- Location
- AB foothills
Mumptia said:Wish I could see your face as you were typing thatLOL
The puke smiley is gone, it was the best I could do on such short notice
Super Long Range Hunting
- Thread starter X-man
- Start date
The puke smiley is gone, it was the best I could do on such short notice
Blindside got a time out for fighting with wrong way. So did wrong way.
And guys - if i won't let you be insulting to people when they're here, i sure ain't gonna let you do it behind their back You'll have to wait a couple of weeks to bug him again.
And guys - if i won't let you be insulting to people when they're here, i sure ain't gonna let you do it behind their back
You'll have to wait a couple of weeks to bug him again.
canadian hunter312
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Brant County
shooting at longer ranges has a higher risk factor for wounding an animal so i would say that longer shots likely cause more wounded animals than shots at shorter ranges.
myself, i prefer to use a bow to get the ticker pumpin
myself, i prefer to use a bow to get the ticker pumpin
canadian hunter312 said:shooting at longer ranges has a higher risk factor for wounding an animal so i would say that longer shots likely cause more wounded animals than shots at shorter ranges.
myself, i prefer to use a bow to get the ticker pumpin
I just can't agree with that comment. Shooting at longer ranges than your skill level will likely cause a wounded animal is more correct. I know some local hunters that 200 meters is a long shot in terms of their skills. I also know some rather talented one guy guys who have thousands of rounds behind their rifle and will shoot better at 500 meters than some do at 100m. As noted before....a man's got to know his limitations. There is no definition of long range. For some it is 150m for some it is 700m. Some "hunters" don't even confirm their rifles zeros, practice or even maintain their rifles. Heck if I had a dollar for each visit by a hunter when I work at a gun shop with a rifle that would not work.....and low and behold, it was so dirty, rusted and in crap shape.
As a note, I use the pie plate test with my son. The distance that he can put all five rounds while shooting in various field positions and place them in pie plate, is his maximum engagement range. I think we would be surprised and disturbed by the results of a similar test if we all gave it a crack. Try it yourself sometimes....especially if you just place the pie plate down with having a known distance to the target. Some peoples range will be surprisingly short while some others who practice and train might have a significantly longer distance.....
My 2 cents...
Cheers
Jeff
And THAT is what we should hammer home to newbies - everytime someone talks about a 'long shot' remind newbs to do the pie plate test before trying. And that pie plates at the range DO NOT count, the woods is different.
IF someone can get into their feild togs, hike to a point and put five out of five in the plate at 500, 600 and 700 ish yards (never make 'em exact
) then they're good out to that range. The only other thing they have to think about is animal retreival, and being able to pin point the spot where they hit the animal on the ground so they can start tracking. Can you find the animal, can you get it out once you do - those are also things you have to think about before pulling the trigger.
truer words were never spoken.... I like all my animals to fall near the road.. and for that, I don't need a 338 Lapua Mag. I shot a deer in a bog this year. I'm getting old and my ankle troubles me... I'll rethink the scenario the next time....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheus32
Try it yourself sometimes....especially if you just place the pie plate down with having a known distance to the target. Some peoples range will be surprisingly short while some others who practice and train might have a significantly longer distance.....
My 2 cents...
Cheers
Jeff
LMFAO, that was funny... too bad hairpie doesnt come with a plate...
Originally Posted by Morpheus32
Try it yourself sometimes....especially if you just place the pie plate down with having a known distance to the target. Some peoples range will be surprisingly short while some others who practice and train might have a significantly longer distance.....
My 2 cents...
Cheers
Jeff
Mr.4x4 said:Sounds good to me !! any excuse to eat some pie to get the all important pie plate
LMFAO, that was funny... too bad hairpie doesnt come with a plate
...
X-Man, you are being contradictory to the avatar (a US Marine) that you are displaying. The avatar represents a Marine fraternity whose members have worked very hard to achieve and maintain the ability to reach out and touch (in the case of this discussion here, critters) long distance and the pride that goes along with that hard earned MOS. I respect your right to your views and beliefs but by putting down the ability of individuals that have earned the skill and/or practice of long range marksmanship while displaying this avatar, is not giving the respect to the fraternity that it is due . I would politely suggest maybe that you choose and display a new avatar that does not advocate long marksmanship and is more inline with the views and beliefs that you hold.Nuff Said
Well - in fairness mc you can't really compare the two. A sniper can afford a slightly 'marginal' shot that may wind up wounding the target instead of killing. As hunters, we tend to look for only those shots with a very high likelyhood of an instant kill.
Different situation.
Different situation.
Those who feel stalking up close is the only right way to hunt have never gone after Pronghorn on baldass prairie that is choc full of prickly pear. Their eyes are compared to 8x binoculars and when the herds move their eyes are everywhere. Decoys work but you are asking for huge trouble in rifle season. Long shots from the ground are at many times the only option. I've never had to shoot a deer past 100yds. But from a good position I wouldn't hesitate to take a long one. I burn a lot of ammo at the range with paper to 300 and silhouettes to 500. To each his own, it's your time and money, enjoy.
