Long Range Hunting - see Page 16 for Riflechair addition

[popcan]

Is shooting an unsuspecting animal from any range ethical. How about game birds shot with a shotgun can you ever be sure you hit vitals. I hunt and don't think you could be 100% ethical unless you kill it with your bare hands.

Don't even start with percentages of ethical!

Maybe you think it's better to hunt using your credit card in Safeway, and let someone else do the killing for you - how do you know how ethical it is?

I think all true hunters have respect for the game they are hunting, and that is what their ethics is based upon.

 

[sealhunter]

My issiue is that marsmanship is not the only factor in hunting for me.
That's why a gopher at 500 trds is excellent marksmanship, but I wasn't hunting the gopher.

I like up close and personal most times.. stalking, observing at close distance, etc.

4 and 5 hundred yards are not for me, cause I don't like hunting that way.
For me, there is no enjoyment in standing atop a ridge and shooting an animal at 700 yrds. Why not stay home and do it by satelite lazer.

If you have the skill and want to, go for it...

I have the skill, but have others as well ...

good guns will never compensate for poor skills.

 

[303carbine]

Most of my shots have been from 75 to 250 yds. I can hit stuff long range, but I prefer something closer. If someone can shoot large game at long range and can kill it without wounding it, then I don't see a problem with that type of shooting.
My dad shot a moose that lasered out at 770 yards, the 6.5-300 Weatherby was enough gun for that distance.
It's not too often that most hunters get a chance to shoot that extreme distance, most of the time the game will be on the side of the road or standing broadside under 100 yards.
The past few years I have had a bi-pod attached to my rifle, when I see game past 100-150 yards and they don't see me, I take the time to extend the bi-pod as I like to have a steady platform to shoot from.

 

[farshot]

it is not an all or nothing thing-
The long range hunter still has skills to hunt. No use sitting in the middle of the bald prairie with your caribou tag!

Some of you think that the long shot hunter is "compensating" with equipment for his own inadequacies- far from it. I see it as a hunter who uses everything learned from decades of shooting and hunting to be able to climb a mouintain ridge for example, and successfully shoot a trophy animal some 500 yds across a valley for that once in a lifetime CHANCE at such an animal. It is that shot or you go home and not be able to ever do it again.

Are you a "bad" hunter - no. Are you unethical - no. Can you make a long shot for that once in a lilfetime trophy - you better be.

It is very nice to say that you go out every day and shoot at gophers at 500 yds or hunt deer up close and personal - but if you are not successful, then you can go and do it again another day. I have preached this before - the single most precious thing we have is time -- time goes by so quickly and the time you get to go hunting for many of us is less and less as the pressure of normal life takes away our free time.

My ethics dictate that I equip myself and train endlessly for those brief periods of time that I get to go hunting. When I do go - I must be capable and ready for the opportunities that present themselves.

If I am driving to my hunting area and a monster presents itself and it is legal - of course I will jump out of the truck and do my best. I wont say "I never truck hunt".

If after climbing, stalking and glassing and doing all the other "skills" (that some argue are what you need instead of shooting far), you have one final chance which is a low percentage shot - I make the decision that is the best shot that I can hope for - then that is my decision and I live with it.

Shooters as well as hunters don't appear out of magazines or web sites. The skills must be learned and practiced. If you dont shoot at different ranges at live animals while hunting, you wont ever be able to shoot at different ranges.

Sorry to those that get offended, but hunting is a blood sport. Some want it to be a surgical operation as to not upset anyone. Animals are wounded all the time. Some are lost - does not matter if they were shot up close or at 700 yds. I hope we all try to avoid the suffering of the hunted, but it is there in any event.

BTW - a well placed killing shot at distance (being the best that can be obtained given the terms you are dealt) taking down a magnificent animal that you have tracked for hours or days if not weeks, is one of the best feelings that I have ever had.

 

[jaydog]

Why is a 500 yard shot on a gopher praised as excellent marksmanship, but shooting under similar conditions and at a much larger target (like a deer) is condemned as unethical?

Answer: the perceived relative 'value' of the different animals. For example, elk are majestic and wolves are scum. Like I said before, hunt 'till you drop, but animals aren't practice targets.

