I just watched a Best of the West episode where the hunter shot a grizz at 500 yards in the head. They were hunting out of Stephanlakelodge, Alaska...wherever that is located.

I'm personally not a big fan of long range hunting primarily because followup shots on moving animals at distance can be difficult and I think we have an ethical responsibility to kill the animals we hunt as quickly and cleanly as possible. The closer we get to the animals the more likely that is to occur.

I'm certainly no bear whisperer but I have put bullets into 6 brown bears myself. One by myself and the other times backing up friends. We have always kept our shots within roughly 100 yards or less to ensure the bear is taken as quickly and cleanly as possible.

Under no circumstances would I consider shooting a grizz or brown bear at 500 yards, let alone in the head but that's my ethical decision. I'm not posting this to draw adverse attention to the outfitter in the show as what they allowed to happen is perfectly legal.

I'm just curious how many of you fellow hunters think it's ethical or the right thing to do.

Stephan lake lodge has gone downhill as of late and has some other legal issues surrounding their activities.

Where they trying to head shoot it?

I guided forma outfitter in Cordova who started letting clients shoot brownies with his 50bmg several hundred yards out there. 600 or so. I never guided for him again.

I agree poor taste in shooting that far at a Grizzly. They are tough animals and deserve better. I hope that more people don't get the idea and start taking shots like that. outfitter should have definitely said no. part of the fun is getting in close and using your skill as a hunter to outwit the defenses of the bear. What if the shot missed and blew his jaw off and he ran off without a follow up shot. poor ethics indeed !

Concur. I read other forums where guys pull this bullshit that discussing ethical hunting is akin to being a commie or child molester. To me that is the equivalent of the folks, in a certain city where I've lived, who invariably say "He was a good kid" after some acquaintance or relative was arrested for murder.

I'm not equating crime versus ethics, I'm equating the attitude that you can't judge someone's ethics. Shooting a prairie dog at 500 yards is one thing, shooting brown bear at 500 yards, regardless of the caliber, is quite another. To me, it shows disrespect to our quarry. Is it different for a 500 yard shot on a sheep? I'd say so, but that involves other issues. A bear is a much tougher animal than a sheep and likely to run off into the alders, never to be found, whereas a sheep is usually shot in wide open country.

But bottom line, I don't like the YouTubers or the TV shows that treat big game like prairie dogs.

Irrespective of the ethics, why would anyone want to shoot a dangerous game animal at 500 yards? I can see shooting a B&C top 10 brown bear at 200 or 250 yards if your guide approves and you can't stalk any closer, but for me the thrill is getting up close and personal.

The hunter said the only shot the bear gave him was a head shot when it looked in his direction. It was the last evening of of the last day of his hunt. He said he held right between its eyes and adjusted for one minute of angle.

At the shot, the bear dropped and rolled around. It looked like he did hit it in the head but when they got to the spot the bear was gone. It was getting dark so they left and came back the next morning and found the bear dead within 40 yards of its last location.

I'm with the rest of you on this encounter. I just don't view it as ethical. I'm not on a crusade to put a stop to long range hunting as I have hunted both goat and sheep myself and sometimes long shots are necessary but goat and sheep are not built like bears and they're not dangerous game.

I considered emailing the Best of the West folks to express my disappointment at this "hunt" but I think it will fall on deaf ears.

Personally, I feel no inclination to "test my bravery!" "get up close and personal!" test my skill as a long distance marksman or anything else. For me, hunting isn't something I need to measure and impress someone else with the statistics or to even meet a standard I may keep private. I simply like to hunt.

I was raised or trained to spot and stalk, quietly pursuing game to a reasonable distance in order to make a clean shot. For me and me only I can say that means something at or less than 200 yards for a bear. If in fact I am able to close the distance to more or less 25 yards maybe, that's fine, but the entertainment for me is no different than sneaking up on a pond full of mallards or a bedded buck. I've called in nice big moose to less than a dozen yards or so. Great fun, no different for me.

