Wouldja?
Couldja?
Shouldja?

"I know this guy..."

...who shall remain nameless, but he talks up a good story about how HE would shoot at an ELK at 500-yards. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

I've offered to take him out and paste a paper plate on a stump and laser-range it at 500-yards just to see if he can do it.
I think he should run in place for a minute, THEN try it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

What do you guys say about this?

I would, absolultely.............if conditions were right. If you see elk at 500 yards you can save the paper plate for your supper!

Heck, if I can hit a steel gong at 500 yards with an iron sighted FN FAL shooting 1980's surplus ammo without a benchrest then why can I not do it with...ah, nevermind.....................................

I think there are guys that can do it. But it has nothing to do with hunting and I feel it is one of the most un-ethical things being done, this long range shooting at game animals. There is a long range section on this site, I seldom go into it for it'll only enrage me. People that do that stuff care not one bit about the animals they hunt, they only want to stroke their egos by letting everyone know they did it. I believe that they are a black mark on hunting. Mike, you've opened a can of worme that never get settled and nobody changes their mind about it. They like to call it long range hunting but it truth it has nothing to do with hunting, it's shooting and nothing else. But with these guy's, the target bleeds. What I find with these guys is that they find nothing un-ethical so long as its legal. This is my last post on this subject. I'll only get angry.

donfisher,
You, sir, are smoking crack!!!!!!
If you are only comfortable shooting game at 50 yards or less with a HIGH power rifle...........well, then have at it!

No problem with the right gear. A bi-pod, a range finder, and enough gun. Some pratcice couldn't hurt either. Check out the thread going on now in General Big Game Hunting. Deer Camp and Ego or something. Whooo it got a little hot.

If you had the right caliber, rifle setup and range, by all means take a 500 yard shot at an elk.
A friend of mine takes long shots all the time at deer, and well he wacked an elk that scored 397 at well over 400 yards. Was he unethical? HECK NO!! His gun is set up for long shots and the caliber bullet choice is well capible of making such a long shot. Plus with knowing the range and having a solid rest, its like being at the range.
We (my buddy and myself) have discussed this numerous times, and it all comes down to this. Ego (with him at least) plays no part in his long range shooting. What does is his chance of success. He says the farther I can shoot safely the better chance I have of taking a trophy class animal. Sometimes a 500 yard shot is all you have and you have to choose. Can I safely take a shot and cleanly take that animal? If I can, but decide to not take him because of the distance, am I confident in being able find him again closer? Sometimes 500 is all you have and those are some questions you have to ask. If bone is not important and meat is, then by all means pass him up and try for a better shot.
Am I saying shoot a elk at 500 with a 243? In no way, its not fair to the animal to have to suffer. What I am saying is if you have a 300 win mag (for example) that is more than capable, and you are confident, have a steady rest, and know the distance and have practiced, there is no reason why you should not take the shot. And in no way is that unethical.
I just switched to a 7 mag, and I personally would not take that shot. Not because my 7 is not capable, but because it is new to me and I don't know the rifle well enough to make those shots.
Common sense is important when making those long shots. Some people don't have that, but some do. Where do you fit in?

Kique

WHOA! Didn't know I'd hit such a nerve here.
I think missing a gong at long-distance is fine.
Not making a perfect shot on the animal is not fine.

Somehow, 300-yards doesn't seem unethical, but adding 200-yards to that seems 'wrong'.
What happens in the extra 200-yards that would make a shot go bad?

DonFisher, Ditto on the smoking crack. I guess the bull that I killed last year at 782 lasered yards, which I might add, had front wheel blown off by an "Ethical Hunter", at 75 yrds. Which is ethical, and which is unethical. Just because you cant shoot further then you can throw rocks, dont knock us that can. I smell troll [bleep] all over this one.

I'm thinking that most people ( me included ) couldn't do it.
Some expert shots can IF the conditions are right.
There aren't too many places in WA STATE to make a shot like this, and inclement weather would seemingly throw a shot off at much more than a couple hundred yards.

I'm interested in what conditions you guys have made the 500+ yard shots...

TOBY, it's great that you made an extremely long hunting shot, but I'm wondering what the weather and terrain were like when you did it.

Please don't throw "troll [bleep]" on the thread.
I'm trying to get good information.
Thanks. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

500 yards is past my abuility to place a perfect shot the first shot unless everything is perfect,which it never seems to be..I passed on two bulls,the closest after coming back with the rangefinder,was 393 yards downhill.They look so little even at 9X and with a slight wind,I decided to pass.

I came back out of curiousity in the spring and set up a freezer box in the same place.No wind that day and I wasn't huffin and puffin, and took a few with the .300 Win Mag with a steady rest, and I probably would have hit it but thats not good enough for me with a cliff just yards away from where they were.Getting to old to be chasing Elk down hill.

It all worked out two days later but it had my curiousity if I could hit it with the first shot being a leathal hit.I guess I will never know with the wind of that day and I did the right thing for me.

Jayco

That's the kind of information I was looking for.

+ 10,000 <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />
----Before you light the flamethrowers read EXACTLY WHAT I RESPONDED TO.

I agree fully. I've been in the exact circumstances imagined here: last day, sundown and sitting at the high end of a big Colorado park when out of the timber came four cows and a nice 5x5 bull. He stopped at __yds, turned broadside and grazed.

By then I was laying prone with rifle over my pack. The hunting part put me in position; then it was time to use the equipment I had for just such a scenario.

I was at the bottom of the range by 3 am with paniers full of elk meat. It was that shot or no shot.

I hunted Elk on large lease. I was helping another group of hunters after I had taken my Elk. On guy who supposedly was an experienced hunter spined a cow elk shooting offhand at 90yds shooting at a bull. He and other hunters missed at least a half dozen other shots under 200yds at other Elk. One brought a 270
Winchester and had to shoot an Elk 5 times before it dropped.
I've shot 2 Elk. My first we spotted while walking a trail. We stalked up an adjoining hill for a several hundred yards, mostly up. I found a tree that had a very comfortable "Y" shaped branch that provided a comfortable rest. I took the time to control my breathing and squeeze off a shot. My first shot put him down.
My second Elk was again spotted while going down a trail. It was 2 separate bulls. This time I had a bipod and stalked as close as I could but could tell they were about to bolt. I took as much time as I could but my guide was whispering to shoot before they took off. My first shot dropped him on the spot.
The first time I had a 338 Win mag shooting 225gr Accubonds. I'd shot the rifle to 300yds at the range and it had shot sub 1 1/2" groups at 300yds with that load, I had the trajectories to 600yds on a range card with the rifle. My second Elk was taken with a 300 Ultra Mag shooting 200gr Accubonds and my Scope had a TDS reticle. With the load I was using it was sighted dead on at 200yds and the 2nd TDS bar was dead on at 300yds. Again this rifle shot sub 1 1/2" groups at 300yds with the load I was shooting.
I was one of the few hunters on this lease that have dropped 2 Elk with 2 shots. My first Elk was lasered at 511yds and the 2nd at 536yds. Are you telling me that the other hunters are more ethical hunters because they did their lousy shooting within a couple hundred yards?............................DJ

As long as the shooter is capable and conditions are correct, no issue.

What I have more of an issue with is most folks shooting past 200.

Lets say you have a 300 yard shot, a norther is blowing, where do you aim? Most don't even consider wind which will start to get you at 200 and can "kill" ya at 300 and beyond.

I ask about 300 yard wind drift in my hunter education classes. Most have NO clue. I get from 1 inch to 2 feet. Those folks have no business.

My longest shot is quite a bit beyond 500 and was 2 shots, 2 hits. Both killing. No big deal but I have lots of practice, experience and great conditions. There are times where I won't shoot at 100 for various reasons...

Jeff

I should add that's why I made a .340 Wby and I shoot out to 500 yds regularly and know the drop of my load at all distances to that point. The scenario above was not even my most difficult shot at a bull; that one came with the animal a lot closer. I'm not saying you need a cartridge like that for most elk huinting but there's no denying it's a good one if one can take advantage of what it offers.

It is probably true most cannot do it - shoot long - and that's most likely because they don't have the equipment for it or practice for it or both but don't make blanket or ethical judgements about others doing it if they are capable.

At 500 yards plus it becomes hard for me to quickly decide if what I'm looking at is what I want to kill. A trophy bull is easy to tell, as is an antlerless elk, but is that raghorn bull legal, or is that a nice big cow or a yearling? A good pair of binocs and a steady rest is very important at those ranges.

I've taken two elk at 400+. Bull at 440 (lasered) took .270 150gr Partition broadside through both lungs, rocked and took another 3 steps. #2 spined him and that was it. Cow broadside at 410 was a bang flop.

My brother took his first bull at 535 with a 165gr Partition out of a 30-06. One shot through the top of the heart. I myself would have passed the shot because I couldn't tell if it was a legal bull at that distance! But brother routinely practices 400 yd shots and has worked it out farther on his chart. He can repeatedly bang the old jerri-can at 550 yds at our range. (He is the shooter/handloader in the family)

To shoot these distances, it takes time/patience and it does have to be perfect conditions. Over 300 the wind is a real factor and if you can't figure out what happens with your rifle at those distances, you shouldn't take the shot. I clean missed a cow trotting by me at 70 yds in some heavy timber. She stopped to look and let me kill her on the second shot.

My hats off to the guys who never take less than a perfect shot. They are much better hunters than I am.

The right gear is a must! Then comes practice and a lot of it, along with knowledge of your particular load, ballistics and conditions. A lot more to it that hold over.
Is it ethical? I do not want to debate that issue, usually I stay out of the long range discussion other than to discuss rifles. Will say that I no longer shoot game aminals past 600 yards any longer. My comfort zone.
Nathanial

Another thing not yet mentioned here is that Elk are BIG! An 800lb Bull Elk at 500 yds as proportionaly large killing zone as a 175lb Whitetail that is far closer. Of course you need to have a round capable of delivering enough energy to penetrate and damage vital organs at that distance but they have bigger vital organs to hit.
I think that "Comfort Zone" is a good concept. It should be based on your equipemnt, skill level, weather conditions etc. and vary according to what you are shooting. Discipline yourself to not take shots until you are satisfied you can comfortably make a clean kill at whatever range...............DJ

That is exactly what they are saying.

THE PROBLEM WITH LONG RANGE SHOOTING AT BIG GAME, IS THE SHOOTERS HAVE NO IDEA HOW FAR THEY ARE SHOOTING--- they see the animal and just start shooting, they may think they know the range, but when they are shooting at 800yds at running elk, thinking it is under 500yds and i'm watching the bullet impacts 8 feet below and 5 feet behind the running elk. i have no doubt that some hunters can ethicly kill at ranges under 600yds with today weapons and gear, with perfect wind conditions. but the reality is, most shots at long range are misses or bad hits by excited, poor hunters and shooter with no experience with long range shooting. i know my limits and my weapons limits, others with lots of longrange practice can easily kill elk at ranges out far past my comfort zone, but they are in the minority. most hunters have no buisness shooting at elk past 400yds, me included.

As I pointed out on another thread, some people can ski the black diamond slopes without falling, others can�t stand up for any length of time on the green slopes. It is no different in shooting at distance.

There are those that condemn long range shots as �shooting� rather than �hunting�. Often they suggest the ethical hunter will �get closer�. Such people conveniently ignore the restrictions placed on the hunter by constraints of time (length of hunting trip, legal shooting hours, season ending dates, etc.), weather, the presence of other hunters in the area, property and Game Management Unit boundaries, animal/herd movement, and so on. I have seen very lengthy stalks blown by other hunters coming into an area, fog rolling in so fast that visibility went from miles to feet in a couple of minutes, animals escape to non-huntable areas, shots not taken because legal shooting hours came to a close, animals that were just passing through and offered only fleeting shot opportunities. Getting close is something I try to do but it is not always possible. Sometimes a decision has to be made to take the long shot or go home empty handed. When the shooter is adequately prepared for the shot that is offered, I have no problem with the shot.

Hunting is what gets you in position to shoot, shooting is what puts the meat on the ground � regardless of the range. I�ve seen enough poor shots at 100 yards and under to know that range is not the most critical element in the success or failure of a shot. Nor is it the primary determinant of whether I consider a particular shot to be ethical or not.

Like most of life�s endeavors, there are those that can and usually do, those that sometimes can and occasionally do, those that have never tried and those that simply cannot. I�m more comfortable with a 500 yard shot by someone who is well prepared than a 300 yard shot by Joe Average.

I live in elk country and here stories every year about the elk shot at 500 yards that got away.

The first thing I have realized is most people don't own a lazer and a 500 yard shot is more like 300. And then there is the slob that is so desperate to kill that they risk taking a trully 500+ yard shot on elk regardless of the odds just so they can say they punched a tag.

I knew a guy that took a shot at an elk at a proclaimed 700 yard shot. He said he wasn't concerned about wounding it because there are so many hunters that he knew if he wounded it someone else would probably get it.

I guess people taking 500 yard+ shots at elk don't ever wonder what kind of energy the bullet still retains at long distance especially when the bullet drifts off course and hits it in the neck or shoulder.

That's a good point, dogcatcher223.

Baltz

Don't know where youve been the last years, but rangefinders take like 3 seconds to confirm a distance.

And no one is saying shooting at a running elk at long range. Heck as admitted folks miss running shots at 70 and under. I can't shoot well at running game and so always pass those shots.

Whats required at any distance is talent, ethics, and ability at that range. Thats up to the shooter and no one elses business really.

I err on the side of power when using an elk gun. Last try was 54 cal wiht 535 grain bullets and 100 grains 2F. Plenty power. Long range?? Had 3 iron sight only shots that were gimmes at just over 100 yards on bulls but had cow tags. Only cow was at 50 yards, chip shot in the brush but factors including positive ID and a bit of possible brush made me not shoot and I'm glad. OTOH I'm very comfortable to 200 with that same setup.

BTW long shots usually have time, IE pack on the ground, prone, range it a few times, consider and adjust for any slope distance issues, temps, pull out the wind speed meter to verify and then study the grass, trees, leaves etc..... before even loading the chamber to make the kill.

While the regular joe sees a deer at 100, tosses the rifle up, no rest, wobbles all over, yanks the trigger while closing his eyes, opens eyes hoping for the best.

You tell me who is responsible and who not?

Jeff

BTW Dogcatcher-- on those that don't own a rangefinder, etc.... I rarely worry about them cutting hair, they don't shoot enough to be accurate(will their guns shoot 1.5-2 inches at 500 like a good one will or can they keep em in a 2 foot circle?)have no clue what wind will do, don't have a clue to the range, dont' know the drop etc... them actually hitting the animal anywhwere is a true fluke all the way. I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm just a bit more concerned about wounding shots much closer.

