For many years, competitive shooters and military shooters / snipers have fired long distances. In recent years there has been an explosion of interest in the sport. There are usually television shows that show hunters taking game over 1000 yards. Military competitions have been televised, along with a number of informational programs highlighting the rifles and equipment used. There are many long-range shooting and “sniper” forums on the web. There is an almost infinite number of videos on You Tube showing shooters attacking targets at distances of up to a mile. With resources so readily available, many enthusiasts are looking to shoot further themselves.
There is still a large community of hunters who believe that shooting games beyond 200 or 300 meters are simply unethical. They believe that human error is simply too great to shoot at such distances consistently. They believe that there is not enough energy available and that the bullets do not work properly at long distances. There is some merit in his argument. When I visited a local shooting range recently, I would say that the average 100-yard group was around 5 “. It’s not hard to see why many would consider a shooting game beyond 300 yards out of the question. At best In some cases, that group would have ended up 2 feet at 500 yards! Even more surprising was that no one seemed particularly upset with these results. I hope none of these “shooters” planned to fire beyond 100 yards. Some controlled expansion hunting bullets Popular ones require higher velocity for proper expansion.Of these bullets are used at long range, they will simply retain their shape and punch a small hole in the game that won’t cause enough damage for an ethical kill.
My good friend and shooting partner was recently hunting in eastern Washington. Seeing that it was not money, he decided to jump into the trees and see if he could push one across the meadow in front of him. He is an accomplished long-range marksman with experience in the field and competition, he has all the right equipment, so he was prepared to shoot from long range if necessary. Sure enough, his plan worked, he pushed a good dollar into the meadow, but before he had a chance to see it, he heard gunshots coming forward, three shots. An older man had shot and killed the deer. At some point the man mentions that he had fired 700 to 800 yards, he was not sure as his rangefinder was not working. Jesse lined up the rocks from where the man claimed to have fired the shot and was, in fact, about 500 meters away. My friend helped deboning the meat and it looked as if the three-shot went high and didn’t fully hit “vitals” even though the ball fell not far from where it was. A lucky shot for sure, as the range was unknown, the filar cross was held high to compensate for the drop, and the shooter was unaware of the actual ballistics. He could have just as easily injured the male or missed completely, although he would probably continue to fire no matter how many times he missed.
Although I also question the ethics of some “long-range hunters”, the fact is that long-range accuracy is possible. With the right information, equipment, experience, and moral strength, it is very possible to be successful. If one does not know when to pass a shot due to conditions that are beyond the shooter’s compensatory ability, it is very likely that he will also make poor ethical judgments when shooting the game at close range. Unfortunately, it is not possible to exclude these people from the shooting game. These few are probably the reason many view long-distance hunting in a negative light.
The business purpose of long-range shooting has come into conflict with your ethics. There is a problem with some TV shows and commercials that show an experienced long-range shooter taking an animal at 1000yds, turning to the camera and saying something about it, “with this or that product … it’s that easy “. Perhaps what should be said is, “With dedication, research, testing under a multitude of conditions, thousands of rounds of practice, and this or that product, it can be that easy.” It sounds ridiculous and it will not sell products, but it is the truth. Worse still when an inexperienced shooter makes a similar shot while someone else marks the range and gives the wind correction. Clearly, this person doesn’t have to shoot at such distances. If it failed, who would be to blame?
These same shows will talk about ethics one minute and tell you how easy it is the next. This type of programming and advertising does not encourage ethics in any way, and you really can’t blame them … they are simply trying to make a profit, not educating hunters on how to take ethical shots in the game. A show that would really educate wouldn’t be as entertaining, no one would want to sponsor or advertise on such a show, so it would be simply impossible to produce.
Fortunately, there is hope to improve the ethics of long-range hunting. I think this is a problem with a minority of long-range hunters. With so many educational websites and more participating, it is very likely that through field practice, many will begin to understand the potential complications and variables to consider when shooting long range game animals. Then there would be more available to pass the information on, and along with the good information already available, an even higher percentage of long-range hunters would value experience and practice over products and advertising.
