Tuesday, 5 October 2010

Moral dilemma

Chad Love, over at the strangely titled Mallard of Discontent blog, tells the story of a badly injured doe, with two fawns, that visited his feeder. Should he put the doe out of her misery, condemning the fawns to certain death? Or should he prolong her agony, in the hope the fawns might survive to adulthood?

Should we, as shooters, ever intervene in such things just because we can, because we think we know best - or should we 'leave nature alone' to conclude matters in her own, cruel, way? Since it's often man that created the problem in some way (traffic accidents and the like are an obvious example), is it our duty to try to set things right? Can we ever know what 'right' really is? Wildlife filmmakers and war reporters sometimes face similar impossible decisions.

Difficult choices, but choices that stalkers, keepers and shooters face all the time. And sometimes the outcome is very different to what we might have predicted - read Chad's story and you'll see what I mean.

1 comment:

vicky said...

What a lovely story. It should be used to illustrate to those who think all hunters and shooters are bloodthirsty and cruel that our relationship with our quarry is complex.