Long Range Rant

cbeard

cbeard

Very Active Member
Messages
1,458
I am not feeling good today so thought I would post on one of my real concerns based on what I see on here,on other sites, and in magazines: too much talk of long range (500 yards plus) shots at big game. Seems like MANY people are taking them but I know in my gut VERY FEW people should be.

ANY shot over,say, 400 yards requires skill,an exhaustive knowledge of your rifle/cartridge, and LOTS of range time. Maybe a handful of guys in the country can consistently make those shots but it seems that every Tom,#####, and Harry is taking them. And many are taking shots at big game beyond what their bullets' consitently lethal range is even if they DO hit their mark.

What is up with this? Why can't guys just get a little closer? Wonder how many animals are limping away wounded for every long-range kill someone crows about? Can't we just keep the ultra long range shots on the target range and prairie dog towns?

Opinions??
 
Cbeard, Good rant and well deserved. I cringe at the thought of new guys getting in the game, going out and buying these turreted scopes and off the shelf rifles, shooting at game 800-1000 yds away. After 40 years of concerned shooting, some of it competitively, i'm just now confident on game out to 500-600yds, an extremely long shot only to be taken under ideal conditions.

As the devils advocate, maybe these guys are wanting to be able to capitalize on the one chance encounter of a huge trophy at whatever range they find him.

Shooting game at 1/2 mile is and won't be for me. I don't see the trend toward this lessening though. Good rant!

the other Joey
 
I could not agree more. I can't for the life of me figure out why guys would want to take those shots. Alot can happen in the moments that it takes for bullet to reach its mark past 500 yards. The animal itself is a huge variable compared to shooting a target at 1000 yards. One step...that is all it takes for you to miss the vitals. As for allowing people the chance at their 1 encounter at a trophy animal. That animal is that big because it is smart enough to keep itself out of range. I guess we have brought the range to the animal. I enjoy long range shooting as much if not more then the next guy. I just like to keep it on the range.
 
Cbeard good post. I couldn't agree more completely but the " best in the west " has started a trend that will see Fish & Wildlife departments across the west passing restrictions on weapons at some point in the future impuning peoples rights. It's already starting to happen and will continue as more animals are wounded and hunting tags get HARDER to obtain. This is one of the fastest growing trends in hunting today and it can be done in the right hands. It's when it's attempted in the wrong hands that we will see the ill effects. Too many today think because they see it on Tv that they can just go out there and do it. If it was so damn easy we would have won every major war we've fought in with thousands less in casualties because the technology isn't new it's been here for every major war we've fought.

All you have to do is adjust those crosshairs and shoot. Well in perfect conditions in some cases that's is all you have to do. But it's when things aren't perfect that many will still take the shot. It's this coupled with the attitude about farther is now better and guys actually moving back to take a longer shot for bragging rights that hunting will suffer. The thought today is that hunting is evolving into shooting and that requires less effort and has a higher overall cost to all of us. It's not just limited to rifles the thought process is in archery, muzzle loading and pistol shooting too. It's a change in mindset and until we physically see the effects of this trend I'm sorry to say it'll be here for a while. How many years do you think it'll take to see articles from guys wondering where all the game went. Oh wait aren't we reading about that now so just how can wounding more animals possibly help in that scenario? Beats the hell out of me too!
 
I agree with your rant, however, to play devil's advocate a little here I have a bit to say about it. First off, define long range. What is considered long range for some is not for others. I have a friend that doesn't feel comfortable with a 300 yard shot but most guys would consider that a very doable shot, some would even consider that an easy shot.

Also, equipment has changed alot in the past 10 years. With an increase in technology comes an increase in confidence with the proper amount of practice. Increased accuracy in rifles, better optics, better triggers, increased muzzle velocities, increased energy, better ballistic coefficients, etc. 100 years ago 300 yards was long range shooting.

What I think your rant should be more centered to is the guy who buys a factory rifle, watches best of the west and goes to the range to "practice" the week before the hunt with the new custom turret he just had installed the week before that was made from the average ballistics for his rifle that he found on the internet.

I feel that one also needs to have the discipline to pass up that slightly questionable shot whether it be at 100 yards or 1000 yards.
 
I think that all of this technology, not just in rifles but in technology as a whole is making it easier for hunters to be more successfull! Man has created all of this, so now man has to figure out how to manage all of it!
 
this isnt anything new, and when you see a guy with a long range rig, dont go casting stones, he can probly out shoot you.

the problem that i see, is the guy that dust's off the '06 once a year and will shoot at anything he can see, there is alot of that going on, always has been. the guy that practices at long range knows his limitations, and the conditions when he should or should not shoot, so dont give them a black eye by lumping them into the if there is lead in the air there's a chance group.

sure they can muff up a 700 yard shot, same as you can a 200 yard shot, but most guys that spend the time with there rifle, can hold a better group at 700 than most guys can at 300, so who's the unethical one?
 
I agree and I feel that good judgment must be used in all hunting situations. Also...if you havent had the opportunity to go out shooting with one of these properly equipped guns and blow up milk jugs at 1000 plus yards every shot, then I can see why you havent got the bug yet. If you understand the gun, its balistics and limitations AND keep your head at all times, long range ethical hunting is for real.
Remember poor ethics can occur at 50 yards too. How many people take shots at animals running thru thick timber and all they are seeing are flickers of hide. Unfortunately it happens way to often! Great thread because ethics can never be stressed too much IMO.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-09 AT 09:35PM (MST)[p]I will take slack for this but in my opinion long range shooting of game animals is the same as the indian term for vegitarian... "poor hunter".

Read or watch Eastman's... those guys will spend hours and sometimes days stalking an animal. If they can't get a good shot... they will pass... even on a once in a lifetime animal.

There is a difference between and hunter and a shooter.
 
"stalking" is what you do to and animal....."stocking" is what you do to a ranch


great post/pic, thanks for sharing

JB
497fc2397b939f19.jpg
 
This debate has been beat out hundreds of times before. Everyone makes a valid point. However, this issue is simply not a right/wrong answer. Long Range Hunting basically boils down to the INDIVIDUAL shooter, the equipment, and the conditions.

A good point was made that one hunter can botch a shot at 200 yards just as easy as one can at 500. That being said, I know several people personally that practice year round and confident in "long" shots. I've been there, seen it done.

Today's equipment offers the hunter who PRACTICES these shots and knows his equipment in and out, and knows the physics of his external environment the opportunity to execute those long shots.

Example: The 300RUM and many other standard calibers now, offer more kinetic energy and velocity at 500 yards than the 30-06 does at the muzzle.

It all boils down to the INDIVIDUAL and the situation. There is not a clear cut right or wrong.
 
Cbeard, right on.

People throw around 500, 600, 700 yard shot talk like it's no big deal. most hunters in field conditions with an aveage rifle set up couldn't hit their pickup at 700 yards. far more animals are missed or wounded at that distance than are harvested, I'd bet on that.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-09 AT 10:25PM (MST)[p]I agree with the rant but this is no different than the 60 to 100 yard archery shot as well. I have probably shot close to 1000 rounds this year and I know that for me 300 yards on the bench is the max. I am older and the eyes are getting tired and I am using a standard hunting rifle. I also really wonder how many people can find practice ranges at the distance they need to shoot. Technology is driving this new mode and I do think that it hurts the hunting world as more and more people jump on the shooting band wagon and away from the hunting skills. I am not knocking the few people who have those skills and practice enough to know what they are doing but for me personaly its about the hunt not the long range shot. All you need is a 300 mag and you can reach out to 600 yards how many times do you hear that? I can tell you don't see a ton of guys practicing at the range with 300's they are pain after a few rounds. :)

I was watching a show the other day and the guy shot his caribou at 500 yards and he could have gotten closer but it is easier with a camara watching you to take the long shot and not sneak in. Myabe that is one reason we are seeing so much of this new religon.

