Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Killing deer at 1000 yards

mart,

Yep, I'd agree with you.

I watched the video these folks promoted, and was not impressed. A bunch of dudes so close to the highway you could hear the cars going by. They puposely set up a location which supported their long range ideals.

They will deny it, but I think most of them would rather back up than take a clean shot.

Let the flames come forth!!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I am 12. My dad was on this website and I saw you all talking. But killing a deer at 1000 yards is a big deal! You don't gotta belittle him. Even I know that! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> You may not aim as well but don't yall think he learned his lesson? He is most likely not going to do that again!

Do u play neopets? This is jack! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

hehehe my dad found out g2g to skool

Well, this IS a long range hunting board I suppose, and I've been staying off of it, or even looking at it much on account of I fall into the camp of those who find the term "long range hunting" to be an oxymoron.

What moved me to post here was Mart's quote. Like Mart I was blown away about six months back when I stumbled on this whole concept, and my reaction was exactly the same of Mart's. I got into a long and ill-considered thread about it on the old Shooterstalk. I just couldn't believe that guys would sit up on a hillside with high powered gear and shoot at deer over in the next county and take themselves seriously.

I'm as impressed and fascinated as the next guy with the fine art of ballistics and long-range precision shooting, I just dunno that such applied against live targets qualifies as "hunting".

Likewise I gotta say I find photos of folks with portable benchrests and the like shooting at way distant game to be tragicomic. Surely if I was an anti-hunter I could get serious mileage out of showing such pics to the previously neutral public.

Case in point, Dan Lilja's website on this topic and his 1100 yard benchrested antelope story (and yes I know Mr Lilja produces excellent products and is very serious about his art)

http://www.riflebarrels.com/articles/longrange_shooting/shooting_hunting.htm

I reckon this is one of them issues where ya either got a problem with it or ya ain't, sorta like Gay marriage or something. Me, I dunno that a situation where the SHOT becomes the challenge is a good idea (as opposed to the oft-quoted bowhunting example where getting in position for the shot is the challenge).

And yeah, I know that there are a million shades of gray and "what-ifs" (like just how long is "long"? and different skill levels yada yada yada) but like most folks and with many moral issues, my opinion on this is visceral and not likely to be swayed by arguments.

On the other hand, this IS a "long-range hunting" board, those long-range guys ain't actually breaking any laws, nor are they getting on the various and sundry "short-to-regular-range" boards and pontificating.

Birdwatcher

Sorry about my son's interjection above (he did kill a whitetail this weekend, but it was at about 100 yards.) I can appreciate the skills necessary to shoot 600 and 1000 yard targets, but those are precision shooting skills--not woodscraft, not stalking, not knowledge of your game, heck, not even being quiet--in short, not hunting. The ethical problem of long range hunting is not just that it robs the sport of all its connection to our past, but the undeniable fact that with the long bullet times of flight required, nobody knows when he lets fly whether he's made a killing shot or a gut shot or just shot off a leg. A deer standing still when the trigger is pulled can take several steps before the bullet gets there (causing a miss) or just one step and move your perfect shot into his guts. The fact you're a long hike away makes it unlikely you'll be able to recover the now wounded animal. And this risk is for what? Bragging rights?

Steve_NO

Your statement (in bold).

"I can appreciate the skills necessary to shoot 600 and 1000 yard targets, but those are precision shooting skills--not woodscraft, not stalking, not knowledge of your game, heck, not even being quiet--in short, not hunting."

Precision shooting skills and "hunting" skill are not mutually exclusive. As one example, knowledge of the game as you state is a requirement for responsible long range hunting...how else does one know the likelyhood of an animal taking a step and therefor being a non-shot situation at long range. Many long range hunters are very familiar with normal animal characteristics and habits. The fact that we're a long way away quite often helps in the "wounded game" scenario. Bear in mind that we all wound animals, the time they live after being wounded is the actual difficulty... Some die immediately after being "wounded" and other live a longer period of time... hunters "wound them to death" in most cases. Being a long way away from the animal eliminates/reduces the "danger" response of most of the animals...they sense no danger... there's no-one nearby and the shot is from a great(er) distance. Shoot them and they often go about their business without significant change and die on their feet or lay down to "take a nap cuz I'm tired all of a sudden" and die.

There are always risks, knowledge and experience reduce the risk(s).

I personally do not hunt at distances over 650 yards but I shoot much further for varmints and practice. I know many folks that hunt at the 1000 yard distances stated here. These responsible folks are not a detriment to hunting once understood.

Many hunt differently, commanding views are the norm, East Coast U.S. is home to many of these folks and if you've ever been over here, there are LOTS of roads nearby... I've archery hunted many times in woodlots small enough and houses close enough that I could watch television while hunting (East Coast suburban hunting). When I'm hunting in the wide open west or northern Canada I hunt as they hunt... I have no problem in that I can't spit to the nearest road. Each area has it's "normal" sphere, learning and accepting this as "area/situation normal" would be a good thing.

I'm not to familiar with the "connection to our past" and how this relates to excluding long range hunting, seems the natural progression.... bare hands, rock, stick, spear, bow and arrow, smoothbore musket, rifles barrels and roundball, conical minnie ball, self contained black power cartridge, ladder sights, telescopic sights. Appears that this is an effort to increase the distance in which a "hunter" can effectively kill the quarry. Why stop at an/some arbitrary distance...who picks the distance... Alley Oop, Daniel Boone, Theodore Roosevelt, Roy Weatherby???

Steve NO, a couple of points.

1) my .338 bullet takes 1.4 seconds to travel 1000 yards. Just how many of these several steps is this deer gonna take?

2) I've seen how elk react to someone talking a little loud from 1400 yards away.

3) If these guys have poor woodsmanship, how do they know where to set up for their shot?

4) My leupold Dot substends 6.4" at 1000 yards with scope on 10X. Looks cool on an elk at that distance <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I thought this subject was to promote Long Range Hunting, hence the tittle. It's fun to watch the ex-spurts berate something when they don't have a clue about what their talking about.

I admire those that shoot targets at 1000 yards.
I admire snipers who can take out an enemy at that distance.
However, if you miss the target well shucks too bad.
If you only gut shoot the hostile or hit the guy standing besides him, mission accomplished.

However one of the commandments of hunting should be that
"thou shall kill cleanly". Even with range finders and windflags it is already tough enough shooting targets @ 800-1000 meters.
Trying that on an noble big game animal is not my idea of fairness. An elk/deer is NOT an enemy or terrorist deserving a gut shot or dismemberment. How long range hunters think they can control wind drift without range flags every 100 yards or so, to be so sure of a 1000 yard shot ??????????
When you fire and the animal runs off, do you guys travel the 1000 meters trying to find where you may have hit him??
How are you going to find the exact spot where you may have hit him trying to find that tiny blood spot or just a few hairs? I find it at times already tough at 200 yards.
Yes, I can imagine the euphoria pulling a shot like that of.
However in my books the risks of wounding are way too high.

And yes a big game animal does cover a number of feet when travelling at slow pace in 1.4 seconds as a poster pointed out that was the time it took his bullet to travel 1000 yards.

Shrike, again your trying to impose your experiences on long range hunters. If someone would do the research on the subject you would have the answers to your questons.

They DO NOT take or advocate shots at moving game. Think about it, the bullet is traveling in excess of the speed of sound. A deer grazing will not be alarmed by the rifle shot (bullet gets there first).

If you learn about their use of sighter shots, you will understand the methodoligy of doping the wind.

These guys are professionals with their game. If its windy, or animals on the move, they pass on the shot and wait for a better opportunity. I don't see long range hunters as clowns road hunting, taking 400 yards shots over the hood of a pickup truck, when having never shot out past 50 yards their entire lives.