 

[Woodsman]

Well... this is a discussion forum, so I suppose people will express their opinions whether ignorant or informed. It's still a free country, for now anyways.

What I can't stand is people making judgements on others and their practices and then trying to get a crew to ralley behind them on what should be allowed/ethical and what is not.

This kind of reminds me of a darn socialist, no? The majority will decide what is acceptable or not acceptable. Don't we already have the uniformed, ignorant majority making our shooting lives more and more difficult? Now we've decided to do this to ourselves? What bloody business is it of mine what distance someone else shoots at? Where does all this gestapo mentality come from anyway?

If someone can make a good killing shot at an usual distance, so be it. It's not for me or anyone else to say what that distance is or should be.

Start with respecting your sport, yourself, and the game animal being hunted. The rest will take care of itself.

 

[BC Bigbore]

I like to have a steady platform to shoot from

Excellent! I won't take a shot at a big game animal unless I know I can put one in the boiler room and that means getting a rest of some sort and not shooting past my comfort zone. One spring I was tossing back some 'shine with a local crusty old hillbilly farmer (ex-girlfriend's grandfather) and mistakenly called BS on his bragging about his shooting prowness with his old Savage 99 rifles (nickle soldered on for a front sight, 3x6 plank roughed into a stock, etc) He got his tail in a knot and growled, "You don't believe me?" and grabbed a handy old SMLE .303 that was leaning by the door of the shack (using the term cabin would be too generous) He stomped outside, set down the jar of hootch and pointed at a herd of mulies feeding at the far end of his hay fields on a hillside. "Watch that one at the bottom" he spat and proceeded to chamber a round, shoulder that old clunker and before I could say a word, he fired. Even from half a mile away I could see the wet grass explode under that doe's belly and she bounced up the field to join her compadre's! "If we needed the meat she'd be dead" he said, then turned and walked back into the shack. I never picked on his shooting abilities again after that.

 

[Gatehouse]

BTW - a well placed killing shot at distance (being the best that can be obtained given the terms you are dealt) taking down a magnificent animal that you have tracked for hours or days if not weeks, is one of the best feelings that I have ever had.

Interesting that you said that....

Earlier I described a longish shot on a buck. I didn't give the background on that buck.

My partner and I had hunted him and his "brother" for almost a month. I had gotten one glimpse of his brother at last light but couldn't get a clear shot. I had never seen the buck I killed before, but I knew he was there, as I had seen his tracks and rubs.

I had passed up numerous smaller bucks.

I had one more day before I had to go back to work, and I was suffering from a knee injury. My knee was throbbing as I had been trudging up and down coastal mountains for the last 2 weeks, as well as hunting earlier seasons before that. The Girl snoozing beside me reached for me as I started to climb out of bed, and that sounded better than trudging in the freezing cold....I almost went back to bed.

I drove to my drop off point and stalked through the dark to where I was going to wait for day break. The ground was frozen, but with no snow cover, it was very crunchy, so I took a step and waited, trying to minimize noise. As the light came, I could make out a feeding doe, standing 300 yards away. She wasn't aware of me.

Within a few minutes I noticed the doe perk up. I was scanning around the varied terrain with my binoculars, but saw nothing at first. Then I made out 2 bucks. I decided that instead of stalking to the bucks, making crunching noises and spooking the doe, I would shoot from where I was, so I rolled into position. By that time one buck had driven the other away, and I was fine wiht that, as this was the one I wanted. When I shot him he dropped dead on the spot, the bullet entering his chest, travelling lengthwise and exiting his rear ham.

It was a very memorable season and a very memorable shot, and a very memorable buck.


In contrast, the buck I shot last year I had seen a few times before, but always passed up. Eventually, he just happened to be in the right place at the right time, and I called him in and then killed him at 20 paces. Interesting, but not nearly as memorable or gratifying as the one the year before.

Bottom line- The distance at which you kill an animal has no bearing on how gratifying or memorable or skillfull you are. All it means is that you killed an animal at close or long range. The rest is up to the individual.

 

[Johnn Peterson]

Inline with the original thread/rant, a while back on HBC, there was a thread accompanied by a video clip of a 700 + yard shot on an Elk.

