TV hunters

[.cheese.]

I've been watching these folks on TV who go hunting for viewers. The stuff on Outdoor Channel for example.

Frankly... they're upsetting me. I have no problem with hunting. I understand that there are times that it is either appropriate or necessary to kill an animal.

What I don't like though is that these people are terrible shots IMO and hit the animal in spots that basically just let the animal die slowly.

Is this typical? I hate the thought of an animal suffering more than necessary due to a bad shot.

What do you guys think? Maybe I'm just not used to hunting yet (I'm still learning).

 

[Alphazulu6]

Absolutely not acceptible to take shots that will wound the animal. It is every hunters job to use enough caliber/shot placement to kill the animal as quickly and humanely as possible.

Quick clean kills are what the animal derserves and with todays modern firearms and ammunition there is no excuse for not. None.

 

[.cheese.]

that's what I thought too.

 

[Selfdfenz]

"What I don't like though is that these people are terrible shots IMO and hit the animal in spots that basically just let the animal die slowly."

Define slowly. (5 seconds, 10 seconds, 4 hours) I’d be surprised if you actually saw the “animal die slowly” on a consistent basis or those shows would be off the air. Me thinks perhaps you self-stated lack of experience may explain your perception, no flame intended.

Sometimes a big game animal will drop in its tracks when struck by a well placed shot. Any hunter worth his morning coffee will tell you that is the desired outcome but not always what happens. In some cases the same species hit with an almost identical shot placement will run a short distance. In another case that same animal/same basic shot will go 50 or 100 yds before it goes down.

Animals are not made in factories where specifications can be controlled. They are biological systems that react to injuries and stressors in highly individual ways. Anyone that's hunted will verify this for you. I would also imagine some of THRer who have been in combat will also verify for you that human beings also react in an unpredictable manner when mortally wounded. Some drop in their tracks others do super human feats before they go down.

What concerns me is that if you haven’t hunted much, or at all, you might be overly judgmental of all hunters because you perceive real world animal behavior after a shot as evidence of unethical or cruel technique. I am an ethical hunter. I know my limitations and don't take unpredictable shots. I use more than enough gun and carefully match the ammo I use to the animal I'm after but I've had deer go some distance after a shot that compromised its lungs and heart instantly and totally. Such is adrenalin. If nothing but DRT is acceptable to you, don't start hunting as sooner or later you will be upset when the animal runs. Also in this day and time we do have good equipment options but even calibers that have an outstanding reputation with hunters over decades will not generate "drop in its tracks" kills 100% of the time on heart/lung shots. If the shooter could aways hit the brain or spinal cord every shot perhaps drop in the tracks is more likley but I will argue some animals hit in the spine will live for some time after being hit.

Not defending televised hunting (but I will defend real life ethical hunting and hunters) but if the animal is traveling 20-50 yds after the shot that is not necessarily indicative of a poorly placed shot or an unethical outcome to the hunt.

Question: How do you feel about bow hunting?

Best

S-

 

[Ranger 40]

I have no use for this crap. Never watch it. This is just what the Non-Hunting public thinks about hunters. Some over weight jerk in camo setting in a blind{Never did understand camo in a blind} shooting deer over bait. And this is all takes place at Billy Bobs Fence' em in Hunt'in lodge only minutes from down town Dallas.

 

[Alphazulu6]

I have no use for this crap. Never watch it. This is just what the Non-Hunting public thinks about hunters. Some over weight jerk in camo setting in a blind{Never did understand camo in a blind} shooting deer over bait. And this is all takes place at Billy Bobs Fence' em in Hunt'in lodge only minutes from down town Dallas.

Haha wow Ranger that was alot to get out I agree 100%.

As far as the animal dying slowly. I have never had the misfortune of shooting a deer and it not dropping by the time my scope settles from the recoil of the shot. I have also NEVER taken a shot that was over 200 yards. Ever. I have turned down some nice deer because they were either on a ridge, too far to 100% take a clean shot, or turned in such a way I could not pull a secure shot at their vitals.

Yes you could in any of those cases shoot and probably kill it as I was at one time an internationally ranked shooting competitor. But the risk is too high that you will miss center by just 2" over these situatinos and not give it a quick death. I would hope that everyone else does the same and honors the animal as you do have the advantages to do it.

