Longrange OK for some?

[Nameless Range]

I think Buzz said it well.

I also think JR made a good point that it is a big "grey area".

I don't have much for opinions about people who are LR shooters, because I don't know those people, the situations, the equipment, etc.

I do think that the amount of skill, practice, and knowledge involved in LR shooting is irrelevant.

Take a thought experiment:

Imagine a new method of hunting is now legal - Drones. Turns out, that to master the use of drones for killing takes more hours of practice on average than that of long range hunting. Drone hunters have to have an intimate knowledge of flying (pitch, yaw, etc.), but also ballistics (angle, recoil against a floating base, etc). Would the fact that the amount of hours averaged over the aggregate is much more than that needed to master Long range shooting matter? No, because the activity is so far removed from what we would typically consider hunting, that the amount of hours for mastery is irrelevant. I think Long Range Shooting "can" walk this same subjective and arbitrary borderline.

At some point the amount of knowledge and practice associated with the method of killing becomes irrelevant, due to the fact that what someone is doing seems far removed from what we would typically call "hunting".

I have shot a couple deer at around 400 yards. I have taken similar shots at antelope that I shouldn't have. This ain't coming from "holier than thou". It's absolutely true that one man's long range shot is another's "chip shot". I don't frown on long range shooters, but, if we were to take a sample of hunts where long range shooting was the method of killing, versus a sample of hunts where what we would typically consider non-long range shooting is the method of killing, I think we would find the latter has more of what we respect and admire and would want in our own hunts, when we define what some of the chief aesthetics are and what we are "shooting" for when we dream and talk about hunting.

Additionally, it is always good to remember what Steven Rinella has said,

"We hunt at the pleasure of non-hunters."

Will non-hunters respect and sympathize with guys poking elk in the heart at 1000 yards as much as they would the guy doing the same from 150? I doubt it, and that should always be a consideration when hunters are discussing ethics.

Long winded I know.

 

[RobG]

I guess Boone and Crocket and myself are loners in saying the issue is about fair chase. At some distance the animal does not have a reasonable chance at detecting you, thus it is not "fair." Greenhorn's kid's bull seemed on the edge, but it is pretty classless to bust on someone for pushing the line, especially a kid. Plus Greenhorn has proven himself to be an awesome hunter.

If you can shoot accurately I personally don't have an issue with whacking gophers or hogs or does at 1000 yards, but it seem unfair to the other hunters to shoot a trophy at such a distance since trophies are rare. What can I say? B&C agrees with me. Are we loners?

There is also the issue of buying yourself into a trophy... a necessary ingredient is expensive optics, guns, and other equipment. As equipment becomes better this will be a bigger and bigger problem and it just takes opportunity from the average hunter and makes it harder to recruit new hunters to what is becoming an expensive sport. Just my opinion... I seem to be alone in seeing the issue from that perspective.

 

[Lawnboy]

Better start making my bows,arrows and broadheads from scratch. Then all the other purist Hunters who can't shoot to 500 yds better leave their binos and remove any scopes in favor of iron sights to avoid an advantage.
I don't buy the notion that it's ok to shoot does or cows at yardage but not on a big 6 point. It's still an animals life that is either going to be taken cleanly or wounded. Bottom line is if youre justifying with this rational then you're not confident in the shot and then therefore shouldn't be pulling the trigger.

 

[belly-deep]

I guess Boone and Crocket and myself are loners in saying the issue is about fair chase. At some distance the animal does not have a reasonable chance at detecting you, thus it is not "fair." Greenhorn's kid's bull seemed on the edge, but it is pretty classless to bust on someone for pushing the line, especially a kid. Plus Greenhorn has proven himself to be an awesome hunter.

If you can shoot accurately I personally don't have an issue with whacking gophers or hogs or does at 1000 yards, but it seem unfair to the other hunters to shoot a trophy at such a distance since trophies are rare. What can I say? B&C agrees with me. Are we loners?

There is also the issue of buying yourself into a trophy... a necessary ingredient is expensive optics, guns, and other equipment. As equipment becomes better this will be a bigger and bigger problem and it just takes opportunity from the average hunter and makes it harder to recruit new hunters to what is becoming an expensive sport. Just my opinion... I seem to be alone in seeing the issue from that perspective.

I don't know if you can say shooting a wild critter on heavily hunted public land at long range is any less sporting than shooting one off of some rancher's alfalfa field or over a corn flinger. A lot of PL critters are very difficult to kill just because of their learned habits, regardless of whether they have a chance to see/smell/hear you.

