ORIGINAL: jeepkid
ORIGINAL: Badger_Girl93
ORIGINAL: jeepkid
I know that it takes a lot more skill, determination, patience, equipment, etc... to hit an animal over 500 yards then it does to plant a food plot and set up a tree stand.
So who is the "better" hunter??
Does it matter?
Yep, its all the guys that sit 50 yards from a food plot that are saying anything over 500 yards is unethical.
Whats more ethical, the guy that shoots THOUSANDS of rounds a year preparing and practicing or the guy that shoots once before season and says "good enough"?
The people that are capable of "long range" shots should do it any time they want. The people that aren't capable, but think they are since they bought a new "ultra-mag" are the ones that are giving long range hunting a bad name.
I agree 100%. But I don't think that it matters who is the "better" hunter. Aperson who sets up a stand 50 yards from a food plot and a long range hunter can be equally effective at their chosen methods. I am a supporter of LRH, but I think the "better" hunter argument is childish and irrelevant.
If everyone worried about themselves as much as they worry about what the other guy is doing, I think we would all be better off.
Really, does it matter who is a "better" hunter? Is it even possible to determinea universalanswer to that? It sounds like the "my dad is stronger than your dad" arguments on the playground all us 12 year olds meet at.