Reluctantly Obliging Matt Rinella

[BuckeyeRifleman]

I’m drawing attention to the absurdity of picking some number and then expecting others to conform their ethics around it.

It really is ridiculous. I’ve passed on 300 yard shots and taken shots well past 500.

Hell I’ve passed on 50 yards shots come to think of it.

Animal behavior, weather/wind, shooting position all come into the decision.

All that being said, I get really selective past 500 and I’m not quite sure I’d go too far beyond 600 even when everything is perfect, despite being into long range shooting as a hobby.

But that’s me, and I’m not gonna put my personal ethics on someone else.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Where should the line be? What is fair for the animal?

Fair chase is allowing the animal to be able to detect your presence in a reasonable scenario.

“The Boone and Crockett Club defines fair chase hunting as the lawful, ethical, and sportsmanlike pursuit of wild game in a way that doesn't give the hunter an unfair advantage over the animal. The main idea of fair chase is to ensure that the hunter has a reasonable chance of failure and the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping predation. If the animal doesn't have a reasonable chance of escape, the hunt can't be considered fair chase”

 

[KurtR]

Fair chase is allowing the animal to be able to detect your presence in a reasonable scenario.

“The Boone and Crockett Club defines fair chase hunting as the lawful, ethical, and sportsmanlike pursuit of wild game in a way that doesn't give the hunter an unfair advantage over the animal. The main idea of fair chase is to ensure that the hunter has a reasonable chance of failure and the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping predation. If the animal doesn't have a reasonable chance of escape, the hunt can't be considered fair chase”

What’s a reasonable chance of escape?

 

[Pacific_Fork]

What’s a reasonable chance of escape?

You have the ability to think this one through. I know you can do it.

Is shooting bedded bull at 1,000 yards reasonable? Would he detect your presence without an Irish car bomb going off next to you? No, ok so start there and work your way towards a reasonable hunting scenario.

 

[KurtR]

You have the ability to think this one through. I know you can do it.

Is shooting bedded bull at 1,000 yards reasonable? Would he detect your presence without an Irish car bomb going off next to you? No, ok so start there and work your way towards a reasonable hunting scenario.

So 1000 yards it how do you enforce the so called reasonable distance?

You with think success rates would be higher than 10% with all these unethical non fair chases people out hunting now. Odd but I guess creating problems that aren’t there is a way of life for some now

 

[bradmacmt]

From my POV, when an animal's senses are removed from the equation, it's no longer hunting, and is mostly just killing. I don't think there's anything wrong with taking game beyond where its senses can protect it, but I also wouldn't call it strictly "fair chase" either.

At the end of the day one has to make one's own choices and live with them. Your own conscience should be your guide (unless you're a sociopath). After all, hunting's ultimate aim is killing an animal. If one want's to get completely "pure" about it, hang up your rifle or bow, and eliminate all meat from your diet.

Participating in "industrial animal agriculture" is far more inhumane and unethical in my view than shooting an elk beyond where its senses can protect it. I wonder if Matt Rinella buys bacon from Hormel, beef from Cargill, or chicken from Purdue? From my perspective, that's participating in a culture far more unethical than shooting an unaware game animal.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

So 1000 yards it how do you enforce the so called reasonable distance?

You with think success rates would be higher than 10% with all these unethical non fair chases people out hunting now. Odd but I guess creating problems that aren’t there is a way of life for some now

Many, many game laws are difficult to enforce. Ethics are doing the right thing when no one is watching.

I’d strongly argue against buying into success rates as gospel. Almost none of them are accurate. Mature “trophy” animals are a fraction of what they were before this new tech and long range craze started 10 years ago. Also, While wound loss has been a thing since people were chucking spears it’s certainly an issue for long range compounds and rifles that shouldn’t be brushed off like no big deal.

For the record I have lots of experience long range and not just some old curmudgeon.

 

[CMP70306]

Fair chase is allowing the animal to be able to detect your presence in a reasonable scenario.

“The Boone and Crockett Club defines fair chase hunting as the lawful, ethical, and sportsmanlike pursuit of wild game in a way that doesn't give the hunter an unfair advantage over the animal. The main idea of fair chase is to ensure that the hunter has a reasonable chance of failure and the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping predation. If the animal doesn't have a reasonable chance of escape, the hunt can't be considered fair chase”

You have the ability to think this one through. I know you can do it.

Is shooting bedded bull at 1,000 yards reasonable? Would he detect your presence without an Irish car bomb going off next to you? No, ok so start there and work your way towards a reasonable hunting scenario.

So the question becomes how far can an animal scent you and should you have to come in upwind to give it a fair chance?

I’ve had deer at 50 yards that couldn’t care less that I was there after I had already killed one of them, does that mean I had an unfair advantage?

 

[cuerro viejo]

So if a hunt code is traditional/historically 100% success is it fair chase?

