Hunt or Harvest?

[Panic]

Just watching WildTv...a show called "Long Range Hunting"

A guy just took a Buck at 725yds on open hillside...I have my own opinion, as you all have yours....I can't call that hunting myself, personally I see it as simply harvesting deer meat. Spending time on a range learning how to range adjust a rifle just isn't hunting. What's your thoughts?

[KB90]

My thoughts are it's best not to judge anyone on any hunting method they choose if it is within the law.

[Steeleco]

Some say they can, some actually can shoot that far. I can't and won't. That said, the pursuit of game for any purpose with even a camera is hunting to me.

[Night Hawk 3]

You can call it whatever you want, I'll call it a bloody good shot and well done on the hunter for honing his skills to such a high level.

There should be no real debate about how one hunts, killing or harvesting, if you will, (choose whatever euphemism you want) your own food from animals is hunting... It could be said that using a rifle at any range is not realllly hunting, rather it's just shooting and collecting meat. Perhaps bow hunters are the only real hunters, or those who use spears, or stones, of clubs.... No, it's all hunting and it's all harvesting (when you actually 'catch' what you're trying to hunt). Even fishing is a form of hunting.

The funny thing is, the more I've gotten in to bow hunting and can get too close to animals to even pull back on my bow; my rifle hunting has gone the exact opposite direction and I'm really enjoying longer and longer range hunting of animals and the challenges that raises.

~NH3

[Gateholio]

I think if he is skilled enough to make a clean kill he should be pleased with himself and tell the people that don't like the way he hunts to go pound sand.

[KTownKiller]

As long as a person does their best to make a clean kill, it's fine by me. But they had better practice a lot at that range!

[Jelvis]

A good calibre rifle with a flat trajectory and a 12 power scope, good rest and no wind, no limbs or bushes in between and animal not moving, shouldn't be that difficult for an experienced shooter.

[Panic]

He was using a precision long range rifle, scope and rangefinder from Gunwerks...very nice gun, and I don't decry his skill. I also agree that it's his right to hunt as he chooses. I stated MY opinion as I see it...everyone sees things differently, right?

[Steeleco]

.everyone sees things differently, right?

Even more so on the internet LOL

[huntwriter]

My thoughts are to each his/her own. Hunting is all about personal experiences and the personal pursuit of happiness, not about measuring up to someones expectations, views, opinions and beliefs.

[hunterdon]

Modern day equipment(rifles caliber scopes etc.) certainly do make those long shots possible, and deadly. However, I would not take that kind of shot myself. Sure I could take the shot and succeed, but to me the risk of wounding the animal is beyond what I consider acceptable. I would instead try to close that distance if possible, and if not, let it walk.
But, to answer your question, yes it is hunting, and it's legal. It is not my style of hunting, but it is still hunting, and I have to respect that hunters choice of hunting style.

[40incher]

Perhaps we should have a .... pride parade?! Some things don't need to be put out there. Close the thread. Please.

[604redneck]

someone practicing at 1000 yds consistently is no different then someone who shoots a few rounds a year and ends up shooting a deer at 300

[Caribou_lou]

To each their own.

I myself would prefer to call moose into 10 yards with the bow. just a rush. But the next guy may get the same rush squeezing the trigger on a 700 yard shot.

[Drillbit]

"Aim high, Willis!"

[Mr. Dean]

Saw the show too.


That guy has been chasing that deer for 2 previous years and he finally got a chance at it in the 3rd season.
I call that dedicated hunting.

Beaut of a velvet, typical Muley Deer, taken out in the open desert.
With anexcellent shot on him.


I holler a BIG congrat's to the lucky guy.

[hunter1947]

My thoughts are it's best not to judge anyone on any hunting method they choose if it is within the law.



X2 I agree..

[The Dude]

someone practicing at 1000 yds consistently is no different then someone who shoots a few rounds a year and ends up shooting a deer at 300


That was quite well put.

[BiG Boar]

So what you're saying is that because he took a long shot (750 yards) he's not a hunter? Yet you, who shot a deer at say, 150 yards with a rifle, are a hunter? Unless you shoot something with a bow, and at less than 20 yards, you can't really call yourself a "hunter". Do you see the logic?

[325 wsm]

biggest concern with it is when people loose the animal they shot at 800 yds because they can't get to it within a reasonable time, didn't hit it well or can't locate where it was in a heavily covered area. long range shooting should only be done in open country where you can shoot multiple times and finding game is not an issue.
If these guy's are so confident maybe they should try hunting big bears this way. Get in close and see if the 800 yd shot was good or not, ha ha.

[Walksalot]

To practice on a 1000 yard range can be drastically different than shooting 1000 yards in a hunting situation. Wind flags at the range give the shooter an idea of what the wind currents are doing. Draws and ridges dictate different wind currents undetected from the shooters position in a hunting situation. These wind currents are going to effect the bullet trajectory differently in just about every long range shot taken. I often wonder, when viewing these videos, how many animals were wounded before the long range hunter put an animal on the ground with a clean, quick, kill.
How does a hunter, when going over to check whether the animal was hit or not determine exactly where the animal was standing. When an animal is gut shot the gut pushes against the ribcage and for all intents and purposes seals the hole. The only time rumen will be excreted is when the holes in the gut and the ribcage line up. This can be very infrequently. The shooter concludes a miss and the animal is left to a rather very unpleasant demise.

[Panic]

I wish I was able to express my thoughts into writing as eloquently as some of the older members here, and wax lyrical with the same zeal but it seems my thread is lacking....ill try and make things clearer.

I'm not disputing the man's skill, I'm not saying he isn't a hunter. I'm not envious and yes, it was a lovely buck with a clean shot....the point I was trying to make is that there wasn't much 'hunt' in a 700yd shot and what do you as hunters DEFINE as hunting.

Yes as a hunter he may have plenty of experience and skill, no doubt...but I've always known hunting to be pursuit of the game, chasing and stalking through trees, rivers, fields and valley.


Perhaps we should have a .... pride parade?! Some things don't need to be put out there. Close the thread. Please.

What does pride have to do with this thread? Which things don't need putting out there, you're opinion?
Surely your mommy taught you that everyone's opinion is as important as the next persons? It's just in this one might be better than yours ;)

[jtred]

Personally I like to get as close as I can before I shoot. The longest shot on big game to date is 150+/-m on a big cow elk 2 years ago. I can practise at our local range out to 300yd and I regularly do, so I am very confident that given a decent rest and the time to settle myself I could take an animal at that range. If I thought I could I would definitely try cutting down the distance however I also know I can make that shot so if there was no way to get closer I would shoot. After 300yd all I have is info from ballistics charts and for me that is not enough, I would need to actually practise at those distances before I would even consider attempting the shot. However if the hunter has the right equipment and put enough time into acquiring the necessary skills then who am I to judge? For me personally I would not shoot at those distances as I see the chance of wounding and losing an animal would increase quite dramatically. That said I would love to start shooting longer distances with my hunting rig(Tikka 270 win with a 3x9 Bushnell elite) because if I can become proficient at 500-600m just imagine how much better I would be at 100-200m(my preferred range).

[rcar]

I have no issues with that shot at all based on the equipment and skill of the shooter....and his spotting team. A lot of practice goes into being able to make that shot and if you are good enough, why not, if that is what excites you. For me, I prefer to use my limited skills to stalk in close. That gets my heart pumping. As for your question, is this hunting....well of course it is and as others have pointed out if it is legal and ethical I have no problem with it.

[Andrewh]

I'm not disputing the man's skill, I'm not saying he isn't a hunter.

