Hacker News Reader

Comment by idiotsecant | Hacker News Reader

On the other hand, recovering an animal with a light is a good thing, because otherwise you might lose an injured animal that will slowly die over hours, days, or weeks

View on HN

The impact of spotlights on nocturnal life are also significant.

If everybody is following the rules in good faith, it should be pretty rare, right? You only have to track down an injured animal in the dark if you shot it in the light and then it became dark before you got to it. Hunting ends almost everywhere around or a little after sun down.

Hunters don't follow the rules in good faith in my experience. If they would, they would combine drinking and hunting less often. Which would lead to less shot dogs or even (!) injured people.

No, too many of them break the rules the moment it is hard to prove it.

What exactly is 'your experience' exactly? There are many many many hunters every year who obey the law and hunt ethically and responsibly. In my state many youth take hunters education courses when young to learn how to responsibly handle firearms, ethically take game, and obey the rules of hunting.

Perhaps, but I suspect this is part of the rationale behind the law.

TBF, if it's injured, it will probably either die in a matter of hours from its injuries or be taken down as easy prey by a predator. If it survives a day, it's probably going to live.

But yes, I get your point.

You're quite wrong here, theres plenty of places an animal can be shot where blood loss is survivable but infection is not

Reply on news.ycombinator.com