Ethical shooting

[Shawn Ryan]

Phantom prohibited ethics on his last post. I was disappointed by the answers to scenario B. Just wondering if people are doing the math. I think elk deserve our best.

A arrow flying 300 ft/sec and an elk walking 4 mph interact like this:

20 yds: .2 sec to impact, elk has moved 14 inches
40 yds:  .4 sec to impact, elk has moved 28 inches
80 yds:  .8 sec to impact, elk has moved 56 inches.

If you factor in .2 seconds of time between your brain telling your finger to release the trigger and the arrow getting up to speed, then the distance the elk travels increases accordingly. .2 seconds is not far off for that process.

If the elk is nervous, he's moving a lot faster than 4 mph when he jumps the string. If you've never seen it in person, Glen Berry has a good video of an elk jumping the string in slow motion.

[kentrek]

Sometimes it takes real world experience for things to really sink in so I can't judge people when they haven't had the same experiences I have had to back up there beliefs...i remember one time at 26 yards I had a bull broad side not stop at my whistle...i then made some god awful noise that put him in full radar...by the time my arrow got to him he spun/rolled to the point it was quartering away and mt arrow was 4 inches too low....i clipped very bottom of the heart with one blade

I was in shock at how fast that bull moved compared to my arrow...

I would say if you don't necessarily have the real world experience of watching a dozen or more elk die then go buy all the elk hunting dvds you can get your hands on and take notes of the shot distances involved and the confidence the hunter has in there Shot AFTER the shot...that time from shot to recovery can be miserable with emotions...

A good set of movies to pick up is the borne and raised series...i believe they show everything how it actually happens and don't edit out the poor shots....watch them..take notes...pay attention to the ranges..figure out what YOUR acceptable amount of doubt it is


 

[belkaholic]

I agree. The first elk I ever took a shot at was 15 yards. I was in the open when I herd her coming and then saw her before she walked out. I was at full draw and she still did not know I was there.   As I started to release she saw me at the same time and dropped what seemed like to get knees. The arrow hit the vary top of her back. I couldn't believe it!  A half mile away I saw her pull the arrow out and then saw her again two days later licking her wound. I was sick to my stomach for those two days. It was a good learning experience and have changed my shoot choices because of it.

[coachcw]

consider angle that changes impact too , typically a cherp will stop them for the shot though.

[WAcoyotehunter]

I agree.  People are VERY OVERCONFIDENT in their archery shooting.  Killing a target at 100 yds DOES NOT mean you can or should shoot at an elk.  Those folks absolutely will lose more elk than they would if they focused on getting closer and taking really easy shots.

[Jonathan_S]

I say 35 yards but I wouldn't do that if he was moving.  In my minds eye, I stop him and take that shot.

Alert is one thing, alert and MOVING is another entirely.

[lamrith]

I for one would not criticize Phantom for how he posted that thread.  While he requested to not bring up ethics, he was in fact pushing everyone to consider not only ethics but to question ones own abilities and think it thru.  And do so NOW rather than when you are in the field faced with it.  Hindsight as a few posters have said already is 20/20.  Phantom likes to get us all thinking about it now so we can apply that 20/20 to OUR benefit as well as the Elk's.  It is no different than going to self defense classes, you are practicing, even if only mentally, what to do and not do so you are ready when faced with different situations in the real world.

I think he was just looking to keep the topic on point and not have the ethics tangent take the entire thread on that discussion, but in fact was putting everyone in the position of thinking about the ethics of it.

Also of note is that a great many posters that responded had shorter, some substantially, distances for B which shows they are taking into account elk movement and temperment.  Some also factor in shooter temperment further with option C..

I do think the OP here makes a bit of an assumption that everyone in B would be shooting at an already moving elk.  I know I would not take a shot like that, and based on the people I have seen posting on this forum, most are not going to shoot when the elk is already moving.  Those that Follow Phantom and Elknut's post will by know now a number of ways with high probability to freeze and elk in its tracks and provide a better target.

Thanks for the data, that is very good information for everyone to keep in mind, even with today's fast shooting bows.  Everyone should watch some DVD's, TV shows (like baiting, canned hunts or not) you learn from them in terms of how animals respond to things, it really is amazing.

[BULLBLASTER]

I agree with this thread and also think shawn ryan was very conservative in his time and distance estimates. In reality the elk would have moved farther because the arrow is slowing down from the point it leaves the string. I dont know how much and a lot of math wouod be involved to find out but it does have an affect.

[RadSav]

One thing to consider...A moving animal rarely ever jumps the string.  A running animal simply can not jump the string.  So if we are wanting to impart ethics to people who shoot at a moving animal we need to condemn shooting at an animal that has been alerted by whistling, cow mewing or chuckling to get them to stop.  Those are the situations when we get the most jumped string occurrences', isn't it?  You can train yourself to shoot at moving animals with a great deal of accuracy, but it is impossible to train yourself to read the direction and speed in which an animal will jump the string.  So if we are going to police ethics on every single situation presented to the bowhunter we should probably ban the use of bows all together.  Just makes sense, doesn't it?