Correct me If I am wrong but as stated before this was season three chasing that buck as well as day 4 (if I remember correctly) hunting this particular buck. He was ONLY interested in this buck, it was not like he was shooting the first thing that he saw inside 800yrds...

[DANOSON]

I don't have a problem with people that hone there skills. Where I have the problem is that all the young hunters that watch this show see almost every shot that they show is a kill shot and gives them the impression that they can do it. I have had to deal with my son on this and reinforce the ethical shot. He gets the picture and we have to remember we are watching TV and how many minutes tape did they have to make a 30 min program. Only my opinion.

[Onesock]

Remember that this is a TV show and they can tell the viewers anything they want. Maybe it was 700 yds, maybe it was the 3rd year chasing the buck, maybe it was the second day out and a kill was needed for the production......maybe maybe maybe. These guys are trying to sell things. Maybe don't get so caught up in TV.

[Patman7]

It's not hunting, it's called being a sniper. No defense for that animal. Probably fed the coyotes & birds a few times also.

[Gateholio]

Good marksmanship has always been promoted as an important aspect of being a good hunter. Strange to see so many upset at a display of good marksmanship.

[hunterdon]

So far a decent thread considering this subject can be quite contentious. Very good. As I stated before, I'm not a fan of those extremely long shots. That said, it is one method of legal hunting, and modern day equipment is certainly capable of a kill at those distances. So again, I have to respect one's choice of hunting methods. Sometimes, when hunting long enough, one can start the season off with a gift. A buck or bull or whatever will present itself on the very first day, or maybe the very first hour of our hunt and the "hunting is finished". Not much effort in that hunt, but it's hunting just the same. It's not always about effort, it's about legal.

[Gateholio]

So far a decent thread considering this subject can be quite contentious. Very good. As I stated before, I'm not a fan of those extremely long shots. That said, it is one method of legal hunting, and modern day equipment is certainly capable of a kill at those distances. So again, I have to respect one's choice of hunting methods. Sometimes, when hunting long enough, one can start the season off with a gift. A buck or bull or whatever will present itself on the very first day, or maybe the very first hour of our hunt and the "hunting is finished". Not much effort in that hunt, but it's hunting just the same. It's not always about effort, it's about legal.

It takes quite a bit of effort to be able to cleanly kill deer at over 700 yards. newfangled gear and all, you still need to put in an effort to learn to use it. ;)


But yeah, I agree with your points. Should we condemn all hunters that kill animals without hiking up a mountain and then stalking them to 20 yards? How about the guys that lollygag on their butts in treestands all day or road hunt on a quad?

[Mr. Dean]

the point I was trying to make is that there wasn't much 'hunt' in a 700yd shot and what do you as hunters DEFINE as hunting.

And I rebutted that this was the 3rd year that he tried for it.
I've done this and it ain't easy locating the same animal, year after year; then to only be out-smarted by it again IF you can even find it.

IMO that guy hunted his ass off - Man and Animal each played with one another and each came back smarter from building on the experience of the 'dance'.
Someone was bound to lose and more often than not, it's the one holding the gun.

What I really liked best was that the buck had no idea of what was coming. He died doing what he did each and every day and without any panic.
He died being a deer and I respect the hunter for it.

[itsy bitsy xj]

My 2 cents worth says...This is hunting by a skilled marksman

[brian]

Why are people so concerned about drawing distinctions where none exist? As a group we need to stick together, not look for excuses to exclude people to make ourselves feel better for how we do it.

[Darksith]

those boys on that show have about 15k invested in their rifle, scope and range finder. They have the right equipment, and they have the the skill level obviosuly...I have wondered though how many hunts don't make it onto their show because of bad hits. I have seen them miss clean, I have seen them hit a little off, but the animal always drops on that show. Just makes you wonder if they are losing some animals and it never makes it on TV...not that I haven't had an animal take off on me, just curious...I would imagine their average is pretty high on successful shots

[Mr. Dean]

those boys on that show have about 15k invested in their rifle, scope and range finder. They have the right equipment, and they have the the skill level obviosuly...I have wondered though how many hunts don't make it onto their show because of bad hits. I have seen them miss clean, I have seen them hit a little off, but the animal always drops on that show. Just makes you wonder if they are losing some animals and it never makes it on TV...not that I haven't had an animal take off on me, just curious...I would imagine their average is pretty high on successful shots


All points can be "same said" for any hunt, at any distance.
It all comes down to what the shooters limitations are and IF they are within or out them.

[IronNoggin]

someone practicing at 1000 yds consistently is no different then someone who shoots a few rounds a year and ends up shooting a deer at 300

Actually there is quite a difference between the two. A 700 yard shot to a Well Practiced 1,000 yard Rifleman is really not all that difficult, and something he has proven his capabilities of accomplishing on a regular basis. Even a 300 yard shot to someone "who shoots a few rounds a year" is more than likely a "Hail Mary". Methinks the former has MUCH Greater Odds of achieving the given task.

I used to be right into long range shooting. Competed at 1,000 yards for years, and strongly admired those who could consistently hit targets and game way the hell out there. Did manage a few myself (not going into that here for the usual self-preservation reasons... ;-) ). Came with the territory of growing up on the flat-lands.

As I "evolved" as a Hunter, I began to realize that taking game at extreme distances wasn't really the mark of what I considered a "True" hunter to be (PERSONAL Opinion ONLY!). It was simply an extension of what we practiced on the range, and much more akin to shooting targets than hunting in my mind's eye. As I grew more and more into the sport, the admiration for the longest shots slowly dissipated, being replaced by the ability to pattern the quarry, to well understand them, and to cut the distance down to the Shortest Possible for the culmination of the hunt. That is something that is still evolving in me as a Hunter, for notably, these days I hunt much more with a bow than a rifle.

Each to their own. I still have my long range rifle. She's decked out with a custom tube specifically designed to deliver pinpoint accuracy one hell of a long ways out there. Funny thing though, except for excursions to the range, she hasn't been out of the closet for almost 5 years (until this fall's unsuccessful moose hunt).

Long Range Shots are possible. They demand the best of equipment, and much more practice than most can afford in terms of time and costs to achieve the level of precision required to be consistent. And to many, those longer shots still epitomize the high end achievement in the sport of hunting. To many others though (myself included obviously) that fascination has given way to the Adrenaline Rush of cutting that distance down to mere yards.

To those that wish to stretch those ranges out, the only advice I can offer is make certain your rifle and load are up to the task, and shoot your rifle of choice as much as absolutely possible. We owe it to our quarry to ensure quick, painless deaths, regardless of whether the animal is at 25 yards, or way out beyond that.

Cheers,
Nog

[Darksith]

All points can be "same said" for any hunt, at any distance.
It all comes down to what the shooters limitations are and IF they are within or out them.

totally agree and tried to demonstrate that by saying I have had it happen...just curious is all. If the ratio was 50/50 one might have to rethink their actions, TV show or not. But again, no judgement being passed, just curious.

[coach]

Anyone claiming that taking an animal at long range isn't hunting clearly has never experienced the challenge of spotting an animal at 200 yards and having to stalk an additional 3-4 hundred back, without detection, to a distance that would ensure the kill is a personal best. :-D

No need to judge people for their chosen legal method of hunting. Hopefully those who enjoy long range pursuit of game practice their skills, know their equipment, are safety conscious and consistently make clean kills. If things go sideways for any hunter, at any distance, I would hope that all conceivable effort is made to recover game.

[springpin]

Wish I could make a shot like that.