If there is any proof of a man in a hunt it is not whether he killed a deer or elk but how he hunted it.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-09 AT 10:31PM (MST)[p]so is this thread about guys that know what they are doing, or just guys that put lead in the air?

I find it funny the guys against it have never put in the time to do it, its just to hard for them, so they make an excuse that LR shooters are poor hunters.

most hunters havent got the practice in to shoot at 300 yards, but some how thats exceptable to you guys??
 
The guys throwing lead into the air.


If there is any proof of a man in a hunt it is not whether he killed a deer or elk but how he hunted it.
 
"so is this thread about guys that know what they are doing, or just guys that put lead in the air?"


i think it should mostly be about guys who just put lead in the air.

Unfortunately, most of "those" guys don't hang around shooting chat rooms. Not saying everybody here is a great shot but i'm willing to accept that most here can do what they say they can because they do it a lot at the range before ever trying it out in the field.

the other Joey
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-23-09 AT 11:18PM (MST)[p]Flat out... an elk crossing a ridge at 600 yards is much different than a target standing still at 1000.

I was sighting in my 338 last fall and at 100 yards the holes were touching dead center... at 350 yards I was nearly 1 foot off center because of a light cross wind. I was shooting not at a range but on a mountain top meadow.

In the mountains thermals are constantly changing.

That 1 foot could mean the difference between a heart shot or a gut shot.

How does the shooter know what the wind is doing out there at 600+ yards on a cold November day at 8,000 ft in the Rockies?

The fact is no matter how good the shooter is... at distances out over 300 yards in "real world" conditions there are to many variables that could cause a perfect shot to be NOT so perfect.

The animal ends up being the one who suffers.
 
For the life of me I dont understand why some folks just dont get closer to the animal before slinging lead...

horsepoop.gif


Disclaimer:
The poster does not take any responsibility for any hurt or bad feelings. Reading threads poses inherent risks. The poster would like to remind readers to make sure they have a functional sense of humor before they visit any discussion board.
 
steve, your saying you have to judge the wind? thanks for the tip!

read into it, the guy that has spent the time knows what conditions he can or cant shoot in, and yes angle meters and wind meters come into play.

and i dont understand for the under 400 crowd why they all dont shoot a 30-06 with a 4x scope, do you need that magnum for close shots?
 
Let me put it this way: I've been hunting big game almost 40 years and grew up with a rifle in my hands. I've taken deer,elk,antelope,and sheep. I own several accurate rifles and am thoroughly familiar with them. I honestly can't remember the last time I missed a big game animal and only a couple have required a follow up shot(and then just for insurance).

BUT I have never taken a shot over 315 yards and would NEVER take one over 400-and then only if conditions were perfect.Why? Just too darn many variables and if any one is not perfectly accounted for the result is a wounded animal. And once you get past 500 yards or so many of those variables are beyond your ability to control-i.e.swirling winds,animal moves,bullet can't perform if a hit is marginal,etc.,etc.

Someone mentioned doping the wind-I'll bet 99% of guys cannot dope the wind with ANY consistency at all.One of my buddies is a decorated Marine sniper and he tells me wind doping past 500 yards is one of the most difficult things on earth to do-yet he must do it and take the shot because American lives are on the line.

The only lives on the line in the field are those of the animals we choose to shoot at and we owe it to them to know we can make the shot-EVERY TIME. I simply don't believe that's possible past 500 yards for 99% of the guys in 99% of the cases-yet guys talk about it like it's old hat. Something is wrong with that picture...
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-09 AT 08:04AM (MST)[p]Do this, next time a Quigley want to be says he whacks elk at 600 yard all the time set up or range an 18" target at 600 yards. with only the rifle and rest he would shoot while hunting, bet him $100 he can't hit it the first shot even though you're probably safe to bet he can't hit it by emptying his gun. see if his confidence is as high with $100 as it is with a free wounded animal.

There's always that risk he can do it or he'd get lucky but I'll gaurantee you the odds are in your favor.
 
Reddog,

What I saying is this... the best of the best does not know what the wind is doing on that ridge 600+ yards away. Wind thermals swirl... one moment the wind is in your face and the next it is at your back... and that is where you are standing.

You can tell me with accuracy the wind condition 600+ yards away from you?
 
I think to add to your point steve. There are no wind flags set up every 100yards in the field like on a long distance range
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-09 AT 12:57PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-09 AT 12:55?PM (MST)

dude, i would love to take you up on that bet.600 yards is a chip shot on an 18" target, do you really think its that hard? i took you for a better riflmen than that, maybe you should step out of your comfort zone and try somthing new, i aint saying you have to shoot that far on a hunt, but you will find out it isnt impossible.

you guys know your limitations, why put them on somone else? your right , it cant be done so i aint arguing anymore.

and steve, i hope your self imposed limit is under 300 yards, cause if you cant figure out that a "light" 30 mph wind (about what it would take to move your 338 1 foot)is gonna cause bullet drift, well you have no buisness shooting at that range.and you prove to me you hav eno idea what your talking about, so why post? and thanks for the insult, a wind over 10 mph is a no shooting situation for me beyond 500 yards.
 
Reddog it was a question... not an insult.

And you are right... I am a hunter and not a LD shooter. I know my limitations and I know that I can not judge the wind accurately across a canyon on another ridge where the wind might be blowing harder and a different direction in order to place a bullet within a 18" killl zone of an elk.

I can't remember to many days hiking open elk country and the wind not blowing more than 10mph.

That is why I stalked the 6 point bull elk in my freezer to within 75 yard before putting a nice sized hole through his heart.
 
I didn't say it couldn't be done , of course it can and with a few of my guns I could do it myself MOST of the time I'm a good rifle shot and a competitive NSCA shooter but I don't feel comfortable shooting over 400 yards at a game animal. I'd rather let 10 animals walk than gimp one that gets away and 90% of those who shoot long distance lose a much higer percentage than the guy who works his butt off to get closer I'd bet on that too. long range means long odds and anyone trying it better know what they're doing and have the equipment to do it, most hunters don't. I'd make a lot of money off the local Quigleys if I set up a 600 yard target for a bat hide bet I'm sure of that.

Shooting at long ranges doesn't make the johnson any longer, the ego that goes with not working as hard as the guy who gets closer is lost on me. those who can do it should clam up and not encourage those who can't to try it, if they really can do it they should know it's not a slam dunk for the average Joe with an average rifle.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-24-09 AT 08:25PM (MST)[p]no ego involved, but it sounds like there is for the "close stalkers". steve, i stalked my last elk,a 330 class 6 point to 760 yards before i put a nice hole in his heart...so what

fwiw, i dont go out planning on a long shot, i will get as close as i can, or at least untill i am confident in the shot. i havent wounded animal shoting long range, i have had 1 clean miss in the last 5 years, it was at 320 yards.

and it goes both ways, those that cant do it should clam up and quit telling those that can that its impossible, i do agree, it isnt for the average joe with the average rifle, i know i am taking this to personal, so i'll stop now.
 
