Weapon Selection Ethics

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
15,527
Location
Colorado Springs
To be honest with you I get more frustrated, and have more mental anguish sitting long hours in a stand than I do living off my back in the west.

That's more like 5 minutes for me.

Jim Shockey wrote a piece about tree stand hunting several years ago and the gist of it went something like this: Up in tree.......out of tree.....back in tree........back down out of tree......in tree again......eating......out of tree.......in tree with coffee.......out of tree peeing......back in tree.......eating lunch........out of tree.......back in tree........and now it's 9am.

It's easier for me to hike 10 miles than sit for even a couple hours. Sitting for even half a day would be my biggest challenge of all. And one I never want to attempt.
 

rodney482

WKR
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
3,815
Havnt you struggled quite a bit with killing critters?

Nice moose.... guided hunt



My point is simply this...you can take somebody from far away, stick em in a treestand and they can be successful because someone else did the work. No so with spot & stalk. The hunter must do the work.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
485
I tip my hat to anyone using trad...they are more skilled than I. But bowhunting in general begins where rifle hunting ends. Closing the distance between 200 & 50 yards or less easily tips the scales in favor of the game. Can't speak to treesquatting hunters, i hate treestands. Spot and stalk bow hunters are definitely the "real" hunters in my book. But I prefer the dictionary definition of hunting:
"...the pursuit and killing or capture of game and wild animals, regarded as a sport..."

If trying to stay awake in a treestand is how you hunt then ya can't really call it the "pursuit" of game...more like the "waiting" of game to walk by. The western style spot and stalk hunter puts far greater effort into his/her hunt than the treesquatter does. Oh sure, it's a mental game and requires knowledge in order to place your treestand in the right place but once that's done, any fatarse with a bow can go sit in it and kill something...doesn't automatically make that person a "hunter" IMO. Same goes for blind hunting. But hey, I'm biased...I'm a ground pounder who burns boot leather. For me, using a gun to kill is anticlimatic. An arrow is far more rewarding.

21314846_10213794675842190_3167235699746650149_n.jpg

12006135_10207439324322374_1679118025145663270_n.jpg

I'll print this and keep it right next to the book I'm reading called "How to Win Presidential Elections" by Hillary Clinton.
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
649
My point is simply this...you can take somebody from far away, stick em in a treestand and they can be successful because someone else did the work. No so with spot & stalk. The hunter must do the work.

I took a friend from "far away" and brought him to a public land piece (I was filming) middle of the whitetail rut. We had two 3yr old bucks and a stud 5yr old within 100yds the first day. He was a hunter but had never been through a dark to dark sit. He messed up on all three bucks spooking the first two with small movements at the wrong time. And the stud buck he missed at 20yds because he didn't pivot at his hips and wasn't used to hunting from a tree stand. This was the best day I have ever had in the whitetail woods and I have completed over 100 dark to dark sits in the past 12 years. It was frustrating to say the least...
I did all the work...knew the right time to go in...which stand to hunt on the right day with the right wind...and he was unsuccessful.
So no you cant just plop a guy in a stand and easily kill a buck...you need to be a hunter.

The patience that you learn sitting in a tree all day can be invaluable for your western hunts as well. This year on my unguided sheep hunt we spent 5.5hrs in a complete downpour/snowstorm waiting for a ram to get up from his bed and move. We were pinned down almost flat behind a boulder and it was easy for me to sit it out because of my experience in a tree...

Just want to reinforce the point that we are talking about two different things...maybe you have not spent much time in a treestand so you are not aware of the work that it takes to kill a mature buck from a tree?
I respect every type of hunting...spot and stalk, treestand, using dogs, decoying, guided, unguided or some combo of those types...each one is different in its own way and provides challenges to make you a well rounded better hunter.

