What do you consider an "ethical" distance for shooting big-game?

[No_Regerts]

isn't safe and ethical really about the shooter, his equipment and his ability to safely and humanly engage his intended target?

Sure is, and that's different for everyone. There is no answer to applies to everyone, no matter how much people try.

Just imagine if all men that were "average" told all the men who were "above average" they could only use up to the "average" size with their lady?

 

[No_Regerts]

When I hunt it is at "Maximum Point Blank Range" .

What is "Maximum Point Blank Range" Hunting?

If the game is outside that range I don't pull the trigger. End of story. I would
never want to wound or cripple one of God's creatures because of my carelessness
or arrogance.

Also using laser range finders, thermal cameras, shooting at game at extreme ranges, etc.
gives the anti-hunters, anti-gunners, etc. "ammo' if you will. That's why its called Hunting
rather than Shooting.

If I bag game with a muzzle loader, with an open ignition, with open sights, a lead patched ball,
by stalking to say 40-50 paces , that to me is Hunting.

Its just part of the ongoing corruption of our society in that "getting" is more important than
the "experience". Personally I prefer the "experience".

Sorry abut the rant; I guess the coffee is kicking in...

Longbeard

You might reconsider the use of MPBR. Its a good way to miss.

For the sake of easy numbers, lets say the vital area of an animal is 8 inches. You would set MPBR as far as the trajectory of the bullet doesn't pass more than 4 inches high from point of aim and drops no more than 4 inches low from POA. Lets say thats 300 yards.

A good level of accuracy for any hunting rifle is 1 MOA. That's 3 inches at 300 yards. If you aim dead on like MPBR suggests and shoot a perfectly round 3 inch group at 300 yards, you could be 1.5 inches out of your kill zone in a best case scenario.

 

[rcnpthfndr]

Sure is, and that's different for everyone. There is no answer to applies to everyone, no matter how much people try.

Just imagine if all men that were "average" told all the men who were "above average" they could only use up to the "average" size with their lady?

totally agree and was kind of my point as this thread seemed to be heading off kilter. my max distance is different than others and that depends on what platform i am using.
forcing an "Ethical distance" argument is a lot like an anti-gunner telling us what we can and should be able to own.

 

[RMc]

While this thread has concentrated on the ethics of hunting at ultra-long range with cutting edge equipment, the ethics of hunting apply to any hunting weapon. With firearms, the gun, the load, the sights, the ability of the shooter and the physical circumstance of the shot all come into play. Several posts have alluded to the multi-faceted aspect of this discussion and the many misconceptions found in the shooting world.

Earlier I set out some open ended questions regarding the use of a .38-40 black powder cartridge rifle and a 10mm handgun on a deer at 60 yards. The relative "quiet" from the long range rifle cognoscenti remains an interesting point to ponder.

In the shooting sports world some things are said so often that a mantle of truth seems to decend. Take the 38 WCF, aka 38-40, for example. In 1881 the 180 grain bullet weight was added to factory cartridges. From a 24" rifle this bullet moved out at some 1300 fps. And, many are the opinions of inadequacy attached to this cartridge for deer hunting.

On the other hand, many are the praises in the current hunting press for the 10mm pistol! Yet the truth be known, full power 10mm pistols push the same diameter 180 grain bullet at some 1300 fps. The very same ballistics as an 1880s Winchester '73 chambered for the 38 WCF!

 

[No_Regerts]

While this thread has concentrated on the ethics of hunting at ultra-long range with cutting edge equipment, the ethics of hunting apply to any hunting weapon. With firearms, the gun, the load, the sights, the ability of the shooter and the physical circumstance of the shot all come into play. Several posts have alluded to the multi-faceted aspect of this discussion and the many misconceptions found in the shooting world.

Earlier I set out some open ended questions regarding the use of a .38-40 black powder cartridge rifle and a 10mm handgun on a deer at 60 yards. The relative "quiet" from the long range rifle cognoscenti remains an interesting point to ponder.

In the shooting sports world some things are said so often that a mantle of truth seems to decend. Take the 38 WCF, aka 38-40, for example. In 1881 the 180 grain bullet weight was added to factory cartridges. From a 24" rifle this bullet moved out at some 1300 fps. And, many are the opinions of inadequacy attached to this cartridge for deer hunting.

On the other hand, many are the praises in the current hunting press for the 10mm pistol! Yet the truth be known, full power 10mm pistols push the same diameter 180 grain bullet at some 1300 fps. The same ballistics as an 1880s Winchester '73 chambered for the 38 WCF!