Getting close to insure a better shot placement is not ego... it is common sense.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-25-09 AT 00:46AM (MST)[p]After having been to the 1,000 yard world championships and pulled targets in the pits from some of the best shooters in the world, I will state that no one has any business shooting at 1,000 yards on big game. Seeing how bad a shot can be flubbed in perfect conditions by a world champion off a bench tells me that no one can CONSISTENTLY and ETHICALLY hit animals at 1,000 yards on big-game in field conditions.

I don't care if Best of the West has Kestrel wind meters, they can shove those right up their hind end. So what if you know what the wind is doing at the muzzle. Watch what wind does to the flags on a range, it swirls, it switches, it can be going in a 180 degree different direction at 700 yards than what it's doing at 200. There are so many factors that come down to making the perfect shot. The mere fact that the sun may decide to come out from behind the clouds can change the impact by over a foot at that range. When shooting 1,000 yards in a match you get to dial in shots before you shoot a group, can't do that on a herd of elk. You also have the benefit of checking your previous shot through a spotting scope during a match. It's such a precision game that just the mere fact of not having consistent temperature ammunition will throw you off at that distance (yes, most shooters keep their ammo in temperature controlled heaters for consistency) don't see best of the west doing that.

The best of the west is nothing but frauds and the sad thing is all the idiots that want to mimic them. I would like to see the unedited footage (what was left on the cutting room floor)from a season of this show.

After second thought maybe I'm being to hard on The best of the west guys, maybe it's the Huskemaw scopes that make them so good.
 
With all due respect Reddog I don't believe one can accurately say he "stalked" any animal if the closest you get to it is just shy of 1/2 a mile.....
 
Just an observation here but you never see guys bragging about the long range (and by long I mean 500 yards plus) shots turned disaster. So does that mean it doesn't happen or just that we don't talk about those? I can pop steel at over 500 yards all day long with a M1 and iron sights but I'm not about to sling lead at a live animal at some of the distances I've seen bragged about. Each his own but there are more disaster stories out there than we are willing to share with each other.

498a6f395e505405.jpg
 
I shoot LD and last year I killed both Bulls at 80 yds, Go figure. We do shoot alot and are happy with what we can do.
You are right about it not being for everyone. But then neither is Treestand hunting or dog chasing deer or road hunting my way is just a lot different then your.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
 
Heres my take on it...
TV shows hve alot of negative impact on hunting. Shows like Best of the West. Not singling them out. I love the show... They hunt the stuff I do. But a guy buys a 6,000 dollar rifle because he saw those guys do it. The guy puts 3 rounds a year thru it. I have heard them say " You need to practice" but in todays world people expect automatic results. No disrespect to these guys but come on "get real".There is no reason to shoot 1200 yards at an antelope. I have been doing it a long time and have never shot one over 150.
You notice they always show there bang flops. But then in there techtips talk about how much 10 yards on a range finder can throw the shot off. I would be fairly confident saying the bang flops are alot less common then the long tracking jobs.
 
I'm not interested in shooting a buck. Let me clarify, Some years i've been in very good country where there was limited access and seen lots of bucks each and every day. Usually i didn't take a buck until the last weekend of the hunt because to me, just killing a buck is too easy, it's like shooting a meat target, doesn't interest me.

I hunted for the biggest oldest, gnarly buck on the mountain and though i'm not what i consider a true long range shooter, i practice enough and shoot enough under less that ideal conditions, know my gun, that "IF" that big ol boy finally does give me a crack at him at 400 or 500 yds, i can confidently take him where he stands or i need to, cause from experience i can say, they usually ain't going to give you a second chance.

After about 500 yds, i pretty much leave that kind of shooting to those that specialize in that, what i consider a whole nother ballgame and there's darn few out there that i'd say were over qualified for the job.

Joey
 
IMO long range hunting is like bowhunting, a bowhunter choses to stalk withing 40 yards of their trophy. I have seen people put shots consitantly in the vitals of elk at 1200 yards when most bowhunters cant do that at 45 yards. If you dont practice at 1000 dont shoot at 1000. Lr hunters always check wind and stuff, and always practice at the distance they are going to shoot. Just because you dont have the time to get good at 1200 yard shots or the equipment doesnt mean it cant be done!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-09 AT 04:57PM (MST)[p]i just don't think it is fair to the animal. No matter how much you practice. Way to many variables. 400 yards..that is my limit for big game. I try not to take shots even close to that and vary rarely have i ever. I have practiced 1000+ yds for a long time now. I am very confident with my rifle. I have a field i pop Pdogs in that sets my shots from 400 to 1100 yards. Things change every time i am out there, and i rarely hit my target on the first shot. After a couple shots i usually have the wind dialed in to the point i can start whackin em. I try basing my first shot off the wind at the end of my rifle, but have found that very rarely is it the same 1000 yards out. When it comes to big game you don't have 2 or 3 shots to figure things out. You have 1. If that wind is off even a couple MPH from what you judge or it is swirling a different direction you will not hit your POA. I don't care how much you practice it does not give you the ability to tell that you may have a 4MPH right to left at your rifle, but you have a 9MPH back right to left at your target 1000 yards away. I'm not saying a shot like that can't be done, but the percentages are to low for it to be fair to the animal. I guess if you have set up targets in multiple terrains from the plains to the mountains and are able to hit your target(we'll say milk jug size) on the very first shot and can do it every time then i would say you could consider taking a shot like that, but you still have not taken the animal that can move into account. So....i guess if can set up a milk jug size target that randomly will make sudden two foot movements in all different terrains from the plains to the mountains with out use of a shooting bench and can hit your target on the first shot every single time then you can consider it. I love long range shooting, and i've done it enough to know that it is not fair for me or anybody else i have shot with long range to be taking shots at a deer or elk at those distances. Just my Opinion
 
Not saying it can't be done but reading the responses to this thread confirms to me that no shot over 600 yards or so can be taken: 1)under true field conditions and 2)with absolute confidence of a first shot kill. (Probably not over 500 but I will give the benefit of the doubt to those more knowledgeable than me.)

Guys on here and elsewhere talk flippantly as if those ultra long shots are "chip shots", "no problem", etc.,etc. I know in my heart that's BS. Too many variables-MANY of which the shooter can't even try to control. When my decorated Marine sniper buddy says he wouldn't take such a shot at big game I know in my heart others have no business taking them either.
 
>IMO long range hunting is like
>bowhunting, a bowhunter choses to
>stalk withing 40 yards of
>their trophy. I have seen
>people put shots consitantly in
>the vitals of elk at
>1200 yards when most bowhunters
>cant do that at 45
>yards. If you dont practice
>at 1000 dont shoot at
>1000. Lr hunters always check
>wind and stuff, and always
>practice at the distance they
>are going to shoot. Just
>because you dont have the
>time to get good at
>1200 yard shots or the
>equipment doesnt mean it cant
>be done!


Just when I thought I had read it all,...I was proven wrong. Why limit yourself. Make it an even 3/4 mile. Ahh...enough with fractions, someone out there has to condone the one mile kill.


