Long range hunting?

[Raypo]

I enjoy both LR rifle shots and bow hunting. Both offer a unique experience and both offer unique skill sets. I could really careless how other people interpret the ethics of it or any other aspects of it. I do it because I like too. As long as it’s legal and ethical in my mind, I’m doing it.

[meltingfeather]

Just because someone else doesn’t have the ability to do this, does not mean I shouldn’t be allowed to.

Who said anything about anyone being allowed? Simmer down, cowboy.

[Grumpy1911]

I do not recall the exact yardage on these, but I know pretty close. I’d have to check the notes on my older phone to see. The first one was around 780-ish and the second one was 825-ish. At the time, those were my longest kills on deer.

**I know this will ruffle some feathers also, but both of those deer, as well as all my deer, were shot with match/target bullets that everyone says aren’t made to kill deer.

Good stuff! [emoji1303]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mayhem]

Sarcasm duly noted......I'm gonna play devil's advocate....because I like you. If you're really mostly concerned about ethics, then why don't you hunt with a gun? There is no doubt that it is a more sure way to kill a deer. Get it into 20 yards and kill it with a slug gun or rifle. No chance of dropping, jumping, wind, etc. I think I can answer it for you.....the challenge. You're willing to take the risk, whether you want to admit that there is one or not, because of the challenge of killing with a bow. I don't know, but maybe some people are as adept at 1000yds with a gun as you are at 30yds with a bow. I'm not, but maybe some people are.

It’s the challenge. Just like dating. You don’t go after the ugly girl cause there is not challenge in it. You go after the hottest girl in the room. [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dale Moser]

It’s the challenge. Just like dating. You don’t go after the ugly girl cause there is not challenge in it. You go after the hottest girl in the room. [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There’s a time and place for every type of “hunt”, sir..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mayhem]

There’s a time and place for every type of “hunt”, sir..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True. Some times you have to pick up the rifle and bust out of the slump if you know what I mean?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[meltingfeather]

"Because I can and choose to" is a good enough reason for anyone to do anything that doesn't affect another-- if someone is worried about what I'm doing that's all the more reason for me not to worry about anything they've got to say. Everyone draws their lines in different places and I'm not entitled to say anything to anyone about where they draw their lines.

[Dale Moser]

True. Some times you have to pick up the rifle and bust out of the slump if you know what I mean?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And some years you kill a beautiful trophy opening morning of archery season, then whip out the rifle and start mowing down culls and hogs because they’re there!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mayhem]

And some years you kill a beautiful trophy opening morning of archery season, then whip out the rifle and start mowing down culls and hogs because they’re there!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Touché’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Huntingfool]

Sarcasm duly noted......I'm gonna play devil's advocate....because I like you. If you're really mostly concerned about ethics, then why don't you hunt with a gun? There is no doubt that it is a more sure way to kill a deer. Get it into 20 yards and kill it with a slug gun or rifle. No chance of dropping, jumping, wind, etc. I think I can answer it for you.....the challenge. You're willing to take the risk, whether you want to admit that there is one or not, because of the challenge of killing with a bow. I don't know, but maybe some people are as adept at 1000yds with a gun as you are at 30yds with a bow. I'm not, but maybe some people are.

read my post please - to repeat my response - the "challenge" is at the cost of an ethical shot on a live animal.

I get that now days ethics is not a popular PC topic. Why have I many times had a 200 yard shot with my rifle but chose to get out of the blind and stalk up to 100 yards for my shot? Because I want to lower the percentage of wounding an animal.

Some of guys will never understand that wounding an animal is something to try to avoid at all cost. I have killed more animals than I can count and have make mistakes but I will do all in my power to limit those mistakes. To take a higher chance of wounding an animal because it is a "challenge" ??

"I cant believe some people still think ethics is a thing in hunting......" - someone stated in an earlier post here - pretty much a summary of our society - one would hope hunters would have a higher standard - apparently not

[TX03RUBI]

Sarcasm duly noted......I'm gonna play devil's advocate....because I like you. If you're really mostly concerned about ethics, then why don't you hunt with a gun? There is no doubt that it is a more sure way to kill a deer. Get it into 20 yards and kill it with a slug gun or rifle. No chance of dropping, jumping, wind, etc. I think I can answer it for you.....the challenge. You're willing to take the risk, whether you want to admit that there is one or not, because of the challenge of killing with a bow. I don't know, but maybe some people are as adept at 1000yds with a gun as you are at 30yds with a bow. I'm not, but maybe some people are.

I made this same argument last year, and it royally ****** everyone off lol I have nothing against bow hunting, and wished I had the time to get back into it. But you can’t argue that the bow is as efficient of a way to kill as the rifle. Yet people continue to choose the bow for the challenge, and still judge others who seek a different challenge. As long as either remain within their own capabilities I have no issue with either.

[Huntingfool]

"Because I can and choose to" is a good enough reason for anyone to do anything that doesn't affect another-- if someone is worried about what I'm doing that's all the more reason for me not to worry about anything they've got to say. Everyone draws their lines in different places and I'm not entitled to say anything to anyone about where they draw their lines.

define "that does not affect another?" - if it affects an animal by wounding it and dying a slow death is that "another?"

Again at my age 66 trust me ------ I have taken more animals than most and from all over the world. But I have always done all in my power NOT to wound a live animal. So if there "are no lines" then you are basically saying we all get to do whatever we wish no matter the consequences. Sad

[Alta]

I made this same argument last year, and it royally ****** everyone off lol I have nothing against bow hunting, and wished I had the time to get back into it. But you can’t argue that the bow is as efficient of a way to kill as the rifle. Yet people continue to choose the bow for the challenge, and still judge others who seek a different challenge. As long as either remain within their own capabilities I have no issue with either.

Some do and others are just thinking about the issue to come up with what they themselves are comfortable doing. On the challenge of bow hunting though I think the “challenge” is being close to the animal to take the shot. I don’t find it any more challenging to accurately shoot a bow at 20 yards than I do a rifle at 100 yards (in other words both shots are virtually automatic to be dead accurate in the vitals). I also think a well placed bow shot is pretty efficient at killing an animal just like a well placed rifle shot. Is a rifle more efficient? Probably so but dead is dead. I do find it more challenging to be 20 yards from an animal than 100. Also, there are other reasons to bow hunt. The reasons I bow hunt has nothing to do with it being challenging or not.

[JTeLarkin08]

I made this same argument last year, and it royally ****** everyone off lol I have nothing against bow hunting, and wished I had the time to get back into it. But you can’t argue that the bow is as efficient of a way to kill as the rifle. Yet people continue to choose the bow for the challenge, and still judge others who seek a different challenge. As long as either remain within their own capabilities I have no issue with either.

You mean your on a bow hunting site and don’t bowhunt? Seems to be common theme around here these days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TX03RUBI]

Some do and others are just thinking about the issue to come up with what they themselves are comfortable doing. On the challenge of bow hunting though I think the “challenge” is being close to the animal to take the shot. I don’t find it any more challenging to accurately shoot a bow at 20 yards than I do a rifle at 100 yards (in other words both shots are virtually automatic to be dead accurate in the vitals). I also think a well placed bow shot is pretty efficient at killing an animal just like a well placed rifle shot. Is a rifle more efficient? Probably so but dead is dead. I do find it more challenging to be 20 yards from an animal than 100. Also, there are other reasons to bow hunt. The reasons I bow hunt has nothing to do with it being challenging or not.

Absolutely. Dead is dead, and I don’t have an issue with either as long as they are within your personal means. A rifle is just easier to do that with.