B&C on long-range shooting

I am not a fan of extreme range shooting... my opinion is not based on ability or equipment but rather flight time and an inability to judge the quarry's body language and anticipate a movement which could lead to a wounding hit... I am kind of tired of the debate around the subject, however...

I understand the spirit and intention of the B&C statement and agree with it in sentiment, but not in practice... it is impossible to draw a line as to what is deemed appropriate and what might be deemed inappropriate (by B&C)... it is very dependant on terrain, species, cartridge, optics, other equipment etc... very hard to define and certainly impossible to regulate..

Putting the brakes on technology is not new to this sport, nor to many other sports... the USGA has placed limits on drivers, putters and balls to try to maintain contact with traditional performance levels in golf... other sports have made similar rulings...

Everything is on a sliding scale... with regard to hunting, on one end of the scale we might have traditional archery equipment on the other end a .50 BMG with range finding electronic optics... the upper end of the scale is continually advancing... and many are concerned for the integrity of the sport, let us say the "fair chase" element... not many CGNers would be pleased to hear of a pimple faced, pasty teenager who whacked a world record moose and never left his living room... rather he used a HD camera equiped drone to locate the animal and laser tagged it to be taken out by a mini homing missile launched from his bedroom window... obviously I am taking great liberty with this analogy, but the line has to be drawn somewhere doesn't it? Is it fair chase when an animal has NO ability to respond to a threat? And at what distance would we feel is appropriate to the quarry's right to "fight or flight?"

The debate will go on long after I withdraw from it... I know what I am comfortable with for myself... within the boundaries of the applicable laws, each individual will make their own choices.
 
hoytcanon said:
I understand the spirit and intention of the B&C statement and agree with it in sentiment, but not in practice... it is impossible to draw a line as to what is deemed appropriate and what might be deemed inappropriate (by B&C)... it is very dependant on terrain, species, cartridge, optics, other equipment etc... very hard to define and certainly impossible to regulate..

.
Click to expand...

Slow clap!!!!! Very well said.

I found it a bit ironic that much of the crux of their argument was the awareness of the animal to the hunter but then went onto to bring bows and muzzleloaders into the discussion. How could long-range bow hunting violate the relationship between hunter and prey when even a punt shot with a rifle would fall well beyond that range. There were a lot of words that said nothing. They could have done a much better job presenting their position. I totally agree with their thoughts that animals should not be targets to test gear on but, I can also tell you that an animal at 1,000 yards can be very aware of danger. They tried to fit way too much into their "press release/position statement" and at the end of the day, they made no mention of this position impacting an animal's eligibility for entry in the books. What was the point? I've never entered an animal in their books but have been a proud member of B&C for over two decades....I'm not so proud today.
 
Last edited:
In principle I whole-heartedly agree with B&C's stance on this. I've seen people take shots that were wwwaaaaaayyyy to long with both bows and rifles. I don't know where one would draw the line, or if one can even do it. Just like I appreciate their view on no radio communications devices to guide someone to an animal - perhaps long range "hunting" is best compared to that - you don't need radios to get closer if you're plinking away at 800 yards....

And as far as I'm concerned, the bows and muzzle loaders thing opens another completely different topic - today's bows with their aperture sights, wheels, trigger releases, etc, and todays sabot shooting, scope-sighted, in-line "muzzle loaders" beg to question if they should be allowed during some jurisdiction's early muzzle loader seasons or not. I kind of like Pennsylvania's muzzle loader season - flintlocks only.
 
I concur with B&C and their stance on long range shooting. They are a North American big game record club which by a long shot, pund intended, that overshadows all other big game clubs. B&C is a conservation group that wishes to primarily recognize the animal, and hunter. With society ever changing, they are trying to keep hunting traditional from pressures of individualism.
If a individual wishes to have self recognition of a long shot, a zoo shot animal, high fence animal or any other animal with no rules barred, then SCI is your source of entry.
 
track said:
I concur with B&C and their stance on long range shooting. They are a North American big game record club which by a long shot, pund intended, that overshadows all other big game clubs. B&C is a conservation group that wishes to primarily recognize the animal, and hunter. With society ever changing, they are trying to keep hunting traditional from pressures of individualism.
If a individual wishes to have self recognition of a long shot, a zoo shot animal, high fence animal or any other animal with no rules barred, then SCI is your source of entry.
Click to expand...

Would a dandy mulie buck taken with a 565 yard shot from a Ruger No.1 in .300 H&H be considered a long shot? Should that animal be admitted to the B&C record book? I think so... so you can see how difficult it is to draw the line in the sand...
 
hoytcanon said:
Would a dandy mulie buck taken with a 565 yard shot from a Ruger No.1 in .300 H&H be considered a long shot? Should that animal be admitted to the B&C record book? I think so... so you can see how difficult it is to draw the line in the sand...
Click to expand...

So what makes that ok but someone else not ok? Was it the rifle, caliber, yardage, person or animal that swayed you to say it is ok?

I am sure if I did the same thing with a 50bmg the tune would be sung a different way.
 
Brian46 said:
So what makes that ok but someone else not ok? Was it the rifle, caliber, yardage, person or animal that swayed you to say it is ok?

I am sure if I did the same thing with a 50bmg the tune would be sung a different way.
Click to expand...