[Gateholio]

I think every show has animals that are hit and not recovered. I'd actually congratulate the show that actually SHOWS a screw up, as long as it wasn't someone taking a hail mary with a rifle, shotgun or bow.

[lorneparker1]

I think every show has animals that are hit and not recovered. I'd actually congratulate the show that actually SHOWS a screw up, as long as it wasn't someone taking a hail mary with a rifle, shotgun or bow.

I wouldnt, we dont really want the general public seeing what reality is.

Lorne.

[Gateholio]

Hiding the truth will work against us in the long run.

[BearStump]

lets not forget that these shows put it out there for thier viewers comments. They rely on the viewers to tell them what they want to see and then do thier best to produce that for TV. If you're seeing long range pursuits on game on your TV, its because thats what people want to see. Thats what makes the money and gets the ratings.

Personally, to answer the OP's question, I think that a 750 yd shot on an animal that this guys been chasing on public land for 3 yrs is much more of a "hunt" than the whitetail bow hunters from the south that basically grow thier own bucks on farmland with food plots then "harvest" them and call it hunting.

[rcar]

I think every show has animals that are hit and not recovered. I'd actually congratulate the show that actually SHOWS a screw up, as long as it wasn't someone taking a hail mary with a rifle, shotgun or bow.

In principal I agree. Also, I would love to see just how difficult it is for professionals....might make all of us feel a bit better about our own blunders in the field, however most of these shows are hanging by a financial thread and rely on sponsors $$. I would bet in the cutting room most of the negative side of hunting is "culled" because of the fear of sponsors pulling their funding.

I have seen a few shows like The Professionals and Jim Shockeys own show that do show the screw ups. Personally I prefer a show like that and not the polished versions.

[bugler]

To me it very much looks like target practice on live targets. When you watch the reaction, most of the time the shooter looks up from his scope, asks "Did I get him?" and gives the guide/shooting coach a weak high 5. There seems to be very little excitement on the shooters part. I personally would just as soon shoot a gong.

The long range shows are all about the shot and selling the system. they are among my least favorite to watch because I just don't see the excitement and the footage of the target is usually crap, mostly you can barely see the thing.

Each to his own, it's legal and all, but it ain't for me.

[Gateholio]

In principal I agree. Also, I would love to see just how difficult it is for professionals....might make all of us feel a bit better about our own blunders in the field, however most of these shows are hanging by a financial thread and rely on sponsors $$. I would bet in the cutting room most of the negative side of hunting is "culled" because of the fear of sponsors pulling their funding.

I have seen a few shows like The Professionals and Jim Shockeys own show that do show the screw ups. Personally I prefer a show like that and not the polished versions.

I'm sure not everyone would appreciate it, but if it showed dogged determination in recovery attempts and included some educational footage of how to track animals and stuff like that, it might be well received. All depends on how it is presented.

[Ron.C]

Just watching WildTv...a show called "Long Range Hunting"

A guy just took a Buck at 725yds on open hillside...I have my own opinion, as you all have yours....I can't call that hunting myself, personally I see it as simply harvesting deer meat. Spending time on a range learning how to range adjust a rifle just isn't hunting. What's your thoughts?

WRT rifle hunting, not my thing. I don't do it and I choose not to watch the "long range" hunting shows.
But I'm not going to question the ethics of this as everyone has their own view on the matter.

As far as shows showing bad shots or poor hits, I'm all for it. Show the hunts as they are. Like someone said already, as long as they are not Hail mary shots, then so be it. It happens in real life and its part of hunting and has at one time happened to most of us.

I do think the "Long Range" rifle hunting has a huge following and beleive most that are into it like the one's on these shows, are into it hardcore. Meaning these are not hail mary shots, but calculated precision long distance shooting. And they can fill the freezer at the same time. It's just not for me, and I dislike it when hunters condem hunters becuase it is not something they would do.

[Apolonius]

I do realise every one has an opinion and we all differ.A very good read will be an article on boone and crocket ."The ethics of fair chase" by Daniel A.Pedrotti jr.He says those guys practice a lot, are very good shots,have the right equipment...but where is the chase???Do an animal has any chance at those distances???As he says and i personally agree..."They are target shooters and instead of targets they use animals."...They are not hunters.But with technology changing where do we go????As for the guys at Gunwerks they just try to sell their products.I personally dont find them even remotely "Hunters".They are there for the kill and the distance...and thats the first thing they show you on TV.I wish they keep their american way of hunting south of the 49th.Just an opinion.

[Mr. Dean]

I do realise every one has an opinion and we all differ.A very good read will be an article on boone and crocket ."The ethics of fair chase" by Daniel A.Pedrotti jr.He says those guys practice a lot, are very good shots,have the right equipment...but where is the chase???Do an animal has any chance at those distances???As he says and i personally agree..."They are target shooters and instead of targets they use animals."...They are not hunters.But with technology changing where do we go????As for the guys at Gunwerks they just try to sell their products.I personally dont find them even remotely "Hunters".They are there for the kill and the distance...and thats the first thing they show you on TV.I wish they keep their american way of hunting south of the 49th.Just an opinion.

Every animal IS a target shot, no matter the distance - Lets not kid ourselves.
The net result is we are taking life.


IMO, pissing on this style of a hunt is no different than pissing on the occupants of a crew-cab pick-up where 6 people bail out when they stumble upon an animal and proceed to start shooting, claiming that that was a *good hunt*.

I say congrats to all that make hunting a part of their life and thank them for their Conservation Efforts, as we all hugely benifit from them.

[Apolonius]

I know Mr Dean it is a very difficult subject and no fences .But hunting without ethics is just killing.Hunting is not just killing.But then again who says what is ethical??Who can play God and say this or that?The bottom line is ...if it is legal and we can be happy with the way we individually hunt ...all the power to each one of us.And thats why we have this forums,to just speak our mind.And like i say to everyone,if you go to bed happy with what you've done today...repeat tomorrow.

[steel_ram]

An 100ft Trawler dragging it's net is "fishing" just as much as some old Gilley working a hand carved plug behind his row boat. Huntings the same. Just a word that applies to the Long Range shooter, Derp the road hunter or super bowhunter. "Fair Chase", the concept taught in the original C.O.R.E. programs, the fundamental idea of what recreation harvesting may be something different.

[Glassman]

For every animal they kill on tv there is probably 5 that got hit and wonder away wounded with a gut shot off tv.

[Mr. Dean]

For every animal they kill on tv there is probably 5 that got hit and wonder away wounded with a gut shot off tv.

Good one.


I would really like to hear your reasoning on how you came to thinks this.
Could it possibly be that you simply don't understand it and are just talking about what your *gut* is telling you?

[Moose63]

The only bad thing about the 700 yd shot is that it might encourage less experienced shooters (or those with scopes not capable) to take that kind of a shot. "Hey, I saw it on TV, I can do that too" Those shows should have warning lablels like "Do not try this yourself, without extensive practice at the range" ie give a bio of much work it takes to accompish that kind of shot.

[The Dude]

The only bad thing about the 700 yd shot is that it might encourage less experienced shooters (or those with scopes not capable) to take that kind of a shot. "Hey, I saw it on TV, I can do that too" Those shows should have warning lablels like "Do not try this yourself, without extensive practice at the range" ie give a bio of much work it takes to accompish that kind of shot.

Agreed. I have nothing against folks that know their limits, and play within it, be it bowhunting, rifle shots they're capable of hitting 10/10, even legal hunting over bait (Not my cup of tea, but I'm not gonna diss it)

The problem with these shows is that every other nimrod that puts 8 rounds a year through his gun thinks he's a Sniper, and will take Hail Mary's at animals far beyond his range.
Has anyone seen a long-range show/episode with a SERIOUS disclaimer before and after?

