# Mulie archery videos



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

I just got done watching the Full Moon Production movies and besides acouple of shot angles they are a pretty good set of movies.


----------



## NoShot (Nov 23, 2007)

Long distance shooting has never captured my viewing attention, they will never earn an accolade from me..


----------



## lionhunter (Sep 11, 2007)

I agree with you inbowrange. BUT you just opened a big can of worms. Sit back and have some fun now listening to all the guys that dont think you should shoot over 50 yards. A little note for all you guys that think that. The equiptment is more then capable of doing it these days. I wouldnt hesitat to shoot at 60 to 70 yards if the conditions are right. Thats why I start shooting targets now till the hunt.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> I wouldnt hesitat to shoot at 60 to 70 yards if the conditions are right.


And just when would that be? :?

Ask those FMP dopes how many times they missed at 60 70+ yards. :roll:

I won't even ask how many they hit and lost...

Sheesh, here we go again! O|*


----------



## Duckholla (Sep 24, 2007)

Agreed....no kudos to those guys from me. If you watch those videos closely they rarely hit the animal in the pocket, and they make a lot of excuses for their poor shots. There are a few shots in those videos if you watch close you can see them miss an animal by feet! Tells me they are shooting with a lot of guess work. They are usually afforded a second shot because out at 100 yards the animal has no idea that anything has happened when an arrow flies 4 feet above its back.
Not too ethical in my opinion...plus...I have never understood the strange psychodelic starts they put on there. Some dude flyin on the drugs and beer he drank the night before that knocked him out on the couch...and now he is going hunting??? Strange message....not too interesting to me.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

I like the videos. I like the guys....they helped a friend with his hunt this year and he said they were good people. Thats good enough for me. So they don't hit the 10X on every shot..... um, after shooting with some of the folks here at the league, under total no pressure situations, it'd be hard for me to give anyone credit for making the perfect shot all the time, at any distance. :? They put together a couple hunting videos doing what they do, hunting mulies on the front. Sure, its not getting them any academy awards for acting or film management or tournament trophies for their shooting, but it was good enough for me to sit back and watch some hunting that took place in my backyard. I like the end result of their hunts as well.... big bucks with a smiling hunter proud of his work. 8)


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> Sure, its not getting them any academy awards for acting or film management or tournament trophies for their shooting, but it was good enough for me


Here in lies the biggest problem I have with FMP. Not everyone has the ability or the experience to make an educated decision on taking long shots. Almost NOBODY has the ability to be * consistently* deadly effective at the ranges they *promote* and boast about shooting at. Take a guy with little or no experience and fill his head with that kind of arrogance and ignorance and you've got a recipe for wounded animals and an overall bad image for bowhunting. That is irresponsible film making and unethical bowhunting.

I don't have this _opinion_ because I shoot a recurve, I have this opinion because 30 years of trial and error with both a compound and recurve bow has taught me better. But, it is _my _ opinion, and like it or not, and I stand by it to the end. Jeeze, I'm starting to sound like Tred Barta :shock:

Bowhunting has *never* been about "how far", it is about "how close". Period!


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Things change. I will not promote any shot at any distance that ends up bad, but I can tell you that things change. And when things change and people don't, all that can be said in the end is that the people that didn't change, don't change, nothing wrong with them or their choice, but those that want to change with the available technology can choose to do so and there is nothing wrong with them, or their choice. Now, people can text, email, in other words communicate more effeciantly, but Tred Barta doesn't think it is the way it was when he was growing up so he still sends out u.s. postal mail and a telegram or two. He still communicates, just not as effectively.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Very well put Tex!


----------



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

If you can show me a movie that EVERY shot was perfect let it be with a rifle, muzzleloader, or bow let me know. In every hunting movie i have there is ALWAYS rifle hunters having to put 2,3,or 4 rounds in an animal to put him down.


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

Very true Inbowrange, there are slobs with every weapon. 1000 yard shots are about the same, videos out for that too, still does not make it right. :?


----------



## north slope (Sep 8, 2007)

o-||


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

north slope said:


> o-||


Quit antagonizing.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> Here in lies the biggest problem I have with FMP. Not everyone has the ability or the experience to make an educated decision on taking long shots. Almost NOBODY has the ability to be consistently deadly effective at the ranges they promote and boast about shooting at. Take a guy with little or no experience and fill his head with that kind of arrogance and ignorance and you've got a recipe for wounded animals and an overall bad image for bowhunting. That is irresponsible film making and unethical bowhunting.
> 
> I don't have this opinion because I shoot a recurve, I have this opinion because 30 years of trial and error with both a compound and recurve bow has taught me better. But, it is my opinion, and like it or not, and I stand by it to the end. Jeeze, I'm starting to sound like Tred Barta
> 
> ...


Soooo, if you *choose* to use modern technology and *promote* the taking of long shots even though the odds of making a good clean kill shot are stacked against you, that's OK because it's your *choice.* :?

Ya, I guess life is just full of choices, good ones and bad ones...


----------



## north slope (Sep 8, 2007)

Does anyone know where I can get some of those explosive tips like Rambo had on his arrows. This way I can shoot 150 yards and anything in a 50 yard radius dies.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

north slope said:


> Does anyone know where I can get some of those explosive tips like Rambo had on his arrows. This way I can shoot 150 yards and anything in a 50 yard radius dies.


