Hunting Vs "Shooting"

[Wapiti1]

Maybe this a great time to start discussing the ethics of hunting an animal more focused on reproduction than it's own survival?

So many lines where does it all stop?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Don't look at me, I still think it's OK to shoot African lion and elephant as long as there is a legit purpose like food, population control, etc.

There are many opinions on ethics and many are regional. Deer over feeders, bear over bait, running dogs for deer, bear, lion, etc. I suggest anyone that doesn't like it, try it. Tell me that a bull elk, even a spike, bugling at your calling isn't fun. Not going down that rabbit hole.

Jeremy

 

[307]

Not trying to define it at all. In my opinion 350 is where i judge it.

Man you got worked up super fast. No one is calling you a douche or attacking you. Great, one of the owners of the site is a long range hunter....it's still a valid question. I hope whoever it is will chime in with his honest opinion....ill gladly have that conversation and have an open mind the whole time. Again this isn't about being tribal but about having an honest discussion.

For claiming to have an open mind, and wanting genuine discussion, your OP was pretty judgemental.

 

[ttucci16]

So learning the unit, finding the animals, patterning them, and setting up an effective ambush isn't hunting?

Whether its 100 yards or 1000 that is one tried and true method of hunting. Pretty sure you still have to play the wind, get up early, stay out late, hike a lot, and freeze your ass off in some cases.

It's not tracking in the snow, calling them in, hanging from a tree, etc. Those are all other techniques that work and are shorter range endeavors.

Jeremy

I think you make a fair point. Maybe I'm just not seeing the full story when i see these videos. I think patterning an animal that well could be seen as ethical. Me personally, i would get in super close if i have an animal patterned that well. I dont think most people shooting long range are conveying that they're patterning the animals they're shooting. Usually seems like a spot and stalk without a lot of stalk involved. If you're doing it like you say, more power to you. Not for me but still shows alot of persistence.

 

[ttucci16]

For claiming to have an open mind, and wanting genuine discussion, your OP was pretty judgemental.

Fair, but again it's all an opinion to create a discussion. It's not an attack on anyone but my insight into what i believe so that someone can rebuttle with what they believe. If you felt attacked, then by all means speak up.

 

[Jbehredt]

No stones to cast. If it comes off that way, than my bad. For me it's more of a fair chase question...does the animal have a chance of getting away by winding you, seeing you, or is his only chance someone misjudging the wing drift..know what im saying???

No stones to cast? “Lazy” and “embarrassment” were the words used to describe hunters who can consistently shoot further than you in your OP. You do know what “casting stones” means right? No literal rock throwing is (generally) involved.

 

[Logan80]

I've always thought that this was an interesting topic.

I can easily see both sides of the "argument" here. It takes immense skill to take a shot at 800 yards and cleanly kill an animal. It also takes immense skill to stalk to within 30 yards of an animal and cleanly kill it with a traditional bow and arrow.

Both of these scenarios take a lot of skill and practice. I can definitely understand how some view the long range thing as more "shooting" than hunting, since you're so far away from the animal that even if it looked right at you, it may not even consider itself in danger.

Then again those that argue that "hunting" means getting up close and personal are doing so with modern versions of primitive weapons (compound bows, fiber optic sights, range finders, etc.). Technology always changes things. If you want to "hunt" for real, get naked and get a spear and go for a hike. Actually, maybe just throw rocks, or just eat carrion. At some point whatever someone is doing is going to be too "easy" for someone else to consider it fair hunting.

 

[Wapiti1]

I think you make a fair point. Maybe I'm just not seeing the full story when i see these videos. I think patterning an animal that well could be seen as ethical. Me personally, i would get in super close if i have an animal patterned that well. I dont think most people shooting long range are conveying that they're patterning the animals their shooting. Usually seems like a spot and stalk without a lot of stalk involved. If you're doing it like you say, more power to you. Not for me but still shows alot of persistence.

Very little of what you see on TV or Youtube is random chance. Especially the long range shots. They figured the animals out and found a good setup for the shot. One thing to also keep in mind is they don't shoot long if they don't have to. Not in real life. Closer will always improve your odds, and long range hunters aren't fools in my experience. Missing is an empty freezer. In the case of TV, missing is bad film.

Although, it does look a little silly when you are laid out prone on the bipod with a 28" barreled boomer for a 50 yard shot.

It's not for everyone. Just like traditional archery isn't for everyone.

I can say that learning to shoot long range with confidence and putting that skill to use hunting is pretty rewarding. Very similar to learning how to call and pulling in a bull, or figuring out a buck and hanging a stand in the perfect spot.

Jeremy

 

[KBC]

Op post #1;
You guys are all wrong! I’m right! Insult! Insult! Insult!
Op posts after being called out;
C’mon guys let’s have a civil discussion.

?

 

[Headwatermike]

I'll help everyone out and post the definition of ethics.

Yep ethics by definition are personal.

To think that I studied ethics for years only to learn this. Seriously, I get your point but the subject runs a little deeper than this!

Personally, I have my own opinions on the subject but it is like discussing religion. I sometimes am inclined to make fun of a religion based on the obvious absurdities but then I bristle a bit when I hear the absurdities of my religion being pointed out. So I try to abstain from judgement.

