Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Ethical or not? 1376 yard elk by a 12 year old

ML's must be capable of safely handling one Triple 7 pellet only. Or Black Powder equivalent. Stick two or three in there and it will get ugly.

Triple 7??

The 1990's called. They want their powder back.

We have to go back to simpler times. Adjust or take up golf. Wooden shafts only. You know, back when 200 yards was a long drive.

I bet you still have the knickers from when you were a kid.

Na, but I just gave the Grandkids my sled. They thought it was sooooo cool. A wooden sled. "Really?" They asked if I still had my helmet. Told them we didn't use helmets back then. Granddaughter shook her finger at me.

Well, that would explain a lot. I bet your sledding hill had lots of big trees?

Na again. We went down hilly streets for the most part. Did get interesting at the intersections. We got a lot of finger waves then also.

With regards to enforcing a limit on long range shooting of game, I am reminded of another controversy that routinely is hashed out in my home state of Louisiana.

The limit on Speckled Trout in LA is 25/person. Every year, on local outdoors forums guides post pics of their clients successful fishing trips. These chartered trips aren't cheap, speckled trout are delicious table fare. While certainly not guaranteed, 4 man limits on 4 man Charters are not uncommon, there is usually the gratuitous pics of the grinning fishermen with their mountain of trout.

And every year when the successful guides start posting the pictures, the same chorus arrises - the limits are too high, the resources are being depleted, LA F&G needs to lower the limits. Other states limits are much lower, ours should be too! Somebody must do something before the trout populations are decimated - Just LOOK at the pictures on the forums for proof!

And every year after the chorus reaches a fever pitch some poor soul from La Dept of Wildlife is badgered into giving a response, which is the same every year: Every year they conduct extensive creel surveys, including what the guides/guided customers catch. The average number of fish per fisherman per trip? Two.

Lowering the limits would have ZERO effect because so few people are successful at catching anywhere close to the limit - despite what you see on the Internet.

I suspect this situation with long range hunting is similar - despite what you see on the Internet, so few people are capable of doing it that it has zero appreciable effect on the game populations...

David

Ethics are a personal thing. Personally, I hate seeing these youtube videos glorifying these stunts. I will also say this: If a less-than-ideal shot on game offends you, take a look at how commercial game is treated and harvested.

Glorifying is what you see. I do not see that. I see guys sharing fun.

This video is garbage. As a hunter It's a disgrace to be associated with such behavior. That elk deserved better.

Fair chase should be central to our hunting ethics. If we compromise the ethics of our sport and it descends into nothing more than a chase for horns and self glorification on the internet at any cost, we erode the noble heritage that our sport is built on. To paraphrase Yvon Chouinard: The whole purpose of doing something difficult (in this case hunting a trophy elk) is to gain physical and spiritual growth, if you compromise the process you're an [bleep] when you start out and you're an [bleep] when you get back.

Lol, I can just see it.

wildcat33,

If you give me your address I will send you a soap box.

Wildcat33, never mind Ringman. He's only got one soapbox and he's always on it.

Hit steel plenty at 1000. Don't think I'd take it on live game. To many variables. Quite sure that my 180 Berger's @2860 would do the deed from my 7mm REM Mag. Most of my tags have been archery and those distances don't come into play. Wyoming archery tag this year.

Gotta love Kids. 😄

I would hope she would not find any joy in that shot even if she could make it.

Nope. I disagree with Ringman on a lot of things, but getting on a soapbox is not something he does. In fact, he's pretty much the opposite when he talks hunting methods, there's not much he objects to.

Gotta read and comprehend my whole post, not just the first couple lines....

All four sentences? Don't know if I'm up to it. BTW, I wrote an article for Colorado Outdoors magazine about those goofy muzzleloader regulations. That's not a subject I'm unfamiliar with. Comparing what is considered a "primitive weapon" (and regulated as such) to modern rifles used for long-range hunting is apples and oranges.

Your post questions whether we have the "political will" to ban scopes or otherwise restrict equipment used on modern rifles. That skips right past the implication (and makes the underlying assumption) that banning scopes is "the right thing to do" and is not happening because our politicians and electorate don't have the will to do it.

So far as I know, there are zero movements afoot to ban scopes, and no pending legislation. So yes, I comprehended your post, and I can unequivocally say that its underlying premise is without basis.

Slashing the federal budget deficit is something that should be done, but we lack the political will to do. Banning scopes for hunting is just a stupid idea espoused by one guy on an internet forum; a solution in search of a problem.

Well, speaking strictly for myself, I don't need Mr. Chouinard, you, or anyone else telling me why I hunt. I'm pretty sure I can figure that out for myself. There are lots of different reasons people hunt and not all are as grandiose as "gaining physical and spiritual growth." Some hunt so they can spend time with friends and family. Some just like to get outdoors. Some want to put meat in the freezer, and some really need to put meat in the freezer. The reasons I hunt change over the course of a season, and also change depending on the animals I'm hunting.

To use your terminology, anyone who presumes to speak for all hunters on "why we hunt" has his head firmly up his [bleep].