I have made one long shot, a little over half of the shot on Elk and foolishly did so so because of the 'urgings' of my hunting buddy. The rifle and reload quality was well known and I had previously taken a few long range shots at a compareable distance so I had a pretty good idea of what result to expect.

Anyway, after viewing the video clip, I had a number of questions/concerns that definately would've kept me from taking that shot. I voiced those questions and concern in posts to that thread and recieved a response from a few guys close to home on Vancouver Island that are into long range target shooting. Further to proving their point, I recieved an invite to come & see and take part in a long range shoot. I took a friend/shooting buddy, hs4570, and we joined the guys for a long range session at the military range in Naniamo.

Long story short, I was IMPRESSED with what can be accomplished with the right equipment, knowing how to read conditions and variables by people that know what they are doing. My opportunity to practice at long ranges has been somewhat limited so those types of shots aren't a realistic consideration but it was an eye opener to see whats consistently possible by someone that knows what he's doing.

 

[Canuck525]

The original post reeks of ignorance and arrogance.For starters I would bet there are FAR FAR more animals wounded at close range. Long range hunters tend to shoot thousands of rounds per year, have good shooting form,good equipment ,are meticulous in nature and pay attention to detail. Most average hunters( not long range) pull their rifle out a day or 2 before season and go fire about 10 shots and are lucky if they pull of an 1 1/2 inch group at 100 yards( most are probably 2-3 inches or more). .Then off to the woods they go.If they see one at 400 yards they will pull a hail mary and half the time their mounts or something aren't installed properly,become loose or something and they don't discover it until after they wound something. On the other hand long ramge shooters are meticulous about their reloads and equipment.That same 400 yard shot is a piece of cake for the long range fanatic.

 

[chuck nelson]

The original post reeks of ignorance and arrogance.

Couldn't have said it better.

 

[Demonical]

I cannot stand the morons on Best of the West that promote long range hunting, just so they can sell scopes and rifles.

I have no issues whatsoever with punching paper or slamming gongs at 500 or 1,000 yards. Long range shooting and hunting do not go together.

 

[chuck nelson]

I cannot stand the morons on Best of the West that promote long range hunting, just so they can sell scopes and rifles.

I have no issues whatsoever with punching paper or slamming gongs at 500 or 1,000 yards. Long range shooting and hunting do not go together.

Now I'm confused.

 

[Riflechair]

And I think YOU are pulling these phantom long range shots out of thin air or perhaps your derrière. Oh and while you're at it here, please define for me "ethical".

The BC Wildlife Federation has a Code of Ethics for Hunters:

1. Ethical hunters respect the animals we hunt, and, when we hunt we do so responsibly;
2. Ethical hunters are students of nature, learning as much as possible about the game pursued, its habitat, habits and life cycle;
3. Ethical hunters support the concept of “Fair Chase”;
4. Ethical hunters are skilled in the use of the tools of hunting. When we shoot, we do so accurately and safely;
5. Ethical Hunters are true conversationalists who believe in the sustainable use of natural resources. Our interest in wildlife and the environment includes non-game and endangered species.

When it comes to Taking the Shot an ethical hunter will ask the following questions:

1. Is it completely safe to take this shot?
2. Have I properly identified the species?
3. If yes, is it legal to shoot this species? (ie: a 6-point elk);
4. Do I have an opportunity for a good shot and a quick, clean kill?
5. If I shoot, can I recover the animal considering its location, the time of day and the time that may be needed to retrieve it?

If the answer to all of these questions is yes, then and only then will the hunter take the shot.

I fully realize that as a hunter in the forested west coast mountains of BC that a long shot is likely 300 metres at best. Where-as in central Canada a short to medium shot probably starts at 300 metres and extends out to say maybe 450 metres. The two hunters are acclimatized to their local conditions.

However I’m seeing folks here talking about taking shots at 700 metres plus. How can anyone maintain with absolute certaintly that they can make a quick and clean kill at those distances?

The reference to military snipers was made previously. These are professional marksmen whom regularly practice at those ranges. They however are still area shooters – center of mass. If they kill the target outright that’s excellent BUT if they maim or wound the target thats OK too because the target has still been effectively neutralized and taken out of action.