498a6f395e505405.jpg
 
>Not saying it can't be done
>but reading the responses to
>this thread confirms to me
>that no shot over 600
>yards or so can be
>taken: 1)under true field conditions
>and 2)with absolute confidence of
>a first shot kill. (Probably
>not over 500 but I
>will give the benefit of
>the doubt to those more
>knowledgeable than me.)
>
>Guys on here and elsewhere talk
>flippantly as if those ultra
>long shots are "chip shots",
>"no problem", etc.,etc. I know
>in my heart that's BS.
>Too many variables-MANY of which
>the shooter can't even try
>to control. When my decorated
>Marine sniper buddy says he
>wouldn't take such a shot
>at big game I know
>in my heart others have
>no business taking them either.
>

So why hunt? The amount of variables is the same if the shot is @ 50 yards or @ (insert long range distance here.) you can probably predict more accurately.a few of the variables @ a closer range, but it still sounds like hunting based on odds. And if this is the case, this doesn't sound "ethical" or respectful of the game we chose 2 hunt.
 
Here is a question for all of you that do not consider yourselves "long distance" hunters/shooters. Could you please let us know if you use rangefinders for your big game hunting? Just curious.
 
A while ago i took a lot of hits for posting that trail cams should be banned. THe point of that thread is that technology is killing this sport. Yes their are a lot of guns that will reach out 500+ yards. Hell I watch the military channel, some will reach out 1 1/2 miles. Is this hunting? First as for the show, if some guide wants me to shoot 500 yards at anything I want a refund. Second do we ever draw some kind of line? Look at what it takes to do this consistantly, custom gun, custom scopes, range finders, wind meters to shoot an elk? Deer? How is this HUNTING? This is killing, the animal is a target, and guys who shoot this way for them the skill is the shot, not the hunt. I am not a bow hunter, they have more skill than me. I shoot a muzzleloader, so I am 100 yrd shooter. My disc will shoot further, but not consistantly and if that critter is worth me killing it, it is deserving of my respect which means I kill it dead and fast. How do you respect something you cannot see with high power optics? If the skill is the shot, go shoot the range. Fair chase means the critter should be within eye or nose, or ear range for the critter you are persuing. Quite frankly if you are shooting 500+ yards at an animal, I wish you would stop it because I am within 150 yards and the sound of bullets whizzing by makes me uncomfortable. Like most of the guys who live out here we hunt deer/elk in the high country. Me 8000ft and above and I have yet to not have swirling winds and wind meters only measure speed not changes. We in the outdoor community have got to start policing our own. If you own a lifted, locked etc rig and can chew it up you can go anywhere reguardless of conditions. But what do you leave in your tracks? Our ATV's will go anywhere, does that mean we should take them there? The odds of getting caught catching more fish than your limit is small so should we forget it? Character is how you act when no one is watching, we need to develop more character in our sport. My .02
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-01-09 AT 03:02AM (MST)[p]My last three bucks killed (edit; or shot at) were 360, 460, and 528 yds. they were all one shot kills from a gun that i regularly shoot out to 500yds. None of these bucks could have been snuck up on for a closer shot but i really felt at the time that i could do the deed...and did.

I'd not think of taking any of those shots without a rangefinder. Of the near 100 other big game animals i've taken before owning a rangefinder, only a few were over 200-300yds. Knowing the range, knowing your trajectories, and tons of practice both at the range and in prairie dog fields, can make 400-500 yd shots doable for SOME. I surly don't recommend anyone to do so but i have and i will, under the right conditions, no matter what anyone says or believes.

As mentioned before, the really long shots are out of my league. They are also out of MOST of the hunters i know league too. I reserve judgment though as i'm sure some of these guys can do what i feel, me and my equipment aren't capable or sure of.

Joey
 
I don't consider myself a long range hunter but I do carry a rangefinder. I have taken deer/elk out to 450yds with clean kills.
Around 500yds is my personal limit.

nnl.gif

GO HEELS!
 
JimmyA you're response is just what I am talking about-to try to say the variables are about the same at 50 yards or 500 yards(or 750 yards or whatever) proves you don't have a clue what you are doing in my opinion. And, unfortunately there are many more of you out there..
 
Hey cbeard

You need to re-read my post!

I never said that the "variables are about the same at 50 yards or 500 yards(or 750 yards or whatever)." I said that the AMOUNT of variables are the same. Wind gusts, thermals, temperature changes, etc, etc, etc can also happen at 10 yards from where you are shooting, same as 500 yards.

Matter of fact, I said "you can probably predict more accurately,a few of the variables @ a closer range."

I have been practicing long range HUNTING for quite a few years now and I am comfortable taking some shots that some may not agree with. I base my comfort on the knowledge of my equipments capabilities and knowing my own limitations.

So I go back to my original question. Why hunt? Variables exist in every hunting situation. Since the variables exist, is this ethical hunting? No one is ever guaranteed a one shot kill, due to variables.

One of the biggest variables that factors into a kill shot is distance.

I will post my question again, how many of you "non-long range" hunters use a range finder? If you do use one, great. If not how do you accurately determine the distance of your game? If you don't use one, it would seem to me that it is just a guess. And if you are guessing at the distance, is that ethical?

My point is that hunting is hunting. I don't think that hunting is defined by the distance you decide to shoot.

If you feel confident enough to take the shot at "long range," do so. If you only feel comfortable shooting out to 100 yards, good for you for knowing your limits.

Don't knock others for having a different set of personal limits, when it comes to hunting.

cbeard, I hope I made my position a bit more clear

JimmyA
 
OK Jimmy I'll bite on some of your comments.

First,(just as I thought you would) you backtracked on your original comments when their absurdity was pointed out.I invite everyone to read them again.

Second, the problem with extreme long range shooting is many of the variables are simply BEYOND THE SHOOTER'S CONTROL. When variables are BEYOND THE SHOOTER'S CONTROL, the shooting should be confined to the target range.SIMPLE. Ain't no such thing as an ethical 750 yard shot at big game.I don't give a crap what anybody says-you're just pokin' and hopin'.

Third, the rangefinder deal is mostly a non-issue at moderate ranges with a high-powered rifle. Why? The entire margin of error is still within the kill zone of big game. My .270 WSM is sighted in 3 inches high at 100 yards and is good with a dead on hold from 0 to well past 300 yards.
As you should know, range estimation becomes MUCH more critical at long range. At my ranges I can afford to guess. You can't.(That said, I use a rangefinder anyway.)

Your comments still indicate to me that,like many of your cohorts, you are simply trying to justify the unjustifiable...
 
>OK Jimmy I'll bite on some
>of your comments.
>
>First,(just as I thought you would)
>you backtracked on your original
>comments when their absurdity was
>pointed out.I invite everyone to
>read them again.
>
>Second, the problem with extreme long
>range shooting is many of
>the variables are simply BEYOND
>THE SHOOTER'S CONTROL. When variables
>are BEYOND THE SHOOTER'S CONTROL,
>the shooting should be confined
>to the target range.SIMPLE. Ain't
>no such thing as an
>ethical 750 yard shot at
>big game.I don't give a
>crap what anybody says-you're just
>pokin' and hopin'.
>
>Third, the rangefinder deal is mostly
>a non-issue at moderate ranges
>with a high-powered rifle. Why?
>The entire margin of error
>is still within the kill
>zone of big game. My
>.270 WSM is sighted in
>3 inches high at 100
>yards and is good with
>a dead on hold from
>0 to well past 300
>yards.
>As you should know, range estimation
>becomes MUCH more critical at
>long range. At my ranges
>I can afford to guess.
>You can't.(That said, I use
>a rangefinder anyway.)
>
>Your comments still indicate to me
>that,like many of your cohorts,
>you are simply trying to
>justify the unjustifiable...


Are you sure you re-read my post? I did not backtrack at all.all I did was point out how you did not READ it correctly the first time and apparently the second time as well.

As far as the variables, when are they ever under a shooters control? I think that is what makes them VARIABLES.

