Thread: Long-range hunting: is it sporting?

Originally Posted by sako75

Whether it is 6m or 600m is still an execution shot
Ethics are whether once you have made the LR shot are you going to go the distance and recover the meat

Ethics are, are you doing everything you can to ensure a clean humane kill...whatever the range and tool used to do the job......I have tracked more than a couple of poorly bow shot deer shot at less than 30y for hours. (not my shooting)

Sorry VC I took the humane part as a given
Seen a mate stalking a hind and due to angle and piss poor performance shot it in the jaw
He was horrified. We tracked it for quite some time but lost out. Something he didn't take lightly

Originally Posted by sako75

Sorry VC I took the humane part as a given
Seen a mate stalking a hind and due to angle and piss poor performance shot it in the jaw
He was horrified. We tracked it for quite some time but lost out. Something he didn't take lightly

I have witnessed that too.
I never recommend a head shot, neck is a far better option imo.

After the airport today, it's probably best to tranculize it, And just get fish and chips.
Everyone else has said the rest, anything more than sharp finger nails is just plain unfair.
Much like giving a burglar a bit of excessive force, it's just unfair, he only wants to rob you.

Originally Posted by Tommy

I have yet to head butt a rabbit to death, so I guess the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Yep...classic.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Welcome to 2007. Don't buy real estate this year.

I think while we are at it, we should ban boats, motors, burley, fish finders it just takes so much of the sportingness out of fishing,
hell even bait and hooks is unfair to the poor fishys

Long range is ok if you know your limitations, But I do see a trend to people wanting to shoot further, yet they want cheap scopes, the cheapest ammo, have know idea how to estimate distance, everyone I know shoots .22 rimfire to 100+ meters , deer at 400+ accurately everyday , yet when asked how wide our shop is will say 50,60mtrs, when it's only 32 where they are standing.

The Editors of Hunting & Wildlife really do need to move along some of these old hack writers that they keep recycling, and encourage some new and more modernly enlightened scribes.

I get a bit sick of a last millennium perspective on "ethics", and dated/homespun articles about firearms.

There's only the one editor, and I don't know if he's actually a hunter, more just a semi-professional free-lance editor.

Have seen some terrible choice of stories included in the mag over the years.. like the one several years ago about a queenstown lakes branch president who, after a new hunter/member had told him about a good stag and shown him photos in a spot he recognised, while declaring his intention to have another crack at it when he had a chance. Said president then took an afternoon off work next chance he got ("Didn't have time to invite the new member along") and went and shot the stag for himself......

Or the one in the current edition with the chap poaching lilybank station.....


I must admit, I only really read the mag these days when I've been told about a particular story, or on the couple of occasions I've had a story in, to see how carved up it has become... (Hut improvements, not ethics... don't worry)

Then how far is too far?
As said above too many people with limited practice/ equipment / knowledge try to beat the latest shooting distance from the mate/ magazine/ now TV and Internet shows.
Once I talked to a guy who was telling me how he was using his magnum rifle to shoot deer at 500 or 600 yards.
I asked him what brand off rangefinders he was using? " nah, I don't need any of these " was his answer.

And with the increased used of Facebook , forums ...etc to show how great one person is, often not showing how the hard work was done to get there, it becomes a simple shortcut in the mind of the watcher: ie , go to the shop , get a rifle/scope/ ammo, sight it in and good to go. For the distance shoot , some might buy a rangefinder and/ or just aim high...
What I just said here, is illustrated by the number of people coming to hunting thinking that within a few hours walk in the bush they ll nail their first deer and bring back home the bacon. As it doesn't not happen often like that, and after a few unsuccessful trip they hang up the rifle and abandon the idea of hunting.and their rifle is for sale on trademe.

Same brain shortcut applies to those who want to tackle long range shooting and get the idea or told that a magnum rifle is the way to go. Fine, they buy that big loodenbloomer and some get a bit of a shock at the recoil. For those who don't persevere, the rifle is on trademe with a short rounds count.
And a good number of us know how many rounds it can take to sight in the thing, develop a proper load , verify ballistic tables on the terrain, practice with it, practice with it again, shoot a few things, and if we fail once rethink the whole process again( if you are ethical that is ;-)

I believe that if a distance of say 30 m for bowhunting and 150 to 250 m for rifles was recommended to the beginner or the average hunter ,it was that beyond those ranges there was great risk of wounding and lousing game.i know technology has evolved and allows us to reach further, fine, shoot to within your ability and know when to say "STOP, I won't take this shot because it is not right and I might wound the animal". Doing otherwise is criminal, unrespectfull and unethical .

I think we also engage into hunting ( or fishing/ skydiving/ racing...whatever floats your boat)for the sensations it brings us.
If I pick up my bow this year for the roar, it is because I don't get those sensations with a rifle anymore.
I use a rifle to put meat on the table, or shoot at a distant varmint or print small groups on a paper target or make ring a gong.
But again, for me, it does not bring the level of sensations that I get when I am close to an animal with a bow.

Each to their own, and KNOW your limits. The game we chase deserves it.

Did hunting ever start out to be sporting? We as humans have decided to add that word to it and with that flows many different interpretations. These many different interpretations are the only issue for me. I personally still hunt for meat and I will use every method in my arsenal including long range hunting. Many that don't like it either can't do it or have never tried or perfected it. Like all forms of hunting you need to master your skills. Poor skills lead to poor results, distance has nothing to do with it IMO.

Originally Posted by Tahr

The Editors of Hunting & Wildlife really do need to move along some of these old hack writers that they keep recycling, and encourage some new and more modernly enlightened scribes.

I get a bit sick of a last millennium perspective on "ethics", and dated/homespun articles about firearms.

I believe it starts at the top with this organisation. Very archaic in their ways for a 21st century time period......

Personally if I am being "sporting" I will be taking a camera. "Eating" on the other hand is different any method is OK with me as long as The "end" for the animal is quick and unexpected.

Could it be considered that longer range is more ethical? It gives a better chance to assess the animal, and fully identify it, and decide whether to take it or not. I suspect fewer friends get shot with longer range.