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 that's true it makes the show even worse than I originally thought.

quote:

Originally posted by sep:

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 that's true it makes the show even worse than I originally thought.

And probably under investigation! Our local ADF&G Officer is a lurker on lots of forums and social media!

Well folks, this is the trend now and it won't be going away any time soon. There are at least 5 builders of these super accurate long range rifles that tout one hole groups at 100 yards and the ability to vaporize a grapefruit at 800 plus yards repeatedly with these rifles and some other gear like rangefinders, special scopes and wind meters. I believe most of them require or at least have the option for the purchaser to attend a long range shooting skills school to hone the ability/understand the limits of long range shooting tactics. You would be surprised by the ability of these rigs, shot by a person of talent/knowledge to hit small targets at extreme range....at a very high percentage of hit. I am with most others and do not condone hunting game like this at all...but am impressed by the technology/ability of these rigs. What I am surprised about though is...lots of people jumping on this concept, but have no problem with a large bear guide intentionally protecting PAYING clients from large bears with a fucking 9mm. Makes NO sense whatsoever. BOTH can have very bad consequences...BOTH are STUNTS....and STUPID ones at that!

Woodrow, stunts are something you intentionally do. I was not intentionally trying to be charged by a bear. But was intentionally trying to keep it from injuring or killing my friends and clients with the best means at hand.

Woodrow, you have been condeming and chastising me ever since this happened and you are certainly free to your opinion but I have been living among and dealing with large brown bears for decades and have killed an awful lot of them. Please tell us how would you have handled it differently?
I suppose you would simply have run screaming because in your hands a 9mm would not have been enough ?
You are free to choose and carry what ever kind of weapon you want for protection from all the big brown bears in Pa. And we are all waiting to hear your stories of how much better your choice works !

Plenty of stories of guys getting the crap kicked outa them after shooting bears with 375's, 458's, 416's etc. there is NO bear stopper cartridge. But there IS bear stopper placement. Wether it's a 9mm or 50mm. What most folks who don't deal with bears don't realize is bear protection handguns aren't here to drop a bear in its tracks. They are there to protect people/turn a change/deter contact. Because a bear stopper handgun is unrealistic. Better a man familiar with bears and his 9 than jumpy guy with his 500.

What Jake said.

And now we're back to this . Ohh boy .

Phil Shoemaker having to defend himself against an anonymous Internet blogger whose experience is unknown. And on a thread about someone intentionally sniping at a grizzly at over 500 yards no less. This is precisely the reason folks like Richard Harland left AR . . . someone who has killed hundreds if not thousands of elephants having to defend himself against someone that read about an elephant hunt in Sports Afield. The Internet is great for many things . . . this is not an example of one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Phil Shoemaker having to defend himself against an anonymous Internet blogger whose experience is unknown. And on a thread about someone intentionally sniping at a grizzly at over 500 yards no less. This is precisely the reason folks like Richard Harland AND HARRY SELBY left AR . . . someone who has killed hundreds if not thousands of elephants having to defend himself against someone that read about an elephant hunt in Sports Afield. The Internet is great for many things . . . this is not an example of one of them.

Mike,

I took the liberty to add the bolded.

Jim

Carrying a handgun, any handgun, for bear protection is similar to wearing a life jacket on a boat or keeping a fire extinguisher in your home.

Indeed.

So many very experienced people do not have the patience to deal with the twits on the internet who seem to get their jollies from being assholes. I do not blame them.

The internet is filled with "experts" who have never done it, or been there. And there are others who love to quote others who have written about this or that.

I get so tired of watching posters beat the crap out of others verbally about things they have no personal knowledge of.

Instead of feeling privileged to have individuals on here (or any other forum) who have a world of REAL experience to offer, so many get their jollies out of being obnoxious assholes. Everyone else ends up paying the price.

As time goes by I have less and less to do with forums and I most certainly post less. It is too bad, because there is always much to learn from others........... if they get the chance to pass it on without having to deal with idiots.

I will take Phil Shoemaker with a BB gun protecting me from a bear attack over Woodrow with the gun of his choice.

This thread is depressing. Do these magnificent animals deserve to be killed by primates of such low ethical hunting standards.