JimmyA
 
The farther you shoot the more variables there are and the bigger the variables are.

I think a good question for those who like to shoot long range would be, though I won't get an honest answer, if you were on a guided hunt where a wounded animal was the end of your hunt would you shoot as far as you would on a public land don't worry about it hunt? this would be the real test of your confidence.

I'm not against those who shoot long range as long as they're up to the task. I'm against the majority who think they're long range shooters but aren't, and they're the majority.
 
No range finder. Elk hunting in the timber means you need about 30 feet if your lucky. Deer hunting in the junipers usually means laying on your belly shooting under trees. I don't hunt a lot of places to shoot 500 yards. I agree with cbeard. At big distance you increase the chance of a bad shot. You owe it to the animal to kill it. If your not smelling or hearing it, I can't help but wonder where the thrill is? At long distance, hunting is basically a physics equation, I personally don't get to excited about math but more power to you.
 
so far reddog is the only one i agree with


the guy that gets the ole '06 out in october, goes to cal ranch, and buys whatever they have on hand, 1 box federal 165 grain, 2 boxes of remington corlok 130 grain, it is all 30-06 right?

after loading the cooler with goodies and 24 natural lights it off a huntin he goes.

this type of hunter is common here, and the give us all a bad name. long rang shooting is just one issue.


now , i shoot, i shoot alot.
i am not going to go through me resume'
but in january i shot a cow elk at 740 yards. 1 shot dead in her tracks.

but i know my rifle, i carry a range card, and i shoot ALOT.
i have never "wounded" an animal and let it limp away. bow, ML, or rifle. i was taught that if you fire you go get it, or make dam sure it was a clean miss.

p.s
I shot my archery buck last year at 74 yards, 1 arrow. the buck went 20 feet.

it is not the distance, it is the man. don't assume anything!


live life one mule deer at a time.
 
I guess my burning question would be 'how far is too far?' What is the magic number that everyone would agree on. I'd honestly like to know on extreme distance shooting where everyone would come to the conclusion it becomes an absurd distance. Certainly it is different for everyone depending on equipment/skill level but what is the number of yards where everyone can say 'that's just crazy.' I'd honestly like to see the number. 1000 yards?..1100?...1200? There is no black and white delineation of what is practical, reasonable, or possible, but at what point is that gray area just irresponsible when talking about big game animals and not steel targets? There has to be some number where EVERYONE will say is just ignorant and irresponsible. For me, I guess I'd have to say unless you've got a 50BMG and are a skilled sniper, anything over 750 yards I'm gonna raise my eyebrows. What is it?

498a6f395e505405.jpg
 
>but i know my rifle, i
>carry a range card, and
>i shoot ALOT.
>i have never "wounded" an animal
>and let it limp away.
>bow, ML, or rifle. i
>was taught that if you
>fire you go get it,
>or make dam sure it
>was a clean miss.
>
>p.s
>I shot my archery buck last
>year at 74 yards, 1
>arrow. the buck went 20
>feet.
>
>it is not the distance, it
>is the man. don't assume
>anything!
>
>
>live life one mule deer at
>a time.

Not a personal attack on you but IMO you might be the luckiest(or full of it) hunter out there. They say if you haven't lost one you haven't hunted long enough. I have made some great shots on critters but made just the same amount of poor hits. Even at reasonable range. There is not not an honest man on here that will tell you they haven't made a mistake. The animals we choose to hunt are tough as nails and have a strong will to live.We owe it to them and the sport to do our best. I too have made some long shots with my bow. That I will be honest were "Dang" lucky shots. Each time I tell myself that was stupid for taking that shot. It worked out but if off an inch it could have been a cripple. I don't care how much you shoot or how long you have been doing it.... it WILL happen.
 
ok i will specify,
i have never hit,wounded not retrieved a single big game animal, protected, or other wise regulated animal.

coyotes don't count, i have hit several hard, and not found a few of them.

luck should not have any thing to do with a shot, that is poor hunting.

i shoot ranges all week, i know my ballistics. i work hard at that.
my bow is new, with pins out to 80 yrds and i shoot every pin every time i shoot my bow,

so you say luck.........i say luck has NO BUSINESS in the shot.
the shot comes from experience, equipment and alot of work.


i shot a buck about 7 years ago with my ML. opening morning. he was a small 3 point, i watched him pile up, i get there blood everywhere. no buck.

i hunted, tracked, crawled until i found him. 4 days later about 500 yards away in the thickest oak on the hill.

but thats just me, i was taught that way, once you hit one, he is yours, find him or eat your tag.

guys that wound multiple animals each hunt, make me sick. it is just laziness,


live life one mule deer at a time.
 
In this month's Rifle Shooter magazine a guy asks about a good rifle out to 600 yards and in his answer J.Scott Rupp replied:

"First off, forget about shooting out to 600 yards at game animals.A more sensible limit is 300 yards or so,a long poke under even the best circumstances."

I believe he is right on. I also believe he has more knowledge and experience than 99.99% of the guys taking these long range shots. IMO most who shoot ultra long range are delusional that they are taking an ethical shot- and the animals are the ones that suffer from those delusions...

My personal feeling is that 500 yards is the maximom distance underperfect conditions by expert marksmen-mostly because my Marine sniper friend believes that too.As I said above my personal limit is much shorter. Heck, just look at a ballistics chart and see what bullets start to do at 350 yards and beyond-it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see there's almost no margin for error.

Rifle666- When you killed that cow elk at 740 yards, both you and she got lucky IMO.
 
cbeard

1st you don't know me
so until you do DON'T presume anything.
your marine buddy went to roughly the same school i did.

I took that 740 yard shot for the following reasons.

1 she was broadside at roughly the same elevation.
2 the was little to no wind
3 i was using my bench 1000 yard rifle
4 i had an EXACT range.
5 from zero i know exactly the dope to get my sights dead on up too 1100 yards
6 i shoot that far all year, and some competition shoots.

you say luck. i say skill, confidence, and training.


another example, you or i probably cannot take a turn in daytona at 195 mph in turn 3 and live to tell about it,
but with the right training, equipment and skill nascar drivers do it everyday.

is that LUCK?????



live life one mule deer at a time.
 
Nothing personal,but with all your hunting experience you describe in such detail couldn't you get closer than 740 yards to that cow(or perhaps another one)?
 
cbeard, you are entitled to your opinion. It is good that you know your limits. But to insist that everyone else's limits should be the same as yours is just ignorance or arrogance. As I said early on in this post, (that will never be resolved), I shoot a tighter group at 800 yards than my buddy does at 300 yards. In my case who is more ethical, me taking an 800 yard shot or my buddy taking a 300 yard shot? It has been said that the real hunter gets closer. I am an avid bowhunter, and I bowhunt for the challenge, so I agree but there is also that challenge at longer ranges with rifle. There are variables in every shot you take no matter what the range or no matter what the weapon. It takes just as long for my arrow to get 35 yards as it takes my bullet to get 800 yards, so the animal movement has the potential of being the same in both situations, but why is it considered very ethical to take a 35 yard shot with my bow?

If your confidence level or your skills or your equipment limits you to 400 yard shots I can honestly say that I applaud and highly respect the fact that you know and stay within your limits. But to group every single person into those same limits is obsurd. Maybe my skills are better, maybe my equipment is better I don't know but I feel extremely comfortable taking a 600 yard shot and with the right conditions an 800 yard shot. Others are lower, others are higher, as long as they know and respect those limits, I respect them.........you should do the same.
 
