Stag Stalking in Scotland - Kristoffer Clausen

Sorry to be a total party pooper here. I don't care that they are in the total wilds of Scotland but they were skyline shots. No backstop at all. Great shots - but in my view not shots. But I wasn't pulling the trigger. I have just spent a week on Arran and didn't get a beast but could have if I'd taken shots like that.

Chris
 
Having done some filming work of my own it is often very hard to tell where the cameraman is in relation to the person taking the shot so I generally give them the benefit of the doubt. In this instance the cameraman keeps on showing the position of the shooter and is often higher than him. Those shots just don't look safe to me but impossible to tell if you are not behind the rifle.
 
OK maybe my typing finger was a bit fast to condemn. But we are taught, nay drilled with the principle of backstops and silhouette shots. Out on the open hill I guess there is a chance you'd never get anything done if you followed the rule book to the letter. But the film does, in my view, give a lesson counter to that which is taught. And for the benefit of those who perhaps don't have years of stalking experience yet, I felt it worth making the point.

Last week, I genuinely turned down a hind and calf walking the rim of a crater I was in. I was shooting 200gr, .300 WM at about 30 degs up and although the chances of that bullet landing anywhere but the sea or heather were billions to one, I could not pull the trigger. Can you imagine the damage to the sport if I'd put a round through something?

I have always worked on the understanding that no matter where you are there is always the potential for someone else to be bimbling around over there somewhere.

I am not going to tell anyone what to do when it's their turn. And as agonising as it would be to turn down that first pair, I would have not taken the shot.

CJ
 
I see your point, and I wouldnt pull a skyline shot either, but I am sure the Ghillie has a lot to lose if he felt the shot was likely to result in anything other than just a clean kill to the animal. I guess he will know the lie of the land, especially beyond the animal, better than anyone on here (I may be wrong), and to be filmed doing it he has a lot to lose if it goes Pete Tong.... I wouldnt be too quick to judge him, cameras do lie occasionally..
 
I saw this earlier on my YouTube feed, I also thought the shots were a little risky at best!
 
You can clearly see that when they are approaching the deer there is another hill behind, cameras do funny things. If I remember correctly Yorkshire Roe stalker came in for a load of sh:;e when he did his documentary. 1995rs
 
bear in mind that the estate might have another 90,000 acres behind the skyline..and that it's actually a ghillies call that's being questioned.......mind, and in saying that - I personally would not take a skyline shot (and those were) as even if I knew there was plenty of ground behind, there could be a rambler with a camera 200yds directly on the other side of the deer...probably not, and very unlikely,,but there could.

in general though, thoroughly enjoyed the video and can't wait for the stags again :)
 
Watched one of Mr Carr's programmes the other night, stalker takes a neck shot on a hind in the mist.
Not one for me but the guy works there knows the ground hind goes straight down,but when the shot is played back in slow motion you can clearly see a couple of hinds behind the one shot.
Now I understand the camera/shooters position but still looks a bit iffy.
Personally with the visibility as it looks in the film would have left it not worth the risk.
 
seems to be a lot of 'iffy' shooting going on tbh - I think in general there's a lot of "argh, it'll be fine" attitude - ie. skyline shots, using woodland as a backstop, neckshooting, partially exposed deer, deer laying down, etc. probably a heck of a lot more than gets discussed. Obviously, every time someone tells a story of a deer shot, it's a "perfect H/L shot" with a "perfect rising earth backstop"..yeah right...
 
someone posted the same response regarding the skyline shot on theyoutube chanel.. Kristofer did say in response because of the mist you could not see the big hill/backstop behind the stag.
 
someone posted the same response regarding the skyline shot on theyoutube chanel.. Kristofer did say in response because of the mist you could not see the big hill/backstop behind the stag.

LOL - then how did he know it was there! LOL ;)
 
someone posted the same response regarding the skyline shot on theyoutube chanel.. Kristofer did say in response because of the mist you could not see the big hill/backstop behind the stag.

Then how do you know there is not someone standing on the side of the hill having a pee :D
 
Last edited:
Im sure the stalker has intimate knowledge of the topography and angulations of the ground.. also when approaching the stags im sure what was covered by mist 300m back would have come into view. We wernt there so either way we cant comment if it was safe or not.. all we can do is go of what the post hunt information states and hope it was indeed a safe shot.

atb

mo
 
valid point however we were not pulling the trigger.. ultimatly its down the the stalker and the guid to make the call if its safe or not.
 
I think that the point that I was trying to underline here was that it matters not if the shot was safe, it's whether or not it appears safe, in the clip. This forum is a great teaching tool with many novices coming along - well we're all learning yada yada. I would not want someone to see that clip after doing their DSC1 without some sort of discussion such as we're having here. Theory over reality? Like learning to drive and not crossing your hands. Yes, of course. But, personally I felt that something needed to be said. In the answers it's clear that at times things are not all that they seem. And in this case there may have been a suitable backstop that they knew was perfectly safe. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But for those newer to stalking, I cannot emphasise enough, and I am sure you'll join with me, in saying that it is essential that you think about where your bullet may end up. No shot is worth the potential outcome if you cannot be sure where you are shooting. I have been in positions, perhaps not just about to take a shot, I'll admit, but where I have been stalking and some bobble-hat with map case, thermos and walking poles has popped up out of nowhere. Even in the middle of what you'd consider as being 'the wilds'.

I know that distance is hard to judge in clips, but I would say that in the main they looked like cracking shots. So another lesson - you CAN take deer at more than 70 yards. Honestly, bullets WILL go that far.
 
It looks an unsafe shot and sadly that will be how it is seen by new stalker and shooters who look up to him not good. Would they have took this shot in and around towns because i was told by our teachers that both have similar standards.
 
I agree that some of the shots look unsafe, but having once been involved in stalking a stag for a film crew the film version can look a lot different from the reality, also here he is accompanied by a pro stalker so doubt if the shots were actually unsafe.

However the fact that they appear unsafe on film , maybe good enough reason for it not to be on show to the general public.
 
Back
Top