 

[ttucci16]

No stones to cast? “Lazy” and “embarrassment” were the words used to describe hunters who can consistently shoot further than you in your OP. You do know what “casting stones” means right? No literal rock throwing is (generally) involved.

Yes lazy in a sense that they are not stalking closer. Maybe they're not lazy when it comes to how much time they put into shooting. Why not add to the discussion instead of arguing about the "feelings" of the thread? Trying to keep this from being locked because someones feelings are hurt. If that's your issue please PM me and we can have a discussion offline. No hard feelings.

 

[ttucci16]

Op post #1;
You guys are all wrong! I’m right! Insult! Insult! Insult!
Op posts after being called out;
C’mon guys let’s have a civil discussion.

?

No one ever said i was right. Nothing i said was factual. If your feelings are hurt please move along or PM me. Otherwise please add to the discussion and argue your point instead of trying to fuel a non existent fire.

 

[Jbehredt]

No need to try to build a worthless thread. It’s gonna get locked. Nobody but you will miss it. Its been explained to you that this argument doesn’t end well on a hunting forum.

 

[huntngolf]

I see both sides to this argument. I’m an archery hunter at heart but use rifle when it is in season. Thing is, I shoot my bow 5 days a week year round and rifle 2 days before season. I’m much more confident at 50 yards with a bow than 150 with a rifle. So personally, I’m more into getting really close to an animal than the long shot. I can also understand how guys who shoot long range get a thrill out of it though

 

[ttucci16]

No need to try to build a worthless thread. It’s gonna get locked. Nobody but you will miss it. Its been explained to you that this argument doesn’t end well on a hunting forum.

Again. Please just move along.

 

[Rich M]

With everyone and their mother having access to youtube, a gopro, and guns, it seems like i'm seeing more and more videos of people blurring the line between "Long range shooting" and "hunting". In my humble opinion, hunting turns into "shooting" after 350 yards. If you can't get to within 350 yards of the animal you are pursuing, then hot damn you're either hunting some insane country, or you're lazy. Not saying this is a one size fits all statement, but as a hunter, there is nothing that boils my blood more than someone lobbing a bullet 800 plus yards on a trophy animal. I think this style of hunting is an embarrasement and I personally think it's completely unethical. I do believe that people are capable of making those long shots very consistently, but there is zero hunting involved with a shot from that range. It's more of a hide and seek game from the comfort of your perch. Maybe we need to start a new trend of mountain hunting with 30-30's. Should there be a reckoning within the hunting community to stop this sillyness and get back to the basics of hunting an animal in their living room and not from the next county over?

What is it with everyone trying to force their opinions on everyone else?

Not sure what's setting everyone off on the few guys who do long range shooting but the internet is a funny machine. Maybe just not watch the self proclaimed experts and their antics?

I don't shoot long ranges but have no problem w guys and gals who do.

 

[sndmn11]

Not saying this is a one size fits all statement, but as a hunter, there is nothing that boils my blood more than someone lobbing a bullet 800 plus yards on a trophy animal.

Can I let it rain from 800 on coyotes and doe pronghorn since those aren't trophy animals?

 

[ttucci16]

Can I let it rain from 800 on coyotes and doe pronghorn since those aren't trophy animals?

Man 800 on a yote would be one hell of a poke. I wouldnt condone it, but to each their own.

 

[Wellsdw]

I’m not a huge gun hunter but, if I shoot 4-5” group with a recurve at say 25 yards, what I use back east, 5” group or so with my compound at 50, western set up and a 400 yard 5” group with my rifle (, I don’t shoot much over 100) all of which I’d say are my ethical bench marks. Then isn’t it relative to the person and what enjoyment. Only issue I’d see is if someone knowingly took a shoot at an animal when someone else was closer moving in. As far as it affecting tags it’s hard to say. Someone could have made the argument when crossbows exploded everywhere back east. Taking a shot to beat your previous distance rather than trying to get closer when able is questionable imo also

 

[Kimber7man]

With everyone and their mother having access to youtube, a gopro, and guns, it seems like i'm seeing more and more videos of people blurring the line between "Long range shooting" and "hunting". In my humble opinion, hunting turns into "shooting" after 350 yards. If you can't get to within 350 yards of the animal you are pursuing, then hot damn you're either hunting some insane country, or you're lazy. Not saying this is a one size fits all statement, but as a hunter, there is nothing that boils my blood more than someone lobbing a bullet 800 plus yards on a trophy animal. I think this style of hunting is an embarrasement and I personally think it's completely unethical. I do believe that people are capable of making those long shots very consistently, but there is zero hunting involved with a shot from that range. It's more of a hide and seek game from the comfort of your perch. Maybe we need to start a new trend of mountain hunting with 30-30's. Should there be a reckoning within the hunting community to stop this sillyness and get back to the basics of hunting an animal in their living room and not from the next county over?

Please just move along.

 

[Swampyak]

My thoughts are shooting skills are needed for hunting. Its amazing how much space there is around an animal no matter if your at 100yds or 1000yds