Maybe he could've gotten closer, he probably could've found a different cow......but why when he felt confident with the one that was standing in front of him. Looks like it didn't matter based on the fact that she's wrapped up in white paper in his freezer.
 
Marley I hear you and will not rehash my feelings again and why I feel as I do. And believe me I do respect yours and everyone else's right to do their thing-right up to the point where their thing unnecessarily places the game we hunt(and perhaps unting itself) at risk.

To me that's the larger issue.....
 
I said i was done with this thread but to answer 1911, my personal max is 800 yards. that is the limit i chose based on my gun and practice. i feel i could extend it with a heavy barrel and some scary high bc. bullets, buy i choose to hunt with a hunting bullet, not a target bullet. i am happy where i am at, because i dont go out looking for a long shot. but up to my limit i will shoot with confidence if the conditons are right.

cbeard, i know a few snipers also, and if i was saddled with the T.O.F of the 308 i wouldnt shoot past 500 either, heck they dont have the gas at 500 for big game anyway. or you could throw in the Barret 50, with its 1.5 MOA, no wonder, i dont even hunt with a gun that in accurate. the canadian and british snipers have supperior wepons to ours, and thats a shame. I am not saying i am a better shot than them,but they have inferior equiptment IMO, i know i will get hell for that, there are guys on here that have been there done that, but i dont expect them to back me up. and the ones who shoot the 300 win are impressive.
 
everyone is entitled to their opinion, thats why this is such a great place to live.

maybe your not shooting 1000 yards,so what? i'm not going to bash you . i could have gotten closer, but like i said it was a perfect situation for a long shot.

i will say this the only thing bad about it was the cut and haul after.
i guess if i were a road hunter, the 50 yard shot would have been much easier.

you seem to hate rangefinders too. before the shot i range estimated at 800 yards, then i hit it with the range finder, 740.

now i ask what is your problem with using every tool available?
do use a modern rifle with a scope? or are you still a patch and ball guy with a flintlock?

do you have a truck? or is a horse your way to go?

how bout a gps? or do you still follow the stars?

so i guess it goes like this, just because you can't, it does not mean that it can't or shouldn't be done.




live life one mule deer at a time.
 
rifle666-

I appreciate your respect for my right to state my opinion-and I respect your right to state yours too. America is a wonderful place and on that we can certainly agree.

To me, the very heart of this issue is found in your last post where you say:

"I could have gotten closer,but like I said it was a perfect situation for a long shot."

With that statement,you admit you voluntarily chose to take a lower percentage shot and put the animal at more risk than you had to.There can be only one reason for this-it was more about you than the animal you were hunting. You wanted to see if you could do it and tell everybody what a long shot you made.

When hunting becomes more about the hunter than the animal and the hunt itself that's where things go south. That's why we have things like high-fenced "hunts", TV shows where guys are giggling and high-fiving as an animal is dying, and poaching.

And that's why we have guys shooting at animals at 800 or 1000 yards when my 15 year old daughter likely could have gotten to within 1/4 of that distance. I'm sorry, I just have a big problem with that...
 
rifle666, Whats your setup??? When shooting off the bench what does your group look like at 700-1000 yards?
 
The plain simple fact is that most guys shouldn't be taking any shots over 400 yards. The fact that few can and do really means little in the big equation. The real fact that matters here is that when those that shouldn't start doing it because they're being told how easy it is, then you will start to see the issues around these shots compounding. The majority of the western states don't seem to have increasing populations of Muleys or Elk currently while we're in this drought cycle. So what these guys are stressing is fundamentally important to hunting and the sustainability of the resource. Guys like cbeard and others are telling it like it is and some of you really don't seem to have the capacity to really look at the big picture.


There was a post on here about the shooters at Camp Perry and how conditions effect them and believe me most of these guys can absolutely shoot circles around most jug busters on here. Many of them get fooled by the conditions downrange from time to time and those shooters have shot HUNDREDS of rounds through their weapons and had them rebarreled a few times in perfecting their craft. They have a much better idea of what's actually going on downrange than many of us ever do in the field. Yes there is a difference in that they're shooting for group size and most here are shooting at chest cavities so yes it's different to a small extent.

If they miss they punch a hole in a piece of paper which is harmless, and the long range hunter wounds a premium game animal. If the animal is recovered there's no harm in the equation and a tag was filled successfully. But if that animal isn't recovered that's where Cbeards & others points takes on new meaning and carry more weight. If the hunter takes a shot within his capability we all win but how many young guys with these long range rigs will exercise that restraint? Given that thousands upon thousands more animals are wounded during firearms season it's a very valid point. The time for taking that longer shot that's stretching your capabilites isn't in the field hunting it's at the range. If somehow we can get that message across without offending anyone then we all will be better served in the end. Hunting and it's challenges are different for all of us. To me I always knew I had the capability of shooting an animal at long range but got more of a thrill about working in closer to the animal and meeting him on level ground but my way isn't necessarily your way.

If it's success you seek pilgrim nothing increases your odds more than closing the distance and that's something that has never changed in hunting because your margain for error increases expotentially as the distance decreases. If you can make the shot fine take it, but the time to experiment isn't in the field on live game not today, tomorrow, or in the future it's at the range.
 
There are two responses I like on this topic that point out perfectly that long range shots "can" become nothing more than "EGO" above ethics.

1) When does the shot become more about you than the animal
2) When does the shot become more about you hitting a target than hunting.

I know there are many on this site that can knock a bumble bee off a fence post at a 1000 yards... you are comended for your skill... but I would say there are also many on this site that would like you to ask yourself these two questions before you pull the trigger next time on a magestic animal.
 
now i have heard some dumb chit but that last posts gets # 1 dumb comment vote for the year.

"1) When does the shot become more about you than the animal
2) When does the shot become more about you hitting a target than hunting."

ok # 1
just because someone can and you can't does not have anything to do with ego, maybe jealousy on your part

#2 the SHOT IS ALWAYS ABOUT HITTING YOUR TARGET WHILE HUNTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT DO YOU AIM AT?



live life one mule deer at a time.
 
There is some proof in that post, I've seen guys take a dink at what they claim was 600 yards, probably more like 300 but they seem to think if it's a long enough shot a dink is still a trophy.

Maybe B&C can add the yardage the animal was shot at into the score and then they can get the credit they want. I think ego is a big part of long shots, if it wasn't we wouldn't hear all the bragging.

I'm not a bowhunter but I admire the effort a good bowhunter puts into getting in range of the animal it requires, I figure if they can get withing bow range I can get within 400 yards. a hunter getting within 40 yards of a big bull impresses me more than a 600 yard shot over the hood of a pickup any day.
 
Dumb chit? The statistical average of adult reading comprehension skills is 6th grade level... I can see that to be true.

Go back over and read the comments of those of "hossblur #43" and "cbeard #66"... and many ohers who believe that when you start shooting at live "game" over 500+ yards you are putting your ego above ethics.

I don't see anyone putting your skill down here... no one doubts that you can make such a shot...

What I see is a concensus of hunters who understand that such a shot has to many inherant risks built in that decrease the probability of a quick and humane kill of the animal.

What is Ethics? "The body of moral principles or values governing or distinctive of a particular culture or group"
 
just because you don't like it
do not bring ethics into it.

ethics to me is a clean kill period. be that at 10 yrds or 1000.

if i can do it clean and many many others can, who are you to say that it is unethical?

i promise you this. more guys have wounded game at under 100 yards and lost them that i have at 400+
my record is still clean.
is yours?

live life one mule deer at a time.
 