Just because an animal can "detect" you but is too stupid to run away does not make it more "sporting" IMO. As a general rule, you're going to work a lot harder to get within 700 yards of a 350" bull on public land than you will getting to within 300 yards on private. You could probably throw quite a few draw units into the that statement as well.

Same goes with the "buying" argument.

 

[buckykm1]

Hell NO

So if you've never shot long range, someone packs a rifle up the hill and then coaches you into a long shot it is ok? Hypothetical of course. mtmuley

To me, it doesn't matter who is coaching you.
If you have not spent time on the range practicing 200, 300, 400 or 500 yard shots.
and know actually where your Rifle shoots at all those distances, you have no business trying to take a shot at any animal at those distances.
and even then, you still need to use some common sense, and factor in the conditions for that day.

To me that is just plan unethical to try a shot that you haven't practiced at. but that is just my opinion.

Kevin

 

[RobG]

Better start making my bows,arrows and broadheads from scratch. Then all the other purist Hunters who can't shoot to 500 yds better leave their binos and remove any scopes in favor of iron sights to avoid an advantage.
I don't buy the notion that it's ok to shoot does or cows at yardage but not on a big 6 point. It's still an animals life that is either going to be taken cleanly or wounded. Bottom line is if youre justifying with this rational then you're not confident in the shot and then therefore shouldn't be pulling the trigger.

I call total baloney on the last line... it makes no sense at all. And I would be the one who knows my justification. It is unrelated to my point. My rational is based on the rarity of the trophy; confidence in the shot has nothing to do with the justification.

B&C says it is about fair chase. I personally don't care about fair chase (within reason) with gophers, coyotes, or other animals when the goal is to reduce the population. Perhaps that last point wasn't made well enough, but it is the rational for my opinion.

We are not trying to reduce the populations of trophies so they should be subjected to the fair chase ethic, especially if you are going to brag their size.

Many people say the same about private land shooting - i.e. it is not as much of an accomplishment. I don't know why belly-deep would choose to drag down the accomplishment of a nice public land animal towards private.

 

[JLS]

At some point, it ceases to be "hunting" and becomes "shooting". Unfortunately, that line is not a clear line in the sand as JR pointed out.

 

[Lawnboy]

but it seem unfair to the other hunters to shoot a trophy at such a distance since trophies are rare.

So where do we draw the line with ethics.? What constitutes unfair? Who has the better optics allowing them to see the game better than Joe with his Tascos. What about simply having a 4 wheel drive or 4 wheeler or horses or planes? We all can't be winners.

My point was this and is simply my ethics gauge talking, is that I don't place any more value on a trophy than I do the cow or doe that has the possibility of creating a future trophy. My final comment revolved around the thought that "well it's only a doe or cow so it doesn't matter if I fling a bullet at it and wound it" My point was with this attitude some obviously aren't confident that they are going to kill it and thus tell themselves well it's only a doe or cow and there's lots to go around. I don't hold the same standard to predators or gophers but for big game I do.

I don't care what Boone & Crockett calls fair chase mostly because I don't shoot big animals
Not trying to start a fight just sharing opinions. Shouldn't you be cutting up elk meat right now anyway

 

[RobG]

So where do we draw the line with ethics.? What constitutes unfair? Who has the better optics allowing them to see the game better than Joe with his Tascos. What about simply having a 4 wheel drive or 4 wheeler or horses or planes? We all can't be winners.

My point was this and is simply my ethics gauge talking, is that I don't place any more value on a trophy than I do the cow or doe that has the possibility of creating a future trophy. My final comment revolved around the thought that "well it's only a doe or cow so it doesn't matter if I fling a bullet at it and wound it" My point was with this attitude some obviously aren't confident that they are going to kill it and thus tell themselves well it's only a doe or cow and there's lots to go around. I don't hold the same standard to predators or gophers but for big game I do.

I don't care what Boone & Crockett calls fair chase mostly because I don't shoot big animals
Not trying to start a fight just sharing opinions. Shouldn't you be cutting up elk meat right now anyway

Most of the doe hunting I do is only sporting if you compare it to shopping. I usually do try to put a sneak on them to make it sporting in my mind. Last year I crept about 300 yards to get within 260 of some. I would have gotten closer but there was a creek that I was not going to bellycrawl though.