 

[eliphalet]

I have been a hunter several decades, but if all I had seen of hunting was most the TV hunting shows I've witnessed, I would not be a fan of hunting. That's how bad IMO far to many hunting shows are.

 

[.cheese.]

Define slowly. (5 seconds, 10 seconds, 4 hours)

Well, for example. The other day I saw a shot that hit the animal in the rear more or less so it ended up dying by internal bleeding combined with some non-functioning organs. They shot it mid-day I believe..... took them until I think they said 1 AM to find it. They were out there with flashlights looking for it. It must have just kept running and running away.

It just seemed wrong. Really wrong.

As for bowhunting - I've seen a couple shows with bowhunting. I didn't get the impression that it was a quick kill. So, I'd say I'm probably not a fan, but then again I've never tried it myself.

 

[koja48]

A well-placed arrow & a razor-sharp broadhead make for very clean kills. No shock factor, so not "instant drop" like with a bullet, but effective & humane nonetheless. No matter what your hunting tool of choice may be, precise placement of the projectile is important. On the other hand, since "sh** happens" . . . nick an unseen tree branch, critter moves unexpectedly, you just plain make a lousy shot (it happens . . . if it doesn't, then every group we shoot at a target is moa & center of the bull, no fliers), you also need to be capable of tracking & recovering the animal in a timely manner. I don't watch a lot of hunting shows, but must admit that it seems like a lot of game (deer in particular -- maybe because deer hunting is the most predominant offering) seem to do considerably more "running away" after the hit than I recall witnessing in the field. In my experience, I recollect few big game animals that have done much more than drop when hit cleanly with an appropriate bullet.

 

[scubie02]

well, the advantage to hunting in real life I guess is that, as mentioned, by the time the scope or sights settle again, maybe alot of the ugly part is over, so you don't see it up close and personal. This may be a similar phenomenon to people in combat who have shot many people at distance and can do so with little thought, but then are horrified when jumping into a trench and stabbing someone in hand to hand fighting. Much easier to do if you can be "detached" a bit. I myself, though raised on hunting, don't really care that much to watch hunting shows. Of course, the best parts of hunting to me were the sights and smells and wandering through the woods on a crisp fall day or snowy winter day--few things more beautiful. Hell, I've let wayyyyy more deer walk than I've shot. The older I get, the less likely I am to actually shoot one, though with prices of everything going sky high these days, it may become necessary just from the quantity of meat/practical standpoint.

Canned hunts really bother me too. Shooting an animal over a feeder or something just seems wrong. But then again, how is that different than a farmer raising animals, then slaughtering them? I couldn't do that, either. I think on some level if you're going to condemn it, you have to become a vegetarian, otherwise you're just being a hypocrite and making somebody else do the dirty work and pretending the meat you just bought from the grocery store got picked off the meat tree. In a way, I think anybody who eats meat should have to do the dirty work themselves sometimes, just to remember what life is really all about.

 

[Selfdfenz]

They shot it mid-day I believe..... took them until I think they said 1 AM to find it. They were out there with flashlights looking for it. It must have just kept running and running away.

Without having viewed the show first hand I'll hold off passing judgement but the shot you describe as having seen on the television program is one I wouldn't have taken. Like others have said, I pass on shots that I don't feel a lot more than good about. I've let many animals walk but as time goes by shooting at something isn't nearly as important as just being out and about. Where I live and hunt it's too thick to see animals or shoot at long ranges so crappy shot placement just isn't excusable.

I don't hunt with a bow because I don't have the discipline to acquire the skills needed to be proficient in the sport or the desire to gain the knowledge & equipment needed to participate. I have nothing against bow hunting and my bow hunting friends, who do all of the above, are good at what they do and I have no issues with it at all. They are perhaps better hunters than I am for that experience. I hunted with a cap and ball rifle for years and was successful with it but the nagging problem I had with the platform, for me, was a quick follow-up shot wasn't part of the equation. In the end I reverted to HP rifles only.

Unlike many that are 95% hunters and 5% paper punchers I'm the opposite. For every round I ever fired at a game animal I would say in confidence I've fired several thousand rounds at all kinds of distances at targets. I shoot throughout the year every chance I get. It's not hunting but I feel it's good practice prior to hunting.