I can't make any kind of guess where my bullet is going at 500 yards and I doubt the assurance of anyone I know and hunt with that they would either. I have no interest in 500 yard bear shooting.

I didn't see it, and don't care to, but if it's a TV show you can bet the producers and advertisers are buying into and selling the current tactical/long range/big scope/sniping view of "hunting"
Let them know how you feel.

Stunt shooting....

Guys,

Personally I don't condemn what is legal. Having said that though head shots are chancy anytime because the actual kill zone is small and the chance of an awful wound and the animal dying a lingering death are pretty high. At 500 yards I can't believe the guide let him shoot. None of the Alaska guides I work with would condone something like that. IMO No TV show is worth the risk.

Mark

quote:

But bottom line, I don't like the YouTubers or the TV shows that treat big game like prairie dogs.

This!

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:

I don't condemn what is legal.

I do. It was an ego- and commercially-driven stunt. The hunters, the guide and the channel airing the program should all be ashamed of themselves. Ironically The Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel have shied away from showing episodes of elephant hunts because of fear of public reprisals yet they will air episodes like this that depict hunters in an absolutely appalling way.

I think the Boone and Crockett Club is spot on in regard to extremely long range shooting. There is nothing sporting about shooting animals beyond their ability to see, smell or hear a hunter. There is no "sixth sense" at that distance and many superior animals are being taken out of the gene pool that would otherwise live to see another day. C'mon guys, we are not hunting to survive.

Not hunting to survive. Mmmmm . Speak for your self. I'm a subsistence hunter. I'm different than you guys tho in that I don't view it as an ethical matter. I view it as anyone that regularly kills brown bear at much over 20 yards is a chicken guts pussy. Its not dangerous game unless your close to it. I could easily kill lots of bears at 200-400 yards. But why. Takes all the fun out of it. Get within 1 or 2 jumps of a pissed off bear . Now that gets flat interesting. I imagine that is what makes elephant hunting so addictive to some hunters. I mean , Really, what is hard about hitting something the size of a pacaderm in a vital spot at 100 yards. But, from what I understand , Its just not done.
There is a guide out of Sitka that lets his clients shoot brown bear at 500 yards, possibly farther. He advocates the 300 RUM.
I dont hold him or the practice in high regard .
I think all brown bear should be killed at 50' or less and that it should be illegal to hunt brown bear with anythng smaller than a 358 Norma shooting at least a 250 grain going at least 2600 fps. .
I guarentee there would be alot fewer bears walking around with bullets in them .
The only reason most guides like 50 yards or so is some clients start acting like scared little girls when a big bear looks at them like they are whats for dinner.

"Long range shooting" used to be our weapon in reserve;something we resorted to on a hunt only after the proverbial wheels fell off on a hunt. So we honed skills to 300-400 years expecting most all opportunities to be less than that, and "knew what to do" at 500-600. That was "it" and as far as we would go.

And there was never a "long shot" at any big bear.

But today it seems the long shot has become the objective rather than the hunt itself.A head shot is a dicey thing at any distance and immoral on a big bear at 500 yards. I haven't seen the video.This is the kind of crap you get from Best of the West and the current generation of "hunters". Big boys playing with sophisticated toys at the expense of some grand game animal.

Very very very few hunters have the skills or ability with hunting rifles to head shoot a bear at 500 yards with standard hunting rifles and scopes, period !No matter what they say or do it'd very difficult to do, the target brain is the size of a small grapefruit at best, throw in wind, mirage, hunting clothes, no bench rest, uneve ground and your talking about something that's close to impossible, I know, I've fired 1000's of bullets at targets 500 yards away with bench rest equipment and not a hunting rifle, no matter how good it claim's to shoot...my guess is he was aiming for the shoulder and the wind blew it off that far, I'd never believe it in a 1000 years he tried to do it ! Bullshit detector equipment needed in this case...

A subsistence hunter that needs to take un edible brown bears at close range or he feels like a wussy?

A bit forked tongued don't you think?

You should start drinking again. The ::::::%:::Gimboot sez ++4+++++" "" posts were much more interesting.

