Eastman's takes a stance on long range hunting as well

[JG358]

So are all you folks saying no regulation also saying we should drop the regulations against drones or all regulations for that matter? Really what is the difference between this and other methods currently regulated, other than this is the preferred method of your choosing? There are plenty of other regulated methods out there with just as much room for discussion as LRH.

Where do you draw the line? You want to limit LR hunting next some wants to limit you to 15 yards with your bow. No point making rules that are uninforcable in the field.

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

I don't know where to draw the line. That's a question I have asked on this thread several times wanting an honest response from someone being rational about it because it more than likely will happen in time but the only response I've received from those who know the sport better than I is "leave it unregulated". That response is unrealistic and emotional. Every other branch of hunting is regulated and they will find a way to rein in LRH too.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I don't know where to draw the line. Every other branch of hunting is regulated and they will find a way to rein in LRH too.

Where in the hell do you read in the regs about a distance limit for your bow?

Rifle hunting IS regulated now and it's working just fine.

Should we ban archery because a few idiots take shots they have no business taking and wound aninals?

Since you're clearly against shooting animals at longer ranges, I challenge you to tell us all what is "an acceptable distance" or shut up about it.

 

[Shrek]

You can fly over in a plane but you can't do it with unmanned aircraft.... Probably needs to be a low altitude limit so you are not harassing game and other hunters but other than that I don't think we need to ban drones honestly. I know most here would rather use boots on the ground instead of substituting technology and capital for scouting and on hunting days flying and hunting is banned because it gives unfair advantage to other hunters in the field not because it harms game.

 

[Beendare]

Here is the article

http://blog.eastmans.com/long-range...mail&utm_term=0_aec388f646-3d5dccd9f9-9557477

Its an ethical question we all should determine prior to the hunt;

It doesn't matter the weapon, our ethical distance is 2/3rds of what it is on the range....or less!

I've seen cases where guys need to cut that distance to 1/2- either due to nerves...or environmental factors..... Plus the fact that animals move...and targets don't

Too many times guys stretch their effective range 'Because it as a good animal'

 

[JG358]

I don't know where to draw the line. That's a question I have asked on this thread several times wanting an honest response from someone being rational about it because it more than likely will happen in time but the only response I've received from those who know the sport better than I is "leave it unregulated". That response is unrealistic and emotional. Every other branch of hunting is regulated and they will find a way to rein in LRH too.

Their are tons of regulations pertaining to rifle hunting; Min bullet diameter, min bullet weight, barrel length, overall length, muzzle energy, max rifle weight. Kinda like min draw weight, arrow weight, BH diameter, you get the idea. You want to regulate max distance which is unenforceable. It would be another emotion based feel good regulation that does absolutely nothing.

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

Where in the hell do you read in the regs about a distance limit for your bow?

Rifle hunting IS regulated now and it's working just fine.

Should we ban archery because a few idiots take shots they have no business taking and wound aninals?

Since you're clearly against shooting animals at longer ranges, I challenge you to tell us all what is "an acceptable distance" or shut up about it.

Did I ever say I am against shooting animals at a distance? Nope quite to the contrary, several times in this discussion I have said I do not take issue with LRH it's just not for me at this time. I never said distance limits should be imposed. I asked what do LRH think reasonable limits to be imposed are? That could be and entire gauntlet of limitations on gear from from optics to a remote operated gun that can be fired from home. I never said ban LRH and anyone who has taken my posts that way are clearly far to emotional about the subject matter to have this discussion rationally, including yourself. At no point in my post have I questioned anyone's personal ethics on taking long shots nor their integrity as hunters, I was simply encouraging rational intellectual debate on a hot topic that is currently in the cross hairs at the moment but several of you on here appear way to oversensitive to do that.

 

[MattB]

Where in the hell do you read in the regs about a distance limit for your bow?

Rifle hunting IS regulated now and it's working just fine.

Should we ban archery because a few idiots take shots they have no business taking and wound aninals?

Since you're clearly against shooting animals at longer ranges, I challenge you to tell us all what is "an acceptable distance" or shut up about it.

It was previously stated that Idaho imposed a 16 lb. weight limitation on rifles in an effort to prohibit the use of .50 BMG rifles in an effort to limit shot range. When you read about kills at distances of 1,000 yards (and some approaching twice that), my sense is that we are seeing shots that fly in the face of the spirit of that regulation even though the equipment used conforms, so one could argue (at least in ID) the current regulations may not be working. My understanding is that, in a similar spirit, CO has a regulation that does not permit magnified scopes on muzzleloaders. To that end, I do not think that the issue will be addressed via an arbitrary distance limitation (which would be virually uninforceable) but rather through further limitations on equipment (i.e. further limits on rifle weights, limitations on maximum scope magnification, etc.).

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

It was previously stated that Idaho imposed a 16 lb. weight limitation on rifles in an effort to prohibit the use of .50 BMG rifles in an effort to limit shot range. When you read about kills at distances of 1,000 yards (and some approaching twice that), my sense is that we are seeing shots that fly in the face of the spirit of that regulation even though the equipment used conforms, so one could argue (at least in ID) the current regulations may not be working. My understanding is that, in a similar spirit, CO has a regulation that does not permit magnified scopes on muzzleloaders. To that end, I do not think that the issue will be addressed via an arbitrary distance limitation (which would be virually uninforceable) but rather through further limitations on equipment (i.e. further limits on rifle weights, limitations on maximum scope magnification, etc.).

^^^^this

 

[robby denning]

Howdy. I appreciate this discussion and for the most part it has been pretty good. However, consulting with Ryan and a few other members, it's starting to head nowhere. Many points made and opinions expressed, some good, some bad, some elitist, some clueless. Let's just lock it where it stands before it gets ugly.