Sighting in: ethics

Late summer, the time of year when Maine big-game and bird hunters go through the ritual. Take the gun out of its case at a local gravel pit. Set up targets. Throw skeet. Align the sights. Sharpen the eye.

It is tradition, passed along to the generations. However, given the expansion of residential development into what historically was hunting territory, cultural changes that have diminished support for blood sports and the increased posting of land off-limits to hunting, sportsmen as never before need to develop skill with more than a gun.

“Ethics,” a word rarely spoken in hunting and fishing circles until relatively recently, now is heard more often. Belatedly, but in time to safeguard these sports against damaging conduct by a minority of sportsmen, a dialogue on acceptable behavior is under way. It is serious business. Everywhere.

Writing in the summer issue of Maine Fish and Wildlife, Keith Sutton, editor of Arkansas Wildlife, provides In “Have You No Ethics,” a primer on proper attitude and a glimpse of a future no serious sportsman wants to see.

The latter, first. Only 6 percent of Americans hunt. Just 17 percent are anglers. Sutton is candid about the bottom line politically: “Presenting a positive image to the majority of citizens who don`t hunt or fish is crucial to the continuation of both sports. Society has a legitimate voice in curtailing hunting and fishing activities if they fail to meet social expectations.”

However, laments Sutton, too many sports behave irresponsibly. Littering, trespass, improper handling of game and other offensive practices are worsening. Not surprisingly, opposition to hunting is increasing. It is “widespread and growing,” he observes, and although the impact has been slight so far, “if we don’t get serious about cleansing our ranks of irresponsible participants, we put our sports at risk.”

Sutton stresses the difference between what is ethical and what is legal. Sportsmen must know the lawbook, but it often is more important to be guided by conscience and instinct. The sense of right and wrong should be overriding. “Ethics,” writes Sutton, “is more a matter of attitude and awareness than of rules and regulations.”

In much of Maine, the onset of autumn promises moments when traditions and pastimes are handed down. Children who are eager to become part of the traditional Maine lifestyle learn quickly when hunting and firearms safety are emphasized. But this is an era of high visibility for their sport, and as hunters know, much of that attention is unfavorable.

Most landowners have a lowering tolerance for sloppy, dangerous and unacceptable behavior. Hunting within legal limits but too close to dwellings, leaving behind containers and papers and failing to show respect to those whose property is used are some of the thoughtless acts that are corrosive to the relationship between sportsmen and society.

Before they head out in the dark before dawn on those crisp fall mornings, sportsmen load their packs with the essentials — rain gear, lunch, compass and spare shells. Sutton suggests hunters of all ages should place their ethics right on top. It is very good advice.