On topic...I do think rifles kill better than bows. It is just simple physics. But I much prefer using a bow because of the challenge that is involved.
 

lcpaul22

FNG
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
55
Each hunter has their own skill level and proficiency with their weapon. The most ethical thing to do is stay within the limitations of your skill set, and practice to extend it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
427
I tip my hat to anyone using trad...they are more skilled than I. But bowhunting in general begins where rifle hunting ends. Closing the distance between 200 & 50 yards or less easily tips the scales in favor of the game. Can't speak to treesquatting hunters, i hate treestands. Spot and stalk bow hunters are definitely the "real" hunters in my book. But I prefer the dictionary definition of hunting:
"...the pursuit and killing or capture of game and wild animals, regarded as a sport..."

If trying to stay awake in a treestand is how you hunt then ya can't really call it the "pursuit" of game...more like the "waiting" of game to walk by. The western style spot and stalk hunter puts far greater effort into his/her hunt than the treesquatter does. Oh sure, it's a mental game and requires knowledge in order to place your treestand in the right place but once that's done, any fatarse with a bow can go sit in it and kill something...doesn't automatically make that person a "hunter" IMO. Same goes for blind hunting. But hey, I'm biased...I'm a ground pounder who burns boot leather. For me, using a gun to kill is anticlimatic. An arrow is far more rewarding.

21314846_10213794675842190_3167235699746650149_n.jpg

12006135_10207439324322374_1679118025145663270_n.jpg

When I was out west, I seen multiple mature bucks a day on public ground. On Illinois public ground, I'm lucky to see one in our 3-1/2 month season. I use a trad bow, but it doesn't make much difference because I usually can't see over 25 yards anyway. If you tried to spot and stalk Whitetail here, you'd either take up tree stand hunting or quit hunting all together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bobinmi

WKR
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
483
Location
Michigan
Ethics lie within the hunter, not the weapon. I've seen jackasses hunting with every type of equipment.

Side note: I invite anyone to attempt a spot and stalk bowhunt on Michigan Public land whitetails. Treestands are the only viable option and you are quite the hunter indeed if you can make it a regular occurrence to harvest a whitetail with a bow at all. Make it a mature buck on a regular basis and you are in rarified air.
 

Beendare

WKR
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
8,247
Location
Corripe cervisiam
Are we really talking ethics when it comes to; what weapon, what technique, etc?
I don't think this has anything to do with "ethics" per say.

Now if you are trying to bring down an elk with a field point....or use a .22 rim fire....THAT to me is unethical.
 

mcseal2

WKR
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
2,671
I grew up whitetail hunting and am privileged to hunt them every year on our place. Even as a rancher who spends every day of the year where those bucks live, trail cams and my spotter from 2 miles away show me bucks that I'll never see from a truck or horse as I do ranch work, they are incredible at evading human contact.

I am hooked on hunting muleys out west, and also enjoy hunting all other western game. Those critters, especially muleys, are damn smart also. The ones who survive to maturity have done so by evading hunters by being smart or by living in areas that most people won't access so they don't have to be quite as smart.

I have been lucky and persistent enough to take some nice animals both in the Midwest and West, they don't come easy anywhere. Some of the skills learned on Western hunts have made me a much better whitetail hunter (spotter from 2 miles away and 15x binos on a tripod). Some of the skills I learned whitetail hunting have made me a better western hunter (patience learned still hunting limited acreage and leaving core areas alone until things are perfect). These are a couple examples but I've learned a ton that crosses over. Western hunting has helped make me a less predictable Midwestern hunter and therefore harder for the whitetail bucks to pattern and avoid. It's also made me more aggressive on tactics when conditions are right, and more confident in forcing things when the advantage is mine. Midwestern hunting has helped me develop the patience to NOT force things when hunting the West when conditions aren't right and it's a low percentage stalk. It's also helped me focus on one area or animal and not just hop around because I can suddenly hunt huge public acreages instead of a small area. Its so easy to go West and just hunt everywhere instead of learning one area well enough to be successful there. I find I need to make a scouting trip in a new area to go crazy exploring, that way I can be more focused on the actual hunt. I like to see the whole unit before making decisions about it.