[40incher]

Close the thread. It would be wise.

[Ron.C]

For every animal they kill on tv there is probably 5 that got hit and wonder away wounded with a gut shot off tv.


is that comment based on some sort of fact or just pulling it out of your ass? I'm pretty sure I know which.

I am no long range hunter, I've stated that already in a previous post. But I see NO difference between a 300-400 yard shot, and a 700 yard shot if you are practiced and capable. To me, no difference in ethics. It is proven that the guns/bullets are capable, and if the shooter is equally as capable then how is this not ethical? Is it more ethical for a guy who shoots his gun once a year just prior to hunting season to take an unranged shot at an animal that he thinks is 300 yards when its actually 200, and with questionable accuracy?

Some have already said that at 700 yards, fair chase is gone and the animal has no chance. How many guys have taken a 300 to 400 yard shot at an animal that just stood there and let you pull the trigger? Why is that so much more ethical?

[budismyhorse]

The only thing that is tough for me about the long distance shooting is it takes away the animals only defences.... They can't hear you... Hardly see you or smell you at that distance. When you can move around and talk at a normal voice then plunk an animal that doesn't have a chance in hell to get wise to you it seems kinda like cheating to me.

if fair chase is all about making sure the hunter doesn't have an improper advantage ..,,how does long distance shooting/hunting sit so well with the majority?

Its also interesting how defensive the supporters are on this thread...... From a psychological standpoint that is.

[Panic]

Close the thread. It would be wise.


Again? Pray tell good sir, why?

[Gateholio]

The only bad thing about the 700 yd shot is that it might encourage less experienced shooters (or those with scopes not capable) to take that kind of a shot. "Hey, I saw it on TV, I can do that too" Those shows should have warning lablels like "Do not try this yourself, without extensive practice at the range" ie give a bio of much work it takes to accompish that kind of shot.

I guess the same thing could be said about many of the bowhunting shows too. Or any show for that matter.

[Mr. Dean]

The only bad thing about the 700 yd shot is that it might encourage less experienced shooters (or those with scopes not capable) to take that kind of a shot. "Hey, I saw it on TV, I can do that too" Those shows should have warning lablels like "Do not try this yourself, without extensive practice at the range" ie give a bio of much work it takes to accompish that kind of shot.

Again, this logic could be placed on any shooter taking a stab past his/her limitations, NO MATTER THE DISTANCE.
Some would say that because I can shoot 300 yrds with virtually no error, they can do the same yet have not shot past 100.

Stupid will always be stupid and I don't think we can blame it on the TV shows that they watch.



The focus should be not be placed on the yards; it should be about being capable and disciplined.

[hunter1947]

Again, this logic could be placed on any shooter taking a stab past his/her limitations, NO MATTER THE DISTANCE.
Some would say that because I can shoot 300 yards with virtually no error, they can do the same yet have not shot past 100.

Stupid will always be stupid and I don't think we can blame it on the TV shows that they watch.



The focus should be not be placed on the yards; it should be about being capable and disciplined.


Couldn't agree more with you wording on this subject Mr.Dean good advice..

[Mr. Dean]

Couldn't agree more with you wording on this subject Mr.Dean good advice..


Thanks, H.

Ill-informed debates like this one, or running dogs, or shooting x-bows, or ANY legal hunt where a fellow Hunter cries fowl and plays the ethics card, adds mud to a slope that is already too slippery.

It's funny how and who we will climb over just to be [feel like] #1, instead of embracing our brothers and sisters and having one hell of a party!

[budismyhorse]

..... No comment about fair chase?

You seems to be well versed in this type of debate. What's the response to my point? I'm curious to how the other half lives...... Not trying to be a dick.

btw..... I asked the host of best of the west that same question and he refused to offer an answer so if you don't you won't be alone.

[Mr. Dean]

..... No comment about fair chase?

You seems to be well versed in this type of debate. What's the response to my point? I'm curious to how the other half lives...... Not trying to be a dick.

btw..... I asked the host of best of the west that same question and he refused to offer an answer so if you don't you won't be alone.


Was an airplane or helio used to find it?
Is it confined in a man-made enclousure?

*The Hunt* is something that takes place before the shot is made and we only gotta glimmer of that info.
And this particular guy hunted/chased that animal for 3 years - Me thinks the buck died an honourable death.

I've killed bears and deer from 20 feet to 300 yards and none knew of my existance - Are you implying that none of those hunts were conducted in fair chase?

[Gateholio]

The only thing that is tough for me about the long distance shooting is it takes away the animals only defences.... They can't hear you... Hardly see you or smell you at that distance. When you can move around and talk at a normal voice then plunk an animal that doesn't have a chance in hell to get wise to you it seems kinda like cheating to me.

if fair chase is all about making sure the hunter doesn't have an improper advantage ..,,how does long distance shooting/hunting sit so well with the majority?

Its also interesting how defensive the supporters are on this thread...... From a psychological standpoint that is.

What is the maximum distance allowable for fair chase?

[budismyhorse]

..... Just want to know if you guys think its fair chase?

Dean..... The bears had a "chance"....... Though you outwitted your quarry.

gate.... Can't give you a distance.... There is just a bubble out there where an animals senses are capable of defending itself.... Outside that bubble isn't fair chase in my opinion.

I was hoping for an opinion boys.... Not just answering a question with a question

[Gateholio]

..... Just want to know if you guys think its fair chase?

Dean..... The bears had a "chance"....... Though you outwitted your quarry.

gate.... Can't give you a distance.... There is just a bubble out there where an animals senses are capable of defending itself.... Outside that bubble isn't fair chase in my opinion.

I was hoping for an opinion boys.... Not just answering a question with a question

Can't answer the question without defining the parameters of what we are talking about. How big is the bubble? I have been watching deer through a spotting scope at over a km and when my buddy coughed, the deer all turned their heads to look. They didn't run away, but they certainly heard something. What do you define the fair chase bubble as?

[budismyhorse]

Hey I'm no expert on the subject that's why I'm curious..... If you think it's fair chase then just say so and why.

As far are your example..... I have countless examples to counter that but that's not what I'm interested in.... I want your opinion.

[Mr. Dean]

I'm with gates on this; I don't know how to formulate a precise answer for your question.
It's simply to vague.

You mentioned:
if fair chase is all about making sure the hunter doesn't have an improper advantage


Then by definition, because man is higher on the food chain and there is a prey/predator relationship at work here, and because we carry tools for hunting and killing, none of us are hunting within your parameters of "fair chase" - The "advantage" is clearly always in our favour with the lowest common denominator being our larger brain capacity.


Have you personally tried this type of hunting experience?

[Gateholio]

Why wouldn't it be fair chase? The animal isn't confined.

[bugler]

I guess the same thing could be said about many of the bowhunting shows too. Or any show for that matter.

Yes, I've seen some bow shots taken (successfully) on Relentless Pursuit that definitely would fall outside of most bowhunter's idea of good ethics. Some quite far, some at fleeing animals, etc. From experience I am pretty sure he is hitting quite a few that don't make it onto TV. Makes for spectacular footage but many of his shots would be considered "hail mary" by virtually any bowhunter. In this case I would question the ethics of some of his shots but not the idea that it is fair chase.

On the other hand, the long range shows do seem to focus on how far away the target is. Wow, look at that, he knocked that thing down at 837 yards! He does it cleanly with skill and precision and I do not question his ethics in this case, but to me it does challenge the idea of fair chase.

