I guess these things called ethics are what intrigue me in the conversation.

Forgive my somewhat facetious and certainly introspective questions.

When I hear someone say "it's OK to do this, but not do that" I can't help but wonder, "but why." Whether or not they are right and/or I agree often comes down to their intent and/or how they go about articulating their position.

Ethics. What are they, how do they form, and how are (or should) the differences between ethical and unethical be articulated.

Back to the hunting - fishing comparison, people would seem to be the biggest variable between the two. People in this instance meaning the culture and traditions that have grown up around each pursuit. The people and their (our) biases are far more apples to oranges than say a fish is to waterfowl and vice versa.

From a purely subsistence based perspective, wild fish and game are merely different forms of protein inhabiting different terrain in the great outdoors.

I like this fair chase concept and think it can be well applied in each case. Who wants to take a stab at defining that