Animal cruelty is serious business to the World Championship Coyote Calling Contest®(WCCCC®) and is to all coyote callers and all hunters. Hunting is a legal activity in the United States and is not considered animal cruelty in most of the civilized world today. In many states hunting and fishing rights have been guarantees by law. There are those that disagree with hunting all together and call it inhumane but it is not and they do have aright to their opinion.
But it is an opinion and not a fact!
In hunting, most states required minimum calibers for hunting to insure that the trauma for game
animals is minimized. All hunters are encouraged to practice and become proficient with their firearms to increase their effectiveness when hunting and shooting. Firearms and related equipment have greatly improved in recent years and hunters are far more effective than ever before too.
In coyote calling the pursuer often is interested in recovering as much of the coyote as possible for use of the fur, skull, glands, and urine. All have monetary value in the open market. Thus the recovery of the downed animal, just like those that hunt for the meat, is very necessary. Even coyote control efforts involve recovery of the valuable parts of a coyote. It is an absolute fact that coyote meat is not good to eat in anyway.
Exactly like fishing, quail, duck, dove, or pheasant hunting it is desirable to take multiple coyotes for the fur and other valuable parts. Unlike deer or elk, coyotes are smaller and more are needed to be worthwhile. You cannot take one fish or one quail and have a family meal nor can you take one coyote and have a profitable season.
We do not allow the use of live decoys, use of animal carcass for bait or lure, or not making a clean kill with the first shot.
The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) lists “shooting” with a firearm as an acceptable euthanasia method for animals. The definition of animal cruelty is used very loosely by many to serve their personal agenda and is often not factual. This wording is taken directly from the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition;
This picture of an adult sheep is an example of real “animal cruelty” caused by coyotes!
Beginning on pages 34 of this report;
“M3. PHYSICAL METHODS M3.1 COMMON CONSIDERATIONS Physical methods of euthanasia include captive bolt, gunshot, cervical dislocation, decapitation, electrocution, focused beam microwave irradiation, thoracic compression, exsanguination, maceration, stunning, and pithing. When properly used by skilled personnel with well-maintained equipment, physical methods of euthanasia may result in less fear and anxiety and be more rapid, painless, humane, and practical than other forms of euthanasia. Exsanguination, stunning, and pithing are not recommended as a sole means of euthanasia, but may be considered as adjuncts to other agents or methods. Some consider physical methods of euthanasia aesthetically displeasing.”
To be clear on these written guideline and not trying to twist them around like some do with the definition of animal cruelty, the AVMA have a great deal of discussion, details, and drawings on properly using a firearm/shooting for euthanasia of an animal. They do not state anywhere that hunting is part of that accepted method but it is clear that firearms and shooting is an acceptable method.
The definition of Animal Cruelty varies from state, from organization to organization, and from person to person. It is a moving target that has good intentions and often tough to exactly and accurately apply to each situation. Most animal cruelty charges accessed to a person(s) can end up in court for a judge and jury to decide if it really is animal cruelty.
In Arizona the following is the official state law on animal cruelty (this is the exact copy of the wording. Some lines have been removed that do not relate to this discussion though;
|13-2910. Cruelty to animals; interference with working or service animal; classification; definitions A person commits cruelty to animals if the person does any of the following:1. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly subjects any animal under the person’s custody or control to cruel neglect or abandonment.2. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly fails to provide medical attention necessary to prevent protracted suffering to any animal under the person’s custody or control.3. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly inflicts unnecessary physical injury to any animal.4. Recklessly subjects any animal to cruel mistreatment.
5. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly kills any animal under the custody or control of another person without either legal privilege or consent of the owner.
6. Recklessly interferes with, kills or harms a working or service animal without either legal privilege or consent of the owner.
7. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly leaves an animal unattended and confined in a motor vehicle and physical injury to or death of the animal is likely to result.
8. Intentionally or knowingly subjects any animal under the person’s custody or control to cruel neglect or abandonment that results in serious physical injury to the animal.
9. Intentionally or knowingly subjects any animal to cruel mistreatment.
10. Intentionally or knowingly interferes with, kills or harms a working or service animal without either legal privilege or consent of the owner.
11. Intentionally or knowingly allows any dog that is under the person’s custody or control to interfere with, kill or cause physical injury to a service animal.
12. Recklessly allows any dog that is under the person’s custody or control to interfere with, kill or cause physical injury to a service animal.
13. Intentionally or knowingly obtains or exerts unauthorized control over a service animal with the intent to deprive the service animal handler of the service animal.
B. It is a defense to subsection A of this section if:
1. Any person exposes poison to be taken by a dog that has killed or wounded livestock or poison to be taken by predatory animals on premises owned, leased or controlled by the person for the purpose of protecting the person or the person’s livestock or poultry, the treated property is kept posted by the person who authorized or performed the treatment until the poison has been removed and the poison is removed by the person exposing the poison after the threat to the person or the person’s livestock or poultry has ceased to exist. The posting required shall provide adequate warning to persons who enter the property by the point or points of normal entry. The warning notice that is posted shall be readable at a distance of fifty feet, shall contain a poison statement and symbol and shall state the word “danger” or “warning”.
2. Any person uses poisons in and immediately around buildings owned, leased or controlled by the person for the purpose of controlling wild and domestic rodents as otherwise allowed by the laws of the state, excluding any fur-bearing animals as defined in section 17-101.
C. This section does not prohibit or restrict:
1. The taking of wildlife or other activities permitted by or pursuant to title 17.
2. Activities permitted by or pursuant to title 3.
3. Activities regulated by the Arizona game and fish department or the Arizona department of agriculture.
H. For the purposes of this section:
1. “Animal” means a mammal, bird, reptile or amphibian.
2. “Cruel mistreatment” means to torture or otherwise inflict unnecessary serious physical injury on an animal or to kill an animal in a manner that causes protracted suffering to the animal.
3. “Cruel neglect” means to fail to provide an animal with necessary food, water or shelter.
- 13-2910.05. Exempt activities
Activity involving the possession, training, exhibition or use of an animal in the otherwise lawful pursuits of hunting, ranching, farming, rodeos, shows and security services shall be exempt from the provisions of §§ 13-2910.01, 13-2910.02, 13-2910.03 and 13-2910.04.
In every state in America that allows hunting and through out the world, Animal Cruelty does not apply. Coyote calling is NOT animal cruelty in anyway.