Shooting does

[Davemuzz]

Something else I have noticed...Seems everyone wants to kill a big buck...Most folks don't own the land they hunt and say they are hunting big bucks only...

Here in Pennsylvania, we are in our (I think) 5th year of "heard reduction" and "antler restriction". This is suppose to bring us hunters a "healthier heard" and "bigger rack bucks". Well, today I just came from our gun club. There are 26 deer hanging in our "deer cooler".  Now, most of the guys are hunting in the "4 points on one side" area, but a few do hunt in the "3 points on one side area". Of the 26 hanging in the cooler right now, 2 of them would (I would) be considered "large buck". One is a 12 point and the other a 10 point. The rest are legal, barely legal....or does.

H\R and A\R, it's a boat load of hooey.

Dave

[prairiedog555]

In Kansas they declared war on does about 5 years ago.  Reason, insurance companies and people dying. 
It went so far as the DA publicly stated he would not prosecute poachers!
 In my little corner of the state, NE, there has been a dramatic reduction in deer.  Still lots of big bucks, but you don't see the herds of 50-75 in a meadow like you used to. 
You can get unlimited doe tags for $10.50 a copy.  I like deer meat and try to shoot one male and one female a year.
But I have written to Dept. of wildlife to limit the doe tags.  I can't help but believe that it will eventually weaken the herd. 
But maybe that is what they want to do. 

[Coyote Hunter]

.... Folks there is no "one size fits all" no one right answer to all questions response to the question asked.
…
Has common sense as well as decency become extinct in today's society?

A well written post an one I agree with on almost every if not all points.  As I said in my last post, “…let people choose their own path. “

[Coyote Hunter]

I'm starting to wonder myself just why this thred was started in the first place. The outcome was predictable. The question was about ethics and soon as one guy has a problem with it he starts getting bashed. Doesn't sound to me like you really wanted to know how people felt CH.

Don -

This thread was started to provide a place for discussion without sidetracking another thread.   I did and still do want to know what others think.  If you go back and re-read the thread you will see I’ve had my knowledge of Colorado’s game management impuned because I brought up the subject of fawns, it’s been suggested in no uncertain terms that I don’t know the difference between ground chuck and steak simply because I contend most of the time folks don’t know what is in their hamburger, I’ve been accused of throwing stones by the person I think is throwing more than anyone, and now you question my integrity.  You guys are great!

If you go back and re-read the thread you’ll see I haven’t judged anyone for eating veal (and plainly stated as much in a response to beemanbeme), or for their stance on shooting does or fawns.  Nor have I used any profanity as others have done or pointed my comments at any one individual.  I did disagree politely with beemanbeme’s definition of veal, as it glossed over what has often been and still often is a far more ugly reality.  I also made a general statement to the effect that I think its hypocritical to be anti-doe/fawn hunting yet enjoy veal or be unconcerned about what’s in your hamburger, as it’s a personal opinion that I hold to be a truism.    In the same vein I pointed out my own hypocrisy concerning chickens given my view about veal.


As I said above:

“I’m not the one throwing stones – I’m saying let people choose their own path. “

[Don Fischer]

Well I went back and read it all again and I don't think you were accussed of throwing stones. You certainly did have your knowledge of colo game management questioned. I'm not sure why it was and I didn't see it answered to other than you've been hunting there 25 yrs. I though roper took a cheap shot as I doubt many on this site really understand their states game management plan. Hell Oregon's game managers can't possibly understand their own! On the matter of veal, you brought it up. The Beeman has something to say and your reply totally dumbfounded me. I have no idea where your reply to him came from. Now we're down to calves raised in veal pens with the crap$ and you don't like that, not sure I do either. And, what was it, open range veal? You made a statement about something Mac said that he never said and then you admit he didn't, you did. Where does that come from? You also said you "think it's hypocritical to be anti-doe/fawn hunting yet enjoy veal..........". He never said he was against it, he said if he did he wouldn't go bragging about it. Ya see, you and Nonya both live in a place where this stuff is normal and excepted by everyone. I think Mac lives in St Louis, Mo. The guy really does live in a glass house. I don't but I try my best to not shine a bad light on hunting anywhere especially with the in your face attitude of some. His intrest is in whats best for all the hunters, not, "nobody can see me here so screw the rest of you". I don't think your in that camp but go back and think about what Mac said in his very first post. I can't see how you could disagree with anything there. That is the base of everything he's been talking about in between dodgeing crap. And I think that that is where hunters really need to pull toward, not the petty crap going on now.