Wonder how many folks see the animal they want and shake so bad, but will take the shot regardless? I know I've shook so bad that I could not shoot, I choose to pass, not let one fly.

Of course you know that 500 is a chip shot for the right person and right conditions. But those 2 are few and far between.

Jeff

10-4 to that, The 500yrd shot on anything is tough. I shoot alot varmints out to 600 with custom rifles. All of my rifles have had alot of gunnie work to them so they will preform out to those ranges and beyond. I can shoot very well but not all the time. There are alot of factors to put into play when you shoot out to that range. I love to shoot yotes out to 600 if I get the chance. I pride myself in practicing alot and I know where my rifle shoots and the optics in which I use are very good also. But to say I make the shot all the time is a farce in itself, yotes and prairie dogs to deer all have fallen along way out but only in prime conditions. HAPPY HUNTING

There are days when 60 yards is a long one for me, is 500 yards doable yep it is, is it doable for me, nope would not even try it. 400 is about as far as I would temp a shot, and the conditions have to be just about perfect and my personal shooting has to have being accurate enough in the pass few months for me do do it. Other wise 250 yard is my practical limit. For two reasons, wind drift for most of the cartridges that I hunt with and the distance of the range I shoot at, maxes out at 240 or so. I like to get close, and then 50 yards closer.

DonFischer �

With all due respect to the sincerity of your beliefs (I do not put you in the same category as Cohiba), I think it is unfair to lump all hunters who take long distance shots into the same category. Certainly there are those that do it purely for purposes of ego stroking, but there are probably as many reasons for preparing for such shots as there are hunters who do so. You say they are a black mark on the sport but I would contend many and probably most of the serious long range hunters are more a credit to the sport than Joe Average who takes a few practice shots at 100 yards just before hunting season, holds a 4� group, and proclaims himself ready to hunt � the same Joe Average that when you ask what ammo he is using can�t tell you because he bought something based on price, doesn�t have a clue what the real world trajectory from his rifle looks like, and then proceeds to take shots at any range at which he can see game. Unfortunately, while this description of Joe Average may sound a bit harsh, it is all too often accurate.

Which of the following would you find MOST unethical?

1. Joe Average, as described above, using his .300 Blaster-Magnum to take a 300 yard shot at a trotting animal.

2. Father giving his young son a .243 Win and 95g Ballistic Tips, letting him practice at 100 yards and then letting him take 300 yard shots.

3. Father allowing son to intentionally shoot a record�class bull elk in the hind quarters with same .243 Win and 95g Ballistic Tip in an effort to slow it down, then lose the bull when it doesn�t.

4. Father stopping along road to allow son to use .243 Win (any load) to take 100-yard broadside shot at cow elk that is part of a moving herd and has other elk on the back side. Shot is off fencepost within 50 feet of centerline of road (read �illegal�). Son turns around and shrugs when no cow drops. Father and son get back in car and drive off. (Read �possible felony�.)

5. Two men from California hunting elk with dog in Colorado. (Read �illegal�).

6. Several men shoot up herd, then drive off. (Read �felony offense�).

7. Man shoots elk and takes hind quarter for �camp meat�, leaving the rest to rot. (Read �felony offense�).

8. Man shoots elk and takes three quarters out, leaving one quarter to rot. (Read �felony offense�).

9. Man, unsure if bull elk has required 4 points, shoots elk and �ground checks� it. Takes bull if it is legal, leaves it if it is not. (Read �really stupid at best and felony offense at worst�.)

10. Man prepares all during the off seasons for extended range shots, then shoots a game animal well within his known capabilities - at 500 yards in this case.

(Sadly, I have personally witnessed items items 1-9.)

So are you saying that no hunters carry laser rangefinders,or are you saying that laser rangefinders aren't accurate.I have never shot an elk at 500 yards,my longest being 377 yards,but I have shot a pronghorn at 480 yards,and a whitetail at 434 yards,all yardages measured with a leica 1200.I practise regularly to 500 yards at my local range from various positions and my rifle and load combinations are capable of consistant 3" to 4" groups at 500 yards with me pulling the trigger.I hunt elk with the 300ultramag launching a 180gr tsx at 3380fps,so there is no questioning that there is enough energy left at 500 yards to provide a clean kill.I set my own range limitations based on the actual field conditions.If it is calm and I have a solid rest available,I would not hesitate to take a 500 yard shot at a stationary elk.If the conditions are not as good,I adjust my range limits accordingly.So perhaps you shouldn't judge others based on your abilities and those of your equipment.

I was out shooting yesterday and took a few at 400 with my 300 WSM. At that range, they were dropping 16 to 17". I have no idea how far they'd drop at 500 and I'll probably never find out. I kept them inside of 6", but I was shooting from a bench. When hunting, that group would probably double or more. It requires a very solid rest and a rangefinder at the very minimum. I've killed a few deer and an elk at over 300, but I doubt that I'd try it at 400 unless conditions were perfect.

Dick

In the last couple of elk seasons, I have taken bulls at 526 and 391 yards. My son was at my side both times (everybody needs a healthy 25 year old when the work really begins!). One 200 gr. NP out of my 300RUM for each bull. One went a wobbly 10 feet and the other immediately face planted.

I do restrict myself to certain ranges dependent on the animals movements and other factors. In these cases, as with all other's past 300 (give or take), they must be at rest or feeding with very little, if any, wind. I must also have a steady foundation from which to shoot. My Harris bipods seem to help a great deal in that regard. If these elements aren't in my favor, I pass. Decisions such as these are made in an instant, experience trumps inexperience.


My son passed on the 391 as he didn't feel comfortable with that range even though he's taken several deer to 300. I always give him first shot and he passed. His choice was based on his confidence level and his "gut" feeling at the time. I was proud of his choice. He practices when time allows, but I am at the range several times each week and have done so for several decades. I also have access to a 600 yard range.

My son and I both made the right choice. He thinks that elk is delicious and has no regrets from a hasty or bad decision that could haunt him for a lifetime. His decision must not have been an easy one. He has not taken an elk as yet.

My Geovids don't lie and each one of my rifles drop charts have been confirmed and calculated for the elevations and avg. temperature I experience in those specific areas.

Practice, the right gear and experience through practical application gives one the confidence needed to make such shots.

Distances we choose to attempt to harvest game animals can only be based on our personal experience and confidence level. If we could regulate other's choices (God forbid), I would be hard pressed to allow 10% of the "shooter's" I see at the range 2 days before the opener to shoot at any game animal over about 50 feet.

We, as individuals, need to make responsible decisions everyday in life. The distance we choose to attempt to do so while hunting, is no different.

Good luck to all this season.

I don't usually shoot over 300 yds. 50 yds or less is the norm. To the hunters that do it and can , fine. I like the challenge of getting close more than the challenge of hitting them at a distnce. Just me though

Not a reply to anyone in particular.
The long range shots I make have taken up to 30 minutes or longer to execute. Studying wind, angle, range (Lica), animal orientation, breathing, comfortable position and setting the rest up, front (pack) rear (plastic bead bag). Have taken a few elk past six hundred in the past and will be honest here, not all were perfect. Did not lose any, thankfully, but it wasnt pretty. Shooting paper at 1K, horizontally, is totally different than the angles and conditions encountered elk hunting. I
practice out to six hundred incorporating angles up to 45 degrees. In my opinion, a .5 moa rifle is a requirement, that is .5 at any range and knowing your scope dope to every 25 yards past zero.
Study, practice, patience, proper gear and good judgment can get it done. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Nathaniel

Angles encountered in hunting are not a big issue, unless its shooting position. Angles are a simple math calculation. My compass has an easy angle indicator,there are ones made that attach to the scope also. Work the numbers, adjust for the actual horizontal distance and fire.

Whats much more variable is wind as it can really vary over the course of a few hundred plus yards. Ad in the fact you zero'd in 80 degrees and now its 20.... altitude, pressure etc...

I'm not knocking 30 minutes time, and please take all you need but running a wind speed meter, checking angle and true distance and flopping your pack down, takes me about 5 minutes max. And maybe some more time for the animal to come to the correct position.

But you have made a great point, you have to have known zero's each 25 yards out from FIRED data, not a computer.

Those that zero at 300 and rely on computer data past that scare me. Good reference where to start, but not for a shot.

BTW we are way ahead in wind issues since most shoot a scope. You can get good wind data and then just lay there in the scope watching it pick up, let off, change direction, just waiting out that perfect scenario for the shot.

And glad ya had the nerve to point out a .5 moa gun, most that shoot longer distances ---- well they strive for better than that. I'm after 1.5 inches to 2 inches max at 500 yards to keep me happy. Not hard to come by if you spend on a good smith.

Of course it never hurt me that I shot 1-2 times a weekend out to 600 and beyond abotu 3/4 of the year. With iron sights. Makes the rest seem easy.

Jeff

Jeff, I use a EXTECH mini thermo-anemometer for wind, Grainger sells them.
The time factor comes from waiting for the critter to stand still or getting up and moving to follow the animal. You hit it, the perfect scenario.
I determine angle with a cosine indicator, shoot as many as four days a week or more and check zero as close to temp as possible before hunting.
Nathanial

i'm glad you have learned to take the first sentence and make your point out of context in the first place, most hunters taking long shots at game do not use lazer rangefinders. they do not have them, they also do not practice like the shooters that do. most hunters do not even sight in their rifles every year. read the complete post i wrote, you took one line from before you start harping <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

There's your whole quote. I think that almost all serious long range hunters will have laser rangerfinders. The ones that are making the 800 yd running shots etc. are probably just as bad hunting much closer. Blame it on bad hunters not on long range hunting itself....................DJ

Because I only had to read one line to find a foolish statement in your post.

A reread of the thread brought the following to mind.

Should have stated that .5 MOA is "minimum" at any given range IMO, the 338RUM I am currently using holds less than that to little over 800. Not all rifles/loads will hold consistent MOA past zero.
Not nerve, my opinion.
You are correct, Inclination and declination are not as important as wind if the formula is known and used. I do. Could also throw in the effects of gravity at elevation into the equation, may need my Texas Instruments cheat pencil for that. However, wind speed may not always be the same from muzzle to target, variables may include terrain (mountains) and natural variation in wind velocities (gusts) over the given distance(muzzle to target). In short, wind is the one variable that will defiantly fornicate the K9 at longer ranges, no doubt.
I will remember to explain to the extreme in the future so that I may be understood.
Then again, I may very well be wrong, would not be the first time.
Nathanial

I'm not a long range shooter - I prefer to hunt close and most often use a handgun for deer.

The two components of LR hunting that I wonder about the most are time of flight and wind. TOF requires the shooter to predict the game's movement - an educated guess at best. Similarly, estimating the windage over the entire 500-plus yards is dicey given variations in terrain.

I've done caribou up to 467 yards with a 300 RUM. One lasered at 467 the other lasered at 441. 2 shots, 2 dead caribou.

I don't have any problem with a hunter shooting at the limit of his/her ability, whatever that distance is. The problem comes when they stretch that limit with "hope" shots. Of course the ethical distance anyone should shoot is a personal decision. I'd like to see everyone who cuts hair, whether the animal is recovered or not, punch their tag. I would bet good money that the number of hope shots would decrease 90% under that condition. And yes, I have cancelled my tag after failing to recover an elk. Just my personal rules of fair chase.
We always congratulate people for getting "their" elk but public dissaproval for taking bad shots or wounding game doesn't seem to be in the same proportion. Most say nothing. So, we have to impose our own limits, sadly, some are not up to the challenge.

[Quote] by baltz526
in the first place, most hunters taking long shots at game do not use lazer rangefinders. they do not have them, they also do not practice like the shooters that do. [Quote]

ALL LONG RANGE HUNTERS DO USE RANGE FINDERS....... ALL LONG RANGE HUNTERS DO PRACTICE WAY MORE THAN THE AVERAGE HUNTER DOES..........
What you are stating as fact is totaly incorrect..........<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

[Quote] by Rock Chuck
I was out shooting yesterday and took a few at 400 with my 300 WSM. At that range, they were dropping 16 to 17". I have no idea how far they'd drop at 500 and I'll probably never find out. [Quote]

If you chrongraph the load that you are shooting and plug in an accurate bc, as well as altitude, temperature, into a qualilty targeting soft ware program such as, ( the Nighforce ExBall by Perry Systems) it will give the drops at all ranges in MOA as well as inches and yardages increments from 10, 20, 25, 50 yards to as far as you could possabley want to shoot

Anone interested in how to execute a Long Range Hunt Properly then check this link and read the story of a successful Long range Hunt conducted properly:

http://longrangehunting.com/ubbthreads/s...e=0&fpart=1

a simple question for all the non-longrange hunters. if you have a 300 winchester magnum, shooting 165gr accubonds at a muzzle velocity of 3100fps, what are your impact points at 300yds, 400yds, 500yds, 600yds if your sighted in with a 200yd zero. now do the same for a 7mm rem mag with a 160gr accubond with a muzzle velocity of 3000fps at the same ranges. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- now that you have the info, how long did it take to look it up. 30 seconds, 2 minutes, longer. if you where hunting, and you had your range finder, and the elk was broadside at 437yds what is your holdover with no wind? what would you do to range the elk if you had no lazer range finder? now if we could all just answer these very simple questions, we are taking the first baby steps to the art of long range shooting.

Mr. Hunt, the troll [bleep] was not thrown at you.
And yes, the conditions were right for a long shot, there was no wind, and it was flat. The bull was out in a flat, and I had a dead rest off of a fence post. I probably woundnt have taken the shot, but the bull was wounded, and was fixing to get on the neigbors, if he would have jumped the fence, we could have kissed him goodbye. I dont take these kinds of shots on a routine basis, but I can, and I will if I have to. I run a 338 rum, with the swaro, 6-18 TDS. I know what this rifle does out to 900 yds, so not that 500 is chip shot, but it very doable on a regular basis, and I get alot of practice, our country here in Tx. allows us to get high, and spot critters below us. You can pretty much shoot as far as you think you can. We get alot of long range practice on hogs, across wheat fields.

Toby Joe

Toby Joe

I can't say that I am a huge fan of the idea of shooting an Elk at 500+, but there are people that can do it. I have a video of my best friend shooting a 300+ incher at 642 yards. My range finder said 644 and his said 642, so we use his number. He was shooting a 300 WSM Browning A-Bolt with Winchester Silver Ballistic tips. It was a pretty impressive shot and that animal never took a step. There was a pause after he pulled the trigger and then it crumbled. It took 2 hours to get to the animal and 13 hours to get it out.

More and more, I am becoming open minded to hunters "reaching out and touching someone" as we say back home.

Excellent.
No offense taken.
Great choice in cartridge, too! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Actually, It only takes a second or two to read them when taped to the side of my stock if I happen to forget............



