Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.

Measure of the hunt: Elk deserve better

  • Updated
  • 20

There are two ways to hunt elk in Montana. One can hunt at times which give elk the upper hand and where the challenge and the ethic of the hunt is the measure. Or one can hunt at times which give hunters the upper hand and where the efficiency and effectiveness of killing elk is the measure. Both ways of hunting are legal. It’s up to the individual to decide how and when to hunt elk. All that is needed to participate is an elk hunting license.

In Montana, it is not uncommon to hear people talk about their love and appreciation for elk. It is a source of state pride. But our policies and behaviors do not seem coherent with these claims. Love and appreciation for something requires certain behaviors. At minimum, it’s reasonable to suggest that this engagement with the beloved must uphold and honor things like fairness and respect.

As it concerns hunting, fairness and respect are built into an engagement where the challenge and ethic of the hunt are the measure. But they are not necessarily built into one where efficiency and effectiveness of killing reign supreme.

At current issue is a steady shift in policies and behaviors that emphasize the killing of elk over the hunting of elk. This shift in emphasis from hunting to killing reflects a slow and steady eroding of our collective love and appreciation for elk as a formidable partner in the ancient engagement of the hunter and the hunted.

Now some may argue that love, appreciation, and respect must never involve death or the pursuit of another and that, for all intents and purposes, hunting and killing are the same. This is an understandable argument, but not necessarily a conclusive one. While the outcome may be the same for the elk (though more often than not, it is not), hunting and killing are fundamentally different things—both in terms of the acts themselves and the scope of objectives involved.

Elk are elk and their worth does not rely on us, though it is influenced by our ability to identify and communicate that value. If we truly love and appreciate elk, it’s time for hunters to reclaim the ethical highroad of fair chase hunting that honors elk for what they are and demands the hunter to be the very best he or she can be.

Before us is a decision by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks to extend “elk shoulder seasons” for the purpose of killing elk efficiently and effectively during a period of up to six months in 43 hunting districts in 2019-20. Incentivized by the prospect of an easy elk, hunters are encouraged to kill cow elk on private land in August, when calves are still nursing, and similarly, in January and February, when elk are concentrated in herds in lowlands trying to survive winter, pregnant with a new crop of calves.

As hunters of all persuasions, we need to dig deep and ask ourselves if this is what love and respect look like and if this is how we want (and ought) to be engaging with an animal that we (supposedly) take great pride in and have pledged to conserve and treat fairly and ethically.

With this in mind, and even if only for purposes of considering the above thoughts more completely, redirecting the accelerating shift of killing elk back to hunting elk seems necessary. And reinstating the measure of the hunt as the ethical pursuit of the hunted is an important first step.

Montana’s elk, Montana’s elk hunters, Montana’s elk hunting ethic, and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks all deserve much better than this zero-sum game we’re in now. (The comment period ends Jan. 18 at Fish, Wildlife & Parks,

Submitted by Thomas Baumeister in conjunction with his 2019 Community Scholar Fellowship with Merlin CCC in Helena. 


Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

What a seismic difference a trial has made to public and media perceptions of Kyle Rittenhouse. When he was charged at age 17 with shooting three men, two fatally, during racial unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last year, various media accounts described him as a rifle-toting white supremacist who drove across the border to shoot Black Lives Matters protesters in the racial unrest that followed ...

Kyle Rittenhouse is 18 years old. On Aug. 25, 2020, when Rittenhouse killed two men during a night of civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, he was 17. But when he took the stand during his murder trial, he looked like he could be 13. Defendants in murder trials often do themselves no favors by testifying in their own defense, but Rittenhouse probably helped himself. He was soft-spoken and ...

Since 1984, the nationwide legal drinking age has been 21 for good reasons. Young people’s brains are still developing, which affects their judgment and cognitive abilities. That, along with raging hormones, boosts the chances of impulsive decision-making. It’s a dumb idea to add alcohol to an already unstable mix. It makes even less sense to add firearms to that unstable mix. Perhaps it’s ...

What can sensible adults agree on regarding Kyle Rittenhouse, the latest young symbol on whom America can hang its devastating internal division and the newest tool for social media networks to monetize without regard to individual and societal hurt? Those who believe in the rule of law, which should be all of us, might start with the notion that a murder trial involving self-defense is no ...

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.


News Alerts

Breaking News