Maybe I should add killing. I'm 57 and have hunted since I was around eight with a BB gun for 'rogue' sparrows stealing songbird grain. I've began shooting game with a shotgun and .22 at thirteen and killed my first deer at 14 or 15. I'm probably a better than average shotgun shot and practice a couple times a month with a rifle. I pass on far more animals than I shoot. If one has a chance to kill and does not is that not hunting? I have never taken, and probably never will take a running shot, a Texas heart shot, or a shot over 300yds at an unwounded animal. How does one practice a moving THS. How many ptactice running deer shots. I think that for the game that I hunt, 150lb deer/pigs, that a gallon jug makes a pretty represenative killzone. It's fun to shoot these farther than that and try to replicate hunting conditions, but still.To me these shots are getting close to shooting and not hunting. Where do we draw the line between hunting/killing/shooting? I know someone will claim, and I have no reason not to believe them, that they can hit a deer at 600yds consistently. I can also kill a deer from the highway, which is illegal, but is either hunting? capt david

hunt ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hnt)
v. hunt�ed, hunt�ing, hunts
v. tr.
To pursue (game) for food or sport.
To search through (an area) for prey: hunted the ridges.
To make use of (hounds, for example) in pursuing game.



shoot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sht)
v. shot, (sht) shoot�ing, shoots
v. tr.

To hit, wound, or kill with a missile fired from a weapon


Above are dictionary definitions of hunting and shooting.

Some people do not consider long range shooting to be hunting.Some people do not consider sitting in stand waiting to ambush game, hunting.Some people do not consider having dogs chase game hunting.Some don't consider harvesting game with the use of bait hunting.Some people don't consider waiting in one spot while others drive the game out to you as hunting.Some people don't consider hunting near a food source hunting.In short everyone has their own idea what hunting is.

Shooting is much simpler to define.If you use a bow and arrow or a gun to kill your game you are shooting the game.

We?

I would very much like to hear this discussion as it sounded back in the 1700's, in the light of a campfire when the plains indians were chatting about the first smokepole of their experience that dispatched something at 50 yards.

Chief Kick-a-Hole-in-the-Soup: Wantanaka come last night in vision, say many friends wounded by smokingpole long shot.

Brave Johnny-come-Lately: And your point is?

Chief: They die without glory.

Brave: White Man have full belly.

captdavid,

I really think that the hunting versus shooting discussion is a matter of geography and topography. In dense woodlands NO ONE is going to make a 600 yard shot!

In the wide open spaces of the great plains (and many hunting areas in the Rockies) it is quite normal to make 200 to 400 yard shots, with 600 yards not out of the question for some accomplised riflemen.

I actually prefer hunting in the woods, as I can stalk. In the prarier one often has nothing but rolling hills for cover, thus the LONG shot or a blind. I am actually more partial to a long shot than a blind, but both work.

ASS_CLOWN

Well, hmmm. These are fertile grounds for discussion. But looks like Ray has already summed it up. No need to add anything else to his post. It is right on.

It is funny that this thread was started though. Just today, I was thinking about how I sit in a stand for hours just waiting for a deer to walk by and it's called, "hunting." I should just call it, "sitting and waiting." Then, if I send an arrow and it hits its mark, I should call it "mission accomplished."

One may "hunt for a needle in a hay stack" and some of us rednecks sit around the store and "shoot the shit". To be correct, if one finds the needle does he have to shoot it in order for it to be a successful hunt? Or even a hunt? Or does merely finding it mean a successful endeavor? Should some of our threads address the question of whether we should use solids or ballistic tips for assaults on piles of feces? Would two fellows yelling are each other acrost a canyon be long range shit shooters?
Diogenes hunted for an honest man with a lantern. Since he wasn't using a rifle, or a bow, or even a sharp stick, was he really hunting?

And to carry DD's thoughts a bit farther, when the first cave man tied a handle onto the rock he was using to bash in his enemies' heads, was the added reach felt by some to be unsporting? Was there long, windy discussions about at what length did the handles become unsporting? If you used a long handle and only stunned your foe, did you get a black mark on your head-bashing license?
Alas, there are no answers, only more questions.

captdavid

When the poisonous snake attacks its prey, does it say to itself...this is not fair...I will only use one fang.

Does the lion say...this is only an Impala....I will give it a chance and only run on 3 legs.