1/3 the way down between the 400 & 500 yard bars on my TDS reticle.......



You could use the TDS "Tri-Factor" reticle, but why would I not use my laser or my spare laser?


Some things are as hard as you make them....................DJ

The kill zone on an elk is big.

Any good marksman who knows his range should be able to hit a trash can lid consistently at 500 from field positions.

and most hunters do not have $3000.00 to spend on scopes and rangefinders, for a hunt they can take 3 workdays and one weekend a year on. including travel time

You can buy a good quality scope and rangefinder for less than half that price..

More like about 1/3 of that.. 1K and it is a done deal.

Mark D

I have been lucky enough to hunt a large ranch in Utah for elk, as a matter of fact I'll be leaving for this years hunt next week. I don't take my good fortune for granted. Now, to my point. The shooting agreement is simple, if you wound an animal and it gets away you are done. This is a guided hunt and it's not cheap. You may take a long shot if you wish, but the timber is thick, the canyons are deep and steep so it can be easy to lose a poorly hit animal. It happens. Under the circumstances most hunters become very conservative with how far they are willing to shoot. Unfortunately, for many of us ethics is situational.

Lets see now, fixed 6X scope, using duplex as hold over points, 200 buck rangefinder should work, be a bit bulky and heavy vs a more expensive Leica or the like. But will work for sure.

I know for damn sure if I could only take 5 days to hunt plus travel time, then all the while I"m slaving away I'd be buying gear that allows me to make the one single shot that I MIGHT get in 5 days.

IE good gun, glass, lots of practice, rangefinders, drop tables, wind meters, etc.......

If not, then if you have to pass that 400 yard shot, well you better be ready to eat tag soup again. Me, I prefer to be ready for as much as I can. Then let me be the one that decides to pass or shoot, not the conditions because I was not prepared.

I"d be willing to bet that those that don't have or won't buy a rangefinder, spend time practicing etc.... are also the ones that hunt in cotton with maybe a canteen and compass, not knowing how to use the compass, and the ones that don't pay attention to weather patterns etc... and are the ones that use SAR most often.

Jeff

Oh yeah, let me see again, Zeiss mil dot 500 bucks give or take, Leica rangefinder, 500 bucks give or take.....1000 bucks is much less than 3000.00 Maybe learn a bit about things before you speak there ol buddy.

Jeff

While I am NOT a "long range hunter" I think something should be said in defense of those who pursue "hunting" in this fashion.

About 3 years ago through a series of mishaps and misfortunes in a late season elk hunt, my hunting partner and I ended up in the camp of an outfitter in northwest Wyoming who specializes in this type of hunt. It happened a movie producer by the name of Bob Burns was there to film some some shots. Some of them are included in his DVD called "Beyond Belief" and it's worth while to see this film, especially for those of us who look down our noses at the long range hunters. It happened that in the camp there were 8 hunters besides myself. I was urged to take one of their rifles when I was unable to connect with the elk I wanted. I declined and became the ONLY hunter in the camp who didn't take an elk. All were taken at ranges exceeding 700 yards with the longest being just under 1000 yards. All but one were one shot drops, I witnessed two of them. (Incidentally, we were welcomed into that camp as one of them, at no charge, and we were treated with extreme hospitality.)

The outfitter, and the producer, Burns, both build guns especially for this type of hunting. Horror of horrors, they also used target bullets, like the Berger VLD's and Sierra Matchkings, with a few Nosler Ballistic Tips, in calibers not exceeding .308 with most being in the 6mm to 7mm class. What they do is develop loads for the rifles then attach a Leupold variable, usually 4X to 14X, on which they put a tactical turret on the elevation knob. Leupold has started selling them in this configuration because of that demand. The turret these builders use is a blank especially ordered from Leupold. Once the load is developed the turret is etched with the ranges based on the ballistics of that load and barrel combination. The elevation knob can be quickly dialed after ranging with usually a Leica 1200 yard rangefinder. You range the animal, figure the wind if any, turn the elevation knob, take a rest, and "bang".

These guys practice considerably and usually "long range" hunt coyotes and other varmints for practice. The DVD mentioned covers all this and shows shots on coyotes way way out there, all one shot bang flops.

Several years back on an outfitted hunt in the Thorofare in Wyoming my outfitter/guide forced me to take a long range shot at a 350 class bull. The range was 580 yards. Against my better judgement I shot using a 338 Win Mag with a 250g Nolser Partition. The bull dropped in his tracks with entry and exit wounds the same size and therefore no bullet recovered. I knew the trajectory, held 3 feet over, and he was down. It was the most unrewarding hunt I ever had and from that day forward I've tried to limit my range to 300 yards or thereabouts. I prefer the hunting to the shooting leaving the latter for the range and paper, but since observing that one long range hunt I find greater tolerance and understanding of those who pursue that method.

bobski,
I like the blank turret idea and have thought about doing the same at times. However, I shoot and record clicks at every 25 yards and use the resulting dope sheet pasted on the stock. Just change the dope sheet per load instead of a turret. Anyway, it works for me.
Nathan

Checkout the Nightforce NP-R2 Reticle, it has hash marks 2 MOA apart and works perfectly:

http://www.nightforceoptics.com/?catid=4...b36faf0f270f353

Same reticle I use and it's great, for the intended purpose, range estimation. But I like to know POI every 25 yards for quick dope.

baltz526 wrote:


Regardless of what some people may spend on long range equipment, it is absolutely NOT necessary to spend $3000, $2000 or even $1000 on equipment in order to make 500-yard shots.

In my own case, the equipment I would most likely use includes a Ruger �canoe paddle� rifle (purchased new for $375), a Burris Fullfield II Ballistic Plex scope ($190) and a Nikon pocket laser ($200). Total cost of equipment, $765. Of course if I was relying on my buddy�s range finder (as he does mine), the cost would be $575.

The only time I have ever made 500-yard shots was at the Whittington Center, where I was shooting the 500-meter rams (546.8 yards) in a strong crosswind. I used two different rifles, a Marlin 1895 in .45-70 and a Marlin 375 in .375 Winchester. Both scopes were topped with fixed-power Leupold M8 4x scopes. The scopes and rifles were all used prior to my acquiring them. I had never shot either rifle at this distance before, so it took a few ranging shots with each. Once that was done, however, both rifles performed very well, each knocking down 4 out of 5. Total cost for each rifle and scope combination was $350. While I would not use these to take 500-yard shots at live game, especially in a strong crosswind, it demonstrates that expensive equipment is not necessarily required.

Your argument about a 3-day hunt (which I did for many years) is actually a good argument for a hunter spending $200 on a LRF and taking time to learn the rifle he already has. The ability to reach out to 500 yards if required may well mean the difference between meat in the freezer and just another walk in the woods.

A reasonably accurate rifle, say 2MOA (better is, well, better), an adequate scope (a simple Duplex is adequate but not preferred), a method of accurate determining the distance (I prefer a laser but there are other methods and devices) and some practice is all that is needed to take a 500-yard shot. Wind will obviously play a role, but there are many times when the wind is negligible and when it is too great it is easy not to shoot. (Just as I refuse to shoot game at 100 yards from a freestanding position, even though I shoot targets at 200 from the same position.)

I guess I've bowhunted too long. For me "HUNTING", is getting close as you can. And I'm used to coming home empty handed because of brush that will deflect an arrow, or just being busted by an animal that is 15 yards away. Still way better than work!

When I gun hunt I think the same way. 150 yards seems a long way. Sure there are people that have the right equipment and practice consistently often enough to make 500 yard shots. But then it's no longer about hunting it's shooting skill.

If you're shooting all your elk at 500 yards, you're more than a great shot. Can't say the same about your hunting and woodsman skills.

Hey Henry, there is another side while we are tossing stones amongst us. I have bowhunted for almost 30 years. Have over 100 big game under my belt bowhunting. To me there is NO challenge at all once game is at short range with a bow. And of course you have approach it differently to get that close which is only considered a tactic to me.

For me it took as many years to become proficient at long range to reliably do it. And took much more effort expended during those years.

What I can't see is that why LR shooting gets a knock when its really harder than just about anything else I've done. Probably many don't get into it because it demands so much time and money to get good enough to do it. Much more so than any sport.

Call it what you will, but if you hunt with both a bow and gun, it can't be much different. Heck a bowhunter shoudl be able to make a 150 yard shot with a gun blindfolded standing on one leg with a mirror. IE you bowhunt, yet you also gun hunt, where is the challenge with the gun at all?

I will agree with you on one count, calling it what you want. Its skill,so if you want to deviate to call differing skills different things then thats fine too. But finding game is hunting. once you found it shooting game is shooting. No difference to me really. Its all hunting its just different stages of the game as you get to the kill.

FWIW my closest kill is 3 yards with homemade recurve. My furtherest to date is 802 with a rifle.

Why try to split us up? We are attempting the same goal, getting joy out of doing it different ways.

Regards, Jeff

I don't use the reticule for range estimation, I use a range finder for range estimation. I also print a balisstic card at 25 yard interviles along with wind drift. I then use the 2 MOA reticle for aim points, such as if I need 12 3/4 MOA I woul simply hold on line 6 and turn 3/4 MOA on my turret for a very precise aim point.

Will restate, I use the reticle for range estimation, using a milliradian formula, same as a standard mil-dot. However, do not use this method much anymore as I use a range finder for finding actual yardage. Good point though, on using it in the manner that you do, will give it try. I am just as
comfortable dialing up the range to the main line using predetermined dope. More than one way to skin it.
Nathanial

You guys are making me want to spend my $$$ at the Exotic MEAT Store and use a recipe from RockyMountainElkFoundation...
No rifle.
No hunt.
Just ELK for dinner!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Wouldn't taste the same!

My first love is for rifles but in order to be in the field more often and hunt more I started bowhunting. I have greatly enjoyed bowhunting. I often read the bowhunting magazines because I've learned a lot about hunting from them. To me bowhunting does require far more hunting skill than does rifle hunting.
But a simple fact remains. Bow hunters don't eat as much Elk as rifle hunters do................ <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />...................DJ

rost495,

I gun hunt because my dad does, my daughter did for a couple of years and a few close friends love to gun hunt. Those are the only reasons I need, but I still like to take my old lever actions out once in a while.

And if you're talking any kind of whitetail from a treestand, yes bowhunting is as easy as falling off a log. There is a ranch I hunt here in Montana that from a simple ground blind it's almost a guarantee of a whitetail everytime you go.

I would venture taking big bucks and bulls while ground hunting with a recurve or longbow on public land more difficult than shooting an elk at 500 yards. Jeff in all true sincerity, if you're consistently taking big muleys and big bulls with your recurve, while stalking on public ground, I will fly you to Montana and beg you to teach me. I'm always trying to learn.

As I said in my first post, to shoot big game animals at 500 to 1000 yards, being just as sure of your making a kill shot as if you had your recurve at 3 yards, takes just the right equipment and lots of practice and is a hard won skill.

For me it's just not hunting to find big game animals at 500 to 1000 yards. Driving the 27 miles from where I live to visit my folks in a neighboring town I will see anywhere from 10 to 50 deer and 5 to 20 antelope. Alot more if I slowed down from 65mph.

Maybe it's just definitions, but to me hunting means thorough knowledge of game and their habits, habitat and the ability to put that all into place to be in the right place at the right time.

By the way, some years back I made a couple longbows and one take down recurve. I had a great time doing it. I've been thinking of trying it again this winter. When did you make your recurve and what materials did you use? I went simple and used maple, walnut and if I remember now, it was bubinga in one riser.

Hope your season is a good one!

Henry
I think we are mostly on the same page-- either way you choose, and there are many more than bow or long range shots, it takes some amount of work.

Now the work can be different, IE long range you have to work on shooting skills. Bowhunting you have to work on patience.

I can't help you with big bucks or bulls, regardles the weapon. I like the meat and the harder won trophy sometimes is the older female of the species. So most times I'm strangely picky. IE depends on the day. I certainly do not hold out for a "book" animal cause they mean nothing to me.

I can't recall what my recurve was made of, its been many a year back. I do recall I made it too short and learned what finger pinch meant.

I do have lots of osage orange/bois d arc around and hope to do a longbow one day, but at this point, I can't dedicate enough time to shooting the bow to become proficient enough again so its either compound which takes no skill or some type of gun.

At the moment I"m settled kinda in the middle and trying to do a lot of MZ hunting as I've not killed many animals with my MZ guns. Gotta find the animals, get close enough but not bow close, and still have the skill to get one.

The reason I say LR takes so much skill is that it took me many years to become proficient enough in shooting a rifle to become comfortable at LR and see its inherent challenge, much more of a challenge that flopping one at a couple hundred yards with a CF rifle.

So yep, you can use whatever terms you want and isolate if you want, we really don't need that as it is going right now. We need more folks on our side.

I used to be a bow snob-- didn't shoot a bow you didn't know squat. I refuse to stoop to that level now and see you as a brother in arms, regardless your choice.

I see you state about knowing about animals and their habits and being in the right place at the right time. A lot of that has to do with choice of weapon also. If you have range, you look for different places than you sit with a MZ or even different still where I expect to intercept them with a bow. Funny part is it works too. The times I bowhunted, I was inside of 50 yards a LOT of the time, the time I MZ hunted I was within MZ range each time I saw them. And if I ever hunt one with a rifle( I don't enjoy seeing others in the field...) I'll be using things to my advantage, IE the reach of the weapon so I'd be in still a different place than I choose with the bow.

And I still see folks much more dangerous with a bore sighted wally gun, than folks that actually get out and practice their intended weapon of choice.

BTW I'm still after my first elk of anykind. Never has worked for me. Muleys, I"ve only been like 3 times, and only been able to bed a few, those that were bedded were easy to stalk if you had lots of patience. Anything you can teach me about elk and or muleys I"m all ears. WT, I hunt on trails anymore these days and normally on the ground at that as I don't care for treestands.

Our WT season opens Friday but Ive been too busy to get the Brackenbury out so it'll be the PSE or just go scouting on the weekend. The little public land we have here in TX you really need to be either lucky or do your homework really good. Much like it is in your area I'm sure.

Best in your season also!!!

Jeff

I have a 700LSS 338 RUM with a Leupold VXIII 2.5x8 with M1 dials. These were added by the Leupold custom shop fro $149. 8x is more than enough to shoot at a 6" bull at 500 yds.
This rifle will shoot .5 MOA if I do my part.
I also have a Swarovski Laser Guide 8x30 which will give readings out past 1500 yds.
[img][image]http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g147/JD338_photos/JD700LSS.jpg[/img][/image]
JD338

I am a banker. I am also an avid hunter. I go to work so i can afford to hunt..

