• 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

what the heck kind of irresponsible bs is this?

I once posted a similar thread about a guy taking a 128 yard shot with a compound. I disapproved. However I was quite surprised how many commenters disagreed with me. It seems like most felt it was up to the individual and their proficiency. I think there are shots that are too far to be ethical no matter how good you are (because of the time of arrow flight and animal movement). But it seems this kind of outlook is old fashioned.
 
I once posted a similar thread about a guy taking a 128 yard shot with a compound. I disapproved. However I was quite surprised how many commenters disagreed with me. It seems like most felt it was up to the individual and their proficiency. I think there are shots that are too far to be ethical no matter how good you are (because of the time of arrow flight and animal movement). But it seems this kind of outlook is old fashioned.
No I wouldn't say old fashioned. Howard Hill and others often took shots in excess of 100yds with longbows. Stories of walking the arrows over till you hit the animal. Somewhere along the way between then and now, some of us have gained a different perspective on what's ethical.
 
I once posted a similar thread about a guy taking a 128 yard shot with a compound. I disapproved. However I was quite surprised how many commenters disagreed with me. It seems like most felt it was up to the individual and their proficiency. I think there are shots that are too far to be ethical no matter how good you are (because of the time of arrow flight and animal movement). But it seems this kind of outlook is old fashioned.
I shared your disapproval of Bowmar taking that 128 yard shot. The max I'd personally consider "ethical" on a whitetail is somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 yards, and only then if the shooter and conditions are ideal for it (could be much shorter in sub-ideal conditions or with a less skilled archer). This one is still a good bit longer than I would consider ethical, but it's not nearly as egregious as Bowmar's and many others'.
 
Watched it a few days ago. The urban stuff is pretty cool. Just bought my first house last month and i have young deer coming through my measley 1.25 acres almost daily so its pretty cool to see what could be potentially roaming the green belts of these cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ha! That's Bourbon nick.....not caffeine nick...right?
Them that's in the Turkey, act a turkey...

For real though, it seems like that "kill for the camera whatever it takes" vibe folks like to condemn in mainstream hunting shows has made its way into the little leagues. Ain't the first time I've seen it in the past month.

I feel kinda hypocritical because I am more in the "I think I can make it so I'll shoot" camp than the "I'm not sure I can make it so I'll pass" camp. I'm more conservative with an arrow than a bullet, but I know from experience marginal shots can produce good results. But...

When you step into the public eye, rules change. It's like being single vs being married. Pros and cons to both situations. One has more responsibilities. I am mildly annoyed at a single, 20 year old hitting on chicks at the bar. I'm rather repulsed at a married, 40 year old with kids doing the exact same thing.

Maybe I'm being weird about it. Ultimately, he made the shot and got the deer I reckon. I'd be tickled if I was in his shoes. But it does rub me wrong to see guys with exposure lobbing arrows.
 
Watched it a few days ago. The urban stuff is pretty cool. Just bought my first house last month and i have young deer coming through my measley 1.25 acres almost daily so its pretty cool to see what could be potentially roaming the green belts of these cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, urban stuff is neat. Part of the bargain is taking only great shots. The last thing any of us should abide is a deer running around the suburbs with an arrow hanging out its ass.
 
This one is still a good bit longer than I would consider ethical, but it's not nearly as egregious as Bowmar's and many others'.
Like I'd mentioned not gonna watch it. I don't believe in 60 yard shots on whitetails - but more than that I don't believe in 60 yard shots in an "urban" situation. If it's false advertising shame on him for that...but if there's a place for pushing boundaries it's not in an urban environment.
 
Not shooting / waiting for a better shot should be an option. But I guess when you need to get your next episode out.....
 
Like I'd mentioned not gonna watch it. I don't believe in 60 yard shots on whitetails - but more than that I don't believe in 60 yard shots in an "urban" situation. If it's false advertising shame on him for that...but if there's a place for pushing boundaries it's not in an urban environment.
I've watched most of their videos, including that one, and there is definitely a trend toward longer shots in order to "get the job done." While "urban hunting" is what made them famous, they've definitely hunted larger properties in the suburbs. I don't know exactly where they hunt, but their Louisville and Nashville "urban" hunts haven't seemed "urban" at all.
 
This one struck a nerve for me. By definition, unethical means "against the rules, not in accords with the standards of a profession, and lacking moral principles." So what was irresponsible or unethical in his shot? It was totally legal, he has practiced at that distance and beyond, and at the end of the day had he wounded and lost it, it is still just a freaking deer, not some high $ value item, and the coyotes would eat it just like they would if it died from old age, disease, or being hit by a car. If he or anyone else chooses to shoot beyond what you consider your max, what difference does it make to you, and who gets to determine what is ethical? We don't question the mentality of guys that bought Mantis saddles and thought they were the greatest thing ever or the ethics of the company selling them as such (ok, strike that one!), but have to do the chest thump holier than thou salute because someone shot further than you can or will and got his animal in the proces? Again, its just a deer, and none of you would say a word if someone takes an "unethical" shot in a squirrel or other small game. If its legal, let it fly and it may die!
 
Yes, urban stuff is neat. Part of the bargain is taking only great shots. The last thing any of us should abide is a deer running around the suburbs with an arrow hanging out its ass.
If it is legal, who cares what neighbors get offended. There are people who think they are Dr. Doolittle and would like to turn every WMA into a petting zoo. So what if your kid sees a wounded deer, how is that any different than seeing a deer hit by a passing car? I cannot hunt where I live because you need 10 acres to hunt, some people cannot afford to buy a 500,000 dollar piece of property to hunt on. About 5 years ago in TX you could bow hunt on 3 acres. All of the PETA folks got that changed because they did not want to be traumatized by seeing a wounded animal, now you cannot bow hunt on less than 10 acres, even if it borders 10,000 acres.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top