[NONYA]

I know more hunters who concentrate on filling their extra doe/fawn tags and apply for cow/calf elk tags every year long before they concentrate on a trophy rack for the wall.We fill our freezers with no consideration for what others may find "unethical" or what antis may find offensive,we stay within our game laws and have a good time bringing in the meat these doe/fawns provide,managing the herd numbers is just an added bonus,you will never keep their numbers in check through a strict male harvest,one buck will breed every doe he can find and his absense will have no effect on long term herd numbers.Our F&G cant get enough people to apply for these tags so they offer them as leftovers and we can buy as many as we need,for antelope we can bu two doe/fawn tags and we can buy an extra cow elk tag in many areas where the herd numbers are way over their population goals.

[mogwai]

This subject has come up a couple times on the Medium Bore forum.  Rather than start a thread there I have created this one and will link to it from the Medium Bore forum.

Here's  some questions:

1. Is it ethical to shoot females (does and cows, etc.)?

2. Should young of the year (fawns) be off limits?

3. Lots of folks proudly display their male (antlered) kills.  Is it any less ethical to display females?

1.  Yes.  If you have a tag for one.  Population control is the job of the hunter.  If we don't do it, we'll lose our moral high ground with those who are not hunters, but support hunters controlling populations.  This segment of the population controls the fate of hunting.
2.  No.  They are part of the population, and the first to die, if winterkill is an issue in the area.  Is starvation more ethical?
3.  It is not less ethical to display any animal cleanly killed within the dictates of fair chase and the rules of the state. 

By the way, I believe that hunters who only hunt for horns, and who don't agree with the statements above, will be the reason we lose hunting privileges before any other reason. Trophy hunting is not "ethical" to nonhunters, not just to anti-hunters.

[DakotaElkSlayer]

Jim's PERSONAL ethics...

Is it ethical to shoot females (does and cows, etc.)?
To me, it is more ethical to shoot does and cows than young(small) bucks and bulls.

Should young of the year (fawns) be off limits?
No.

Lots of folks proudly display their male (antlered) kills.  Is it any less ethical to display females?
Of course not!  A the headgear alone doesn't make a trophy.

I don't shoot does with young.  I don't shoot youngsters with Mom.  It is just the way I am.  I don't see the point of shooting a 1.5year old buck when he could be a dandy for someone in a couple of years.  I "don't" shoot yearlings...want some more meat.  This year, we spotted two does on the side of the mountain at 299yds.  I dropped one, DRT, and made the long walk to my "trophy."  "Gee, I didn't know they were that small" was my buddies reply on seeing the monster doe.  Sad to say, I fit an ENTIRE front quarter in our larger crock pot!   Guys, the front quarter was as tasty as most deer's backstraps.  Also, it was really easy for the two of us to CARRY, not drag, it the mile back to the truck.  But fellas, as tasty as she is, I would've rather had three or four times the meat.

Jim

[nomosendero]

This subject has come up a couple times on the Medium Bore forum.  Rather than start a thread there I have created this one and will link to it from the Medium Bore forum.

Here's  some questions:

1. Is it ethical to shoot females (does and cows, etc.)?

2. Should young of the year (fawns) be off limits?

3. Lots of folks proudly display their male (antlered) kills.  Is it any less ethical to display females?

It was first brought up on the medium bore forum completely out of context, it had NOTHING to do with shooting Does, rather pointing out in a sarcastic way that special bullets weren't needed for Fawns or Big, Bad Does, in other words saying in a sarcastic way that Does aren't that hard to kill. Nothing to do pro or con about harvesting Does. Unless Coyote Hunter, there is a thread I am unaware of. Besides, we can't see the sex of squirrels, Bears in some cases & other animals before we shoot them, but yet we hunt them.

