Fair Hunting Ethics More Fiction Than Fair?
Big Horn Ranch Revisited - Part II
Big Horn Canyon Ranch is located in Riverside County, California, about 14 miles east of the City Riverside on approximately 200 acres plus. For many wild pig hunters in Southern California this ranch is the closest destination for boar hunting. Compared to other ranches in the area fees are reasonable. And success is practically guaranteed. Big Horn Ranch is (temporary) home not only to feral pigs and hybrid boar but also to exotic goats and sheep. This combination attracts many hunters from Southern California and beyond as well as out of State hunters. First time hunters, beginners and meat hunters make up the majority of all patrons of this ranch.
Here in a civilized wilderness within easy reach of over 14 million urbanites, hunters and anti- hunting forces collide in an epic battle over hunting and the ethics of hunting.
My first post in this series about Big Horn Ranch dealt with the location, the terrain, the game on the property and to some extent with the motivations for hunting at the ranch. In Part II I hope to explore and consider rationally issues some people, non-hunters and hunters alike, may have with the modus operandi of this ranch.
Issues? What issues?
That depends a little on who has the issue. Dye-hard 'fair chase' hunters, the common hunter, animal rights activists, vegetarians, vegans and some religious people all define the 'issues' differently. Even hunters have ambiguous opinions when it comes to hunting on the Big Horn Ranch. They object to 'hunting' pen raised animals released on the ranch only for the purpose of being hunted. They condemn the fences, high fences in anti-hunter jargon, that confine the game and prevent it from escaping the ranch and hunters. The most virulent critics refer to this type of hunting as 'canned hunts'.
Most hunters agree that the elements of “fair chase” are missing in hunts on the Big Horn Ranch. But this is also true for all other 'game ranches' wherever located, whatever size and even for many of the ranches used by hunting guides and outfitters.
The term 'fair chase' itself is wide open to critical consideration. What exactly is 'fair chase'? Who determines what it is and what it is not?
The term 'fair chase' was established by the Boone and Crockett Club in about 1830. It is defined as “the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animals in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals”.
Did I read right?
“. . . native North American big game animals”?
Huh? Native North American big game?
Really, native North American big game animals?
Need I wonder one more time?
No.
Crank up your ATV, start your 4x4, get your amphibious All Terrain chariot ready to roll. The discussion ends right here. Since when are feral pigs, wild pig hybrids and even true wild boar “native American game animals”?
They are not.
Thus, they do not deserve the protection of fair chase? Of course they do. Let us not kill (sic) a concept over semantics alone.
The real problem is that there are multiple definitions of fair chaise. MAHA (Mid-America Hunting Association), for example, defines it as :
. . . “Fair Chase” is that all pursued wildlife has fair chance to escape the hunter through full use of all of its God given capabilities to detect, fly or run unrestricted by man or his inventions.”
So, a pen raised pheasant that is released a few seconds before the hunters start hunting is hunted fairly because it can run, though it may have never flown in his life?
Is that fair?
Wild pigs pursued by a pack of hunting dogs are hunted fairly just because they can run away? But do they have a fair chance?
Deer fleeing from hunters on ATVs that never tire are hunted fairly because they can flee?
Is that fair?
Hunters on horseback chasing foxes to death with the help of dogs, are the foxes hunted fairly? After all, they don't have to stay put. They can run!
Wild pigs that are lured to a ranch and kept there by ample food and water sources provided to them by the rancher are hunted fairly by those paying for the privilege? Really?
Boar accustomed to feeders and conditioned to the presence of man are hunted fairly when shot right under the feeders?
Of course, they could have run away!
European hunters who feed the game on their hunting grounds during winter and in fall at feeding stations in the line of fire from high blinds are hunted fairly? They can run away too.
Is that fair?
Game, big and small, driven from their hiding places and chased into shooting galleries lined by dozens of hunters during a drive are all running. For their lives!
Surely, they are hunted fairly?
If you have any doubt about the fairness of drives, visit these websites and have a look at the pictures of old, fat heroic hunters celebrating their fair and successful hunt by blowing mightily into rusty watering cans aka bugles. But I am warning you: The website is maintained by a virulent anti-hunting group. The pictures reflect their bias against hunting in general and drives in particular. They represent the worst and bloodiest examples of contemporary 'fair chase' hunting this group could muster.
http://www.abschaffung-der-jagd.de/bildergalerie/treibjagd/index.html
Want more?
Here is more blood and gore: http://www.abschaffung-der-jagd.de/bildergalerie/fuchsjagd/index.html
These are only a few examples of dubious application of 'fair chase'.
More can be found without doubt in the many individual interpretations hunters apply in the field and on the spot to the rule. In other words, there is no ironclad rule or definition of 'fair chase'.
