Hunting’s Newest Controversy: Snipers

[billc]

Here is the big problem as I see it. Bow,muzzlerloader,rifle ,handgun is all ways to hunt. Each one has little to do when an animal is wounded as that normally falls back to hunter error more then the weapon choice.

Ethics or morals is for each of us to decide for ourselves on how WE HUNT FOR OURSELVES not to judge others. It pisses me off that even the guy in the story is quick to through bow hunting under the bus to make his way look ok. No one gains anything when we do the this way is not hunting because I will not do it.

This way takes a different skill set then bow and the other ways. But it all ends up the same in the end with a dead,passed on, missed or wounded animal. The whole this is not hunting because you don't get close to the animal is the same as the anti's saying why not just shot it with a camera. You carry a weapon to hunt and kill in the end plan and simple if not take the camera instead. I know it sounds great to say killing is only a small part but it is part of it. Not many of us would be doing it yet if we never killed anything.

I don't hear people saying I am going back to any place because I did not get anything. They go back to try again because they did not take what they wanted or they had funny taking what they did. Lets face it we go back to Africa because it is a great place to hunt and what we take after being there.

The way we hunt needs to be handled the same as raised or wild game. We stick together and don't pick sides we win overall for all hunters. Take sides we lose and just another divide in us as a group. I think we have seen how us being divided has worked over the last few years just maybe time to work together and leave your ethics and morals for your own hunts. After all if you don't like the way someone hunts I think your free to not hunt like that.

 

[sierraone]

Not an issue for me. I may try to shoot a steel plate over a soybean cut over with one of their gadgets, but I would never be able to spot an animal at 1000 yards anyway. I have a 200 yard limit, and better yet 100 yards.

 

[spike.t]

It won't be long and outfitters will be getting requests something like this... "I would like to take animals x,y and z and want to take all my shots beyond 750 yards".

yeah right......these sable were about 60 yards away....so looking at our bush behind dont think we will be bothering with any of that!

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I spoke to a well known long range group who has their own show and they admitted that they shoot about four shots on average before they hit, they just don't televise their misses.

Or their wounded animals. I have a friend in the area that was at one time on one of the tv shows that was essentially an infomercial used to hock their wares. He got tired of that and left the show many years ago.

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

I think it has nothing to do with hunting.
Witold

 

[Wheels]

yeah right......these sable were about 60 yards away....so looking at our bush behind dont think we will be bothering with any of that!

View attachment 166247

You could hunt Katanga from a Koppie or a tailings pile.

 

[gillettehunter]

If you practice consistently out to 1000 yds then 5-600 is a lot easier. The further out you go the more you have to deal with the wind. I have a couple of long range rigs. They work just fine at close range. One of them went to Africa with me this year. Long shot was a Springbuck at around 200. I took 2 deer and a antelope this year in Wy. 75 to 325 yds. The key is to practice. I don't practice enough to feel confident beyond 500 yds for the most part. There is a time and place for it. It has its own thrill.
I have 2 friends that put the time in and they have the equipment and experience to be confident to 1000 yds under good conditions. When I saw this first come up I expected some "discussion". We are not all going to agree. One of the keys is they shoot a lot with good equipment.
I have not seen/used/ or even talked to anyone who has used the Trackingpoint rifles. I would be a bit skeptical of them myself at this point. As long as it is legal we as a group of hunters need to help one another. United we stand and divided we fall. Bruce

 

[spike.t]

You could hunt Katanga from a Koppie or a tailings pile.

highest thing we have is the top of a tree, grass or a termite mound....so not quite going to cut it

 

[Ragman]

.... there is a lot more to hunting for me than pulling the trigger from distance.

As you can see by my signature line, this is pretty much how I feel for my personal hunting. I hunt with bow, muzzleloader and rifle and enjoy all immensely for each of their own attributes. But I'll do everything in my ability to get to 250 yards and preferably less every time. I can shoot to 300 yards, but I don't like to. I also don't have the equipment to shoot much that either.

For those who do and can shoot those distances, great. It's actually amazing to see some of these shots (I've only seen them on TV, not in person). And I can see how some people would get a lot of satisfaction out of it. Good for them. Just not for me. I'd rather hunt with my open-sight .30-30!

