Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics What happened to Leupold?

+1

I've been all over Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and the Dakotas. Hiked in the bitterrroots and the Bob Marshal. I spent a whole summer out there in the early 90's. I know what it's like. I also know you can only cover so much country in a days hunt and that applies here or there. Deer populations are extremely sparse in the wilderness areas of both the Adirondacks and the Catskills. I seriously doubt filling a tag gets much tougher anywhere when you're dealing with deer densities of less than 1 psm in an unbroken, heavily forested 10,000 - 192,000 acre tract of state land. You don't have the option of glassing game from afar and using the modern technology of a laser range finder and pricisely dialable scope to shoot a deer 500 - 1000 yards away across a canyon on the vast majority of state forest land here. You've got to get close because there ain't no way you're going to see or shoot it from afar. On the flip side of that, I've hunted the open farmlands of central NY many times with a slug gun. Sure I saw deer across big crop fields that were far out of slug range. That's hunting and you sure shouldn't expect to be able to shoot every animal right from where you are just because you can see it through a high magnification scope. I'm just not convinced there's much "fair chase" involved when you're bombing animals from distances beyond their ability to detect that they are being hunted and are in danger. Hell, I don't consider shooting woodchucks from 400 yards "hunting" either. It's just shooting/killing woodchucks. Sure you can miss one from 400 yards but until you do they have no clue they'e in mortal danger or that theres even a hunter in the same zip code.

Hmmm, I've never seen any housing developments in any of the designated wilderness, wild forests, state forests or WMA's in NY. I'm pretty goddam sure you haven't either.

Your drivel is making less sense every time you post. First, it's "if you don't hunt the way I do you're not a hunter", then it's some new excuse that you can't get close to an animal because of the conditions, what is next? The point of hunting is to get close without the animal sensing you isn't it? And that doesn't matter if it is 25 yards or 1000 yards. And don't tell me a deer or elk can't see, smell, or sense you at those distances. The longest shot I've personally made on an elk was 700 yards. Just a couple minutes before, a very large 7 pt bull saw me move slightly from farther away (probably 800-900 yards) on the same hillside and ran off at top speed. Since I only had a spike tag in my pocket I concentrated on the spike on the hillside ahead of me. There were even elk on the hillside below me, but it was so steep I could hear them but not see them. Being prepared is what separated this from a sightseeing trip to a hunting trip....

I am thinking you should try plopping your ass into the middle of the 192,000 acre high peaks, 156,000 acre West Canada lake or maybe even the little 112,000 acre Siamese ponds wilderness area and see how long it takes you to walk to the nearest housing development.

Gosh your elk must just be way smarter than our deer. I have a field on the mountainside 850 yards across the valley from me here {measured with rangefinder} I see deer out in that field all the time during the open season. I can go out in my yard and cut wood with my chainsaw, shoot my .30-06, drive my Jeep down the driveway, play with my dogs, you name it, and they won't even stop feeding or look in this direction. I never said anything about not being able to get close because of the conditions either so about now I'm thinking your drivel is getting just as fuggin lame as your reading comprehension.

Different terrain types call for different strategies and different skill sets. It's a good idea to be well-versed in more than one of them.

I suppose if the be all and end all is just killing something for you. Do you put any limits at all as to what technology is used or how far away you can kill something and still consider it fair chase ? Suppose for instance some sort of laser gun is in our future. No bullet drop, no wind drift to contend with. A range finder would be pretty superfluous then because no dialing would be required without drop or wind drift so you can just leave it at home.. Would it still be "fair chase" to situate yourself on a mountain overlooking a vast plain with powerful telescope, spot a deer 10 miles out and smoke it with your ACME super deer blaster laser gun ? Did that deer have a snowballs chance in hell of detecting you ? What if we just develop a personal human cloaking device so that game hasn't a chance of seeing, hearing or smelling you so you can just walk right up to any old buck and bash it's head in with a hammer ? Still fair chase ? How far should it go and at what point do you cease to be a "hunter" and become merely a killer ?

Jordan,
You're the voice of reason. It's refreshing.

It is always interesting to me how people react to being proven wrong on a subject when everyone knows you were wrong. Nothing wrong with being wrong, but there is something to be said, after being proven innaccurate, the proper response would be to admit it, own it, and get on with it and all the onlookers would get on with it as well. The other way to respond is obviously the way BH responded...cloud the issue with more bullcrap and admit nothing. Says all you really need to know if you think about it.

Not going to even take a guess how much they have lost, but just for information sake I was in a new Scheels store yesterday. Huge scope display. Almost every scope brand I have known and several I wasn't familiar with, but NOT ONE LEUPOLD.

Really how amazing how they went from a leader too???.


Lefty C

You have some serious issues to work out ...

You have a tiny mind.

What was I supposed to admit ? That you technology buffs would rather get further and further from being hunters and work dilligently burning up barrels and feverishly twisting turrets rather than having to stalk your game or heaven forbid, run across a buck/bull you just couldn't kill that day ? It almost seems like some of you don't really like to hunt all that much but sure do want to kill stuff and to hell with whether it's sporting or not.

Did we get this one nailed down yet?

Believe it was along the lines of you stating that your home hunting ground was just as rugged and steep as the country GregW and other mountain hunters in the West hunt in.

I never said it was "just as rugged" you perpetually dimwitted twit. What I did say is, and I quote "Admittedly our mountains aren't as big as the rockies but they're plenty steep and covered with dense forest."

Says the guy who’s reading comprehension is so poor, that he though this was a thread about long range hunting.

If your scope doesn’t track correctly..... it doesn’t matter what range you’re shooting critters at.... your scope still doesn’t work the way it was intended, or expected.

If your scope doesn’t retain its zero.... then it doesn’t matter what range you’re shooting critters at.... your scope is defective.

I don’t know why that’s so hard to understand?

There are enough testimonies on here of Leupolds losing zero, not tracking correctly, and randomly schitting the bed..... to make a guy take a closer look at his Leupold.

Why does it have to be one or the other?

I like shooting steel and rocks and such..... my scope needs to work.

I’ve occasionally shot a critter over 1/4 mile away..... my scope needed to work.

I like hunting with a muzzleloader.... and killed a bull last fall with one.... my open-sights had to work.

I’ll even shoot a bow on occasion.... and the sights need to stay where I put them, or I miss.

Whether your scope works or not is the topic of the thread..... not some arbitrary range/hunting vendetta you saw the opportunity to pounce on. Hop off your Uber steep soap-Box, and apologize to some of the quality guys on this thread that you’ve pigeon-holed as long range snobs, and recognize that they’re hunters.... just like you.

My Leupolds work fine. So do my Weavers, Nikons, Bushnells, Redfields and Bausch and Lombs. I have had several Tasco's a couple Bushnells a Simmons and a Sightron fail in one way or another but none on a hunt yet.