Wyoming long range hunting debate

[3325]

“Wyoming legislators on Friday discussed what can be done, if anything, to regulate extreme-range hunting.“

Link: https://cowboystatedaily.com/2025/0...2hKTVnMNfCuVej3Hnu_aem_JmtfaBbAtNQfk3SofwtbJA

 

[MuleyFever]

I don't know what the answer is but I am glad it is on the radar. Shooting animals at distance is not hunting. I just don't know how to define that distance.

 

[Trimbandit]

It's an interesting discussion. "What constitutes fair chase?"
I don't think the governing bodies should decide on that. But that hunters should "self regulate".
It's a good discussion to have especially since long range shooting is such a big deal anymore.
I respect guys that can consistently hit a gong at crazy long ranges. My personal opinion is, that skill should only be used in hunting when there are other physical handicaps/limitations that prevent a closer shot.

 

[PathFinder]

Anyone who thinks that hunting with a modern rifle and scope is different at one range than another is just a different level of hypocrite than the guy who thinks that distance is 100 yards more or less.
If they want to limit range, it's going to have to include excluding optics entirely. Which, as a mule deer hunter, I'm entirely in favor of.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Mattman215]

technology is getting wild, but the reason should not be to appease tree huggers and liberals in hopes of a better image. I would not be opposed to some very stringent laws as I think we are all experiencing the crowds in the west.

 

[wpeach1912]

Idk how they’d regulate ethics. You can ban scopes, but dumb people are still going to do dumb things. I have a hard time saying “long range hunting isn’t hunting” or “anything beyond X range isn’t hunting”. The definition of “hunting” or “ethical hunting” will vary widely person to person too. Especially between people that hunt for sport and those who hunt for food.

 

[Jordan Smith]

It's an interesting discussion. "What constitutes fair chase?"
I don't think the governing bodies should decide on that. But that hunters should "self regulate".

Agree.

I respect guys that can consistently hit a gong at crazy long ranges. My personal opinion is, that skill should only be used in hunting when there are other physical handicaps/limitations that prevent a closer shot.

Disagree.



The subject is too contextual and subjective to standardize in regulation. Similar to the issue of using .22-caliber bullets on game. Many regions prohibited it for decades in the hopes that it would prevent people from using inappropriate bullets on game, reducing the number of wounded game animals. Well, careless hunters still use poorly selected bullets on game, and then place them poorly, so the regulation is largely ineffective while restricting the freedom of responsible hunters. Now, regions seem to be trending back towards allowing .22-caliber bullets and relying on education and the promotion of ethical hunting to minimize the wounding of game animals. An approach I think is more effective.

 

[Sevens]

Seems like a slippery slope to me. Agree with the person who said hunters should self-regulate. Hunters are too divided on issues already, we need to be united in the way anti-hunters are united against us.

 

[LongWayAround]

I don't know what the answer is but I am glad it is on the radar. Shooting animals at distance is not hunting. I just don't know how to define that distance.

That's about where I am at with this.

I'm not sure there is a way to legislate a distance limit. You can legislate equipment, but not ethics.

I am certain that guys taking 800yd shots across a canyon are less likely to make a reasonable effort to look for blood or to even find the spot to look if they go over there.

Long range target shooting is fun. When the target is a live animal though, I believe that fair chase diminishes at some point.

 

[rookieforever33]

The regulation should not be made by lawmakers. Chances are it will either be so short you could use a muzzle loader, or far enough that bad marksmen can say "I wasn't sure but it was a legal range". If there are injured/unrecovered dead animals all over limit tags. Other hunters will regulate the bad shots

 

[deadwolf]

Know your limitations and act accordingly. You owe it to the animal, whether it’s a 900 yard rifle shot or an 80 yard archery shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I don’t really believe in trying to regulate or legislate fair chase. Bag limits, yes. What defines a legal animal, sure. But I believe it is up to a hunter to determine what is ethical for himself in a given time and place.

Edit - and I will add that I believe that unethical behavior is unethical behavior regardless of circumstances. Shooting animals at long range is not inherently unethical. Some people have no business shooting animals at any range. Other people have the skills to really excel at longer ranges.

I won’t make assumptions about “long range hunters are less likely to look for wounded game” or something like that. Unethical hunters are less likely to look for wounded game. I’ve found deer for people who shot at 50 meters and didn’t bother to look for blood.