[Mr. Dean]

Dean..... The bears had a "chance"....... Though you outwitted your quarry.



I would argue they didn't have ANY chance because I didn't allow them any.
I took their chance of survival out of the equation loooong before I killed them.

If I'm good at how I hunt, are my hunts then not allowing the animal the priveledge of a fair chase?

[Gateholio]

On the other hand, the long range shows do seem to focus on how far away the target is. Wow, look at that, he knocked that thing down at 837 yards! He does it cleanly with skill and precision and I do not question his ethics in this case, but to me it does challenge the idea of fair chase.

Every show seems to have it's niche. The long range ones definitely focus on the shot, as the shot seems to be what excites them, rather than the animal with a big rack or horns or hide. What makes it remarkable is the long shot, not the size of the animal. I still don't see the lack of fair chase though. The animals are not confined, and everything has to be perfect before executing a long shot, unlike a 150 yards shot. The conditions themselves make for a challenge.

[bugler]

Every show seems to have it's niche. The long range ones definitely focus on the shot, as the shot seems to be what excites them, rather than the animal with a big rack or horns or hide. What makes it remarkable is the long shot, not the size of the animal. I still don't see the lack of fair chase though. The animals are not confined, and everything has to be perfect before executing a long shot, unlike a 150 yards shot. The conditions themselves make for a challenge.

No question it is a challenge, and it does fall within the B & C definition of fair chase, just not mine. And I really haven't seen much "excitement" from the shooters. Usually it looks to me like they would get just as much out of shooting a gong. I know I would.

[Gateholio]

No question it is a challenge, and it does fall within the B & C definition of fair chase, just not mine. And I really haven't seen much "excitement" from the shooters. Usually it looks to me like they would get just as much out of shooting a gong. I know I would.

Unless the animal was a true trophy, I'm not sure I would get too excited either. More of a 'hey, that's pretty cool" thing. The longest I have shot an animal is almost 400 yards, and while I thought the shot was fairly well done (frontal shot on a deer) and the bullet performance was excellent (180gr TSX went in the chest and exited near the rear "knee" joint and animal dropped on the spot) the shot itself was just "pretty cool" but the deer was a true trophy and that is what really got me excited. The deer was totally unaware of me too, just like the real long range shooters.

[budismyhorse]

If your hunt occurs at a distance where the animal was a fair chance to evade you then yes. If not..... Like the 925 yard BOTW shot on an elk for example.....

then NO.

I don't begrudge people for doing it..... I know it's legal and that's fine. But I have no respect for the shooter outside his ability to pull off a shot. Unless someone can convince me it's fair.... I think it isn't.

So far everyone has dodged answering the question.

Ill start you off.... It's fair chase because.....

[budismyhorse]

If the deer at 400 yards doesn't know you are there with the hammer of god out.... Then you've done something right..... If that same deer was at 900 yards its because of physical limitations....Not your skill.

[Gateholio]

If your hunt occurs at a distance where the animal was a fair chance to evade you then yes. If not..... Like the 925 yard BOTW shot on an elk for example.....

..

And that distance is......?

[budismyhorse]

Lol.... Lets just say it isn't 700plus like what seems to dominate the airways these days

[budismyhorse]

And that distance is......?

How about this. At a distance where the hunter can speak at a normal volume, move freely without risk of being seen or where it is physically impossible for human scent to travel that far...... That would be putting the hunter at an unfair advantage.

[lorneparker1]

How about this. At a distance where the hunter can speak at a normal volume, move freely without risk of being seen or where it is physically impossible for human scent to travel that far...... That would be putting the hunter at an unfair advantage.

So? putting 9 wolves on a deer vs 1 wolf, is a un fair advantage. We are predators they are prey. Unfair advantages are part of the game!

Lorne

[Gateholio]

How about this. At a distance where the hunter can speak at a normal volume, move freely without risk of being seen or where it is physically impossible for human scent to travel that far...... That would be putting the hunter at an unfair advantage.

At that distance conditions can make shooting very difficult, giving more advantage to the prey than at closer ranges. Any reasonably competent hunter can kill a deer standing in timber at 200 yards in a stiff breeze. Not so with 700 yards.

It's not a simple black and white thing.

[budismyhorse]

So? putting 9 wolves on a deer vs 1 wolf, is a un fair advantage. We are predators they are prey. Unfair advantages are part of the game!

Lorne

lorne.... Not if you are interested in "fair chase".... But I see your point.

[budismyhorse]

Gate... Good point.... So the increasing distance makes shooting so difficult that it evens out... Interesting way to look at it.

This is the type of thing I'm looking for. Pile it on!

[steel_ram]

Part of "fair chase", is treating the animal with respect. (I didn't event that). Is shooting an animal on a far away hillside not just treating it as a target? "Hunting" and "Fair chase" aren't always the same thing, though that is whats taught in hunter training courses, for those that didn't get around that. Same as what is legal isn't always the right thing to do. As long as the act is legal, it's just that, but if one feels anothers actions reflect badly on hunters then they sure as heck have the right to criticize.

[Mr. Dean]

Gate... Good point.... So the increasing distance makes shooting so difficult that it evens out... Interesting way to look at it.

This is the type of thing I'm looking for. Pile it on!

I did ask you earlier if you tried your hand at this.
From the above response, I see that answer would be, no.


How-a-bout trying it before making an opinion?

I strongly encourage you to take a .223 and try hitting paper out @ 300 yards, under variable conditions - Not extreme, just variable...
Perhaps then, a lot of your answers will be answered.

Don't forget to post up your targets and have an open chat about it. :wink:
And perhaps then we can also get into your psychological review of me. :lol:

[troutseeker]

Harvesting game animals is mean, I just kill mine.

[Mr. Dean]

As long as the act is legal, it's just that, but if one feels anothers actions reflect badly on hunters then they sure as heck have the right to criticize.

Why not make an attempt in seeing it from the others perspective and then make an informed opinion....
Or is it just easier to be "critical" with no sound rationale.

Just because something doesn't *seem* right, doesn't meen it actually is.


Lets not forget, A LOT of people are critical of what we do, no matter how we do it - Are they right?

[Mr. Dean]

Part of "fair chase", is treating the animal with respect. (I didn't event that). Is shooting an animal on a far away hillside not just treating it as a target?



I give the animal my respect in giving it a death where it's doing what it does, on a day to day basis.
If it's even alerted of me, I back down, regroup, and come back for him another day.


Of my kills at close range, the animal got nothing out of it.
All it was was pats on the back and high-5's for me - Big Deal. :rolleyes:

I proved I could do it, nothing more....

[steel_ram]

Why not make an attempt in seeing it from the others perspective and then make an informed opinion....
Or is it just easier to be "critical" with no sound rationale.

Just because something doesn't *seem* right, doesn't meen it actually is.


Lets not forget, A LOT of people are critical of what we do, no matter how we do it - Are they right?

I agree about seeing other peoples perspective before criticizing, but if it still does seem right after, it probably isn't. I really have no problem with game being taken at a distance that meets that shooters skill level, but having said that, I have seen some pretty good shooter pull bad shots under controlled range conditions, including national champions. There's always a risk. At what point does the risk of wounding game outway showing respect for the game? Hopefully everyone knows and sticks to their limits.

[Mr. Dean]

Hopefully everyone knows and sticks to their limits

And that should be where all concerns go.

Sadly, far too many don't know limits and I'm sure we all personally know of some that are in our hunting folds.
And even more sad, they know who they are too yet still have faith in, good ole *Mary*.