'Fair chase' as an ideal, as an ethical concept, resides on the pages of learned treatises about, well, fair chase and in the mind of the hunters in the field confronting game. The twain may never meet.
Why did the Boone and Crockett Club and others find it necessary to define acceptable hunting practices by developing and defining the concept of fair chase?
Humans have hunted ever since they descended from the trees. They survived by hunting and by gathering for thousands of years. For the subsistence hunter it was either feast or famine. The gatherers, usually the women, were often much more successful. After all, plants do not run away as do animals when preyed upon.
Few people have a problem with subsistence hunting. If you do, just try to survive a weekend in the wilderness without food. I bet you will be tempted to catch a fish or snare a rabbit to ease your hunger pain! How about a dead-drop for a squirrel? Even lowly snails and insects might suddenly look appealing to you.
With the advent of farming subsistence hunting slowly transformed from a necessity to sustain life into a somewhat unreliable source of protein. This precious resource had to be protected at all cost. Protection soon developed into a privilege for those in power. Ordinary people were excluded. All game belonged to the ruler. Farmers could not kill game animals even when they caused enormous damage to their fields and crops. If they did, they themselves risked death. The farmers only defence were sticks and paddles with which to shush away destructive game.
Yet, the poor farmers held privileges as well: The privilege to serve as drivers during huge battues held by nobility, to feed and protect game during wintertime and the privilege to assist in the capture and the transport of large numbers of game animals to so-called 'game gardens' or 'game zoos'. There the animals were held for long periods of time to serve as wild game in gigantic hunting extravaganzas organised by noblemen for the entertainment of their noble guests.
The picture below shows a hunt held in a forest in Southern Germany at the occasion of a royal wedding. Note the enclosed staging arena (on the left side of the picture), the narrowing game enclosures on the right. The hunters are positioned on the sides of death alley, in a protected blind in the middle and all around the containment areas. The animals harvested during this hunt were driven from their game zoo directly into the shooting gallery.
(Source: http://www.teachsam.de/geschichte/ges_deu_1648-1790/wuert_carl_eugen/ges_wuertt_carl_eugen_10_4.htm) These hunting extravaganzas became very popular during the 18th century. Hundreds of animals were driven into lakes, shooting corrals or confined in fenced killing fields where they were dispatched in an orgy of bloodthirsty butchery.
The following is a scene from a hunt held to honor a Russian Duke. The participating animals were herded into a lake and mercilessly dispatched en masse.
(
Source: http://www.teachsam.de/geschichte/ges_deu_1648-1790/wuert_carl_eugen/ges_wuertt_carl_eugen_10_4.htm)
Lucky game had a chance to run for their lives pursued by packs of hunting dogs and hunters on horseback until it collapsed from exhaustion. Others were released to run into shooting alleys that ended in a fenced in cul de sac. The hunters waited for the arrival of the driven game inside the enclosure in a well protected area with an open field of fire in all directions. Check out the scenario in the picture below.
Ausschnitt Jagdszene, Aquarell 1778; Das Museum des Oberbergischen Kreises Schloss Homburg
Some captured animals even became living 'balls' in the game of rag throwing. No rags were thrown. Only animals were. Male and female courtiers would line up on opposite sides of an arena enclosed on three sides. The floor consisted of wide strips of a strong fabric held on both sides and moved by the throng of brave courtiers. Then foxes or other game were driven into the arena where the participants used the fabric to propel the unfortunate animals violently into the air delighting in their twisted turns, flips and somersaults. This would go on until the animals died from exhaustion or injuries sustained during their repeated trips into the air.
In the beginning, noblemen hunted wild animals that were big and dangerous to prove their courage and to practice skills needed in hand to hand combat in war. Lions, tigers and, closer to home, wild boar all play their part in many heroic hunting stories passed on from ancient times until today. Just think of the Calydonian Boar, rock painting of a Mesolithic boar in Bhimbetka, India, and other large predators, numerous Irish mythical monster boar, the heroic hunting exploits of Alexander The Great and many other heroes of antiquity.
Because of their reputation of ferocity, wild boar ranked high on the list of game pursued by nobility. That in itself did not make boar hunting a fairer hunt. On the contrary, noblemen quite frequently proved their valor by chasing the boar on horseback and with a pack of dogs until they finally were either corralled by the dogs or driven into an fenced off clearing with hardly an escape for the animals.
The picture shown here depicts such a hunt (in the early 15th century). As you can see the boar are in a fenced clearing; the dogs have closed in and are tearing into the boar while the dog handlers are standing by idly admiring their handiwork. One of them is blowing the signal “Boar Dead” on his horn to call the noble hunter to the site!