Nice! no fuss & no cleaning, better put a camera on your bow to record the evidence of the kill since nothing will be left. :mrgreen:


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Here is my response to my very dear friend. As you promote bow hunting is not about how far but how close. This is exactly what I promote. If you do hunt the way you do out of very well scouted out tree stands, and by placing a well thought out tree stand and utilizing this technology to get close, then you should be very close to your quarry, elevated above them and with in ten yards you will usually always make a very, very good shot. Some times you don't. I have the sad tale to tell of utilizing this technology and making a very poor choice to shoot thru some cover, very well with in my very effective range as I had just proven the day before when I twelve ringed a coyote. I ended up 'trying' to track a very, very, very large buck that I 'glanced' an arrow back and low, and ended up following his very faint blood trail in the snow for three days until I realized that his buck was either not mortally wounded, or if so, it was such a bad shot placement that it was at least going to live long enough to elude me. So, getting close does not always mean making a good connection. The closer you are to a buck, the situation usually calls for a very wary buck on high alert and ready to spring or jump a string or duck a shot and poor shot placement is still a feasable possible outcome. OK, so jump to another very fun and not as effective hunting technique in the spot and stalk meathodology and ponder on these learned facts. When you first spot a buck at a distance, and watch where he ends up, or note a direction he is headed, you then utilize a method, or plan to close the distance and 'get close' (I ablolutely love Tiffiney, Lee not so much). You sneek, and binocular and sneek and drop a pack and sent up and test the wind and test the wind again and again. You drop your boots (I recomend tying orange tape on them at this time so that you don't have to spend four hours looking for them when the action makes you forget the exact patch of sage brush you left them buy) and you sneek some more. I insert hear that it is next to absolute impossiblity to get with in thirty five yards if you are doing any moving. The way you get with in thirty five yards if, IF THE WIND IS RIGHT, you get with in a hundred or so yards and then wate them out and HOPE they bring it in your direction and then the buck is what closes the rest of the distance. If you have done everything right and the buck cooperates, then you should be placed in a very inconspituous spot where you can draw your bow with out alerting the approaching buck and get anchored in and then execute a very good shot. But other scenerios often place themselves into the equation. You might be able to get to with in sixty three yards of a bedded buck that is down hill from you and in a good shooting lane with his ears fixed down hill. A good archer y hunter then can asses the possiblilites. I submit that trying to get closer will nintey nine point eight percent of the time you will end up jumping the buck out of its bed and have to go back and look for your boots and step on a few sharp things while you do so. But another CHOICE does present itself. You can use your (New technology currently available) laser range finder and see that you are 62.5 yards from the buck. You can then use your angle meter and asses that the buck is 35 degrees down hill from you. You can then look at your cut chart and find out that you need to cut 12.1 yards off of your shot. You can then move your single pin sight which has been calibrated via your Archery Advantage computer program and even know exactly how many pounds of kinetic enery will be available upon impact if you wanted to know some 'mostly' useless information. You could sit there for a little while and really think about whether you are indeed close enough to make that shot since you really should know your capabilities and factor everything in to your decission. (If you have not been grouping really well at sixty yards very consistently..... as in the last fifteen groups of five or more arrows inside a softball or smaller, then you should consider the wind and if it is feasable to get about ten to fifteen yards closer.) BUT, if you feel confident with making this shot, then number one, you did get close, and number two, if you just got with in sixty two and a half yards of a mature buck, then you just proved to me that you are a very good sneeker thus a decent hunter. Now, make sure that you can hold that pin where you want the arrow to enter and if anything does not feel right (stiff cross wind, buck fever, the pin is swirling, you can't get your bubble square with out peeking or changing your anchor point, the buck becomes 'alert' to your draw, the ears turn, it stands up and looks at you......... or anything not just right), let down, don't make the shot. On the other hand, if you draw back and anchor in and square your buble and square your sight window and bend properly and your pin is steady and you feel calm and confident, then hold good and execute a smooth realease with a proper follow thru and watch your arrow disapear (luminocks really help in longer shot situations for arrow flight visablilty, also new technology) into the pocket and pull out your binoculars and enjoy the rest of the day. That is how you get close enough to make an ethical shot. That would be the more likely scenerio on a successful spot and stalk. You could not do that five to ten years ago. Five to ten years ago the technology did not exist to make this an ethical possiblitiy. That is why I said things change, and recent technological advances including, now, proper broadhead technology with the very ethical EPEK X-C3, this scenerio is a more ethical possiblity. But read everything I said, especially the part about passing up on the shot if it doesn't feel right. I am not promoting long shots, I am promoting getting as close as you possibly (read: understanding the entire dynamic of spot and stalk hunting and know that if you push the extra step, or try to get with in twenty yards before you think you have a shot opportunity, you haven't learned that deer main defense mechanism is it's warry ways, and getting to close in a spot and stalk will end up in a spooked and nervous often eluding and usually escaping your effort of impatience when you think you are doing what is right. 

Many of the FMP endeavors have spent countless hours hanging out above a bedded buck, waiting for it to change it's bed or stand up and sun etc... I have confirmed that there has been two instances where they did not retrieve the buck and the first one was in the book cliffs with a close shot and the other was on the Blind Creek slope with a fairly long shot, but both of those bucks were not fatal wounds, and the camera showed that the first shot was in no mans land above the vitals and below the spine and the second shot was low and barley hit the brisquet. They spent tons of hours still trying to track both those animals, I was on the second one for two days and very little blood and never even a bedded spot with hardley any ferensics. Every other deer they have hit they have retrieved. 

Once again, get as close as you can to make the most ethical shot you feel you are cabable of and do not shoot, release, if you are not tremendously confident that your arrow is going to do some fatal damage. Once you do make this shot, be very diligent in your effort to retrieve your game. 

I love hunting, and I love you Tex.


This got me excited to continue in this most morral endeavor in the up comming months.


----------



## north slope (Sep 8, 2007)

Wow, now I know why I can't get my loan papers looked at............. :roll: Broadheads, wrassssailing, and writing books no wonder your sooo busy.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Wow, FMP should hire you to write the script for their next film. "The shots, stunts, and kills on this video were performed by trained, seasoned, highly skilled professionals, Please, don't try this at home".

I love you to Greg.