I have been gone for the last 4 days. Little brother drew a Cow Elk Tag for the latest season here in AR. & I camped with him & my older brother until yesterday afternoon when he harvested the Cow & we cut it up today. Great hunt, more on that later!

CH, answers to your questions

1. Yes!!!! Not only is it ethical, it is necessary to the health of the herd. This has been going on for eons in the South & it is still difficult to keep
Deer numbers at the proper level in some areas. Not doing so would be all harm & zero good.

2. The game departments don't think Fawns should be off limits, at least in some States. When we go to WY. as we did this year, we buy some Doe tags over the counter for the extra meat. The Doe tags state plainly, Doe/Fawn. Sooo, the Does & Fawns are LEGAL with that tag. But then, if the game department said Doe was legal but Fawns were off limits, where would they draw the line. This would be an enforcement nightmare. I mean, would a 20# Antelope be a Fawn but a 25# Antelope be a Doe? It is easier for most departments to not go there & just say Doe/Fawn, a no brainer really for them. And some States probably aren't concerned if the harvested females are Doe or Fawn, but some States DO have a preference. Some states like Arkansas, have in past years mentioned pointers in their manual where the inexperienced can look at the head, ears, etc. & determine if it is a Fawn, their stance is they would rather not see Fawns killed (esp. buttons), but it is not illegal. Therefore, it can & does become a personal decision for many of us.

My position is that I harvest Does every year & have for 25-30 years & sometimes many per year, but I have no reason or interest whatsoever
in shooting Fawns, just not interested & see no logic in plugging one. It was mentioned by one that the big/old Does know how to survive & could be helpful to other Does as well. That is true & if you feel that way, leave the lead Does, no biggie. If I felt that was necessary for some Doe groups, then I would shoot grown ones that were not the oldest, but that's me.
Some personal reasons/opinions that I will not shoot Fawns are as follows:
A. Like Don Fisher said, they don't eat as much of the food & why? When I buy Doe tags in WY, I believe they were $27.00 ea., why would I pay that price & then shoot a babe that would feed us a meal or two (my boys are BIG). Why not take a reasonable size, I call them eating sized Doe & have something. And why should I even bother to clean a miniture animal that I could have dropped like a bad habit with a 22lr, when I could in just a few more minutes cleaned an average size Doe & they are plenty tender, if they were any better I couldn't stand it anyway.
B. This is a big reason to me & not an opinion at all. If you shoot a Fawn & do not get a good look at the head, you have a good chance of killing a button buck (Deer) or young Buck. Now one thing we CANNOT do is know the trophy potential of that little Buck, not opinion FACT. Why would I want to kill a button Buck Whitetail when he may be a potential B&C Buck in the making? Better to know the sex of what you are shooting for this reason.
C. To me & this is just the way I was raised, it is just not cool to shoot Fawns. No sport, no challenge, no sense of accomplishment to me. We were taught not to do so & we did not. It was just part of the "DO NOTS", you know, not hitting females, not cussing elders so forth. Not to say it fits with those, just part of a long list of rules is my point. Now, this is personal, & not really a moral or Holier than thou thing at all. And it won't upset me a bit when killing Fawns is mentioned here, I will digest my Doe steaks just fine, thanks. So, if others fell a need to shoot a Fawn, then bang away.
No need to get mad at me for my belief & I won't be mad at anyone for shooting them & telling me they were hard to bring down, I will pass over those discussions in the future instead of making light of them to avoid unnecessary & valueless conflict.
 
3. No, it is not less ethical to display Females. In fact, when I slow down the hunting a little, I will show some pictures of Does we took this year & the Cow Elk taken yesterday.    

[Sourdough]

I look at wildlife as a crop that needs to be harvested.  Also as a herd of livestock that needs to be managed.  So called ETHICS have no place here.  Plus ethics are in the mind of the person thinking about what he and others are doing.

1.  Should cows or does be harvested?  Depends on whether the herd needs to grow (no), or needs to be reduced in size (yes).

2.  Should young be killed?  Again dependent on the condition of the herd.  If conditions are bad and the odds of that calf/fawn living to maturity are poor, then why not let someone harvest it and at least make use of the animal, rather than let it starve and feed the carrion eaters.  And possibly foster disease while in poor condition, that could devastate the health of the herd.

