The present trend of ultra long range hunting/shooting
- Thread starter bearkilr
- Start date
That's how I do it anyways.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I feel a bit weird asking, but why'd you add the "naked"?
Not sure I'd be posting that on a public forum, might alert some authorities.
Well Gentlemen, I wasn't around for the begining of this post but have read it through and will weigh in now.
There are many valid points and questions of ethics, for sure. I just got back from a hunt where shots were taken successfully from 40-250 yds and a couple misses at 350 yds. These last 2 shots exceeded the capability of my equipment and my ability with this equipment, period. Was it unethical to attempt them? I don't feel it was because I was shooting a .375 H+H at a 30 lb animal. Pretty much any body hit would be lethal and I had a team of professional trackers. Probably could have made the shots but they were in light and bush conditions where ranging was impossible and we all underestimated the distance.
I have attempted and succeeded at 5-600 yd/mtr game shots but I consider that to be extreme. These were sheep and caribou shots in a terrain where the animal could not make 2 jumps and be out of sight. The few I have made have been with a very trusted hunting partner who was spotting for me and none were on the first shot. The first shot is always a ranging and wind doping shot, my spotter then tells me where to hold for a killing second shot. I have done the same for him many times and the system worked very well for us. These shots are only taken when all stalking and getting closer possibilities have been exhaused. Long range taking of game is thrilling in it's own way but I've only done it when closer possibilities are gone.
What I'm getting at is there are intentional long range hunters and there are normal hunters who have the ability to make the odd longish shot when presented. I personally do not agree with the 1000 yd shooting of game unless done with the right equipment and the right shooting skills and the right type of terrain where the animal cannot retreat out of sight in 2 seconds.
Barrenland caribou present this type of hunting possibility and I will have to try it for myself but forest animals are at much greater risk of wounding and loss.
Ethics are a very fluid and changing entity depending on the game hunted, the terrain, your equipment, skill level and the LAWS.
So here's the breakdown for me anyway...........is it ethical to hunt barrenland caribou with a 50 BMG at 1000-1500 mtrs, YES, with a solid rest and a spotter you trust, who's not in competition for the shot and you have the appropriate optics and ranging equipment to be confident. Is it ethical to take an 800 +/- shot at an elk in a clearing way up the mountain with your 30-06 while resting against a tree and hunting alone, NO.
This is my opinion of longrange harvesting of game, there are a lot of variables that move it between ethical and unethical.
There are many valid points and questions of ethics, for sure. I just got back from a hunt where shots were taken successfully from 40-250 yds and a couple misses at 350 yds. These last 2 shots exceeded the capability of my equipment and my ability with this equipment, period. Was it unethical to attempt them? I don't feel it was because I was shooting a .375 H+H at a 30 lb animal. Pretty much any body hit would be lethal and I had a team of professional trackers. Probably could have made the shots but they were in light and bush conditions where ranging was impossible and we all underestimated the distance.
I have attempted and succeeded at 5-600 yd/mtr game shots but I consider that to be extreme. These were sheep and caribou shots in a terrain where the animal could not make 2 jumps and be out of sight. The few I have made have been with a very trusted hunting partner who was spotting for me and none were on the first shot. The first shot is always a ranging and wind doping shot, my spotter then tells me where to hold for a killing second shot. I have done the same for him many times and the system worked very well for us. These shots are only taken when all stalking and getting closer possibilities have been exhaused. Long range taking of game is thrilling in it's own way but I've only done it when closer possibilities are gone.
What I'm getting at is there are intentional long range hunters and there are normal hunters who have the ability to make the odd longish shot when presented. I personally do not agree with the 1000 yd shooting of game unless done with the right equipment and the right shooting skills and the right type of terrain where the animal cannot retreat out of sight in 2 seconds.
Barrenland caribou present this type of hunting possibility and I will have to try it for myself but forest animals are at much greater risk of wounding and loss.
Ethics are a very fluid and changing entity depending on the game hunted, the terrain, your equipment, skill level and the LAWS.
So here's the breakdown for me anyway...........is it ethical to hunt barrenland caribou with a 50 BMG at 1000-1500 mtrs, YES, with a solid rest and a spotter you trust, who's not in competition for the shot and you have the appropriate optics and ranging equipment to be confident. Is it ethical to take an 800 +/- shot at an elk in a clearing way up the mountain with your 30-06 while resting against a tree and hunting alone, NO.