I think sarcasm is hard for some to understand.

Long range is shooting, hunting is getting close.

Dave

Eastcoaster,

You are 100% correct. There is a segment of the hunting fraternity that WANTS to shoot at long range only. They are requesting it from the outfitters.

Mark

I can just see it now. The hunter is looking through his scope at a bear 345 yards away, almost the limit of ethical hunting distance. The bear pauses. The hunter slides the safety off and prepares to make the shot. Suddenly the bear turns and walks off another 10 yards before stopping again. The bear is stationary but a shot at that distance would be unethical. It wouldn't be hunting. It would be shooting. The hunter thumbs the safety lever, stands, and shoulders his rifle. He shakes his head, turns toward camp, and walks off in disappointment.

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Eastcoaster,

You are 100% correct. There is a segment of the hunting fraternity that WANTS to shoot at long range only. They are requesting it from the outfitters.

Mark

There are also those who want to shoot charging animals at arms length.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
I can just see it now. The hunter is looking through his scope at a bear 345 yards away, almost the limit of ethical hunting distance. The bear pauses. The hunter slides the safety off and prepares to make the shot. Suddenly the bear turns and walks off another 10 yards before stopping again. The bear is stationary but a shot at that distance would be unethical. It wouldn't be hunting. It would be shooting. The hunter thumbs the safety lever, stands, and shoulders his rifle. He shakes his head, turns toward camp, and walks off in disappointment.

. . . kudos to the hunter.

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:

IMO No TV show is worth the risk.

Mark

And if they don't make the shot, I guarantee you there will be no Best [sic] of the West TV show. I always wonder how many of those shots don't pan out.

I dunno, say he was a ranked PRS shooter that could run 1/2 moa thru intermediate range. With the rifle he was shooting . Obviously it wasnt a perfect brain shot as the bear wandered off. But some guys can shoot 1/2 moa from a bipod, and do it with confidence. Not that I'm agreeing with the practice, just saying its doable.

quote:

Originally posted by sep:
The hunter said the only shot the bear gave him was a head shot when it looked in his direction. It was the last evening of of the last day of his hunt. He said he held right between its eyes and adjusted for one minute of angle.

I think a lot of those shows use that line to justify the shots they take. We as viewers have no way to know if it's actually the last day or not. I think it gets used for cinematic effect more often than not.

I grew up hunting back east, moved to the northwest to wide open sage brush country and then to Alaska where we have everything from the heaviest brush country to the most open country you can imagine. I have never been in a situation where a 500 yard head shot was the only option. Either use the terrain and brush to close the distance or wait until such time as you can use the terrain and brush to your advantage, or pass on the shot.

I watched a couple of shows several years ago that pretty much turned me off to hunting shows altogether. One was a mule deer hunt in which the guy muffed a number of stalks and finally, "in the last half hour of the last day" he took a shot at 650 yards and a nice buck. They did a crappy job of editing as you could plainly see the deer's broken lower foreleg swinging when the deer took off after the shot. They tried to pass it off as a one shot kill.

The other was a sheep hunt and I don't recall whether it was Alaska or Canada. The hunter never got a shot at a ram until they were riding out the last day. They spotted some sheep 700+ yards up on the mountain side and set up right next to the horse trail with range finders and bipods. The guide was calling out ranges and wind adjustments and while the guy connected first shot, it was evident from the video the shot hit quite far back. I suspect the shot connected with the liver because the ram succumbed fairly quickly. Of course there was the obligatory grandstanding and carrying on about what great hunters and shooters they were. Road hunting off a horse basically.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:
I dunno, say he was a ranked PRS shooter that could run 1/2 moa thru intermediate range. With the rifle he was shooting . Obviously it wasnt a perfect brain shot as the bear wandered off. But some guys can shoot 1/2 moa from a bipod, and do it with confidence. Not that I'm agreeing with the practice, just saying its doable.

stopping a charging bear with a 9mm is doable - but is still not something to be recommended !

quote:

Either use the terrain and brush to close the distance or wait until such time as you can use the terrain and brush to your advantage, or pass on the shot.

