Counting Points and Game Management
Over at Deer and Deer Hunting Nicole McClain makes an interesting point that gets lost in much of the hoopla of hunting television and magazine coverage: that hunting shouldn’t be about killing an animal with a large number of points, but about the opportunity to participate in killing and retrieving an animal. In her article she writes,
As a McClain — and a cancer survivor — hunting isn’t about trophy hunting, killing animals, hanging heads on the wall, waiting for the biggest buck in the woods, uncalculated shots with a firearm, shooting out of range because “it’s a monster buck,” shooting a dog-of-a-deer for lack of patience or cerebral intelligence, or staying up late drinking beers at camp waiting on the ace of spades.
If any of those are your reasons for hunting, what a damn sad shame.
Hunting is:
– being grateful for the God-given privilege to partake in the blessing of harvesting an animal
– participating in the balance of nature
– respecting the gift of life
– the ability to be an animal lover and a hunter simultaneously
– providing food for my family
– eating nonhormone-injected, low-fat meat
– educating the next generation on the importance, safety and privilege to bear and use arms
– camaraderie that creates trust, respect, knowledge and close connections
– perfecting the skill sets and natural talent it takes to do this sport – and do it well
– mental agility and perseverance
– land calculations and weather interpretations
God aside,* it seems to me that McClain has her ethical considerations pretty well straight. I too tire of those whose primary reason for hunting is to put a tag on a trophy to brag about, and, even in my inexperience, have seen far too many who too hastily kill a spike at daybreak of the second day of a four day hunt, but she also seems to be missing one critical point. Though using the number of points on the head of an animal you shot as a means to brag just a little louder than the next guy in camp probably ought not be terribly high on your list of priorities, there is evidence which shows a pretty direct correlation between an animal with impressive headgear and a mature one.** In short, a buck with lots of points may not indicate that he is mature, but one with a very small number of points is a pretty good indicator that he is immature. For some, passing on small bucks and lamenting their being shot by others isn’t about bragging or somehow trying to feel superior, but about actively seeking to maintain the health of the local deer herd. One could argue that “participating in the balance of nature” might cover herd management, but it certainly isn’t explicit, especially as she poses with a small 3×3 that will never grow to maturity, and had few, if any, chances to perform his biological imperative of contributing his DNA to the local deer population. To some, not shooting a small buck isn’t about passing on an animal so that you can take a more brag-worthy one later, but about allowing that buck to live and be a meaningful part of his herd both biologically and socially before he’s killed. Simply put, it’s healthy to have mature bucks. It’s not that the hunter who’s killed the forkhorn or small two year old should be ashamed because you can’t hang him on the wall, or because you’ll have to take a back seat during the many bloviating bragging sessions that take place in your average hunting camp, but that you’ve placed “being grateful for the God-given privilege to partake in the blessing of harvesting an animal” above the health of the herd itself. That your getting a kill right then and there outweighs all other considerations.
In a time and place in human history where virtually all of us who hunt do so as a choice rather than as an imperative to survive, health of the herd and allowing it to acquire and maintain a healthy age structure should be of primary concern for all hunters. Without each hunter’s conscientious efforts in science-based herd management, opportunities to hunt an animal as a means to participate in the balance of nature, or learn respect for life, or to provide food for our families, or eat healthy meat, or educate the next generation on one of the many responsible ways to exercise our right to bear arms, or enjoy camaraderie with our fellow hunters, or develop mental agility and a sense of perseverance, or learn how to be a better outdoorsman will continue to dwindle. Indeed, passing on that forkhorn or small 3×3 might even help us further enhance those benefits that so many of us find in hunting. It means more time on the hunt perfecting our outdoor skills and forming bonds with our fellow hunters. It means more opportunities to enhance our mental and physical agility and perseverance. It means higher quality opportunities for all hunters in the future, and more of them. Allowing that small buck to walk shows the ultimate respect for the game that we hunt by allowing him the opportunity to mature and contribute to the overall health of the local deer herd, perhaps even becoming an integral part of it.
None of this is to say that shooting a small buck is necessarily unethical. It isn’t. Many states, for instance, mandate a shot on small bucks by making it a part of their overall deer management strategy to disallow shooting does on public land. If you don’t find a bigger buck to shoot, you have to shoot a smaller one if you don’t want your cooler to be empty on the way home. Wyoming is one such state, a state that I’ve hunted in for the last three seasons on both private and public land. Others, like my home state of Kentucky, won’t allow the taking of a doe during or after the rut in certain areas. These kinds of wildlife management decisions force the hunter to either kill a small buck or risk eating tag soup instead of venison roast. That’s a risk that, rightfully, many of us don’t want to take. Tags, equipment, and travel are expensive, and going home without an animal seems like a waste. But is it more wasteful to go on a hunt that doesn’t result with an animal on the ground, or to actively disrupt the natural dynamics and overall health of the game that all hunters rely on by killing immature bucks? The deer we hunt don’t exist in a vacuum. The herds they live in require mature bucks in order to thrive, and killing small immature bucks denies them the opportunity to become large, mature ones. Shooting smaller bucks isn’t unethical, but it is bad game management, and it does show an unwillingness of individual hunters to take it upon themselves to also be wildlife managers; to take responsibility in to their own hands for the overall health of the local deer population. Some place that charge in the state game agency responsible for setting game law, others in their guide or outfitter, but it should be incumbent on all hunters to also be game managers while they’re hunting. Just as all ethical hunters seek to ensure that our shot placement is sound, it should also be incumbent upon all of us to widen that point of view and ensure that the killing of a particular animal is also sound. We must all go beyond merely being in compliance with local game laws if we’re to ensure that we’re personally taking responsibility for conserving a resource that we’ve charged ourselves with conserving.
_______________
* Not everyone is religious, or even spiritual, and so nothing has much to do with God for those of us who aren’t believers, and has nothing to do with whether we can appropriately appreciate what it means to hunt.
** Though I would be remiss were I to fail to acknowledge that a large rack with many points does NOT automatically denote maturity. It’s a decent initial indicator, but there are better ways of determining the maturity of a buck.