Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Crippled big game from LR hunters

So I always here all the LR hunting haters talking about all the crippled big game animals walking around and how every year so many have to be put down because of bad shots from LR guys yadda yadda . And many times they say there's like charts or something you can look up and see the proof.
Has anyone ever seen one of these or fish and game analytics or something? Like I'm legit curious because everytime I've asked these people for proof, no link, no whatever to look up ,just "O WHY IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME" .
So. Any actual numbers like they say or ?

Can someone please interpret?

Sock puppets have a diverse language, but let me give you the cliff notes just based on the thread title

If you can't get close enough, you are a bad hunter

In 1990 I believe, the Arizona game and fish commission was only one vote shy of cancelling Archery Elk hunting in Arizona due to the number of elk wounded by bow hunters.
I don't remember the exact figures but it was like 3 elk wounded for every elk recovered. They just could stomach that statistic and i can't really say i blame them.
I suspect there are a fair number of cripples due to guys buying " package" hunting rifles that suddenly make them long range hunters.

" I just spent $10 k at Gunwurks, i can automatically make 1000 yard shots"...

Wrong

This^

Don’t have any field data on live animals - but can point directly to the results of Ridgway, PA long range varmint benchrest silhouette matches - where a winning score is in the low to mid 30s (out of 40) and the average score is in the low 20s. So 2-3 out of four shots are hitting a stationary target between 850-1000 yards (that would be the approximately size of vitals) - from the better shooters. I personally can’t imagine taking a shot at a living animal (that is moving or has the potential to move) at these ranges just so I could brag about how far I killed one. I have way more respect for the animals than I do a “hunter” that would take such a shot. Damn sad really that some need attention so bad that this is something they have to brag about.

The other things is how many of these shooters ever walk out to the distance they shoot to follow up a shot?

PennDog

If you need to be up close to game in order to hit what you're shooting at, you are incapable of properly handling a rifle and you have no business tramping through the woods with a loaded rifle

You are a loose cannon and I don't trust you

I'm not exactly sure what he's asking/saying. Except that there are probably more hunters that get buck fever and wound animals, than the "longrange" hunters do. I'm sure there is no chart showing this as proof, but I've seen it many times. A lot of guys get pretty worked up, when confronted with making a shot on live game animals.

Or if you're too lazy to get close, you shouldn't be in the woods with a loaded rfle.

I remember there was a thing about L.R. hunting about five years back maybe little longer where couple of guys wounded Elk, total of four I believe and a Outfitters guide turned them in and believe it was documented on film as well but edit out of the film that they put up on the Net. Kind of funny in Africa you wound and lose your game that tag is considered used and hunter [bleep] out of luck. Oh well L.R. away.

People who hate LR hunting like trying to talk about how many animals are crippled because of LR hunters

They always talk about proof that you can find

I've never seen anything from fish and game or similar ,in the form charts , studies or some form of analytics that shows numbers of animals crippled by LR hunters or other hunters in general.

Where is this mystical proof LR hunters keep talking about but can never actually provide. If there even is any

This is just another example of numbers without statistics.

A friend of mine put it into a more realistic realm when he said “a million deer is 20 and a billion is 40”


It’s not new to stretch the truth to make a point…

Numbers and statistics can be misleading. My son tracked 2 wounded deer that were shot at less than 200yds with a 6.5 CM. Didn't find either one, does that mean a 6.5 CM sucks for killing deer?

That particular one sounds cursed...

Just how the heck would there be any "charts" to look up when no one is contacting any game biologists to report wounded animals. Just dumb to assume that's there's any solid proof recorded any where.

^This sums it up.

I actually believe that it's caliber/bullet selection and failure of that bullet at long range, loss of energy, velocity falls below minimum FPS to cause upset and sheer apart or expand that causes more issues with wounding than the numbskull behind the trigger. The numbskull actually goes and shoots at long range, practices reading wind/conditions because they can come and brag/post pictures online or be king asshat at the local long distance range. Ballistic apps, Labradars and Xeros further add to the problem, no more math, no more developing your physical dope, punch it in and the device spits out the drop/drift chart. Any bullet can ring steel, punch paper or go thru the imaginary "vitals" at any distance the numbskull chooses if they practice alot. It's when those imaginary "vitals" become flesh and blood where the problem is exacerbated.