If you can figure out what show that was I'd like to know. As others have pointed out that kind of thing gives all hunters a black eye. The network should be aware that ethical hunters will take exception to poor sportman's ship or else that kind of thing will continue to be shown. Such is the desire to make the all mighty dollar.


Best

S-

 

[ojibweindian]

I like watching the various TV hunting shows because of the scenery. Very nice.

What I don't like are those shows that are more infomercials than actual programs.

As far as the shooting goes, I'll echo what others have said. Some game animals will drop like a rock with a well-placed shot, others can go for some time.

And, as it was mentioned previously, sometimes sh*t happens (animal moves just as the trigger is pulled, wind, unseen twigs, etc), and the shot is blown.

 

[Art Eatman]

I won't argue the luck factor, but few deer I've killed ever ran more than fifty yards before piling up dead. I hunted for some ten years with a group, and that seemed pretty much to be the case for everybody. Mostly, DRT--dead right there.

That said, every now and then "something happened" and we wound up in the tracking business. And that's where ethics comes in: Don't wound an animal and then not follow up in an appropriate effort.

Let's don't get into the stand/stalk/whatever-style argument. That's a whole 'nother argument, and we've posted pages on it.

From the standpoint of a third party using a camera to produce a video, using a stand is indeed a good thing.

I'm totally turned off by using camo in a stand, but then I've never used camo, ever, when deer hunting. It's unnecessary. And, all that whispering baloney: Why not just do a voiceover after editing the film?

But it sells camo...

Art

 

[Carl N. Brown]

When I have hunted (and I expect to resume hunting in the future)
it has usually been on family land where my folks have hunted for
over a hundred years. At least twice on land owned by friends.
The thought of a "canned" hunt on a commercial game farm is
absolutely creepifying.

 

[41magsnub]

Agreed. Based on my limited viewing of hunting shows (hunting and golf are similar in my mind in that they are fun to do, but ungodly boring to watch on TV) it seems they exist more to sell realtree products than anything else.

 

[MCgunner]

Well, I guess if you don't like those deer running off, you should be in favor of outlawing bow hunting, then. Shoot a deer with a bow, even a good placement, the thing is going to run until it bleeds out. But, ya know, nature is cruel, man is a predator, man is no different now than he was 50,000 years ago, still omnivorous, still needs meat in the diet. I go hunting, partially, to be the predator I am. I can buy meat at HEB killed "humanely" if I need, but I like doing it more traditionally, all-be-it with firearms rather than spears or atlatls or even bows. Wonder how many of those mammoths dropped in their tracks after being stabbed with a couple dozen spears? Actually, the most effective technique was to run 'em off a cliff and butcher the victims.

Now, I'll say, only two deer I've ever shot went more'n a few steps and I found both of 'em. I don't hunt with sticks and strings, eye dominance thing, just don't shoot bows and have no desire to. My "primitive weapon" is a cap lock Hawkin. But, hey, I understand the desire to go primitive (okay, to a point, pulleys and such, but still sticks and strings. In that sort of hunting, blood trailing is a necessary skill. You aren't killing with shock, you're killing with a cutting edge and blood loss.

As far as "baiting deer", that is the only way to hunt in the eastern third of Texas. You ain't goin' to kill squat if you don't have a feeder. It is a way of life here. I have two feeders and two tripod stands. I really enjoy spot and stalk hunting when I can, but it's impossible where I'm at. You can "still hunt", but your success rate will be measured in decimal points of a percent. You'll kill a lot more deer over a feeder. If you don't like feeder watching, don't come to Texas. It's just the way it's done here. I consider it a sporting way to hunt, but I'd rather be moving and spotting, just ain't possible to hunt that way here. I suspect many of those shows are filmed in Texas because of the success rate of feeder watching. They have to air an episode every week. I often wonder how they accomplish that.

I watch the outdoor channel and like it. Mostly, I like the wing shooting stuff, but they have "Tracks Across Africa" and the only way I'll ever see African hunting is on TV. The feeder watching stuff gets as old as bass fishing. I mean, you've seen one bass caught, you've seen 'em all. Fishing shows bore me about as much as golf or baseball. I'm a little bored by the turkey hunting, too. I like the stuff up in the mountains, the bear hunting (usually over bait) and that sort of thing that I don't get to do.

