• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Not a fan...128 yrd shot w/ a compound

Crafty1 said:
I guess I'm on the other side of the fence in thinking than most of you guys. To me being "ETHICAL" is a personal matter there fore I can not judge ones ethics from being different than mine. Two, a shot like that isn't for your avg bowhunter, however the equipment is plenty capable and in this case so is Bowmar. I hear the argument often that "too much can go wrong" but that is the case whether it be a 20, 30, 40..etc yd, every scenario is different in the field. That is the case in hunting in general, all we can do is hunters is practice and prepare ourselves to capitalize when the opportunity arises. With that said, long shots are a norm with western bowhunting, would those hunters be unethical being they hunt different size animals in different terrain?
Click to expand...
I can agree with a lot of this. I think my biggest issue is the shot angle (he had to of seen the animal move yet he still shot) and the fact the animal knew he was there.

That's a good sized animal and no doubt if it were not alert the odds on making the shot would of been much higher. There may very well be some other variables like.
Probably a HF. I have no problem with that and most of PH's in Africa do have a trailing dog of some sort. Not to mention to say the natives over there are remarkable at tracking is still an understatement.
He obviously had the green light from the guide and that does go a long ways especially if he want to see you do it lol.

Having been on a couple of Pronghorn hunts in an area that resembles the moons surface ya really just don't know till ya been there. A 50yd goat looked like it was about to jump in your lap. I can see an 80yd shot there being the norm.

With that being said just because you did it doesn't mean the world needs to see it. I fear young men with cameras will be the death of our lifestyle someday.
 
Navy Chief said:
You are absolutely correct that something can happen on a shot of any distance, our responsibility as hunters is to do everything we can to minimize the opportunity for those things to happen so we have a clean quick kill and the animal does not suffer due to our ego. Taking a shot at 128 yards is irresponsible behavior when viewed from that perspective, all that shot served to do was inflate his ego. He needs to spend the same time and effort it took him to learn to shoot at that distance accurately to learn to stalk closer to his intended target animals instead of taking irresponsible shots just because he can.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that
 
I fast forwarded through the video to the shot; however, It appeared to me that he was always near brush but not using it as cover. Even at 128 yards I think I would have done a better job at concealing myself.
 
Tjraley2 said:
No one can consistently argue that ethics are a personal matter. You can’t judge the ethics of others? How about Hitler? ISIS? We judge the ethics of others all the time. That’s why we fight wars, have a police force and criminal justice system, and laws in general. Ethical relativity is an intellectual, philosophical, and personal cop-out.

And while it is true that something can happen at 20-40 yd distances, you cannot equate those risks to a 128 yd shot. You simply cannot predict the movement of an animal. A 20-40 yd shot means less time for an animal to respond and a better chance that your arrow can make the distance before the animal can respond.
Click to expand...
I will have to agree to disagree. Laws and ethics are 2 entirely different creatures. I have seen more guys than I care to count that an ethical shot with a bow would be a matter of inches after the arrow leaves the string. I have seen plenty of guys who could stand at the range and stack arrows in a softball size target out to 60-70 yards but you put hair and a heart beat on it and they cant hold a 30" group at 20 yards. Their ability to be an archer says an ethical shot is 70 and in while their ability as a hunter says they should hunt with a freakin RPG. An ethical shot takes into consideration much more than distance and it most certainly is individual at least in my estimation.
 
BTaylor said:
I will have to agree to disagree. Laws and ethics are 2 entirely different creatures. I have seen more guys than I care to count that an ethical shot with a bow would be a matter of inches after the arrow leaves the string. I have seen plenty of guys who could stand at the range and stack arrows in a softball size target out to 60-70 yards but you put hair and a heart beat on it and they cant hold a 30" group at 20 yards. Their ability to be an archer says an ethical shot is 70 and in while their ability as a hunter says they should hunt with a freakin RPG. An ethical shot takes into consideration much more than distance and it most certainly is individual at least in my estimation.
Click to expand...
Agree with most of that, but just because what's ethical for a given hunter is largely dependent on his skill, that doesn't mean there aren't objective factors at play, too--distance of the animal being one of the biggest. The duration of time an arrow is in flight at 128 yards gives the animal far too much time to move from the perfect spot to gut-shot, making an archery shot at that range universally unethical. My accurate range with a rifle is 200 yards or less because of my skill level with a rifle; Chris Kyle's was probably a mile. A one-mile shot at an elk is obviously unethical for me, but I'd argue it's also unethical for the sniper because of how long it takes the bullet to arrive. That doesn't make the ethics subjective; there is still an objective line that trumps shooter skill.
 
I do not as a blanket statement count animal movement as having any influence on a shot being ethical otherwise I would hunt exactly no animals. Animal movement for me comes into play if the animal is alert due to either seeing, hearing or smelling me or if it is otherwise in a heightened state of ready to haulassedness due to other environmental factors. The ethics of distance as it relates to a hunting shot in my mind has to take into consideration all the factors that could impact the outcome of the shot, my ability at a given range, wind, flight path obstructions, relative alertness of the animal, etc. Hunting shows have made the word ethics or ethical shot a freakin catch phrase and a tool for hunters to beat up on other hunters with. If we spent as much time and effort building up responsible hunters as we do trying to tear each other down for actions outside of our presence I think we would be much better off as a whole.
 
Everyone's ethical shot is at a different range. To put everyone in the same bubble is just wrong. If every time I drew back on an animal and put animal movement in my basket of to shoot or not I would never be pulling the trigger. T-Bone said that he would rather shoot a deer past 28 yards (pretty sure that was the yardage but could be wrong) because he has noticed less deer jumping the string past 28 yards then within. He thinks that it is do to sound of the bow going off. Bows are so quiet that after a certain distance the bow sound is not a factor. T-Bone has killed enough animals in his life time that I will take his word for it. I just don't think that we need to but an ethical statement on every shot part 40 to archers that are clearly more skilled then we are. Not saying that nobody in this thread can shoot out to 100 but a lot of these guys know how to handle their s%&^ under pressure and that's a major difference.
 
IMO the individual should decide what an ethical shot is for themselves. Fred Bear used to take shots that would make most modern day "ethical" hunters cringe. 100+ yard shots, intentional ham shots, shooting at running animals etc. Howard Hill killed an elk at 185 yards, and an eagle at 150. I'm not advocating long range bow hunting. I personally try to limit my shots on whitetails to 30 yards. But I'll admit that has gone out the window on several occasions when I've had shooter bucks at 30-45 yards. Maybe one day I'll have the patience and poise to stick to that 30 yard limit, but that day is not today. My point is that ethics are an individual matter. Some people would say that shooting animals with arrows is unethical.
 
Nutterbuster said:
I can kill deer at double that distance with my crossbow. Break his shoulder at the joint like Annie Wilkes broke Paul Sheldon's legs. It's like a rifle. Any man who says otherwise sucks eggs.
Click to expand...
As Joe Rogan says, "A crossbow is just a ****ty gun." After using one for the last couple seasons, I'm planning on going back to a compound for this fall. So much skill is removed from the equation, too much for me. I've changed my perspective recently, I feel it's my duty to excel at everything I commit to, be the best I can be at everything. If I can't make an ethical shot I won't, with a bow 30yards is about it. I would take 128 yard shot with the ought-6 any day, less can go wrong after release in one second than 10 seconds.
 
www.bowhunter.com

Is it Ethical to Take Long-Distance Bowhunting Shots? - Bowhunter

Taking long-distance shots at big-game animals has become acceptable, but here's why it isn't the ethical choice.
www.bowhunter.com www.bowhunter.com

Totally agree with this editorial. If you feel like 128 yards is as close as you can get, go with a rifle. At one point bowhunting was about seeing how close you could get. Seems like today all these "pros" want to have a d*** measuring contest about who could injure, errrr I mean hit, an animal at greater and greater distance. To be honest, not impressed, rather a little saddened & disgusted.
 
huntin_addict said:
www.bowhunter.com

Is it Ethical to Take Long-Distance Bowhunting Shots? - Bowhunter

Taking long-distance shots at big-game animals has become acceptable, but here's why it isn't the ethical choice.
www.bowhunter.com www.bowhunter.com

Totally agree with this editorial. If you feel like 128 yards is as close as you can get, go with a rifle. At one point bowhunting was about seeing how close you could get. Seems like today all these "pros" want to have a d*** measuring contest about who could injure, errrr I mean hit, an animal at greater and greater distance. To be honest, not impressed, rather a little saddened & disgusted.
Click to expand...

Well said...

If these "Hunters" want to take long shots to show off how great they are maybe they need to drop hunting with a bow and take up target archery. They can shoot as long of shots as they care to there without putting animals at risk of being wounded to pump up somebody's ego....
 
My biggest complaint was I felt he was selling Hoyt bows and Easton arrows after the shot. Hopefully a new Hunter dosent say if I buy this stuff, I can smoke deer at 120yrds as well. Goes out and gives hunters a bad name.
I have no room to talk as I have had my share of bad moments and lost deer.
But what he showed of there stalking looked more like walking around than Stalking. I wish they would have shown more attempts failed to lead up to the descion to take that shot.
Was it me, or does it look like it saw the arrow and dropped before impact? I think he got super lucky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top