Dave, I didn't mean to imply (as I see I did) that shooting skill is not part of hunting. Thank you for pointing that out.
What I don't see in your post (other than a rationalization that all hunters wound animals, so whats the big deal) is a response to the fact that no matter how good a shot you are, or how powerful and high-tech your equipment is, you're launching a projectile with a second or two of flight time, and you have no idea whether your animal is going to move in that time period--or for that matter whether another animal is going to move in front of your bullet--maybe one you haven't even seen, maybe one you don't have a tag for. Even loafing along at a 5 mph walk, a deer goes 14 feet in 2 seconds. Even if he's feeding when you shoot, he's got plenty of time to raise his head and move two feet, just far enough to put your perfect shot in his gut. I don't think you can just ignore that fact and say, well, all shots are wounds, some just kill faster than others.
And somehow I don't think Boone, Roosevelt, or even Roy Weatherby would see hauling the benchrest out of the back of the truck and lobbing rounds at an elk two ridges over to be the logical extension of their hunting efforts. If mortars were legal, would that be the next step?

Agreed, this is a long range hunting board, but I do take exception to the second statement and the implication that everyone would approve if they only knew. The fact is anyone can understand what it takes to make a long-range shot (a good rifle, a good load, and a lot of practice). Lilja claims four inches at 1,000 yards under ideal conditions and I have no reason to doubt him.



Somehow I find this to be a less than a telling argument <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Birdwatcher

Birdwatcher, It's not approval I'm looking for. If you read some of the statements and realized that they were made by someone less informed, kinda gets under your skin after awhile. If were gonna argue the basics, lets have all the data. As far as the ethics are concerned, I don't queston your beliefs, nor am trying to change your opinion. As someone else stated, your either for em or totaly against them, theres no middle ground.



If were gonna discuss long range hunting lets stick to the facts. A debate of the process and procedures they employ is fine.

Years ago had an interesting situation occur while I was in the military. We were trying to accomplish something which some senior officers were totaly against. They thought they had just reasons, and some of their concerns were indeed valid. Scheduled a meeting with all the base higher command, base commander, wing commander, OPS commander, wing saftey, and a few others. The DCM was on "our side". We're all sitting around this table, the DCM walks in, and makes the statement that we're not going to discuss why we can't accomplish what we're trying to do, we're there to figure out how to make it happen! There was no doubt about the outcome of the metting. It was smooth sailing from that point on.



Lets try to help someone accomplish their goal. Let them make the judgement if this type of hunting is "ethical" in their eyes.





As for the wind, they dial in short of their intended target, take a sighter shot using a spotter, and confirm their wind correction.

Steve_No



Rationalizing the "all hunters wound animals" was not what I was after... What I was saying it that we shoot animals and they die, some quickly and others not so quickly. Sometimes at long(er) ranges they don't even know they've been "killed" for a few long seconds....The same shot at close range would/might well send the animal scampering for cover and result in a "wounded" critter thus seemingly requiring a follow-up shot. It's a bit of a different ball game at long(er) ranges.



Again... I do not hunt game animals at distances beyond 650 yards... Just want to make that clear. I do however know about shooting them further.



You are ignoring several statements or trying to make things un-necessarily difficult. Most/Many of us have many hours experience watching and studying the animals we shoot. Remember that we use good optics and watch large areas of land. We see many deer/whatever and have hours to watch and study them in their natural state...not in the close range "danger close by" mode. They telegraph their intentions just as most other critters, if they're jumpy and nervous, it's easily seen. When they calmly feed there's a pattern. The critters are individuals and each is a bit different in their timing and demeanor but they're not complete mysteries. They're grazers and browsers and often stand for long minutes eating, looking around seemingly enjoying themselves, unhurried. Shooting at walking, trotting, running deer is generally not done.



1 mile per hour = 1.44 feet per second. 5 mph = 14.4 feet in 2 seconds... you're correct and I'm impressed as usually these type responses are made by folks that don't know how to calculate this type of thing... often they just "fling" a number in for effect. Thanks for not doing so.



Not all long range hunters use benches (the picture earlier in this thread of a bench setup is one method), neither do all long range hunters fire "spotter rounds". There are various techniques and methods, some are not unlike military sniper and this is a tried and true method but the limitations are there must be a first round kill shot... A second shot is anticipated but never thought of as the norm so the conditions must be correct for the shooter.



Long range in NOT the only method used by "Long Range" hunters, it's a tool and used as needed/desired.



