Is long range hunting fair chase? Ethical??
- Thread starter Buckmastr
- Start date
- Status
canadian hunter312
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County
I completely agree with them. Hunting is getting as close to your quarry as possible by using hunting skills to do so such as playing the wind, using available cover, patterning and anticipating their next move and possibly scent, calls, decoys and bait to lure them to you. Scouting and finding trails, bedding areas and where they’re feeding to determine the best point of ambush.
Shooting an animal at 700 yards requires literally zero hunting skill. None whatsoever. It does require good equipment, practice and skill though. Nobody is arguing that. If you want to show off your shooting skills, do it at the range on paper targets. It’s completely selfish to intentionally create a scenario where you’re really lowering the chances of a good hit and greatly increasing the risk of wounding an animal. That is not what a hunter does.
Shooting an animal at 700 yards requires literally zero hunting skill. None whatsoever. It does require good equipment, practice and skill though. Nobody is arguing that. If you want to show off your shooting skills, do it at the range on paper targets. It’s completely selfish to intentionally create a scenario where you’re really lowering the chances of a good hit and greatly increasing the risk of wounding an animal. That is not what a hunter does.
How far is too far? Every technological advancement in hunting has extended the range at which game could be ethically taken. Compound bows, crossbows, flatter shooting cartridges, better bullets, telescopic sights, range finders are just some of them. An experienced, practiced shooter who knows his equipment and his own capabilities and takes an animal at 600 yards from a solid rest in a tree stand is not unethical. The same cannot be said about the stalker who gets close to the game and makes a marginal shot because he hasn't practiced or his gun isn't sighted in properly.
Some hunters glass for hours and days looking for a shot at longer ranges. What one person considers long range might be a typical distance shot to another.
Time of flight must be taken into account, and the shooter's capability as well.
Bottom line is that every hunter owns the shot after it is taken, be it with a bow at twenty or 50 yards, an open sighted caplock at 50 or 150 yards, or a modern cartridge rifle at 100 or 1,000 yards.
It is not for one person to tell another what is ethical.
Cat
Time of flight must be taken into account, and the shooter's capability as well.
Bottom line is that every hunter owns the shot after it is taken, be it with a bow at twenty or 50 yards, an open sighted caplock at 50 or 150 yards, or a modern cartridge rifle at 100 or 1,000 yards.
It is not for one person to tell another what is ethical.
Cat
A hunter must know where to look and how to glass an area , and know where to aim as well on an animal at any distance, it is all part of hunting.
Some people consider tree stands unethical, caplock rifles unethical as opposed to flinters, and compounds unethical compared to trad bows, not to mention the iron sighted guys who say scopes are cheating!
Cat
The answer is always "it depends", when we are talking ethics of hunting be it at short or long range. I am not a long range hunter, never have been and never will be, but it certainly can be done ethically.
What constitutes fair chase is subjective, imo. The club may talk down long range hunting, but still includes plenty of animals shot over bait (where legal). To me it's far more impressive to shoot an animal at long distance than to hammer one over an apple pile, but at the end of the day if it's legal in your jurisdiction than have at er.
Hunters will never settle on what constitutes fair chase, as we all hunt differently, and that's ok.
What constitutes fair chase is subjective, imo. The club may talk down long range hunting, but still includes plenty of animals shot over bait (where legal). To me it's far more impressive to shoot an animal at long distance than to hammer one over an apple pile, but at the end of the day if it's legal in your jurisdiction than have at er.
Hunters will never settle on what constitutes fair chase, as we all hunt differently, and that's ok.
I think there are two aspects to this issue:
First, an ethical hunter owes a duty to the wild game to make a shot that will maximize the chances of a quick kill and the recovery of that kill.
Some 'hunters' will make questionable shots at close range that do not meet this simple standard, let alone at long range.
In both cases, it is highly dependent on the hunter's own skill, the conditions, the game being pursued, etc.
A particular hunter may be very skilled at making the long range shot, but if he is trying to push the envelope for the sake of his own ego, and making the ethical standard a secondary consideration, he should probably re-evaluate his intentions. Every long range shot he makes should still stand the test of producing a high probability of success.
The other aspect is the hunt itself. This is considerably more subjective, imho. Personally I enjoy getting as close as possible, because there is value in seeing the animal in its natural environment aside from having the opportunity to end its life and reap the harvest. I want to watch and listen to it for as long as possible, before the shot. Looking through glass at an animal several hundred yards away is just not the same immersive experience.
