Long Range Ethics

[scythefwd]

it takes just as much training and practice to be a long range shooter than it does to stalk within 20 yards of your prey

Two completely different skill sets. One can be learned using nothing but paper. The other requires that you practice in real life. 20y to a deer is an incredible feat. Stepping on a leaf and having it crack can end your game. At 1k yards, you can do jumping jacks and that deer never knows. At 20y, you move your rifle up to shoulder too quick and you have a deer moving out a full speed. Yes, there are plenty of people that can and do shoot .5 moa at 1k meters... Which is 5 inches. Shooting that on paper is one thing, nothing gets injured. Shooting that distance at a target over a ravine or valley and you have to try to dope wind that is gusting. If that wind changes 5 mph, you have moved your 5 inch shot group from centered on the heart to centered on the guts. Every former sniper I know, a total of 4...3 army and 1 marine...1 still on the army reserve shooting team, will readily admit that shooting over ravines and valleys is the hardest shot you can come up with. It is awesome that some people can shoot well at that distance, but I don't think it is ethical to take that shot on a living animal. You gut shot a deer and it will be 2-3 miles away before you get to where you can track it. 5 mph difference in wind.. either by guessing wrong or it is gusty out... and you injure instead of making a clean ethical kill. That is my objection, not the ability of the shooter.

 

[~z]

Todd, 50yds with a bow seems a bit unethical, and shooting a bedded deer that had no idea that you were there, oh the shame...

Just funnin a bit. You have to know your abilities and work within that box. If you have invested the time and effort on steel in varied conditions you learn what shots are 'doable' and what ones should be passed on.

Some may be appalled and call this a parlor trick of a shot done simply for bravado and ponder on all the wounded animals necessary to make this video. Others may marvel at the skill and wonder how long they had to wait for all the conditions to cooperate. And sadly some may say ‘that was cool, I’m gonna try that with my .270’.

Everyone must wrestle their own ethics and adjust to their skill set and temper that with their personal experience. There is no ‘one size fits all’.

~z

 

[inherentical]

You say that, maybe in jest, but the first account I heard about somebody doing that I was amazed. It was Louis Leakey, the anthropologist. It had been argued that the crude stone tools of Homo habilis were not very useful and offered little to survival. So Leakey ran down some small artiodactyl and killed it with replica Homo habilis stone tools and proceeded to butcher the animal with them.

It's partially in jest, partially to show that everyone has a different definition of hunting. We, as a species, really did used to do this kind of stuff all the time. I can just imagine Grog complaining to another old caveman by the fire that kids today didn't know what hunting really was, what with using these fancy stone tools instead of leg bones like they did in his day.

 

[Todd1700]

Some may be appalled and call this a parlor trick of a shot done simply for bravado and ponder on all the wounded animals necessary to make this video.

I simply look at it like this.

1. What is the goal of people taking these long shots? If they want to prove themselves a good shot then hitting a 10 inch steel gong at 1000 yards is just as impressive a shot as hitting a deer at that distance? To use animals as nothing more than targets and take a major risk of maiming or crippling an animal just so you can post video of the times these 1000 plus yard shots pan out okay online in order to impress the easily impressionable is low class in my book. And shows a complete lack of respect for the game animals we hunt.

2. If their goal is to simply harvest an animal then why not get closer where the outcome is more certain?

3. I don't buy that these shots are ever a necessity. Because if you can't get closer than 1000 yards without being busted then you are the worst hunter I have ever heard of. Hell it would be hard to spook most game animals in North America from 1000 yards away if you were sitting in your truck flashing the headlights and honking the horn at them. Even standing in plain view most animals just don't consider anything that far away a threat.

4. If you are having to take 1200 yard shots at animals that thousands of other hunters have killed with a bow at less than 50 yards, then I'm not sure who finds that impressive but it sure ain't me.

5. I remain firm in my position (as someone that knows a pretty good bit about shooting a rifle) that these Rambo wannabes cannot consistently place a first shot bullet into the vitals of an animal at distances greater than 1000 yards under variable and often unreadable field conditions.

Wanna shut one of them up. Don't watch his edited films that only show the kills and good hits. Offer him this bet.

Offer to go with him on as many hunts as it takes to encounter 10 shots at animals greater than 1000 yards under various terrain and field conditions. If he places his first shot in the vitals on every animal you pay him 20,000 dollars. If he misses any animal or hits any animal anywhere other than the head, neck or heart lung area on any of the 10 attempts then he gives you 20,000 dollars.

Don't expect any takers however. In fact after making that offer you will probably never see them again. Why? Cause despite the bold claims they make online they know the truth about shots in the field of that distance.

Money talks and bu###### walks.

 

[Jefferson Herb]

long range

One thing that has'nt been mentioned is the shotgunners w/the new slugs/sabot's etc.As hunting pressure is put on the animals the range seems to get longer,since the fees etc are pricy for out of state hunters [ ie mt ]and no-one wants to go home w/o trophy. It comes to that trip of a life time,that you've saved for. Trophys don't eat as well,from the ones I've tasted.I have two 4x4's [ blacktail] to my name,and a younger animal will eat better;I'm sorry they never allow Doe hunts here.
The 243 is considered an excellent deer round here,yet I've seen a deer wounded with a shoulder shot,bullet lodged in the socket like you flattened it in a vise; 200yd shot. Go figgure.
In the oaks ie close range,I prefer my Browning 1886 in 45-70,use cast bullets,but some days the .218 bee is lighter to pack , but I have to be selective.

 

[IdahoLT1]

Todd, I'm sorry man but get off your high horse. One persons ideals on ethics can't be everyone's. If you don't think its ethical to take 1000yd shots then fine, that's your opinion. It's not always everyone else's. It can be argued that waterfowl hunting is unethical. A bad shot and the bird falls onto the water and drowns. Or its picked up by a dog, chewed on until its brought to the hunter, then swung around by its head.

Trapping could be argued to be unethical.

Using bait, feeders, and dogs to tree animals could be considered unethical.

Using anything but a .338 lapua on any game animal could be argued to be unethical.

My point is, is that's its very rude to try to force your ethics on someone else. As long as now laws are broken, their ethics should be respected. Rambling on and ridiculing/calling them names makes you look like an as*.

 

[~z]

Todd, if your offer is serious I may know someone who will take you up on it.
Key assumptions:
You pay your expenses to wherever it is the shooter wants to hunt, he will pay his way.
The shooter chooses the shot.
The shooter chooses the timing of the shot.
The shooter chooses whether or not he will take the shot based on the conditions.
If you interfere with the shooter or the shot in any way you forfeit the $20K.

Would you be confident enough to propose a similar offer with your bow shots at 50yds?

~z

 

[Art Eatman]

Sorry, folks, but this getting to the 'round and 'round and 'round stage. Sorta like a broken sword: Not much point to it.