Dismissing Long Range Hunters as irresponsible is going off a little early. We generally know our own limitations and the accuracy and precision of our equipment and personal marksmanship skills. Shooting outside the envelope is generally not done and there is an understanding (personal limitation) of the maximum distance and greatest normal error factor. Quickly, if I have a .5 MOA precision rifle and a 1 MOA field accuracy with that rifle I can add a "what if" buffer of 1 MOA and feel very confident that I can cleanly hit anything up to 2 MOA. Kill Zone size is not a hard fast size, on a large deer 12 inches is what I consider (I will not debate this issue) the kill zone. I know that this 12 inches equals 2 MOA at 600 yards and I'm confident that the 1 MOA accuracy and 1 MOA buffer is sufficient for me to kill that deer at 600 yards when I choose to shoot based on my acceptable conditions. Often the reply is... what about movement, wind, etc, etc... These and other things are considered before the shot and are individual limitations, I elect when to shoot, not the critter or some other hunter. We are still in complete control of the situation as far the decision to shoot or not. The animal can move and the wind can gust and a bird can fly into the path of the projectile (seen it happen on a range) but the likelihood of these things/event (minus that bird thing) can be

minimized though experience. Experience most often gained at closer ranges... we don't automatically start at 650 or 1000 or 1500 yards... we learn and experience our way out to our personal limit(s) through mentorship, range time and hunting.



I have no problem with anyone that won't or can't accept hunting as it's done by some folks, long range in this case. But a sound background and/or general understanding of the concepts help to eliminate some of the "myths" that abound. We're not much different than any other group of hunters, we use different techniques sometimes but we're not any less knowledgeable or responsible as a whole than any other group of knowledgeable and responsible hunters...



Too long already... sorry. We can chat again later.



(edited for formatting)

AJ... Preach? Naah I thought I WAS stating facts, it IS relevant that a great many react upon learning of the concept with stunned disbelief (as I did), and images of hunting off of a bench rest WOULD look ludicrous to the general public. I posted in response to someone who's reaction was exactly like my own a few months back, nothing more.

And then I replied to the incorrect implication that regular folks just couldn't understand (a common but fallacious pro-LR argument).

'Twas I who suggested there ain't no middle ground here, its visceral, either ya get it or ya don't.

I don't mind shutting TFU, most times such is only polite after all. I gotta tell you though, relating the challenge of LR killing of game to having a "can-do" attitude to overcoming problems only reinforces the notion that the challenge of LR lies mostly in the skill and equipment required to make the shot itself.

Ya I know a certain amount of "fieldcraft" is inolved in setting up over a place where game is likely to appear in the open and not move much, but certainly not more so than getting within a much lesser range.

I will readily concede that the wind has always seemed to me to be an exceedingly fickle entity, especially over long range and on the scale of a few mph, even given a short interval between a spotter shot and a serious shot. Especially given the fact a livng creature one has a responsibility to kill cleanly lies at the other end of all those yards. But perhaps I am uninformed.

With that, unless specifically addressed, I will gracefully "STFU'

Birdwatcher

BirdWtcher, On what is thise statement based?

Dave, I never used the word "irresponsible" or talked about acceptance of other people's methods of killing animals. In fact I said, more or less, whatever blows your skirt up is fine for you. What I don't accept is the "we're experts and you peons just don't get it" attitude which sort of pervades the arguments by the over-the-horizon boys when the rather obvious ethical problems with their method are pointed out. Not to get into a "mine is bigger than yours" exchange, but I started shooting service rifle matches which require firing at 600 yards with iron sights back when Nixon was president, so I really don't need an explanation of the ins and outs of shooting a far piece out there. I'll accept that you and some others study your animals patiently, and that you really can predict, to a certainty which makes you comfortable, what a wild animal is going to do in the next two seconds. I also understand your point that you don't shoot big game over 650 yards and are really just making the case for others. But if you shoot at that range, you know how hard it is to dope the wind at nearly twice that range. And I suppose since this neck of the forum is for LR shooters, those of us who don't subscribe to the premises of LR shooting should just STFU and leave you to talk among yourselves. But I've enjoyed talking with you. Regards, Steve

Birdwatcher, Steve, My comments were not aimed at you specifically, and with out a doubt were heavy handed. My intention is that with your experiences we can discuss the logistics of long range hunting. As in Steve's case, he has experience with shooting at long ranges under less than perfect conditions (match conditions). So we have an understanding that it takes a talented individual to pursue this style of hunting. Might not be your or my cup of tea, but don't see a reason to crash their party.

