Gun store Shooting Locations It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:02 am



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me Shield NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar




Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Missed a bear today, but learned some valuable lessons 
Author Message
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Kentucky
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015
Posts: 11049
I'm really bad with judging distance. This spring I bought a Sig Kilo and have been trying to get better at it

When I first got it I was ranging everything just to get used to it, I need to get back to doing that. It takes practice. At least for me it does...

Thanks for the report. Talking about it speeds up the learning. Don't listen to the naysayer.

_________________
You may be right, I may be crazy, but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for


Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:51 am
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:03 pm
Profile
Online
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Burlington
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012
Posts: 5999
Real Name: Kyle
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


Wow, and there you have it. Case closed, bailiff take him away! :facepalm2:

_________________
Looking for:
S&W Schofield 2x (.38/357)
Coonan 1911
Nemo Omen
JM Marlin 39M
Tikka T3 Tactical(.308)
BAR(.308)


Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:27 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Hoodsport/Shelton
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011
Posts: 3370
Real Name: Don
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


This may be hard to comprehend...but for 200+ years shots were made without the aid of modern range finding equipment and nothing but good old "Kentucky Windage" with diminutive little cartridges such as the now much scoffed at .30 WCF (.30-.30) and open iron sights. Not all hunting shots are cut, dried and ranged. With DOPE on every previous shot.

_________________
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living".

-- Travis A Kisner


Wed Oct 24, 2018 2:48 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
Anyone thinking the OPs attempted shot was ethical, should consider brushing up on hunting ethics. Please find peer reviewed hunting articles that endorse taking a shot at an unknown long distance. :popcorn:

Meanwhile, every article on the subject would call that attempted shot unethical.

https://www.gohunt.com/read/life/what-i ... gs.hvNhSm4
WHAT IS AN ETHICAL SHOT?
Quote:
As distance increases, the possibility of missing or wounding an animal increases. There is no magic number or specific range that dictates an unethical shot; however, every effort must be made to get as close to the animal as possible. The distance at which an ethical shot is made is relative to the hunter’s skill acquired through preparation as well as his intention......Whether your effective range is 20 yards or 500, in order to make a truly ethical shot, you must be absolutely confident that your arrow or bullet will hit its mark. An ethical shot will vary from hunter to hunter, but one fact holds true throughout: an ethical shot is only taken when the shooter has full knowledge of his own and his weapon's capabilities


http://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/6-hunt ... ould-know/
6 Hunting Ethics That Every New Hunter Should Know. John McAdams
Quote:
Take Shots At A Reasonable Range. I caution against taking extreme long range shots on an animal when hunting...it is your duty as an ethical hunter to get as close to your target as possible before shooting. Not only does that line up with the tenet of fair chase we’ll discuss in later, but it also increases your chances of making a good shot. The further you are from the animal when you shoot, the higher the odds are of something out of your control (such as the wind or even the animal moving) can cause your shot to miss, or worse, wound the animal, even if the shot was otherwise perfect...when you pull the trigger or release an arrow, you should be almost completely certain you are going to hit and kill the animal you’re aiming at. You should not take a shot to find out if you can hit an animal. If there is any doubt in your mind that you’re going to hit the animal you are shooting at, then you should not take the shot.


https://medium.com/@MyODFW/just-because ... b571de39ec
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should: Hunting ethics
by Jeff Barnard, AP environmental reporter in SW Oregon for 30+ years

Quote:
“The real key is thinking about how you would feel if you wounded an animal simply because you were poorly prepared and had to chase that animal for a day or two. You are ethically charged with retrieving the animal you killed. That is with the ideal of a one-shot kill we are all looking for. You owe the animal the courtesy of taking it humanely.”

For me, that will mean limiting any shot I take to about 100 yards.

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:07 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
foothills wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


This may be hard to comprehend...but for 200+ years shots were made without the aid of modern range finding equipment and nothing but good old "Kentucky Windage" with diminutive little cartridges such as the now much scoffed at .30 WCF (.30-.30) and open iron sights. Not all hunting shots are cut, dried and ranged. With DOPE on every previous shot.


So, you're apply 200+ year old tactics and processes to modern hunting? Hmmmm, I wonder if any other areas of life are the same today as 2 centuries ago? Turns out, skills, tools, and procedures have in fact changed. What might have been 'ethical' back then, is no longer the case. From slavery to war tactics to treatment of minorities or women, and yes, hunting too...

