What is ethical?

On more than one occasion I've been out hunting and a pack of hunting dogs has ruined my hunt. Some people believe the "traditional" way of hunting with dogs is ethical, but personally I think it should be illegal. These guys send their dogs out to track down, brutally attack, & pin down the pigs, then after the pit bulls have worn out the pig, torn off their ears, and severely injured them, a hunter comes along and finishes it with a knife. Then the "traditional hunters" have the audacity to parade around town with the pigs on their truck.





Nuisance/pest/or not... what bothers me the most is that there is no doubt that these pigs suffered a great deal before they perished. When I know for a fact that a properly placed shot with a powerful air rifle could have instantly and ethically dropped the pig. Yet here we are in some states still fighting to have the right to hunt on public land with an air rifle. 
 
I was watching night vision YouTube videos of the air rifle hunters controlling rats in the U.K. Of course in the comments were posts such as "how could you do such a thing to a sweet furry rat?"

Well off to the side are 'You might like these videos' were some rat terrier dog clips. I watched as these dogs with the help from the owners lifting up debris would track down terrified rats trying to escape their death. The dogs would viciously pull a rat apart as it squeaked and shrilled in pain. Did I see any warning that this would upset viewers...nooope. Were there similar comments about how terrible they were to the rat....nope. But use a rifle and it is "shame on you for doing such a crime." Just astounding how soft society is now.
 
We tend to be less lenient because we favor precision. The gory truth is in nature animals are the most brutal. I have a hard time watching some lion kills when the gazelle is crying and the lion is in no hurry to finish the job. I don't condone hunting pigs with dogs. It seems unmercifully brutal. It is however legal where I live. I don't hunt with a bow because it is not humane to me, but that's all my son in law does. He finds it a challenge and thinks high powered rifles are too easy. He is an excellent archer, but he has no issues with a slower kill and tracking. It's just a deer he says. I don't like gray squirrels. To me they are tree rats, but I do want to be efficient killing one. Blood sport is a difficult subject. 
 
About 130 years ago Teddy Roosevelt wrote that dog hunting was the most ethical form of hunting because it gave the game ample chance to escape, followed by spot and stalk, while ambush hunting (our style of hunting today) was shameful because the animal isn't given a fair chance. 

That's why I don't put much stock in ethics. We just make them up as we go. Basically if we like something, its ethical. If we don't like something, its unethical.

Honor the rights of your fellow man. Stay safe. Strive for clean kills. Everything beyond that is just hot air. 

So no, I don't support the banning of dog hunting even though I don't do it myself. That the hog got tore up is just evidence that the hog was given a chance to defend itself. A hog, is just a hog after all. One man's hog is another man's pigeon. 
 
Teddy Roosevelt may have said that of dog hunting methods at one time but he was one of the most accomplished modern hunters around. He thought the hunt itself was an experience like non other, connecting man to nature in a sacred-like manner. He did kill for sport but said " The chase is among the best of all national pastimes..."

Your point is valid, we do easily defend what we see as right. And we should strive for clean kills always. But President Roosevelt would not consider hunting as 'shameful' so long as it wasnt the needless slaughter of animals. I am not a historian but I imagine the majestic buffalo shot only for their skin by the thousands would be one example of such.
 
I tend to not like hunting with packs of dogs like that, but that is me. I know how things work in the wild, having seen evidence of kills in the snow by owls, foxes and coyotes. Sometimes hair and blood trails go on for quite a ways before the prey is actually killed. Ghastly business. Imagine having your intestines eaten while you bleed out. That is the kind of thing wolves do to their prey. That is not to excuse people. But nature is harsh. I don`t hunt that way but do not oppose those who do.
 
I spent every weekend during season running our beagles for rabbits. Sometimes our faster dogs would actually catch and kill the rabbit but usually they circled them back to us to be taken with a shotgun. We hunted raccoon with hounds and even black bear in my families home state of Tennessee with hounds. I worked on a farm that raised pheasant, chukar, and quail. We had short hair pointers that we used to guide hunts. I love dogs and enjoyed watching dogs work a field, woods, or railroad track as a young man.

I no longer hunt with dogs. Not because I am against it, but I prefer to hunt differently than I did as a kid. To each there own. We live in a society of bleeding heart sissies that think everything they disagree with should be illegal. Look how well that mentality is working out!! Ethics?? All personal opinion. Opinions are like??? What's the phrase? Lol. I caught a rabbit in a snare and broke it's neck with my bare hands. That sounds horrible right? Ethical?? Well, it was at the time because I hadn't eaten in a couple days and had no other means to dispatch my food.

Nature is unethical and unfair. So is life. Humans have had to kill living things to survive since the dawn of mankind. We kill animals and living plants to survive. How those things are harvested is a personal thing in my mind. Any of you see how pigs, cows, chickens, and turkey are killed to provide you food at the grocery store?
 
"DuncanHynes"Teddy Roosevelt may have said that of dog hunting methods at one time but he was one of the most accomplished modern hunters around. He thought the hunt itself was an experience like non other, connecting man to nature in a sacred-like manner. He did kill for sport but said " The chase is among the best of all national pastimes..."

