Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game The Moralityof Hunting

Not that I should drag this out, BUT if your shot description is as it sounds, and the buff was broadside, there is no way to break both shoulders. Anatomically its impossible.

rost, that was a different Buff, the way I took it... elliphino!! 721

"In the fall of 2003, I went to Zimbabwe for the express purpose of killing a bull elephant. This was my second trip to Africa in two years. The preceding year I went to the Republic of South Africa on a Cape Buffalo hunt."

Ok Buffhunter, just to establish your bona fides, can you tell us who you hunted with FOR BUFFALO IN RSA or at least tell us what you paid for the hunt including trophy fees for the buff? Oh yeah, pictures would really help. jorge

I think that if you keep fooling around with dangerous game the way you describe there will certainly be a day of reckoning. Unfortunately, you may not be the only one hurt or killed. Its not called "dangerous game" for nothing.

Most of us learned the hows and whys of hunting from sage, but unpublished men..like fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and such. Just because someone got their ideas printed doesn't make their stance unique or more worthy. Being able to quote them doesn't elevate anyone to a higher moral platform.

You don't have to be elequent, well read, or published to know in your own heart and mind why you hunt. You don't need those things to know right from wrong. Learning hunting ethics over luke warm coffee from a battered thermos or around a fire somewhere is just as effective, even moreso if the pupil is 12 or 13 years old.

jorge1:

I have always thought, that regardless of what people say or believe, it doesn't change reality. Therefore, I don't really feel any need or justification to "establish my bona fides". Having said that, I don't mind sharing hunting pictures or mounts with other hunters, so I will try and attach a shot of the mounted buffs and the ellie's tusks. (BTW the one in the middle is the Zim buff. I put it there, because it died valiantly.

To view the picture, you have to click on the attachment. I never got around to setting up a personal web page. Hope you can access it.

rost495:

Just about every antonomical drawing of cape buffs that I've seen, show the lower part of the humerus (big bone that slants forward) connects to that weird "elbow-looking" bone within an inch or so of that aiming point. Hit a little high and you take out the upper part of the heart. A little high and forward and you still catch the humerous. A little back and you catch that weird bone. Sure enough you ain't going to break the scapula (shoulder blades). Not much more I can say about that topic. Maybe the PHs could provide some information on where they tell clients to aim on buff?

To all:

One connection I've seen several posters make is that of "legality is linked to morality". Now I don't believe that at all. IMO sometimes, laws are condusive to morality, but many times they aren't. Slavery, rape, and cannibalism have been legal in some societys, at some point in recorded history. To my mind that doesn't make it moral. To me, morality, is living (or at least trying to) to your personal sense of what is right and wrong. This is usually developed through lifes experiences, training, influences, and personal inclinations and philosophizing (sp). That to me is what morality is "being true to yourself".

Independent thinking is high on my list of being true to yourself. Sure you will make mistakes (sometimes on purpose and maybe without regrets. "Honey, I ate all the Hagen Daze, and I'd do it again too).

logger:

In regards to bullfighting, according to Hemingway "Death in the Afternoon", that is one strange game. Guys with big spears on horses come in and inflict stab wounds (up to 12 inches deep) in the bulls neck in order to weaken the muscles and force the bull to drop his head. Makes it harder for him to see what he's doing. Then the bandalliros (sp), put in the big darts in an attempt to correct a smart bulls habit of hooking one way or the other.

Only then do the matordors start doing their thing. No doubt it takes one hell of a lot of courage and skill and sometimes the bull wins. Still, it is way too commercial for my tastes. But to each his own.

To anyone who joined in late, this thread was not started to justify or brag about hitting a buff to provoke a charge. It was started to get hunters to relate how they perceive hunting and what's moral or immoral. It actually started on the LRH forum where so many hunters attacked the concept of long-range hunting, even to the point where many opined that it wasn't even hunting.

To me, hunting is done in many different ways, calling upon different skill sets. Tracking, spotting, stalking, and shooting are the basics. In addition, the timing of the shot, using the right equipment, and more importantly, knowing when to pass up a shot are equally important. Putting up with physical and psychological hardship is also part of the sport.

I personally derive a lot of satisfaction in facing a dangerous situation and being able to face it effectively.

I also admire animals that can take one hell of a beating and still give their all in trying to eliminate their adversaries.

I read a story about two hunters who wounded a buff just before dark one evening. Since it was too late to go in after the buff, they decided to go back to camp and finish up the job the next morning. Their camp was a couple of miles from the area where they shot the buff.

The next morning they started out, and not 200 yards from their tent was the dead buffalo. Apparently, it tracked the hunters and was going to finish things up on its terms, but (forunately for the hunters), it died before it made it to the tent.

I don't know for sure if that is a true tail, but I could certainly believe it.

So again, is their a strong connection between what is legal and what is moral? What do you think?

BH: Those are really nice buffaloes and great elephant tusks. As to the "bona fides" I find that whenever there is a controversial post and I think yours meets that criteria, pictures and a description of who, what, when and where, go a long way in explaining one's position. For example, hunting buffalo in RSA is rare, albeit not unheard of. I still don't agree with your premise on the buffalo, but that was your choice, after all, you paid for it. So how much are trophy fees for buffalo in RSA these days? jorge

A sociopathic serial killer is "true to himself." He just is not very nice to his victims.

I am getting on a plane to Montana for opening day of rifle season on Sunday, so I really don't have the time to teach Philosophy 101. Think of ethics, morality and law as three circles in a Venn diagram. A religious prohibition against eating a particular food is a moral issue, but not one of ethics or (generally) law. Jaywalking is a legal issue, but not really a moral or ethical one.

