me hunting in nz for chamois video
- Thread starter WhelanLad
- Start date
Thanks. Beautiful country. - dan
Excuse my ignorance of hunting... I've only 'hunted' grey squirrels and rats, over the past 8 years taking 317 squirrels and 176 rats, all with airguns. I've only shot my centrefire rifles a few times - a 9mm carbine and a 6.5Creedmoor - but hoping to obtain a hunting license within the next year and get busy going after a deer. So again, please allow for that in considering my questions. I'm really just curious, hoping not to offend
At about 15:30 you shoot an animal. I'm puzzled about range and accuracy considerations. You've settled your rifle's zero at the beginning of the trek, so it would seem you're confident up to a point. But the range, looking at the fuzzy camera image, seems considerable. You mention "320 backline" but I'm not sure what is meant - is this 320 yards, 320 metres, or some other information - what's a 'backline,' is it aiming for the spine? Are you shooting outside your trained comfort zone? I regard that as being that distance at which I can confidently place a projectile inside the brain of a rodent. Obviously deer and similar game animals are considered differently, and only certain highly skilled wildlife managers take head shots - as is shown on this Fieldsports Britain video for example - https://youtu.be/KvT6oWdwPLc - but if you can't be confident of a clean heart/lung shot and the animal dropping after 1 hit, is it really a shot worth taking without further stalking, considering whatever is limiting your accuracy?
140gr .270Win, from what I've just looked up, leaves the barrel with about 2,700fpe, theoretically more than enough power to drop a modestly sized deer such as this. But you've taken 3 shots. The second on a front knee, while you say you were aiming for the lower neck. Is this a shot-out barrel, an insufficiently steady rifle, or simply a shot taken at a range beyond which you can confidently hit where you intend? That animal was walking around for about 90 seconds (subtracting about 10 seconds for the couple of edits where you've inserted a few seconds for repeating the hits) before finally collapsing, laying down its head. Such a long death would have me seriously worried about my decision to squeeze the trigger if it were on a squirrel. I never intend for an animal to suffer, and had a shot an animal and left it alive for such a long time I'd be going to shots on paper for quite a while before establishing thorough confidence in both the gun and my ability with it. I won't be taking my Sig Cross hunting until completely certain that I can place a bullet within an inch of my point of aim at whatever range that turns out to be - probably inside 200 yards - as the possibility of losing a wounded animal due to poor marksmanship isn't acceptable.
On the second animal - ignoring the younger one you later noticed alongside it, something anyone could miss as it only appears after the shot - I'm puzzled about the lack of backstop. Certainly in the mountains the odds of hitting someone else downrange are very slim, but not zero. There is no backstop. If that shot had missed, the bullet would likely travel for a couple of miles before hitting something. Is that considered acceptable somehow? I've been taught never to take shots along ridges for this reason. One can never be certain where a missed shot, or even a pass-through, might end up hitting next. A dirt biker was killed on Vancouver Island earlier this year, apparently riding with some friends near where some others were shooting without a safe backstop, just shooting through trees and brush. Hit in the neck, dropped dead right there, totally random and one might think a 1 in a billion chance considering the territory and how few people go there. But such is the reality with bullets. Knowing where they'll land is vitally important.
And lastly I'm curious about the meat. You've shot an animal one evening and left it to cool with the guts in, which according to the hunter education materials provided by our government, and backed up by a great many hunters including Steve Rinella, getting the meat cooled as soon as possible is imperative to extend storage time until refrigeration is available. That means gutting and separating the major portions within half an hour or less if at all possible, though obviously sometimes longer storage becomes necessary, as with a shot too near to dusk in dangerous terrain. The lower temperature evident from the snow on the ground perhaps makes this less concerning... but it seems easy to imagine that an animal that size would retain body heat well above ambient for many hours, left in its whole state.
If meat isn't being considered - I see only a skinned skull in the cabin at the end of the video - then I'm curious as to why not? Are these considered pest animals, to be killed and left in the field? Sorry again for my ignorance, as New Zealand hunting practices are alien to me. I've never heard of such game animals simply being left to rot and feed birds and bugs. Seems not much like a hunt, if this were the case. More like killing for the sake of killing. But perhaps I've missed some crucial information along the way. I don't understand everything you say, my Canadian ears being unfamiliar with some slang.
At about 15:30 you shoot an animal. I'm puzzled about range and accuracy considerations. You've settled your rifle's zero at the beginning of the trek, so it would seem you're confident up to a point. But the range, looking at the fuzzy camera image, seems considerable. You mention "320 backline" but I'm not sure what is meant - is this 320 yards, 320 metres, or some other information - what's a 'backline,' is it aiming for the spine? Are you shooting outside your trained comfort zone? I regard that as being that distance at which I can confidently place a projectile inside the brain of a rodent. Obviously deer and similar game animals are considered differently, and only certain highly skilled wildlife managers take head shots - as is shown on this Fieldsports Britain video for example - https://youtu.be/KvT6oWdwPLc - but if you can't be confident of a clean heart/lung shot and the animal dropping after 1 hit, is it really a shot worth taking without further stalking, considering whatever is limiting your accuracy?
140gr .270Win, from what I've just looked up, leaves the barrel with about 2,700fpe, theoretically more than enough power to drop a modestly sized deer such as this. But you've taken 3 shots. The second on a front knee, while you say you were aiming for the lower neck. Is this a shot-out barrel, an insufficiently steady rifle, or simply a shot taken at a range beyond which you can confidently hit where you intend? That animal was walking around for about 90 seconds (subtracting about 10 seconds for the couple of edits where you've inserted a few seconds for repeating the hits) before finally collapsing, laying down its head. Such a long death would have me seriously worried about my decision to squeeze the trigger if it were on a squirrel. I never intend for an animal to suffer, and had a shot an animal and left it alive for such a long time I'd be going to shots on paper for quite a while before establishing thorough confidence in both the gun and my ability with it. I won't be taking my Sig Cross hunting until completely certain that I can place a bullet within an inch of my point of aim at whatever range that turns out to be - probably inside 200 yards - as the possibility of losing a wounded animal due to poor marksmanship isn't acceptable.
On the second animal - ignoring the younger one you later noticed alongside it, something anyone could miss as it only appears after the shot - I'm puzzled about the lack of backstop. Certainly in the mountains the odds of hitting someone else downrange are very slim, but not zero. There is no backstop. If that shot had missed, the bullet would likely travel for a couple of miles before hitting something. Is that considered acceptable somehow? I've been taught never to take shots along ridges for this reason. One can never be certain where a missed shot, or even a pass-through, might end up hitting next. A dirt biker was killed on Vancouver Island earlier this year, apparently riding with some friends near where some others were shooting without a safe backstop, just shooting through trees and brush. Hit in the neck, dropped dead right there, totally random and one might think a 1 in a billion chance considering the territory and how few people go there. But such is the reality with bullets. Knowing where they'll land is vitally important.
And lastly I'm curious about the meat. You've shot an animal one evening and left it to cool with the guts in, which according to the hunter education materials provided by our government, and backed up by a great many hunters including Steve Rinella, getting the meat cooled as soon as possible is imperative to extend storage time until refrigeration is available. That means gutting and separating the major portions within half an hour or less if at all possible, though obviously sometimes longer storage becomes necessary, as with a shot too near to dusk in dangerous terrain. The lower temperature evident from the snow on the ground perhaps makes this less concerning... but it seems easy to imagine that an animal that size would retain body heat well above ambient for many hours, left in its whole state.
If meat isn't being considered - I see only a skinned skull in the cabin at the end of the video - then I'm curious as to why not? Are these considered pest animals, to be killed and left in the field? Sorry again for my ignorance, as New Zealand hunting practices are alien to me. I've never heard of such game animals simply being left to rot and feed birds and bugs. Seems not much like a hunt, if this were the case. More like killing for the sake of killing. But perhaps I've missed some crucial information along the way. I don't understand everything you say, my Canadian ears being unfamiliar with some slang.
Last edited:
I grew up in the area being hunted, these are introduced pests that need to be controlled for environmental reasons, you are encouraged to shoot as many as you can and there is a problem with some people only taking old males with good heads- to the point that they ask that you shoot 5 females for every male you shoot.
A old male with a good head is not likely to taste that good, but otherwise the meat is good eating although most don’t bother with it-its a lot easier to shoot a handy deer(another pest species)for its back straps closer to your vehicle if you want some meat.
Ah, well that clears up a lot rather nicely, thank you. Indeed, humans have behaved rather badly when it comes to moving species around (besides ourselves that is). Rats wiping out songbirds in Hawai'i for instance, or their problems with feral goats and pigs. Many other examples abound, like cane toads in Australia obviously, rabbits long before them, and some are very difficult or impossible to remove once established. Several idiots over the past century thought grey squirrels from the East would be cute here on the West Coast. They've been a disaster for local smaller squirrel types and for songbirds, killing more birds than house cats, though cats get all the attention and other idiots continue to feed the squirrels peanuts and other goodies. Education is needed. Thank you for sharing this good information.
ah, late to the party, but that was some good reading an gave alot of food for thought..........
that was a fairly dumb manouver on the ridge , no doubt.
Great Questions and you handled it well.. So hopefully everyoe has learnt one thing from this post, an that is Awesome...
moral of story,,, Come Hunt NZ
that was a fairly dumb manouver on the ridge , no doubt.
Great Questions and you handled it well.. So hopefully everyoe has learnt one thing from this post, an that is Awesome...
moral of story,,, Come Hunt NZ
If you use a 200 yd zero with most "normal" rifles, .270, .30/06 etc, the bullet will drop roughly 8-10" at 300 yds, depending on velocity and specific bullet. If you hold the horizontal crosshair along the top of the back, at that distance the bullet should drop right into the vitals of all but the smallest game animals.
Ah, okay. I'm used to using range cards, derived from Strelok or Chairgun, then confirming various ranges in the field and correcting the cards as necessary. Can't really see myself ranging an animal then using a 'rule of thumb' such as this - with a known set of cartridge characteristics, known scope-over-bore, and known range, placing the bullet within an inch or two becomes a matter of exact crosshair placement, once wind is factored in. Awfully handy these modern calculators. So far they've proven to be rather accurate in their predictions.
