The Phony Hunt

I've done pretty much the exact same thing as Boomer with black bears and grizzly bears, quite a few times.

Once, when I was young and foolish, I crept so close to a grazing black bear tht I really freaked myself out, I could have almost touched him...And I only had a hunting knife for back up!:)

This spring I posted pics of 2 grizzly bears that I snuck up on to take thier pics. I had my .375 in hand and camera in the other. Had things gone poorly, I probably would have had some explaining to do to a CO, I guess. But wildlife photography is not illegal or immoral, nor is defending yourself from bear attack.

The only time I believe somethign like this woudl be "wrong" is if the person doing it had so little bear knowledge that they couldn't do it safely for both the bear and themselves.

Hunting magazines are full of pictures of grizzly bears, sows and cubs etc. Anyone wonder hwo they got these shots? Probably not all are with lenses the size of 45 gallon drums.:)
 
Hunting magazines are full of pictures of grizzly bears, sows and cubs etc. Anyone wonder hwo they got these shots? Probably not all are with lenses the size of 45 gallon drums.
Click to expand...

You might be shocked how few of those are of actual wild bears and even the wild bears are most often photographed from safe locations like vehicles, viewing platforms, tundra buggies, etc......
 
sheephunter said:
You might be shocked how few of those are of actual wild bears and even the wild bears are most often photographed from safe locations like vehicles, viewing platforms, tundra buggies, etc......
Click to expand...

No, I am not shocked. Many hunting magazines have quite a bit of BS in them anyway, and I've seen pictures recycled a few times, or pictures of bears in the wrong habitat for the hunting trip, etc.;)

Still, some of those pics of dangerous game, whether they be grizzlies, lions, cape buffalo or grouse, are taken up close and personal, and I dont' see anything wrong with that or what Boomer did. He didn't press the bear into a fight situation- and he sure COULD have if he wanted to.

That's what makes his activities completely fine, to me...
 
Still, some of those pics of dangerous game, whether they be grizzlies, lions, cape buffalo or grouse, are taken up close and personal
Click to expand...

Yup, many of them in game farms!

I do see what he did as wrong but the great thing about the interweb is that we are each entitled to an opinion.
 
Sakoman said:
There would have been nothing wrong wiyth what Boomer had done had he done it with his camera not his gun and camera. Taking wildlife pictures is one thing but the risk associated witjh what he did in my opionion was not very smart. Had the bear decided he did not like the game and came after him he would have had to kill it to save himself. So all his little game would have done was kill the bear for no reason other than his pure enjoyment.
Click to expand...

SO he would have been morally superior if he went after it with only camera, and if the bear attacked him, he would be dead.

Weird way to look at it, but I guess everyone has an opinion.:p
 
Very few of the pro photographers who make their way here are interested in buggy pictures. The pictures from the buggies are all looking down on the bears and photographs that are taken at ground level are more valuable. These guys are super dedicated, will endure hours of extreme cold in the fall and winter and bugs in the summer. But the bottom line is they want that shot that no one has seen before, and that is why they are prepared to accept discomfort and take risks. The big name photographers who come here regularly, often hire bear guards.

Sheephunter and I don't like each other much, and I suspect he thought this was a good opportunity to discredit me. Clearly though, if the situation as I explained it is considered by the reader, there is no reason to be concerned about my conduct. I appreciate the many positive comments that this thread has generated.
 
Sheephunter and I don't like each other much, and I suspect he thought this was a good opportunity to discredit me. Clearly though, if the situation as I explained it is considered by the reader, there is no reason to be concerned about my conduct. I appreciate the many positive comments that this thread has generated
Click to expand...

You flatter yourself Boomer....I bear no ill will against you....just your actions. Sorry to hear you don't like me. I really wouldn't care who pulled this stunt, I would have still thought it wrong. Trust me, I considered the situation! Just my opinion of your actions....not the man.
 
Last edited:
Gatehouse said:
Well, I suppose we have learned that most hunting magazines and writers are full of BS.
Click to expand...

Likely a lot of truth to that but the fact with photographers is that they need to build large stocks of photos with minimum time and money commitments and the easiest way is game farms. Montana is full of "Hire a Whatever Critter you need" farms. It's just a fact of business....not really their ethics but as Boomer pointed out, there are a dedicated few that endure what it takes to get the real thing.
 
I got way too close to this guy. There was a point I hit that "fight or flight" thing you hear about. He started to make aggresive postures towards me, but thankfully I had my trusty .300 and felt perfectly safe.
PGpics040.jpg


However when I got too close to these guys, I was way too close. When they decided I was to be investigated, I had no choice but to fire on them. In the end, I killed 17 of them, and suffered several lacerations on my lower extremities. I've never spoken of this before because I feared retribution from experts and everyone with an opinion. It still sends shudders of fear coursing through my body by looking at that last photo before the 'incident' happened.
CopyofPGpics028.jpg
 
Clearly the chickadee was taken from behind the protection of glass....likely bulletproof by the reflection......confess, you were on a farm in Montana weren't you?
 
sheephunter said:
Boomer, I guess the question that begs asking here is why would you put yourself in such close proximity to a bear when you know things could go wrong and you'd end up having to shoot the bear. The bear was causing you no distress yet you basically endangered its life for this childish game you were playing. I fail to see the point. Maybe you can enlighten me.

I routinely see grizzlies in the mountains but would never play the phony hunt game with them and endanger their life for my amusement. It's one thing when you have a tag and are actually hunting the animal but I'm guessing you didn't and weren't so what was the point of putting this animal's life in danger?????
Click to expand...

Maybe he wanted to give them some porridge :D
 
Sakoman said:
There would have been nothing wrong wiyth what Boomer had done had he done it with his camera not his gun and camera. Taking wildlife pictures is one thing but the risk associated witjh what he did in my opionion was not very smart. Had the bear decided he did not like the game and came after him he would have had to kill it to save himself. So all his little game would have done was kill the bear for no reason other than his pure enjoyment.
Click to expand...

hat are you getting at? I kill things for pure enjoyment. It's not because of necessity, we have Sobeys for that this day and age. I usually eat what I hunt, but I won't starve. Sure I gotta drive an hour or so to get my groceries but your logic is pretty skewed.

Why would there be nothing wrong if Boomer went unarmed? Why would a firearm make the situation from right to wrong? Kinda reminds me of the same logic that has poisoned the minds of this country and why we have to wait for AFTER the fact police to show up.

/end rant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom