B & C on Long Range Shooting

[Nameless Range]

Boone and Crockett released a position statement on Long Range Shooting when it comes to hunting.

http://www.boone-crockett.org/about/LRS.asp?area=about&ID=6B455080&se=1&te=1

Without trying to rile too many people up, I gotta say I liked it. Of course it's a grey area, and varies based on hunter and situation, and should be gauged on a continuum, but to defend things like fair-chase, ethical hunting, etc, we first have to define those things. I appreciate that B & C does just that. As a guest on the Joe Rogan show, Steven Rinella said,

"We hunters hunt at the pleasure of non-hunters."

This is true and something worthy of being mindful of, especially when we are defining that which we will defend. I liked this paragraph from the position statement.

Hunting must involve the risk of detection and failure if there is to be any honor in having overcome the superior senses and survival instincts of the hunted. It is for this reason that sportsmen have embraced limitations so that technology does not fully overwhelm the natural capacities of the prey they pursue. This is a self-imposed trade-off that decreases the likelihood of a successful harvest, but heightens the hunting experience and shows respect for the animals being hunted. Combined, these values represent the intent and cherished traditions of hunting.

 

[Gr8bawana]

I read an article somewhere about this long range shooting and they interviewed a guy who used to be
a camera man for one of the shows that is on tv right now.
He said he quit because he got tired of seeing all the animals that were wounded and never recovered.
There are too many things that can go wrong when shooting animals such long range. If you miss your
paper target in doesn't matter, just a few inches off and you send that animal off to a slow agonizing
death.
Part of the fun of hunting is spotting that animal and figuring out a way to get close enough for a good
shot, not shooting it from a mile away.
I hate to see hunting turn in to just shooting to see if you can hit the animal somewhere.

 

[TheShootist.41]

^ Good point

 

[Ben Long]

Here's what Jack O'Connor wrote on the subject: "There is something about long-range shooting that fascinates many hunters and riflemen; the less they have hunted, the more fascinated they are." That pretty much sums it up, IMO.

 

[dcopas78]

I am comfortable at shooting to about 350-400 yards, and that would be perfect conditions, and shot angle. I can shoot farther and be accurate, but I wouldn't take a chance on an animal. I have lost a few animals, as all hunters have if you do it long enough, and it just eats away at me. I don't think there is a worse feeling for a sportsman. There are very few things that I like to argue about when it comes to hunting. However, I agree with the BC stance on this. Long range shots with poorly hit animals, that suffer prolonged deaths only to go to waste would give the antis many more talking points than anything else a hunter can do in my opinion.

 

[BIDZ]

No such thing as long range hunting

I agree with B&C's position 100%. I know there are better than average shooters that are often very successful at killing animals at great distance, but I do not consider that hunting. I admire the Long Range Pursuits and Gunwerks guys ability to use their precision equipment, but I can't stand to hear them on every episode talk about how far away they are and how they can't get any closer without missing their chance. Those shows should stick to filming on the range... 700-1000yd+ shots have no place in the world of hunting IMHO.

As for the former camera guy who witnessed too many wounded animals.... I imagine that is the case far more often than what is shown on T.V.

 

[JCW]

In a nut shell they are saying to only shoot at distances you are completely confident in. To most of us this is common sense, but like they always say it's not that common.

I believe there are a couple comments that are a bit over the top or contradictory like "Hunting must involve the risk of detection and failure if there is to be any honor in having overcome the superior senses and survival instincts of the hunted. It is for this reason that sportsmen have embraced limitations so that technology does not fully overwhelm the natural capacities of the prey they pursue. " Well didn't B&C team up with Leupold to create the B&C reticle? How far do the hash marks go, 500 yds? Is that the limit for the "risk of detection"? Did they get involved with the LR hype and are they now back pedaling?

I believe B&C have unintentionally opened a can of worms with their 5 paragraph statement, when all they were trying to do was open up awareness as to individuals shooting limitations.

 

[MKotur325]

As someone who greatly enjoys Long range shooting, I completely Agree with the B&C's stance on long range hunting. I practice on steel at double the ranges that I'd be comfortable taking any shot at big game, and they are completely accurate that yardage is not the only factor of determining the ethics or difficulty of a shot.

Brings to mind the phrase, "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

 

[Sabot]

As men, and really as Americans, we are obsessed with competition. It saturates our culture from sports to American Idol. We are wired to compete at work and in social media for popularity.

I believe that our obsession with competing leads to lives filled with restlessness and empty accomplishments...because there is always somebody out there who has outdone you.

Sadly, this extreme competitiveness has produced the worst possible culture for hunting and that is the culture obsessed with the scoring of antlers. It has gotten out of control and is destroying much of outdoor TV for sure. No longer do we long for the challenge of the hunt, we long for the length of the brow tine. Rather than being content to shoot a good buck at the end of a hard hunt, we see outdoor personalities passing on amazing deer and elk because "He's not what I'm looking for." Most of us would give our left nut to shoot the animals they pass on, but the never ending drive to shoot bigger animals with more inches of antler has reached the absurd and drown out the sport altogether. Look no further than the trophy deer breeding farms to see the gross manifestation of our hunger to win the un-winable biggest buck contest.