I hesitate to be blunt but I think the bottom line for me (and apparently many others) is that there is a point where the line should be drawn and it is irresponsible and enethical to take the shot because NO ONE IS THAT SKILLED no matter what they claim.

I'm no expert so I don't know exactly where to draw the line. But I do know that TV shows promoting and guys talking about "ethical shots out to 1000 yards" is pure BS. Plain and simple. I don't care what you say. Go to Camp Perry. Watch the best shooters in the world. See how long it takes them to even begin to get their rifles dialed in. And guys talk about a one shot kill on an elk in the mountains at that range?

Give me a break. This stuff is getting out of hand and is going to end up with alot of wounded animals and a black eye for hunting if we don't inject a little reason into our actions.That's why I'm concerned.
 
You underestimate the shooters around here, if they weren't so busy they'd go show those Camp Perry boys how it's done.
 
cbeard I am with you on this whole thread and I am glad to brought out the debate.

Usually I say "to each is his own"... but when it comes to the fact that there is an animal envolved... I get sick to the stomach to see it promoted and glorified.
 
>My long range setup----> .270 Win and a pair of Danners. :)


Same here. Hunting for me doesn't take place at 300 yds. If you spook them that far away you need to practice your woodsmanship.
 
If you can't get inside of 400 yards, you need to sharpen your skills. Big game animals deserve more respect than a low percentage shot.
Let me put it another way, I understand that there are people skilled enough to take shots longer than 400 yards. If you can develop this amount of skill with your rifle, you can develop the amount of skill required to get within 400 yards. Then put the bullet exactly where it belongs, not within 10 inches, of where it belongs.
 
i love this thread!
ok guy, 10 inches of where it should be......you bragging?
anyway MOST hunters can't do that at 100 YARDS!!!!!!!!!!
i dare say 50% of hunters can't do it every time.

i will also add more than 75% of hunters have NEVER made a heart shot.

by the way, it takes more SKILL to shoot at a distance than it takes to stalk an animal..PERIOD. and left footed oof can stalk to 300 yards .....nuff said

did you guys catch the show on the outdoor channel last weekend?
long distance big game hunting.
if not you missed a good watch. i hope it comes on again. 700 yard white tail...............poof........


a bunch of posts ago someone asked about my rifle
so PM me if you'd like specifics








live life one mule deer at a time.
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-29-09 AT 07:17AM (MST)[p]666 said; "i will also add more than 75% of hunters have NEVER made a heart shot."

Whoa!! lol, where'd you come up with that stat? Though i long ago learned that a heart shot is only a fair place to shoot for, it certainly is no tough trick. And being you're talking to a bunch of guys that eat, sleep, and stumble around all day, speaking for myself only, thinking about shooting and hunting, it might be a hard sell to push that 75% figure around here. :)

Seems the bigger bucks i've killed through the years required some good shooting to get the job done. They don't come easy, they usually don't stand around while you sashay up on em. I like being prepared for the longer shots i might take. I have good equipment and believe i know how to use it.

I believe a lot of the guys here are the same. It's those others, those that couldn't tell you much more than they know their gun is a Winchester and it's "on" cause it was "on" a couple years ago, the last time they shot it, that you need to get the message to. Good luck with that! lol

Having any fun yet?

Joey
 
Rifle 666 you may be ashooter but you missed the target on this thread. How many stalks have you ever blown at 500+ yards except for maybe a sheep or antelope? How tough is it to shoot something that has no idea you're even out there? I can take any guy that never hunted in his life and take him to a range and within 60 days have him shooting a gun well enough to take a game animal at 400 yards especially off a bipod or a rest. Because that's not hunting it's shooting! Every single drill instructor in the military has done it 1000 times over with nimrods that think like you. But teaching him how to be able to sneak up and get closer to his target and watch the elements is a considerably harder task and he will blow many stalks in learning how to hunt. So I think your analogy and numerology is a little off base here. Put a bow in his hands and the equation gets many times harder again.

So what was it you were expounding on shooting is harder to learn than hunting? The argument you made simply supports my conclusion in that most knowledgeable hunters also know that a double lung shot is better and gives you a larger margain for error in your shot but yet increases the odds of your success by shooting at an area with over 4 times the mass of an animals heart. Odds are much greater that a low heart shot is a miss with a slight miscalculation in yardage but a low lung shot will normally still take out the heart on most animals and make a kill. Any long range shooter that concentrates on heart shots will be fairly unsuccessful in comparision. For a shooter that has to judge his conditions in the field it seems you completely missed the wind direction on this thread.

While you may be a shooter there seems to be a little you need to learn about hunting and math. Coming on here throwing out that 75% is almost as grave an error as Custer made. Some of these guys have trophy rooms that you would envy, and their shots were a hell of a lot closer than 500 yards. You see they did it for the thrill of the hunt and matching their skills against their prey knowing full well that a mistake on their part could cost them yet somehow that made it that much sweeter in the end because they're hunters. A hunter takes a shot as part of the experience and to a shooter it is the experience.
 
Right now I shoot just a little 308win with a 4x scope. I get 4-5" groups at 400yds. Sooooo what you guys are saying is if I get a 300rum with a 32x scope I wont have to hike as much??? :)

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
NO i don't believe my windage is off course at all!
so i speak my mind, GET OVER IT!

I primarily hunt deer with a muzzle loader, with shots not exceeding 150 yards. i have several decent bucks on the wall that i worked hard for. the best being shot under 40 yards after a 1000+ yard stalk that took about 3 hours. so don't come to me with can't stalk a deer comments.
I made my living useing cover and concealment, field craft and "indian" tactics to stay alive. so ya i can put a stalk on when needed.

I guess what i need from you guys is my very own copy of utahs "ETHICAL HUNTING AND SHOOTING OF BIG GAME"
with this i can learn what is acceptable and what is not.
silly me i always thought that a one shot kill was good enough, i guess now i know better!

and i guess get the definitions of a stalk, because in MY BOOK, A VEHICLE MOUNTED STALK DOES NOT COUNT! but i guess 100,000 road hunters can't be wrong.


ONE LAST THING FOR NOW. WHILE YOU PREACHERS ARE ON A STALK, HOW MANY USE A RADIO WITH A GUY WATCHING YOU AND THE ANIMAL THOUGH A 80 POWER SCOPE?

THAT IS NOT STALKING IN MY BOOK.

NUFF SAID



live life one mule deer at a time.
 
I think it's you that needs to reread his post. Those that challenged you certainly aren't long range advocates. It was you that said it takes more skill to shoot than stalk and now your defending your well honed indian skills as a stalker and your heart shots. Most of us couldn't agree more about the vehicle stalk positon and the radios. I certainly don't know what you thought you were implying on your last post but it definately wasn't what you wrote and implied. You're right NUFF SAID!
 
My original post was not aimed at expert marksmen who hone their craft and can confidently make the occasional long shot (400-600yds)if there is no other option and conditions are perfect. From the replies it is clear those folks have not taken offense-nor should they.

The purpose of my post is to expose the fallacy being promoted by some on TV,in magazines, and on the internet that ultra long-range shots (600-1000yds+) AT BIG GAME ANIMALS are cool,exciting, and doable with the right equipment and a little practice. TV shows like "Best In The West" are promoting this practice with one purpose-to make money by selling advertising for long range shooting equipment, and the companies that sell this stuff are going right along.