To take your post one step further....should you be using a gun??

Mike

Good post Ray.



But I'll also add that I like to gaze at antler material. My season is over, I was successful, and I'm already planning for next years hunt. And part of that planning will include shooting and developing loads for both of my Model 70 338's. One is for Deer, the other for Elk. I could use either for both, but what fun is that?

JBabcock, that looks like one fine moose you have there. Did you have to hunt him up, or merely shoot him?

Tried to get this going earlier,didnt fly.Here we go again.I live in topography of 50% natural bush,50% agricultural/residential.A lot of our whitetail have become urbanized and human friendly to a degree.Some have stayed high in the hills,and only see humans via hunting season.Some people here so called hunt off of such and such drive,crescent or street,some hunt high in the bush country,10's of miles away from the nearest sound.The ones in urbania sometimes bait or for whatever reason usually shoot bigger racks.The guys in the hills work for 2 weeks to nail their trophy.Who's hunting,who's shooting?THANKYOU

Mike, The snake/lion are animals. They and the Indian kill to eat. We are more than animals. I hope. I do not hunt just for food, although I eat what I kill with the exception of 'pests.' I suppose if I did I might look at it differently. The hunting experience is part shooting and part killing. To me it is so much more: the preperation, the anticipation, the camp, the friends, the outdoors and the rememberances all are equal. capt david

capt david

I guess a posting like yours brings out the extreme pro gun in me and with respect I think the theme of your postings is "a gun is not needed"

I realise that is not your intention but I am sure you know what I mean.

Mike

I think I've just slid a little on the scale over the years. I used to be 75% Hunt and 25% Shoot when I grew up hunting mule deer on public land in New Mexico. I hunted hard. If the oppportunity to shoot at a buck came, it was probably the one and only chance I would have that year, with tremendous self-imposed pressure to make it count.

Forty five years later I mostly hunt big game on guided hunts. I pay to have the best help hunting the game. Sure I "hunt", but I defer to the expert that knows the game better than me and knows the terrain better than me.

"Shooting" is my job. No one knows ME better than me. I don't raise the scope to my eye unless it feels right. I feel a little pressure, because a lot of hard work by others got me to that moment. It's my job to finish the hunt right.

I'd say I'm 25% Hunt and 75% Shoot now.

Capt. David,

I will expand on a notion that several have danced
around. Be careful of being too judgemental, using
your context of "hunting", and the local traditions,
and ethics, and applying those "rules", to another's
methods. As an example, I grew up shooting cottontail
rabbits, running in front of a beagle, with a .22 rifle,
because we needed the food, and .22 ammo was cheaper than
shotgun ammo. For me shooting a running buck, in the
northern forests of Wisconsin, is not only well within my
skills, it is a big part of the thrill of whitetail
hunting. Of my 30 some whitetail bucks, at least 15 have
been hauling butt through the timber, across a crop field,
or a river bottom. Actually where I come from, a 200
yard shot, in some circles, is considered close to slob
hunting. So as you can see, one man's poor ethics,
could be an exceptable practice, and even in some cases,
the sign of a very skilled hunter. If you toss in
a wide variety of skills, experience, and situations,
it becomes very difficult for one man to question another
man's hunting practices, without being there, and knowing
the man. Within my hunting camp, I might ask
another hunter, why they did what they did, but even then,
I try not to be judgemental. If something went wrong,
for that hunter, I know that they already feel bad. If
they don't appear to be bothered by a wounded animal,
or by a missed opportunity, that is when judgement
kicks in for me.

Squeeze

Well first I hunted him, then I shot him!

I got that Moose in Nome Alaska, 2000. Also shot my 1st Grizzly that year. I hunted it first, then shot it too!

I think the area you live dictates the methods used to hunt. If you then believe yours is the only way to do it, you develop prejudices against people who do it differently. When I lived in Wyoming, I used to take from 3 to 50 animals a year(antelope, deer, elk, badger, and coyote). I went for 8 years without a single miss, and almost all my shots were at undisturbed game. It was the same when I lived in Texas.

Now I live in North Dakota where you may get one or two shots a year at game that has not been pushed; these shots where I hunt are usually in the 150-300 yds. range. Most of the larger bucks I've taken here have been with running shots at 10 to 50 yds in heavy brush.