 

[Pacific_Fork]

That’s a hard question and glad I’m not on a wildlife board trying to determine and legislate. Gun to my head id start around 500 yards for various reasons around game senses, since you asked.

To your second question, no. That should be obvious.

So the question becomes how far can an animal scent you and should you have to come in upwind to give it a fair chance?

I’ve had deer at 50 yards that couldn’t care less that I was there after I had already killed one of them, does that mean I had an unfair advantage?

 

[Hnthrdr]

Accuracy is only one part of that argument. I could nail 700+ shots all day; I am confident and competent at that range. Ethics, in terms of fair chase, come into play as well. Say you were competent and accurate at a mile. Absurd, I know, but is it really hunting at that point? Where is the cutoff? If the animal has no chance to detect you and escape, is it fair chase? Just because you can make a shot doesn't necessarily mean you should.

Made my longest shot on a buck last year at 490, dumped him, but that 500 and in seems very fair… honestly 500 yards is a heck of a poke, I get it folks can shoot accurately to much much further, but it often doesn’t “feel sporting” at least for me… which it is a personal choice so everyone will have to figure out where “fair” and ethical intersect for them

 

[Weldor]

Fair chase, crowds, competion from others, time constraints, list is long. That's a tough nut to crack.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

The fact is people in the “industry” are promoting 1,000 yard + kill shots.

If it was legal for some to sit in their home and drone down a buck/bull they would do it. Cell camera hunting is done often, lol at that being fair chase.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Too many variables to say any specific distance is fair or not. There are bucks and bulls that live most of their lives in oak brush covered hills and thick timber mountainsides where there might only be a few small open areas to get a shot from an opposite hill further than 500y away. Stomping up in their territory is loud and futile. If I spend multiple days waiting for an opportunity that probably won’t even happen anyway, I’d call that pretty fair chase.

On another note since this thread started with Matt Rinella stuff. He seems to have lost all the steam behind the hunt quietly movement. I recently saw one of his YT videos was a few days old with less than 30 views. I agree with a lot of what he says but he talks like he’s been stuck in a cabin too long.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Too many variables to say any specific distance is fair or not. There are bucks and bulls that live most of their lives in oak brush covered hills and thick timber mountainsides where there might only be a few small open areas to get a shot from an opposite hill further than 500y away. Stomping up in their territory is loud and futile. If I spend multiple days waiting for an opportunity that probably won’t even happen anyway, I’d call that pretty fair chase.

On another note since this thread started with Matt Rinella stuff. He seems to have lost all the steam behind the hunt quietly movement. I recently saw one of his YT videos was a few days old with less than 30 views. I agree with a lot of what he says but he talks like he’s been stuck in a cabin too long.

I don’t take any issue with your first paragraph.

However, you’re wrong about HQ losing steam. YouTube is the least focused form of SM, it does need attention tho.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

However, you’re wrong about HQ losing steam. YouTube is the least focused form of SM, it does need attention tho.

Good to hear, it’s hard to see how much activity he’s getting on the other platforms so YT is the easiest measuring stick.

 

[Snowwolfe]

At 71 years old the last thing I need is some youngster trying to tell me what works and what doesn't.

 

[TheTone]

What’s a reasonable chance of escape?

They seem to be totally fine with animals that were killed by someone that employed a posse to watch the critter year round and also with people killing near tame town animals. To me those issues are problematic but the record orgs seem to not care

 

[KurtR]

Many, many game laws are difficult to enforce. Ethics are doing the right thing when no one is watching.

I’d strongly argue against buying into success rates as gospel. Almost none of them are accurate. Mature “trophy” animals are a fraction of what they were before this new tech and long range craze started 10 years ago. Also, While wound loss has been a thing since people were chucking spears it’s certainly an issue for long range compounds and rifles that shouldn’t be brushed off like no big deal.

For the record I have lots of experience long range and not just some old curmudgeon.

Not to much if you think this all started 10 years ago. It might be new to some but my grandpa was shooting stuff along ways out in the 60’s with his unertl and custom 30-06 along with a bunch of his buddies.

Having rules for the sake of having rules is an exercise in futility. If you can’t enforce them . Game wardens have a hard enough job as it is now .

Habitat is the start and end . That and you manage for opportunities or trophies people need to decide do they want to hunt every year or have a chance at a trophy every four years or so.

This blaming subsets of hunters will be the downfall of the whole thing. Why when a guy gets screwed out of how he likes to hunt is he going to support the people who did the screwing.

 

[displacedtexan]

At 71 years old the last thing I need is some youngster trying to tell me what works and what doesn't.

I'm not saying you're wrong (or right) in this situation...

But that same logic has been used to maintain some objectively bad stuff, like segregation.

Sometimes years of experience can show the need for a change.

And you don't have 71 years of experience with social media.