This stuff makes me sick. One miscalculation or error and they could have had a gut shot bear at 728 yards. In the bear video the distance could clearly have been cut in half so this was basically just a publicity stunt to sell a product.

This may be some kind of sport but it's not hunting in my book. Any animal deserves better than to be pot shot at half a mile.

It isn't even a big bear. You are correct. I certainly believe the distance could have easily been cut in half.

Never fails to amaze me how good those guys are and how easy they make it look. Impressive stuff.

I'm sure they are excellent marksmen, but it's a simple fact that any error is magnified tremendously at those distances. And of course we don't get to see the mistakes. If you look closely at that video it appears that bear was hit in the head-neck area. I think we can assume the shot was intended for the chest. If the wind had been blowing right to left that bear might well have been hit in the paunch.

I'm sure others disagree but in my opinion the fact that you CAN shoot an animal at 760 yards doesn't mean it's ethically acceptable to do so.

I just watched the bear video kill shot about 10 times in a row...looks like a dead nuts center shoulder punch to me every time.

I have to agree that I dislike seeing this kind of stuff. It's more live target shooting than hunting IMHO. I'm no expert, but to me the hunt is in getting in close, not being able to snipe something that far away. Certainly a skilled marksman, but something I'll never do (unless we're talking about a previously wounded animal situation). FWIW.

KG

I would very much like to see the stats on kills v. wounded v. misses.

I like game as close as possible. Maybe that's why I'm a bowhunter at heart.

I agree with the majority here...this is not ethical hunting...it's stunt/trick shooting.

I'd hazard a guess they don't post the "shot's that went wrong" videos...do they?

FN in MT

If you can do it reliably it isn't a stunt or trick in my book. Different strokes for different folks.

The critters deserve better.

I ran the video one frame at a time.

Hit was in the neck.

In other words, damn near a miss. LUCK!

Not hunting, assassination.

I would like to think I could pull that type of shot off most of the time and read when the conditions are saying I can't. That being said, there IS a part of me that wants to just once but my gut feeling says, no.

For me it boils down to this. If I'm hunting an animal that can smell me I want to be close enough to worry about my scent. If I'm hunting an animal that can hear me I need to be close enough to worry about being quiet. If I'm hunting an animal that can see me I need to be close enough to worry about concelement......... Well, you get it.

A good shot is a good shot at 50 yards or 1000 yards. You wouldn't belive how many shots at bears ect are messed up at 25 yards or less.

I freind of mine who takes lots of guys out bear hunting with hounds has many a story about how some on them have wounded bears at very close ranges while the bear was treed. This year alone he had a guy shoot the poor bear twice in the paws once in the leg before the finsher shot was made at about 10 feet on the ground.

Piss and moan all you want about guys taking long shots plenty of critters are wounded at close ranges also.

Critters never shot at are never killed.

quote:

If you can do it reliably it isn't a stunt or trick in my book.

Too many variables under real field conditions to do that reliably.

I can show you 700+ yard shots on black bears and black-tailed deer here, cross canyon shots to the little prairie they're on amidst the timber in damn near vertical country.

You won't convince me that a killing shot can be made 'reliably' under those conditions.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
I would very much like to see the stats on kills v. wounded v. misses.

I like game as close as possible. Maybe that's why I'm a bowhunter at heart.

If your gonna run those stats, you'll need to run it for all types of hunting/shooting - close range & thick cover, average distance average hunter, LR shooting above average shooter etc. My guess is there would be very similar stats in all cases for wounds vs misses vs clean kills. Why is a guy that shoots all year round and knows what his LR rig does less ethical that joe blow hunter that shoots less than a box of shells in a year and wails away at a whitetail busting cover ?

I like to shoot long range as much as possible.

I personally have no problems with those who shoot a lot and take game at long range b/c I've seen MORE wounded game with archery equipment/crossbows, muzzleloaders, and shotguns than I have with rifles at longer distances--from either being there or hearing it via friends or even videos.

I've watched friends and family totally f_ck up archery shots on deer at less than 20 yards and I sit there and just shake my head. My brother shot the biggest buck either of us have ever seen while hunting, square in the shoulder at 7 yards with his bow and a mechanical broadhead. We didn't find him.

When I bear hunted over bait in AB, I practically begged the guide to have at least one or 2 stands for me where the bait was 50 or so yards away. I was told "the bait is less than 10 yards for a reason. We have hunters every year who wound bears at this distance. We're not about to back the barrels further."

