Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game The questionable long shot

They are sweet.

stxhunter

thanks it shoots as good as it looks.


jwp

I used the 195 wildcat to take that buck, glad to see I might be able to get them again in a few months. I still have a little over 300 of them though.

"I did find a bobcat while still-hunting at 10:00 AM Sunday morning. I walked up on him and took the shot at 35 yards."





We can stir this bucket all day and it's just gonna keep raising a stench.

I don't care what anyone else does as long as it's legal. You answer to your own sense of ethics, not mine.

As for my own self, I practice enough to know the range and conditions that I can make a killing shot and I work within those limitations. I'm not afraid to pass on any shot that I am not confident with.

However, when I see something I want to shoot and it's within my ability to hit it, I don't dick around trying to get closer or puck around with gadgets. I just shoot the damn thing.

Know (not guess) your limitations, work within them and you'll never know regret.

Don't forget the suitcase with the little trolley wheels to haul all that junk around in... My LRF (acquired just a couple years ago) goes to 400 yards or so. If it doesn't register in strange country, I get closer...

I zero for 200 (more or less), and remember the 8, 3, 2 rule. For my rifles, most will drop 7-8 inches plus or minus at 300 yards, 3X that at 400, and double the last figure thereafter. I don't do varmits, so on big game, this works - "close enough IS good enough!"

Then I shoot the damned thing under 200, if I can manage it.

Basically then, what Eramicus said.

Long range hunting is not for the woods stalker. I am 58 and I get my equipment to where ever I am going it's only an obstacle if you make it one

The sport is called hunting not shooting. Learn how to get closer.

I agree!

It took me a long time to learn that just because I can't/won't do something in the way of hunting and shooting it's no sign that you can't/shouldn't.

BCR

I'm sucked in, I'll comment some more.
Comments that bowhunters do it all the time. Lets just say I'm a bowhunter, over 100 big game kills with compound and recurve over the years. Never did get to a longbow or a stone head though that may happen eventually. But for harvest, if you think you just have to get closer to get one, you are a fool if you think you can do it every time. It simply won't happen. The numbers harvested by bow vs gun are skewed. It can be done, but I'm not dumb enough to grab a bow when I have 1-2 days and need to thin out 3-5 deer or so. I might get some or none with the bow. Simply because you have the same parameters, just because you are within bowrange doesnt' mean you should or could shoot. I still love bowhunting, but these last years I don't have or make the time I used to, and as such rarely grab a bow anymore. Take that however you need to. While I haven't taken a mature buck in over 5 years, I do HAVE to keep the herd in proper parameters and I do love the meat so we harvest. And it IS about the kill and meat for me, not just the hunt.

My standard reply is to the folks that must seperate and divide and are much "holier" than I am in hunting, how much closer do you want me to get? What are you using for a weapon? How close do you get? WTF is your point? Forcing your methods on me? Do you use a bow, or handgun, or is 100 yards close enough? Point being I can't draw the line otehr than being 200% sure of the kill, beyond that who cares really and why should you? I've passed on shots well under 10 yards because it wasn't a sure thing. I watch folks on TV make 30 yard shots on deer with bows all the time, that wouldn't happen here, the deer are gone before the arrow gets there. Speed of sound being about 3 times faster than a fast arrow. And if not gone, they certainly move.

Go define hunting, it means finding game and generally assumed after that shooting it. Doesn't put other parameters on it about what weapon(technically I could define it as finding game and if you decide to shoot it with a weapon and kill it you are murdering it...poor defenseless animal....)what distance etc... simply tells me you are searching for something that you will attempt to kill.

The thing beyond getting closer that I think we SHOULD look into though is performance testing... IE you pass a shooting test before you get a license. Having guided, I've seen more disasters from 100-200 yard shots than I have from ones fartehr out, granted 100-200 is much more common and shoudl have a higher screw up rate, but IMHO, any fool with a gun should be at least 99% at those distances. How folks can screw those shots up is beyond me, other than the fact they take shots they have no business taking and are not 200% sure of. The old mentality of I'm close enough now and if I dont' get lead in the air there isnt' any chance. I'm just now slowly breaking a nephew of that situation, WAIT for the perfect shot and then take that ONE perfect shot. He is much happier lately too.

And this isn't a dis on shorter range shooters, or choice of weapon, simply the point that you ahve to be 200% sure of the shot, and the end result is a dead animal. Beyond that to pick and choose is up to YOU, but not to be forced on ME.

Seperation is how we all die in this sport, seperation is what the antis want. They want the "deer hunters" to agree no need for the AR15, no need for this or that. And if we take this to the end, if all you want folks to do is 100-200 yards or so we really have no need for anything more powerful than the 30-30 or so and no need for things like scopes(damn sure no "sniper" rifles)

Look at the big picture here is all I ask. And then realize folks that ethically take longer shots, generally can shoot a better group at their distance than most can shoot at 200 or 300 yards. Have a better understanding of conditions related to shooting portion of the game and such. Thats where they prefer to spend their efforts.
And thankfully everyone doesn't like the same thing IMHO.