Mike

I don't like what hunting has become....I'm starting to become ashamed of us as a group. Is killing so important that we throw honor out the window?

Head shoot a bear at 500 yards? Really???

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
I don't like what hunting has become....I'm starting to become ashamed of us as a group. Is killing so important that we throw honor out the window?

Head shoot a bear at 500 yards? Really???

It has become a gimmick.

A dog and pony show to sell a new product - be it long range shooting gear or a new gizmo.

Mike

I totally agree an animal needs a quick clean death. How that gets accomplished is up for interpretation. That is where the argument comes from.

May as well stir things a bit more .
The "hit", blame falls onto the guide. For this particular bear hunt. Why didn't he dump the bear that the client hit. Regardless of the distance. That would have closed this thread prior to its commencement. If the guide couldn't make the shot, he shouldn't have let the client make the attempt.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:
May as well stir things a bit more .
The "hit", blame falls onto the guide. For this particular bear hunt. Why didn't he dump the bear that the client hit. Regardless of the distance. That would have closed this thread prior to its commencement. If the guide couldn't make the shot, he shouldn't have let the client make the attempt.

Wait a minute, it's not all that simple. Who is paying, who is the HUNTER and what is the purpose of a guide ?

Lol now it's gonna get interesting

Doesn't matter who is paying . Right is right and wrong is wrong . It's really simple . Who ever gets the money is responsible for what happens. The purpose of the guide is to provide the fulfillment of the hunt contract while upholding all state and federal and possibly tribal laws

The hunter pulled the trigger, the hunter bears, in this instance, both the blame and the shame.

As Mike says, neither the guide, nor the contract, forced the hunter to pull the trigger.

OK, this is now officially headed to 26 pages even though it's not in the African Forum.

That said, I wouldn't shoot a Sheep at 500 plus let alone a Brown Bear. I NEVER take a head shot on anything (self defense excluded should it arrive).

Didn't see the show but remember, as we apparently learned already, these shows are edited sometimes as much as a reality TV show. Lot's of B-roll footage shot later and blended in.

Does someone know for fact (remember these shows are often faked) that a bear was struck at that distance, wounded and not recovered?

Just curious!

Jim

I used to do a lot of metallic silhouette shooting out to 500 meters. Every day we had to sight our rifles because of changing conditions. The best shooters usually had the best spotters reading mirage that would change during the shoot. A ram at 500 meters was a lot bigger than a bear's head and sometimes you would be forced to hold half an animal off to hit it. I'm not even going to get into wind. I seriously doubt there were any flags near the bear.
Woodrow, I seriously doubt Phil strapped on his 9MM and said lets go bear hunting. If he was attempting to perform a "stunt" as you put, it I suspect he would have had better back up than two flyrods. It was one of those things that happen. Give it a rest!

Understand , this guide responsibility thing I'm talking about only relates to this bear hunt thing . Or guided hunting .
In no way am I refrencing the 9mm flyrod bear. I'm of the opinion that Phil did a PERFECT job as a guide there . Both in choosing a place to fish where he was quite sure he wouldnt have any bear problems . And protecting his clients in what transpired.
Not that Phil or anyone needs my approval. Just clearifying.
I just want to be clear that my view is the guide is responsible to make sure any wounded animal is killed dead . Then and there. . A guide should never let a client ( get the ball rolling ) if they arent ready to stop the ball immediatly. In my opinion.

Trigger finger, It is pretty obvious that you have never guided a hunter and most likely never been on a guided hunt!
Guides are not nurse maids. We have plenty of responsibilities but the hunter is still the HUNTER: or should be. The guide is more of a paid advisor who knows the area and the game. They are not responsible for the hunters ability to work, walk, shoot, load their rifle or even get out of bed in the morning !
Most of us make every effort to make sure our clients get within range of the game because we do have the legal/ethical responsibility to stop a wounded animal from escaping and retreiving it. BUT it is the hunter's responsibility to assure that THEY can make the shot and then do it and any follow ups that are required !

And while the guide can recommend which animal the client should shoot it is, or should be, the hunters decision on which animal they shoot. If it's legal and the client is happy then they had a good hunt. If the client somehow ends up shooting a sub legal animal the guide has a legal responsibility to turn the client in to F&W protection.