 

[lcq]

To each their own but while I enjoy long range sniping on paper I find the best part of hunting is the stalk. Just my personal preference

 

[edward]

I'm looking into this new system that ensures the animal never knows you are present, clean kills are guaranteed and processing and cooking is inherent in the harvest procedure.

You can watch from your office computer and never have to actually be present or develop any type of skill set.
It is the prefect point and shoot system.

The older system was a bit crude but got the job done.

View attachment 166241

The latest update really is a step ahead. Much more precision is possible depending, as we all know, on the projectile being launched.

Going price about $2Billion. Manufacturer says everyone should have one, but hey will do quantity discounts.

View attachment 166242


The action

point well taken.

 

[edward]

as an old fashioned guy i think ill stick to the hunt and stalk method,get as close as i can and then get ten yards closer.compete with the animal on its terms and turf.

 

[jeff]

One should ask where it will all end, the animal has the same technology as he's had for hundreds of years.

 

[Red Leg]

I'm sorry, but I find this unethical use of our scarce game resources to be repugnant. Our tolerating it only invites further behavior, which though technically legal (for the moment), ultimately can truly damage our sport - say getting all optical sights banned by an uninformed public voting or their ban through some bureaucratic ruling. Shooting game at these ranges has nothing to do with hunting but everything to do with using the sport of hunting to turn game animals into animated targets for "killing". How many hunters, however great the killing technology, have hit a game animal at an honest 400 yards and then tried to find the exact spot where it was hit so as to start working out a blood trail? Then imagine doing the same at 800 or a 1000. In the military, we use spotters because first round hits fall off dramatically beyond 500 yards. And should the target be only wounded, the military is just as happy because human and material resources are needed to care for him. The poor elk merely gets to nurse the bullet in its guts until it finally dies from infection. So no - on this issue - I don't believe in "to each his own" or "so long as its legal ....." This sort of abusive use of a natural resource can only hurt us collectively the longer it continues.

 

[Velo Dog]

I'm sorry, but I find this unethical use of our scarce game resources to be repugnant. Our tolerating it only invites further behavior, which though technically legal (for the moment), ultimately can truly damage our sport - say getting all optical sights banned by an uninformed public voting or their ban through some bureaucratic ruling. Shooting game at these ranges has nothing to do with hunting but everything to do with using the sport of hunting to turn game animals into animated targets for "killing". How many hunters, however great the killing technology, have hit a game animal at an honest 400 yards and then tried to find the exact spot where it was hit so as to start working out a blood trail? Then imagine doing the same at 800 or a 1000. In the military, we use spotters because first round hits fall off dramatically beyond 500 yards. And should the target be only wounded, the military is just as happy because human and material resources are needed to care for him. The poor elk merely gets to nurse the bullet in its guts until it finally dies from infection. So no - on this issue - I don't believe in "to each his own" or "so long as its legal ....." This sort of abusive use of a natural resource can only hurt us collectively the longer it continues.

Red Leg,

I wish I had said that and so, obviously I'm definitely +1 with you on this topic.

In keeping with what Popeye can stands and also when Popeye can't stands no more:
A fellow I know once showed me a video of some guys in the back of a bush cruiser, as their driver chased guinea fowl through the bush.
The aforementioned passengers, riding back in the bed of the vehicle had their baseball hats on backwards and were holding onto the vehicle with one hand, while blazing away with shotgun in the other hand, at the running and flushing birds.

They were roaring with laughter and "high fiving" when the vehicle wasn't bouncing around too much.
I am proud to say that I politely but quite clearly voiced my disapproval.
The fellow became defensive and also seemed to be somewhat puzzled as to why I found a group of howling / chest beating characters, chasing game birds with a motor vehicle so disgusting.

I do not find the super long range game animal shooting, by means of space age electronic equipment quite as embarrassing as using a motor vehicle to chase animals, but damn close.

If we are expected to "stick together" and embrace the above things, will we then also be expected to embrace flying an armed drone over the bush and strafing animals with same, simply because some country decides to declare it lawful within their jurisdiction?

