82 yards with a Bow?

[treesmith]

Not exactly. IMO, the further out an animal is, the more time it has to react.

From my experience, game's reaction is totally unpredictable at best. I shot at a doe once at 50 yards. She was standing broadside, clear shot...when the arrow arrived, it went right where her heart/lung area had been, but she had completely turned and was a body length away when the arrow sailed behind her. I've seen others on video that at 40 yards did not react at all. Much of it depends on the animal's alertness. A deer on high alert is most responsive. I have seen deer lunge to run, which results in "ducking the string" and I've seen others hunch up to jump away and the arrow go right below the belly. Of course a shot above or below is often blamed on the deer's reaction, whilst it mostly resulted from bad ranging. Shooting at a deer five yards further than you think can result in several inches of drop (depending of course on just how far out it is). I shot right under a deer last year....I was holding for 300 yards....When I went to look for signs of a hit, I ranged back to the house. It was 365 yards. (How's that for a bow shot?) Same thing could happen with a bow at 40-50 yards.

 

[DMc]

The difference is that one target is a fixed, inanimate target, and the other is a live target that may or may not move between the time of release and the time the arrow arrives.

This is it right here. Arrows can accurately be shot out to 100 yards and beyond. Howard Hill shot and killed animals at over 100 yds with his long bows. It is not the lack of lethality or accuracy, it is the fact that arrows move slowly, compared to bullets. So many things can happen between the time of release and arrow impact. Twenty yards are considered a high percentage shot, not just because most people are most accurate at this range but the ability of the animal to react is reduced. Long range arrow shots, at animals, should not be considered as a way of bow hunting. Very low percentage and negates the reason for bow hunting in the first place, which is clean kills at close range.

 

[sotc]

Agreed, animals can and do react to motion and sound. They spend their entire lives watching and listening for predaors.

 

[Al Smith]

Between 80 and one hundred yards is the average range of a shot with a rifle in the Colorado Rockies . Now you might get a 200 yard shot in these parts but unless you had a good black powder gun ,a shotgun just will not shoot accurately at that range and a bow is out of the question unless perhaps it were William Tell or Robin Hood .

 

[Widow Shooter]

if the deer flexes to fart...you will make a bad hit at that range...Howard Hill could do it with the longbow, but he was a once in a millennium bowhunter

 

[fishhuntcutwood]

Taking an 82 yard shot with a bow isn't crazy.

Taking a shot at a range beyond your level of proficiency is. If they practice at that range, there is little viable reason they should have missed the target completely. I'd agree with writing a letter to the editor, if you are interested.

Tangentially, I hate hunting/shooting for accuracy with someone else's gun that I have not had time with, and thus I'll rarely take the shot.

Agreed. I'd not stand up in an archery shop and advocate taking a shot like this, because it's the kind of shot that you should only take if you're the kind of guy that knows you shouldn't stand up in an archery shop and advocate it. What I mean by that is exactly what he said above...it's all about the individual's proficiency, and knowing what "you" can do yourself. And if you "know" you can do it, and not just "think" you can do it, you're also probably experienced enough to know that most people can't do it, which is why you'd never advocate it. Same as I don't advocate anyone fishing Lake St. Clair in the dark during a small craft advisory, though I do it myself. I used to compe nationally in 3D archery. (I was 1st in the state three years in a row, and top 10 nationally in my class two of those years, if I may toot my own horn...) I was proficient to 75 yards without a second thought. (Competition in the IBO is limited to 50 yards). So my proficiency would hit the target at that range.

The second factor in my control is my set-up; my bow and arrow combo...arrow speed, kinetic energy, broadhead, even arrow type. Without boring everyone here with the specifics in bow tuning in pursuance of kinetic energy (compared to tuning for pure speed as you do in 3D, or for forgiveness as in field or indoor archery), the IBO recommends 55 ft/lbs of kinetic energy off the rest to adequately penetrate a bull elk at 30 yards. The last season I bowhunted, which was 07, my bows were each generating 90+ ft/lbs of energy. Add to that using A/C/C arrows which hold their energy downrange better than pure aluminum, using shorter plastic vanes, which hold arrow speed downrange better than natural feathers, and Vortex broadheads which penetrate better than any broadhead I've ever used...add all that up and I was comfortable having a 75 yard pin for elk and moose. Never used it, but I had it and was ready to. Was on a trip with a friend (who still shoots professionally) and he took a moose at 84 yards. Excellent shot, was a pass through even at that range. Bull was down ten feet from where he shot it.