This picture is displayed in the National Library in Paris, France. It is part of the “Book of Hours” (about 1415) of the Duc de Berry.
Not exactly a fair hunt either. Almost identical practices have survived until today in the form of hunting wild boar with dogs and of battues where numerous wild boar and other game animals, large and small, are driven through corridors marked by colorful laps suspended on bushes to prevent the game from escaping to the side. Once in the shooting alley the animals have to run the gauntlet of dozens of hunters positioned on the sides of the 'sendero' and at the very end of it. There is nary a chance for the game to escape alive. Those that do must face a screen of 'cleanup' hunters who are stationed strategically to harvest any animal that escaped death alley. The results are horrific and bloody because of poor shot placement on running game. Visit these links again if you dare.
http://www.abschaffung-der-jagd.de/bildergalerie/treibjagd/index.html
http://www.abschaffung-der-jagd.de/bildergalerie/fuchsjagd/index.html
There are other hunting websites proudly displaying the results of hunting drives.
Fair chase?
No.
Widely accepted practice and considered a traditional form of big game hunting at least in Europe: Yes. It is also a good excuse for socializing with fellow hunters, for entertainment, a hefty meal and lots of adult beverages.
I am tempted to say that because of the abusive hunting practices in the 18th century and beyond members of the Boone and Crockett Club felt compelled to define hunting ethics that could be accepted by most hunters. So did others. The majority of hunters indeed pay verbal homage to some standard of fair chase hunting. How they interpret the standard is another question.
The answer varies from hunter to hunter. It also shows variations in different cultural backgrounds. Eskimo hunters find it fair to crawl into a seal skin in order to approach their quarry as closely as possible. Many ancient and even not so ancient cultures deemed it fair practice to harvest large numbers of game by herding them over a cliff.
Fair chase?
No.
What about game and hunting ranches in the US that keep stable populations of boar on their property by feeding them and by encouraging breeding. What is the difference between game bred in 'freedom' on a ranch and the animals posted on another?
Not much. In both cases the game is confined and conditioned to tolerate humans. That makes hunting on the ranches easier and more successful. It's good for business. But is that 'fair chase'?
And what about hunting guides or ranch owners who 'stock' a ranch with captured game held in a holding pen until a paying hunting party is unable to find 'wild' wild pigs? Fair chase?
I could go on and on exemplifying hunting that looks like fair chase but is not. Does “Fair chase' as an ethical postulate for hunters really exist outside the books of B & C and other well meaning organizations for 'ethical' hunting?
I do not think so.
Merriam–Webster Online Dictionary defines 'ethical' as “conforming to accepted standards of conduct” and as “the principals of conduct governing an individual or a group”.
Well, by this definition 'fair chase' has little to do with the ethics of fair hunting. Since the acceptable standards change from hunter to hunter – and I suspect from one hunting situation in the field to another – it follows that there is hardly any 'principal of conduct governing. . .' a whole group. Thus there is no ethical 'fair chase'.
If there is a concept of fair chase, then it only exists in the mind of an individual hunter. Fair is what that particular hunter declares it to be at a given moment during a hunt.
For example, those who like to pursue and run down game with ATVs would consider that fair chase. Do you?
Be that as it may, the relationship between the hunter and the hunted, human and animal, is inherently unfair. The hunted prey does not have a choice to be hunted or not. The hunter uses stealth, deception and long range weaponry to gain a decisive advantage over his prey and ultimately to subdue it. Watch a pride of lions hunt a prey animal. There is nothing fair about it. The lions hold all winning cards. The prey has only a choice between running early, faster than the predator and being killed.
For convenience and in a very casual, informal way, I also use the term 'fair chase' when talking about hunting. However, I do not use it in the sense of the B & C definition. To me it just denotes hunting on foot whether it be still hunting or stalking, waiting for my quarry at a trail or other ways that do not require the use of mechanical equipment to stir up and corner the prey.
Of course, many hunter perceive the term 'fair chase' as a good way of assuaging anti-hunters. As in “See, we are really not so bad. We give the animals a fair chance to run away”.
Unfortunately, this strategy does not work. Try to convince an animal rights activist or a vegan with that argument!
The tide of public opinion may be running against hunters, fair chase or not. Surprisingly, surveys of the general public have shown increasing numbers of hunters and a far more positive attitude by the general public towards hunters – at least in certain States. But I doubt they will be at the top of any popularity list. We will explore this in more detail in another post.
The website Helium (http://www.helium.com/debates/113277-is-hunting-animals-a-legitimate-sport), a site for writers who want to publish their works, asked “Is Hunting A Legitimate Sport?”. Sixty two (62) percent of the respondents said No, 32 percent answered Yes. Respondents also submitted numerous articles to demonstrate and support their view. However, the result is based on a small sample of approximately 650 participants. But I assume that a survey of more people connected to anti-hunting groups would have a very similar result.