Anyways, in the banking world, we call it the rule of "0's" (Zeros)... If someone says they make $100,000.00 per year, they never do when you verify it (lots of 0's). If they say $50,000 then you can say it is still not accurate but they probably make pretty close to it. $35000 , well they are getting closer. If someone says they make $52,389.00 per year. It usualy checks out.

My point is, if a guy says he shot a 500yd elk... I would bet a lot of money that it wasn't 500 yds. If he said it was 550, I would believe him more and if he said it was 507 yds, well, I would be more inclined to believe him. All things equal about ability, conditions, gear, etc.

I just always think that specific details in a story, usually check out. Generic ones, well, they tend to change as the years go on.
Just my 2 cents...

PJ,
Good wisdom in what you said.
I remember distances, type of field rest used, and conditions even at distances under 500 yards.

I posted about this topic on deer with an 30'06. It became a Deadhorse and a 300 yard turd went to ethics quickly.

On the net it is hard to know that some of us rifleman are frankly obsessed as I am about ballistics and the 20 other variables that play a role. Wind, barometric pressure, temp, bullet choice, BC and on and on. "Set up for long range" is a key statement.

My brother and I invested in a Lazz Warbird. Many variables were taken out of that long distance equation. She is setup to get steady as a rock, with a 20x 30mm Swaro scope and lots of practice.

We pass on 20 shots for every one, but with todays technology it is down right fun and quite a mind exercise. He shoots for the military professionally. I even run a laptop computer with external plugins. Wind out west, wind out west, wind out west. Of course conditions have to be right. Duh.

We do not take the life an elk lightly. They are magnificient. I am a conservationist as many of us are at heart. But after busting big cans of 8 o'clock cofee at 800 yards builds confidence over the years. 500 yards on the warbird is a walk in the park.

petr �
Sorry, it just CAN�T be done! I was out shooting clay pigeons at 300 yards today with my Marlin .30-30. OK, I missed more than I hit, but that just proves my point, doesn�t it? Didn�t get to shoot the 400-yard 8� steel gong much because every time we shot we hit it and it fell to the ground. Even my brother in-law, who hasn�t shot since the last time I took him 7 years ago was hitting the 12� steel at 400 and was able to hit a clay pigeon at 400 with the .22-250. Yeah, he missed some, too.

That�s all the proof I need that nobody but NOBODY should be shooting elk at 500 yards. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Petr

Sounds like ya'll practice plenty. Don't know how ya can deal with 20X scope in the mirage though. Especially down in your area. Its rare that I like to shoot that kind of X.

But to the real question. What barrels do you run on the Warbird when replacing them?

Barrel life on a real mag is so short, and practice burns up tons of ammo, I'm curious as to what you settled on.

Jeff

There are plenty of 500 yd elk rifles, but there is a shortage of 500 yd elk shooters.

Shortage? How many is needed?

I'm all I need.

Actually in reality, a good 500 yard rifle is a rare beast. It takes a lot of work on a factory gun and better yet takes a new tube and some smithing tune up, though blueprinting does less than just a good new tube and correctly done chamber and checking the locking lugs. And bedding has lots to do with accuracy.

Lets just say that 1 inch at 100 is not 5 inches at 500, and that to minimize shooter error, I would not be happy unless I knew my gun was head shooting accurate at 500 IE 3 inches or less for sure. Not taht I'm gonna head shoot at that range, but it allows me to be my imperfect(but dang close to.....) self.
Jeff

Groups at 300 yards on steel gong:

http://longrangehunting.com/ubbthreads/s...;page=16#108976

Two hours just to get to the animal. I wonder what you do when you make a bad hit and it runs away, then it takes 2 hours just to get to where it was standing in the first place?

Lets see, its taken me over an hour to get up to a caribou. No big deal.

You do what you do when you make a 50 yard shot, a 200 yard shot, or any other shot. You find where the animal was, follow sign to dead animal and continue on with life.

I'm not saying many out there understand how to do it all. But its all very simple. If farther than you think capable, or in some cases even if its not(BTDT) you have range distance to the animal. You mark exactly where it was when you shot it, then where you last saw it. I take out my notebook and make quick notes as sometimes later you can't remember things. Then we leave one person, usually the shooter or spotter at the spot the shot was fired at. Sometimes if you have bipod etc... unloaded gun, bolt out, and propped up to exact spot animal was in. Then we guide another to the exact spot. Then its usually easy to find blood or at least the tracks, impact tracks, hair off the animal and start following the trail. Which will lead to blood at some point usually. Anyway finding the impact point is the most important and after that its all simple trailing. Of course I used to be mostly a bowhunter so trails are no big deal to me and part of the hunt really.

BTW as you well know(and I'm not really defending poster you are picking on) an animal in certain cases can be a few hundred yards away yet take quite a bit of time to get there.

Yet in the end you've made another good point-- most don't prepare or understand how to handle regular shots, much less a longer distance shot. If prepared the long shots are not at all different than the short ones. What about those 100 yard or less shots, the ones where nothing falls, all runs off and the hunter leaves without looking, assuming his newest wizz bang super mag will knock em flat, gut and process them all in one..... Same possible results from either scenario.

Jeff

If I thought it was going to take me 2 hours to get to an animal after I downed it, I�d pass on the shot. I�m a meat hunter and my primary concern once an animal is down is to get the meat cooled down as quickly as possible. Even in below freezing weather the hide holds the heat in so well that in an hour the bacteria count has skyrocketed, and additional time exacerbates the problem.

CH

So lets say you take a shot, not quite sure of the exact outcome. This is a 15 yard bow shot and maybe a touch back. So to be safe, you let the animal alone a few hours. Normal procedure for us anyway. Our temps are not anywhere near freezing. Heck we have waited 3-4 hours before trailing. Even on hogs, just depending on what all was going on.

99% are dead and stiff when we get to them. Might be a tad blown up starting. Have NEVER lost any meat this way.

I don't buy the pass the shot 2 hour theory at all.

Jeff

[Quote] by rost495
I don't buy the pass the shot 2 hour theory at all. [Quote]

Niether do I. I have seen Deer that were shot late in the day and not recovered untill the next day with no loss of meat.........

Just about any elk, even with snow on the ground, unless it is below 15 degrees or so, will spoil on the bottom if left over night. Probablly can get way with leaving deer over night. Elk are a diffrent story

Elk or Moose I would not leave overnite. Probably Caribou too. All due to the insulative quality of the hide. Vs a deer.

I suspect that even cold temps don't help all that much with elk like animals-- again due to the R factor in the hide which won't let the heat out OR the cold in.

That being said, on a bad shot I'd still have to err to the side of letting em go till I was sure they were dead. Which might mean a 2-3 am tracking job. BTDT on deer before. And managed to have to be home for work after a 2 hour drive, by 730 am. No fun.

Jeff

rost495 �

With all due respect to those that do bow hunt (including most of my hunting buddies), I choose not to for a number of reasons. The only thing I�ve ever l killed with a bow was a cottontail.

My experiences with game left on the ground for extended periods all have an unhappy ending. One of my bow hunting buddies gave me some meat from an elk he had killed in the evening and left overnight. Don�t know what the overnight temps were, but it�s no wonder he was giving it away � it was inedible. My rifle hunting buddy (also a bow hunter) neck shot a cow in 15-20 degree weather with 6-8� of snow on the ground, sometime around 11:00 in the morning. The cow was part of a small herd that split up and went two different directions. Four of us searched for a blood trail and found nothing and we eventually decided he had missed. We found the cow early the next morning. Even though daytime temps were never above freezing and overnight temps were below zero, the meat was so bad the processor wouldn�t take it. Another time a mulie doe had been dropped and left in the sun for an hour and a half before it was found. Temps were in the 50�s. The meat smelled as bad as that from the two elk.

I�m not going to fault others who choose differently, but I won�t take a shot if I can�t get to the game quickly.

What would every one think if they killed beef and let it lay a few hours before they slaughtered it? Bet no one would buy it. it .Why do peopel think differntly about ther game they shoot.
I suspect that those who are happy to let thier game lay a few hours of either not caring about the meat, or have never tasted game properly taken care of.

Not in an argument, and almost all of my issues are with TX whitetail, but there have been more than a few circumstances where in we've not cleaned deer for a couple of hours. Of course its rare to be more than cool down here. In fact when doe shooting(mind you I said nothing about hunting) we often ride a couple of hours or so and have a few in the truck.

I have yet to taste bad deer. Maybe because we usually hit the CNS on meat shoots. BUt its sure not because we stop and gut each one on the spot.

And some of my "good luck" may come from the fact I age all my meat before packing it in the freezer.

Let me also add, that if I see it drop or find it right away, especially if I ever get lucky on an elk or similar, I"ll go to work on it right away. Its just when in a vehicle we take them to a place where its much easier to clean, and you don't get dust and dirt in the cavity while riding around.

I can see each point of view clearly.

I can also add that on a caribou that took over an hour to get to, well after photos and high 5s. etc..... it was about 2 hours to even start gutting. Animal was blown up a bit by then. Afterwards drug down the hill quartered and hung. Meat was perfectly fine.

Again not arguing, but there are some differing opinions and results. I think we can all agree that as soon as you find the game you gut it and get it to the point the meat can let the heat escape and the cool get in. That means not leaving it overnite without gutting and quartering and hanging. But it also doesn't mean that it has to be gutted before it quits twitching and immediately put in a cooler.

In fact the very worst meat we've ever had was meat that was gutted, quartered, and in a cooler of ice within 30 minutes of the kill. Strong flavor, and extremely tough. I'm 99% sure it more or less spoiled in the ice as I've seen that happen with nilgai before. One MUST let the body heat out before starting to cool it down with ice. Or else it can spoil while covered with ice. Much like the animals with high R factor skins as you all have noted. And the tough meat is meat thats not correctly aged. We've tried to eat backstraps the nite something was killed-- nope way tough nasty stuff. Now I age all mine 7 days minimum in a cooler of ice.

Jeff

Interesting and informative post.

I've killed elk at 500yds before but only when conditions require it and allow it. If I recall the last one was late in the day (17:30) on the last day of the season, very still, dry weather across a deep draw that I'd been glassing for half the day, listening to bugles of at least three different bulls (Very late rut about Oct 20ish). However: I have a 4->16 power scope with the range finding reticle (Double crosshairs that you "bracket" the animal with) and has trajectory adjusting knob/cam to match the yardage found. I also had plenty of time to range the elk and had an awesone rock rest in prone position. I would not attempt the shot without knowing that I could get to the meat within an hour and if memory serves, it took appx. 40 minutes to get to him, gut him, prop him open and drag him so he'd be in the shade tomorrow A.M. and get back to the 4 wheeler. I de-boned him the next morning, packed him out and the meat was fine, not sure why I am submitting this.....is this relevant to anything?........does anyone care? I guess my point is that nowadays I would rather stalk the animal to get closer even if I didn't get a shot because it's more of a thrill, That's probably why I've been leaning more towards muzzle loader and bow hunting too, my natural digression I suppose. More of a challenge, Vern.

Hey watch out if you go MZ or Bow, you might have to be on the safe side and let em lay an hour or more before trailing.... Really.

Does it bother me? Nope not at all. But they don't always drop right away and not seeing them fall you have to be careful about pushing a shot you are not certain of.

But its funny to me that archery is in warmer months usually. And its normally safer to wait 30 minutes or an hour before tracking, yet you don't hear of wasted meat there, and here we have gun hunters saying ya gotta gut em right away.

I say, its not about X amount of time or temp, only that you use sense and be as timely as possible.

Like I said, I'd never leave an animal laying taht i'd found-- IE overnite, without hanging the meat.

Jeff

This is from the Colorado Department of Wildlife:

Whoever wrote this obviously has never tasted properly aged elk. We used a processor in CO that does age the Elk and it tasted Waaaaaaaayyyyyy better than other Elk I'd tried................................DJ

Funny one would expect nothing but perfection from a state agency.....

I'm here to say I have been on both sides in REAL life. Cannot speak about elk much but can definitely say that "aging" helps deer.

I also suspect they print the way they do so that they scare folks into not being lazy and that they know well that aging helps and that you actually have a time frame in which to work.

Like I said, it was warm one weekend, we killed some nilgai. We gutted mine about 2 hours or so after being shot as we continued to hunt that morning. Actually it was around 50 or so when I say warm. We gutted, skinned and cut in half and let mine hang for 1-2 hours trying to get the heat out of the meat. A buddy was paranoid, gutted his and skinned and put on ice in a cooler and covered with ice. I put mine in th cooler once I could put my finger deep in the meat and it had no excess heat. We threw his meat out as it was spoiled by the next day. Mine was some of the best I've ever had.

Sometimes real life is more important than what you think.

As an aside if aging doesnt' help, as mentioned, it sure doesnt hurt. And then I cannot explain why fresh meat is tough but aged is not. Or why with certain meat, IE caribou and moose, it has to hang for a week before the plane comes in to get it, well its not exactly freezing or below most times and yet it has always been fine.

Regards, Jeff

rost495 �
I think the important part of the DOW quote was �Bacterial growth begins at any temperature over 38 degrees Fahrenheit. Maggots can hatch within eight hours if the carcass is exposed to flies and other winged insects. Skinning improves airflow around the carcass and hastens cooling. Without air circulating around the carcass the meat can sour quickly.�

At room temperature the bacterial count can double every 20 minutes and the clock starts when the animal quits breathing in fresh oxygen and the circulatory system quits distributing it. If you don�t start gutting for 2 hours the bacterial count can already be up by a factor of 64x and by the time you are done it can have increased by a factor of 128x or more. Keeping the meat dry, as well as cool, is important because moisture and lack of oxygen accelerates bacterial growth and anaerobic decomposition. While much of the bacteria present are in the digestive system, bacteria are present throughout the animal.

When you see bloated carcasses what you are looking at is trapped gases given off by the bacteria. With a lack of oxygen, anaerobic decomposition occurs. This process is called �putrefaction� for a reason - one of the byproducts is a foul-smelling chemical called �putrescine� and another is a foul-smelling and toxic chemical called �cadaverine�.

The question is not whether or not these processes occur but rather what we are willing to do to retard them.

Sure they occur, but what harm do they do at what point?

Remember when keeping kids away from bacteria became anal? And those same kids were more prone to disease?

I"m not saying I like bacteria, just that we have not been johnny on the spot all the time and its never ended up in foul tasting meat,ruined meat or had any ill effect on any of us.

I suspect this is all gonna boil down to(on game care) as long as the meat is not spoiled, your method works just fine.

I know folks that shudder to think it takes us all morning to grind up deer and pork for sausage, and then we take a break after the meat is seasoned(we have to eat) for an hour or more before starting to stuff the casings. You can bet that 38 and below here is considered cold. And that this meat has been in a thawed state for a minimum of 12 hours before its into a casing and smoked.