I think it is also fair to say that more game is shot at, at closer ranges than at longer range. That said, I'm assuming more game is wounded at closer range than at long distance shooting with a rifle.

It seems that someone posted some published stat on AR where they found that archery game is the highest incidence of wounded game not found. It also stated that most archery game was shot within 30 yards with 20 yards and under being the most common.

I've also read about the vast numbers of shotgun hits here in the midwest where the deer was never found, or folks who are killing these deer are finding encapsulated slugs, broadheads, etc.

My position: if you can get closer, do it. I would never personally back up or stay put b/c I want to shoot long range at an animal just to see if I can make the shot. I'd also take a long poke if I felt just as confident with the current conditions as I would if I was bowhunting from a treestand.

I watched the video again....looks the same...bullet struck right in the shoulder with a secondary "poof" visible just to the left and high that makes it appear to be a hit in the neck, then the dirt behind. That's what I see. It may appear to hit the neck b/c the bear's shoulder is so far fwd.

That isnt hunting, its shooting at a living animal at long range. Just as no Ph would think shooting an unwounded Cape Buffalo at 200 yards is hunting, I dont think there is any reason to shoot at unwounded game at that distance, period. We owe it to the animals we hunt to dispatch them cleanly and quickly. I have lost animals due to a bad shot and it SUCKS!!! I dont have many instances but each is burned into my brain and forever will be.

I have been working with our Department SWAT sniper this year and we have gone to the 1000 yard range several times. I have seen first hand the effect of wind on bullets; you may know what the wind speed is at barrel, and can interpret the wind at target, but the distance between the two is where you make it or break it. A gust somewhere in the middle ruins a perfectly good shot. At the range it just drives down your average, ruins your group and makes you work harder on the next shot. In a hunting scenario it can cause wounded animals that die a slow and painful death. We owe them more than that!\
Eterry

Eterry its all shooting once you start the trigger pull. Arrow release ect. When it is time to shoot it is time to be a shooter not a hunter.

No doubt there's a lot of skill involved in this but it's not hunting skill. Doping the wind and good range estimation are very difficult to learn and I'm trying like Hell to get better at it but even if I ever achieve a level of skill necessary to make this kind of shot I won't take it at a living animal.

quote:

Originally posted by The Slug:
No doubt there's a lot of skill involved in this but it's not hunting skill.

+1

It's shooting skill.

I don't look down on anyone's style as long as they know their limits. My limit with a bow is 30yds, my limit with a rifle and big game is 400-450. I know my limits, many do not.

I'll put it this way, I'd rather be in camp with these guys than be in camp with a local redneck that buys a walmart package rifle, a box of the cheapest shells available, and says "The box said it was bore sighted, so I'm good to go..."

You wouldn't believe how many folks can't hit an animal at 100yds let alone 800.

If you have the talent, go for it.

Reloader

quote:

If you have the talent, go for it.

Thing is that's it's not a question of 'talent', there are too many variables to take a shot at that distance on a black bear under field conditions.

I guess, for many, it would depend on the "value" of the animal involved too. I don't regularly hear many complain about this distance for Prairie dog shooting. Where I hunt, the landowners count deer and prairie dogs as the same...pests to be erradicated.

There's skill there but no hunting.

What makes this worse is that this wasn't even an attempt at hunting, but a stunt designed to sell product.

I'm on the fence on this one. I see the merits on both sides. I just got back from a CO elk hunt where I took a bull elk at 601 yards. One shot, hit on the top of the shoulders (exactly where I was aiming) and the bull dropped in his tracks. It was a 4X5 bull with 15" eye guards. There was a beautiful 6X6 at 800 yards that I never even contemplated shooting at, but my drop figures were 300 yard zero, -10 at 400, -25 at 500 and -48 at 600. My rifle was shooting 2" groups at 300 yards (300WSM). I hunted HARD all week in the thick stuff trying to locate the elk with my father-in-law that just weren't there. Headed over to another area and had a herd feed down the opposite slope in some thick scrub oak. There was no way to get closer, and I was very confident with my shot. Ethical? I'm sure it wasn't in many eyes but there was less than 5mph wind to contend with and the shot was placed exactly as intended. The other elk never even ran at the shot and were feeding again within 2 minutes of that bull dropping like nothing happened.

Next morning there was a hunter at the trailhead looking over that same herd and he let loose 8 rounds that I counted to drop the 6X6 bull that was still there at a ranged 400 yards as the herd had fed down lower in the night. Who was more prepared for the shot made???