal method of hunting.

Part of the reasoning stated was about a dozen other states have legalized the use of spears in hunting. The Montana Senate Bill 112 would also allow the use of an atlatl, which is a device to create more power with a hand thrown spear. Indians across North America used atlatls, including local tribes.

As readers can imagine, spear hunters often ambush their game in a variety of ways; from a tree stand or a ground blind for example.

I've hunted deer in Alabama and know how brushy the hunting areas are. Shotguns with buckshot was required when I hunted there while in Army helicopter flight school.

In my mind, if a hunter in Alabama wants to hunt with a spear, more power to him, especially if he is going after the hogs. Those critters are able to cause considerable damage to a human body. But in Montana...?

Another example

In Oregon it is legal to use a dog to bust up a flock of turkeys in the fall. The hunter can then try to call them back within range. It is not legal to do so in Washington. If I was hunting in Oregon, I wouldn't think it wrong or unethical to use a dog for such a purpose, especially if the dog belonged to a hunting buddy, but I wouldn't think of it in Washington.

It is always best to use a hunting buddy's dog for all types of hunting. This way of thinking means the hunting buddy pays all the feed bills, vet bills etc., so dogs owned by a hunting buddy are always the best.

For those of you who think hunting turkey with a dog is not ethical in any state, perhaps we should rethink the use of dogs for hunting pheasant. I hunted a lot of pheasant in the Columbia Basin in the mid-1960s with my .410 and brought limits home without using a dog. Of course, I was a lot younger then and there were more pheasants in the mid-1960s.

Illegal, but ethical situation

There are times when a situation might be illegal, but ethical in the eyes of the person involved. A friend saw a doe hit by a car on a remote rural road. The deer was very much alive, but both legs hind legs were broken. She called the state patrol who said they would be out.

She waited several hours and called several more times as the doe pulled herself across the road and into an alfalfa field. Just before dark, she took her pistol and put the doe out of its misery. The friend says she would have been haunted by the doe if she hadn't taken action. I'm sure she is still troubled by the sight of the animal suffering needlessly.

Another interesting ethical situation was discussed over several months in the newsletter of the Outdoor Writers' Association of America. One writer brought up the question, "What would you do if a wounded mule deer doe passed by your position while hunting deer?"

Writers were in fighting mood as they bantered back and forth month after month on the newsletter pages. Of course, in Washington there would be nothing a person could do, unless they possessed a permit to harvest a doe. To shoot it without the proper permit would be illegal and unethical.

Writers in other states claimed it would be unethical to let the doe suffer. They would have shot the doe on sight, to make sure it didn't suffer one second longer. But the difference is clear when we take into consideration the game regulations and limits.

Alabama allows two does per hunter to be taken for the entire season, but only three antlered deer. A wounded doe would end up being one of the two allowed in the bag limit for the day. The question would come into play when an Alabama hunter has tagged the two doe for the day and a wounded doe came by, how should the hunter respond?

Some states allow party hunting, when one hunter can kill a deer to fill a tag of another hunter. This practice is not allowed in Washington.

And so it goes on, which makes ethics such an interesting and fascinating subject. Hunting ethics is not a black and white topic. There are muddied waters involved with each situation.

Shooting a duck on the water might be considered unethical by some, but what if the duck is wounded? Would putting the bird out of its misery still be considered unethical or the proper thing to do?

What would I do?

Here is my answer about the wounded doe when a hunter doesn't have a doe permit? I would first try to find the hunter who wounded the animal. If he has a proper permit, I would assist him in finding the doe and have him dispatch it.

If the hunter couldn't be found, I would call Capt. Chris Anderson, local enforcement officer or one of his officers. If I couldn't reach any of them, I could try Capt. Mann. Any one of these might tell me to put it down and donate the meat to the food bank. If I couldn't reach anyone in authority, I would have to let the doe suffer.

And I would be haunted by the sight of the animal suffering.

There is no simple answer to the complex topic of hunter ethics. There are just too much varying scenarios, so one solution will never fit all of them.

Hunting turkeys with a dog will always be unethical to some and ethical to others. I encourage readers to discuss the topic often with hunting companions, especially the youth in our sport.