Same folks shudder when I keep deer meat on ice for 7 days before cutting. They never complain when eating though(unless they know what they are eating)

I am anal about water not getting on the carcass though-- Over time I'm convinced that water might be the biggest carrier of extra bacteria ever introduced to the carcass.

I don't think we'll ever see eye to eye on this issue. I'm just thinking that there is really no way to gut an animal right after it dies every time you hunt, and that there is no reason to have to do it that quickly. Of course if the option/opportunity is there, sure why not. Ain't got no problem with that. Just have a problem with folks saying if it takes you 2 hours to get around to gutting it(regardless the reason) that its ruined. Not the case in my experience. BTW my years of guiding tend to back this up. Worked on a ranch where we were required to kill 300+/- deer each year on management. Lets just say I cleaned more than a few deer over the years. And while guiding there is no way in heck you'd be able to gut them on the spot. You had to drop off hunters, get ready, go pick all of them and the game up, get them to camp and then start in on the cleaning. And often if you were not first back at camp, it might take a bit of waiting in line for the cleaning table for your animals, though we did help each other the whole time.

Regards, Jeff

I've scraped mold off a deer carcass before processing with no ill effects.....twitch....twitch.

Some links for you: lorazepam is page about lorazepam. avapro information is page about avapro information. xenical weight loss story is page about xenical weight loss story. online prozac is page about online prozac. prilosec otc side effects is page about prilosec otc side effects. cheap percocet is page about cheap percocet. taking together wellbutrin and zoloft is page about taking together wellbutrin and zoloft. celexa wellbutrin is page about celexa wellbutrin. online lortab is page about online lortab. seroquel online no prescription is page about seroquel online no prescription. anabolic steroid is page about anabolic steroid. order valium online is page about order valium online. oxycodone withdrawal is page about oxycodone withdrawal. amoxicillin 500 mg is page about amoxicillin 500 mg. nexium canada is page about nexium canada. order viagra online is page about order viagra online. discount didrex online is page about discount didrex online. order soma is page about order soma. cancer and morphine is page about cancer and morphine. valium order cheap is page about valium order cheap. purchase viagra is page about purchase viagra. mail order xanax is page about mail order xanax. percocet withdrawal is page about percocet withdrawal. discount valium is page about discount valium. buy cheap phentermine is page about buy cheap phentermine.

I used to do a lot of shooting with my rifle. I've killed elk with it at 320 and 410 yards. I hadn't shot it in a while and figured that I'd limit myself to 200 yards last year. In fact I'd only put three rounds through the tube on that rifle just to check the sights a few weeks before season.

An opportunity came up and the elk was at 320 again. I lasered the tree 5 yards in front since my old Bushnell needs a harder target out that far. There was ZERO wind, which is very important. I was seated with my sling wrapped, no bipod for miles. I watch my crosshairs and if they're dancing then I don't shoot. They were rock solid. I put the bullet within an inch or two of where I intended and the elk walked 5 yards and dropped.

I don't need to run in place for a minute before I shoot at the range to simulate field conditions on long shots. My heart might race when things are going fast like bull coming in to a call when I'm bowhunting but shooting over 200 yards with a rifle is a different experience. It's a lot more of a shooting problem than it is an animal encounter.

I'd probably have to do a lot more shooting before I took a 500 yard shot at an elk but if my shooting ability and rifle were tweaked up a notch and the wind was right (as in none or very slight) and the terrain and conditions were right I'd do it and not have any guilt about it.

Your milage, rifle, shooting skills, and everything else may vary.

I agree completely.
In my book it is mandatory to age the meat. It makes all the difference. You mentioned you�re meat processor was in CO; that makes all the difference. No wonder it came out well��.

You might want to read this: RUGER rifles can't shoot worth spit!

The Ruger .22-250 was factory stock. The Ruger .257 Roberts was free floated and had a homespun trigger job. No bedding. The Ruger .300 Win Mag had a Ruger �canoe paddle� stock and was factory stock except for a homespun trigger job.

A lot of work on a factory gun? Nope.

I have an old Ruger .22-250 M77 with a factory heavy barrel. I put a Timney trigger on it and trimmed the sling swivel stud so it didn't protrude into the barrel channel any more. It has shot 3/8" groups at 100 yards. That's a tad better than my custom made .300 wildcat magnum that cost a whole lot more.

I think there are a lot more 500 yard rifles than there are 500 yard riflemen.

500+ yards is posible for some folks.

Jamie

As to Ruger guns not being worth a flip, lets just see.

To me they are much more complicatd to bed them correctly. Vs a 700 or 70 type gun. The angled bedding screw makes life interesting. Though a good theory. They the bottom parts are cast, snug up on them incorrectly and they snap easily. Triggers used to be junk. Can't comment now. Of course new 700 triggers are junk to me also. And then there is the issue of the palma rifles. Ruger made a run of special 77s for the palma team. For those not in the know, thats 800-900-1000 yards shooting team, iron sights from prone with a sling and shooting coat. Not a dang one was close to good enough to actually be used in competition. Doesn't say 77s are junk, just that they are far from the best option. These even had an exteneded reciever area for extra stiffness. Did not work.

I've seen more 77s shoot good out of the box, only to get 1000 rounds or so in them and go to hell and have to be bedded etc..... While a normal 700 usually trucks right along at its average for the life, though bedding and tweaking no doubt helps them also. But its rare for the to take the "dump" that a 77 has shown the tendency to do.

Can they shoot? Yep. Now as to accuracy and I did look at the linked thread. Pigeons and or steel plates dont' give group size. I'm not saying they are bad accuracy wise but that a few shots does not tell the tale at all. Anyone can get lucky and in reality a pigeon is an awful large target for a 500 yard target.

As to the 3/8 inch at 100 in 22-250. Lets convert that to a hunting caliber and bench it at 500 or 600 yards and see what the track record will be. More than likely not 3/8 MOA carried on out.

Of course I have my own 600 yard range right out the door, have competed and tested out to 1000 yards and have done this for many years and from that many rounds down range, I'll still stand by my statement that a 500 yard rifle ain't one out of the box and that they are rare, maybe not more rare than the folks capable of the 500 yard shots, but they sure aren't falling off every apple tree.

Now let me add I'm not dissing the 77 as I like them, I'm just saying one needs a very reliably, consitently accurate long range gun, I'd not be happy with anything less than 5 shots at 500 in calm conditions that would land in 1.5 or 2 inches and I'm gonna be hoping for a LOT better in reality. Folks that play this game, will understand we as humans have a lot of error already, added in the conditions, and you'll realize that a REAL .5 MOA is gonna be needed when the ranges are extended. And that .5 moa is at the used range, not at 100 yards and extrapolated.

Sure there are some guns out there that are factory that are capable, especially if you shoot custom ammo in the gun. BTW the trigger pull though it helps, is something that really has zero effect on group size. But I still say that for a gun to be commonly accurate enough to be used at mid ranges, it sure ain't a factory gun out of the box with little or nothing done to it.

And let me clarify when I speak of expenses, sure a lot of us can do some work on our guns for free, but the value of such work is gonna be in the couple hundred bucks range if done by a good smith, and so if we do it, its taken us time and some components and thats certainly not free. At least not in my books.

Final comment, though I suspect I run in a rare competition group, I'd say I can quickly name off a minimum of 50 folks very capable of 500 yard shots. And of the guns I have in the cabinet that are capable, lets just say I've got zero custom bolt guns, have abotu 7 hunting rifles that are hand tweaked to the max of what I can do and 6 of those 7 still will need a custom barrel for me to consider them accurate enough for the longer shots. 300-400 no problem. Longer, nope. Not without a new barrel/chamber.

Regards, Jeff

Jeff

While there isn't such a thing as a rifle that's too accurate I'm not so sure that you have to have a rifle that shoots 1.5 to 2" groups at a given range to hit a target that's 10-12" in diameter. I'm thinking that a rifle that shoots 6" at 500yds would be pretty deadly on an animal with a vital zone the size of an Elk's................DJ

The clay pigeons don�t give a group size but they do tell a story given that they are only 4-1/4� in diameter. We busted 4 of them with two different essentially stock Ruger rifles at 500 yards with a handful of shots. The 8� steel plate didn�t give a group size because we had shot it so many times prior, but the 24� steel plate steel plate at 600 yards did give a group size � about 2� � because the paint was fresh. Group center was at the 10-11 o�clock position about 3� from dead center.

While you may need that kind of accuracy (5 shots in 1-1/2� to 2� at 500 yards) to do well in competition, you certainly don�t need it to take elk or even deer at 500 yards. A consistent 9� group will drop game as dead at 500 as it does at 100.

None of my rifles are bedded and free floating takes about the same skill level that it takes to jump into a lake and get wet. If a person isn�t up to a homespun trigger job, replacement drop-in triggers are available for far less than a �couple hundred bucks�.

Just my opinion.

Let me expand a bit. Thought I'd done that already. You don't NEED great accuracy for a longer shot. But you need to be close to perfect in every other aspect. On the bench thats fine. But in the field you want every other thing working for you. I know that my wobble zone is on the order of .5 moa with a sling prone, a bit less if I can get over a pack and settle in. But move that to a quicker sitting shot etc.... your body starts moving more. Then add in the other factors that you are doing some adjusting for but cannot be perfect in, IE wind, temperature, pressure, etc..... they all start stacking the odds. Look at your extreme group size, add in your extreme wobble and other extreme edge conditions like missing the wind and so on. That gives you the fact that for one shot, every error could stack on you in the same direction. Taking the 2 inch 500 yard group out to a 6-10 "group" on any given shot. Which, though still in vitals, if the animal is prone to take a step at the time... anyway I hope you can see my point of view, more accuracy is much better at helping the odds.

Heck given an elks vitals are probably on the order of 16-18 inches deep and or long, a given theory is one could get by with a 3moa gun pretty easy IF everything else worked out well. Of course vitals are not round and as such the oval shape starts shrinking your target size right away....

CH-- you have gems of rifles then. Keep them well treated. I've been down that road too many years ago. And then they go TU for accuracy all of a sudden. Bedded and floated in a good stock is the only way for me. I"ve seen too many things over the years to trust anything thats not. They can shoot today but not tommorrow just depending. Well that was old wood stocks anyway. You have the new boat paddle stocks that are more reliable. BTW very nice group at 600 yards. Thats the kind that makes me happy.

I tend to be too anal on issues, but an accurate rifle sure helps the faults I have as a shooter. Kind of my safety net if you will.

And yep, I'll change my tune, I bet there are many more capable rifles than shooters. I just am somewhat blinded by the crowd I run in.

BTW I can't go the jump in the lake and get wet route. I'd sink and drown.

Regards, Jeff

I have always tended to think along the lines that Jeff mentioned. When I have a specialty handgun built, it is built to the same level that you would do for a bench gun. No, not a 2 ounce Jewell or so heavy you can't carry it in the field, but I have everything trued/bedded, and several are even tight neck chambers. In other words I try to take everything from the accuracy world and put it into a field usable gun. I like the confidence and the fudge factor it gives me. And I confess, I simply like accurate rigs. My primary shot will be prone off a pack or from a bi-pod. Will I take a 500 yard shot with my XP-100 - You bet, if the conditions and my condition is right.
I admit that the job can get done with leser accuracy, but I simply choose a different route.

rost495 �

I think we�re on the same page � I wouldn�t shoot game at 500 with a rifle that shot 9� groups at that range. Rather I was thinking total cumulative error for the shooter and rifle, with the wind being a separate but important issue. I agree that a really accurate rifle makes the work much easier.

The rifles shot well, which was very satisfying. Frankly I was quite surprised that either of us could hit the pigeons at 500. Guess you never know until you try! Only the .300 Win had a synthetic stock (the canoe paddle design). The .22-250 is a Target Grey VT (free-floated at the factory) and the .257 Roberts is blue/walnut with a free-floated 22� tube. One of these days I may take on the task of learning to bed the rifles.

Would love to try longer ranges and am sure there is a lot I could learn from you. Just looked up La Grange and see its only 100 miles form Houston. My wife is going into MD Anderson next month for a bone marrow transplant so I�ll be in Houston much of the time till the first of March. If I haven�t ticked you off maybe we could get together?

Meantime, stay out of the deep water!

First question I have when someone says they made over a 500 yard shot is what rangfinder did they use. Most will say they eyeballed it. As anyone with a rangefinder knows you can look a distance one day and guess right next day your off by a mile, depending on air, clouds temp, rain, terrain. Then ask the exact speed, ballistic coefficient, and trajectory of there load. Then what scope and how they judged the drop on the crosshairs.
In other words if you are not hand loading or at least chronographing your factory load and don't have a BDC or mildot scope you shouldn't even be thinking of shooting over 500. But if you are and have practiced and know all variables no problem.

BL,
I always use a rangefinder and take multiple confirmations, to make sure of the distance. Flat terrain can be all but impossible at times at longer distances as it it so easy to hit before or after the animal.
I wouldn't say that someone who shoots factory ammo, has a plex reticle, and does not have a chronograph has no business shooting at 500 yards or a little further. Several reasons:
First, some factory ammo will do exceptionally well and at the same time is suitable for the animal and the distance. Second, a committed shooter can shoot his rig at multiple distances and record the drops and make his own drop chart and tape it to his own stock or scope. Third, you can use a plex reticle by measuring it's distance from the X-hair to the tip of the plex (Can get this from the manufacturer or do it yourself to confirm it's accuracy), and then break up that distance in units (1-10) and confirming it by actually practicing that way. By knowing the average back to brisket size of the animal in question combined by all of the above you can go into the field quite prepared for a long shot.
This is not the ideal and it is not the route I choose, but it can work and now the hunter is relying on actual field data drops which those of us who take advantage of the technology are also required to do to make sure everything is correct. Also having a cartridge that is horsey enough to get the job done and setting up your sight-in distance to take advantage of the trajectory is vital. In this scenario a man has spent a lot of time behind his rifle in field conditions (uses a LRF) and hopefully has learned his limits.
From his drops and available data he can also have a real god idea of what his bullet is doing in the wind. The field practice itself will be telling on how humbling wind can be <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hey XP you just confirmed what I said if you have all the pieces of the puzzle and experience no problem. But most people I run into that say they shot 500 plus cant answer those questions so that tells you what? I hate seeing 5 guys lined up slinging lead across a hillside. But I cant tell you how many times I have seen it. One shot One kill

Ernie here also but my hunting partners call me old deadeye or caveman

Thanks for the confirmation. I wasn't for sure what you meant and was hoping you would respond-Thanks!