Now, for midwestern deer, I only run up to a 50 yard pin. Midwestern treestand hunting and whitetails just aren't conducive to 75 yard shots, so I won't take them. But moose and elk in open country, yes, I'd take that shot under the right conditions. In the same breath though, I'll stress that it shouldn't be glorified or advocated in most circles as most archers are at their upper limit of skill and gear at 40-50 yards.

You could almost compare it to tree work and climbing. Is it a good idea for me to go out and climb 200 up some massive tree out West? Hell no. I'm not prepared and don't have the gear. Could most of the members here do it without breaking a sweat? Yep, and they have. It's allr relative. 75-85 yard shots aren't for everyone. They're not even for every animal or situation for those that can take them. But they are doable.

 

[wiley_p]

Great post Jeff. Pertinent to the question, and in line with what I was thinking. I would hope the guy who wrote the article was as skilled as you. I still feel that it wasn't the type of thing to make public, too many clowns get the wrong idea.

 

[tophopper]

Very well said Jeff!

 

[bruce6670]

Great post. If the guy who decided to print that article thought like that, maybe he would have thought twice before writing it.

 

[fishhuntcutwood]

Thanks guys. I've got a couple loves in my life, and bowhunting is one of them.

 

[woodworkingboy]

It''s confusing a bit now with Jeff's informative post.... He mentions maximizing arrow speed with his set up, but still a bullet vs an arrow would have a difference of at least four or five times the speed, correct? He further says that with some individuals, it's not irresponsible to take the shot at the extended range. Other guys are saying that with the shooter's marksmanship not in question, still with the slow speed and the potential for the animal moving, accuracy is unpredictable, so it's not a high enough percentage shot. It would seem that people should be able to agree here for the most part, in whichever way the logic swings, and it not just be a different opinion thing.

 

[Thor's Hammer]

Your a cool Dude Jeff. Great post, and good to get your insight.

 

[treesmith]

It''s confusing a bit now with Jeff's informative post.... He mentions maximizing arrow speed with his set up, but still a bullet vs an arrow would have a difference of at least four or five times the speed, correct? He further says that with some individuals, it's not irresponsible to take the shot at the extended range. Other guys are saying that with the shooter's marksmanship not in question, still with the slow speed and the potential for the animal moving, accuracy is unpredictable, so it's not a high enough percentage shot. It would seem that people should be able to agree here for the most part, in whichever way the logic swings, and it not just be a different opinion thing.

The opening post of this thread was about taking long shots at at an elk. The mention of "jumping the string" came into the discussion a few posts later, and mainly concerns deer. I've never hunted moose or elk, but based on video I've seen of both, neither is as nimble and quick as a whitetail. Not only that, the vital zone is nearly twice as large. That doesn't mean that if one is good enough to hit a whitetail at 40 yards, he could hit an elk at 80, just that the target is a bit larger. Jeff's mention of arrow speed, (great post, by the way), was a great point of discussion in long range shooting, especially at larger game. Even if you can hit an elk at 80 yards, are you packing enough punch to penetrate to the vitals? They are larger, therefore heavier/tougher than a whitetail. I have hit my metal target plates at 250 yards with my .22 magnum, but I would never attempt a shot at a deer at that range with that gun....not enough gun for the job.

 

[Al Smith]

You have to take into consideration that using a bow in comparrison to a long gun requires a lot of patience and stealth to get close enough to even get a shot .

One certain poster , somewhat of New Jersey born Walter Mitty of the internet bragged about 700 yard shots .It takes a lot more skill to be able to get in close of say 25 yards than to sit back a third of a mile with a benched rifle I'll tell you that . That's more like shooting fish in a rain barrel in my opinion .

