Long Range Ethics

[coloradokevin]

While I'm hardly the most experienced hunter on this forum, I've still been around for long enough to notice a trend towards extreme distance hunting these days. It seems like a lot of folks today are interested in trying to take game at ridiculous distances, and I can't help but wonder how many animals have been wounded and lost because of these techniques.


The following video is apparently sponsored by Nightforce, but still highlights an example of this trend. While these folks are obviously very experienced, and clearly drop all of the animals that they show in the video, I still wonder if they've lost game on countless other occasions by taking shots at these distances?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX4aqmbaGIo

At 1,000+ yards there is just so much going on that it seems like even the best shooters would be at a huge risk of wounding and losing their game animals. I personally grew up under the philosophy that losing an animal that you've wounded is generally a mark of a poor hunter.

Just wondering what you guys think about this long range hunting trend?


(BTW: I'm not trying to pick on the guys in this video in particular. I enjoyed watching that video, but it raised some questions for me. These questions are even more notable to me when I consider that less skilled hunters/shooters might be inclined to attempt these shots with an even greater chance of simply wounding the animal).

 

[MCgunner]

Know your limits and stick to 'em. I know there are those with limits beyond mine. I ain't gonna tell them how to shoot. Me, I sorta prefer the stalk, myself, to the shot. But, that's me. Dumb argument around here, anyway. I can't even see past 150 yards where I hunt. I've hunted the mountains and desert country, though, where you can see forever. If the shot is beyond 400 yards, too risky for me, and it'd better be a calm day for 400 yards. I don't really carry a ballistics computer with me. I have a range finder and I put a printed drop table taped to the scope of my .308 as a reminder lest I forget. I only carry it to 500 yards. Therefore, I can't account for Coriolis effect, humidity, altitude, air density, whatever.

Actually, I've become more of a handgun hunter anyway. I have BP stuff, but it's such a PITA to hunt with and we don't have a special season here. Just too easy to load the .308 or stuff the Contender in its shoulder holster and go. However, I'm into archery, now. That's something that takes HUNTING techniques, not shooting. 50 yards is a LONG shot for a bow. I've always considered myself a rifleman, but hell, I shoot birds, hunt with handguns, like BP, like archery. I guess I'm not a "long range hunter" by nature after all. I guess I might could get into it if I could practice beyond 300 yards and had a place that I could see game beyond 150, but that limits me on the long range stuff.

 

[MCgunner]

BTW, this is a bit of rehash. There are those here that won't shoot beyond 100 and there are those here that like to play with targets at a mile. Everyone has their own thing. Some can actually make 1000 yard shots on deer reliably. I've seen some impressive shooting in silhouettes. Never seen an animal killed at that sort of range, but I'm sure it can happen. Too much for me, though.

 

[jmr40]

Normally I would leave the decision on taking a long shot up to the person pulling the trigger. If you have the equipment and skill to take shots far longer than I am capable of then go for it. But to take long shots just as a stunt at live animals just seems wrong to me.

If you have no other options maybe. They do not show any animals wounded, but they probably did not include that video. Unless they are just trying to prove a point I believe they could have gotten a closer shot than the 1,000+ yard shots they took at game.

 

[Art Eatman]

Out to 300 yards has never seemed like a big deal to me. Past that, though, the issues of accurately estimating the distance and doping the wind become serious matters. When you get to 500 and over, I'd just as soon pass the shot and try to get closer.

As far as actually making a successful shot Way Out There, yeah, I gotta respect the skill level. That doesn't mean I regard it as any sort of proper hunting style. Taking a bunch of specialized gear along for "respectable" animals just irks me. Doing the same for prairie dogs does not.

I dunno. I far and away prefer it to be me, my rifle, and a minimal amount of "stuff". The idea of a spotter and a shooting table and all that removes the deal from what I call "hunting". Might's well just drive over, set up a life-size animal picture on a target frame, and back away until you can thrill yourself with a hit.

 

[noob_shooter]

i prefer using my bow at 50 yards max haha

 

[ArmedBear]

There's another factor. Say the deer doesn't drop dead as soon as you hit it. Then what?

In some terrain, you can see 10 miles. In other places, you have slim-to-no chance of tracking a woundede deer with the better part of a mile's head start.

It's all conditional, and not just on the shooter, rifle and wind, either.

 

[35 Whelen]

Just wondering what you guys think about this long range hunting trend?

"Hunting" trend? Shooting at an animal 1000 yds. away is just that...shooting...not hunting. Last elk season I watched a big 6x6 and a small 5x5 walk out of the timber and begin sparring. My Nikon rangefinder said they were 514 yds. away, the trajectory chart taped to the stock of my rifle told me the 225 gr. TSX would drop a hair over 4' at that distance. A year of High Power competition had given me all the needed skills to take the shot and I wanted that 6x6 BAD. Did all that info and over 1000 rds. of shooting over the previous several months give me the ethical right to lob bullets at that bull? NO. A few minutes later a husky 4x4 walked out below me at a little over 350 yds and after some soul searching I decided to take the shot even thought I felt it was at the edge of practical hunting distance. I hit him and he's now in white packages in my freezer. TOUGH shot.

All this nonsense of shooting game at 500+ yds. is nothing but showboating as far as I'm concerned. I say if you want to show your shooting skills at long range, shoot at paper or steel...not an animal.

Let the flames begin....
35W

 

[skiking]

Everybody has their own max distance. I hunt with a guy that limits his shots to 100 yds. I limit myself to 650 yds, but have never shot a deer past 350 yds. I don't have to try too hard to ring a 8" gong at 700 yds if the winds are calm or steady and I can get a good rest, but when I am hunting I usually can't find a good rest, the winds are gusting, I am really cold, or the animals don't do what I want them to, so I usually get much closer.

