Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting LR Hunting - Why?

How does lack of hunting skills have anything to do with killing a deer you ask?

That's easy, barring the use of monstrosity rifle/scope combos, if a guy does not have the requisite hunting skills (ie. ability to get sportingly close to an animal) then he's not at all likely to be a successfull hunter. A successful shooter perhaps, but not a successful hunter.

Reloading and trigger time on the range has very little to do with hunting.

Take a guy that takes to the hills every year with a bow and fills his tag. This same guy can put 'em in tight out to 800 yards on paper. Now, take another guy that only has the tools and skills to shoot out to 800 and kill paper targets and/or animals.

The former is a hunter , the other is merely a shooter . By extension, one is hunting and the other is shooting.

Thus, my rationale for why this particular forum should be more aptly titled Long Range Shooting, instead of Long Range Hunting.

What does lack of hunting skills have to do with killing deer?
EVERYTHING?
Lack of skills is why people have to shoot so far. No excuse. I know all the game I took over 200 yards was because I COULD NOT get any closer. I limited my shots to about 250. If standing and no wind.
And the truth is I should have let them go and tried another day. But I was to lazy and wanted the horns.
Now I only hunt iron sights. I dont need to kill so badly I cant try another day. I have no gortex,gps or any of that bull crap.
Im out hunting for the experience not bragging rights.
That said , to each his own. Just love how quickly you can get someone in the wrong rilled up!

By the way, there is no excuse for bubba shooting like a slob either! The game we hunt deserves more.

Oh and I can shoot, I can regularly ring a gong off hand with my 45-70 at 300 yrds. Doesnt mean I would shoot that at a elk.

Well I guess we will agree to disagree regarding the fact that a long range "hunter/shooter" does not have the woodsmanship to be a hunter by your definition.

I guess I should be ashamed of my top 10 SCI free ranging animal because I shot farther than 250 yards?

Only if it was free-ranging inside a high fence. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

My point exactly, Make sure you tell us of your trophy. The score of his horns matters more than the method taken.

What I do not understand is what the difference is between a elk or bear or whitetail or muley or antelope or sci top 10 trophy at 500 yards. There is no difference between shooting a doe or smart ole monster at 500 yards. How would either know you where even hunting them. Unless you already have spooked them.
And let me get this straight. The sport/challenge of long range shoot/hunting is you might miss? So your trophy may get away or get wounded? Dont we owe it to the game we hunt as ethical hunters to strive to make shots we are sure will cleanly kill? But wait, that would take the challenge/sport out of the long range "hunt".
I know this will change no ones mind, so I agree to disagree, thanks for the debate! I enjoyed it.

Cacci

I dno't know anyone that hasn't missed ever. That means everyone is capable of wounding, regardless of range.

Jeff

Mr Spade, I mean bushcraft.

Lets call all rifle hunting shooting then too. Doesn't take any skill to get within 200 yards of a deer either. Now maybe the only real hunters are bowhunters??

Jeff

In my outfitting bussiness the worst weapon for deer miss/wounding is blackpowder guns. Nebraska only allows open sights or 1x scope so that is part of the problem but we have had very few hunters show up that have spent anytime developing loads. You see TV shots of xxx yards and these people think they can do this with the data on the bullet box. Will I go to a muzzelloading forum to partake in a "lively debate" on how unethical it is to wound deer with crude weapons? No, as I thoroughly enjoy blackpowder, archery,and yes, long range hunting. It is all hunting in one manner or another requiring different skills and I will never critisize ones choice as long as it is legal and they have prepared themselves.

Safari

True where do we draw the line. Challenging is not a modern rifle, lets limit it all to matchlocks or even spears?

Have you noticed that many folks that take long shots are also bowhunters? I'm proficient on both ends, close and long. Each takes a skill set. My choice. Not your choice. I don't fault you for a close range shot, why fault my choice? Result is still a dead deer.

Your scenario on the elk, sorry, wake up brother, taht one gets played out, simply by numbers of slob hunters period, at ranges of 200 and well under all season long..... For the most part I'd bet the dedicated long range folks put in many more hours of time and effort than the average joe, and on average, wound much less than the average joe.

Too much name calling here, and division.

Jeff

Safari, you fail to realize that everytime you pull the trigger you take a risk. One just never knows. As to skills, you can shove that statement, as mentioned I happen to enjoy lots of variations of skills. Have you killed anythign with a custom recurve, instinctively, at 3 yards on the ground? And you are saying (you are blindly painting a wide stroke of all that take mid range shots) taht I have no hunting skills? You have said such. I enjoy that bow very much. I enjoy what it takes to shoot a muzzleloader. I enjoy what it takes to make a mid range shot also.

Why such condescending tone? Why exactly are you correct and I am wrong?

If it simply changes all of your life to change the forum sub title to long range shooting at game animals, I'm all for that, lets petition Rick and go with it. Won't change the fact that its different strokes for different folks.