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:20 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: South Seattle
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011
Posts: 13485
Real Name: JP
leadcounsel wrote:
foothills wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


This may be hard to comprehend...but for 200+ years shots were made without the aid of modern range finding equipment and nothing but good old "Kentucky Windage" with diminutive little cartridges such as the now much scoffed at .30 WCF (.30-.30) and open iron sights. Not all hunting shots are cut, dried and ranged. With DOPE on every previous shot.


So, you're apply 200+ year old tactics and processes to modern hunting? Hmmmm, I wonder if any other areas of life are the same today as 2 centuries ago? Turns out, skills, tools, and procedures have in fact changed. What might have been 'ethical' back then, is no longer the case. From slavery to war tactics to treatment of minorities or women, and yes, hunting too...



You sound eerily similar to anti gun people claiming that guns today are more deadly and are not needed.

_________________
Yes I Do Have A Beautiful Daughter.. I Also Have A Gun, A Shovel, & An Alibi


Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:27 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Hoodsport/Shelton
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011
Posts: 3370
Real Name: Don
leadcounsel wrote:
foothills wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


This may be hard to comprehend...but for 200+ years shots were made without the aid of modern range finding equipment and nothing but good old "Kentucky Windage" with diminutive little cartridges such as the now much scoffed at .30 WCF (.30-.30) and open iron sights. Not all hunting shots are cut, dried and ranged. With DOPE on every previous shot.


So, you're apply 200+ year old tactics and processes to modern hunting? Hmmmm, I wonder if any other areas of life are the same today as 2 centuries ago? Turns out, skills, tools, and procedures have in fact changed. What might have been 'ethical' back then, is no longer the case. From slavery to war tactics to treatment of minorities or women, and yes, hunting too...



Counselor...you stated that the caliber was not up to the task, for the distance, and the shooters experience was inadequate. Those are personal opinions. Not admissible.

_________________
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living".

-- Travis A Kisner


Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:31 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Downtown Newcastle
Joined: Sat Mar 5, 2016
Posts: 3440
Real Name: Traut
I'm a little curious LC, how many bears have you killed, shot at, seen in the woods on public land? You know we're talking about black bears. Not polar or Kodiak?

_________________
I always thought growing old would take a lot longer.....

So, when does that "Old enough to know better" shit kick in???
I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible, but pissing everyone off is a piece of cake.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 3:40 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Kentucky
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015
Posts: 11049
LC- You're argument fails because you assume that the shooter knew that the shot was at a greater range than he was capable of shooting at. He believed (and I believe him when he states) that he was at a range where he was comfortable taking a shot that would have had a high probability of dispatching the bear humanely.

Did he mistake the range? Of course, he clearly states that

Was it unethical? No, to prove it was unethical you would have to show that he knew that the bear was at such a distance that to take a shot would mean guessing a holdover or other compensation

Had the OP got on here and said "I had no idea how far the bear was so I took a wild ass shot" I would totally agree with you, but he didn't and you shouldn't make that leap

_________________
You may be right, I may be crazy, but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for


Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:29 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
foothills wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
foothills wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
I want to add to my brief comment, typed on my phone.

The .308 can do the job with a proper hit in a kill zone that's not very large. An experience hunter at a known range within 400 can do the task as well.

In THIS case, the hunter badly underestimated the range. Not even close. In THIS case, at an unknown long range, the odds of injuring the bear were far greater than the required hit. Lobbing a .308 at a bear at an unknown range is in fact unethical.

If you think it's ethical, what if he hit the arm, and the bear ran off? Would ya'll still think it was an ethical shot to take?

Never take a shot that's a guess or outside your skill or ability of the rifle. Here the hunter took a shot at an unknown range outside his ability, and at that range the gun ability too since it dropped so much. Not as flat shooting as other calibers.


This may be hard to comprehend...but for 200+ years shots were made without the aid of modern range finding equipment and nothing but good old "Kentucky Windage" with diminutive little cartridges such as the now much scoffed at .30 WCF (.30-.30) and open iron sights. Not all hunting shots are cut, dried and ranged. With DOPE on every previous shot.


So, you're apply 200+ year old tactics and processes to modern hunting? Hmmmm, I wonder if any other areas of life are the same today as 2 centuries ago? Turns out, skills, tools, and procedures have in fact changed. What might have been 'ethical' back then, is no longer the case. From slavery to war tactics to treatment of minorities or women, and yes, hunting too...



Counselor...you stated that the caliber was not up to the task, for the distance, and the shooters experience was inadequate. Those are personal opinions. Not admissible.