MC One Shot said:
Nuff Said
Read what I wrote! If you put in the trigger time and can take an animal cleanly at long range, I've got no problem with it! I personally fire and load thousands of rounds every year and have made some exceptionally long shots. Please high light for me the post where I denigrated snipers? I know several and have the highest respect for them and their skills. Two of Canada's finest, and both of which broke the record held by Gny. Sgt. Carlos Hathcock during Op Anaconda were also fellow Newfoundlanders. I have never, nor will I ever say one negative thing about our servicemen or women, or those of our allies...well, maybe the French (France, not Quebec!
) All kidding aside, dude, don't go putting words in my mouth, I'm quite capable of doing that myself!Back to the topic at hand; my personal feeling and preference when hunting big game, (and since I live in Newfoundland that is limited to Moose, Caribou and Black Bear,) is to get as close as possible before pulling the trigger. This tends to negate the biggest variable Newfoundland hunters face when shooting. WIND!!!
For those who have never hunted the Rock, Wind is our constant companion here in Newfoundland, (the wind speed required for Environment Canada to issue a Wind Warning on the Rock is 10 Km/h higher than for the rest of Canada!) and unless you get enough trigger time in under real world field condtions, you're going to miss quite a bit if you shoot at ranges much beyond 200-300 yards...unless you're lucky enough to enjoy one of our all too rare "calm" days, at least relatively speaking. Shooting long distance in typical Newfoundland wind conditions is nothing to worry about, if you're shooting at paper, but of definite concern if you're shooting at a live animal.
Hunting in the Western provinces is a different kettle of fish. Obviously, when hunting animals such as Antelope, ranges are going to be greater on average than that say for a eastern woods bear hunt. Different territory, different terrain and different circumstances that put different demands upon the hunter.
My original concern was for the welfare of the animals we hunt, as well as the potential problems that may be created when impressionable newbies read articles in hunting mags about shooting deer at 800 yards. The writer in question may have 30 years experience shooting at those distances and have fired tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of rounds during his career to develop those shooting skills. He has put in the trigger time to develop those skills.
However, new hunters or relatively inexperienced hunters have not, yet the impression they take away from some of those articles is that killing an animal at 800 yards isn't that hard to do. So off they go with their Remington 710 and their box of Winchester Power Points....That said, I'll be keeping my Avatar as is. If you don't like it, tough!
Hunting Ethics is something that each individual hunter has to develop for himself. Obviously, as individuals, that standard is going to be different.
Here are two quotes I posted earlier:
Jose Ortega y Gasset also had strong feelings concerning the use of modern high technology when it came to hunting. I'm posting these here, not to ruffle any feathers, but to simply put his position out there. It may help some readers more clearly delineate their own personal code of ethics. Some of what he says I agree with, other stuff I do not. Again, its up to each individual to decide for himself...
As I have said, if you put in the trigger time to develop the skills necessary to kill game cleanly at long ranges, then I believe you to be an ethical hunter. However, if you choose not to develop those skills and yet still choose to shoot at live animals that are at ranges far beyond your skill level, knowing that there is a very good chance that a consequence of your actions will be a wounded and lost animal, its a whole different ball game. I like Foxer's earlier post about the pie plates and each hunter limiting himself to the distance he can consistently hit that pie plate target at.
Jose Ortega y Gasset. 1942 (1985 ed.). "Meditations on
Hunting".
Parker-Hale Mike
CGN Regular
- Location
- Beautiful Victoria
X-man, I am sorry. I interpreted your post as though you were chucking feces at a friend of mine. As far as impressionable newbies that read his articles, the same can be said for an article on anything extreme, how about skiing, motocross, drag racing, mountain climbing or even mountain biking, you can write an article on damn near anything and some idiot who doesn't have the skillset to accomplish what is being written about is going to attempt it...not much you can do about it. Watch the tv show "Real TV' you will see at least a dozen Darwin award winners in every episode.
parker-hale mike said:
No problem Mike, in actuality, Ian is one of the few gun writers currently active that I do have a genuine fondness for, another is Mike Venturino. It was Ian and Bryce Towsley that actually got me to go buy my first "performance" rifle back in 1990...a Remington 700VS in .308 Win. After a trigger job and a few tweaks I fell in love...still have the rifle today and it remains one of my most accurate rifles. Not a light weight by any means, I carried that rifle on many a Caribou and Moose hunt. It and my own handloads never let me down. My brother and a couple of my hunting buddies still pester me to sell it to them. It is a genuine .2"'s rifle.
"X-man" I enjoyed your last post and the quotes from some of historys best writers. It has a completely different tone and direction than that of your original post. Although I still feel the Ethical and Moral Dogma coming through strong and your interpretation and use of many of those quotes is subjective to say the least!
I feel the urge to reprint your original post for comparison. It seems to me that you have altered the focus and message more than a little.
I feel the urge to reprint your original post for comparison. It seems to me that you have altered the focus and message more than a little.
