Long Range Shooting or Hunting?

[scf]

Those that were interested in the Boone and Crockett position on long range hunting might want to check out the new email newsletter from Eastman's Hunting Journal. Seems the Eastmans are of the same opinion and they are sponsored by Savage.

 

[JakeL]

It would be helpful if a link were posted or the email copied and pasted. I can't readily google search for emails in your inbox.

 

[scf]

Yes I realize that my lack of computer skills leave something to be desired, sorry. SansSouchi has a thread on the article and that was what I hoped would happen. I consider the Eastman's article an endorsement of the B & C position and I will not renew my subscription to their magazine

 

[dkhunt14]

I can't find that other article but it seems I won't buy anything from them either. I have seen them take excessively long shots with a compound bow, and I have seen long shots off of coats where I feel weren't solid enough. Maybe everybody should email Savage.. Matt

 

[Capt. D]

Its been known for a long time that the Eastmans have and do not endorse long range hunting, altough they don't seem to mind televising long range archery kills.

Long range to some is something completely different to others. While some archers should not loose an arrow at a target past 20yds, others are completely capable of taking game to 60yds and beyond. I myself have taken white tailed deer to 80yds with archery equipment under perfect conditions; however in those days, being a competitive archer, I regularly practiced at 80yds and beyond. That being said, since I don't shoot archery much these days I wouldn't even consider a shot that far.

Now considering the other side of the coin, some shooters should not let a bullet go at a target beyond 200yds while others are more than capable to taking game at 1000yds and beyond.

Now I could turn this into a several page disertation but it all boils down to having the proper equipment, proper equipment set-up, knowing the capability of your equipment, knowing your own capablilities, and lots of range time. By putting the effort in, and determining your own maximum effective range, one method is just as ethical as the other. To practice one and to condem the other is hypocrisy at its best.gun)gun)gun)

 

[JakeL]

I found it and read it. I don't see any problem with their position. They say no one should shoot at an animal farther than their proven capabilities. Everyone here should agree with that. Their second point may sting the conscience of a few here, but I believe they are in the right.

They argue that to some, the distance of the shot matters more than the pursuit of the animal. The hunter would be more proud of killing a spike at 1000 yards than a 6x6 at 100. This is innocent enough, since feeling proud of a long shot isn't a real problem. But it can lead to serious ethical issues. For example, a hunter is sitting on a ridge and spots two similarly sized bull elk. One is at 100 yards and the other 1000. The ethical, responsible thing is to shoot the bull at 100. But there are people who would shoot at the 1000 yard bull. I don't care how good you are at 1000 yards (and you may be very very good), you are taking a much larger risk shooting that far than you would be shooting 100.

This is especially bad when you consider that the animal is what has to suffer the consequences of a poor shot.

Overall I guess I agree with most of that article. I think everyone should have an established range of competency and not exceed it. And I think everyone should always strive for a closer shot than a farther one. I don't have any problem with a skilled guy shooting an elk at 1000 yards. But if he spots the elk at 200 and backs up to 1000 so he can have more bragging rights he is a toolbag who shouldn't be hunting. If he spots the elk at 1000 at 8 am and has no good reason he couldn't get closer, he should. Period. I don't care how good he is. He should get closer. But how close should he get? Now that's a tough question. I guess the best answer is as close as he can without risking spooking the elk and while setting up a clear shot. I won't judge him if he tells me he made an honest effort and 999 yards is as close as he could get. OK then, that's fine. Fire away. But if he shoots from 800 when he could have perfectly well moved up one ridge and shot from 400, I am going to think less of him.

Alright. I'm done. I think this forum is too wonderful of a place for me to preach repentance and such at people. I can see where people might not like the article, but I respectfully disagree. I think that many need to be sure they are hunting when hunting, and not just long range shooting at live targets. The actual yardage to the target is only one small factor.

 

[WildRose]

Jake I can I think speak for all of us in telling you we know the difference between shooting at a live animal and shooting at rocks, paper, or steel.

 

[JakeL]

Jake I can I think speak for all of us in telling you we know the difference between shooting at a live animal and shooting at rocks, paper, or steel.

I agree. I think I was preaching to the choir.