Enter long range hunting. Long range shooting in general, and long range hunting specifically, are a craft. You don't simply order a gun from Gunwerks and go shoot an elk at 750 yards. Long Range Pursuit is more about promoting the tools of the craft (selling guns, scopes, classes and rangefinders) than it is about only taking long range shots. The guys at Gunwerks are truly passionate about their craft and teaching others how to do it. Whether or not their show or others depicting long range shots is a further extension of the competitiveness engulfing hunting is for you to decide. We can argue all day about the nuances of what makes "hunting" hunting. I would argue that each man can define it very differently and that shooting an elk or deer or pronghorn across a great distance using finely tuned skills and equipment is still a form of hunting.

Nobody likes the idea of risky shots wounding game and most responsible hunters know the limits of their gear and skill. Certainly we all take shots outside those limits at times, but we usually regret them. The reality that some of us have better skills and better equipment means that we can and sometimes do make longer shots. There is a limit to this however. Despite the fact that technology makes longer shots possible, they still may be unethical given the situation and that's where the hunter's ethics come into play. Is long range hunting just another "main beams, kickers, and brow tines" competition to claim the longest kill? Probably so for some hunters, and we need fewer of them.

I do find it ironic that the organization making this statement is also at least tangentially responsible for the scoring craze. Kudos to Steve Rinella and Randy for showing us the sport with passion for the adventure over passion for record books.

 

[Gr8bawana]

In respnse to JCWINZ who says that the statement from B&C is " over the top", I say when you take the
risk of detection and failure out of the equation is just becomes shooting not hunting.
That being said we all have the right to our own opinion.
We do need to stick together as hunters.

 

[roadhunter]

.
We do need to stick together as hunters.

100% right but that is not true on this site. This is probably the most opinionated group of hunters you will find. You won't find many hunting groups that are anti NRA but this site has plenty of those as well. It's funny to watch all the political maneuvering and hate for other types of hunting (baiting, hounds, crossbows, high fence, tree stands, sabots, lighted knocks, etc) but it definitely does not bring hunters together.

 

[JCW]

In respnse to JCWINZ who says that the statement from B&C is " over the top", I say when you take the
risk of detection and failure out of the equation is just becomes shooting not hunting.
That being said we all have the right to our own opinion.
We do need to stick together as hunters.

Yes Gr8, I said "a bit over the top and contradictory" as their statement I quoted contradicts the fact that they promoted the Boone and Crockett reticle. If you are a get up and close type of hunter, more power to you. Didn't intend to say otherwise.

Truthfully I still don't know what to feel about their article/ position statement. I think they maybe could have worded it a bit differently so they were not so matter of fact and as I stated before I understand what they are trying to get across, but not sure it did to the ones that article was written for, the ones that start flinging lead with no respect for the game they are aiming at.

I do believe we should try and get as close to an animal as we can before making the shot, I do believe in clean and ethical kills and knowing ones limitations. I do believe hunting involves much, much more than just the break of a trigger and the distance my quarry is from the muzzle. The minute I step out of the vehicle at the trailhead I am hunting and I cherish every moment of it.

An article like this scares me because like you said, "We need to stick together", but that is not what is happening. Hopefully all this will just be water under the bridge in a few weeks.

 

[HSi-ESi]

It is interesting how the perception of an organization can change over time. B&C's original focus for the record book was to start to chronicle in a biological sense - not a 'biggest buck' contest. This of course was in a time when big game populations were at an all time low throughout North America. I do agree that the perception of the record books have changed over time - and it is up to B&C to refine and communicate what their organization is about.

Time will tell if B&C's public statement is a popular sentiment.

I do believe that we need to stick together as hunters. But that doesn't mean if someone does something I don't agree with that I have to support them in their endeavor.

I think that it is good timing for B&C to make a distinction in this regard. With the number of hunters finally on the rise - it is important to portray a sense of ethics first and foremost.

I also love the Jack O'Connor quote.

 

[pointingdogsrule]

I like the B&C statement. Hunt within limits.

I wish Those long range shows would do a show on how many misses they have had (if any misses).

good luck to all
the dog

 

[sbhooper]

I like the B&C statement. Hunt within limits.

I wish Those long range shows would do a show on how many misses they have had (if any misses).

good luck to all
the dog

Unfortunately, because of a couple of shows that promote it, and the advent of quality gear, long-range hunting has become nothing more than a target sport with furry targets. Long-range hunting is one thing if you cannot get closer and are competent to take the shot. It is, however, a totally different thing when you are purposely trying to take extreme shots.

One of the worst problems that I see, is that because it is long-range people are using marginal bullets that are essentially target bullets, because they have a good BC. Yes, I am referring to Bergers and Hornady A-max bullets. Both are really just target bullets. Flame me if you want, but that was the design.