Read all of the "bullet failure" threads across the WWW and it soon becomes apparent that the numbskull is actually responsible because they developed their load based on accuracy criteria versus bullet performance criteria and not because they weren't able to actually hit their target, problem is they actually hit what they were aiming at.

How many threads about Berger/Nosler/Hornady/Barnes with malformed bullets, reports of penciling, or expending energy to soon creating craters in the onside shoulders do we read versus success stories where the caliber/bullet performed as it should? The word of mouth phenomenon at its core.

The problem is on this forum and others like it, we hear/read about alot of the failure of this or that stories, but we only read a few of the actual success stories. Facebook is even more of a bad experience collecting disaster.

People don't like to always report the success, not because they are not proud, but because of the internet scouters. Kinda like boom scouters back in the pre-internet days of duck or dove hunting. People to lazy to put in the work mine the data of those who do. Well, that same laziness transfers over to load development, they chose the bullet that they can develop the quickest accurate load with, versus choosing a bullet that is going to give them the best performance over the ranges they may actually have to use that bullet. Then those same people read all the threads or actually ask questions related to this zone or this area and figure where their best chance of seeing the species they are after and apply for that area.

I read it all the time, I consume a lot of information, problem is my health does not allow me to capitalize on all that information.

I can think of three podcasts where the "expert" talks about what they have personally witnessed using Berger hunting bullets and they perform exactly as they were designed when used within the design parameters, but then hearing reports from other hunters about the failures, then when quizzed, it becomes apparent that the bullet was not able to perform because the caliber was too small and didn't carry enough energy or velocity at the extended range.

For every actual posting member here, there are 10+ non-members reading and accumulating the information about their chosen caliber, their chosen rifle platform, their optics, their clothing and their bullet and load selection and the areas they plan to hunt. It is based on choice, not on performance. It's cool to have this or that because all of the other kids are doing it, hell, I have done it.

How many times have you stumbled across information(pins dropped) on Google maps, On-X or any other "hunting" app that are not private. Before the days of apps for hunting, I remember reading about "hunters" using Google maps to search for pins left that were not private and the day of the big duck hunt the pin dropper arrives to several boats being in their honey hole. I was guilty of dropping non private pins all over a lake of the worst areas to setup because of the internet scouters. I even had a boat built to run a particular river channel that a fullsize boat couldn't navigate. Killed alot of ducks before the college kids found a new way to access that pocket. I no longer hunt public for that reason.

This discussion isn't about the actual distance, it's about how lazy the slob is in choosing their equipment, developing their load, fully developing their condition reading skills and picking an area where their chances for seeing game are high, but well beyond the performance of their caliber/bullet and not their actual ability to hit at that distance.

Wounded game is because a lot of the chosen bullet didn't perform, a lot of not reading the conditions properly and maybe a little of "buck fever". Technology and equipment has led us backwards as hunters, the good old days of Kentucky windage and soft mushrooming bullets are gone. It's more about bragging than hunting or feeding your family.

It’s my job to make good shots within the capabilities of my skill and equipment, not to police others. Someone who takes risky shots and doesn’t follow up is a callous, selfish bum, no matter what they shoot or how far. Every shot, unless there’s clear evidence of a clean miss, should be checked out, even if it means a long hard hike.

Have only seen one lost wounded deer on my WMA in years of hunting there, and that hunter worked very hard to recover it. I was dragging out one of my own, so after helping him look for more blood for a bit, I left him to it. Have never found one there dead by bullet or arrow.

For myself I am totally against this thing called long range hunting. Amazing thing about it is I have never read of a bad shot. Seems long range hunter's? always kill with one well placed shot! If they would make a serious attempt to learn to hunt they probably would not have to shoot long range but, what fun is that?

Bottom line is people not accepting responsibility for shots , regardless of distance.
Once the trigger is tripped we own the shot. And many don't accept that, they don't care if they hit the animal , killed it or wounded it.

Many people I meet at the range figure they are long rangers because they have the gear, yet they never get off the bench or take random distance shots, rather they go to each distance progressively.
It does not lead to good shooting practices when it comes to hunting , regardless of distance.
Cat