As one of my friends remarked,“ I’ ve seen shooters on the range who shouldn’ t be shooting at any animal over 200 metres!” So that relates directly to the individual’ s ability.
With bipods, portable benches and other stability aids, basically this is bench rest shooting at extreme distances and best kept to the range, where the worst outcome is a missed target rather than a suffering animal. Paper targets don’ t feel pain; animals can.
Physically and philosophically, shooting game animals this way is not hunting. It’ s specialised, highly skilled shooting, more like execution than a sporting hunt.
It also sends the wrong message to other hunters, especially new chums who certainly don’ t have the experience and skills to stretch out to those distances. In the field, compared to the rifle range, they are also more likely to be adversely affected by excitement, likely with some degree of“ buck fever”.
The question of ethics can’ t be totally answered by specifying maximum shooting range because this varies with individual factors such as equipment, shooting conditions, the species and the hunter’ s marksmanship skills.
So I went searching for guidance – first, to the US hunter-conservation organisation the Boone and Crockett Club:
“ It is widely acknowledged that the likelihood of wounding, and the challenges of tracking, and recovering animals increase proportionally as shooting distances increase,” it said.
The Club believes the term“ longrange” shooting is more defined by a hunter’ s intentions than by any specific distance at which a shot is taken. It says that if your intention is to test equipment and determine how far away you can hit a live target but have no motivation to risk engagement with the animal, you are not hunting.
The Club says that“ long-range shooting takes unfair advantage of the game animal, effectively eliminates the natural capacity of an animal to use its senses and instincts to detect danger, and demeans the hunter-prey relationship in a way that diminishes the importance and relevance of the animal and the hunt.”
Well, that’ s fairly clear-cut: if there’ s no stalking involved, the animal’ s not getting a fair chance; and that’ s not sport.
I then canvassed the views of half a dozen experienced New Zealand hunters. Some are also extremely competent range shooters. I gave them no indication of my own views or what I was” fishing” for: I wanted their responses to be 100 percent independent of me and each other. And, because it’ s a controversial subject, I promised them anonymity so they could express their views freely.
Shooter 1:“ I can see things from both perspectives. There are some guys out there who have good gear and are very diligent and competent long-range shooters. At what range someone considers it ethical to shoot at a game animal, though, depends largely on their own abilities.
“ Personally, I don’ t think that there are too many guys out there who have done the training and ground work to be seriously shooting at deer at extended ranges – there are some real dreamers out there for sure. Long-range hunting is not something I advocate for.
“ The vast majority of hunters have absolutely no business shooting at game over 500 yards away. However, there are a small percentage who can. I would just say it is not really something to be encouraged, or for just anyone to have a go at.
“ Practise shooting long range at steel gongs or targets for sure, but leave the ultra-long range 800-yardplus hero shots for the range, where it doesn’ t matter if you only‘ wound’ the target.”
Shooter 2:“ Even with the best equipment available( and some of the equipment available in New Zealand today is of very high quality indeed) it is morally and ethically
The hunter’ s responsibility is first and foremost towards the animal. Running shots should not be taken, especially at long range. Extreme distance shots should similarly not be taken by the vast majority of hunters.
indefensible to shoot at a game animal at long range, by which I mean more than 350 – 400 metres. Shooting at game at 500, 800, even 1000 metres has nothing to do with hunting. It is sniping and, as such, has no place except on the battlefield or at inanimate targets as a test of shooter skill and equipment.
“ Boasting of 1000-metre shots sends out a bad, wrong signal to young and new hunters – and any hunter for that matter.”
Shooter 3:“ There’ s a high level of skill, accuracy, and the prerequisite of near 20-20 vision required for longrange shooting. From memory, I’ ve never shot an animal beyond about a hundred metres. That’ s partly to do with lacking all of the long-range skills listed above and partly to do with my preference for bush hunting.
“ However, animal welfare needs to be considered when it comes to reaching out beyond a few hundred metres. Wounding, and the nonrecovery of animals because of the difficulty in locating them, is far more probable. I guess folk might say that with my limited skill set it would be perfectly normal to harbor concerns!
“ That aside, and as caring hunters,
NZ Hunting & Wildlife 196- Autumn 2017 19