• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

'Ethical' binocular companies (1 Viewer)

Perhaps we're getting to the point where the reason for the hunting discussion ban is becoming obvious.

It worth reminding that this thread, posted by John, was not to discuss hunting - it was a simple post offering a link to information that some persons might find interesting. Nowhere did John suggest all should take account of the information, nor did he pass any judgement on hunting.

It would seem that quite a lot of persons have taken objection to a post that offers information to persons that hold different opinions to them. This is an issue that, for me, is nothing to do with hunting per se, but to respecting that this is a forum with many members who will be interested in such information.
 
To me recreational hunters are psychopaths and part of a bygone era. They seem unable to evolve compassion for 'lesser' creatures as most of the rest of us do. There are proven links between hunting, child abuse and domestic abuse because the perpetrators strive for the same feeling of power over their victims and get off on the sense of suffering they witness.

This is not what I come here to read. I come here to read about and learn about optics.

Spare us your "opinion" which is just that, not fact.
 
.......To me recreational hunters are psychopaths and part of a bygone era. They seem unable to evolve compassion for 'lesser' creatures as most of the rest of us do. There are proven links between hunting, child abuse and domestic abuse because the perpetrators strive for the same feeling of power over their victims and get off on the sense of suffering they witness.

Wow- just wow is all I can think about this part of this post. What a completely unbelievable and unsubstantiated opinion!

It is one thing to argue merits of hunting vs not hunting; and also to decide if that should be discussed in a forum. It is really quite another to personally attack a group of people for what they legally choose to do and link them/ associate them with some of the most terrible illegal behavior that can be done to another human being. THAT is truly shameful!

Some people are just totally clueless with the comparisons they make. Totally disrespectful. I am offended; and not just because I choose to participate in hunting activities.
 
Last edited:
It worth reminding that this thread, posted by John, was not to discuss hunting - it was a simple post offering a link to information that some persons might find interesting. Nowhere did John suggest all should take account of the information, nor did he pass any judgement on hunting.

It would seem that quite a lot of persons have taken objection to a post that offers information to persons that hold different opinions to them. This is an issue that, for me, is nothing to do with hunting per se, but to respecting that this is a forum with many members who will be interested in such information.

thank you. yes, exactly. If anyone doesn't like the article they can simply skip it and/or skip the thread discussion entirely.
 
There are proven links between hunting, child abuse and domestic abuse because the perpetrators strive for the same feeling of power over their victims and get off on the sense of suffering they witness.

There are proven links between being human and committing all crimes under the sun. Astonishing though it may seem but it is a proven fact that all of the crimes committed today were committed by a human.

Hitler, Genghis Khan, 9/11, Paris bombing: hard to believe but it was all done by humans.

Maybe we should reflect on that.

Lee
 
We have had several complaints already to admin about this thread but TBH I am at a total loss as what to do with it. 9/10 I would lock it off as we have a policy about hunting being discussed on the bird forums,strangely in this case, I am wondering if we shouldn't let it run its course and let folk air opinions on the thread topic i.e. ethical binocular companies. Personally I'm against killing anything but I did as a younger man and regret three pointless empty kills to this day, and I ask myself sometimes what right I had to to to it.

Anyway moving on from my own guilt surely all the major companies have a sports optic section with incorporates hunting?

Happy to close this thread if it gets out of hand or people become more abusive than normal ;) but lets see how it goes at the moment, keeping it open may be the wrong decision but maybe once in a while the hunting fraternity should have a say on the forum.

over to you?
 
All I'll say to those who are against hunting and argue its merits for population control is to look at imagery from the property I manage (a reservoir w/ legal hunting) vs. imagery of most state parks that do not allow hunting!
 
My view is that discussing the ethics of hunting is not the same as discussing hunting and by that I mean telling stories about the last hunt someone went on and the best places to go to hunt whatever species etc. The questions of ethics and sustainability of this type of activity are intimately bound up with questions of conservation, land management and in the end ethics.

There should be a place to discuss these issues but I am not sure it is on the binoculars forum although I wholeheartedly support the OP's giving us all access to the report even if the report might be flawed.

We have Ruffled Feathers as a forum for contentious issues and maybe folks should continue to discuss the wider aspects of hunting ethics there and leave this thread for discussing the companies with references to hunting as long as it doesn't become the centre of discussion.

Lee
 
As a lifelong vegetarian, I expect I am exactly the sort of person to whom a report on "ethical optics manufacturers" is aimed.

Truthfully though, it would not bother me one iota if the company I bought my next binoculars or scope from was also a manufacturer of optics for field sports. Indeed, it is probably better that hunters have good quality optical equipment available, as it increases the chances of them making a clean kill.

Quite frankly, what other people do is their business. So long as they remain within the law and do not damage the ecology, it is of no concern to me.

I must say though, I am rather sceptical of the motivation for reports like this, and I suspect it is more about assisting folk in salving their consciences. I would bet a considerable amount of money that most of the folk making purchases of "ethical optics" have no problem utilising the products of industrial farming, which I would humbly suggest is a greater evil than sustainable hunting.
 