----------



## idiot with a bow (Sep 10, 2007)

Make sure you use magnifiers.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

EPEK said:


> Many of the FMP endeavors have spent countless hours hanging out above a bedded buck, waiting for it to change it's bed or stand up and sun etc... I have confirmed that there has been two instances where they did not retrieve the buck and the first one was in the book cliffs with a close shot and the other was on the Blind Creek slope with a fairly long shot, but both of those bucks were not fatal wounds, and the camera showed that the first shot was in no mans land above the vitals and below the spine and the second shot was low and barley hit the brisquet. They spent tons of hours still trying to track both those animals, I was on the second one for two days and very little blood and never even a bedded spot with hardley any ferensics. Every other deer they have hit they have retrieved.
> 
> Once again, get as close as you can to make the most ethical shot you feel you are cabable of and do not shoot, release, if you are not tremendously confident that your arrow is going to do some fatal damage. Once you do make this shot, be very diligent in your effort to retrieve your game.
> 
> *This got me excited to continue in this most morral endeavor in the up comming months.*


Good to hear somebody else vouch for those guys and the unseen hours they put into their work. Greg, this year I hope to test your theory of "sixty three yards and a dose of confidence" myself.... hopefully I can prove myself worthy of taking the shot. If I can get that close and hopefully closer and successfully fill my tag/s, I'm sure there won't be much of a better feeling for a hunter. I welcome that challenge or at least the opportunity to test my stalking capabilities against the ingrained wariness of a nice buck. All I've ever done is stalk... no treestanding for me (yet) and I've loved every second of it. I honestly can't imagine sitting and waiting would be as fulfilling as pitting myself against the senses of the deer or elk and trying to close the distance on their terms. Setting myself up for failure?? Perhaps, but I doubt I'd have it any other way.... and it won't keep me from admiring the guys who are out there getting it done, better yet, capturing their endeavor on film. 8)


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

EPEK said:


> Here is my response to my very dear friend. As you promote bow hunting is not about how far but how close. This is exactly what I promote. If you do hunt the way you do out of very well scouted out tree stands, and by placing a well thought out tree stand and utilizing this technology to get close, then you should be very close to your quarry, elevated above them and with in ten yards you will usually always make a very, very good shot. Some times you don't. I have the sad tale to tell of utilizing this technology and making a very poor choice to shoot thru some cover, very well with in my very effective range as I had just proven the day before when I twelve ringed a coyote. I ended up 'trying' to track a very, very, very large buck that I 'glanced' an arrow back and low, and ended up following his very faint blood trail in the snow for three days until I realized that his buck was either not mortally wounded, or if so, it was such a bad shot placement that it was at least going to live long enough to elude me. So, getting close does not always mean making a good connection. The closer you are to a buck, the situation usually calls for a very wary buck on high alert and ready to spring or jump a string or duck a shot and poor shot placement is still a feasable possible outcome. OK, so jump to another very fun and not as effective hunting technique in the spot and stalk meathodology and ponder on these learned facts. When you first spot a buck at a distance, and watch where he ends up, or note a direction he is headed, you then utilize a method, or plan to close the distance and 'get close' (I ablolutely love Tiffiney, Lee not so much). You sneek, and binocular and sneek and drop a pack and sent up and test the wind and test the wind again and again. You drop your boots (I recomend tying orange tape on them at this time so that you don't have to spend four hours looking for them when the action makes you forget the exact patch of sage brush you left them buy) and you sneek some more. I insert hear that it is next to absolute impossiblity to get with in thirty five yards if you are doing any moving. The way you get with in thirty five yards if, IF THE WIND IS RIGHT, you get with in a hundred or so yards and then wate them out and HOPE they bring it in your direction and then the buck is what closes the rest of the distance. If you have done everything right and the buck cooperates, then you should be placed in a very inconspituous spot where you can draw your bow with out alerting the approaching buck and get anchored in and then execute a very good shot. But other scenerios often place themselves into the equation. You might be able to get to with in sixty three yards of a bedded buck that is down hill from you and in a good shooting lane with his ears fixed down hill. A good archer y hunter then can asses the possiblilites. I submit that trying to get closer will nintey nine point eight percent of the time you will end up jumping the buck out of its bed and have to go back and look for your boots and step on a few sharp things while you do so. But another CHOICE does present itself. You can use your (New technology currently available) laser range finder and see that you are 62.5 yards from the buck. You can then use your angle meter and asses that the buck is 35 degrees down hill from you. You can then look at your cut chart and find out that you need to cut 12.1 yards off of your shot. You can then move your single pin sight which has been calibrated via your Archery Advantage computer program and even know exactly how many pounds of kinetic enery will be available upon impact if you wanted to know some 'mostly' useless information. You could sit there for a little while and really think about whether you are indeed close enough to make that shot since you really should know your capabilities and factor everything in to your decission. (If you have not been grouping really well at sixty yards very consistently..... as in the last fifteen groups of five or more arrows inside a softball or smaller, then you should consider the wind and if it is feasable to get about ten to fifteen yards closer.) BUT, if you feel confident with making this shot, then number one, you did get close, and number two, if you just got with in sixty two and a half yards of a mature buck, then you just proved to me that you are a very good sneeker thus a decent hunter. Now, make sure that you can hold that pin where you want the arrow to enter and if anything does not feel right (stiff cross wind, buck fever, the pin is swirling, you can't get your bubble square with out peeking or changing your anchor point, the buck becomes 'alert' to your draw, the ears turn, it stands up and looks at you......... or anything not just right), let down, don't make the shot. On the other hand, if you draw back and anchor in and square your buble and square your sight window and bend properly and your pin is steady and you feel calm and confident, then hold good and execute a smooth realease with a proper follow thru and watch your arrow disapear (luminocks really help in longer shot situations for arrow flight visablilty, also new technology) into the pocket and pull out your binoculars and enjoy the rest of the day. That is how you get close enough to make an ethical shot. That would be the more likely scenerio on a successful spot and stalk. You could not do that five to ten years ago. Five to ten years ago the technology did not exist to make this an ethical possiblitiy. That is why I said things change, and recent technological advances including, now, proper broadhead technology with the very ethical EPEK X-C3, this scenerio is a more ethical possiblity. But read everything I said, especially the part about passing up on the shot if it doesn't feel right. I am not promoting long shots, I am promoting getting as close as you possibly (read: understanding the entire dynamic of spot and stalk hunting and know that if you push the extra step, or try to get with in twenty yards before you think you have a shot opportunity, you haven't learned that deer main defense mechanism is it's warry ways, and getting to close in a spot and stalk will end up in a spooked and nervous often eluding and usually escaping your effort of impatience when you think you are doing what is right.
> 
> Many of the FMP endeavors have spent countless hours hanging out above a bedded buck, waiting for it to change it's bed or stand up and sun etc... I have confirmed that there has been two instances where they did not retrieve the buck and the first one was in the book cliffs with a close shot and the other was on the Blind Creek slope with a fairly long shot, but both of those bucks were not fatal wounds, and the camera showed that the first shot was in no mans land above the vitals and below the spine and the second shot was low and barley hit the brisquet. They spent tons of hours still trying to track both those animals, I was on the second one for two days and very little blood and never even a bedded spot with hardley any ferensics. Every other deer they have hit they have retrieved.
> 
> ...