Actually you don't have to know all the BC ,MV etc.... if you just get out and shoot a LOT and know the drops and wind effects.

But most all those that are capable are reloaders, including me, and while I'm not at all anal about BC or MV stuff, I am anal, like others, about shooting real distances. It helps I have out to 600 out my back door and benches ready.

The wind can humble you, it did me for many years until it all came together. And thats what it takes dedicated practice. For any shot over 200, well for any shot really as some of the biggest slobs are the 50-100 yard shooters.

Jeff

I won't take a long shot if there's anything but a mild breeze. Gravity is constant so I can deal with that but wind introduces too many variables for me to feel comfortable with it. Those that can do it have my respect because it took some doing to get there.

I don't have a problem shooting that distance provided you can lay prone and use a bipod with little to no wind. Shot a bull twice last year between 400 & 500 yards and placed both rounds within 2 inches of each other just at the back edge of his shoulder.

As far as meat spoiling goes I think there is a big misconception on how fast elk meat will spoil. I archery hunt a lot (most of my elk kills have been archery) and in many of the elk I have shot I let them lay overnight and have never lost any meat. The only place where flies and bacteria have ACCESS to the meat is where the shot wound is located. Once you cut into the animal then you certainly open up plenty of places for bacteria to start multiplying.

The other thing that increases the process is moisture. Putting the meat on ice is one of the worst things you can do. I would much rather hang the meat in the shade than throw it in a cooler where it will get wet from melting ice. The only time I lost any meat is when I threw the meat in coolers with ice to cool it. When that meat is sitting in water bacteria multiplies extreamly fast. Now days I bring a chest freezer and generator which makes for an ideal situation in any weather.

I hear you I don't know how many times I have heard someone talking about 800 to 1000 yard shots. and just looking and listening makes you disgusted

I practiced and have all the tools and have shot one shot hunting over 500 although I have shot a lot between 300-400 yds I am zeroed at 300 that puts me 11inchs low at 400 so anything under 400 I can just take a normal shot.

I've always been against long range shooting of animals. However,this year I witnessed two seperate bull elk killed at 612 yards and 580 yards. The first was with a 7mm RUM,the second was with a 300 win mag. Both were one shot kills. Not on accident either. The use of mildots and range finders really has changed the distances one can humanely kill elk and other big game at.

I am against them if someone is guessing and slinging lead

For them if they are calculating and controlled.

I work my tail off all summer at the range preparing for such a shot. This year I moved from my old faithful, 30'06 to my new 325 WSM. I ran 210 rounds through this gun over a 5 month period of time. I would shot 10 rounds per trip, perfecting the reloading rounds. Finally I found the "perfect" match of powder, bullet, seating, etc.....

Two weeks ago my last trip to the range before elk season started.....I shot ten rounds, 5 at 100 yards and 5 at 200 yards. At the 100 yard mark with swirling wind I still achieved a 0.7" group. At 200 yards, with the same swirling wind, I was able to keep them inside 2".

My reloads are chrono'd at an average of 2,710 fps for the last 50 rounds I fired with a 220 grain bullet. The gun is zero'd at 200 yards. At 300 yards it is 8" low....at 400 yards it is 23" low and at 500 yards it is 47" low. I also know that with a 10 mph crosswind, my bullet will drift 18 inches at 500 yards.

I am prepared to take a shot at 500 yards if I have a fabulous rest and am not huffing and puffing.

I say all this because if one does not know his gun as well as I know mine and if one is only willing to have the discipline to take only the best shots....then don't pull the trigger if that bull is beyond 300 yards.

Out here in Colorado it is very often that I see many an Elk across a small canyon 400-500 yards in a small opening surrounded by thick, black timber. You either take this shot or you pass on the animal.

I shoot a lot. I have a 400 yard range. I use a 300 Weatherby. I have taken a large mule deer at 565 yards, laser range finder verified distance.

Still 500 on elk: probably not.

W.H.
What kind of groups do you get at 500 yds when estimating the 47" drop ?

If he was using the rifle Burris Ballistic Plex reticle it would be precisely 3.55 "stadia units" below crosshair's center axis (at scope's highest magnification). Sounds to me the way he posted that that wouldn't be an estimation, but the end result of a calculation, that MUST be done to get to those ranges. Now, the accuracy of his group size is up to him, the conditions, and his rig; AND HIM ONLY, for that elk shot. Bet he'd be hauling quarters out though, while those LESS prepared, and/or less-inclined, may not. That's their choice, and if they're as practiced at their "system" as much as he sounds like he is with his, then they would deserve just as much respect for doing it their way. I've seen a handgun shooter clean 10 in a row without a miss between 585 and 685 yards on 8" silhouettes, by applying a calculated/tested system. But then that's my opinion, and mine only.

It depends on a lot of factors, but group size can be pretty small. A couple weeks ago a friend and I were shooting at 500 yards for the first time. It was the first time he had shot in 4 years. After taking a couple ranging shots with my .22-250, we were both able to hit a clay pigeon in a couple shots. Same with my .257 Roberts. The .22-250 had a mil-dot reticle, the .257 Roberts had a simple duplex. We then backed off to 600 yards where we shot my .300 Win Mag with a Burris Ballistic Plex reticle. One ranging shot, then one shot each on a freshly painted steel gong. The bullets impacted about 2� apart, with the �group center� about 3� out from center at the 10:30 to 11:00 position.

That is my only experience using bolt guns past 400 yards at the range, but it was enlightening.

Well thats not the kind of hunting that I like to do. (I also hunt with a bow.) But people can argue about what they see as a 'quality hunting experience'. One guys definition might not match another's. - - The point that we shouldn't have any argument about is the importance of putting down the game animal quickly & cleanly. When all is said and done, the animal is dead whether shot from 500 yards or 40. But the question to me is how certain you are that a shot will put down that animal by hitting the vital zone. - - Would you bet $1000 on that next shot ? How about your car or your house ? - - - A live magnificent bull elk isn't a steel gong that you can clip anywhere to ring or knock down.
I know there are riflemen that can make that 500 yard shot with complete confidence. They can do it even though winded from climbing up a mountain. They can do it from awkward shooting positions and over rough ground. They are able to dope the wind even in tricky canyons where the wind may be blowing from several different directions & velocities over that 500 yard distance. They can do this when looking at that huge bull without getting so overly excited that they rush/pull/flinch at the shot. After all this, such an accomplished rifleman will have to have the necessary equipment in terms of rifle/optics to place that shot (A 1 MOA rifle at 100 yards may not be so at 500, and he'll need a scope capable of adjusting for the distance. How well does his hunting bullet fly at that distance - he's not using match target ammo). So, I don't think you can put a hard and fast absolute number on whats possible in terms of range. Everyone thinks theyre a 'great shot'. But the typical hunter who doesn't put many rounds through his rifle except for checking that his scope is still on at the begining of the season doesn't have the required experience and skill. Its likely that those that can reliably make such a shot under field conditions are very, very few. - - To some its worse to risk losing a trophy bull than risk wounding that same bull, and to me that is very wrong.

The serious shooters/hunters that I know don't even consider shooting at 500 without some sort of dot/ballistic plex and or clicks so the 47" of drop isn't even in the equasion.

And if it was from any decent elk rig it would be more in the range of 25-30" of drop at 500 and not 47".

Mark D

I to shoot quite a bit, for the most part I run 1K rounds a year thru my dedicated long range rig.

And 99% of that is from hunt positions and either for 3 quick shots and or for groups one by one.

For the 3 quick shots I like to beat up the gong (434 yds is the longest gong we have readily available and what I do is run all 3 rounds thru the gun just as quick as I can reaquire and get the round off. I can't quite get the 2nd one going b4 the sound of the first hit gets back to me but I do get very close.

This old rifle of mine is on its 8th tube now and will be ready for its 9th some time in the 1st qtr of 07.

I do like the idea of being extremely intimate with my rifle.

Good luck to ya all.

Mark D

PS

Can you make that 40 yard shot every time regardless of situation. How much will your arrow drift in a 25 mph cross wind. How much do you have to adjust for a 20 degree up hill shot. Do you use a rangefinder to know he is 40 and not 43 or 47?

My brother, we are on teh same page, eating off the same plate, yet you don't see it, all you see is a difference.

I have the luxury of being a bowhunter since 1976 and having over 100 animals under my belt there, mostly deer and hogs.

I also am/was a competitive shooter and can tell you a 40 yard bow shot is no easier or difficult than a 500 yard rifle shot.

I shoot rifle all year. Know how often I shoot my bow? Shot it one arrow the other week to verify it was zero'd. The mechanics of the shot interchange.

What you need to realize is we pick what we want to do and how we do it. I change my methods every so often so I'm not so bored. Or maybe cause I need meat etc.....

We are the same and the shots mentioned are very similar. Have you compared the BC of the arrow at 200-300 fps and then the BC of the bullet at 3000 fps? I never have but often wonder if 500 and 50 yards respectively could be interesting.

Oh BTW, do you use multiple pins? Same as we do in rifle shooting IE mildots etc.... or clicking for the range.

I'd put 1000 on a 500 yard rifle shot, and a 40 yard bow shot. I think eihter from a non practiced hunter is irresponsible. I'm not 100% confident I could make either under the right circumstances. I am 150% confindent I could. I personally equal a 20 yard bow shot to a 100 yard rifle shot. Should be a chip shot for anyone but for many neither one is responsible.

Regards, Jeff

I'd put 1000 on a 500 yard rifle shot, ... I'm not 100% confident I could make either under the right circumstances. I am 150% confindent I could.

Just curious, what would be the right circumstances? Maybe like you are hunting in an indoor gun range and you have a bench rest? Seriously, define that for us.

Rost:

I have been following this thread for the last two weeks, and I finally have to add my two cents. You and some others have taken a few hits, and rightly so. I have read all about how you can make 500+ yard shots on a 700 lb animal with complete confidence. Well, I have been elk hunting for the better part of 30 years, and in at least five states. I have hunted with newbies, and with marine snipers. I have hunted these great animals in rain forests and in deserts. The one thing I can say about all of this with absolute certainty, is that if you, or anyone else is making a 500+ yard shot on one of these animals IN ANY CONDITIONS, you are LAZY, IRRESPONSIBLE, and probably care more about how you can brag to your friends how long the shot was, then your respect for the animal. There is absolutely NO excuse for not getting closer to elk that is 500 yards away. Wind bad? Walk around and get the wind in your face. No Cover? Wait, watch, and find an ambush point. Spotted by the lead cow? Hold still, don't talk, and let them calm down. Bottom line -- be a better HUNTER. And before you start to argue this fact -- you have no defense! If you truly cared about dipatching this animal in the most humane way possible, and being the best HUNTER possible, this wouldn't even be a discussion topic.

As one on my famous mentors once said, just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you shoud -- oh, and by the way, it's not ALL about penis size either.

rost - if you carefully read over my post again youll see that we are actually saying the same thing. One must have the necessary skill to ethically take the shot in terms of there being a very good chance that they will put the animal down quickly. - - (I say nothing about taking 40 yd bow shots or advocating anything regarding a bow.) - - You may be skilled enough to ethically make 500 yd rifle shots on some game (deer & hogs aint elk). Of course, I don't know you so I have no way of knowing. - - What I also say is that there are few hunters necessarily skilled and equipped. The ones I know are all very careful and methodical types who pay attention to all the details. - -

Where do all you guys hunt, where the wind is so dead calm that all you have to worry about is bullet drop?

Pointshoot-
My bad, I was in a hurry and read between the lines that were not there. I just happened to think those that take 40-50 yard bow shots and then complain about a midrange rifle shot are all wet. My apologies. I did not pay attention there at all.

McInis
Sure I'll play your game. Since no one seems to understand and why the hell should I have to constantly defend myself.....Anyway FYI background real quick. I'm an iron sight shooter in competition. A top ranked one when i was still shooting, one thats come away with the only perfect score at nationals on a few given days at the midrange targets. Thats everythign inside a 12 inch circle over a time limit of 20 minutes, iron sights, in whatever winds, light, temps, rain there was. With only a sling. NO rest. Well over 60% of those shots (up to 22 of them) are inside a 6 inch group at 600 yards. Am I capable? Yes I'd say so.

Conditions to take shot. Lets just go over my most recent shot(and this might answer some for bert too.(besides the fact I just want to!)
Last day of caribou hunt. Yep I'm there to actually shoot one. Not just to admire and eat tag soup. I've flown many thousands of miles and I'm not ashamed to say I want to kill one.

We have spotted one in teh morning, of course its miles away but by itself. Takes us hours to get closer, and cannot find it back. Our only other choice is we finally see some more over 5 miles away and its some 3 hours before dark right now. So you see we can't do that. We wait it out till its gonna be dark till we get back and about the time we get up to leave we see the bull come back out. From where I don't know cause one minute the tundra is bare, the next he is out feeding. We hurry to cut the range down and get it under 1000 yards. Of course its evening so the winds have calmed. They were mild all day running 5-7mph most of the day and very consistent in direction( its tough to shoot in switching winds and if hunting where I dont' have to shoot like in a match, I wont). Being a competitor I tend to pay attention to things like this. Just in case. My partner is a former 4H shooter I've coached. We get the range cut down to what looks workable to me and then run into a canyon. Cannot go any further with time running out and leaving the next morning. IE it would be dark by the time we track back around and get over it(it took us over an hour after the shots just to get to him as it was which was through the canyon but he could have seen us cut through the canyon so we could not while he was alive).
With time running out I have ballistic marks in the scope and I know exactly where to hold at 600 yards. The scope is zero'd for this elevation and temperature as we did that when we got to camp and it had not changed much. It had actually warmed up so i had already adjusted the zero .5 moa the day before.
Get the rangefinder out. A huge boulder next to bull, ranges 801/802 repeatedly. Take the incline of slope with my compass, do a quick calculation and find out horizontal distance ends up being just over 600 yards. So I use my 600 yard mark. Take off the backpack, get out the gun and ammo. Prone shot. Take a couple of dry fires at the bull who is grazing and has no clue. I can hold easily on him within what looks to be about a 2 inch area of wobble as a max. I normally have about a .4 moa wobble area with irons and a sling and feel that prone with a scope over a pack is even easier. Load up and have my buddy spot for me. Tell him just to keep watching. We are in tune. He and I see the bull angling as he feeds. In the meantime I'm watching the mirage real close. The mirage is indicating just a tiny bit of downhill (thermal) wind that has a minor rt to lt component in it. Such that according to my wind chart a 2mph wind(no way its over that) is gonna need me to fudge a bit. So instead of clicking I feel I can easily fudge it 4 inches or so and that should be plenty good. Takes probably close to 10 minutes to get the shot off, one time I was real close and Spencer stops me as I'm letting off the trigger as the bull was good, but starting to angle. I will not fire the gun, I always let it fire itself which means a perfect break. I have a nice white tuft of hair in the heart area to aim at, top of aorta area basically so I'm comfortable there. Thankfully the bull has remained there all this time. At the last second I see the mirage start to pick up just a bit and shade a hair more with the horizontal mark. Gun goes off, I instantly reload and find the bull standing facing the other way to my right now. Ask about a spot and he said if anything a hair low is what he saw. Since it was a hit but bull was standing, I tell him I'm gonna hold spine this time(not hairline but spinal column) and the shot breaks. Caribou is down.
After some pictures, and packing up we start up and over. Hour later we find that I was exact on for elevation but had factored in a bit much for what I saw as wind, shot hitting about 4 inches further back than I wanted, taking out lungs. Second shot I held same favor for wind and broke the spine, also about 4 inches behind the front leg knuckle.