I agree that drawing the line is tough and depends on circumstances but the basic criteria in my opinion is whether the animal has a reasonable chance at detecting you. This opens up a whole can of worms... like treestand hunting, etc. However, it seems 1000 yards is over the line under any circumstances. The only chance an animal has at the distance is if you fire a non-lethal shot.

I cut up my elk backstrap Wednesday and the *&#$ thing seems tough so I'm letting the hind leg hang a bit. This cow had small ivories so I assume it is young, but it is still tough... The same thing happened last year with a young cow that wound up tougher than my 6 pt bull. Not sure what is going on but the common denominator with the tough cows I've had is the backstraps have been twitching when I take them out. (Perhaps from my final shot to the head?) That's a bit creepy! Maybe if I didn't creep so close to them (50 yards) they would have more time to die before I start cutting on them!

 

[belly-deep]

I agree that drawing the line is tough and depends on circumstances but the basic criteria in my opinion is whether the animal has a reasonable chance at detecting you.

You still haven't explained how this is different than shooting one over an alfalfa field that detects you but is too dumb to run away because it lives on private land.

 

[RobG]

You still haven't explained how this is different than shooting one over an alfalfa field that detects you but is too dumb to run away because it lives on private land.

I touched on it... not much more to say on this subject.

 

[VAspeedgoat]

In my opinion "long range" is not a distance measurement but more of a relative measurement based on the individual. The people who take truly unethical long range shots are idiots. The same idiots that don't practice past "thats good enough". The worst thing about idiots is they don't know they are idiots. I don't have any problem with anyone who is profficient at a given range taking a shot whithin that range. For me that is 300 max. I have friends that I don't trust at 100. But again idiots don't know. I would nevet tell a guy that has worked so hard at a long range accuracy that they are taking an unethical shot. Too often I think that criticism comes from jealousy

 

[JoseCuervo]

If you are a lousy hunter you better get busy buying expensive equipment so you can shoot long range to make up for a lack of hunting skills.

$$$$$ always overcomes ability and skills. Just watch most of the outdoor shows.

 

[the nikster]

I sometimes take shots that others would not. Last week I helped my wife take an elk outside of what many would consider a realistic shot. She went 3 for 3. Tonight I just returned from an elk hunt with my niece. She does not have the same level of experience that my wife has. We put her within 600 yards of a herd with a 5 x 5 at the farther end. No go, too far. We spent more than an hour moving her to within 300 yards of the bull. No go, too far still. She really wanted the bigger bull but had a smaller bull broadside at 200 yards. She and her dad decided to take the smaller bull. She got it with her first shot and the smiles....!!!
It was great to watch her stay within her limits and not push them for the bigger animal. I am equally proud of the 2 women I got to watch take elk this week.

 

[The Hedgehog]

In the case of Jesus hunting, what would B&C think? Totally unfair? Obviously. He can walk on water, among other things. Would a Jesus elk hunt be sporting? What do you think? I think it's completely unethical - not hunting, just shooting. What would anti-hunters think?

 

[RobG]

In the case of Jesus hunting, what would B&C think?

They would deny Jesus's entry because he doesn't have a last name. Bummer.

 

[The Hedgehog]

There really is no uncertainty when hunting with Jesus. The animals have no reasonable chance of escape. It's way more unethical than drones, chute planes, long range rifles, lighted arrow nocks, filtered water, etc.

 

[Elkchaser12]

Here is my view on it, long range I am totally fine with the guys that practice the ranges often know how the round is going to perform at each distance, know the ballistics of the round and honestly give a damn about if they're gonna wound or not, as a diehard Bowhunter now after years of rifle hunting I just perfer to be close to my animas if you know your limitations I see no problem with it, the problem I have is the guys out there trying to make those 500 yard and above shots with no practice or knowledge of long range shooting. The same argument can be made for bows I am comfortable shooting 60 yards at an animal because I practice that range know exactly what my arrow will do at the range and know it has effectively killed animals but we do have guys that take those shots with no practice and would animals which in turn give us a bad name

 

[RobG]

There really is no uncertainty when hunting with Jesus. The animals have no reasonable chance of escape. It's way more unethical than drones, chute planes, long range rifles, lighted arrow nocks, filtered water, etc.

Pros: Retrieves ducks, doesn't shed or roll in dead stuff. Cons: Doesn't hunt Sundays, ammo falls through holes in hands.

 

[Slam]

Is that Jesus in the middle with the beard?