Ringman... the question of long range hunting comes down to two issues..

1) The possibiility of making quick-killing shots on game at extreme ranges. Opinions differ, even among experienced long range riflemen.

2) The other is the far more nebulous question of class, or ethics or whatever you want to call it. All would agree that getting closer before shooting places a proportionately greater emphasis on stealth, all would also agree that shooting from farther away requires proportionately less stealth and also makes the shot inherently more difficult (all else being equal). Hunting the way I understand it places an emphasis on the stalk, such that the shot should ideally be a slam dunk, among the least challenging parts of the experience.

Note here I did not say anywhere "this should be illegal", we pro-gun types have enough enemies already. But I think you would concede it would be a public relations disaster if your local fish and game posted pictures of guys with bench rests plugging elk at 1,000 yards.

A second way of interpreting your question would be do I think that animals have "rights". No, but we as sentinent beings endowed with reason and judgement by our Creator do have a responsibility to act with class. Would I sit up on a hillside and shoot a mule deer 1,000 yards away even given I had the rifle, the ammo and the practice? (as well as a convenient range flag previously set out in the meadow <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> )

Nope. To quote a Brit "that just wouldn't be cricket old boy, now would it".

Shutting the heck up again

Birdwatcher

Steve_NO



Sorry if I came across in a portion of my earlier post as harsh... not my intent.



The "irresponsible" portion was more or less directed at readers in general and not directly toward anything you directly stated (as I recall).





I also shot High Power for a while while stationed at Camp Pendleton, CA. Had some fine folks to shoot with and learn from. I stopped competing for many years as the Navy moved me around a lot but in the late 1990's I was asked to compete for a few "new" matches. I threw these few items onto the internet as a bit of a validity offering.



http://www.the-king-family.com/DaveMarksmanship.html



As a general statement.



From our viewpoint (Long Range Hunting) we are nearly always immediately classified as "irresponsible" "poke and hope" "lead flinging" "hail mary" types... This seems to be the case as many hunters know and have seen folks "let one fly" at a critter in a desperate attempt to kill far beyond their capability and understanding. We unjustly suffer from this stereotype and often any attempt to turn aside this view is rebuffed as "some psychological problem with you guys" as a "real hunter" would never do that.



Steve_No and others have experience at NRA High Power rifle competitions, and so do many Long Range Hunters (myself included). Just as some folks simply can't believe a shooter using "iron" sights can hit a bullseye at 600 or 1000 yards with an M1 Garand/M14/M16/bolt rifle others won't believe another group of folks can reliably kill animals at those same/similar (and further) distances. Once actually show the tools, techniques and having grasped the basic concepts some of these same non-believers often have a change of heart.



I know about the wind, it's a constant crutch and/or stumbling block set in our paths, used as either a reason LRH can't be done or as a limiter for actual LRHunters.



I'm sorry there are folks that can't and won't accept that there is a group of responsible hunters shooting game animals further than the general hunting populace but I see how this stereotype is formed. Many of the true LRHunters spend hours trying to overcome this stumbling block and many folks come to understand and believe, others witness one "long range" event by someone with "no business shooting at a critter that far away" and never get beyond that.



All-in-all we're likeable, common folks with a quirk about marksmanship. We put forth a bit more practice and critter observation than many but not all and have found a niche.



(edited for spelling)

Birdwatcher, you forgot my second requirement. Without a 1/2" bright red diamond to aim at, I can't hit the broad side of a barn from the inside <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ever try to velcro one of theese puppies to the side of an elk while he's sleepin!!!!

Merry Christmas to All!!!!

Al