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

 

[Pheroze]

This year was my third attempt at a moose in a particular area of northern Quebec. I have scouted huge sections of land with trails everywhere. The guys have even named one area "pheroze's road" for all the effort my boys and I have put into scouting. Over this time we have developed an understanding of the area and the moose movements. If long range hunting would allow me to take my moose without all that effort in the bush then I say long range hunting isn't for me.

 

[Royal27]

I'm sorry, but I find this unethical use of our scarce game resources to be repugnant. Our tolerating it only invites further behavior, which though technically legal (for the moment), ultimately can truly damage our sport - say getting all optical sights banned by an uninformed public voting or their ban through some bureaucratic ruling. Shooting game at these ranges has nothing to do with hunting but everything to do with using the sport of hunting to turn game animals into animated targets for "killing". How many hunters, however great the killing technology, have hit a game animal at an honest 400 yards and then tried to find the exact spot where it was hit so as to start working out a blood trail? Then imagine doing the same at 800 or a 1000. In the military, we use spotters because first round hits fall off dramatically beyond 500 yards. And should the target be only wounded, the military is just as happy because human and material resources are needed to care for him. The poor elk merely gets to nurse the bullet in its guts until it finally dies from infection. So no - on this issue - I don't believe in "to each his own" or "so long as its legal ....." This sort of abusive use of a natural resource can only hurt us collectively the longer it continues.

Red Leg,

I wish I had said that and so, obviously I'm definitely +1 with you on this topic.

In keeping with what Popeye can stands and also when Popeye can't stands no more:
A fellow I know once showed me a video of some guys in the back of a bush cruiser, as their driver chased guinea fowl through the bush.
The aforementioned passengers, riding back in the bed of the vehicle had their baseball hats on backwards and were holding onto the vehicle with one hand, while blazing away with shotgun in the other hand, at the running and flushing birds.

They were roaring with laughter and "high fiving" when the vehicle wasn't bouncing around too much.
I am proud to say that I politely but quite clearly voiced my disapproval.
The fellow became defensive and also seemed to be somewhat puzzled as to why I found a group of howling / chest beating characters, chasing game birds with a motor vehicle so disgusting.

I do not find the super long range game animal shooting, by means of space age electronic equipment quite as embarrassing as using a motor vehicle to chase animals, but damn close.

If we are expected to "stick together" and embrace the above things, will we then also be expected to embrace flying an armed drone over the bush and strafing animals with same, simply because some country decides to declare it lawful within their jurisdiction?

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

Plus, a whole lot, to both of these posts!

Said from a reasonable range, of course.

 

[edward]

One should ask where it will all end, the animal has the same technology as he's had for hundreds of years.

and the animal still wins,isnt that great?it can and does still kick our ass and scoot merrily away,wow.

 

[gizmo]

Just one more issue people are making a big deal about to stir up controversy and division among hunters. The fact of the matter is no one has the right to force their ethics on someone else provided what one does is legal. If someone doesn't like it fine don't choose to hunt that way but I'll be damned if someone is going to tell me I can't as long as its legal.
I love distance shooting, I have built my own custom rifles just for distance. I choose not to take thousand yard shots at animals because my confidence isn't there yet. Right now 400 yards under the right conditions is the max I'll shoot at an animal. One day if my skills get to where I'm comfortable shooting at longer distances I probably will. For now I won't. Anyone who thinks these rigs make a 1000 yard shot a sure deal obviously never has shot that distances. Does it make it doable and repeatable? Yes it does but.... you have to put the training in. Otherwise wind or elevation will cause you to miss by a mile. A lot goes into making those shots. There is a lot of skill involved. It's much easier to stalk in close than it is to get everything just right for a extreme distance shot. For now my 500 and up shots are reserved for paper or gongs but who knows what the future will hold. It's a labor of love actually. Building the rifle, load development, ballistic charts, and the like. It's very involved and that's what I enjoy about it so much. I equate it to bow hunting which I do also. In bow hunting a lot of effort is put into getting everything just right and being accurate enough to comfortably make a shot and clean humane kill. Distance shooting is no different.

 

[siml]

It's much easier to stalk in close than it is to get everything just right for a extreme distance shot.

@gizmo , I would have to disagree with you on that comment.