I found a very interesting article about us.

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by diderr, Jan 21, 2008.

  1. diderr

    diderr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    432
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Long-Range Shooting
    It seems like there is a lot of people out there who think we aren't "real" hunters. I found this article very biased.
    diderr,
     
  2. 52449

    52449 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    The author seems to be more of a long range hunter than old avg. Joe. I don't like the idea that at some arbitrary distance hunting turns into shooting. The long range hunter has to do just as much "hunting" as someone putting up a tree stand. We could call tree stand hunting waiting couldn't we. If you want to get really torked do a youtube search for long range hunting and read the replies. That is if you haven't already. I can't understand where the judgemental attitude comes from.
     

  3. 52449

    52449 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Oh by the way, the little video in the corner of your post is great!
     
  4. Boss Hoss

    Boss Hoss Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,843
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    On the contrary-----very well written and accurate. Way too many Goobers including I am sure SOME on this site who think getting a long range rifle, powerful scope, rangefinder, and some shooting sticks or shooting bags and they are good to go out to 1K. Much Much more to being consistently accurate at extreme ranges than just holding over an animal and hoping the bullet finds its mark. 10 years ago if a 400+ bull elk came out at 1K I would have very hard pressed to judge the drop, wind deflection and the value to assign it given the relative position of the wind to my POA. 10 years ago I would have passed on that shot now I have been able to hone my skills in the field and during competition (I always shoot for score and the matches and State Title have always been for score not group size anywhere on the target) that make that shot under almost all conditions a piece of cake.

    The hunting part of that equation is still being able to position yourself in such a manner that you will have something to shoot at!!! LOL
     
  5. gravedigger

    gravedigger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    I think he should not try to tell everybody how to hunt, we need to stick togather not fight about hunting.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2008
  6. Len Backus

    Len Backus Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,343
    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    I thought it was a mild and well written article. I was not insulted by "his" definition of "hunting". He writes about enjoying the same technical aspects of longer-than-average shots on big game.

    Sometimes I think our fraternity is a little too sensitive about someone else's definitions.
     
  7. rtv900

    rtv900 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    409
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    I didn't think it was a big deal.
     
  8. goodgrouper

    goodgrouper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,705
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    As I read the article, it struck me as really contradictive to itself. Sundra tries to be impartial and unbiased but you can hear his underlying view of anti-long range hunting coming through. Then towards the end of the article, he tries to side with long range guys by sort of implying he looks for the long range shot when he can. Sounds like he's trying to please both sides.

    I have a question for John: When did the question of hunting or not hunting become a matter of distance? Since "ethical" shooting distances have more than tripled since the 1700's, does that mean that our ancestors would have had the right to call modern hunters "shooters" since our 30-06's can kill game five times further than a musket?

    I thought hunting was more of intent. If I am trying to kill something, it doesn't really matter how I do it or how far I do it, it is still "hunting" in my book. After all, I'm in the woods but I'm not looking for sheds. I'm not hiking for my health. I'm not painting a scenic picture. I'm there to find and kill game. Period. The other things are side benefits.

    And if your definition of hunting comes from which method you use, sitting and glassing a distant hillside or pushing and stalking techniques, then what about the long range hunters previous scouting trips to find the hillside to "hunt"? Does the long range hunter not have to find areas holding game just like the bowhunter or muzzleloader hunter? I know I scout my sheep areas more than any bowhunter or stalker on the planet so does that mean I'm not hunting because I can take the long shot when required?

    The anti long range hunters are kidding themselves and lack practical thinking. They have no gripes that hold any water. I think it just boils down to jealousy. And Sundra just joined the ranks of the antis in my book.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2008
  9. diderr

    diderr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    432
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Me neither, i just think it's funny how almost everyone who doesn't do it thinks it's super easy and takes no skill. On a first hand experience i always walked draws hunting, and just depending on chance. That takes almost no skill just drive to walk further. Everybody and their mother can pull of a 200-300 yard shot.
     
  10. BrandonA

    BrandonA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    105
    Joined:
    May 2, 2006
    I didn't take much offense to the article either... But I've seen far too many people miss 100-300 yard shots so I wouldn't say it's automatic for all
     
  11. pinshootr

    pinshootr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    139
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    BUT HE CALLED US TECKNO WEENIES :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
     
  12. Len Backus

    Len Backus Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,343
    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    I disagree, don't think he's anti and don't care anyway if he was. And his name is Sundra.

    You're being too sensitive and defensive IMHO.
     
  13. Brain

    Brain Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    147
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    I didn't read the article with any bias and found it gave credit to both sides of the argument.

    The last line of the article is, "The important thing is that, though methods, tactics and equipment can differ widely, we all belong to the same fraternity."

    What fraternity that is, I don't know. Shooters? Hunters? Outdoorsmen (or women)? Which one?

    Either way, I wasn't offended by it.
     
  14. goodgrouper

    goodgrouper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,705
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Sorry. Sundra not Barsness. My bad.

    Len,
    I wasn't trying to be sensitive or defensive. I wasn't offended by the article. I see these types of writings all the time. I just thought it was self-contradictory thats all. He did try to look at the issue from two vantage points but in the end he called us "shooters" and not hunters and then admitted that he looked for the long shot too. So does he not consider himself a hunter either?