I'm totally turned off by using camo in a stand, but then I've never used camo, ever, when deer hunting. It's unnecessary. And, all that whispering baloney: Why not just do a voiceover after editing the film?

One of my tripods is open, just a seat with a gun rest between your legs that swivels. I camo out in that one. I've got the camo anyway. You don't go duck hunting without camo. I've been hunting waterfowl for 40 years.

 

[.cheese.]

Well, I guess if you don't like those deer running off, you should be in favor of outlawing bow hunting

I never said I was in favor of outlawing anything.

Just because I may choose not to do something myself, like bowhunting, and I probably never will, doesn't mean I have any desire to prevent others from doing it.

That's like saying that people who don't own a gun and don't want to must be anti-gun and must want to repeal the second amendment.

When I start taking up hunting more, I'll probably use rifles, and that's just a choice. Doesn't have anything to do with me influencing legality.

 

[MCgunner]

Well, I remember about 20 years ago the animal rights idiots were all over trying to outlaw bow hunting as cruel and the logic is similar to your post, well, as if anyone from PETA has a logical bone in their bodies.

The mall ninjas with their black guns make it a point to not criticize hunting with .223s because it plays into the hands of the antis, and it's a very good point. I sorta had this feeling with this post, but I know that's not the intent of the post. Everyone has their own idea of "cruel". I suppose everyone here can agree on Micheal Vick. Anything lesser than that is up to the individual, I reckon. I don't bow hunt only because I can't hit a barn with a bow and don't want to. LOL But, I do think it's more "hunting" than what I do with a rifle and I do handgun hunt a lot for those reasons. The bow thing, though, is back to basics, well, sorta. I mean, the Cherokee didn't have pulleys on their bows, LOL!

 

[gipperdog]

I've hunted most of my life (34 yrs in the field). I don't like watching others hunt on TV or video. It seems to me there's a bunch of yahoo's out there who are taking risky shots & some are just down right stupid. I saw a moose shot the other day in a video online - with archery. The moose was facing quartered in front of the hunter. The distance was less than 10 feet & the freakin idiot gut shot the moose. I hate that kind of crap.

 

[eliphalet]

The distance was less than 10 feet & the freakin idiot gut shot the moose. I hate that kind of crap

This is the sort of unethical irresponsible actions I see that turn me off to the hunting shows. I find it hard to believe they show it. I can understand guys doing foolish things, but not putting it on satellite TV and letting the whole world see it.

We as hunters should ban together as we did when we were attacked by Mr Zimbo. Stop buying products that advertise and pay for these shows that, IMHO, hurt all hunters/shooters everywhere.
I personally have sent a E-Mail or two expressing my feeling to a couple of manufactures.
I don't watch these shows but a time or two a year so really have no idea how many, or for that matter who/what company's support such distasteful crap.

 

[Mr.Brown16]

Selfdfenz I agree with everything you say.

 

[trueblue1776]

It's funny this came up, I was watching dove "hunters" on TV today. Never saw them retrieve a single bird, nobody had game bags, and they shot a ridiculous number of birds. (missing half the time)

They might have had an intern fetching birds, I don't know, but it sends a bad message to young hunters that living things are only targets.

 

[MinnMooney]

All of the good hunting magizine and actual good hunters preach that just because you can take an animal it certainly doesn't mean that you should shoot it. What they're saying is - OK, your gun is capable of a killing shot at 450 yards................ but are you? Do you practice a LOT at that range? do you keep almost every bullet in a 4"-5" circle? If either answer is "Huh?" then don't shoot.
Is the animal facing away from you or in heavy brush where you're not quite sure of what part of the animal that you are lookin' at? Then don't shoot.
That animal is a wonderful creation of millions of years of evolution and deserves to be harvested with all of the humanity that you can muster.

DON'T TAKE STUPID SHOTS !!!

 

[MCgunner]

I've never been on one (I'm not rich), but those dove hunts down in Argentina, they have bird boys that fetch the birds for 'em. They take 'em for meals at the lodge and give 'em to the locals I reckon. I can't see flying to Argentina for MEAT. They shoot a lot of birds because there's huge numbers of birds down there and the limits are high and hunting pressure is low. I'd love to hunt Argentina someday, after I win the lotto.

And, hey, it's a successful day when I can shoot 50 percent on doves. ROFLMAO! Those little toots can make you feel real stupid sometimes.