Holy crap, are we having the hunting story contest again? I had to stop for lunch on that one.

I agree with ALL of you...................Keep it fun!


----------



## lehi (Sep 13, 2007)

EPEK, In your first post you sounded like Barack Obama. :lol: "change this, change that, change!"


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

I know, I #1 got carried away, #2 have changed my opinion and #3 mentioned that this is for experts only:

#1 I have no explenation for why I went on and on except for I must have felt that every thing I said needed to be said.

#2 I have changed my opinion because the technology has changed. I also, ten years ago, never used to be able to get on the internet and chat with people that have similar likes to mine.

#3 I do feel like only experts should take the shots they are capable of making. Thus if you are going to take a 20 yard shot you had better be an expert at 20 yard shots. If you are ever going to endeavor into the 50 + world, you had better make sure you have the technology to do so and then make sure that you are capable of technology utilization. I don't think anyone that is not an expert at hunting should be hunting, but I do feel that every one that hunts should be afforded the opportunity to learn how to be an expert and thus venture to be one. So............ while everyone is 'enjoying' learning how to become an expert, there will be mistakes made along the way. I could go on and on on this, so I will thru out the other responses, and no all in one post this time.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Will your arrows be in a quiver?


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

EPEK said:


> I don't think anyone that is not an expert at hunting should be hunting, but I do feel that every one that hunts should be afforded the opportunity to learn how to be an expert and thus venture to be one. So............ while everyone is 'enjoying' learning how to become an expert, there will be mistakes made along the way. I could go on and on on this, so I will thru out the other responses, and no all in one post this time.


You didn't get the memo huh?? Being on the internet forums automatically makes you an expert....


----------



## Firstarrow (Sep 28, 2007)

*idiot with a bow *wrote:



> Make sure you use magnifiers.


for the fine print? 
or 
to see the deer at that distance?

Interesting posts!


----------



## Mountain Time (Sep 24, 2007)

Here is a post that I wrote on another forum related to very same subject....Interesting the 'controversy' that the FMP videos seem to stir up whenever there is a thread about there movies:


The distance of the shots is what gets a lot of guys wound up. I really didn't hear much criticism (actually I heard lot's of positive) about the first video but the second video sure stirred it up. I go back and forth on the subject as well. The justification for these long shots often points to the technological development of the new archery equipment and the year round practice that these guys put in. The common argument against long shots is the number of variables that can't be controlled at such long distances, ie wind, animal movement, etc. and the small margin of error. 

To me it's like playing basketball, if you had to make a game winning shot would you rather have to make a lay up or 3 pointer? Percentages say that most people--even those who have not practiced--have a better chance of making the lay up. Taking this analogy a little further, what if you have to take a 3 pointer to win/tie the game? Do you let just anyone take it or do you put the ball in the hands of the guy who has the best chance of making the shot. The answer is obvious in basketball but it's not as obvious to some hunters watching these videos and that is the problem that I have with the long shots. 

The avg joe watching this video hears the FMP crew talking about making 80 + yard shots and they start thinking that they can take that shot too. Just like a basketball game, not everyone on the floor should be taking 3 pointers. It comes down to knowing your abilities. Even if an archer practices shooting year round that doesn't mean they have the ability to make that 80 yard shot! In the second video "The Ride", Anthony takes a shot and then talks about how that shot is 'not for everyone'. That's the truth, most guys don't put in the kind of practice that these guys do and some may not have ability no matter how much they practice. 

The part that I go back and forth on is, what's worse, the long shots these guys are taking and following up on or the guy who busts out his bow on opening day and starts flinging arrows; even if it is a 20 yard shot what chance does the guy have of an ethical kill? These are the hunters that I worry about. They watch the video and think I saw those guys take the shot why shouldn't I........I think FMP should make it more clear how much they practice and that the ideal is to get closer to the deer etc. I do like how they point out having the right tools, like a slopeshot, 3rd axis and so forth...but in the end actions speak louder than words and people tend to think that they are the exception to the rule. 


Personally, I feel comfortable shooting at around 50 yards max. I practice past that range so that I feel more comfortable at the shorter distances. Truthfully when I am hunting and find a buck I want to go after I go in for the layup......that's how I prefer to hunt. But even a layup is not gaurenteed. I have proven that on more than one occasion. 

Sorry for the long post.....I could go on ....so I will..... _(O)_ 

I do agree with EPEK's novel to a point, times have changed, equipment has gotten better, '60 is the new 40'. My opinion differs in the fact I think you can sneak closer than 62.5 yards--In fact under the right circumstances I think it is possible to sneak within 40 yards fairly consistently. Yes you will blow some of the stocks but to me it's worth trying to close the gap. Perhaps my opinion will change when I have as much experience as EPEK. Alright .......the end...


