Hunting Ethics

[FishingBum]

. We both thought it was the same bear and I told her to take the shot when it stopped moving. She shot it with her Winchester Mod 70 270 WSM, right shoulder through chest and under hide on left side. Bear spun and I shot it with my 375 through the gut she shot again then it dissapeared behind the wall of seagulls. When they cleared out the bear was laying in the creek with its head still up. I shot it again in the rear quarters with her 270(no scope on my 375) . The bear then started to slowly walk away then lay down then walk till it got to the treeline. Had my wife go get the kids/boat. We landed on the shore and found the blood trail. Not hard it was at least 1.5 feet wide leading to the treeline. Went in with guns at the ready expecting the worse with the thick brush of southeast alaska. Could see some thing black moving about ten feet in front of us, handed her my 375 and told her to shoot. The black thing stopped moving.

When I read this story about this bear hunt I found my self feeling very frustrated. When I was learning to hunt I was taught to make every shot count and always try for the sure one shot kill. I have lived by this while hunting all these years. This has meant that I have had to pass on some shots or have had to go to great lengths to close the distance to make sure I got the one shot kill. When I read the above story two things came to my mind right away. First thing is that they needed to put more time in at the range and become more familiar with there weapons. The second thing is maybe they farther out than they had practiced and should have closed the distance before taking the shot.

I do not claim to be the greatest hunter in the world and have mad my share of mistakes in the past. The important thing is that we learn something from our mistakes and do not make the same one again. Stories like this are the ones that organizations like PETA use against us hunters to try to remove our right to hunt. I will say I am very glad that they stayed with it and tracked down and finished the kill as every hunter should.

I enjoyed a great hunting season teaching my son how to hunt and how to be an ethical hunter. Just some food for thought and that is the end of my two cents.

 

[Tag]

I agree. I live in Wisconsin and during deer hunting season here its amazing how many times people will shoot at a deer. We usually have a few fatalitites a year related to unsafe shooting. And on a 140-200lb animal any more than one well placed shot and you are losing a lot of meat.

 

[BrownBear]

You know, I have to say it. Hunting ethics have taken such a downturn in the last decade that I'm seriously thinking about quiting altogether after 50 years of joy. There's so much awful stuff going on out there that I'm more an more embarassed to be associated with it.

Hunting today is starting to look more and more like the TV show "Survivor" with large groups of people doing really stupid things. Fishing is even worse.

I used to stay well away from other hunting parties out of politeness, not wanting to limit their experience in any way. Now I'm avoiding them out of self-defense because too many think nothing of walking right over the top of you.

Sure good for business on the private holdings though, because more and more that's about the only way to get away from yokels.

 

[ohhunter1]

black thing?

black thing?

That moving black thing could just as well been the black Labrador Retreiver belonging to someone who posted about the death of their dog by a careless bear hunter. Whatever happened to positivly identifying your target before you pull the trigger. The sloppy, inhumane shooting, I won't even go into.

 

[Bill S.]

OK, for those that have hunted bears, they don't want to die easily, especially if they don't go with the first shot. One black bear took 9 shots to kill, and seven were right where they were suppose to be, but the bear didn't give up easily. So the number of shots taken is not a problem. I have to agree with shooting at "some thing black moving about ten feet in front of us" is not the way to do things. However, we were not there, we don't know how much they actually saw so perhaps we should nto judge quickly and going into heavy brush for a wounded bear is not for the faint of heart, even if its a black bear. However, I truly believe that you should ALWAYS positively identify your target before pulling the trigger.

 

[thunder chicken1]

ethics

ethics

I agree with Brownbear, it's been tough so I try and stay as far away from other hunters due to the fact I've almost been shot twice ( while wearing blaze orange )and my dog almost got shot once. I've seen alot of stupid things and I just have to shake my head in disbelief. I think there's to much competition going on as everyone thinks they need to shoot the biggest or the most to be considered successful and they'll stoop as low as they have to to accomplish that goal, what happened to just enjoying the hunt and if you get something so much the better and if you don't, oh well is was fun anyway and still better than being at work!!!

 

[broncoformudv]

Bill S, think you for your comments. Yes I did positively identify the black think as her bear. The blood trail went to it as well as the broken foliage. No I would not shoot nor have another person with me shoot at something in the woods without properly identifying our target first.

I apologize for my poor writing skills and leaving out all of the particulars. Was just excited about my wife’s first hunting experience and wanted to share it with all of you. I did not look over what I wrote before posting to see how it might look from a different set of eyes.


Rob

 

[winkhink]

Don't know if this is the case in this situation but if multiple people shoot at one animal, who claims it, first shot or last... This story, she shot first and last but just a question.

 

[GEC1000]

Bill S. is on right track

Bill S. is on right track

Many recent posts on lots of threads in this forum are more about complaining, and soap boxing, and less about hunting. Posts that point the finger at the other guy, reteric that highlights the worst that man has to offer instead of the positives offer little. Re-read the post, you might see a man hunting with, and enjoying his family, doing his best to ensure he finished what he started. It takes courage to admit mistakes, like posting that errant bullet struck intestines instead of breaking bone. And extraordinary courage to enter the alder after an injured bear.

 

[mod elan]

More stories please!

More stories please!

Hey Bronco, keep the stories coming! They are one of the biggest reasons guys like me come here.

I for one feel sick to my stomach when the the first shot doesn't do what is expected. I do believe the majority try to get an animal on the first shot. There are many reasons for this. Less suffering, less tracking, less waste of meat, and bragging rights of course. I have been blessed with the patience that many don't have when hunting. Being able to keep my calm and wait for the best shot, but that has also limited me to one caribou and 2 moose in my life time even though I am born and raised Alaskan. Keep up the good work and the stories!