But I appreciate that not everyone is looking for the same thing. This part is less about ethics and much more about what you want from the experience.
First, an ethical hunter owes a duty to the wild game to make a shot that will maximize the chances of a quick kill and the recovery of that kill.
Some 'hunters' will make questionable shots at close range that do not meet this simple standard, let alone at long range.
In both cases, it is highly dependent on the hunter's own skill, the conditions, the game being pursued, etc.
A particular hunter may be very skilled at making the long range shot, but if he is trying to push the envelope for the sake of his own ego, and making the ethical standard a secondary consideration, he should probably re-evaluate his intentions. Every long range shot he makes should still stand the test of producing a high probability of success.
The other aspect is the hunt itself. This is considerably more subjective, imho. Personally I enjoy getting as close as possible, because there is value in seeing the animal in its natural environment aside from having the opportunity to end its life and reap the harvest. I want to watch and listen to it for as long as possible, before the shot. Looking through glass at an animal several hundred yards away is just not the same immersive experience.
But I appreciate that not everyone is looking for the same thing. This part is less about ethics and much more about what you want from the experience.
If it’s legal and what you want to do then how is it unethical? Not up to others to judge unless your making or enforcing the laws.
It’s not my cup of tea but I’m not so high on myself that I’ll pass judgment on others.
By that logic anything but a handheld spear is unethical in some one’s mind
It’s not my cup of tea but I’m not so high on myself that I’ll pass judgment on others.
By that logic anything but a handheld spear is unethical in some one’s mind
Historically People have hunted alone stalking their individual prey with stealth, and or in packs surrounding and overwhelming their prey as in when hunting the megafauna of the past. They have used sticks....they have used stones...they have used bows...they have used darts...they have used poison ***...they have followed their prey for days until they quite literally run it into the ground from exhaustion waiting for the coup de grace . They have even used other animals to hunt for them...... They ran entire herds off cliffs FFS, Were these people throughout history unethical ? Were they immoral ? Yet, here we sit in our first world comfort with the most lethal .......and humane weapons that have ever been available to the human species, navel gazing and trying to pick each other apart and their preferred method of hunting to claim what ? some moral high ground ? virtue signaling ? seriously ,people who kill from 200 meters vs people who kill from 700 m ? We are splitting some pretty fine hairs here, and its kinda silly. This looks to me less about the animals and the ethics and more about mans need to have some moral position over other people. Just how i see it.
There's a world of difference between hunting of the kind being discussed here and primitive hunting for your very survival (and not just for food, but for everything else the body of the animal could provide, such as clothing and tools).
seems to me topics like this just serve to divide the hunting community.
An ethical shot is an ethical shot..... whether it's 20 ft away or 1000 yards away.
My opinion is this..... if the hunter has the right equipment and the time behind the rifle to make clean long range kills..... who the phuck am I to judge ?
If the animal dies a quick sudden death it doesn't matter how close you are, it's an ethical kill.
We , as a group, should not be so quick to fall into these arguments.
My most productive deer hunting spot is all close range , even as close as 10 yards but like long distance hunting, the deer can't smell me, they can't see me, they have no idea I am there laying in wait. I could be 10 yards away.... I could be 1000...... when the bullet strikes the vitals it makes no difference.
So to me the whole argument is nothing but a bunch of divisive nonsense and I think Boone and Crocket's stance on the whole thing is dead wrong
For the record, my longest shot (measured shot) on a game animal is an honest 295 yards with the leupold range finder. I know I have taken at least 2 animals at further distance but they are guesses , not measured..... but both under 400 and probably in the 350-ish range. Some hunters call that long range hehe
At the end of the day if the hunter is skilled and is able to consistantly strike vitals at 700 to 1000 yards and the animals are killed quickly and efficiently...... who am I to judge?
An ethical shot is an ethical shot..... whether it's 20 ft away or 1000 yards away.
My opinion is this..... if the hunter has the right equipment and the time behind the rifle to make clean long range kills..... who the phuck am I to judge ?
If the animal dies a quick sudden death it doesn't matter how close you are, it's an ethical kill.
We , as a group, should not be so quick to fall into these arguments.
My most productive deer hunting spot is all close range , even as close as 10 yards but like long distance hunting, the deer can't smell me, they can't see me, they have no idea I am there laying in wait. I could be 10 yards away.... I could be 1000...... when the bullet strikes the vitals it makes no difference.