X-man said:Over the past couple of years, I'm sure we've all seen and read hunting/gun mag articles dealing with super long range hunting. Guys/writers bragging about shooting deer, antelope, goats, etc...in excess of 500 yards...often at much further ranges. The issue was brought to the fore once again in the past two issues of North American Hunter Magazine. Writer Ian McMurchy wrote about a cull hunt where he and a companion were shooting at 600-700+ yards. A reader called him to task in the next issue, McMurchy got his back up and defended his actions.
I've seen far too many wounded animals this past hunting season to accept any such justification. I know damn well that newbie hunters and those that should have better common sense are reading those articles, going up and buying themselves the latest sooper-dooper magnum and then emptying it in the general direction of a big game animal a mile away!
Now we're seeing new hunters, etc...trying to use magnum calibers as a replacement for developing stalking skills.
For the guys who want to take those super long shots, take up bench rest or service rifle and "kill" paper! Don't get your jollies shooting at distant live targets that you can barely see in your scope, simply because the law says you can. Develop a code of personal ethics and either stalk closer or pass!
I'll grudgingly grant your point Bigredd, but in my defence the initial post was written in anger after running into a brick wall with our local DNR, while also angry over the needless suffering of a big game animal. I'll hope you'll forgive me.
But the core of my message remains the same. For the most part, I don't see too many experienced hunters attempting to shoot Moose/Caribou at 1000 yards, I have seen a number of young/new hunters attempt shots that were well beyond their skill level or that of their equipment.
Hunting and shooting is like any other hobby, sport, etc...there are always fads and guys willing to jump on the next popular bandwagon. One of those bandwagons just happens to be super-long range hunting. I'm sure that there were a small core of dedicated long-range hunters who have been practicing their craft for decades (and I'm not attacking that facet of the sport), but where were all the articles in hunting magazines 10-20-30 years ago on the same subject? The rifles and technology existed back then, but such activities weren't discussed, nor encouraged.
Over the past 6-7 years, however, there have been a growing number of such articles finally seeing print. My concern is that new hunters and/or relatively inexperienced hunters are reading these articles and then going out and trying to emulate the writer, without developing the necessary shooting skills or necessary judgement of when and where to shoot. That comes from practice and experience. These are the same things that will eventually help each new hunter develop their own code of personal ethics. Again, I still stand by my assertion that if you don't have the skills to make the shot, pass or stalk closer.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, just the ones I've personally discovered on my journey to become what I believe to be an ethical hunter. Sure, that makes what I say a little biased and most definitely subjective, but I'm sure when you step back and consider your own comments, the same can be said of yours. As was discussed previously, hunting Moose in Newfoundland tuckamores most definitely puts different demands on the individual hunter than say the antelope hunter in the badlands of Alberta. However, when it is all said and done, we're all hunters and we should all share the same desire to protect our sport.
A healthy debate and a free exchange of ideas, personal views and experiences is critical for us all to grow as individual hunters and to allow us to be able to view an argument from all sides. As my mother was so fond of saying when a disagreement broke out between us boys, "...there's three sides to every argument, his side, your side and somewhere in the middle, the truth!"
but in my defence the initial post was written in anger after running into a brick wall with our local DNR, while also angry over the needless suffering of a big game animal. I'll hope you'll forgive me. But the core of my message remains the same. For the most part, I don't see too many experienced hunters attempting to shoot Moose/Caribou at 1000 yards, I have seen a number of young/new hunters attempt shots that were well beyond their skill level or that of their equipment.
Hunting and shooting is like any other hobby, sport, etc...there are always fads and guys willing to jump on the next popular bandwagon. One of those bandwagons just happens to be super-long range hunting. I'm sure that there were a small core of dedicated long-range hunters who have been practicing their craft for decades (and I'm not attacking that facet of the sport), but where were all the articles in hunting magazines 10-20-30 years ago on the same subject? The rifles and technology existed back then, but such activities weren't discussed, nor encouraged.
Over the past 6-7 years, however, there have been a growing number of such articles finally seeing print. My concern is that new hunters and/or relatively inexperienced hunters are reading these articles and then going out and trying to emulate the writer, without developing the necessary shooting skills or necessary judgement of when and where to shoot. That comes from practice and experience. These are the same things that will eventually help each new hunter develop their own code of personal ethics. Again, I still stand by my assertion that if you don't have the skills to make the shot, pass or stalk closer.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, just the ones I've personally discovered on my journey to become what I believe to be an ethical hunter. Sure, that makes what I say a little biased and most definitely subjective, but I'm sure when you step back and consider your own comments, the same can be said of yours.
As was discussed previously, hunting Moose in Newfoundland tuckamores most definitely puts different demands on the individual hunter than say the antelope hunter in the badlands of Alberta. However, when it is all said and done, we're all hunters and we should all share the same desire to protect our sport. A healthy debate and a free exchange of ideas, personal views and experiences is critical for us all to grow as individual hunters and to allow us to be able to view an argument from all sides. As my mother was so fond of saying when a disagreement broke out between us boys, "...there's three sides to every argument, his side, your side and somewhere in the middle, the truth!"