Wyoming Game and Fish would like to shut those shows down, but there is really no way to do it. One group lost a lease because the land owner got sick of seeing dead elk laying around.

 

[BuzzH]

100% right but that is not true on this site. This is probably the most opinionated group of hunters you will find. You won't find many hunting groups that are anti NRA but this site has plenty of those as well. It's funny to watch all the political maneuvering and hate for other types of hunting (baiting, hounds, crossbows, high fence, tree stands, sabots, lighted knocks, etc) but it definitely does not bring hunters together.

Theres a reason for that...this site has a lot of good hunters that take it pretty seriously. Most sites are over-run with weekend warriors who think getting involved and being a "serious" hunter is buying a $20 deer tag once a year.

There are lots of guys on this board that are on the cutting edge of conservation, wildlife, hunting, wildlife management, etc. etc. etc. They understand the issues and are leaders in the hunting and conservation effort both professionally and on their own time as volunteers with many organizations. You dont find that on ANY site other than hunttalk...and thats a fact. When someone wants to discuss wildlife and hunting related issues on this board, I strongly suggest they bring their "A" game...

As to the NRA, they should have stuck to what they know...the 2nd. Instead, they've stuck their nose into wildlife management and hunting which they have no clue about. Their lack of knowledge about all things hunting has been pointed out many times on this board.

Trusting the NRA with the future of hunting and wildlife management is akin to trusting a circus carney to fly the space shuttle...

 

[BigRack]

As to the NRA, they should have stuck to what they know...the 2nd. Instead, they've stuck their nose into wildlife management and hunting which they have no clue about. Their lack of knowledge about all things hunting has been pointed out many times on this board.

Trusting the NRA with the future of hunting and wildlife management is akin to trusting a circus carney to fly the space shuttle...

Please explain how the NRA has "stuck their nose into wildlife management"?

HSUS and many other non-profits have stuck their nose into wildlife management as well as some government workers who make decisions based on politics and not science when it comes to wildlife and land management.

There are a lot of conservationists on here which is great, but not many scientists.

 

[BuzzH]

Please explain how the NRA has "stuck their nose into wildlife management"?

HSUS and many other non-profits have stuck their nose into wildlife management as well as some government workers who make decisions based on politics and not science when it comes to wildlife and land management.

There are a lot of conservationists on here which is great, but not many scientists.

Try the search function...

How do you define scientist?...maybe not lab rats, but lots of science based professional experience/education on this board...you know, biologists, foresters, fisheries, wildlife, range cons, etc. etc. etc.

Not to mention those that may not have the formal education, but just flat have a sound common sense background into wildlife/conservation issues via decades of hunting, fishing, trapping, and being involved in the process...

Many first rate outdoorsmen on this board.

 

[BigRack]

Try the search function...

How do you define scientist?...maybe not lab rats, but lots of science based professional experience/education on this board...you know, biologists, foresters, fisheries, wildlife, range cons, etc. etc. etc.

Not to mention those that may not have the formal education, but just flat have a sound common sense background into wildlife/conservation issues via decades of hunting, fishing, trapping, and being involved in the process...

Many first rate outdoorsmen on this board.

Biologists for animals.

I can search for the NRA giving money to wildlife organizations but I bet I will find more money given to HSUS and many others that are anti-hunter yet there isn't a lot of talk on here about that.

If you think the NRA is the big bad guy, you are ignorant.

BTW, some idiots are tying to ban the selling of rabbit meat at whole foods right now.

 

[BuzzH]

If you blindly trust the NRA when it comes to science based wildlife management...you shouldnt even be posting on this board.

You owe it to yourself to research issues before you go to posting a bunch of BS and accuse others of ignorance. Similar to your "bison are livestock in Montana" comment...research would have saved you from egg on your face with that "intelligent" statement, just like researching this one will.

The NRA should stick to defending the 2nd...period. Its what they're good at, and where their level of expertise ends.

As part of a major effort since 2008 to bolster its lobbying and political power, the oil and gas industry has steadily expanded its contributions and influence over several major conservative sportsmen’s organizations, including Safari Club International (SCI) the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF). The first two organizations have assumed an increasingly active and vocal role in advancing energy industry priorities, even when those positions are in apparent conflict with the interests of hunters and anglers who are their rank-and-file members. The third group, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, is also heavily funded by oil and gas interests and plays a key role in providing energy companies, SCI, the NRA, and other corporate sponsors with direct access to members of Congress.

In this report, we identify three high-profile debates in which the growing influence of the oil and gas industry in SCI, CSF, the NRA and other conservative sportsmen groups could play a decisive role in achieving outcomes that are beneficial to energy companies at the expense of habitat protection, science-based management, and hunter and angler access to wildlife and public lands. These areas to watch are:

■Endangered and threatened wildlife in oil- and gas-producing regions: The case of the greater sage grouse and the lesser prairie chicken
■The backcountry: How the oil and gas industry and its allies are working to undo protections of roadless areas and wilderness study areas
■Public access and ownership: The movement to privatize public lands and wildlife