The wave of anti-hunting sentiment is rising not only in our country but almost everywhere in the world. Even in countries with long established and hallowed hunting traditions like many of the European countries. Hunting is under attack, for example, in Germany where anti-hunting groups are working hard on outlawing it outright! No more hunting whatsoever. Not even a clean, fair battue with bugling and after the hunt refreshments. Oh, horror of horrors!
Hunting Facts, a web publication of the pro-animal rights group In Defense of Animals in San Rafael, California, discusses in some detail the pro and con of sports hunting, mainly the con. They state correctly: “. . . Hunting by humans operates perversely. The kill ratio at a couple hundred feet with a semi-automatic weapon and scope is virtually 100 percent. The animal, no matter how well-adapted to escape natural predation, has virtually no way to escape death once he/she is in the cross hairs of a scope mounted on a rifle. Nature's adaptive structures and behaviors that have evolved during millions of years simply count for naught when a human is the hunter. . .”
Doesn't this strike a blow to the concept of 'fair chase' as defined by B & C and others?
In California leaded ammunition can no longer be used for hunting in the Condor Zone in order to 'protect the endangered condor'. Now another group of animal rights activists is demanding to forbid hunting in the Mojave Desert in order to protect the Desert Tortoise. Dare I say that this is more a reflection of anti-hunting sentiments than protection for a species? It's a clever strategy: Use species protection to get at the evil hunters with their big, scoped 'semi - automatic' weapons and Rambo attitudes.
Hunters themselves unwittingly contribute to the negative picture of their activities by referring to them as a 'sport'. It conjures up the picture of ruthless murderers killing and maiming animals as a hobby. Chasing down animals, fair chase or not, as a sport or a hobby does not sit well with the general public - myself included. It reduces hunting to the level of a shoot-them-up video game played for entertainment. Yet, contrary to the characters in a video game, hunted animals in reality end up dead. Dead dead! No resurrection spoken here.
For a long time I held the opinion that declaring hunting as a sport and/or talking about it in terms of fair chase does not serve hunters well. Just as I think that hunters with a big gun mentality – the bigger, the better and machine guns are best – hurt hunting immensely.
Don H. Meredith in an article titled “What's Fair?” (posted on the Hog Blog) refers to Ed Hanna who “argues that hunters are on much firmer ground justifying their activities based on the more legitimate claim that hunting embodies important traditional cultural and environmental values . . .”
Meredith adds: “ I believe he's right. In this day and time, the preservation of cultural and environmental values (connectedness to the land) rings well with an urban public largely estranged from their roots and their sense of home. . . ”
I tend to agree with his assessment. It certainly is far superior to calling hunting a sport and entertainment. Instead of providing fodder for the anti-hunting forces, we should stress the positive values of hunting in terms that cannot be used to put a noose around our necks.
To pay lip service to some lofty ethical principle of hunting in order to appease anti-hunting forces, then to go out giving fair chase on an ATV, to use the infamous semi-automatic weapon with a scope or to hunt under feeding stations only fuels the fire of anti-hunting activists.
Finally, back to my original 'question' about hunting on the Big Horn Ranch: Is it hunting or shooting fish in a barrel? Is it fair chase or hobbyists murdering Miss Piggy in cold blood for entertainment? Or do we actually spare the Miss and her friends the horror and pains of a cruel, ignominious death in a slaughterhouse?
The answer depends on your moral standards and criteria for ethical hunting. Therefore only you can answer it. If I felt the need for meat, wild pig meat that is, and I were looking for (almost) guaranteed hunting success at a very reasonable price, I would go get it at the Big Horn Ranch.
However, if I yearned to be the successful big white hunter who braved a free roaming, ferocious wild trophy boar on a ranch (replete with automated feeders), I would go to certain ranches in Texas. Or I might go to a large ranch in Florida where wild boar roam and breed freely. There I could harvest a wild pig named Harry.
But if I liked a real challenge, a manly challenge, I would hike into the wilderness and tempt my luck on public land giving fair chase and upholding standards of ethical hunting. My hands would most likely remain empty, yet my heart would swell with pride over having given a 'fair chase' that makes the old chaps at the Boone and Crockett Club proud.
Yet, it is fine with me if you decide to honor Boone and Crockett by giving fair chase on an all-terrain vehicle with the assistance of a guide who leads your fair chase to the fertile feeding grounds on a private ranch with free wild boar.
Fairness in hunting is in the eye of the beholder.
You decide whether to hunt at the Big Horn Canyon Ranch is good or evil.
Or whether you would rather kill off plant life that cannot run away. You might even find some at the Big Horn Ranch.
PJJ