Now with that said, we have some hunts where we authorized the harvesting of moose calves.  There was a huge public outcry, screams of it being unethical.  But the people that did harvest the calves were surprised.  They got as much meat off a four to five month old as they would have gotten off a yearling beef.  At the time we authorized the calf hunts the herd was in poor shape, with the cows only having single calves and not being able to raise that single calf to maturity.  We also took out a bunch of cows, because of over browsing.  Today five years later we have a much healthier herd with cows now having twins again.

I'll bring up another question since we are on the subject.  Bears, we have an overpopulation of them.  We have had a restriction on sows with cubs for years.  Wild life managers did not realize the volume of predation of baby ungulates by bears till recently.  The elders (Native Alaskans) have said we need to take sows with cubs as well as boars.  Other wise we were not being effective.  Now the numbers of moose around the villages are so low, we are having to take drastic measures.  And the taking of sows with cubs are being considered.  Also the practice of denning ( the practice of going into the dens and killing the  female and all the pups) with wolves and coyotes.  I personally feel that this is an acceptable practice under the circumstances.  If we did not have wolves running out our ears so to speak, no I would never consider this as a good practice.  But under our current situation I feel it is justified.  If we continue to let the predators kill off everything they have to eat, they will eventually start to eat one another.  Wolves will kill and eat other wolves.  Bears already do that, but will be forced to do it to a greater extent and the numbers of the predators will plummet.  We don't need that, we need health numbers of all animals, bears and wolves too.

[Mac11700]

Yup...ethics is a personal view...and some may take my stance on it that what I post to mean they should...I don't...What I have posted is trying to show that in different geographical locations...what may be acceptable their...isn't some where else..and how a person raised has a-lot to do with how they view things...I expressed my view points and stated my opinions...I don't walk in any bodies shoes but my own...but...as sportsmen...I feel we all should at least try to walk the same path when it comes to the non hunting general public...and to do that...we have to take how they feel about what we do into account and act accordingly...I don't like it more than anyone else...but I do have to deal with it on a day in...and day out basis here...You guys who live out where it's wide open and free of this BS...count your blessings...cause 1 day...at the rate it is going...it will move to your area...

Mac

[SHOOTALL]

MAC, you have a point , they don't butcher chickens and cows on the street anymore cause people don't want to see it and hunters shouldn't tie bucks on the top of the Tahoe and parade around town either . BUT , BUT - laws that govern which sex we shoot should be made for sound reasons not knee jerk reaction to peta !

[beemanbeme]

Well, I'm having a bit of trouble getting past this veal thing. You don't feel that "veal is meat from a calf that has been horribly mistreated for its short miserable existance" could be considered biased and inflamatory?   Also there was some PETA remark about chickens. 
I lived in Okla for 15 years.  In the country near half a dozen dairies.  Bull calves are a unwanted, neccassary byproduct of a dairy operation.  The dairys don't have time to fool with them and practically give them away.  Folks buy them, feed 'em up and sell them while they're still under the "baby beef" weight. Or if they['ve got the grass, they feed 'em out and sell them as beef. They may change hands a couple of times but that's neither here nor there.  Switching them from mother's milk to formula will sometimes scour them up for a day or two but you certainly don't want them to lose weight cause that's money.  Whether you take them to the sale barn or a buyer comes and gets them, buyers don't buy sickly calves with crap running down their legs.  You have heard of the USDA, right?

[SHOOTALL]

gee around here they have veal in barns , 200 per barn each stall is narrow they have bars that don't allow the veal to lay down ( wouldn't want them to get tuff , building muscle laying down and getting up ) . they are fed a liquid only .
they hose out the barn each day .
now you know when one is near cause of the smell !
IF I PASS ON EATING VEAL ITS MY LOSS !

[Mac11700]

MAC, you have a point , they don't butcher chickens and cows on the street anymore cause people don't want to see it and hunters shouldn't tie bucks on the top of the Tahoe and parade around town either . BUT , BUT - laws that govern which sex we shoot should be made for sound reasons not knee jerk reaction to peta !