It is obvious to me their strategy is working.I can tell by some of the replies on this thread that guys that either 1)don't know any better or 2)don't care are taking irresponsible shots at big game.

For all the reasons discussed above by many,I will repeat what I know to be true: ANY ULTRA LONG-RANGE SHOT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO THE RANGE OR PRAIRIE DOG TOWNS.

That's it. Please don't fall prey to the macho and wrongheaded arguments to the contrary. Our game animals deserve better.
 
I would have to say this it the best response on the whole thread:

"A hunter takes a shot as part of the experience and to a shooter it is the experience."
 
Can a shooter be a hunter? And most hunters are shooters, aren't they? I'm not trying to be funny, but some that can really hunt, can shoot also. Sometimes the hunt may have to be ended by a long shot. Does the long shot make one less of a hunter? I think it takes both skills, hunting and shooting. Skills being key. mtmuley
 
Muley I couldn't agree more and most are both. But there is a valid point here that as effective range increases effort decreases and we can't over look that. There will always be circumstance where a long shot is the only alternative that's available. In those instances if it's within the hunters capability by all means take the shot it's their hunt. I think the new thinking that is permeating hunting is that all long shots are OK is more of the issue. You can rest assured that we are going to see more interference with other hunters in the field as this practice grows. How about the guy that's been stalking his bull all morning and some guy sitting on a ledge 1000 yards away shoots him out from under him, all the the while watching whats been going on. It's not right but you and I both know it's going to happen.

MT muley this is not directed at you but is food for thought. Then you also have to think about the advantage of a rich guy using a gun that will shoot well over 1000 yards doing the same thing over some poor guy with his .308. There are no right or wrong answers to all this but as things evolve other issues that weren't before will surface. Eventually bowing to public pressure, the states will most likely be enacting some type of regulations to level the field in some manner. It could be as simple as no muzzle brakes and adjustable turret scopes or done in some other fashion. I don't know where this will wind up but at some point it will change as increased efficiency and extended range extracts it's toll on the resource. Maybe we'll just have to settle for 1/2 the tags and more success and 10-15 years between tags. More hunters taking more animals simply can't lead to more opportunity.

Where does the line get drawn? There are guns out there right now that will shoot 2200 yards and hit an elk 95% of the time and some say that's hunting too. I guess it's just a matter of what we want to justify in our minds since in reality if you have enough money you can shoot as far as you want and call it hunting. At what range do we give the animals a chance and does fair chase come back into play. I don't know the answer to this either but this current "anything goes" mentality doesn't seem to warrant any long term consideration for hunting's future and that should concern all of us but for some reason doesn't. Why?
 
> MT muley this is not
>directed at you but is
>food for thought. Then you
>also have to think about
>the advantage of a rich
>guy using a gun that
>will shoot well over 1000
>yards doing the same thing
>over some poor guy with
>his .308.

Damn, I thought I was at least middle class. Now caliber choice defines poverty level :)


"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
LAST EDITED ON May-01-09 AT 02:29PM (MST)[p]how does class get in this topic?
money rich, poor ? wtf?

money will never a shooter make!

a real shooter will out shoot a rich or poor guy with ANY RIFLE PERIOD!

i am now loosing interest in this topic.


still waiting for my copy of ethical hunting and the practical application of its usage. utah edition.
 
I think the issue i have with some of these shows coming out is this...They act like they are going out with the intent to see how far they can push the limits on a long shot. They are not going out to hunt deer or elk. They are going out to see how far they can shoot a deer or an elk. I still don't agree with 500+ yard shots being taken on big game, BUT if a person takes a longer shot then he normally would but is still comfortable with because all means to get closer seem to have been spent. That is a big differance from the guys that go out to see how far of a shot they can make on a big game animal. If you want to see how far of a shot you can make...take it to the range or set some targets in the hills. Don't push your limits on the animals. Regardless of your thoughts on long range shots i think the point of hunting is being completley thrown to the side when you go out with the intent of taking a long shot, or you don't try and get a little closer before pulling the trigger.
 
LAST EDITED ON May-01-09 AT 04:10PM (MST)[p]I received a copy of one of the hunting publications not long ago.

It was a great issue. Particularly the article about a big sheep that was taken. I very much enjoyed the magazine and was looking foreward to the story about the sheep.

I would love to go on a sheep hunt. It seems to be near the top as far as hunting experiences.

Then I get into the story, man is it great, detailed and written so you really understand some of what went into this hunt.

Then I get to the part about the shot............ 718 yards or some such distance?????????????

I was not there of course.. But, does one feel good about taking this great animal at 718 yards?

At minimum, it made many of the readers think less of the writter and less of the publication.
 
need4X4-

I read the very same article and felt just like you.
Then I noticed at page 19 of the same magazine(and the others since) there was an ad by the rifle manufacturer featuring the hunter, the ram, and the shot. The hunter is the publisher of the magazine.

Then it all came together......
 
I don't mind him doing what he did.

Sure guys can make the shot.

I love to hunt. But, it still doesn't make me feel great to read it at that range.
 
Boskee, I understand your points perfectly. I am not advocating LR hunting, but my comfort level may be different than others. The media is doing a great job of perpetuating the idea that long shots are easy and common. I bet the majority of guys equipping themselves with the items needed to do what they see on TV and read about in magazines, rarely practice any real world shooting, or educate themselves with the knowledge needed to make a long shot. I'm not talking 1000 yards plus, that's a whole other ballgame. On the other hand, criticizing someone else's way of hunting is a no win situation in itself. Anti's love infighting. I'm thinking the long range debate rages for a long time. mtmuley
 
I watched a bow hunting video the other night with 10+ hunts on it. Several guys passed up trophy elk because the angle of the shot did not make them feel comfortable releasing an arrow. Most were within 30 yards. They were plenty capable to make the shot... but their own personal ethics stopped them.

This thread boils down to that... personal ethics.
 
Damn right it ethics! People who can do it...more power to ya. For the rest...they should realize their own skill level. That applies across the board. No matter what the chore there will always be people wanting a shortcut to success. And success has mostly (due to media) become about the kill instead of the expierience and tradition of our sport. It all goes back to society and parenting.

Personally for me I cant afford it, but if I get some overtime I'll be slangin lead with the rest of ya. Sorry Boskee, Had to poke some fun since you singled out my favorite cartrige :)

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
hardway that was some funny stuff!:) I appreciated your humor!

Mtmuley I see your side too thank you. But to me it's not about dividing hunting it's more about giving your fellow man a fair chance of taking an animal on public land while adhering to the principles of fair chase. He owns just as much of that resource as anyone else and deserves a fair opportunity IMO.
 

Similar threads

littlebighorn
Backfire Milk Jug Challenge
Replies
73
Views
2k
elkassassin
elkassassin
gr8fuldoug
For Sale Sig Sauer Open Box Sale
Replies
0
Views
145
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
For Sale New Arrivals and Specials
Replies
0
Views
222
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

8 bachelors.jpg
Screenshot_20240215_222157_Photos.jpg
IMG_4783.jpeg
Droptine Buck.mp4
IMG_4618.jpeg
56688051-10AF-4CDC-9982-8F8A5996DBCC.jpeg
20211119_181620.jpg
IMG_20161123_142539531_HDR[1].jpg
6 pt bull 7-21.JPG
4A14E963-6E8B-482D-860E-4B32E22AA11A.jpeg
avon deer (2).jpg
harry dangler.jpg
Back
Top Bottom