Your point is valid, we do easily defend what we see as right. And we should strive for clean kills always. But President Roosevelt would not consider hunting as 'shameful' so long as it wasnt the needless slaughter of animals. I am not a historian but I imagine the majestic buffalo shot only for their skin by the thousands would be one example of such.
I could very likely see Teddy Roosevelt (were he to magically appear in our time) coming around to our way of thinking about hunting. Nonetheless, in his time, our style of ambush hunting was shameful, especially when hunting animals over a food source. Here's what he had to say about it: in the context of whitetail deer:

"It [the whitetail] is a shrewd, wary, knowing beast; but it owes its prolonged stay in the land chiefly to the fact that it is an inveterate skulker, and fond of the thickest cover. Accordingly it usually has to be killed by stealth and stratagem, and not by fair, manly hunting; being quite easily slain in any one of half a dozen unsportsmanlike ways. In consequence, I care less for its chase than for the chase of any other kind of American big game. Yet in a few places where it dwells in open, hilly forests and can be killed by still-hunting ["still hunting" means spot-and-stalk in this era] as if it were a blacktail ["blacktail" means mule deer in this era], or better still, where the nature of the ground is such that it can be run down in fair chase on horseback, either with grey-hounds, or with a pack of trackhounds, it yields splendid sport. Killing a deer from a boat while the poor animal is swimming in the water, or on snow-shoes as it flounders helplessly in the deep drifts, can only be justified on the plea of hunger. This is also true of lying in wait on a lick. Whoever indulges in any of these methods save from necessity, is a butcher, pure and simple, and has no business in the company of true sportsmen. Fire hunting may be placed in the same category; yet it is possibly allowable under exceptional circumstances to indulge in a fire hunt, if only for the sake of seeing the wilderness by torchlight." - Teddy Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter chapter III. 

Remember in his time treestands were considered unethical and were banned in many places. 
 
We as hunters must stick together .As long as it is legal I will support hunters who use different ways to harvest game .If You side with the antis to stop stop some one from hunting in a different manner that You do .rest assured Your rights are soon to be gone .It took many years to get cross bow hunting for N.C. Who resisted the bow hunters .They could have easily cost all hunters by causing division among the ranks .Forty years a go dog fox hunters teamed with the antis and by passed the wildlife commission and made fox trapping and gun hunting illegal. 40 years later We are still trying to get our rights back. Now a new challenge for Us is to get airgun hunting in all states approved .The last thing We need to do is cause division among the ranks . My two cents worth Stan
 
"ncstan"We as hunters must stick together .As long as it is legal I will support hunters who use different ways to harvest game .If You side with the antis to stop stop some one from hunting in a different manner that You do .rest assured Your rights are soon to be gone .It took many years to get cross bow hunting for N.C. Who resisted the bow hunters .They could have easily cost all hunters by causing division among the ranks .Forty years a go dog fox hunters teamed with the antis and by passed the wildlife commission and made fox trapping and gun hunting illegal. 40 years later We are still trying to get our rights back. Now a new challenge for Us is to get airgun hunting in all states approved .The last thing We need to do is cause division among the ranks . My two cents worth Stan
Same thing happened in FL with foxes in that same time period. No-kill fox hunters teamed up with antis to ban fox killing. It must have been a concerted effort across the county in that era. 
 
Different types of hunting, ambush, stalking and trapping, for me they are all equally challenging. Training your dogs/ferret/hawk (what ever) and see that is succeeding is amazing experience. Same can be said sitting and just waiting at the right spot at the right time and fire of exactly where you planned. Or using the right trap/snare at the right spot with the right bait. The ethical part is more about how hungry are you or how much are the pest destroying, dont get me wrong I dont want to see animals suffer but that is why share stories and experience on forums and around the fireplace. I bet that those pig hunters let the dog tire those beasts down before they stabb them is because they just dont wanna get hurt or shoot the dogs.
 
Whatever we see as sport, we are all open to criticism, in the UK they banned hunting Fox with Horse and Hounds, some consider that to be the British sport.
There are forms of "sport" that are close and somewhat over the edge ... I don't like the idea of animals being trained to tear each other apart and if we are to kill, then I believe we owe as least suffering as possible to the quarry as is humanly possible .
not comfortable taking a shot, then don't take it ... Go practice more 
 
"plinker"We tend to be less lenient because we favor precision. The gory truth is in nature animals are the most brutal. I have a hard time watching some lion kills when the gazelle is crying and the lion is in no hurry to finish the job. I don't condone hunting pigs with dogs. It seems unmercifully brutal. It is however legal where I live. I don't hunt with a bow because it is not humane to me, but that's all my son in law does. He finds it a challenge and thinks high powered rifles are too easy. He is an excellent archer, but he has no issues with a slower kill and tracking. It's just a deer he says. I don't like gray squirrels. To me they are tree rats, but I do want to be efficient killing one. Blood sport is a difficult subject.
Don't need to say anything more than ... you said it all plinker.
 
I would say that ethical is quickly and as pain free dispatching of the target for the purpose of food, preservation of crop or livestock and or protection of people. I am not a hunter that shoots for antlers or horns. If I do get the trophy, it is solely based on right spot at the right time. I have never shot or caught anything, outside of rodents, that I have not cooked and ate.

great topic @Michael!