I know...but...let's put things into my perspective ...so you can see how I see it...This is my view...ok

Who governs what game is to be taken...? .The state on most levels...but can be mandated by federal law if  the feds choose to...which they have on several issues before...Are they elected officials that we can vote out of office..No...they aren't...They are appointed to that position...by what ever state governing body that is in power...Who puts that body in power...supposedly "we the people"..but national elections can change popular vote...can it not...Does that governing body  listen to us hunters...Not very much from what I can see....It's more lip service than anything else...at least around here...Ask the folks about the reintroduction of wolves into their area...and how they feel about it...What state government isn't effected by what happens at a national level...? All are...what happens in New York city...effects what happens in Helena Mt...What state government isn't ruled by public opinion...? They all are...they live & breath by it...and by the polls that are run...Where are these polls conducted...In large cities...with a diverse cultural background...Not out in the rural areas...where most of the hunting occurs....

If the general public perception turns against us...nationally or locally what do you think it will like for us...It's already happening...Every time a crazy grabs a gun and kills someone...any body that has owns a gun or hunts..cringes..You know what the general public opinion is ..Are things getting better or worse...Here...it's getting worse...every day...Where does the general public get it's information from...? Mostly...the media...The Internet is part of this media...and here where I live...the news channels are running stories about the various "blogs" describing how people are upset over stupid issues...and it changes the perception of some of those not going to these sites and reading it...they blindly accept what is told them...after all...they don't lie about things on the news channels...do they... So...what happens on the Internet...matters to people who don't even go on the Internet...How favorable has/is the media to us hunters...? It isn't been favorable at all...and hasn't been in a long time...What state government isn't effected by what happens on a national basis... All state governments are effected...What is happening in every  state right now as we are here discussing this...Change is being discussed...and it isn't a change for common sense either...it is a knee jerk reaction caused by the general public...It isn't a knee jerk reaction by PETA that I am concerned with...but the knee jerk reaction of my next door neighbor and the others down the street...and across town...and in NYC...or L.A. that I am worried about...This is the big picture many have turned a blind eye to in what I have trying to say...Something so simple as posting a picture on the net...can be transmitted nation wide...and world wide in seconds...and since the media isn't for us...but against us...do you honestly think it will be presented in a good manner...?What we do as hunters and sportsmen effects how people feel about the whole sport...It's all interconnected...If folks have blinders on..and refuse to listen...they can't grasp how what they do effects us all...and they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces in the process...Sure...they can do all of these thing legally...but...I question wither they should be telling the world about it...Public perception rules those who govern us......I can't for the life of me why some folks don't understand it...and  those that say I don't care...I'll say what I want...I'll post what I want...I feel...will be the cause of unwanted change...

That is about as clear as I can say it...I hope my posting it doesn't offend anyone in particular...it is not meant to...since it isn't directed at any one individual but merely my views and opinion...

Mac

[SHOOTALL]

Mac i think we say the same , you just type more and better !
I don't mind offending so i will say it -
there are good hunters and there are SLOB hunters and the SLOBS days are numbered or all hunting will stop ! And the good hunters need to see to it !

[Mac11700]

Mac i think we say the same , you just type more and better !
I don't mind offending so i will say it -
there are good hunters and there are SLOB hunters and the SLOBS days are numbered or all hunting will stop ! And the good hunters need to see to it !

Your right...but...this issue wasn't' about slob hunters per se...and I don't want anyone thinking it as such for my part in it...for taking does & fawns where legal to do so...My stake in it...is how we are perceived and portrayed as hunters across this nation...and how some act in public can effect us all...Even those who have good intentions...and are trying to help...We are up against a stacked deck...with the media... and we have lost our chance to shuffle the cards...

Mac

[Davemuzz]

Mac,

Well said.

Dave

[Coyote Hunter]

Well, I'm having a bit of trouble getting past this veal thing. You don't feel that "veal is meat from a calf that has been horribly mistreated for its short miserable existance" could be considered biased and inflamatory?  

Biased?  Yes, but then I have never claimed to be unbiased about veal.  Quite the opposite.

Inflammatory?  Perhaps, but, IMHO, all too often 100% accurate.  Let’s face it – calves raised in pens so small they can barely move, fed only liquids which gives them acute diarrhea, are chronically anemic and live in their own excrement are not exactly living in the best of conditions – even for a food animal.