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

I went into a local archery shop to get some broadheads. The man behind the counter couldn't wait to talk to me about his latest hunting endeavor on the Front. He told me how just that morning he missed a buck at 106 yards. The evening before he missed a buck at 132 yards. I found out later, thru a friend, that he killed a buck at over 120 yards. Now, this guy didn't know me or what my skill level is. He was stating this to me like I should be a) worshiping him or b) doing it myself. I have not set foot back in that shop. What are we teaching the newcomers to the sport? The point is, even the most skilled try to push their limits in chase for ego boosting.

The truth of the matter is simple: As technology makes weapons (bows, muzzleloaders, rifles) more efficient, opportunity to hunt will be lost. If archers are consistently taking and making 80+ yard shots, the archery opportunity will be diminished. The DWR (and all game agencies) base their permit numbers on the knowledge that most hunters are UNSUCCESSFUL. But as the technology creates more harvest (including wounding rates) then the permits available will drop.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Packout said:


> I went into a local archery shop to get some broadheads. The man behind the counter couldn't wait to talk to me about his latest hunting endeavor on the Front. He told me how just that morning he missed a buck at 106 yards. The evening before he missed a buck at 132 yards. I found out later, thru a friend, that he killed a buck at over 120 yards. Now, this guy didn't know me or what my skill level is. He was stating this to me like I should be a) worshiping him or b) doing it myself. I have not set foot back in that shop. What are we teaching the newcomers to the sport? The point is, even the most skilled try to push their limits in chase for ego boosting.
> 
> The truth of the matter is simple: As technology makes weapons (bows, muzzleloaders, rifles) more efficient, opportunity to hunt will be lost. If archers are consistently taking and making 80+ yard shots, the archery opportunity will be diminished. The DWR (and all game agencies) base their permit numbers on the knowledge that most hunters are UNSUCCESSFUL. But as the technology creates more harvest (including wounding rates) then the permits available will drop.


I agree with you to a point but the fact is archery sucsess rates havn't changed much in the last 20 years. It was and still is around 22% sucsess. So, has advances in technology made people better at getting their deer? Some yes. But for the most part It's made us lazy and dependant. Technology for many, is a cruch for poor hunting skills. But hey, We're Americans! Right! We want it all, NOW! And we don't want to work for it. :|


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I hate to admit it, but several months ago I had a discussion w/Packout on this very subject. I have now come to see things more like Packout now than I did then. I believe way too many people are taking shots well out of their effective range, resulting in how many wounded animals? Tex, you say success rates have stayed basically the same, but if 'hunters' are taking longer shots how many animals are being hit and unrecovered as compared to 30 years ago? That is the most troublesome aspect of this long range shooting issue. When archery 'pro's' are advocating it, it results in many who have no business trying to do the same. There may be some who can make 100 yards shots on animals, I personally don't think there is EVER a situation to justify such, but to 'glorify' it by putting it on a video and sell it as an admirable 'trait' and something that should be desired by others borders on irresponsible actions. I view the long-range rifle shooting as being in the same boat. I do NOT see it as being a positive for the hunting industry. And, as Packout said, it WILL hurt opportunities and LOWER tag allotments, how does that benefit the sport of hunting?


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

They must be doing the next movie as he is now sporting a mohawk with all of the colors of the rainbow. Some how they needed to look tougher than the tatoo and W Beater T shirt.

I say shoot what you are capable and if that means holding a little high at 90 yards then by dang hold it the right height above him and let-r-rip. :mrgreen:

It seems that we've had this discussion once or fifty times before.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Tex- good point on the small change recently in archery success rates. They seem to jump around in the 15-20% range. However I see that changing in the future as people acquire more technology and become more efficient. 

I just wanted to tell a story I had encountered about long-range mentality. It amazed me that this "Pro" would tell a stranger about it, encourage it. I got carried away on my little internet SoapBox (as happens far too often) and went off on a tangent. I tend to do that..... But, I know that the mindset of shooting animals at extreme distance with bows does nothing to help acquire more hunting opportunity for Archers. That I am sure of. 

Pro- I sure wish we'd stop agreeing on things. It is more fun egging on internet personalities.....

And elk22, I think it is more than 50  ...... we're bored.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> Tex, you say success rates have stayed basically the same, but if 'hunters' are taking longer shots how many animals are being hit and unrecovered as compared to 30 years ago?


They took long shots 30 years ago too. They say todays 50 yards is yesterdays 30 yards. While folks back then may have been stretched at taking a 70 yard shot, the same aplies today with the fool who takes a 100 yard shot. But 30 years ago not many people were educated on what to do after the shot. I think now, even with the amount of idiots we all encounter, people are more apt to look a little harder for hit game. There are many factors, but I really don't think things have changed all that much. Technology is far advanced from 30 years ago, but one fact still remains the same. The farther away you are, the more that can go wrong, no matter how good a shot you THINK you are.

I know this, back in 1989 I THOUGHT I was a pretty good shot with my decked out, tricked up, supper-whammy Hoyt Pro Hunter. And I can safely say I have never missed anything as bad as I've missed a deer at 70 yards. :roll: I can also say I've never sh*tshot more deer than I have when sooting those distances. And yes, I had a rangefinder, and a release.  Live and learn...


----------



## GSPS ROCK (Sep 14, 2007)

I have been reading and watching this thread evolve and have come to the conclusion the topic of long range shooting will never be resolved. It doesn’t matter what topic you want to discuss you will always find that what one believes to be right another person will always believe it to be wrong.

Is it illegal to shoot at an animal beyond 40 yards, the answer is obviously NO! So why should we argue and try and prove that they are wrong for making a video that portrays this type of skill. 

What one person determines to be long range another will not. Let’s take myself and my son for example when we are at the range or some 3D shoot he won’t even pull his bow back beyond 40 yards, where I won’t even hesitate. Why you ask, because he says that is too far. Obviously it is for him and he knows his limits and where he is comfortable to shoot.