So all you do is hunt and never shoot? Hunting is to search for something and in the game fields once you find it most will shoot. The distance matters not. If you are going to define hunting by distance then at what distance does it cease to be hunting? Perhaps we should go back to Spears will that be close enough.
Why do those that can't condem those that can?

That last statement is not meant as bragging or condemning either, simply we would back your choice to the ends of the earth, what about just a bit of understanding and togetherness here.
JWP, sorry to hijack your quote....
Jeff

Spot on Jeff.... Hunting is personal experience and like you stated we have no problem how any one wishes to hunt, that is his buisness whether it be by bow, handgum or rifle and the distance that one is or is not competent at does not change the fact that it is hunting.

I like the 200% rule. Each of us has a different yardage under given conditions. Mine might be 400 yards. Yours might be 600 or 200. Here is the important piece...you better know what your limit is and not stretch it. That is the tricky part. Maybe you have worked real hard and feel you have "earned" that buck or bull that is just beyond your limits. Easy to say, tough to do, but you have to find a way to put it into your "200% zone". Also of note, your "200% zone" changes with conditions. For example, I am 200% confident to 400 yards under ideal conditions, but start messing with the conditions and my "200% zone" starts shrinking.

I think that most of the hard core shooters out there (and they know who they are) prolly know much better than the weekend warrior where their personal "200% zone" is.

I believe every good hunter should also be a long distance shooter to some degree. The fact is that we never can be absolutely sure that everything will work perfectly even at 50 yards. And it doesn't take many animals long to put distance between themselves and the shooter/hunter even wounded sometimes. Consequently the need to shoot long - even if we hope never to. And then- for those who still use the more traditional methods of rangefinding and judging wind, sometimes an error is made and one cannot know for certain whether a clean miss or wounding hit was made. What to do? Being able to shoot at distances and in wind can be useful - and ethical- if more shooting seems called for. The same idea applies to moving targets.

Rost495 said it well. He's had practice debating this one! :-)

Knowing your limitations is the key. Get out and shoot at longer ranges. If guys did this, they'd learn two things- first, it's easier than you might think if you have some basic gear. Second, it's a whole lot HARDER than the magazines, TV shows, and gunshop cowboys would have you believe!

Get out and do it... it's fun, it'll make you a far better shot at closer ranges, and you'll know for yourself what your limitations are.

Just my humble opinion.

That�s got to be the most ignorant statement ever!!! I took up long-range hunting to be a better all round hunter. It all depends where I�m hunting if I�m going in a area that the shots are long I�ll take a long range set up, if I�m going in to a area that only offers close shots I�ll take one of my sportier weight rifles.

Joe, exactly it's about having more options to choose from

The more options, the more better, as I see it. I think both getting close and shooting far are awesome. I love bowhunting, especially with my recurve. Yet at the same time, I think whacking a critter at 500+ yards is similarly cool. Hopefully one day I'll be good enough to give it a shot.

John you are spot on, Most would just crap if they new how much we had tied up into our equipment to do this right. Not only that the time we spend doing it and money it takes to practice and send rounds down range.

Lucky for me I don�t have to go anywhere to shoot. Off of this bench alone I can get to 630 yards.



And a little bit of the view from that bench I like to call it... THE DEAD ZONE.

I didn't post this to start a war between the long range clan and the short range only sorts.
Like I said, I've found the much closer shots, say 50-200 yds. on a running animal, particularly if ducking in and out of cover far harder to make than the standing 400-600 yd. shot on an undistrubed animal. That's assuming I've got all the time I need to range him, set up a nice solid shooting position and make a very accurate wind call.
I was interesting in how you get closer if you must.
I was interested in how you avoid having to make those running shots. Or, if you do, just how and under what circumstances you take them.
Just for the record, I've killed a few critters at 500 plus yds. I know what that's about. I still practice at the longer ranges. It is fun. It is valuable. There is always the chance that you won't have any other choice.
What I have learned is that I really don't have to have a bipod on my rifle to do them. I don't need a particularly heavy rifle either. But I do need a load that will expand at the range I intend to use it. I do find both the readily adfjustable elevation knob and the laser range finder very helpful. Certain retilces, like the duplex type can also be very useful for this. Especially when time is short.
All I meant to point out is that most of the animals I prefer to take, the four year old plus animals, in the places where I hunt, public land, don't seem to cooperate much when it comes to allowing me to shoot at them at say 400 or 500 yds.
Younger animals yes. But not the older ones.
So the question is, have you found this to be true ? What sort of shots do you find yourself having to take for such animals ? How do you you make them ? What equipment do you use ? E