So to me the whole argument is nothing but a bunch of divisive nonsense and I think Boone and Crocket's stance on the whole thing is dead wrong
For the record, my longest shot (measured shot) on a game animal is an honest 295 yards with the leupold range finder. I know I have taken at least 2 animals at further distance but they are guesses , not measured..... but both under 400 and probably in the 350-ish range. Some hunters call that long range hehe
At the end of the day if the hunter is skilled and is able to consistantly strike vitals at 700 to 1000 yards and the animals are killed quickly and efficiently...... who am I to judge?
coyoteshooter
CGN Regular
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
the ability to take the longer shot must be considered . buy the .hunter...if one does not bother to practice longer shots and does not know the capability of the rifle then you have the answer...hail merry shots have no place......the game should always be respected ... after all one must project our poor results past the mistake and turn the tables ...reflect on the games future .....your responsibility is to get it wright....if you do not take the time or MAKE the effort to be able to shoot effectively at any range you should take up a sport that has less suffering for your mistake.........one shot one kill 100% 2 targets 2 shots 1 kill.....50% 3to 1 ...33% the only way to claw your way back is for one to have all the fingers on your hand not just the trigger finger don
It's all too murky to be discussed seriously. I voted yes because I don't want to look down on anyone just because of the distance they take the shot at. As for the notion of fair chase, that's another murky subject. Many hunters consider themselves harvesters, and do everything they can to minimize the chance of detection. Does that take away from fair chase? I sure as hell try not to make myself obvious, and I use a combination of distance, silence, camoflauge and wind direction to make the best of the situation. I don't get as close as I can, I use some degree of distance as a strategy. I don't position myself right on top of a trail.
If a person is capable and has the proper equipment for extreme long range "killing/sniping", and if it isn't with full intent, to kill at extreme long range, then I can understand. However, there are individuals or groups who will, with full intent, to kill at extreme long ranges. This a disagree with and DO NOT classify them as hunters.
It is possible for the individual to decide for his own actions whether long range hunting, plus a whole bunch of other actions, are”ethical” or not. Any long range shooting, live targets or not, leaves me out. It would certainly be unethical for me, as I am not a particularly “good shot”.
Technology/skill/real world conditions determine what is an ethical shot in hunting. I am troubled when I read about 700yd shots on sheep taken after the shooter uses his smart phone and ballistic programs to determine the hold or reticle adjustment.At long range the effect of wind is significant even with the new wonder cartridges. Reading wind in mountainous country is difficult in my opinion.700 yd shots on the range in windy conditions can be adjusted when hits can be spotted and corrections made, not so in the mountains.There are no wind flags every 100yds in the mountains i hunt. Cross winds from unseen geographic features cannot be determined by the shooter . Military snipers routinely make these very long shots but a miss or bad hit producing only a non fatal wound is acceptable in war. I don't think that standard is applicable to ethical hunting.
In the end, hunting is a very good ethical measure of a man. one has to judge himself about the righteousness of his acts in the hunt as usually the hunter is the only there at the time of the shot.
What troubles me is we never hear about the misses at long range with their 300PRC chambered rifle ,$4,000 scope and Smart phoned linked Kestrel device.
i suggest all hunters read "Meditations on Hunting" by JoseOrtega y Gasset.
My 2 cents.
Cheers!
In the end, hunting is a very good ethical measure of a man. one has to judge himself about the righteousness of his acts in the hunt as usually the hunter is the only there at the time of the shot.
What troubles me is we never hear about the misses at long range with their 300PRC chambered rifle ,$4,000 scope and Smart phoned linked Kestrel device.
i suggest all hunters read "Meditations on Hunting" by JoseOrtega y Gasset.
My 2 cents.
Cheers!
I don't do catch and release fishing, if I don't need a fish for the pot I don't go annoying fish. Same with deer hunting, I have no interest in proving to myself I can stalk in very close... that happens every now and then anyway. No interest in "fair", rather do everything to get an "unfair" clean shot and try avoid runners. I prefer a longer shot where I can take my time (if possible), also prefer to take calf and mother (if possible). My long shots are almost all under 500m, average of deer in one season depends on weather in the season between 150m and 250m. Favourite distance would be around 200m. At that distance it is also easier to back out without annoying the animal if things don't suit.
edi
edi
Suka
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I've no problem with someone hunting how they can get it done. I know through lot's of practice what my limitations are. As long as others do, I have no problem with it.
If they have a false sense of capability? Then it's just not right.
If they have a false sense of capability? Then it's just not right.
- Status