He isn't saying if it is ok or is not ok..... he is pointing out how difficult it is to draw the line.....
 
As Hoytcannon and alot of other people have said, where is the line in the sand?

My personal opinion, and that is all it is as I am no authority. It REALLY depends on the person, equipment, knowledge, and skill with the equipment.
Now a guy shooting a muley at 410m to some is an incredible long distance, or is it? If the hunter has painstakenly practiced shots out to and including 600m. 410m is a chipshot. this is where it comes down to personal skill level and practice, practice, practice. Being so comfortable with your firearm that you can make such a shot confidently.

so the line in the sand has to be drawn by the individual, not some club somewhere!

Just my $.02
 
The line doesn't exist and the strength of your argument is all that delineates, B&C has accepted tons of pronghorn taken over 400 and even 500 yards, to be sure. Things are different in Saskatchewan than they are in BC. And again in tundra versus Ontario bush. It's a wishy washy thing, and impossible to quantify, it also quite unfortunately breeds judgment within our sport between hunters when each likely doesn't understand the circumstances of the other.
 
Superbrad said:
He isn't saying if it is ok or is not ok..... he is pointing out how difficult it is to draw the line.....
Click to expand...
really? Hmmm.......

hoytcanon said:
Would a dandy mulie buck taken with a 565 yard shot from a Ruger No.1 in .300 H&H be considered a long shot? Should that animal be admitted to the B&C record book? I think so... so you can see how difficult it is to draw the line in the sand...
Click to expand...
 
Brian46 said:
really? Hmmm.......
Click to expand...

Exactly.... he is saying that that particular harvest should be admissable to B&C..... so where do you draw the line?.....

At which point you pounced and said.....





Brian46 said:
So what makes that ok but someone else not ok? Was it the rifle, caliber, yardage, person or animal that swayed you to say it is ok?

I am sure if I did the same thing with a 50bmg the tune would be sung a different way.
Click to expand...
 
Superbrad said:
Exactly.... he is saying that that particular harvest should be admissable to B&C..... so where do you draw the line?.....

At which point you pounced and said.....
Click to expand...
which was me asking for his opinion? and stating the same scenario with a different hunter and rifle just to see if his opinion would change.

I quoted him, not you, not sure why you need this explained as it is pretty straight forward I was talking to him.
 
Probably should have put that in the question, as nobody provided that information given it wasn't asked. Pretty useless to ask for a suggestion on long range cartridges and not either provide what you deem long range to be, or request it be specified along with the cartridge used. :)

Just like B&C's statement, totally unquantifiable.
 
Ardent said:
Probably should have put that in the question, as nobody provided that information given it wasn't asked. Pretty useless to ask for a suggestion on long range cartridges and not either provide what you deem long range to be, or request it be specified along with the cartridge used. :)

Just like B&C's statement, totally unquantifiable.
Click to expand...
you also get a good idea from the cartridge used as to what range it is effective on game still so not as useless as you may think.

You asked a similar question in that thread and I wrote exactly what I was looking for there for everyone to read before they posted, but I guess you wanna d:h:


Brian46 said:
I left it open ended so that those that post can state what ranges they hunt with that caliber rather than posting a distance and getting one or two responses.
Click to expand...
 
So, what is long range to you? :) What is ethical, and where is the cut off? You can use your own personal experiences and not be concerned with everyone.

If your answer lacks a definable number for all situations, you will see the problem with B&C's statement- there is no definable threshold, just as you've avoided choosing one in this and the other thread. If you say it always varies by the situation, equipment, and shooter as almost everyone here is saying, such a statement isn't worth the digital media through which it was made. That's the problem with B&C's position, though I understand what they are trying to do, it is impossible to quantify and must be left up to the hunter's good judgment. They should have simply stated they would like to see improved judgement in shot taking and left it at that. With the influx of the new era hunting crowd, riskier shots are certainly being taken, and even glamorised. We need to talk culture not sweeping standards across an impossible spectrum.
 
Ardent said:
So, what is long range to you? :) What is ethical, and where is the cut off? You can use your own personal experiences and not be concerned with everyone.

If your answer lacks a definable number for all situations, you will see the problem with B&C's statement- there is no definable threshold, just as you've avoided choosing one in this and the other thread. If you say it always varies by the situation, equipment, and shooter as almost everyone here is saying, such a statement isn't worth the digital media through which it was made. That's the problem with B&C's position, though I understand what they are trying to do, it is impossible to quantify and must be left up to the hunter's good judgment. They should have simply stated they would like to see improved judgement in shot taking and left it at that. With the influx of the new era hunting crowd, riskier shots are certainly being taken, and even glamorised. We need to talk culture not sweeping standards across an impossible spectrum.
Click to expand...
What is long range for me and the ethics I practice while hunting is mine alone in the field, why should there be a cut off other than what you limit yourself to under ethical practices? The hunting regulations do not impose a limit on yards because a hunters ability is that limitation.

Why do some think there should be a limit set is the real question?
 
Brian46 said:
What is long range for me and the ethics I practice while hunting is mine alone in the field, why should there be a cut off other than what you limit yourself to under ethical practices? The hunting regulations do not impose a limit on yards because a hunters ability is that limitation.

Why do some think there should be a limit set is the real question?
Click to expand...

Then maybe that is the one you should have asked....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom