Ethical scenario

[Bango skank]

That's the thing, WDFW can't tell you to do something illegal.  They also can't change the law to allow for it otherwise there would be a dramatic rise in the number of mercy killings of animals for sure.  It's just one of those unfortunate realities of life.

It's a slippery slope if they start telling people its okay to break the law in certain situations. I don't think we want them to do that. Shady people would be all over that, taking advantage of it.

Exactly, they cant tell you its okay.  But i would guess they would really wish people would just do what needs to be done in these situations without calling, so they wouldnt have to say no.

[Stein]

Yeah, I'm sure they don't like to see it any more than we do.

[LDennis24]

Most of us hunt because of our love for nature and animals. Ethically, there's no real choice in my mind. I'd have taken the shot, removed the bear or at least the meat, and called it in without having a tag. 

 

[hunter399]

Most of us hunt because of our love for nature and animals. Ethically, there's no real choice in my mind. I'd have taken the shot, removed the bear or at least the meat, and called it in without having a tag. 

 

I would never call wdfw or take any meat or even walk over and look at it .Calling them after shooting it and harvesting it without a tag.Is asking for a ticket.
I would of sent it, and walk away without a tag that's all you can do.And tell know one .

[pianoman9701]

It's kind of a moot point because I'd never go into the woods without bear and cougar tags.

[GHETTO GUIDE]

A quick video,

proving it was wounded.  Then put it down. 
I think I could defend that in court?  Or at least have a better case trying.

As far as the meat Its hard to call with out being in the situation.


Sent from my SM-G935R4 using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

Personally speaking, if I were acting outside of or on edge of legal behavior to do something I considered ethical and necessary I would practice SSS.

[gutsnthegrass]

I think the right thing to do would be to dispatch it.  If it was shot the day before and suffering that long, I doubt the meat would taste any good.  I would think it would be pretty rancid with all that adrenaline running thought it trying to keep itself alive.  I would let the other scavengers do their thing.  I am pretty sure that it wouldn't be legal though.  Like mentioned before, it's sad that what's right, isn't legal.

[yakimanoob]

I don’t hunt for bears or cougars specifically, but I always buy and carry the tags..
In 15 years, It has resulted in 4 bears and 1 cat, that made themselves available.
And would allow for legally dispatching this wounded animal.
For an extra $11 it’s totally worth it and almost a no brainer

And +1 for carrying an inReach and trying to find someone with a tag who could do it legally.  But if that fails, I would have dispatched it and not reported it.  Every LEO with a brain knows putting that poor animal out of its misery is the right thing to do.  But they also took an oath to enforce the law, and while certainly a reasonable law overall, in this specific case it's not in line with what's ethical. 

Sorry to hear about the experience overall though.  Watching a wounded animal suffer is awful. 

[HikerHunter]

A quick video,

proving it was wounded.  Then put it down. 
I think I could defend that in court?  Or at least have a better case trying.

As far as the meat Its hard to call with out being in the situation.


Sent from my SM-G935R4 using Tapatalk

I thought about this, but who is to say you didn't do the wounding shot?

[npaull]

Laws are necessarily imperfect attempts to codify our ethics in a way that is broadly applicable. They cannot possibly capture every single scenario in which those ethics may need to be exercised. There are times when to act lawfully is to act unethically, and vice versa. Given that the laws stem from our ethics, and are meant to reinforce them, and NOT vice-versa, in a situation in which ethics clearly conflict with the law, I choose to act ethically.

[yakimanoob]

Laws are necessarily imperfect attempts to codify our ethics in a way that is broadly applicable. They cannot possibly capture every single scenario in which those ethics may need to be exercised. There are times when to act lawfully is to act unethically, and vice versa. Given that the laws stem from our ethics, and are meant to reinforce them, and NOT vice-versa, in a situation in which ethics clearly conflict with the law, I choose to act ethically.

[Bango skank]

Laws are necessarily imperfect attempts to codify our ethics in a way that is broadly applicable. They cannot possibly capture every single scenario in which those ethics may need to be exercised. There are times when to act lawfully is to act unethically, and vice versa. Given that the laws stem from our ethics, and are meant to reinforce them, and NOT vice-versa, in a situation in which ethics clearly conflict with the law, I choose to act ethically.

Very well said

[pianoman9701]

  x3

[10thmountainarcher]

Laws are necessarily imperfect attempts to codify our ethics in a way that is broadly applicable. They cannot possibly capture every single scenario in which those ethics may need to be exercised. There are times when to act lawfully is to act unethically, and vice versa. Given that the laws stem from our ethics, and are meant to reinforce them, and NOT vice-versa, in a situation in which ethics clearly conflict with the law, I choose to act ethically.

  Very, very well said!