And a 22-250 often generates more energy with a 55gr bullet going 3500
fps vs a 45-70 sending a 405gr bullet at 1700 fps. We all know which we would choose to stop a bear.

The numbers are often meaningless.

 

[slimmer13]

Here is a several year old article from the local rag that pretty much echoes the arguments on either side of this.

Jeff Huber, vice president of Nightforce Optics, an Orofino-based business focusing on long range and precision rifle scopes, said hunters must be sure they have a reasonable chance of hitting their targets and must use bullets that properly expand on impact at the low speeds associated with long-range shots.

Ethical long-range hunting "really comes down to a guy knowing his limitations and the proper practice and experience and getting to the point where you have an 80 percent hit probability or better," he said

The Long Rangers

 

[RMc]

And a 22-250 often generates more energy with a 55gr bullet going 3500
fps vs a 45-70 sending a 405gr bullet at 1700 fps. We all know which we would choose to stop a bear.

The numbers are often meaningless.

Ah! The dreaded FPE figures strike again!

Such is the value of a formula first derived to compare the ability of a single cylinder vertical lift steam engine to horse powered water pumps.

Yes, the ammunition advertising departments of the late 19th century latched onto FPE as a way to market the power of the then new smokeless powder small bore, (such as the 30 WCF), over the long familiar large bore black powder rounds.

 

[x2ndxall]

While this thread has concentrated on the ethics of hunting at ultra-long range with cutting edge equipment, the ethics of hunting apply to any hunting weapon. With firearms, the gun, the load, the sights, the ability of the shooter and the physical circumstance of the shot all come into play. Several posts have alluded to the multi-faceted aspect of this discussion and the many misconceptions found in the shooting world.

Earlier I set out some open ended questions regarding the use of a .38-40 black powder cartridge rifle and a 10mm handgun on a deer at 60 yards. The relative "quiet" from the long range rifle cognoscenti remains an interesting point to ponder.

In the shooting sports world some things are said so often that a mantle of truth seems to decend. Take the 38 WCF, aka 38-40, for example. In 1881 the 180 grain bullet weight was added to factory cartridges. From a 24" rifle this bullet moved out at some 1300 fps. And, many are the opinions of inadequacy attached to this cartridge for deer hunting.

On the other hand, many are the praises in the current hunting press for the 10mm pistol! Yet the truth be known, full power 10mm pistols push the same diameter 180 grain bullet at some 1300 fps. The very same ballistics as an 1880s Winchester '73 chambered for the 38 WCF!

My lack of meaningful response to your posts is based on the fact that I don't feel I have the knowledge you're asking for. I try to keep my opinions based on my own personal experience. I have very little to no experience with the equipment you're bringing to the discussion.

As stated over and over in this thread, ethical shots are per the guy with his finger on the trigger.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Its the lawfull pursuit of wild game for food and/or sport. Hunting. It may not be stalking, but it is certainly hunting.

I've seen far more animals lost to archers and they get pretty dang close.

True that, my ex-coworker is an accomplished archer at his home range, goes archery deer & elk & tells me reports of the ones that got away (and likely died & wasted away).
One day I told him that if he couldn't make an ethical kill he should hang up his bow. That's when he finally bought & used a ............. rangefinder..
The only animal I lost was a tall & thick 3 point deer (largest one I ever shot) it is a long story about to hunt but I was physically ill and distraught for that season from not finding it.
I did not fill my tag that year feeling I did take an animals life.

 

[osprey]

It you hunt long enough odds are you will eventually lose an animal no matter what the weapon. I was a pretty serious bow hunter early on in my big game hunting career and lost a well hit blacktail one day in thick cover and a driving rainstorm. It made me so sick I put down the bow for 25 years. I have since picked it back up with a healthy dose of what conditions constitutes an ethical shot for me with a bow.

 

[clearconscience]

Another thing to consider having been out in the woods a lot during hunting season.
There is usually a sea of orange.
If your shooting at a distance you may be shooting over someone or several people, or towards someone.

If I'm out hunting and someone shoots over my head I might just assume they're shooting at me.

Things won't go very well.

 

[Longbeard]

Another thing to consider having been out in the woods a lot during hunting season.
There is usually a sea of orange.
If your shooting at a distance you may be shooting over someone or several people, or towards someone.

If I'm out hunting and someone shoots over my head I might just assume they're shooting at me.

Things won't go very well.

Like this:

I agree with you. If I don't have line of sight to the target I don't pull the
trigger.
Paul Harrell is actually very knowledgeable.
Blessings,
Longbeard