Jeff

Buffalo, send a link on your outfitting, PM is fine.
I may be interested. I like your tone!
I hunt varying weapons and distances!! Preparation is the key. My nephew can't hit an elk target every time from field position at 75 yards. I can hit it every time in the vitals from field positions at 200. It takes practice and effort as you mention. Iron sights are tough but the skill level is up to the time put in. Much like it is for the mart mart crowds with the bore sighted rifles opening morning....

Thanks, Jeff

Well , No I havent killed anything with a custom recurve at 3 yards. But one of many I have killed with a bow include, A nice raghorn bull at about 12 paces with a english yew wood longbow and horn tips, [email]7427[/email] inches. Which I built!
I did state that it was bad form to come to your house ,so to speak and start something! Sorry couldnt resist. And I am done now , as I stated in my last post. I agree to disagree.

What does bother me is that "hunting" continues to go high tech. And I feel we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
No more longbows, now we have ultra short arrow throwing machines capable of 100 yard accuracy.
No more flintlocks, now we have inline scoped professional hunters!
And no longer is the old 30-30 or 06 good enough, Now we need 500 yard rifles.
All to shoot some meat which few of us need?
I do know very well about wounding, If you hunt very long you learn the hard way. enough said.
I am not a purist, and am not into dividing our ranks, Just playing the devils advocate and asking some questions.
As mini pearl would say " Im thru playin now!"

OOPps I forgot, I shot a doe once with a damon howatt hunter. Not custom by any means. She was jumping over me. I hit her in the brisket and it went out her right shoulder high. She walked off for a handful of yards , wobbled and fell. It was very personal.

Jeff,
PM sent, I think.
Thanks
Lance

Safari

Yes agree to disagree. Just chaps me that others do what they want, yet toss stones at something they don't participate in when, as mentioned, the goal is a dead animal.

Nice kills with the longbow, thats something I never could get into much. Tried and tried and just kept coming back to the Brackenbury. Have stone heads, but have only shot one, a miss, and have not gone back to that route for some reason. Though an aquaintence killed many with them over the years.

I get kinda miffed quick like you do too. I've just simply got too many years in long range competition with iron sights to know what is accomplished took much more for a for sure long range shot to impact correctly, than it ever took me to learn and become adept at bowhunting. And all other methods in between. So the time dedicated is there.

I myself fight tecnology a lot. Its like an internal battle. I always go back adn think, he we are not walking anymore, we ride, we fly..... I'm not hunting with a club or a cliff, I've passed that. All this current technology will be old in coming years. I'm guessing we may be hunting with funky weapons in years lamenting the fact that the hard way to do it was with laser rangefinders and real bullets and if you didnt' do it that way you are a wuss for using technology.....

Very hard to civilly sort this out on a board.

Thing is, I really respect each others choices. For instance I've had some bad experiences with round balls in MZ guns. I shoot conicals. I get condemned, yet conicals have been around a long time. I love MZ seasons that only allow iron sights. Yet when I hunt a state that allows scopes, I do take that advantage, as my sig line says, Just in case.

If I was out only for the experience of the woods I can do it without a gun or tags..... I am out to kill. Sometimes it works soemtimes it doesn't.

Thanks for your time!

Jeff

Jeff,

Clearly there is a grey area. No disputing that. My gripe lies with chestbeaters shooting animals way out there and bragging about (via implication) their "hunt" and/or their "hunting" skills. Where was the pursuit? Where exactly was the hunt? Where was the essence of fair-chase? Increasing the distance is easy, why not stalk in as close as you can regardless of the weapon in your hand to see just how good you really are and in the process make the experience that much more sporting and challenging AND create an even greater assurance of a fast kill?

Any fattass road hunting slob can buy shooting accuracy. On the other hand, one must learn, earn and continually hone their hunting skills.

Anyway, distance or weapon choice is not at the heart of my gripe. You know as well as I do that taking an animal at three yards can be done by just about anyone with just about any adequate weapon. Park your butt downwind of a well used game trail for 10 days during the rut and I garuantee that you'll get a shot at something, that is if you don't die of sheer boredom first. That's not hunting in my book either, its called sitting. Plenty of people do it and take animals, but we don't have a short range hunting forum. Why? - because no one would brag about it! (BTW, I'm not saying or implying this is what you did, I'm just providing the example.)

Jeff,

Just read your last post...our thinking is probably closer than what I initially surmised given your 4th paragraph.

Allen

If you weren't there hunting with the folks that went long, how can you say they didn't persue their game?

It's a big hunting world with alot of different hunting conditions, so don't be so quick to condem those that hunt differently than you as unethical or shooters vs hunters.

They elitists and their high and mighty stands will do more harm to hunting than the antis.

458,

C'mon...don't even try to pin that devisive elitism BS on me. No division here...let's just call a long range shot at an animal what it is...a long range shot.

Whats the magic distance the differentiates between hunting and shooting?

It's a fair question, and there needs to be some basis for the reasoning vs, it just doesn't seem like hunting past X yards.