×

No one is an expert on all: Opinions on what is sporting can vary

Immediately following the conclusion of any hunting season it is the lot of the outdoor writer to hear all manner of gripes and opinions on outdoor subjects. We can get pretty firm about what we view as the “unsporting practices” of other hunters.

As if enduring the harangues of anti-hunters is not enough, it is surprising how we snipe at fellow sportsmen for using methods or equipment foreign to our own way of thinking. Every time something new is introduced some group gets vocal about how “unsporting” it is.

Remember the flap about using crossbows? The same rhetoric was used when recurve bows were introduced to the hunting world. The longbow-only crowd was incensed; then when compound bows came along, the opposition roared. Always, the argument is the same: it isn’t “sporting” in their opinion and it will surely make hunting so easy it will decimate the resource.

Now, I’m not talking about things that are illegal such as poaching deer, shooting hours, etc. Mostly I’m referring to things that are accepted in one area and disdained in another. For instance, fly fishermen sometimes denigrate any who fish with live bait or artificial lures. The wild turkey “expert” declares from a stage that hunting turkeys with a rifle in the fall should be outlawed.

This one particularly bothers me. He declares that shooting a turkey with a rifle is like shooting fish in a barrel and so it is unsporting.

“Anyone can pick off a turkey at 100 yards with a rifle,” he declares.

Can they? Ask someone who has tried that trick and you find it isn’t so easy after all. Chances are good, the protester has never tried it. He’s just decided that he doesn’t like it so it ought to be outlawed.

Many groups or even individuals try to ram through laws on the basis of what is they think is or is not sporting and there we get into trouble. Vying for laws to make hunting safer is one matter. But attempting to force all other hunters to hunt by our own personal notions of what is sporting is another matter indeed.

In the south, shooting a turkey off the roost is nothing unusual; in the north, it is considered “unsporting.” I’ve heard folks pontificate loudly about how terrible it is that in other places, black bears are hunted over bait. Yes, a bait pile in Pennsylvania’s open woods and fields probably would be unsporting but in Maine and Canada where the forest is as thick as a Brazilian rain forest there is simply no other way to do it. If you think you can still hunt or drive bears in that particular terrain, it is obvious you have never tried it.

In the south it is common to drive deer through swamps with dogs; in the north we frown on that. Some folks believe that hunting gobblers in the spring is so easy they won’t dignify the sport by doing it. You’ll generally always find out that those making such statements have never tried spring gobbler hunting.

Generally speaking, our opinions on the matter are shaped by the area of the nation in which we live and the attitudes of those who mentored us in the shooting sports. The great Roger Latham wrote in his book “The complete book of the wild turkey” that he was taught not to ever shoot a turkey unless it was flying. He couldn’t bring himself to shoot at a turkey on the ground even if he had called it in. He’d flush it then shoot as it lifted into the air.

While I never personally hunted with Latham, I did hunt many times with someone who was one of Latham’s best friends. The man had absorbed Latham’s philosophy and when spring gobbler hunting was begun in Pennsylvania he had a rough time acclimating himself to that style of hunting.

For years, it was illegal to hunt turkeys from a blind in our state but that has been changed. Remember when the “cub law” was instituted? That was when the silly criteria for deciding if a bear actually was a cub couldn’t be decided until a bear was dead because you had to examine its teeth to know if it was a cub or not. I know of many cubs that were shot, then left lying in the woods because they couldn’t accurately its age. When that law was abolished, the entire hunting world, it seemed, was enraged. The hue and cray was that the law would mean 30 and 40 pound cubs would be killed, which would wipe out the bear population with a few years, sportsmen declared. But the scientific research showed that it would not and now, there are more black bears in Pennsylvania than at any time in our history.

Everyone had an opinion back in the 1960s when doe hunting was begun. What a howl.

“It would kill off the deer herd in a couple years time,” disgruntled hunters said. But the deer population exploded to such an extent that a few years ago, very strict population control measures had to be instituted and that’s the protest now.

The big change we will be adapting to this deer season is that we may shoot both bucks and does during the same two week season. I have to admit that I have not heard nearly as many complaints about that as I have over every other change in game laws or seasons since I have been hunting.

Of course, we are all entitled to our own opinions but we ought to be careful about trying to foist them onto other people. Especially when scientific, biological research shows our opinion is wrong. But we don’t like to admit that, do we?

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $4.39/week.

Subscribe Today