I'm not always in agreement with Phantom in these questions and situations, but I appreciate that he does not allow ethics to cloud the training he is attempting to create.  Especially since folks these days feel the need to be offended and push their own holier than thou ethics on everyone else.  I think Phantom does a lot of good at getting people to ask themselves to be put in a set of shoes.  And then after discussion figure out if those shoes fit or we should adjust to a better fit. 

Personally I hate getting into an ethics discussion.  Way too many "My way or the Highway" attitudes.  Most of which have a very narrow view of reality.  And most are based on complete conjecture and supposition.  Disagree all you want in a thread.  Voice your opinion respectfully.  But, ethic policing serves no one especially those who are doing the policing.  That's my  anyway.

[h20hunter]

 

Well said. I enjoy all the replies, especially the ones that shed more light on where I would put the X. We should look at these scenarios as a learning discussion. I mean, we can't all be perfect shots now can we.

[Shawn Ryan]

I was not criticizing Phantom at all; I was respecting his request not to post on his thread about the ethics of a particular shot.  Rory and I have a good on-line relationship.  Phantom was doing exactly what lamrith said:  getting readers to consider the ethics of their shot during the off season and I agree with lamrith that Phantom was subtly putting us all in a situation to consider the ethics.  This thread is not as subtle. I wanted to express my opinion and sentiment about distance shots on spooked elk, which is partially based on the physics of arrow and elk travel.

I was not assuming the spooked elk is moving. I wanted shooters who haven't done the math and/or experienced it in the field, to read the numbers.  I agree with RadSav that a moving animal doesn't jump the string.  And agree that a nervous grunt stops an elk at the right moment and distracts the elk's attention from fleeing.

I respectfully disagree with RadSav, if he is saying "don't discuss ethics."  The boundary between policing ethics and discussing ethics is often seen differently by different folks.  Teaching and discussing ethics is one of the most important tasks with which we are burdened.  I tend to be direct in stating my positions and opinions. Hopefully, I do it respectfully, but if it happens to offend because someone disagrees, then that is part of the risk I'll assume. 

RMEF's Bugle magazine devotes an article every month to situation ethics in the hope of altering hunter behavior/making hunters think about their ethics.  That monthly article has a consistent page-top banner quote from Aldo Leopold that is part of Leopold's statement on ethics:  "A peculiar virtue in wildlife ethics is that the hunter ordinarily has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. Whatever his acts, they are dictated by his own conscience, rather than by a mob of onlookers. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of this fact."

[RadSav]

RMEF's Bugle magazine devotes an article every month to situation ethics in the hope of altering hunter behavior/making hunters think about their ethics.  That monthly article has a consistent page-top banner quote from Aldo Leopold that is part of Leopold's statement on ethics:  "A peculiar virtue in wildlife ethics is that the hunter ordinarily has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. Whatever his acts, they are dictated by his own conscience, rather than by a mob of onlookers. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of this fact."

IMO, for what that's worth, a magazine article on situational ethic varies greatly from internet bickering sessions.  Bugle does a good job of educating rather than demanding and ridiculing.  Learning through reflection and self discovery is quite a bit different than one persons attempt to beat others into submission to their own version of truth and belief.  I think we can agree that the intent of Bugle is much more effective at reaching a goal than most internet arguments. 

Good post!

[rtspring]

To each his own.  Who am I to judge how another hunts..  I started bowhunting last year and me personally I would not let one fly on a moving animal. 

Each and every hunting situation is diffrent, only the shooter knows for sure if he took a confident shot or not.. 

This goes for rifle guys too!!  Alot of people say dont shoot a running animal, well everyone I ever shot at running I ate..  It comes down to your skills..  My at hery skills are far from skill so far   it has to be my coachs fault...

[lamrith]

I was not criticizing Phantom at all; I was respecting his request not to post on his thread about the ethics of a particular shot.  Rory and I have a good on-line relationship.  Phantom was doing exactly what lamrith said:  getting readers to consider the ethics of their shot during the off season and I agree with lamrith that Phantom was subtly putting us all in a situation to consider the ethics.  This thread is not as subtle. I wanted to express my opinion and sentiment about distance shots on spooked elk, which is partially based on the physics of arrow and elk travel.

I was not assuming the spooked elk is moving. I wanted shooters who haven't done the math and/or experienced it in the field, to read the numbers.  I agree with RadSav that a moving animal doesn't jump the string.  And agree that a nervous grunt stops an elk at the right moment and distracts the elk's attention from fleeing.

I respectfully disagree with RadSav, if he is saying "don't discuss ethics."  The boundary between policing ethics and discussing ethics is often seen differently by different folks.  Teaching and discussing ethics is one of the most important tasks with which we are burdened.  I tend to be direct in stating my positions and opinions. Hopefully, I do it respectfully, but if it happens to offend because someone disagrees, then that is part of the risk I'll assume. 

RMEF's Bugle magazine devotes an article every month to situation ethics in the hope of altering hunter behavior/making hunters think about their ethics.  That monthly article has a consistent page-top banner quote from Aldo Leopold that is part of Leopold's statement on ethics:  "A peculiar virtue in wildlife ethics is that the hunter ordinarily has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. Whatever his acts, they are dictated by his own conscience, rather than by a mob of onlookers. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of this fact."

  Thanks for the clarification, I think we are on the same page!

[WAPatriot]

it aint the arrow its the indian to each there own