Also there was some PETA remark about chickens.  

Nothing PETA about it.  I was simply admitting my own hypocrisy by pointing out that while I refuse to eat veal I have no problem eating chickens that have been living in cages and (often) have had their beaks cut off to prevent them form pecking each other to death.

I lived in Okla for 15 years.  In the country near half a dozen dairies.  

And I grew up on a farm in Iowa where I raised calves for 4-H.  There is no way I would have raised them the way veal calves are often raised.

Bull calves are a unwanted, neccassary byproduct of a dairy operation.  The dairys don't have time to fool with them and practically give them away.  Folks buy them, feed 'em up and sell them while they're still under the "baby beef" weight. Or if they['ve got the grass, they feed 'em out and sell them as beef. They may change hands a couple of times but that's neither here nor there.  Switching them from mother's milk to formula will sometimes scour them up for a day or two but you certainly don't want them to lose weight cause that's money.  Whether you take them to the sale barn or a buyer comes and gets them, buyers don't buy sickly calves with poop running down their legs.  You have heard of the USDA, right?

Sounds like the Oklahoma veal calves are living in the lap of luxury compared to their cousins.

Anemic isn’t exactly healthy, and buyers often do get calves/cattle with poop running down their legs.  

Enjoy veal if you want and you can have my share.

[Coyote Hunter]

Mac –

Believe it or not, I’m more on your side than not.  I hunt does but not fawns and I don’t care to see game strapped on top of cars.

That said, I realize that not everyone shares my views, and I’m OK with that.  I’m quite willing to leave the subject of fawns up to state wildlife agencies and if a car top is the most practical means a person has to get an animal home, well at least they’ve been out hunting. 

[Mac11700]

Coyote..

I don't like to see any animal mistreated needlessly...and if what you are describing is common place...then the FDA should do something about it..please don't take this wrong...but...livestock isn't perceived as wild game...and there in lies the difference and the problem...There are lots of things done to animals that isn't right...some in the name of making life better for us humans...some not...In some cases...it is a catch 22 situation...in others...it's not so clear cut..Unsanitary conditions for livestock should be dealt with...it effects us all...morally...and health wise...We are the stewards of all of the animals on this planet...The Bible tells us this...It's up to us to do right by what has been put in our charge...and it should be a joint effort by all to see it so...unfortunately...it isn't that way for some...Money..greed...convenience..laziness...all can & do contribute to this situation... 

Mac

[Graybeard]

Beats me how this thread seems to have become so tracked by the issue of veal when it started out about DEER. Hey even with my poor vision I can tell the difference between a deer and a cow. 

But on the off topic subject of veal I've never ever in my life eaten any so got no clue how it tastes. I reckon my reasons have more to do with me being cheap and veal costing more than heavy beef at the store than with humanitarian reasons. I kinda sorta prefer my beef to be full grown tho cuz I like my steaks to be BIG and thick so I can eat one and be full rather than needing to eat two or three to no longer be hungry.

On the subject of sanitation of the growing and slaughter processes I'm quite sure that if a huge percentage of the meat eaters of this nation actually had to see how they are raised, slaughtered and handled afterward they'd become vegetarians. I'm probably one of those. I know but I don't wanna see it or smell it and likely wouldn't eat the meat from the processes if I did. I'm sure most also don't wanna know what all chemicals and what excuses for food the critters we eat are dosed with.

[280shooter]

About 9 years ago we started keeping track of the number of deer we saw in the area that we hunt. 45-50 per day was not uncommon, with possibly 1 buck. F&G started issuing antlerless tags on a draw basis and I have put in and drawn one for most of the last 8 years. This year when we went out, we only hunted half a day, but saw around 20-25 deer and 4 were bucks, with the largest being a nice 5 pt. I have never had a problem pulling the trigger on a doe and actually go to the extra effort and expense of applying in order to do so. Seems to be working in our particular area.

[Cheesehead]

Since doe tags are more available, many hunters take the first deer the see, usually a doe, and that buck, just around the corner is often spared.

Cheese

[SuperstitionCoues]

Yes.  Good population management and buck age structure is partially achieved through doe removal.  The meat is tastier also!