[rocksteady]

Whether its shooting an animal at 1000 yards or shhoting at single digt bow distancrs, makes no never mind to me its still hunting..

[325 wsm]

the farther you shoot from the less likely you are to recover your game or make a humane kill.

[budismyhorse]

Dean Im starting to see what you are getting at there.....it makes sense. Don't worry about me or my resume.... I have an accurate rifle and load.... I practice more than most guys I know. In variable conditions. I have always simply been curious as to how shooting an animal from a different zip code was "fair". I've been given at least one answer so I've learned something. I'm happy.

[Glassman]

What is the maximum distance allowable for fair chase?

Depends on a a few factors.
1) Shooting a target at 700 yards at a range is very different than shooting a deer at same distance out in the field. An ethical hunter does not shoot a deer just to "hit it" he wants to put the shot in the "kill zone". It's not a video game.
2) The ft lbs of energy of the bullet when it hits the animal dictates "fair chase". Larger animals need more bullet energy for an ethical kill.

[40incher]

So if someone kills at 2 kilometers and he feels good it's OK?! Why not 3 Km?

This thread is an embarrassment to real hunters. Not?

[Panic]

So if someone kills at 2 kilometers and he feels good it's OK?! Why not 3 Km?

This thread is an embarrassment to real hunters. Not?

Not! Just your opinion friend.

[Panic]

So if someone kills at 2 kilometers and he feels good it's OK?! Why not 3 Km?

This thread is an embarrassment to real hunters. Not?

Define 'real' hunter.

[OutWest]

The only thing that is tough for me about the long distance shooting is it takes away the animals only defences.... They can't hear you... Hardly see you or smell you at that distance.

Do you use camo or scent-proof clothing?

[budismyhorse]

A bit.... But for the most part I don't drape myself in it.... Why?

Why do you want to know what I'm wearing??? A t- shirt jeans and only one sock..... You?

[OutWest]

A bit.... But for the most part I don't drape myself in it.... Why?

Why do you want to know what I'm wearing??? A t- shirt jeans and only one sock..... You?

You stated that shooting at long distances takes away an animals defenses. How is that any different than wearing camo or scent proof gear?

[Gateholio]

Depends on a a few factors.
1) Shooting a target at 700 yards at a range is very different than shooting a deer at same distance out in the field. An ethical hunter does not shoot a deer just to "hit it" he wants to put the shot in the "kill zone". It's not a video game.
2) The ft lbs of energy of the bullet when it hits the animal dictates "fair chase". Larger animals need more bullet energy for an ethical kill.

Assuming the hunter has both the horsepower in his cartridge for the given distance and the skill to put it in the kill zone. What is the max distance for it to be fair chase?

[hunter1947]

Hunt and harvest an animal to me a shot 20yard shot or a 700 yard shot would not matter as long as you have the skill to put the animal down with one shot.

I know I won't ever consider a 700 yard shot at any animal reason being is that I don't practice at this distance and people that do practice at that 700 or out further and can zero in a grouping at that distance they have confidence and know where there bullet is going to be all the more to them..

If the rifle they are using has got the penetration hit at the 700 hundred yard distance I see nothing wrong with a shot at this distance ,,,,I agree with budismyhorse the animal out at any distance has no chance getting away from you when it comes to the long distance shooting.


Long story short if shooting at 700 yards you have hunted for your animal and you have harvested you animal same goes for shooting your animal at 20 yards...

[325 wsm]

what's a follow up shot like on a wounded moving animal at 700 + yds.
I've followed enough wounded rams across the mountains to know that if they were in a forest they would never be found.
Legal and ethical are 2 different words.
The more you respect wildlife the more likely you are to dispatch it with utmost urgency.
Those guy's shooting 700 yds are just looking for their 5 minutes of fame. They aren't good or unique enough to break into the industry any other way.
One guide I worked with a couple years ago showed me a video of a very famous beanfield rifle maker. Off a nice rest he missed a black bear in the wide open at 200yds after bragging about moa past 1000.
the longer the shot the more screw ups you will have to deal with.

[Mr. Dean]

the farther you shoot from the less likely you are to recover your game or make a humane kill.

Again, making a humane kill at ANY distance comes to knowing your personal limits - This point is invalid.
As for recovery, I'm not sure why you feel that way as recovery boils down to tracking skills, not shooting skills.

Someone earlier mentioned because of the time needed to get to where the animal was, led to a higher chance of losing the critter.
I simply don't agree with that .

I think more animals get lost because of them being pushed and not left alone to bed down and expire - This is recovery 101


Lets not confuse LRH with Hail Mary's - There's a TON of variables that need digesting before a cartridge gets jacked into the pipe.
Even the simplest thing like a clear shooting lane can be a major obstacle.

This isn't road hunting at extreme distances (bail-n-shoot).....
Very different. Very calculated.

[Mr. Dean]

One guide I worked with a couple years ago showed me a video of a very famous beanfield rifle maker. Off a nice rest he missed a black bear in the wide open at 200yds after bragging about moa past 1000.

Even the most skilled make stupid mistakes.
And clearly, shit can happen at the modest of ranges - 200 ain't all that far. :lol:

[325 wsm]

quote Mr Dean[ This is recovery 101


actually hunting is 101, recovery is 202 and you only need it if you don't apply 101 properly, animals don't bed down and die slowly when you do your part.

[325 wsm]

[QUOTE=Mr. Dean;1276464]

Someone earlier mentioned because of the time needed to get to where the animal was, led to a higher chance of losing the critter.
I simply don't agree with that .

There are more variables to tracking than shooting, so maybe you should brush up on tracking 101

[budismyhorse]

You stated that shooting at long distances takes away an animals defenses. How is that any different than wearing camo or scent proof gear?

Give me a break buddy..... Are you saying wearing camo pants is the same as planting yourself 1000 yards away from an animal?? Yikes.... Maybe I should invest in some magic camo you have.....

[Walksalot]

It matters not the style of hunter you are at the end of the day you have to live with your decisions. Only you or maybe you partner really knows how effective you are at making humane kills on animals. If you can look into the mirror and be happy with the person looking back then all is fine in your world. I know I have wounded a couple of animals in my years of hunting. I have forgotten many of the animals I made a clean kill on but the ones I wounded, to this day, hang around my neck like an albatross.

[Mr. Dean]

325 wsm;
...animals don't bed down and die slowly when you do your part
....There are more variables to tracking than shooting

I totally agree on both counts but it was you that brought into the discussion, what if and chances are....
And if we were to actually apply your reasonings on LRH to bow hunting, people should be hanging those up too.

Like I said earlier, once we get into debating the ethics of different styles, the slope gets fugly slippery for ALL styles.
The can of worms just keeps on rolling.....

[Mr. Dean]

It matters not the style of hunter you are at the end of the day you have to live with your decisions. Only you or maybe you partner really knows how effective you are at making humane kills on animals. If you can look into the mirror and be happy with the person looking back then all is fine in your world. I know I have wounded a couple of animals in my years of hunting. I have forgotten many of the animals I made a clean kill on but the ones I wounded, to this day, hang around my neck like an albatross.

Good words.