Considering the physique of The Best of the West team, I am starting to wonder if the long range shots are simply an excuse not walk and close the distance! Another observation, on the black bear hunt the shooter talks about the importance of "good ethical shots" . . . how ironic . . . right after he shoots a black bear about the size of a large dog.

I agree . I didn't say I reccomended the practice. I just don't get too het up about it. I do believe there are plenty of guys that can do it. I don't think I can reliably do it and wouldn't try. Especially a head shot. Kinda makes me think he was nervous about his bullets ability to get the job done.
I'm not much on hunting TV. Except coyote hunting shows. They are fun to watch.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
I can just see it now. The hunter is looking through his scope at a bear 345 yards away, almost the limit of ethical hunting distance. The bear pauses. The hunter slides the safety off and prepares to make the shot. Suddenly the bear turns and walks off another 10 yards before stopping again. The bear is stationary but a shot at that distance would be unethical. It wouldn't be hunting. It would be shooting. The hunter thumbs the safety lever, stands, and shoulders his rifle. He shakes his head, turns toward camp, and walks off in disappointment.

. . . kudos to the hunter.

No, a good hunter would simply walk eleven yards closer.

To me the whole argument is ridiculous.

Long shot's on bear always seemed to be an invitation seemed like a recipe for disaster to me. 90% of the bears I did business with were between 10yds and 75yds, the rest around 100 or so except for this fellow. He had got in a trench and gotten behind us. He was in the wide open and the hunter was an excellent marksman and made a perfect shot at 270yds. We were on the tallest ridge behind us. It was a good bear and an ideal set-up!

I don't mine long range shooting at game.

I have called head shots on P dogs at some longer ranges.

I do not thinks head shots on big game most of the time are a good idea.

That said I have shot some meat deer in the head. The ranges have been close under 50 yards or half that.

We head shoot a lot of treed bears but then the range is very close.

Don't like dropping a dead but alive bear into a pack of hounds and hunters.

But then I seen it fail no shot is 100 percent all the time. Just as I seen other shots not preform as planned.

Strange things can happen from the time the trigger is pulled and through the time the bullet enters the animal.

I don't plan on head shooting a bear on the ground I do prefer good shoulder/lung/heart shots.

But nothing is 100 percent.

Here is a picture of a head shot gone bad, this deer was shot in November so the wound is healed meaning it was shot the year before. The only reason why the deer did not die a terrible death was his palate was left in tack so he was able to eat, The buck sported a nice rack so he was healthy. In addition to this wound he had an infected rear quarter from a fairly fresh 22 cal lead

Game animals deserve to be taken cleanly

Spoke with a guide that was at the lodge when they shot the bear in the head, that bear was never recovered. They used footage of a dead bear from a month later for the show.
There you have it. Entertainment at the cost of.....

A real pity to see groups like the Wild Sheep Foundation and Hornady sponsoring this show, particularly the Wild Sheep Foundation. I sent them both emails asking them to reconsider their sponsorship.

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
Spoke with a guide that was at the lodge when they shot the bear in the head, that bear was never recovered. They used footage of a dead bear from a month later for the show.
There you have it. Entertainment at the cost of.....

Goes along about what I have heard of that shows folks.

And these are the "good trained LR shooters...

Quality gear and a capable gun is still limited by the judgment behind it.

Jake,

I know some of the principals in that show. That news if true is very disappointing.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
Spoke with a guide that was at the lodge when they shot the bear in the head, that bear was never recovered. They used footage of a dead bear from a month later for the show.
There you have it. Entertainment at the cost of.....

If true this is absoloutley inexcusable!

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Eastcoaster,

You are 100% correct. There is a segment of the hunting fraternity that WANTS to shoot at long range only. They are requesting it from the outfitters.

Mark

Yes Mark I truly believe they go looking for the long range opportunity. I don't understand the appeal but it's there for some folks.

I have heard similar to you indirectly.