by Bob Robb
Most ethical
decisions are not black and white, like legal issues are. If it isn't legal,
there really isn't any decision to make. You just don't do it. But just
because it's legal, it isn't necessarily ethical.
Bowhunters -- the good ones, at least -- are always talking about hunter ethics. One of the reasons so many people love the sport, and a big reason why so many non-hunters are supportive of bowhunting -- is the fact that the intimate, short-range nature of bowhunting lends itself to ethical choices, and thus ethical behavior. If a long, poor-angle shot might be made, is it ethical to take that shot?
If you come to your favorite "secret spot" one morning and another tree stand is right where you want to be, it's legal for you to still hunt nearby. But is it ethical?
Most ethical decisions are not black and white, like legal issues are. If it isn't legal, there really isn't any decision to make. You just don't do it. But just because it's legal, it isn't necessarily ethical.
A couple of bowhunters that live in the same small Alaska town I do just learned a hard lesson in the legal/ethical dilemma. Here's what happened.
The coastal town is surrounded by steep, thickly-brushed mountains, an area simply loaded with black bears, as well as a fair number of brown bears. There are so many bears, in fact, that each summer the local police are called out to rid the city of a few bears that have become a nuisance by raiding trash dumpsters or tearing up private property. I live on the edge of town, and have seen them walk right through my yard on several occasions.
As you enter the heart of town by the one road in and out, along the coast there is a small, 100-acre tract of protected wetlands we call the Duck Flats. The Flats contains a small salmon stream, breeding areas for all kinds of shorebirds and waterfowl, and a well-used bike path frequented by joggers, roller bladers, bicycle riders, and hiking tourists. Occasionally a black bear can be seen on the flats, munching fresh spring grass. When one appears, everyone turns out to watch the show.
It is legal to hunt within the city limits with bow-and-arrow. One reason that's so is because the city limits encompass an area of about 20 square miles, even though the developed area is just a fraction of this, and most of the "city" is still true wilderness. Therefore, many local hunters actively hunt black bears in the steep mountains and coastal beaches nearby, often right in the city limits.
This past spring, a pair of prime black bears began frequenting the Duck Flats. They were there like clockwork for three weeks, and quite tolerant of photographers and gawking tourists. But then two local hunters, who had just taken up bowhunting, decided they were going to arrow the Flats bears. It took them three attempts, one of which resulted in a missed shot taken as about 30 other people watched in disbelief, before they finally killed one of the bears, a 3-year old sow.
These bowhunters were perfectly legal in taking this bear. But were they ethical?
The local newspapers, members of the city council, and the local police department all told me they had never, ever had more public comment and outcry over any other occasion in their memory than over the killing of the Flats bear. Letters to the editor of the paper ran 20 to 1 against the killing, calling the men who shot these bears everything from murderers to cowards. The local animal rights activists -- yes, we have them in Alaska, too -- went nuts, of course. Tourism operators -- and tourism is huge business in Alaska -- went ballistic. The debate, of course, escalated beyond the Flats bear incident and moved into gun control, banning all hunting, and more. Soon the cry reached the city council, with demands from many in the standing-room only crowd at the council meeting to close the entire city limits to all hunting at all times, as well as banning all shooting of both firearms and archery equipment inside the city.
Fortunately, several members of the city council are hunters, and they helped minimize the damage. The result was that the Duck Flats is now closed to all hunting, all the time. The council also closed a major portion of a large canyon in town, popular with skiers in winter and tourists and general recreationists in summer, to all hunting.
Losing the Duck Flats to hunting was no big deal. It really is a game refuge, even though not labeled or managed as such. Losing the canyon access, where several local men have established bear baiting stations in the past, and each year spot & stalk hunters challenge the tough mountains to pursue black bears, is a blow. But it could have been worse. And all because two men followed the letter of the law, but not its spirit. They were legal, but most don't believe they were ethical.
Ethics are an individual thing. You have to decide for yourself whether or not what you do in the field as a bowhunter meets your own standards. But as you're making those decisions, please remember this. Your actions will reflect upon all bowhunters, everywhere. The legal actions of the Flats bear hunters could have resulted in 400 square miles of pristine wilderness being closed to all hunting and shooting, an irrevocable disaster. The judgment of public opinion is often swift and not always rational.
Just because it's legal does not necessarily mean it's the right thing
to do.