On weapons and ethics I think it's a personal choice. I think we as hunters have to many enemies in the general public and to few young people joining our ranks to start pointing fingers. I know bow hunters who hit and lose 2 or 3 deer each year. I personally couldn't handle that and would either change my ways or quit bow hunting. I know rifle hunters who throw lead at everything and probably hit the same number they don't recover. The rifle hunters just don't admit to hitting that many or don't know they did until someone locates the deer later. I feel like we owe it to our game to learn our limitations and be both proficient and cautious with our shots.

I just got back from a Wyoming muley hunt last night where I shot a smaller buck on the last day. I hit him twice as he traveled a short distance into a massive willow tangle alongside a stream. He hunched up good on the first shot, then traveled a few yards before I put the second one in him as he disappeared into the willows. We had to make a trip around the canyon I shot him across and as we made that journey the snow clouds broke over the mountain tops and it cut loose. By the time we got to where we last saw the buck we had 2" of snow, and and a half hour later we had 5" and white-out conditions. We looked for 3 hours and then I walked the creek out to the next road hoping to spot some sign. I don't think the buck made it far from where we last saw him, but I could never find any sign with the snow to track him off of. When I shot the sky was still clear on our side of the mountain range and the weather forecast from that morning was a 40% chance of light snow. I went home with my tag in my pack knowing I had killed a buck but failed to find it, I didn't try for another. That was on me.

I guess my point is that if you hunt long enough you will miss and you will make a bad hit no matter what weapon you use. Let it bother you and try not to make a habit of it, but evaluate it honestly after, fix any mistakes you made, and continue hunting. If you just can't not take the shot because your weapon isn't reliable at that range, go to a longer range weapon don't just take the shot anyway. Find what fits you and your hunting style/desires.

Back to the OP's post, hunt with whatever you want that's legal but understand your limitations. I think mine have shrunk a bit until I cleanly take some more animals and reassure myself I'm capable of what I think I am. I think the season dates and lengths are well matched in most states to the difficulty of harvesting a mature animal with that weapon. I think the vast majority of us who enjoy regular success in any state on any animal with any weapon are doing so by hard work and persistence, not because it's easy. The skill sets necessary may change a little but the dedication necessary does not.
 
Last edited:

MattB

WKR
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,410
As a bow hunter, I will disagree with the notion that at any point a bow is amore efficient . If a person who was equally proficient with their weapon was to gun hunt at bowhunting ranges versus bowhunting at the same range, the gun is more efficient.

I am on board with the notion that hunting within your abilities and only taking high % shots the ethics largely levels the playing field between weapon types, but all else equal, the longer range weapon will be more efficient at shorter range.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
15,527
Location
Colorado Springs
As a bow hunter, I will disagree with the notion that at any point a bow is amore efficient . If a person who was equally proficient with their weapon was to gun hunt at bowhunting ranges versus bowhunting at the same range, the gun is more efficient.

That depends on what "efficient" means. Is it more efficient at getting a shot? Or more efficient at killing? That cow that ran almost 1/4 mile without a heart was shot at about 75 yards. Not many bow shot elk run that far after a BH through the same spot. Every situation is different, but efficiency depends on how you look at it.
 

AdamW

WKR
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
820
Have you ever seen the comments posted online "Be a real man, use a spear you p***y!" from antis in reference to rifle hunters? Then the Bowmar's film a video of them hunting with spears and the world lost their minds.

I hunted with a compound for about 5 years, let a lot of animals walk by at very close range, and never shot one. I just lost interest in shooting a compound over time so this year I picked up a trad bow. This year is my 22nd deer season and knock on major wood I have never lost an animal. I give VERY heavy consideration to that every time I pick up my recurve. Should I just be shooting for fun? Should I just stick to being a rifle hunter? I went out last night for the first time with my recurve and started ranging things. "I won't shoot past that fence post or that clump of brush..." With more primitive gear the limitations I impose on myself are heavy and weigh on me.