I personally don’t think it is unethical to shoot farther than 40 yards. Obviously in this situation ethics is an individual decision, the person shooting knows their equipment, abilities and the hours spent practicing. With today’s technology in bows, arrows, sights and the use of range finders the ability to shoot long range is very capable for ANYONE that has the desire to invest the time in learning their abilities. Of course it will require one to invest both time practicing and money in good equipment.

If we want to discuss ethical than I will put my neck on the line a ruffle a few feathers by saying that anyone that shoots a traditional bow is unethical, after all every shot is a guess and you hope that you will what you aim at. 

The list could go on and on about the ethics between a traditional and compound bow and short or long range shots but once again I am not here to argue what is right or wrong. It all boils down to the amount of practice one spends with what their weapon that they choose to hunt with. 

I stand in awe when someone can hit what they are aiming at regardless of the distance maybe it is just the flight of the arrow I enjoy seeing and the longer it flies the more time I have to enjoy the magical flight of the amazing weapon.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Regardless of the ability, capability, effectiveness, margin for error, distance, technology, conditions or any other variable that comes into the equation at the moment of truth, or the moment you make the decission to either draw back, take the saftey off, lower the sight, etc......... ethics is all about every decision that is made leading up to the fragmental moment you decide to try and end the life of the amazing resource of wildlife. Ethics, and ethical practices should always be promoted in every effort of pursuit and taking of wild game. Measuring these ethics is not possible, and a standard can probably never actually be set, at least not in stone. Therefore, each individual needs to catagorize what they are willing to do, and willing not to do and play with in these self set moral standards so that we can each police our own ethics. Sometimes we will 'feel' very ethical for what we did on a certain day, other times we will stretch those standards a bit and learn a little about ourselves and adjust our standards either tighter based upon the experience, or we might expand the standards based on newley aquired education based on field experience. If we see someone do something that is outside of our standards, we need to assess if we need to impose our standards upon them, or try and understand how they came to the decision and in an effort of understanding, still accept their actions as long as it is not illegal as with in the 'ethics' they set for themselves. 

Again, on the long distance thing, get as close as you possibly can. How close is that, you decide.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

EPEK said:


> Regardless of the ability, capability, effectiveness, margin for error, distance, technology, conditions or any other variable that comes into the equation at the moment of truth, or the moment you make the decission to either draw back, take the saftey off, lower the sight, etc......... ethics is all about every decision that is made leading up to the fragmental moment you decide to try and end the life of the amazing resource of wildlife. Ethics, and ethical practices should always be promoted in every effort of pursuit and taking of wild game. Measuring these ethics is not possible, and a standard can probably never actually be set, at least not in stone. Therefore, each individual needs to catagorize what they are willing to do, and willing not to do and play with in these self set moral standards so that we can each police our own ethics. Sometimes we will 'feel' very ethical for what we did on a certain day, other times we will stretch those standards a bit and learn a little about ourselves and adjust our standards either tighter based upon the experience, or we might expand the standards based on newley aquired education based on field experience. If we see someone do something that is outside of our standards, we need to assess if we need to impose our standards upon them, or try and understand how they came to the decision and in an effort of understanding, still accept their actions as long as it is not illegal as with in the 'ethics' they set for themselves.
> 
> Again, on the long distance thing, get as close as you possibly can. How close is that, you decide.


Great post Greg,

After all, ethics can only be described by what we do when nobody is looking.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

EPEK said:


> Regardless of the ability, capability, effectiveness, margin for error, distance, technology, conditions or any other variable that comes into the equation at the moment of truth, or the moment you make the decission to either draw back, take the saftey off, lower the sight, etc......... ethics is all about every decision that is made leading up to the fragmental moment you decide to try and end the life of the amazing resource of wildlife. Ethics, and ethical practices should always be promoted in every effort of pursuit and taking of wild game. Measuring these ethics is not possible, and a standard can probably never actually be set, at least not in stone. Therefore, each individual needs to catagorize what they are willing to do, and willing not to do and play with in these self set moral standards so that we can each police our own ethics. Sometimes we will 'feel' very ethical for what we did on a certain day, other times we will stretch those standards a bit and learn a little about ourselves and adjust our standards either tighter based upon the experience, or we might expand the standards based on newley aquired education based on field experience. If we see someone do something that is outside of our standards, we need to assess if we need to impose our standards upon them, or try and understand how they came to the decision and in an effort of understanding, still accept their actions as long as it is not illegal as with in the 'ethics' they set for themselves.
> 
> Again, on the long distance thing, get as close as you possibly can. How close is that, you decide.


This is one of the best statements on here. There is no blanketed response to how far archery hunters should be shooting. Ethically, that choice is and should be left up to the shooter. There are many who shouldn't be shooting even 20 yards and there are others that can do much more. For me personally, I wouldn't post on here if I made a 2 yard or 200 yard shot, I don't need to be flamed by the ethics police. I can say this, I am 100% deadly with my compound bow. Can I say that about my long bow? He11 no! The fact of the matter is I shoot the training wheels at 60 yards much better and more consistant than I can shoot a long bow at 10 yards! That being said, I better not shoot any deer over 10 yards with my traditional gear. Again, I am the only one that can decide what ethically my effect killing range is.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

My 'issue' with 100+ yard shots is the unknowns, like wind, the animal moving, unseen obstacles, etc. There is no way in the real world to be in control of all these factors that MUST be factored in on a 100+ yard shot. I admire those who can hit the 10 ring at 100 yards, I still say they have no business taking that shot at a LIVE animal that can/will move! How does the 'expert' ensure the animal will not move while the arrow is in flight? Hows does the 'expert' ensure he can 'control' all the variables? He *CAN'T*, and that is why I dislike the nod of approval given to these type of shots, regardless of how 'expert' the archer may be. Let's assume mister 'expert' shots his arrows at 300 fps, a 100 yard shot means the arrow will take one full second to get there. A deer can move several feet in one second. Most humans could elude an arrow shot at them at 100 yards if they saw it coming, and humans are slow compared to deer.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Your very argument could be used for 30, 40, 50 or any yardage. It is the same argument that can be used for guys that shoot a rifle over 800 yards. Basically, you are defining what the very limit is. No shot ever by any human over 100 yards is ethical. Is that what you are saying?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Your very argument could be used for 30, 40, 50 or any yardage. It is the same argument that can be used for guys that shoot a rifle over 800 yards. Basically, you are defining what the very limit is. * No shot ever by any human over 100 yards is ethical. Is that what you are saying*?


