Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikejonestkd
Isn't hunting more than long range sniping?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikejonestkd
That being said, hunting is much more long long range sniping at warm blooded targets. It is far more exciting to have a great hunt, a long and difficult stalk to get close undetected, and then make a clean shot at an appropriate range. THAT is hunting. ( Prarie dog hunting being an exception ).
|
I was wondering when the East Coasters would chime in!
Where ya guys been?
I am actually glad that you guys chimed in, because the whole point of this thread is to find out if this is possible/ethical. Dissenting opinions are very welcome here.
Obviously, there are regional differences in hunting. East Coast hunters hunt different than midwest hunters, who hunt differently than Texas hunters, who hunt different than Colorado hunters, who hunt differently than Northwest hunters. That is something I have noticed just from reading TFL, THR, and other places.
In many areas of the country, it is legal to hunt over bait (neither NY or NC allow this), but people in areas where this is legal, place treestands near bait piles, and hunt the bears that way. Is that hunting or shooting?
That isn't an option in Oregon. It's not legal here.
In many places, including NC, people hunt using dogs to track and tree the bears before shooting them.
That isn't an option in Oregon. It's not legal here.
Regional differences aren't only based on legal issues though, it is also the terrain that can come into play, and that is one of the biggest issues in this discussion.
I can't speak for hunting in the rest of the country, since I have only hunted in Oregon, and a limited amount at that. But I have spent a fair amount of time in other forests in other states. With the exception of Washington and parts of Canada, I have found that Oregon's forests are some of the most dense out there. True rainforests, very limited visibility, and the steep unforgiving landscape make this a tough area to hunt.
Hunters adapt though, just as they have throughout history. So hunters out here hunt the replanted clearcuts, the reprod. This can mean hunting from the edge or a draw, or even the landings above the draws, across to the other side of the draw. These distance can be quite large, but there is often times no other choice.
It all depends on the terrain, and where in that terrain the animals are eating, sleeping, or hiding.
You might find an area where you can stalk to within very close range to an animal here, depending on the terrain you are hunting, and where the animals are. Or, in the same day, you might be hunting an area where if there are any animals out, you can't stalk to under 350 yards, or even more than that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by swampdog
If your guide can't get you any closer than 500 yards, maybe you ought to see what other guides around the area you are hunting are doing.
|
It was never said that they couldn't get us withing 500 yards, the locals pointed out that some times, the only available shot on a particular animal might be 400-500 yards. The guides never said that, but did mention that it is good to have the ability to hit at longer ranges, as it sometimes might be needed. I can see that they way that I posted it made it look a little different than that. And most of those comments reallly revolved around deer hunting, not the bear hunt that we were on. The guides showed us the long range shooting only in an effort to show us that it can be done, and to make us think.
Actually, as mentioned earlier, our guides got us to within 50-75 yards of a bear (if she didn't have cubs......), about 300 yards to another bear (got up on a landing and out of sight, in order to get across those 300 or so yards, we had to hike 3+ miles to get up over the area, and that bear was already gone), and probably 250-300 yards from another bear (never saw it, only heard it, down in a ravine, and opposite draw. This one we put a little stalk on, but had no way to fully stalk to where the animal was, especially since it was in an old growth area, next to a reprod area)
And they are one of the most respected guide services in the area. So I place a little more faith in them, and outfit that has hunted the area for many years, than I do people that have never hunted our forests before. That's not an attack on you or your opinions, only a statement that regional differences account for different hunting styles.
If you disagree with the stated goal of being able to take an animal at longer ranges (400-500 yards),
if there is no ability to stalk closer, give me some evidence that it isn't an ethical thing to do.
Tell me that the round isn't capable of penetrating deep enough to put down a 250-350# black bear, or a blacktail deer, or even an Elk.
Show me energy figures that show that it isn't possible.
Because where I am sitting, looking at the fact that the .30-30 has killed bears, deer, and elk across the continent for over 100 years, and many of those over 100 yards, I have to acknowledge that the .30-06 with a 180gr projectile has more energy @ 500 yards than the .30-30 does @ 100 yards.
I.G.B.