As for long range shooting at game, as a former competitive high power rifle shooter I am fully aware of the possibilities of what can and what is most likely to happen. Which is why I have always adhered to the principle that any animal that gets away wounded counts as the clients animal and the hunt is over and make sure every client knows it before the hunt. If wounding an animal does not dissuade them from taking risky shots then the additional knowledge that they have $20,000 + riding on the shot usually does.

I have learned from long, hard earned experience
that it is not good enough to simply get the client close enough to hit the animal --- but to get them close enough that they can not miss !

Life is a lot easier that way.

When I worked for Jim Harrower in Unit 19B and 17B as a packer There were times when the animal taken was up to the guide and sometimes there was a spefic animal to be taken. Usually that was for sheep tho.
But the responsibility to stop wounded animals. Was the guides.

Here's what the guide regs say. It is listed under the ethics section.
"All classes of guides shall
(1) use every lawful means at the licensee’s disposal to bag a wounded animal while it is in danger of escaping, or, in a serious emergency, while human life or well-being is endangered;"

Most of the rifles and scopes and ammunition featured on "Best of the West" are high dollar precision equipment built to very high standards of accuracy. With range finders and wind speed meters, scopes can be dialed in for precise accuracy at ranges out to 1000 yards provided the shooter has a steady rest and is experienced and well practiced. And wind conditions down range are predictable.

However, most hunters do not own that kind of equipment and are not capable of long range accuracy with what they own (or even with the best equipment).

If you are like most of us, try shooting at 500 yards from a field position using your pack or rolled up jacket on a rock for a rest. Then, add a dose of "buck fever" and throw in some wind. You likely will be surprised and feel a little more humble.

Also throw in animal movement. Don't matter if you can shoot flies off a carcass at 1000 yards....still takes a bullet time to travel.

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
Also throw in animal movement. Don't matter if you can shoot flies off a carcass at 1000 yards....still takes a bullet time to travel.

Many strange things can happen from the time the bullet leaves the barrel up through the time the bullet travels into and through the animals body.

Close up or longer I seen more game wounded shot at 100 yards or less because that where a lot of game is shot at.

When hunting in cover the chances of hitting a unseen twig is high. After that happens the bullets do strange stuff.

When one shoots at enough critters some thing weird is bound to happen.

Both my wife and daughter are very good shots the are very careful when taking there shots.
Between the 60 plus years of shooting deer and bear between them. Many dozens of big game animals.

They have wounded two both were under 40 yards and standing still off a good rest. The first one my wife shot at was at 30 yards. The bullet hit the deer in the right front hoof.

Why because the bullet nicked a half inch maple 20 feet in front of it. We killed that deer 3 days latter it had a nice key hole in the hoof.

My daughters was at 40 yards her bullet nicked around a half inch aspen sapling then hit dead center a 4 inch aspen came out side ways and fragments. And as close as I can figure hit the deer with some fragments. Never did catch up with that one.

But did cut the offending wood down and mount them at the hunting camp.

If we never shot at game where there was a chance of nicking a sapling or limb we would kill 99.9% less animals.

If you want to be sure that you never ever ever wound a game animal never shoot at one.

Wounded game that isn't recovered is fact of life if one hunts long enough. One tries to make the best quick killing shot one can under the conditions at the time.

Other hunters and gun owners complaining about others doing something or owning something that is legal are our own worst enemies and the anti's best friend.

I DVR'ed this show yesterday to check something I recalled. After they shoot the bear, the hunter says words to the effect, "we went back to the lodge, I spent a sleepless night", then he says, "we went back in the morning and recovered the bear". What is odd though is that in the pictures they show of the bear, none of them show anyone's faces even though the hunter's narrative suggests he was there. It is just a hand lifting a paw for the camera, showing the teeth for the camera. There is no "trophy shot" of the hunter and the bear, no narrative by the hunter sitting behind the bear regarding the hunt, etc. Just odd to me, particularly in light of the possibility noted above that the bear was never recovered. Also, the bear in the photos at the end appears to be a lighter bear than the one you get glimpses of before the hunter shoots. Last thing, to the point others have made about the wind. When you see the bullet hit the bear, you can clearly see that the bullet struck on the far left side of the bear's skull (near and below the ear actually). I am not familiar with the skeletal structure of a bear's head but looking at diagrams it appears not surprisingly that the skull is relatively small in relation to the head given all the musculature. That being the case from the video it could well be that the shot did not even hit the skull or if it did it simply grazed the left side of the skull. If someone else has access to the footage, I would be interested in their observations. Bottom line, I would not be surprised at all to hear that if and when all the facts come out that this bear was never recovered and they dubbed in photos of another bear at the end.

