Posted on

Fishing morals vs fishing laws

Fishing morals vs fishing laws Fishing morals vs fishing laws

Game regulations, among other things, attempt to put our morals toward the animals and fish we stalk into law. They seek to define a moral compass of fair chase. They also seek to protect the animals from over harvest and to protect hunters from those that would take more than their share.

But when do morals towards those same creatures and the law diverge? It’s a fascinating topic I’ve pondered many times, seen firsthand several times, but I’ve never participated in that divergence myself. Luck of the draw I guess.

While fishing quite a few years ago, the friend I was fishing with had switched to artificials for the crappie we were fishing. The lake we were on was known more for walleye and musky then crappie, but I’m sure more pounds of panfish were hauled out of the lake then all the walleye and musky put together.

He hooked into something big and pulled up a walleye over 24 inches. I don’t recall the size limits, but this fish was in the slot where they all get released. Problem was, this walleye had inhaled the small crappie jig and was hooked and bleeding steady from the gills. This walleye was going to die whether it was released back into the lake or into hot oil.

What to do? He put the fish back since he didn’t want to risk getting caught with an “illegal fish.” A few inches longer and he could have legally kept that walleye. So maybe when it was released that fish swam around looking distressed and a 50 inch musky ate it. Maybe it just sank to the bottom and crayfish and turtles ate it. Maybe it floated to the surface and an eagle ate it. Maybe my friend could have eaten it. It was going to die and something was going to eat it. Why not him?

I understand the size limit regulation. And I understand why exceptions can’t be allowed because that opens a big can of worms and would encourage purposeful activity violating the rules.

But it just seems like perfectly good food was discarded that day.

I came upon a car-deer accident once while heading home from something that had us wearing our Sunday best and we all had to work the next morning. We stopped to see if they needed help and the deer was still alive. It would have died within 12 hours, suffering the whole time. In the back of the vehicle was a rifle. It could end the suffering immediately and painlessly.

Up pulls a county plow truck since we were driving in a pretty good snow storm. He sees the situation and jumps out with a large hammer and dispatches the deer with that. We stayed with the people until a deputy arrived. The deputy wanted to know who killed the deer. Someone told him and he said, “He can’t do that!”

Even the deputy would need to gain permission back then to dispatch a mortally wounded deer. I understand why, but the deer was suffering. Is the law really moral in that situation?

Having a wounded deer walk up on you or you upon it creates dilemmas. Morally most would say we should finish it off. But what if it’s an antlerless deer and you don’t have an antlerless tag or vice versa? How about you decide to finish the deer off to ease its suffering and not tag it? Or if you keep one backstrap for camp meat?

Does the moral choice ever outweigh the legal regulations? As a hunter don’t we have a moral obligation to animals we hunt to try to alleviate suffering?

Way back in what’s known as “The Year of the Quest” for me - a difficult deer season that created a lot of stories. One involves a wounded yearling doe that I tried to harvest from September to the antlerless gun hunt in December. I stopped seeing her about the end of October and felt she was dead. I ended up harvesting her in December with a rifle. Obviously wounded deer can live much longer than expected, but she had absolutely no fat on her. Would she have survived the winter?

Some of us are going to encounter a moral decision like these and more this year. What is the right decision and is it the right decision in every situation?

I pondered this around the campfire last night. It’s good campfire thinking.

THROUGH A

DECOY’S

E

YE

CHUCK K OLAR LOCAL OUTDOORSMAN

LATEST NEWS