This is my opinion of longrange harvesting of game, there are a lot of variables that move it between ethical and unethical.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
That's a bit of a disappointing post coming from someone who has hunted extensively. Basically, you base your ethics on caliber selection. If you were to hit a caribou in the lower front leg at 1500m with your 50 BMG then that's somehow better than doing the same with a 300WM?
Ask your 30 lb African creature if it would prefer to have its lower leg shot off with a 375 or a 270?
I have been hunting moose for over 25 ytears. Most kills have been under 100 yards. My longest kill was at 275 yards at a whitetail. I have witnessed in the past three years a hunter at our outfitter shoot and kill two calves and a cow at over 800 yards with his 338 Lapua. My only problem with this is that all of the kills were after numerous shots [over 5] and it took the outfitter and his team over 24 hours to track and recover the animals. That is his thrill and none were trophy animals. I personally think he is unethical because of the numerous attempts. If he practised at long ranges and was hitting his targets consistently, then he should be making clean kills. Just my two cents
^ That doesn't sound too good, what you describe.
BUT... hunters have also shot animals at 25 yards distance and still taken 24 hrs to recover them...
AND... there is no doubt that guys that practice at long range, and have the right gear to do it, can consistently hit stationary targets at 700 yds (and longer)... we need to remind the animals to stand still.
BUT... hunters have also shot animals at 25 yards distance and still taken 24 hrs to recover them...
AND... there is no doubt that guys that practice at long range, and have the right gear to do it, can consistently hit stationary targets at 700 yds (and longer)... we need to remind the animals to stand still.
Just picked up on this topic...
Wow, interesting replies.
Here is a scenario that most `ethical and responsible`hunters have probably encountered. You spot an animal at 500 or so yards...maybe a tad more. You have an adequate caliber, you have a good rest, you are a confident shooter, the shooting conditions are good, and there is simply no way you can stalk closer to it. Would you take a shot... I believe many of us have been in a similar situation at one time or another, and I bet many have tried.
Boils down this: Long range hunting is legal last time I checked. If one is not comfortable doing it, good on them, and I certainly will not slam them, nor should anyone else. If one is comfortable doing it, good on you, and as stated, no one should slam you either.
My $0.02 worth...Happy Hunting
Wow, interesting replies.
Here is a scenario that most `ethical and responsible`hunters have probably encountered. You spot an animal at 500 or so yards...maybe a tad more. You have an adequate caliber, you have a good rest, you are a confident shooter, the shooting conditions are good, and there is simply no way you can stalk closer to it. Would you take a shot... I believe many of us have been in a similar situation at one time or another, and I bet many have tried.
Boils down this: Long range hunting is legal last time I checked. If one is not comfortable doing it, good on them, and I certainly will not slam them, nor should anyone else. If one is comfortable doing it, good on you, and as stated, no one should slam you either.
My $0.02 worth...Happy Hunting
The story in his book, Hell I Was There!, except I think he claims it was an even longer shot. Like 600 yards or something...
(mods mine)
(I'd wonder about retrieving something that I can't get closer to, but let's entertain the hypothetical anyway). Let me ask this: Are we comfortable with inserting any value for range here? 800 yards? 1,000? 1,500? How about adjusting the other variables? For example, the effectiveness of caliber or cartridge can also be very subjective. You can in theory kill most any game animal with a rimfire, but should you? I suppose a very skilled bowhunter could probably make the shot at 70 yards, but should he? Should we make it a 'free for all' and leave all such decisions to the individual? There are no clearly defined black and white boundaries here but, imho, there are generally accepted standards and expectations. Most hunters know where theirs lie. But speaking for myself only, by way of example, I wouldn't dream of suggesting to a new hunter (however great a target shooter he might be) that he should push the envelope on range. As others have said, pulling the trigger is such a small part of the overall endeavour.
That's a bit of a disappointing post coming from someone who has hunted extensively. Basically, you base your ethics on caliber selection. If you were to hit a caribou in the lower front leg at 1500m with your 50 BMG then that's somehow better than doing the same with a 300WM?
Ask your 30 lb African creature if it would prefer to have its lower leg shot off with a 375 or a 270?
Many a front leg has been removed at 25-250 yds as well, my point is that given the terrain a second lethal shot should be within the ability of the shooter in a matter of seconds, given a good spotter and the right equipment and skill level. Regardless of range there is no guarantee the first shot is lethal it is a matter of finishing the the harvest quickly and humanely, IMHO. I believe that is all any of us ask.