Some acts--like murder--concern ethics, morality and the law. So does hunting. Buffhunter suggest that the hunter who follow his conscience is moral. This is windy old Polonius saying, "To thine own self be true." Unfortunately, my example of the serial killer points out one flaw in this argument.

The ethic of hunting is not about being true to yourself. It is about being true to hunting. As a community, hunters have developed ethical guidelines like fair chase. These guidlines are not mere personal opinions, but conclusions about ethical "rights" and "wrongs" based on philosophical inquiry and community consensus.

Now it may not matter to "buffhunter" if he is an ethical hunter. Frankly, he seems more concerned about feeding his Jones for adrenaline and following his own internal compass like a Nietzchean superman. That is his business, not mine. If he wants to engage in a serious discussion about philosophy, he needs to come to the table prepared.

Contrary to "steelyeyes," you don't learn about things like existential ethics sitting around the campfire. Hunting requires hard work... so does philosophy. And honestly, I have never hunting an animal as elusive as Kant's Prolegmena to Any Future Metaphysics. Reading is not as exciting as bungee jumping or hunting cape buffalo with tongs and a pasta fork. It is necessary, however, if you really want to learn about the ethics of hunting.

Uh oh... we have an educated fellow in our midst... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Excellent post, btw - that one will take a while to digest.

Reading is very imporant. I used to be a more avid reader before other parts of life intervened. At one point I was reading between four and five books a week. Having better things to invest my cash in at the time, I got a library card. For at least two of those years I never ventured outside the nonfiction section. My thoughts were that while I was reading I might as well learn about something concrete.

My education didn't result in letters behind my name unless you count my rank in the Navy, EM1/SS. It didn't involve philosophy or humanities, just physics, heat transfer, metalurgy, and dull subjects along that line. While I managed to learn to operate several nuclear propulsion plants I never did end up studying or reading much philosophy. I guess I missed out.


I suppose I could feel insulted by the idea that a person must read "the classics" to understand or to be able to discuss ethics but I choose not to. I'm in good company. I'd wager that 90% or more of ethical hunters learned from their elders in the field instead of a book. If the tweed coat crowd wants to make reading a book by the author of their choice the ticket to the discussion I suppose they can try.

I think that if ethics are developed by community consensus and the vast majority of us are excluded from the table by the required reading list the resulting ethical code won't be "ours", but "theirs". That's just what the hunting community needs, more divisions. *irony alert*

My guess is if we let "community consensus" determine the hunting ethics, we'll do all our hunting on video games (until the "community" decides that is wrong as well.

I would guess those smart hunter/poet/philosophers of old, did things, that even "sociopaths" like myself wouldn't have the stomach do to.

I have read some of the old hunting classics and I guarantee if any of us tried emulating some of their methods, we would be in prison. Still Mr. Hampstead makes some interesting points.

jorge1:

In 2003, I paid a trophy fee of 8k for the buff. In Zim in 2004, I paid 2k for the buff, but it was a last minute add-on to the elephant hunt in mid-September. Of course the RSA hunt only at a minimum of 4 days, while the Zim hunt had a minimum of 14 days (at 1k a day).

If you do a buff hunt in RSA, let me know by PM and maybe I can set you up with a good outfit (they will even let you bowhunt for buff, provided you can shoot well enough). They would certainly frown on you making an "off shoulder" shot on purpose though! LOL.

Good hunting to all.

Thanks BH. You know, the trophy fee in RSA is high, but when you offset it with less days afield it might make it worthwhile. What type of hunting area is it? jorge

PS: I don't bowhunt.

Buffty hunter wrote.....No one got excited about it for a few days until thor222 or something like that started making a big deal about it. At that time I tried to explain my thought processes. In truth, the buffalo was hit somewhere in the region of its lower lung and liver, definately "off shoulder" but not in the paunch. As I stated,.....

Yep buffty It most certainly was me that rightly called you on it.
the truth is you are nothing but a ****hole troll...so now its a low lung/liver shot, please make up your mind.
For me you have NO CREDIBILITY.
Thor222

For those who haven't read buffty hunters post on long range hunting,
[Re: buffhunter]
#556824 - 08/24/05 08:45 PM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply





_________________________________________________

QUOTE
For the record, I did deliberately shoot a buff a to wound it and provoke a charge...... A+ grade a**hole

Is that a nice thing to do. Hell no.........I don't like anything to suffer needlessly (except maybe for my enemies)........Please refer to above..errrr but you did gut shooter A+ AGAIN

Ask any PH, and they will tell you that a "gut shot" animal will be dead within a week, even quicker if there are lions and such around......Only a week of suffering needlessly if the buff had run off,not so bad really then A++ AWARDED

I make no apologies. The only real regret I have is the fact that I might have put the PH and tracker in a dangerous situation.......Firstly if the PH condoned that then A+ to him,if not then if they whipped you black and blue you would have deserved it A++ Awarded

The object of long range hunting is to make a one-shot, clean kill..........indeed any hunting DUH!! read above for what you actually did A++ Awarded

There are a lot of good, decent, experienced hunters on this forum.......Agreed there are indeed,I dont count you amongst them however

If you are an experienced hunter, than why don't you provide us some examples of your experience, rather than bad-mouthing people who have been there and done that.......been there and done what exactly?...deliberately cause suffering to a animal?...no thanks its always my aim for 1 quick shot kills

To the rest of you, I apologize for the tirade.......to the rest of the forum, you have been revealed for what you are.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



ok BH thats it,but I hope some day that your gut shooting antics repay you.....them big AK kodiaks rip a mean hole.


Thor222

Dont let this guy cajole you into thinking he is something he is not,I am glad the PH's read this thread and commented.