I'm not ashamed to say that I never felt I was a good enough archer to consider using a bow as I'd stand a better chance with a Louisville slugger .

 

[woodworkingboy]

Louisville slugger....

 

[fishhuntcutwood]

It''s confusing a bit now with Jeff's informative post.... He mentions maximizing arrow speed with his set up, but still a bullet vs an arrow would have a difference of at least four or five times the speed, correct? He further says that with some individuals, it's not irresponsible to take the shot at the extended range. Other guys are saying that with the shooter's marksmanship not in question, still with the slow speed and the potential for the animal moving, accuracy is unpredictable, so it's not a high enough percentage shot. It would seem that people should be able to agree here for the most part, in whichever way the logic swings, and it not just be a different opinion thing.

Yep, as treesmith states and as I mention at the end of my first post, the long shots can be appropriate for moose and elk under the right conditions, even caribou, but wouldn't be good for whitetail deer in the midwest. A whitetail can and will "jump the string" and actually hear, see, then dodge the arrow. It's nuts that they can move that quickly. Moose and elk just aren't typically that fast or skittish. Now, if a bull elk is looking directly at me,and I just stepped on a twig and he's tensed and on alert, then I'd not take a shot like that. That would be inappropriate. That would arguably inappropriate at any distance as the animal is aware and ready to move.

A couple other things come into play as well and the following are also "tips" that I'd never advertise to anyone who doesn't already know it. First, as was mentioned, a moose and elk have a larger vital area than a deer. Meaning, if your shot is off by five inches on a deer, you may miss the whole animal. If it's off five inches on a moose, you're still going to be very likely to hit something fatal. The lungs alone on a moose are larger than a deer's entire vital cavity.

The next thing to take into consideration is the ability to track the animal. Even with an excellent heart shot a whitetail can run a mile or more. It's incredible. It's their adrenaline output after the hit. Basically a moose's adrenal glands aren't proportionately larger than a whitetail's. What that means is a whitetail's gland will fill it's body chock-full of adrenaline in a split second which can carry the animal a mile or more away on a fatal shot. A moose, not so. They can run and run very quick, but moose are just not runners like deer are. I could go further in detail, but getting to my point, there's a saying amongst bowhunters and that is "moose die easy." And it's true. Get an arrow in a moose's vitals and your chances are better of killing it than not. A deer is not that way. A deer can be a big question mark, even with a shot to the vitals.

So give my first post another look and you'll see where I quantify that for excessively long shots, I'm speaking of moose, elk and caribou, not deer by any means. They are different critters.

Anyone here ever hear of a "Texas heart shot?" Similar idea...it's a viable shot with the right animal, right conditions and the right shooter. Never done one myself, but they are a doable, fatal shot when man, moment and machine (like the TV show) all line up, but you'd never want to advocate it on a bowhunting forum because then every clown in there would think they can do it.

 

[bruce6670]

I saw a doe in my yard a few years back with an arrow sticking out of her front shoulder. Someone probably watched a TV show and saw a pro take a head on shot at the heart and thought that they could do the same. Well I guess it didn't work and resulted in a wounded deer that actually made it through the winter. With the abundance of deer in my area, there is absolutely no reason to take such low percentage shot.

 

[Stumper]

An arrow is potentially lethal for the full length of its flight even if shot from a low poundage bow. Arrow speed, kinetic energy and other aspects of ballistics are unavoidable topics of discussion for modern bowhunters-probably because we spend a lot more time thinking about hunting than we spend doing it but the actuall energy needed to drive a sharp cut on contact broadhead into a deer's vitals is amazingly small. Saxton Pope, Art Young, Fred Bear, Ben Pearson and Howard Hill all took long shots (Howard Hill killed an elk in front of a witness at over 180 yards). However most present day bowhunters will pardon the actions of the Pioneers of modern bowhunting while condemning such behavior by sportsmen of today.(Obviously there were thousands of years of experience that "modern man " forgot for a couple of generations and then went back to relearn). The biggest problem with long shots in archery are range estimation (miss it by a yard or so at 70 yards and the arrow goes too high or too low depending on your error) and target movement-an undisturbed animal at 82 yards isn't likely to "jump the string" but can easily take a step for another mouthful of browse during the time the arrow is in flight and wind up gut shot from a "perfectly aimed" arrow. My own parameters are 10-20 yards preferred, 20-30yards reasonable if conditions are right, 30-45 yards I MIGHT attempt a shot if I think that is the best I'm going to get and conditions are otherwise favorable. Beyond 45 yards I will only shoot at wounded animals in an attempt to end things or at vermin that need to be eliminated.