Those were workable conditions for me. And being 100 yards closer for an elk would be easier too.
Bottom line I have to feel comfortable in teh conditions. Mirage reads great up to abotu 12 mph or so. Over that its such that I won't shoot past about 300 yards. Leaves a LOT of chances out. need to have a solid rest, that is not defined, but I gauge it off my wobble area while dry firing. I'm very picky once you get past 300 or so. 300 you can usually flop down and pop one off quick, but every 100 past that factors in extra time to check things out. Bottom line is I really can't say until the situation arises as I want to be confindent of hitting a clay target at the range I'm shooting.
Did you have 1000 to spare laying around that you needed to burn up? Say against a 12inch steel gong? 1 round.

Bert-- yep you can say all you want about lazy etc.... and not getting closer, I enjoy the challenge of the long shot. I shoot way more than most naysayers. And to top it off I've been close too. 3 yards with my bow is the closest kill. Either one is challenging. So I take it as it comes. Still say i'm more reliable at 500 than most any weekend warrior is at 100 or 200. Hell most folks dont' even think about wind, altitude,temperature, pressure, humidity, slope angle etc.... Most have no clue where the bullet would hit at 500 much less most never shoot past 100, but trust drop tables off the ammo box for a 200 or 300 yard shot, and thats fine for everyone else, no one complains about that, but here you have folks that can make a 500 yard shot, and you want to chide us for it? Please.... Humane. How exactly do you define that? A quick death. Its the only thing I"ve seen from most of my shots. Want to hear about my inhumane shot a few years back that still bothers me? Took a chip shot at a young buck. Wanted the meat. He was standing still at about 70 yards, I was sitting, leaned the gun up against the tree, put it on his lungs ,rolled the safety off and pressed the trigger when the red dot settled in low on the lungs/heart. Result was a lost deer with a broken leg. Bullet exploded on an unseen vine about 3 feet in front of him, about the size of a pencil. Followed him and jumped him in the swamp one more time, over 4 hours later, with no shot as a result. Thats the one that bothers me most. Not any of the long pokes that are kills. None of the 300 plus yard head shots. Nope nothing long range -- it was the 70 yarder that haunts me. And I just took that 70 yard shot because I could.... Come on, wake up, we are all in this together. I've never said that most should take this shot, I still say most folks have no business with a 200 yard shot really. By the way i don't go out looking for the long shot, read my tagline. If there is time and a way to get closer, I will, every damn time. Had 2 bucks inside of 10 yards last nite. Chose not to harvest tough. But I wont' eat tag soup either if my skills allow me to harvest.
Bert-- might I ask how many rounds a year you fire? And how far you practice at? How often you practice. How much will wind affect your bullet at 200 yards?

Unfortunately your mind is made up and I wont' change it so my arguments are a waste, which is a shame.

I think we should all be about done with this one. I gotta get back to firewood anyway.

Regards, Jeff

rost - very interesting last post. We are completely in agreement about the need for a humane kill first and foremost (to me that is putting the animal down quickly and with as little suffering as possible). Beyond this people get into arguments about what defines the Quality of the hunt and there seems to be a wide variation of attitudes regarding this. Good hunting - - -

I've seen more problems in long range shooting caused by the shooter second guessing himself,then failure of equipment or wind drift.

I've also seen more animals wounded with archery and half box of ammo a year types then everything else combined.

I also benchrest....and will be going through a barrel a year on my 12 pound .223. That is where I learned how to shoot 500 yard shots with a hunting rifle.

Like another poster...I am also a bow hunter. I highly value the ability to get close to my prey. Matter of fact, if you read my posting on Backpack hunting, I stalked to within 75 yards of a Massive Mule Deer Buck last weekend (not knowing if it was a deer or an elk...very thick cover....all I could see was the tip of a horn. I only have an Elk Tag.) I love to still hunt and stalk, but as I mentioned in my earlier post....sometimes, it just can't be done. At that point a hunter has to know if they have the abilities and the weapon to make a 400-500 yard shot.

Honestly, I think everyone shot hone their skills to the point that they can constantly hit a 9" pie plate at 500 yards. We should all be that good.

It really rips me to see a couple of guys come to the range once a year, run 10 rounds through their hunting rifle and be happy with a 3" group at 100 yards. These are the guys that start slinging lead at a bull 400 yards away....injuring a few.

Just my two cents.

I heard a quote sometime (I don't remember the source): "To not know is bad enough, but to not know that you don't know is tragic." - - and that is the danger that I see. There are some guys who do lots of long range bench rest shooting. (Of course a nice comfortable bench isn't field shooting at a fleeting game animal while tired from climbing a mountain.) These guys handload their own ammo - it gives them the best match to their rifles and it would cost too much if they shot the required amount of factory ammo to be proficient anyway. They know their rifles - which theyve either tweaked from a factory rifle or have a full custom rig. They can figure the necessary come-ups on their scope quickly when needed, or use the appropriate marks on a mil-dot or other appropriate reticle. They have a great deal of experience doping the wind.- - - But such guys aren't the average Joe Blow hunter who has no clue what's really involved for such a shot. (How many times do we keep seeing articles in the general gun magazines entitled "Do you hold high or low on uphill shots?" - - I agree with Wilderness Hunter when he says that everyone can hone their skills to a very high level - - - but because of limitations of interest, time, money, personal commitments, etc - - very few do so. I do wish those that have made the required commitment would preface their stories about the long shots they made with some further background about what they needed to do to prepare themselves beforehand. Maybe that will help prevent the yahoos from thinking " I'll just send one over, this new fangled magnum will shoot that far and Joe Rifleman on the forum made one longer than that . . . " <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> If you randomly picked out 100 elk hunters from the license rolls, how many have the required skill ? I don't know 5 in 100, 2 in 100 ? I very much doubt its as much as 10 in 100. So for the vast majority of people the answer to the question asked by this thread is No. Do the benchrest shooter/hunters disagree ?
P.S. - Everyone interested might check out this article in Rifle Shooter Magazine by John Sundra entitled "Hunting vs Shooting: Is There a Difference ?" http://www.rifleshootermag.com/shooting_tips/hunsch_082106/index.html
I happen to choose to be a hunter first and a shooter second, but that's just me. - - As youll see from the Sundra article, hunting requires attention to the animal catching your scent, cover, movement, etc - while shooting concentrates on equipment and technical matters more than fieldcraft. - - Well, as long as theres a good, clean humane kill of the animal - your hunt quality is your business. (BTW - Sundra identifies himself as a shooter first rather than hunter.)

3� at 100 ain�t so bad � wish they all would do so well...

PS

I always tend to downgrade myself. If the truth be known, the fact that I have a few Presidents 100 medals in which you fire, without sighters, from 200 to 600 yards both slow adn rapid fire with an AR15 basically, P100 means top 100 shooters in the nation. Reflecting back on that issue, I suspect that out of 100 shooters capable of being 150% confident in the first shot at 500, I suspect the number may well be much closer to less than 1 per 100.

10 out of 100 is probably wishful thinking. Again its why I infer the impossibilities of a 300 yard shot in weather and terrain to my hunter ed classes. Just cause someone can do it, doesnt' mean everyone can.

Jeff

rost495 - - - Jeff, you sound like a very accomplished marksman and I congratulate you on your success and on the discipline & hard work necessary to achieve that. - - You sound like one of those rare fellows who can ethically make that long shot and I applaud you for educating the vast majority of folks on what it takes to do so (and to not make the attempt till they are truly able) BTW - I watched a video on handloading for High Power Rifle competition featuring G. David Tubb awhile ago (as you know but others might not, Mr. Tubb is a very accomplished competitive long range shooter with many wins in competition and he is also a hunter). At one point in the video, a 400 yard range shot was mentioned and Tubb said that it wasn't a shot that you would take at a game animal. Now I suspect that Mr Tubb would actually be quite able to make such a shot himself - though I don't know what his personal policy is in that regard. I have also seen him put shots into the black on a target that was 1 mile away using a 6.5-284. I suspect his comment on the 400 yd game shot was for the vast majority of hunters - probably the 99% that you mentioned in your last post. - - Regards, - -

I agree....if they will keep their shots inside 200 yards. But, that 3" at a 100 yards.....turns into 15" at 500 yards....not taking windage into effect and if they shoot to their ability with Buck Fever....which means they are probably wounding an animal.

PS

I know David. Have had the extreme pleasure of using my AR service rifle to beat him at his game vs his tweaked out bolt guns. He is a much better shot than I am. My case was something along the lines of a pig and acorns.....

I know he'll kill game much further than 400. He just isn't as dumb as I am to defend the fact or make it public that we would do just that. Trying to think back, but something in a conversation about an offhand 400-500 M shot at something big game once. Of course he is probably one of the very best, if not the best offhand shooter around. Have been out of the shooting loop now a bit and have not talked to him in a few years, though one of my partners talks to him quite often.

BUT point is well taken, and I'd like to thank you for your time on this subject, I enjoy talking to level headed folks. I again apologize for my mis read of your earlier post.

Regards, Jeff

rost495 - Jeff, its been informative and a pleasure. I figured you might have run into David Tubb since he's from your part of the country. Regards & good shooting, - - -

Some links for you: ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel is page about ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel. lowest price for buspar is page about lowest price for buspar. acne treatment side effects is page about acne treatment side effects . buy plavix online no prescription is page about buy plavix online no prescription. canada celexa is page about canada celexa. prices for tramadol is page about prices for tramadol. cheap ativan is page about cheap ativan. xanax free shipping is page about xanax free shipping. ibuprofen 800mg is page about ibuprofen 800mg. purchase ceftin is page about purchase ceftin. soma carisoprodol is page about soma carisoprodol. diazepam 10mg is page about diazepam 10mg. buy ceftin without prescription is page about buy ceftin without prescription. prices for carisoprodol is page about prices for carisoprodol. wellbutrin xl side effects is page about wellbutrin xl side effects. cialis is page about cialis. buy soma cheap online is page about buy soma cheap online. retin review is page about retin review. tramadol hci is page about tramadol hci. cheap levitra is page about cheap levitra. percocet pill is page about percocet pill. valium without prescription is page about valium without prescription. buy lortab online no prescription is page about buy lortab online no prescription. mexican pharmacy soma is page about mexican pharmacy soma. prozac and pregnancy is page about prozac and pregnancy.

Would I? Not on your life.
Could I? Yes.
Should I? No.

Too many things can go wrong at that distance.

Hunterbug-I find your post welcome. You talk about would "you" instead of the normal "no one should".

Whenever someone starts passing judgement on what someone else should or should not be doing I don't appreciate it nor is it a good way for use IMO to go about life.

Thx for your candor about what you would do and for not attempting to judge others based off of you.

Mark D

Good tools 500 yarders can by done.The first moose I got with my STW was 436 yds.Didn't know that till after I shot.Ranged it after.But I also practice and practice and practice at longer range shooting.

If you take the time and know your gun and loads it is possible.At 3 high at a 100 my STW shooting 150 NP drops very little.Wind is a whole different post.

Shot my New Mexico 6x6 at a lasered 448 yards....300RUM, 180 Scirroco, 3350MV, dead on @300.

Bull never took a step.

I don't see what the beef is all about. If you have the right equipment and have the right trigger time at long distances, it really isn't that hard on a elk sized target.

I shot mine off of a bypod. The sight picture didn't look all that different than a bench rest shot. Could be the reason I took the shot eh ??

There might be a hint in that last paragraph...............

Tony

PS : 7STW, response was not directed at you...I agree with your post, just hit the respond button after yours.

Mark:



That's a great statement and maybe the best I've read on the thread.

Regardless of what some have said here, it is NOT always possible to get closer due to numerous factors.

Mark's comment really gets to the nut of the issue......it's a moral decision each hunter has to make based on his experience and ability and the given circumstances.

Guess what separates everyone is their own honesty with themselves and their capabilities.

All 500 yd shots are not created equal, either.

JMHO

MM

MM, well said and ditto's to Mark.

Good posts Hunterbug and Dob!

You are not shooting at an elk size target, or at least you shouldn't be! The kill area on an elk is not that much larger than a deer.

husq,

I hate to break this to you, but the kill zone on an elk IS larger than a deer....especially the terrier sized deer you guys hunt in Texas.

Now talk about a Canadian deer, or big bodied mule deer, you are getting closer, but the elk is still larger.

Not talking about 1 year old elk calfs right ...............

You been reading Field and Stream lately ? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Tony

Your assumptions are wrong. Most of my whitetails have been shot in Wisconsin. In my earlier years deer hunting for me was for mule deer in New Mexico and Colorado.

husqvarna,
A New Mexico mulie has the same size vital area as a mature bull elk???????? What are you smoking?

I suspect ya'll aint' reading husky right there. I THINK he is alluding to the fact the vitals of an elk are the size of a small wt. Not the size of a small wt's vitals...

I hunt Alberta....and the biggest bodied Mulie or Whitetail from Northern AB doesnt come close to a bull elk.......

Not sure what you're tryin to say husq....

That would make more sense.....

I did kill a calf two years ago. It was an any elk area. They're trying to keep the elk from competing with the quality deer in the area.

320 yards, no wind, seated, sling wrapped. One shot while it was at a slow walk. Hit it 2" to the left of where I wanted the bullet to hit, dropped in under 5 seconds.

A full sized elk in the same situation with a good rest or a bipod wouldn't be any harder than that. I know lots of guys that are forced to take cross canyon shots or go home with an unfilled tag. They've learned to get it done at ranges up to 600 yards when the conditions are right. When they aren't then they don't shoot. That crew was 5 for 6 this year on bulls in an area that people complain about the wolves killing all the elk in.