With a bow, yes that is what I believe. I also believe a 800+ yard shot with a rifle is in the same arena. The difference between a 50 yard shot and a 100 yard shot is HUGE when you look at 'variables'. It easier to see the small twigs/branches at 50 yards versus 100 yards, the animal has less time to move while the arrow is in flight, wind has less of an effect because the arrow is in flight for a shorter period of time. I personally will NOT take a shot an an animal over 50 yards, regardless of how big the animal is. I believe I owe that to the animals I pursue. I won't hunt with 'hunters' who take 100+ yard shots, that is my choice. I will also continue to voice my views on this, because I believe these long-range archery shots are NOT good for the sport. If you or others believe differently, so be it.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

I will not say what I think the limit for EVERY hunter should be. I can find 100 other guys that don't think you should shoot over 40 yards (and most probably shouldn't). Like I said, I shouldn't shoot my long bow over 10 yards. What I hate the most about this discussion is other hunters trying to police my ethics. For some reason it just rubs me wrong. Pro, I won't ever tell you how far you should or shouldn't shoot. I don't know what it is. There are some topics up for debate, I just don't feel anyone person can give an educated blanketed response on this one.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I disagree with you, but I still think you are an alright guy. 8) 

I would rather 'rub' someone wrong than be guilty of saying nothing on a topic I believe is hurting the sport of archery. I love archery and I love bowhunting, so I feel it is justified to take a stand on issues that have negative impacts on the sport. I see taking these long range shots just as bad for the sport as taking OHV's off approved trails/roads, littering, trespassing, and party hunting. This is MY view/opinion and I am NOT saying it should be illegal to take such a shot, but I most certainly believe it should NOT be condoned by archery shops and/or archery 'experts'. JMHO


----------



## NoShot (Nov 23, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I would rather 'rub' someone wrong than be guilty of saying nothing on a topic I believe is hurting the sport of archery. I love archery and I love bowhunting, so I feel it is justified to take a stand on issues that have negative impacts on the sport. I see taking these long range shots just as bad for the sport as taking OHV's off approved trails/roads, littering, trespassing, and party hunting. This is MY view/opinion and I am NOT saying it should be illegal to take such a shot, but I most certainly believe it should NOT be condoned by archery shops and/or archery 'experts'. JMHO


I feel the same way pro. thanks for putting it in words.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

epek said it best... Get as close as you can and make a good shot based on your abilities.

However, when I hear a guy say "I just couldn't get any closer than 80 yards" I call BS! Lets do a little better job at getting close in the first place. Calling it quits at 80 yards is a cough-out. Here we are again, using technology as a crutch for poor hunting skills. I think the hunt/stalk should just be getting started at 80 yards. Getting to within 80 yards of a deer is easy, closing the gap to 30, now that takes some Indian training. 8)


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I disagree with you, but I still think you are an alright guy. 8)
> 
> I would rather 'rub' someone wrong than be guilty of saying nothing on a topic I believe is hurting the sport of archery. I love archery and I love bowhunting, so I feel it is justified to take a stand on issues that have negative impacts on the sport. I see taking these long range shots just as bad for the sport as taking OHV's off approved trails/roads, littering, trespassing, and party hunting. This is MY view/opinion and I am NOT saying it should be illegal to take such a shot, but I most certainly believe it should NOT be condoned by archery shops and/or archery 'experts'. JMHO


Lets agree then that nobody should ever shoot beyond....hmmm...15 yards! I will practice and get up my accuracy to be able to still hunt with my POS stick and string!


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> epek said it best... Get as close as you can and make a good shot based on your abilities.
> 
> However, when I hear a guy say "I just couldn't get any closer than 80 yards" I call BS! Lets do a little better job at getting close in the first place. Calling it quits at 80 yards is a cough-out. Here we are again, using technology as a crutch for poor hunting skills. I think the hunt/stalk should just be getting started at 80 yards. Getting to within 80 yards of a deer is easy, closing the gap to 30, now that takes some Indian training. 8)


Ummm ya, hunting skills... :roll: It doesn't seem very hard to roll up in a truck and jump out and shoot at a deer at 20 yards! Those are some skills!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Lets agree then that nobody should ever shoot beyond....hmmm...15 yards! I will practice and get up my accuracy to be able to still hunt with my POS stick and string!


If that is what you believe is the maximum yardage then by all means push that limit. I believe 15 yards is inane, I could possibly go for 15 *1/8 *yards, but 15 yards no way.


----------



## NoShot (Nov 23, 2007)

bwhntr said:


> Ummm ya, hunting skills... :roll: It doesn't seem very hard to roll up in a truck and jump out and shoot at a deer at 20 yards! Those are some skills!


So you're saying, like with a neighbor of mine(slob hunter at it's finest) it takes hunting skill to roll up in your truck and shoot *at* a deer thats 100 yards? :?


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> bwhntr said:
> 
> 
> > Lets agree then that nobody should ever shoot beyond....hmmm...15 yards! I will practice and get up my accuracy to be able to still hunt with my POS stick and string!
> ...


Ok then...I will step up my practice to 7 days a week and try for 15 1/8!! I am always up for a challenge! :mrgreen:


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

NoShot said:


> bwhntr said:
> 
> 
> > Ummm ya, hunting skills... :roll: It doesn't seem very hard to roll up in a truck and jump out and shoot at a deer at 20 yards! Those are some skills!
> ...


Oh ya...that is some of the finest archery skills one can acquire!