There was a push here in MO a few years ago to get the atlatl added as an approved method of take. It got approved and since then a couple/few people (mainly the same husband and wife) have killed deer with an atlatl. The wife recently darted (?) one out of their barn on a Monday and recovered the animal the following Monday. The Missouri Department of Conservation (our fish and game) has made probably 1 or 2 dozen posts in the last couple years on the atlatl. They rarely mention the implications of wounded and unrecovered game. I think we owe it to ourselves and one another to keep that stuff in mind while not mudslinging other hunters. All that said, there are some hunters who don't lose a minute of sleep wounding and never recovering an animal and we can't do anything to change that most likely.
 

woodmoose

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
May 27, 2016
Messages
149
Location
North Carolina
I will almost always use the most efficient weapon I can. In Montana I could hunt during rifle season with a bow, but I never have UNLESS the rules of the area require it. It has nothing to do with ethics, I just want the best opportunity to kill the animal I want to kill, and my standards don't really change from weapon to weapon very much. To me it is about the animal, not the weapon I got it with. And I don't think a compound bow is a substandard weapon, or a trad bow either, it just limits your range. All of the weapons require dedication and practice to learn to shoot effectively, especially at longer ranges. I guess my thought is that any weapon is ethical in the hands of an ethical hunter who accepts their limits with that weapon, which might include not using a particular weapon they can't shoot well enough (for me a trad bow).

that is my philosophy,,,,

during my planning for a Frank Church Wilderness area elk hunt a while ago a friend of mine asked "you bowhunting?" (he was and remains a bow only guy who get's a bit snobbish on the subject),,,,,,I said "it's any weapon,,,what do you think?" and proceeded to prep my 7mm Mag, betsy,,,,,,,

I hunt for me and the animal,,,,love all methods and use what feels right, and is legal, for that area/season/etc,,,,,,,
 

Rich M

WKR
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Messages
5,103
Location
Orlando
I always get a kick out of this stuff.

I'm a bow hunter - Hoo-Aah! It's better! Tree stands bite! Western hunters can't hunt in the woods. Eastern hunters don't know how to stalk. LOL! Just returned from my first WY hunt and it was great, much more fun than sitting in a bug, snake, and alligator infested swamp waiting for a 100# whitetail to walk by, for sure.

Do what you like and like what you do. Try the traditional - it is fun and challenging. If you hunt for a challenge, that'll up your fun.

You started down the efficiency road. Can't go there as a rifle is more efficient than a string propelled shaft is more efficient than a spear is more proficient than a rock. Some states have 3 month archery season and a 3 day rifle season - it is to limit the kill and provide the most hunting days for folks who like to hunt.

I'm deaf and have 40 seasons behind me. About 25-30 with archery included. First bow hunt was in 1977. I even used a spear on a wild hog hunt - bounced the spear off one at about 12 feet. Archery is tough, getting inside 100 feet from an animal and using stick and string is the real deal - I'd starve if I had to do that for food. So, with only 3 deer in 25-30 years of archery (i quit for a while after losing a 2nd deer), I use a rifle to keep the freezer stocked. More efficient for me in that I can sit back 100 yards and not spook the animals with some tiny sound I don't hear.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
682
Location
North Idaho
People always seem to get things backwards. The weapon doesn't make the hunter, weapons are an extension of the hunter.

Everything goes in this direction.

Trad bows, compound, muzzleloader, handgun or rifle. Long range, short range, tree stands, bait. All of it is made better by a good hunter and all can be made miserably bad by a bad hunter.

40 years I have been hearing the same comments and arguments for or against every single style of hunting.

I don't care what tools you use, we are all hunters. The end result we all seek is a dead animal to eat. How you choose to do it is entirely up to you.
 

AKBC

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
222
My issue is with non-archers who archery hunt because there is a longer season or an extra tag.
 

MattB

WKR
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,410
That depends on what "efficient" means. Is it more efficient at getting a shot? Or more efficient at killing? That cow that ran almost 1/4 mile without a heart was shot at about 75 yards. Not many bow shot elk run that far after a BH through the same spot. Every situation is different, but efficiency depends on how you look at it.

Are you are suggesting that, on average, elk that have their heart destroyed by a bullet run a longer distance than elk heart shot with a broadhead because you are familiar with a single incident that suggests so?
 
Top