[HIGHRPM]

I understand the skill needed, but to me its shooting not hunting . Hunting for the longest time has been to go into the animals world and defeat it in it's back yard by beating its defences. In long range shooting you are doing virtually none of that. While the shots are something to marvel at, I feel that some hunters are becoming lazy and don't / won't put the work in to hunt. Hell, even on most of todays hunting shows, they bait the deer in by planting food crops, bait stations and the such. They know without a doubt the deer are going to be there because they have created a situation where they are feeding the animal and then killing it, not true hunting at all, just made for tv, not much skill involved there. If you have put in the time to shoot long ranges, good for you, I also love to shoot long distance (targets), but show some hunting skill and spot and stalk and then hold your head up proudly, because then you have really done something, you have beaten your game by truely defeating its sences.I know some long distance shooters will be pissed at this but that is my feelings. I choose to hunt as hunting was ment to be. I have talked to some teachers of the long distance shootering and they also mention, the best hunts they have ever had were at close range while stalking their animal, and hope that the average shooter will always remember that this is the most rewarding way to hunt.

[hunter1947]

I understand the skill needed, but to me its shooting not hunting . Hunting for the longest time has been to go into the animals world and defeat it in it's back yard by beating its defences. In long range shooting you are doing virtually none of that. While the shots are something to marvel at, I feel that some hunters are becoming lazy and don't / won't put the work in to hunt. Hell, even on most of todays hunting shows, they bait the deer in by planting food crops, bait stations and the such. They know without a doubt the deer are going to be there because they have created a situation where they are feeding the animal and then killing it, not true hunting at all, just made for tv, not much skill involved there. If you have put in the time to shoot long ranges, good for you, I also love to shoot long distance (targets), but show some hunting skill and spot and stalk and then hold your head up proudly, because then you have really done something, you have beaten your game by truely defeating its sences.I know some long distance shooters will be pissed at this but that is my feelings. I choose to hunt as hunting was ment to be. I have talked to some teachers of the long distance shootering and they also mention, the best hunts they have ever had were at close range while stalking their animal, and hope that the average shooter will always remember that this is the most rewarding way to hunt.


The bottom line its still harvesting an animal no matter how you look at it :)..

[Patman7]

I understand the skill needed, but to me its shooting not hunting . Hunting for the longest time has been to go into the animals world and defeat it in it's back yard by beating its defences. In long range shooting you are doing virtually none of that. While the shots are something to marvel at, I feel that some hunters are becoming lazy and don't / won't put the work in to hunt. Hell, even on most of todays hunting shows, they bait the deer in by planting food crops, bait stations and the such. They know without a doubt the deer are going to be there because they have created a situation where they are feeding the animal and then killing it, not true hunting at all, just made for tv, not much skill involved there. If you have put in the time to shoot long ranges, good for you, I also love to shoot long distance (targets), but show some hunting skill and spot and stalk and then hold your head up proudly, because then you have really done something, you have beaten your game by truely defeating its sences.I know some long distance shooters will be pissed at this but that is my feelings. I choose to hunt as hunting was ment to be. I have talked to some teachers of the long distance shootering and they also mention, the best hunts they have ever had were at close range while stalking their animal, and hope that the average shooter will always remember that this is the most rewarding way to hunt.

Thanks, that is how I feel about this also.

[Onesock]

I can see shooting long range if the critter could shoot back. Like the snipers in Agfagistan. Last time I checked our deer can't shoot back,I don't think.

[Gateholio]

The deer should have frckin laser beams attached to their heads, to return fire!

[biggyun68]

Following this thread and having a resource management education background I was always lead to believe: That you can Hunt but not harvest however you cannot harvest with out hunting.
MHO

[Darksith]

The focus should be not be placed on the yards; it should be about being capable and disciplined.

I agree with that statement, but on LRP it is all about the distance. The show isn't so much a hunting show, but a sales pitch...plain and simple. They are selling their brand...thats what its about. Its not about the hunt, or the animal, its all a sales pitch. Personally I thought it was a great show for about 5 episodes...I don't watch it anymore, but will say they do seem like a good bunch of peeps.

As for fair chase...if its not stuck in a fenced area...no matter how big the area then its fair chase. I have been elk hunting 5 times now...still haven't seen a legal bull at any distance. Most of us are hunting for meat, not trophies, so its the harvest that is important not the "how". Fair chase only matters if you are a trophy hunter looking to put your name in some book. Shoot at distances inside your ability and know your ability...don't pretend to be something you aren't...nothing wrong with being a hunter and not a shooter.

[325 wsm]

I was always lead to believe: That you can Hunt but not harvest however you cannot harvest with out hunting.
MHO

actually you can but I call it farming, and SCI is quite comfortable with that for their record books. $$$$. It's legal in places to harvest penned animals without hunting them but I'm totally against it if it's portrayed as hunting.
To practice for and be prepared for a long range shot is 1 thing but anyone who goes out with the intention of killing at long range only has a big L on their forehead.

[Gateholio]

Almost all of the hunting shows are advertisements for their sponsors. From what I understand, that's how these shows work- Instead of a network picking them up and selling advertising for the shows, the show gets their own sponsors and then pays the network to air their show. No advertising= No show.

[Mr. Dean]

I agree with that statement, but on LRP it is all about the distance. The show isn't so much a hunting show, but a sales pitch...plain and simple. They are selling their brand...thats what its about. Its not about the hunt, or the animal, its all a sales pitch. Personally I thought it was a great show for about 5 episodes...I don't watch it anymore, but will say they do seem like a good bunch of peeps.


I don't think I've seen a hunting show that wasn't all about promoting products.
I swear, we get 10 minutes of content and 20 minutes of corporate blah blah blah.

And that's on a 30 minute show.
Needless to say, I ony watch one here and there and am not a follower of any.

[Mr. Dean]

actually you can but I call it farming, and SCI is quite comfortable with that for their record books. $$$$. It's legal in places to harvest penned animals without hunting them but I'm totally against it if it's portrayed as hunting.
To practice for and be prepared for a long range shot is 1 thing but anyone who goes out with the intention of killing at long range only has a big L on their forehead.

Big words.
Congrats!

And you contradicted your self: If you're preparing, you ARE intending.
Just saying.

[325 wsm]

.

Someone earlier mentioned because of the time needed to get to where the animal was, led to a higher chance of losing the critter.
I simply don't agree with that .




. speaking of contradictions

[325 wsm]

325 wsm;

I totally agree on both counts ...


in regards to tracking variables.

[HIGHRPM]

My second reply to the question. After reading all the responds I came to the decision that the question was a very good one to ask, and it got a great responce. I will always spot and stalk, the way I was taught to hunt. To those that shoot at extreme distances (I wish I could shoot that good), I hope all your shots are good kills ! This forum is great as the opinions come out quickly and honestly. I really dont feel that there can be a bad question regarding our love for hunting.

[Darksith]

Almost all of the hunting shows are advertisements for their sponsors. From what I understand, that's how these shows work- Instead of a network picking them up and selling advertising for the shows, the show gets their own sponsors and then pays the network to air their show. No advertising= No show.

The people on LRP are gunwerks...they don't have sponsors, they are the sponsors, owners all in 1. Its them that are selling, you call and you will be talking to one of the shooters on the show.

But yeah, most of the shows are just guys trying to squeak out a living doing what they love, and hoping to produce so they keep the sponsors that are supplying them with the tags and gear.

[Darksith]

I don't think I've seen a hunting show that wasn't all about promoting products.
I swear, we get 10 minutes of content and 20 minutes of corporate blah blah blah.

And that's on a 30 minute show.
Needless to say, I ony watch one here and there and am not a follower of any.
totally agree...I like the big game shows, going after moose, elk...not so much a fan of watching a gun in a tree stand arrow a deer at 20 yards. I don't follow any either, sometimes I'll PVR a bunch, and kinda watch them or have them on as back ground noise.