Well, it's a fact he missed. And it's a fact the distance was way off.... so there's that pesky set of facts.

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:43 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
Traut wrote:
I'm a little curious LC, how many bears have you killed, shot at, seen in the woods on public land? You know we're talking about black bears. Not polar or Kodiak?


None, since I would not enjoy killing a bear. I can still understand that it was not an ethical shot.

Attempted argument is irrelevant. Example. Bank robberies are also unethical for a lot of reasons. Lots of other acts are unethical. I don't have to participate in them to know they are unethical.

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:52 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
RocketScott wrote:
LC- You're argument fails because you assume that the shooter knew that the shot was at a greater range than he was capable of shooting at. He believed (and I believe him when he states) that he was at a range where he was comfortable taking a shot that would have had a high probability of dispatching the bear humanely.

Did he mistake the range? Of course, he clearly states that

Was it unethical? No, to prove it was unethical you would have to show that he knew that the bear was at such a distance that to take a shot would mean guessing a holdover or other compensation

Had the OP got on here and said "I had no idea how far the bear was so I took a wild ass shot" I would totally agree with you, but he didn't and you shouldn't make that leap


This is a teaching point, for which even the OP admits. No need for folks here to get their feathers ruffled.

Well, let's look at what the OP said that shows the shot attempt was unethical:


Quote:
Been hunting a little after work the past couple weeks. I’d scouted this spot for deer before the season initially, but seen both deer and bear sign in the area. Well today I found some sign that a bear had been through the area I’d posted up for deer. Followed the trail and fresh poop to a huge clear cut.

On the far end of the clear cut I see movement below the ridge (brushy ridge with thick timber on the other side). It’s a big ol’ black bear. I creep forward quietly to set a better line of sight. That bear starts moving towards the top of the ridge There’s no time to grab my range finder out of my pack. I guess 200-250 yards. I figure with a 100 yard zero, aim dead on and I’ll still be safe. I got a head/neck shot (between bushes). My scope is cranked up to 10x. I hold steady resting on the top of a stump. Breathing is good. I slowly squeeze the trigger. BOOM! Then I see a very scared bear cover ground and into the brush faster than I could believe. Checked for blood. I missed.

Well, the hilly clear cut fooled me. What I thought was 200-250 yards, was 382 yards after I checked with my range finder. So instead of having to hold over 4”-9” (with my zero), I would have had to hold about 32”. That felt so heartbreaking missing that bear. But I also felt stupid and irresponsible. I couldn’t have stalked closer without making a ton of noise, and I didn’t have time to check distance. It definitely was an ego killer. I think I’m a pretty good shot. I’m not a good guesser of distance thought by eyeballing it. Not knowing correct distance and hold over made me miss. Not from skill at pulling a trigger and shooting accurately. That really drove me nuts.

So here’s some humbling lessons I learned today:
-Sometimes things are further away than they seem. Different terrains, elevation differences, and conditions (it was raining) make it harder to guess. It’s one thing at a rifle range void of brush, hills, etc. It’s another in the field.
-A bear still looks pretty big in a scope almost 400 yards away. I figured if it was further away, it would be hard to see.
-Have your gear ready. If that rangefinder had been in my pocket, I would have had time to use it.
- 308 isn’t as flat shooting as I thought. I should really study up more of a ballistics chart for the round I use, and get to know that info.
-You don’t usually have time for a follow up shot if you miss in Western Washington. That bear went into some really thick stuff in the blink of an eye.


I was not critical of the OP, but instead I applaud the dialogue on hunting ethics.

OP admits it was an irresponsible shot, he took a rushed shot at a MOVING bear, he had to "guess" the range which was nearly twice as far as he guessed, his rifle was not as flat shooting as thought, etc.

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:58 pm
Profile
Site Moderator
User avatar
Site Moderator

Location: Renton/Kent
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012
Posts: 3545
Real Name: Jacy
Irresponsible is not the same as unethical.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 5:21 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Can't say
Joined: Sun Sep 7, 2014
Posts: 8134
DGM33 wrote:
Irresponsible is not the same as unethical.


It is when talking about taking life...

_________________
I defend the 2A. US Army Combat Veteran and Paratrooper: OIF Veteran. BSM and MSM recipient. NRA Lifetime. Entertainment purposes only. I'm a lawyer, but have not offered you legal advice.


Wed Oct 24, 2018 5:24 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
[ Time : 0.587s | 16 Queries | GZIP : Off ]