Eaglet,
My main concern is this, there are thousands of people out there that think what we do it completely unethical. Some are non hunters, but many are hunters themselves.
Its sad but its a fact. Many of those will look for any excuse to go after what we do saying it IS unethical to take game at these ranges even though the majority of the game John kills on his videos are not wild ranges that are out of the norm.
The claims are made time and again that these are all one shot kills and that when done the way John tells you to do it, you will also be able to make long range one shot kills. Certainly no arguement there, do it right and it definately is effective, no question there.
BUT, what concerns me is that there are many out there that have a huge amount of experience taking big game at conventional ranges but are aggressively against long range hunting.
Now it does not matter if your at 100 yards or 600 yards. If you see a group of elk on a hillside, you pick out the bull you want, you line up and prepare for the shot, settle in, and a cow elk walks behind the front shoulders of the bull you have the crosshairs on, DO YOU SHOOT? Forget the range, forget the claims, getting back to hunting 101 basics, DO YOU SHOOT AT A BIG GAME ANIMAL IF THERE IS ANOTHER ANIMAL BEHIND THE TARGET ANIMAL?????
In this case, the trigger broke, and it appears that no harm was done to the cow but will those that are against our way of hunting give this type of decision to shoot a pass? I think not. You can hear them now, those long range hunters do not care about the other animals, they just shoot to get trophies and could care less about the other game around the target animal.
Do I believe John feels this way, CERTAINLY NOT. But, the video gives that impression. Now I have been so zeroed in on a target animal that I lost all awareness of other animals in the area. Luckily, I had good spotters with me that got my attention and a potentially bad situation was avoided, where was Johns spotter if this was the case???
Simply put, we all havebig targets on our backs, why make that target bigger by putting something like this out there for the public where we know for a fact that it will be picked over with a fine toothed comb and anything that in any way loose remotely questionable will be used against us.
As to my comments about the bull not being killed to that one shot, time and again, the claim is made over and over that these are all one shot kills that put the animals on their nose where they are hit. In this case, there is more then enough evidence to shot that this is likely not the case.
The fact that the camera is pulled off the bull nearly instantly after the shot and then the next caption shows the bull well down the hillside only raises questions, what happened when the camera was off? How much time was there between the cut off and getting back on the target.
At least on the first elk, the camera pans back and stays back. On the second example, the camera is turned off and then brought back on. WHY? Is there a reason to show the bull hit the ground, then cut off and then pick back up with the bull 20 yards down the hill?
My point is, leave the second section of video with the bull sliding down the hill off the video because it simply raises questions about Johns credibility and long range hunting credibility as a hole. What benefit does it bring to show that portion of video?
The first thing that popped into my head was there was something in between these sections of video that someone did not want us to see. I often watch videos with this attitude, unfortunately because I know that all our enemies are looking at them in this same way, just looking for an excuse to hammer us.
When you put a product out to the public, you open yourself up to attacks from every side, those that hate you, those that do not care but are watching anyway and those that like you but are worried about our sport. When dealing with long range hunting, in this day and age, you HAVE to make sure the product you offer leaves no room for question. My point is simply that there are several areas in these videos that raise alot of questions and nearly every one I have seen that peaked my attention could easily be eliminated with either a bit more video or a bit less video and the end goal of the product would be the same.
As far as John, I have no ill will against him at all. I know he has taken alot of heat for his videos. I believe alot of this has been brought on by himself, again, just because there are things in the videos that can raise questions as to the legitimacy of the video. AS such, he has been attached several times for this and my only point has been all along that all those questions could be 100% eliminated with just a bit more or a bit less video or at least a breif explination to the viewer.
I have watched many hunting videos for whitetail deer in Canada where big bucks come in and are shot over a green patch of freshly spread hay. Several occasions the buck drops at the shot right in the middle of the alfalfa but when the hunter gets up to the buck, there is nothing but clean white snow all around the buck??????
Do you think those against hunting notice this, you bet, why is it so important that we make it look like there was no hay on the ground where the buck was killed, we don't want those that are uneducated to raise heck about it. Trying to hide the fact is almost worse in my opinion.
This is simply my opinion but if you put something out to the public, especially something as heated as long range hunting, it better be bullet proof against those that do not like what we do because if there is anything that can possibly raise a question, it most certainly will.
We have to monitor each other to protect each other. If someone was advertising they are driving a 180 gr 30 cal bullet to 3800 fps in a 300 RUM would we sit by and not say anything about it. I do not think so. We would speak up for two reasons, the safety of those that may read this and do the same thing, and also to offer constructive critizism to those making the claim that they are treading on dangerous ground and need to rethink what they are telling the pubic.
Same thing in this case.
Again, I hold no ill will toward John in any way. He can seem to be a bit holier then thou because he has been on TV but maybe I come off that way as well, I am sure some feel I do.
Anyway, I am done with this topic as well. We just all need to watch out for each other and tell each other when we see something that could be taken the wrong way. That is how this started and it has turned into personal challanges and if anything I have said has been taken that way by John, I apologize to him.
I do not think he is unethical in any way, I feel is he a great smith, a great shot and a great hunter. I also feel there are a few things on his video that has caused him problems and he has had to try to explain it over and over. That could have been avoided.
Kirby Allen(50)