[Mr. Dean]

325 wsm;

I don't understand what you think I contradicted...
But none the less, I normally don't do well with people who blatently label others and toss around the insults anyway. So if it's my loss, so be it - No need to explain.

Happy goat hunting. :wink:

[325 wsm]

you said you didn't think it mattered how long it took to get to an animal after it was shot but then agreed there were more variables in tracking than shooting. The time it takes to get to the Point Last Seen is one of the variables of tracking. Sorry I don't do well with people calling 1000 yd shots ethical. I never used to like the thought of leg hold traps either when they were legal. There's more respectful ways to kill.

[steel_ram]

I've been told of a couple of situations here on the Island where deer were shot across the valley on an opposite cutblock and the shooter was unable to find the deer or even be sure of the exact spot it had been standing in. Small deer, thick brush. One similiar hunt I was involved in, we found the deer before dark only because it had not dropped in it's tracks and I stumbled upon a streak of blood no where near where the original shooter thought the deer was. Lots of stories on these forums of shot game lost, so I suspect it happens more often than it should.

[hunterdon]

This thread still going I see. Long distance shooting is hunting......period. As long as it satisfies the legal definition of hunting, it's hunting. It's not my method of hunting, but I respect the hunter who may chooses this as his method. It really is all about respect folks. Respecting each hunter's choice of hunting methods AND respect for his quarry.

With that in mind, what ever method of hunting one chooses, he should make every effort to be the best that he or she can be out of respect for the animal. A clean kill should ALWAYS be his barometer.
For those who do take long shots at game, keep in mind that shooting at a target is always different than shooting while hunting. No one has yet mentioned the fact that in in a hunting situation, there is the rush of adrenaline and a faster heartbeat to contend with, along with heavier breathing which will certainly affect those long shots. Not so when shooting targets.

[Mr. Dean]

[QUOTE=325 wsm;1277072]you said you didn't think it mattered how long it took to get to an animal after it was shot but then agreed there were more variables in tracking than shooting. The time it takes to get to the Point Last Seen is one of the variables of tracking.

Oh, I see.

To clarify, I know more shooters who can shoot, but not so good with tracking - Both require experience and training and tracking is harder to become experienced at. The dynamics are also much greater than that of shooting (hence more varible in comparison).

I never said time to kill site didn't matter.
I said it could also work in one's favour.

The point is moot and what are we talking???? 20 minutes, maybe?





Sorry I don't do well with people calling 1000 yd shots ethical. I never used to like the thought of leg hold traps either when they were legal. There's more respectful ways to kill.

You equate a lethally shot and killed animal to one trapped in a leg-hold.
That is interesting...

[Mr. Dean]

I've been told of a couple of situations here on the Island where deer were shot across the valley on an opposite cutblock and the shooter was unable to find the deer or even be sure of the exact spot it had been standing in. Small deer, thick brush. One similiar hunt I was involved in, we found the deer before dark only because it had not dropped in it's tracks and I stumbled upon a streak of blood no where near where the original shooter thought the deer was. Lots of stories on these forums of shot game lost, so I suspect it happens more often than it should.

Again, this can be at any distance.

Would having a spotter be helpful?
- A fella that stays at the shoot site and guides you to the kill site?

[Mr. Dean]

[QUOTE=hunterdon;1277148]This thread still going I see. Long distance shooting is hunting......period. As long as it satisfies the legal definition of hunting, it's hunting. It's not my method of hunting, but I respect the hunter who may chooses this as his method. It really is all about respect folks. Respecting each hunter's choice of hunting methods AND respect for his quarry.

With that in mind, what ever method of hunting one chooses, he should make every effort to be the best that he or she can be out of respect for the animal. A clean kill should ALWAYS be his barometer.

Excellent words to live by - Thanks




For those who do take long shots at game, keep in mind that shooting at a target is always different than shooting while hunting. No one has yet mentioned the fact that in in a hunting situation, there is the rush of adrenaline and a faster heartbeat to contend with, along with heavier breathing which will certainly affect those long shots. Not so when shooting targets.

This can actually work both ways.
I have found that one has all the time in the world to contemplate what is about to happen and 'get in tune' with it, as distance is increased.

But you need the mindset that it's OK if the shot/opportunity is lost, if the animal steps outta the lane or what have you.
Discipline is, or should be the key factor to hunting...

[curt]

wow this is lame who gives a F*** !! :)

[GoatGuy]

Personally not a big fan of the long range fad. Met and seen too many clowns who can 'do it at the range', but not in the field. Seen and been a part of more than one rodeo where good shooting was trumped by poor decision making and excitement. While that isn't range specific, the margin of error does increase with distance.

Ethics are not an enjoyable area of debate, but they are important as socially based laws are created to legislate ethics. Saying 'it's legal' really doesn't cut it when forming an argument - there are many things that used to be 'legal', which are now condemned. As hunters we are held to account by the non-hunting public and to the wildlife we hunt - how we conduct ourselves ultimately affects us all.

[steel_ram]

As long as it satisfies the legal definition of hunting, it's hunting. It's not my method of hunting, but I respect the hunter who may chooses this as his method.

I can't say I'd agree with that. There are certainly forms of "hunting" that are illegal. There are also those that legally use every form of technology they can to get an advantage of their quarry, basically taking the "hunt" out of the hunt. ATV's, GPS's, Scents, Electric calls, Game cams, Two way Radio's, Range finders, Uber-magnums, thermo-scensors, etc. are all taking away from the "tradition".

[325 wsm]

Goat Guy, Nice to see a well educated comment from someone who has the experience to know what they are talking about.

[Mr. Dean]

Goat Guy, Nice to see a well educated comment from someone who has the experience to know what they are talking about.

x2
............

[Darksith]

Personally not a big fan of the long range fad. Met and seen too many clowns who can 'do it at the range', but not in the field. Seen and been a part of more than one rodeo where good shooting was trumped by poor decision making and excitement. While that isn't range specific, the margin of error does increase with distance.

Ethics are not an enjoyable area of debate, but they are important as socially based laws are created to legislate ethics. Saying 'it's legal' really doesn't cut it when forming an argument - there are many things that used to be 'legal', which are now condemned. As hunters we are held to account by the non-hunting public and to the wildlife we hunt - how we conduct ourselves ultimately affects us all.

very good post...just because you can doesn't mean you necessarily should. I would agree that it is our duty to remove as many variables as possible when going for the kill, cutting the distance could be seen as one of those variables. Its up to the individual to make the call at the time, but if we as a group pressure each other without disrespect or prejudice on all aspect of ethics then maybe just maybe people will at the very least take that extra second to asses their decision, which in turn benefits the animals and the community.

[limit time]

I can't say I'd agree with that. There are certainly forms of "hunting" that are illegal. There are also those that legally use every form of technology they can to get an advantage of their quarry, basically taking the "hunt" out of the hunt. ATV's, GPS's, Scents, Electric calls, Game cams, Two way Radio's, Range finders, Uber-magnums, thermo-scensors, etc. are all taking away from the "tradition".

So...you don't use any of these when you hunt?? What's an "Uber-magnum"?

[The Dude]

Since the .17 HMR is the Double magnum, that would make the new Winchester .17 RAPTOR MAG the new Uber-magnum

(There ya go, SingleShot...whaddya think.... Raptor Mag?)

[steel_ram]

So...you don't use any of these when you hunt?? What's an "Uber-magnum"?

I don't use any of those things hunting. I have a GPS I play with in other games, but don't trust it 100% off the beaten track.

An "Uber-magnum" is bigger than yours and inspires awe amongst other hunters. It shoots 2" groups at one mile "all day".;)