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
Here's what the guide regs say. It is listed under the ethics section.
"All classes of guides shall
(1) use every lawful means at the licensee’s disposal to bag a wounded animal while it is in danger of escaping, or, in a serious emergency, while human life or well-being is endangered;"

Thanks for posting this.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:
Most of the rifles and scopes and ammunition featured on "Best of the West" are high dollar precision equipment built to very high standards of accuracy. With range finders and wind speed meters, scopes can be dialed in for precise accuracy at ranges out to 1000 yards provided the shooter has a steady rest and is experienced and well practiced. And wind conditions down range are predictable.

However, most hunters do not own that kind of equipment and are not capable of long range accuracy with what they own (or even with the best equipment).

If you are like most of us, try shooting at 500 yards from a field position using your pack or rolled up jacket on a rock for a rest. Then, add a dose of "buck fever" and throw in some wind. You likely will be surprised and feel a little more humble.

Sorry Vic, simply holding up an anemometer does not tell you what the wind is doing 1000 yards away. Anyone who believes otherwise has not done much long range shooting.

There is a reason snipers work as a team and one of the primary reasons is that even highly trained and experienced shooters miss,sometimes by quite a bit, and the spotter can call the corrections.
long range sniping at enemy combatants is not the same as sport hunting !

I don't see this as an either/ or debate. Obviously AR has an over abundance of close range hunters and shooters . Nothing wrong with that . But just because some people cant make a shot consistently doesn't mean that no one can.
I see the intermediate and long range hunters more as riflemen than hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:

I just want to be clear that my view is the guide is responsible to make sure any wounded animal is killed dead . Then and there. . A guide should never let a client ( get the ball rolling ) if they arent ready to stop the ball immediatly. In my opinion.

I agree that a guide should be certain that they stand a good chance of making a solid hit in case a bear is wounded. And on fast moving wounded bears the chances for that happening decrease rapidly at distances past 100 yards.
That would severely limit the number of guides avaliable and capable for backing up the ultra-long range bear shooters.

Phil how many bears have you had to help finish off at were first shot at less then a 100 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Carrying a handgun, any handgun, for bear protection is similar to wearing a life jacket on a boat or keeping a fire extinguisher in your home.

Very true it's there if you need it, and you should know how to properly use. But you hope you never have to.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:

I just want to be clear that my view is the guide is responsible to make sure any wounded animal is killed dead . Then and there. . A guide should never let a client ( get the ball rolling ) if they arent ready to stop the ball immediatly. In my opinion.

I agree that a guide should be certain that they stand a good chance of making a solid hit in case a bear is wounded. And on fast moving wounded bears the chances for that happening decrease rapidly at distances past 100 yards.
That would severely limit the number of guides avaliable and capable for backing up the ultra-long range bear shooters.

Completely agree. But we arent talking about ultra long range. Just intermediate to long range. Which brings in a huge amount of skill and specific requirements as to the rifle , cartridge , bullet , optic and most of all skill. In my experience of all the guides I've known personally. There is only about 10-15% that actually are enough of a rifleman to be able to consistently hit a bear in the thoracic cavity at 500+yards. Some of them barely know which end of the gun the bullet is supposed to come out. . Maybe not that bad , but not alot better.
They tend to be real good hunters , just not reliable enough shots to back up a client at getting towards long range.

I was on a Caribou hunt 2 years ago 2 of the hunters in camp where long range hunters, they would constantly go on about I can make that shot when we saw a animal from camp on a ridge line. They had taking the Gunwerks course and had rifles built. They did make some long shots, but of the 14 animals in camp they took the 3 worst animals. I had past put 4 animals better then theirs till I found the ones I wanted. My point is at 500-1000 yards it is hard to judge an animal. The first animal I past up I stalked for 2 miles, got within 150 yards put the binoculars on it turned around and went back to the boat.