 

[J FICKES]

Solid!

Solid!

Bronco,

Good job of retrieving that bear! I know my Alert Meter was redlined when I had to go in the brush for ours too not so much for me but my son was along. Were you able to drag it out of the brush to clean it? I was on edge the whole time cleaning mine cause we couldn't get it out of the brush.

 

[broncoformudv]

J Fickes,

Yes we managed to drag it out of the tree line and onto a nice grassy bank before the skinning process started. I was very thankfull for that due to all of the bear activity we had seen there the past two days. We ended up having another blackie stalk our boat twice while skinning it out. Both times I had my back to the boat(anchored in the stream) and it got within 15-20 feet of it.

 

[Ken R]

Bronco did right

Bronco did right

Once the animal is hit--keep shooting. It is your responsibility to put it on the ground after it is hit-or even if you think you hit. Running shots on animals are not easy nor easy to practice. Personally though, you need to think your rifle/bullet selection through based on the animal. Certainly a 375 is enough gun, but less than a 300 should be used only at short distances with plenty of "grains" to efficiently kill bears--they are incredibly tough animals with a strong will to survive. While I realize that smaller rifles are necessary for some hunters--they should only be used if that person is competent with the gun and at short range. My 2 pennies...

 

[covert80]

No problem from what I see

No problem from what I see

"She shot it with her Winchester Mod 70 270 WSM, right shoulder through chest and under hide on left side." That was the first shot. According to this, she hit the bear perfectly with the first shot.

"Bear spun and I shot it with my 375 through the gut she shot again then it dissapeared behind the wall of seagulls." Absolutely right thing to do! It had already been hit by a quality shot, but with dangerous game (especially with the family around) any second shot to anchor it is better than no shot.

"When they cleared out the bear was laying in the creek with its head still up. I shot it again in the rear quarters with her 270(no scope on my 375)." The bear had already been hit twice. This shot was an anchoring shot. Again, safety. The rear quarters shot is an excellent anchor shot for a bear already hit well.

"Went in with guns at the ready expecting the worse with the thick brush of southeast alaska. Could see some thing black moving about ten feet in front of us, handed her my 375 and told her to shoot. The black thing stopped moving." I highly doubt there were labs or anything running around here. They went into thick brush exactly where they had just shot dangerous game. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% for target ID, but from his post in this thread and the given situation, they did nothing wrond here either.

I just don't see how anyone could take this as unethical. There was a good first shot followed by anchoring shots on dangerous game. A final finishing shot at close range on an identified target. If anyone has a problem with this situation, they need to re-think their ethics. Bears take a long time to die and safety first. Congratulations to you for taking your family out to enjoy hunting with you and congrats to your wife on her bear!

 

[Brian M]

Rob asked me to remove his narrative from the original post, and I did so at his request. He expressed regret both to me in a PM and to the community here through this thread for what was a confusing re-telling of the events that transpired. Regardless of how you feel about his ethics concerning this situation, he has apologized for any unintended offense. Let's let this one go, guys. When people admit mistakes and clarify their posts we should seek to build up, not tear down. Thanks.

-Brian

 

[AlleninAlaska]

So what was unethical about taking the first shot? Sounds like a good shot to me, shoulder, chest, under hide on off side.

 

[twodux]

My personal credo

My personal credo

Don't know if this is the case in this situation but if multiple people shoot at one animal, who claims it, first shot or last... This story, she shot first and last but just a question.

While legally, the person who makes the killing shot and reduces the animal to possesion, can tag the animal, I feel different about it personally. If I take down a wounded animal that someone else put the first bullet in, I'm not interested in taking possesion of the animal. I'm just trying to reduce the suffering of the animal and making it's death quicker. Then I congratulate the other hunter and go on my way. I haven't been in this position in Alaska except with others I was hunting with, but when I hunted in Washington I did finish a couple elk and a couple deer that were wounded by other parties.

A buddy and I did give up an elk that my buddy had hit first then had his gun jam and I finished it. Then some yay hoo about 500 yards away shot it in the belly as it was laying there on the ground. He and his party came down as we were gutting it out and were yelling at us that they "had lead" in that animal and they wanted it. The other distastful part of the whole thing was that we were on private property and had stopped for permission from the owners (who we knew) before going in. The other guys had no permission. But I conidered it my partners elk, so I left it up to him. He told them if they wanted the d**n thing so bad to take it and we left there pretty disgusted.

 

[Kusko]

This just drives me nuts. A person puts a decent story on an internet hunting website and every Tom, Dick or Harry has to knitpick it to death with their Boy Scout attitudes.

Everyone is always try to find a violation or an unethical portion of the hunt. Give it a break, not all of us can write like Jack O'Conner.

Big deal, she whacked the bear and it took multiple follow ups.

You shouldn't have to apologize.

Good story Bronc!

 

[Shoot2Kill]

Nicely put Kusko..

Nicely put Kusko..

This just drives me nuts. A person puts a decent story on an internet hunting website and every Tom, Dick or Harry has to knitpick it to death with their Boy Scout attitudes.

Everyone is always try to find a violation or an unethical portion of the hunt. Give it a break, not all of us can write like Jack O'Conner.

Big deal, she whacked the bear and it took multiple follow ups.

You shouldn't have to apologize.

Good story Bronc!

I've stopped visiting this site as much as I used to just because of all the ethics police patrolling this site. It's amazing how tough and perfect people are sitting in front of a computer screen.

 

[257wby]

Nice bear

Nice bear

I've stopped visiting this site as much as I used to just because of all the ethics police patrolling this site. It's amazing how tough and perfect people are sitting in front of a computer screen.


You and me both!

Nice bear and nice hunt!