For the guys that say it is just shooting and not hunting, that opens a whole new can of worms into what is considered hunting. You may not think that shooting game at 500+ yards is hunting, but I would bet that there is something that you do that somebody somewhere doesn't consider "hunting".

 

[blackops]

As I’ve stated numerous times before it comes down to terrain, situation, position, and weather. I hunt in challenging terrain during rifle season so a 400yd shot across a canyon looks good to me. That said, not every shot is always that far either. If I feel like I can get closer without spooking a buck over into another canyon (that will take me two hours to get to) I do so. Why take a 400yd shoot when you can take a 250yd shot? Getting close to an animal (without it noticing) is what makes hunting….well hunting. Once you go beyond the 500yd mark IMO you become a shooter. In most cases I think shots are taken around 150yds, but in some terrains you simply won’t don’t have that luxury.

 

[IdahoLT1]

It's all dependent on the shooters ability and his equipment. Some people aren't confident with those shots and that's fine. However, I can almost guarantee more deer and elk are wounded every year by crappy hunters at 150 yds or less than by guys trained and proficient at long ranges. So it really comes out to what you think is the bigger problem.

 

[Jefferson Herb]

shooting distance

I've killed Deer from 35 yds to around 300.Shooting High Power helps with confidence,and you [ Myself anyway ] must have a good scope that will adj with accuracy.[ I don't hold over I adj scope ] I have a limit of 440 yds for deer,but for varments[all kinds] I would give it my best if the rifle was capable.From a 200 yd zero you need aprox 22min to go 1,000yds,I don't have a program or tables to go further.

 

[alsaqr]

At 1,000+ yards there is just so much going on that it seems like even the best shooters would be at a huge risk of wounding and losing their game animals.

Dead on.

Those so called "hunting shows" never show the shots of the animals that they cripple. Then there are the 1,000 yard hunter wannabees who do not have access to a 1,000 yard range. They sight in their guns at much shorter ranges and try to extrapolate that data so they can make a 1,000 yard hit.

 

[qajaq59]

If a little voice in the back of your head says, " I hope I can hit him?" Don't pull the trigger.

 

[Sav .250]

Different strokes for different folks.........

 

[Rembrandt]

....Just wondering what you guys think about this long range hunting trend?

The premise is flawed, long distance shots and ethics are not the issue....any more than bow hunters that wound animals at short distances. Ethics and distance are not the problem, it's the hunters experience and shot placement for a clean humane kill that should be be addressed. That's a duty & responsibility of the hunter....not an ethics issue.

 

[Sam1911]

There was a long and quite acrimonious thread on this exact subject a little while back.

If you want to know what everyone thinks about the matter, read this: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=483982&highlight=ethics

-Sam

 

[HunterBear71]

It is shooting versus hunting. Folks can do whatever they want. I prefer to hunt animals and shoot at targets.

 

[Atroxus]

Personally I don't see a problem with it *if* a person has practiced enough at a given range and has the skill/equipment needed to make those long shots consistently. Despite the fact that military snipers do it regularly, some people just seem to be stuck in a mind set of "if I can't/won't do it consistently then nobody else could/should either". But then again I guess trying to define what's ethical on this board is kind of a lost cause though as nobody seems to be able to agree on it.

 

[HunterBear71]

There is a tactical reason for a military sniper to take the long shots. People can do whatever they like. From whatever distance, we are killing the animal.

 

[schlockinz]

I use to shoot an elk target at 700yds with whatever rifle I had with me that day when the varmint hunters came out and tried to judge distances and hit targets. With their target nobs and bull barrels I could usually out shoot them with my ol' '06 and really piss them off. These were the guys that bragged about 600yd shots, although I never saw one actually connect in under 4 shots for one of the 600+yd targets.

It all comes down to hunting within your limits, and the vast majority of people cannot make those shots. The shows are unfortunate in that they make people believe that they can easily make those shots, and these viewers don't know how to control breathing etc...and don't practice much at all.

 

[JKimball]

Dang! That was amazing. My favorite was at 4:40 or so shooting a .338 at a rock 1693 yards (67 yds short of a mile.) They dialed in 74.4 feet of drop. That's like artillery practice!

As far as ethics goes... it is hard to say. I know it wouldn't be ethical for me to take those shots with my equipment and training. But advancements in technology have been pushing the effective range out for hunters since they switched from knives to spears. At what point did it become unethical to increase that range? I would say if they are taking long shots just for fun when they know they could most likely get closer that probably isn't very good ethics.

In reality, if you really want to guarantee that you don't wound an animal, the best advice is to not shoot at them.

 

[RumRunner]

As far as actually making a successful shot Way Out There, yeah, I gotta respect the skill level. That doesn't mean I regard it as any sort of proper hunting style. Taking a bunch of specialized gear along for "respectable" animals just irks me. Doing the same for prairie dogs does not.

proper hunting style? i always thought killing the animals in a humane way during its hunting season, then recovering it and eating it was proper? or am i wrong? what am i missing? if they can take them out at 1000+ yards... good!

the method does not matter, whether you use dogs to find them, dogs to bring them to you, bait to bring them in, rifle or spear... if you take it humanly and legally, there you go!

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LAEOJbyklI&feature=related

Here's another video of guys that can do it. I have mixed feelings on it. *IF* you really know what you're doing, AND the wind is consistent, then I cannot say it's necessarily unethical. In inconsistent swirling winds, no amount of skill or equipment can guarantee a good ethical hit.

 

[oneounceload]

If you have to take a shot at 1000 yards, then you're not "hunting". If you can't get closer to the animal than that, then your skills need improvement