HUNTERS DON’T DO THAT. We want quick and clean kills and that’s the end of it.

Hunters are not professional marksmen but some of us are pretty darn close to that. They are the exception not the rule. They understand the effect of wind drift , the relationship of velocity and energy VS , distance, bullet rotational velocity, terminal kinetic energy and bullet expansion, etc… They are marksmen that deploy marksmanship principle, breathing, natural point of aim, trigger control and so on. Even with all of these attributes a 700 yard shot is a gamble according to the code of ethics identified above. This is basic stuff.

Most hunters do not fall within this skill level. Frankly most of the people that frequent these forums visit the range on the occasional weekend a few weeks before hunting season opens just to check their zero. No one should be gambling with the code of ethics. The fact that you asked me about them means that they are evidently low on the priority list for many hunters out there. It should be of utmost importance.

Any "anti" statement on a gun board is going to strike a chord. Did you really think that if you come to a gun forum and call what people are doing unethical and illegal that they were going to just curl up?
It seems to me that they struck your chord, they are out hunting and you are in complaining about it, you are just another anti who can't mind his own business.
I am thinking there is an underlying reason you dislike capable hunters and this is your disturbed way of showing it.

OK so I’m an anti now? I disagree with you on ethics and now I’m an anti? I volunteer my time to the promotion of safe and ethical hunting and shooting sports that some may consider radical. My web page is even dedicated to it.

Riflechair.com
This web site is designed to promote the safe and ethical use of firearms for sport, hunting and competition within Canada. Thank you for visiting Riflechair's site and enjoy!​

I’m also a member of the Association of BC Forest Professionals which has its own code of ethics. Ethics are foremost on my mind. Give your head a shake. Just because people disagree does not make one of them an anti-hunter or anti-gun.

 

[Crazy.kayaker]

I can group 6-7" at 200 yards with my .308 easy, but if the animals much past 100 yards I'll either try to get closer or just watch to see what it does...I can make long range shots at the range but why risk it in the field as paper doesn't hurt if I miss or pull a shot....an animal will. Long range hunters are either stupid....or have enough practice to know what they are doing....either way it's not my cup of tea once I'm in the field.

EDITED IN: I should add the grouping isn't with the Bench rested but under hunting conditions. Bench rest is MUCH smaller

 

[Gatehouse]

If you wish to suggest that most hunters have no business shooting at animals 700 yards away, I will agree with you. However, that's not really what you said in your first post, which basically suggested that hunters taking long shots were unethical and didn't want to get out of their trucks.

 

[Pyd]

Yes, you are an anti. And it is very disappointing to hear you have a website that promotes your lopsided views.
This isn't a matter of disagreeing with anyone, you didn't come along and state that you "disagreed". You used the words "unethical" and "illegal", you didn't come and share your opinion, you worded it in a way that you thought you would be able to just slam down our throats, well it's not going to happen.
You can open any website you choose, if you decide that it is in the sport of hunting's best interest to condemn long range shooting than you sir are indeed an anti.
Discussion is when we exchange thoughts with an open mind to learn about both sides of the fence, you didn't do that, you came along accusing people who do not hunt the way you do as being unethical.
In the world of your website that may be OK, but in the real world there are actual hunters, leave them alone, they will carve their own path without your self righteous perspective.

 

[Riflechair]

If you wish to suggest that most hunters have no business shooting at animals 700 yards away, I will agree with you. However, that's not really what you said in your first post, which basically suggested that hunters taking long shots were unethical and didn't want to get out of their trucks.

No
I advised them to get as close as they to take a clean shot rather than gambling a 600 metres shot off the door of their pick-up truck BUT because I was in Rant mode is said it in a rather rude and obnoxious manner, specifically "Get your fat asses out of the truck, off the ATV and actually WALK & STALK. Don't shoot at an animal thats 600 metres off."

 

[Riflechair]

Pyd...
I'm right and you're wrong...
Neener neener neener.
OK I'm anti-hunting.
The freezer full of deer steaks is just a cover.
Happy?

 

[Gatehouse]

Rant mode makes it all better

"Sorry officer, I was in RANT MODE"