The thing that stops me from taking longer shots on big game animals is the time of flight and my own limitations with wind calls. Targets don’t move. Animals do. Yes, this can be mitigated by knowledge of the animals in question, but I am still uncomfortable with a shot that takes a full second to arrive. The second best thing that can happen in that time is a clean miss.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Lee_R]

I don’t really believe in trying to regulate or legislate fair chase. Bag limits, yes. What defines a legal animal, sure. But I believe it is up to a hunter to determine what is ethical for himself in a given time and place.

I won’t make assumptions about “long range hunters are less likely to look for wounded game” or something like that. Unethical hunters are less likely to look for wounded game. I’ve found deer for people who shot at 50 meters and didn’t bother to look for blood.

The thing that stops me from taking longer shots on big game animals is the time of flight and my own limitations with wind calls. Targets don’t move. Animals do. Yes, this can be mitigated by knowledge of the animals in question, but I am still uncomfortable with a shot that takes a full second to arrive. The second best thing that can happen in that time is a clean miss.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

My eyes were opened to the ethics (lack thereof) of "hunters" after working a gun counter in a western state for the last 3 years. Ethics and/or basic hunting knowledge relating to the killing/ wounding of animals simply does not exist or doesn't matter for at least 65% of the people out there. You're being too generous to think that ethics can be effectively self managed by the general population, they don't all think the same as you.

 

[H80Hunter]

I think if everyone behaved like they were on day 1 of a 10 day hunt of a lifetime, and you have an XXX yard shot at the animal of your dreams, and if you drew blood you had to punch your tag and go home. I think whatever distance you’d shoot the deer at should be your max range and I bet it’s shorter than a lot of people would say off the cuff. That’s how sure I want to be shooting any animal.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

My eyes were opened to the ethics (lack thereof) of "hunters" after working a gun counter in a western state for the last 3 years. Ethics and/or basic hunting knowledge relating to the killing/ wounding of animals simply does not exist or doesn't matter for at least 65% of the people out there. You're being too generous to think that ethics can be effectively self managed by the general population, they don't all think the same as you.

And giving the state the power to put people in jail won’t change that. Trying to prevent those with the skills to take animals at long range won’t improve the knowledge or ethics of the average idiot.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Lee_R]

Idk, I think jailing some idiots and the word getting out might work better than the nothing that is being done right now. Montana estimates that for every 100 ungulates harvested, up to 30 more are wounded that aren't recovered. Animal numbers would be up and tags along with it if people were more ethical by law.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Idk, I think jailing some idiots and the word getting out might work better than the nothing that is being done right now. Montana estimates that for every 100 ungulates harvested, up to 30 more are wounded that aren't recovered. Animal numbers would be up and tags along with it if people were more ethical by law.

In Virginia, we already have a regulation that covers that. I am sure your state does too.

It is unlawful to:
- Kill or cripple and knowingly allow any nonmigratory game bird or game animal to be wasted without making a reasonable effort to retrieve the animal and retain it in possession.

I don't trust the government enough to give them further power to regulate conduct by hunters or shooters that is not always and inherently unethical. My normal rule for ethics is that it has to be unethical for ANYONE to engage in that behavior, not just the unwashed masses and not except a privileged few. No one should be shooting animals and not making an effort to recover them - without any regard to the range at which they shoot. I've personally killed three deer with arrows sticking in their hindquarters and one with his face blown off by a muzzleloader. In each case, I don't believe the hunter had any business using the weapon in question and/or did not make a reasonable effort to recover the animal. But that doesn't mean I am going to go campaign to ban bowhunting or muzzleloader hunting. And certainly rifle hunters often fall short of the required skills and effort too.

Edit - I don't feel the need to go back and forth on this, so I will let you have the last word if you want it.

 

[Bobrobheimer]

Idk, I think jailing some idiots and the word getting out might work better than the nothing that is being done right now. Montana estimates that for every 100 ungulates harvested, up to 30 more are wounded that aren't recovered. Animal numbers would be up and tags along with it if people were more ethical by law.

That’s a brutal wound rate.

 

[keystone112]

My opinion on this is split.

If you’re capable at extreme distances, I get it.

For me, wind holds me at 500 yards max.

 

[BRTreedogs]

My opinion on this is split.

If you’re capable at extreme distances, I get it.

For me, wind holds me at 500 yards max.

500 is extreme distance to 90% of fudds out there.

They are holding you in the unethical category