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Guys like that shoot with all the accuracy and precision of a Scud Missile. _(O)_


----------



## Mountain Time (Sep 24, 2007)

Tex said:


> epek said it best... Get as close as you can and make a good shot based on your abilities.
> 
> However, when I hear a guy say "I just couldn't get any closer than 80 yards" I call BS! Lets do a little better job at getting close in the first place. Calling it quits at 80 yards is a cough-out. Here we are again, using technology as a crutch for poor hunting skills. I think the hunt/stalk should just be getting started at 80 yards. Getting to within 80 yards of a deer is easy, closing the gap to 30, now that takes some Indian training.


Well said EPEK/Tex.

I know this topic gets hashed over and over but there are newbies (like myself) on the forum all the time and some may not realize what is considered a 'long shot'. At a minimum these discussions help people form their own 'eductated' opinion. My hope is that they end up at the conclusion explained above. I think PRO did a good job putting into words as well.



PRO said:


> I would rather 'rub' someone wrong than be guilty of saying nothing on a topic I believe is hurting the sport of archery. I love archery and I love bowhunting, so I feel it is justified to take a stand on issues that have negative impacts on the sport. I see taking these long range shots just as bad for the sport as taking OHV's off approved trails/roads, littering, trespassing, and party hunting. This is MY view/opinion and I am NOT saying it should be illegal to take such a shot, but I most certainly believe it should NOT be condoned by archery shops and/or archery 'experts'. JMHO


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

I like the part about not saying how far the shot was. I don't know why this is an issue, and why it is usually included in hunting stories, obviously the distance of the shot has something to do with the outcome of the story, but I have tried to just say I made a good shot, or if needed, admit that I didn't make the best shot, and leave it at that. Now on a 3D course, or at camp shooting at targets, I feel that ego comes in and it is enhanced when the perfect shot results come at further distances. I mean, come on, we are humans, and most of us are men, and when human men come together, the tougher the competition, the tuffer the winner of that competition is. Anyone whom does not agree with me has got to be a female.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

EPEK said:


> I like the part about not saying how far the shot was. I don't know why this is an issue, and why it is usually included in hunting stories, obviously the distance of the shot has something to do with the outcome of the story, but I have tried to just say I made a good shot, or if needed, admit that I didn't make the best shot, and leave it at that. Now on a 3D course, or at camp shooting at targets, I feel that ego comes in and it is enhanced when the perfect shot results come at further distances. I mean, come on, we are humans, and most of us are men, and when human men come together, the tougher the competition, the tuffer the winner of that competition is. Anyone whom does not agree with me has got to be a female.


Yes! I agree!

If you ask me, Archery golf was invented with just these sentiments in mind. While hunting this year with bwhntr and our freind Mike, we played our own version of archery golf. We'd pick out an object maybe 100-150 yards away and see who could come closest to hitting it. With the wind and terrain it made for a fun way to pass the heat of the day away. A good ego stroker when you'd win for sure!

BTW, All three participants have penises. :wink:


----------



## idiot with a bow (Sep 10, 2007)

> BTW, All three participants have *penises*. :wink:


You spelled pennies wrong....


----------



## lionhunter (Sep 11, 2007)

Well FMP made some money on there movies and they make even more every time anyone talks about them. Because wether people state why they like it or why they dont others want to watch them to see what they think. So they go out and buy these movies. I personaly like there movies because they are filmed in utah and it is bowhunting. I dont like the theme they have. But thats how they make there money being diffrent from everyone else. I love the slope shots it helped me make a great shot on my elk last year. I guided for the guy that invented them last year. If anyone doesnt know about the slope shot and is interested pm me and I will send you info. :wink:


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Todays equipement allows u to shoot 70 yards and more? Does a kill zone get larger than 16 to 18 inches past 70 yards? Does a dime look like a silver dollar? What if you have some wind? what if you jerk when you release? What if you blink? It's not so much the new tech, I'ts still the ability of the shooter to make the shot. SOOO can't we just all get along ""


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

idiot with a bow said:


> > BTW, All three participants have *penises*. :wink:
> 
> 
> You spelled pennies wrong....


Hmm, I thought he spelled _penguins_ wrong. :? Go figure.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> idiot with a bow said:
> 
> 
> > > BTW, All three participants have *penises*. :wink:
> ...


If you look at the pictures of this trip, you will notice that there were penguins in the back ground, but I am not sure they actually belonged to anyone.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

> If you look at the pictures of this trip, you will notice that there were penguins in the back ground, but I am not sure they actually belonged to anyone.


Unlicensed, undomesticated penguins are very big threat to good mule deer populations. I once saw a pack of penquins chasing a very nice buck on winter range. The next one I see off of a leash is getting a healthy dose of led.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Did you spell led correctly? Or did you mean L.E.D, and what exactly does that stand for?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)




----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Fraternal order of *L*ost *E*mperor penquins that like to draw pictures of one eyed *D*eer?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Good cover tree. 8)


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Now I'm confused, why are we talking about tree cover? Are we back to the opening day thing again?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Not tree cover, it is cover tree. Completely different foliage. :roll:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

It's the best camo on the market, all you can see are the whites of my eyes, but sometimes I wear sunglasses.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Is that because your future is so bright?


----------



## LETTER-RIP (Sep 14, 2007)

Speaking of tree cover. Why do you need face camo and to take off your shoes to shoot at a deer at 80 plus yards?


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

LETTER-RIP said:


> Speaking of tree cover. Why do you need face camo and to take off your shoes to shoot at a deer at 80 plus yards?


You don't. It does look good on film though, makes people think you're a better hunter.


----------



## woollybugger (Oct 13, 2007)

A good archer is not necessarily a good hunter. I am never impressed by animals taken over 50 yards. Like TEX said, how many animals are missed, wounded, and lost because the shot was just too far. Can you tell what kind of hit you made on an animal in cover at 80 yards? Don't lie. No, you cannot tell! Be a good hunter, get inside of 40, make a good hit that you can clearly see is a good hit because the animal isn't just a speck slightly larger than your sight pin.


----------