As a lifelong vegetarian, I expect I am exactly the sort of person to whom a report on "ethical optics manufacturers" is aimed.

Truthfully though, it would not bother me one iota if the company I bought my next binoculars or scope from was also a manufacturer of optics for field sports. Indeed, it is probably better that hunters have good quality optical equipment available, as it increases the chances of them making a clean kill.

Quite frankly, what other people do is their business. So long as they remain within the law and do not damage the ecology, it is of no concern to me.

I must say though, I am rather sceptical of the motivation for reports like this, and I suspect it is more about assisting folk in salving their consciences. I would bet a considerable amount of money that most of the folk making purchases of "ethical optics" have no problem utilising the products of industrial farming, which I would humbly suggest is a greater evil than sustainable hunting.


Thats pretty much the way I feel.

I admire you for the vegetarian part, I couldnt do it, but have people I consider friends who do it on religious grounds. It takes a life style change I would struggle with. If you want ethical treatment of animals, then to me, that life style is putting your money where your mouth is. It is walking the walk.
 
I think it's an excellent idea and have already taken note. I appreciate there are sometimes legitimate reasons for hunting but personally I think these are few and far between. Hunting for food is fine if you have to but wanting to kill it yourself I think is profoundly disturbing, even if the death is more humane than that which might take place in a slaughterhouse. What makes people take pleasure in such extreme violent acts? If you watch ancient tribes hunt out of necessity they seem to show respect for the creatures and feel almost bad for doing it. In western society hunters choose hunting for the kick they get out of it.

As for population control, half of this is probably debatable (look at the mountain hare culling that goes on on Scottish grouse moors; you can call most animals pests and find some half-baked evidence to justify it if you really want to), and the other half pales into insignificance compared to the recreational hunting industry

To me recreational hunters are psychopaths and part of a bygone era. They seem unable to evolve compassion for 'lesser' creatures as most of the rest of us do. There are proven links between hunting, child abuse and domestic abuse because the perpetrators strive for the same feeling of power over their victims and get off on the sense of suffering they witness.

I do need to ask you a question, as I wonder if you will stuff a noisy
cricket or spider if in your range, or what you do about a mouse in your
house ? :eek!:

Jerry
 
We have had several complaints already to admin about this thread but TBH I am at a total loss as what to do with it. 9/10 I would lock it off as we have a policy about hunting being discussed on the bird forums,strangely in this case, I am wondering if we shouldn't let it run its course and let folk air opinions on the thread topic i.e. ethical binocular companies. Personally I'm against killing anything but I did as a younger man and regret three pointless empty kills to this day, and I ask myself sometimes what right I had to to to it.

Anyway moving on from my own guilt surely all the major companies have a sports optic section with incorporates hunting?

Happy to close this thread if it gets out of hand or people become more abusive than normal ;) but lets see how it goes at the moment, keeping it open may be the wrong decision but maybe once in a while the hunting fraternity should have a say on the forum.

over to you?

Steve:

Just let it run, it will soon run its course. Just some releasing gas that has built up over winter|!|.

Jerry
 
All I'll say to those who are against hunting and argue its merits for population control is to look at imagery from the property I manage (a reservoir w/ legal hunting) vs. imagery of most state parks that do not allow hunting!
That's a fair point. A great many years ago I was in Omaha, NE and a good friend was associated with a local reserve (Fontenelle Forest) which had a major 'bambi problem' and was more-or-less being eaten out of house and home. The decision to allow carefully managed hunting to control deer population densities was a matter of some local controversy (including some, shall we say, "worryingly robust" and typically anonymous correspondence and calls to my friend). It did, however, meet it's objectives:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2360&context=icwdm_usdanwrc

...Mike
 
That's a fair point. A great many years ago I was in Omaha, NE and a good friend was associated with a local reserve (Fontenelle Forest) which had a major 'bambi problem' and was more-or-less being eaten out of house and home. The decision to allow carefully managed hunting to control deer population densities was a matter of some local controversy (including some, shall we say, "worryingly robust" and typically anonymous correspondence and calls to my friend). It did, however, meet it's objectives:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2360&context=icwdm_usdanwrc

...Mike

Below is a picture of a fence line between two large (over 10 000 acre) ranches in South Africa. Guess which one is a cattle ranch and which one is for commercial hunting?

FenceAfricacattlegame_zps0b02108a.jpg


When it comes to Africa the land and the wildlife need to have economic value to avoid it being plundered. Whether that plundering being poaching, commercial farming or simple neglect for any sort of principals of conservation. Like it or not, hunting is a large piece of the conservation puzzle. I'm not stating it is the only activity raising $$ for conservation as other eco tourists also do their part. One can also find hunts worldwide that are not being done in a sustainable fashion. I think hunters have a moral obligation to do their research in that regard. However, an objective observer should also be able to see that hunting, yes even the vilified trophy hunting, has done remarkable things for conservation. Hunters and their $$$ can, and should, be used as another tool to keeping the world wild.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top