 

[fishhuntcutwood]

Good points Justin. You reminded me of one thing I forgot to mention, and that's that while hunting I always use a laser ranger finder to eliminate that variable as well. But that's a good point; a yard or two in either direction, especially at further distances is huge.

 

[woodworkingboy]

Some seemingly really well considered excellent posts going on here, very enjoyable to read.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Your sentence structure... it's in a Japanese vein.

 

[woodworkingboy]

Really? I need to get back to the states for a visit....prolly feel like a damn tourist.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Actually, I wouldn't expect anything else. Hell, you live there, immersed.

 

[woodworkingboy]

My first reaction upon walking out of the airport is always, man, look how wide the roads are! It's almost shocking. How much food a restaurant puts on your plate is another. I visit the homeys and slip back into the fold easily enough.

 

[Tucker943]

Agreed. I'd not stand up in an archery shop and advocate taking a shot like this, because it's the kind of shot that you should only take if you're the kind of guy that knows you shouldn't stand up in an archery shop and advocate it. What I mean by that is exactly what he said above...it's all about the individual's proficiency, and knowing what "you" can do yourself. And if you "know" you can do it, and not just "think" you can do it, you're also probably experienced enough to know that most people can't do it, which is why you'd never advocate it. Same as I don't advocate anyone fishing Lake St. Clair in the dark during a small craft advisory, though I do it myself. I used to compe nationally in 3D archery. (I was 1st in the state three years in a row, and top 10 nationally in my class two of those years, if I may toot my own horn...) I was proficient to 75 yards without a second thought. (Competition in the IBO is limited to 50 yards). So my proficiency would hit the target at that range.

The second factor in my control is my set-up; my bow and arrow combo...arrow speed, kinetic energy, broadhead, even arrow type. Without boring everyone here with the specifics in bow tuning in pursuance of kinetic energy (compared to tuning for pure speed as you do in 3D, or for forgiveness as in field or indoor archery), the IBO recommends 55 ft/lbs of kinetic energy off the rest to adequately penetrate a bull elk at 30 yards. The last season I bowhunted, which was 07, my bows were each generating 90+ ft/lbs of energy. Add to that using A/C/C arrows which hold their energy downrange better than pure aluminum, using shorter plastic vanes, which hold arrow speed downrange better than natural feathers, and Vortex broadheads which penetrate better than any broadhead I've ever used...add all that up and I was comfortable having a 75 yard pin for elk and moose. Never used it, but I had it and was ready to. Was on a trip with a friend (who still shoots professionally) and he took a moose at 84 yards. Excellent shot, was a pass through even at that range. Bull was down ten feet from where he shot it.

Now, for midwestern deer, I only run up to a 50 yard pin. Midwestern treestand hunting and whitetails just aren't conducive to 75 yard shots, so I won't take them. But moose and elk in open country, yes, I'd take that shot under the right conditions. In the same breath though, I'll stress that it shouldn't be glorified or advocated in most circles as most archers are at their upper limit of skill and gear at 40-50 yards.

You could almost compare it to tree work and climbing. Is it a good idea for me to go out and climb 200 up some massive tree out West? Hell no. I'm not prepared and don't have the gear. Could most of the members here do it without breaking a sweat? Yep, and they have. It's allr relative. 75-85 yard shots aren't for everyone. They're not even for every animal or situation for those that can take them. But they are doable.

Extremely well articulated. I was going to knock the long range bow shots, But, after reading what you wrote and how well you wrote it, I have to now look at it and say "they are doable"