Some links for you: lowest price darvon is page about lowest price darvon. cheap phenergan no prescription is page about cheap phenergan no prescription. paxil online pharmacy is page about paxil online pharmacy. cialis pill is page about cialis pill. capoten delivery is page about capoten delivery. order piroxicam cheap is page about order piroxicam cheap. accupril drug is page about accupril drug. cyclobenzaprine info is page about cyclobenzaprine info. discount indocin online is page about discount indocin online. buy accutane online is page about buy accutane online. online order accutane is page about online order accutane. 30mg percocet is page about 30mg percocet. oxycodone withdrawal symptom is page about oxycodone withdrawal symptom. effects side tramadol is page about effects side tramadol. where to buy diazepam is page about where to buy diazepam. order without prescription codeine is page about order without prescription codeine. fiorinal with codeine is page about fiorinal with codeine. demerol phenergan is page about demerol phenergan. salmeterol online is page about salmeterol online. zolpidem online is page about zolpidem online. tylenol 4 codeine is page about tylenol 4 codeine. xanax is page about xanax. testosterone for woman is page about testosterone for woman. online zolpidem prescription is page about online zolpidem prescription. keflex is page about keflex.

So if you don't catch trout with your hands it isn't sporting?

Divide and conquer that is what gives the anti-(you pick the topic) group the upper hand.

In Pennsylvania it is the muzzleloader hunters that use flintlocks vs. percussion vs. in-line shooters. The only difference is the ignition system. Or patched round ball vs. conical bullet. The anti's win in the end.

Some can shoot long and some can't. Some hunt close and some don't. So what! Does that make one better or worse than the other?

I have a friend who can consistently kill sod rats (I refuse to call them prairie dogs as the bunny huggers think they are cute) at 650 to 750 yards. Is he un-ethical?

You guys are picking fly chitt out of pepper.

Taking game at long range is nothing to brag about or be ashamed of either. It is a skill pure and simple - some people have developed it and some haven't. I try to get as close as possible but realize that sometimes it is shoot long or leave empty handed. I have done both and probably will again. Each of us has to decide what we are comfortable with in terms of personal skill and ethics but I don't subscribe to any universal standard - too many variables.

Interesting thread about all the different calibers that can and can't do it. Most hunting rifles can shoot a hunk of lead a long way, no doubt about it. (several kilometers if you shoot high)One thing not mentioned is that you need energy remaining when it gets to it's target. If you haven't between 1200-1500 ft/pounds of energy left at what ever range your shooting at that elk then you should not try it. For you to find this out you have to look in your ballistic charts if you have any. Shooting paper targets and plywood is not relative to knocking down an elk at great distances. Large Bull Elk are not that easily killed. 1200-1500 ft lbs of energy is the optimum that is reccomended in professional hunting. Check your ballistic charts and then come back to the forum for more discussion.

Guess thats why I consistently think that 338 Win Mag and faster, with a good projectile(225 xish....) is a good start for a longer shot......

Yes rost495 it looks like you have done your homework and I would believe you if you told me that you clobbered one at 500 yards because you have the potential with that caliber. It takes years of working up loads and practise but with the right gear it can be done.

ddsd

Even my 7mm Dakota center-grip XP-100 has 1500 foot pounds of energy at 1000 yards (elevation 8500) using the 200 grain Wildcat with a 2706 MV. I didn't shoot a bull this year, but a mid-sized cow, and one shot did the trick on her, as she never got up. Since she was still moving her head, I reloaded and fired again. Right before I fired, steve was preparing to tell me not to shoot as she was dead, but the 2nd shot broke before he could get it out. Range was far from 1000 yards, but it was over 500.
Typical practice distance for me this past year (field shooting=prone with bipod was 600 yards).
Wind is the biggest issue with me for distance shooting. Using a high BC bullet (.800) which still works well on elk helps a lot.

Actually the load work up in a good gun might take a week to get to great ammo if the barrel isn't a bummer.

But years of highpower match shooting help a lot in reading wind. Distances are much a non issue with rangefinders, quickly calculated horizontal distances and any temperature related issues are already at hand...

Most have no business with this kind of shot. But you run into above average folks on this board. Face it the slobs of wally world boresighted cotton clothed road hunters don't take time to read and learn...

Jeff

xphunter I didn't realize that this single shot bolt action pistol(if it can be called that) was such a heavy hitter. That's some shooting. I would like to check this in my balistic tables? What is the barrel length? Great BC. Obviously you reload and have found the magic recipe for your unit and that doesn't come easy, especially when you start dealing with BTs. BTs are finicky and some rifles don't group well with them especially in the larger Bee rifles. Great talking at you. Have a good day.

Yeah I know what you mean rost495. Usually you just have to look at the gear there using at the shooting range.(if they even go there)You know if the guy is hard core or a box a year shooter. I started out by building bullets for some of my friends/brother that do competitive shooting and I learned a lot from them. My best shooter is my 378 mag weatherby 26"with 3.5-15 x 56 RF Night force scope mounted atop. (120"MOA) Its not a custom like many of my friends use but it's a good all around gun. I'm on my second barrel so you know I use it. I've been reloading for 35 years and have played around with 12 different rifles that I own. I don't need to tell you the range that this unit can go. But try 50" MOA and zero at 225yd shooting 270 grains at 3200 f/sec hitting with 3000 ft LBs at 500 yards. Plug that in your ballistic program and you and I will be probably some of the few on this forum that can calculate it. Wind is a curse no doubt. Have a good none windy day Rost495

378,
This XP is sort of a evolution of LR shooting with XP's (and few other SP actions). I had some specific LR goals in mind and had Kirby Allen chop the barrel at just a smidget under 18". I have shot some of my SP's up in Pella, IA at the 1k IBS comps and they have a club handgun class and limited barrel length @ 18". So any LR rig I have built will be just tad under 18" so I can play up there when I get the chance again.
When speaking to some folks at Hogdgon & Kirby we came up with Retumbo being a good starting point. I have had several other specialty handguns in larger than normal cartridges and have discovered that the powders that work best with rifles also work best with the specialty handguns (14'-17"). Kirby did some initial load development with retumbo and it was good. So I just took it from there and fiddled some with bullet seating length and settled with a MV of 2706 fps.
Load development was easy this time aruond.
He designed the reamer around the brass (made by Norma) and made the neck what I would call a match neck, where no turning is required but it is still very tight by most standards. I do light clean-up with my K-M neck turner and most of the typical accuracy stuff. Yep, just put in a .800 BC w/8500 elevation, temps in the 30's and results should be quite close.
Actual load is 76.0 grains of Retumbo w/the 200 grainer-safe in my rig, but may not be in yours. It was throated with the 200 WC in mind. I could run it faster but I am content with it's accuracy (no ejector marks on the head). I originally guesstimated a 2750-2775 MV, but oh well.
To date all of my shooting with it has been off of a bi-pod. Some off of a bench while a good portion was of course prone.
When field shooting I use my kestrel combined with a pocket pc loaded with Exbal to get an accurate reading of Barometric pressure. This is an easy rig to shoot and my 12 year old enjoys shooting too. I use a rifle scope (I don't see a full FOV when I shoot it) on it that has Holland's ART reticle or I can run clicks. I do both but will run clicks when I have the time.
It is a puff-cake to shoot so it has been nicknamed "Puff" (Holland QD brake is wonderful).
Specialty handguns will typically run from 200-300 fps slower than similarly chambered rifles.
Specialty pistols are harder to use than rifles, but that is part of the fun and the challenge. I don't own any centefire rifles and I don't feel handicapped using singleshots. I do not hunt dangerous game.

Guess my .300 Win Mag and 180g TSX are good to 600 yards (1500fpe) or 735 yards (1200fpe).

Now if the shooter was just adequate...

DITTO, Don. When macho leaves reason behind we get the irresponsible long pot-shot crowd. Even with the "right equipment" the shooter has NO idea as to what the wind is doing 500-700 yards away, and that perfectly placed shot is blown off by FEET, not inches.

And, at those ranges you have a 30-30 at 100 yards. Its about hunting, not lobbing hopes and prayers. P.O. Ackley said it best a long time ago..."most hunters couldn't hit a flock of circus tents at that range".

None of you ever brag about the wounded animals that you leave, never knowing for sure that you even punched a hole into the critter.

Now that I've made a bunch of new friends, I'll end my rant. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

If a 30-30 at 100 yards is a hope and a prayer, it's due to the operator. Maybe you should lecture less and practice more.

Hi Luv2safari. You are correct with the statement about blown off by feet. I've purposely shot in slight winds to see if I could calibrate my windage to compensate for left to right drift and vice versa. I've spent hours doing this and now on my 3rd wife. Mine was not a golf widow she was a shooter's widow. I have tried the same shot with up to 4 different calibers. 25-06, 7mm mag, 300mag and the 378mag which I still own. The caliber the least pushed off was the heavier bullets in all calibers and the winner was the 378mag. The 25-06 drifted 2 feet as you said but the 378 drifted 1 foot at 700 yards with 5-7 mile an hour cross wind, it didn't affect elevation. When I see through my scope the leaves moving or grass moving I know it is to windy and I try to stalk closer. But for black bears that have killed 3 people in my life time the canon will roar.

After reading my post, I needed to expand. The rifles that I used can group in 1 inch at 100 yards. 12 inch at 500 yard. This is set up on sand bags with no wind at the range. I reload all my own bullets weighing every charge exactly. If you use factory ammo other than match bullets, which still aren't as good as reloaded bullets because they are seated,charged (customized) for your rifle. The very slightest difference in powder will vary the bullet point of impact. Add this to the wind push and you can miss the animal entirely or wound it at 500 yards. Luv2safari is correct in his statement and long shots are not for the average shooters. 12 inch accuracy at 500 yards is sniper shooting/reloading expert skills which most hunters don't have. The people that were killed by black bears was my 1st wife, the daughter of a close friend and a fellow worker on a Drilling rig in Northern Alberta.

Don't want to flame ya and please don't take it as such, but 12 inches at 500 yards off a bench in no wind really sucks. 500 yards even my factory rifles can be loaded so that they will shoot 6 inches or so. A good rifle should be shooting 2-3 inches or less at 500. I guarantee its far from sniper accuracy. My best AR15s will shoot 2 inches or less at 600 yards for 5 shot groups.
Only other thing is that you really need to know the difference between 5 and 7mph before you shoot. Which only takes a lot of shooting in differing conditions, but I would not hold the same for a 5mph as a 7mph wind.

My sympathies on the bear deaths, especially your wife. Im' readign between the lines though-- if you'd dink a bear at long range just cause you are pissed, remember if you manage to wound one they are then more dangerous... Not that any of us would take a shot that would wound.
One poster alluded to wounding here, not realizing that LR shooters ethics are much higher than your run of the mill idiot.
Jeff

No offense taken, I would like to see you put a 5 round group from my 378 mag in less than 6 inches even on a bench rest at 500 yards. . My other rifles are easier to shoot and I can do better. Remember this is hunting ammo not high price tournament pills. Next time your at the range look for a big bore bee and try it just for fun. If you can shoot like you say you can you can come up to Canada and clean up at all the shooting tournaments hands down. My rifles are all off the shelf with no trigger work done, what every Joe Blow hunts with. Level the playing field. The rifle you talk about is a specialty item not an off the shelf unit. Are you ex-military? You have training of some kind.

Yep I have a few years of experience under the belt.
As to off the shelf stuff, nope, no way I'd hunt like that. All my factory guns have worked on triggers, lapped in scope rings, loads worked up with good bullets, generally the X series, not match bullets. Remember TSX are really capable accuracy wise. All rifles are pillar bedded. Then if they don't shoot right, the get blueprinted and a custom tube. And possibly a new stock. I'm not going to handicap myself with an inaccurate rifle. As to your recoil, I"ve very familiar with the 378 and hate it with a passion without a brake. But what remains there is consistent position, body tension or lack thereof, and follow through. Works for every round out there.
Back to the ammo, again the only difference between my hunting ammo and match ammo in preparation is choice of the projectile.

You can do the exact same with your rifles. Bed them, adjust the trigger, play with the ammo till it works, primers, powders, bullets, seating depth, neck tension and so on. No need to handicap yourself. By doing so you eliminate the long shots. If the best my gun did at 500 was 12 inches I would not be taking a poke at that range for sure....

Brake on the 378 and I'd love to come shoot it!!! We've seen some really good groups from the 338.378 wtby rounds.

BTW my longest shot to date is 802, factory 338 Win Mag, Remmy. But worked on for ammo and gun, factory barrel. Shot groups of around 6 inches at 600 yards off my 600 yard bench. Not all that bad. New barrel would help it along though, but its a friends gun....

Jeff

Well buddy your in a different league. I don't have an unlimited budget. I have reloaded for many years basically to save money and to get the best groups that I can with what I purchased off the shelf. I have reloaded for friends of mine that have high dollar custom guns such as you have. I know about seating and other loading tricks. These guys run Kimber barrels, bedded,lapped fine tuned units but like I said I don't have an unlimited budget such that you have. You have the Porshe and I have the volkswagon. Let's race scenario. It's been great talking to you and have a great day.

This is a chip shot for a person who has the dedicated equipment and time.
It is hunting. Especially here in the west.
Being proficient in the longer ranges just expands your opportunity to harvest a trophy.
Those who denounce this are often those who can't do it or can't do it well.

JonA,

You mistake facts with lecturing. Nobody can know exactly what the wind is doing out at 500-800 yards, only where they are shooting from. I GET IT <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> You put windsocks on the elk's antlers... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

As to whether I can shoot, BOYS...I was almost killed in my younger days while shooting Russian Engineers off missle platforms being built on a certain island S of FL. All this with "old technology" rifles at 700-1000 meters. We nailed our targets, but got our asses blown off afterward.

I won't appologize to anyone for my "lack" of experience. If you can't get close enough for responsible shots at something that can't shoot back, you're not hunting...just shooting.

I don't want to pick a fight here, as this is a wonderful forum. My point is that it is not altogether responsible to take these shots; there are far too many things that can go wrong. I ask that the quary be respected, that's all. I guided for a while years ago, but left it because I didn't like seeing things get sideways far too often. To many hunters don't do what the long shooters do, (and I freely give that credit) learn your rifle BEFORE the hunt, not during the hunt.

As to the reference about a 30-30, it sure isn't an elk round, but that is what you have when the bullet gets out too far...30-30 at 100s yard energy...not my Idea of an elk killer.

OK, your turn to beat me up; I'm a big boy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Elk at 100 yards with a .30-30 is a no brainer. Easy if you can shoot. If you can't, it won't matter what you use.

378
Don't be fooled. I do my own bedding, gun work, stock work, trigger tuning and loading. Things like learning to load by Audette test to get in a sweet spot is easy and cheap. If you have bad bullets, get some Accubond types and you'll be happy. I've one custom tube so far on a bolt gun(have many on competition ARs though).

I'm forced to do it mostly myself, I'm rural US, on a very rural pay scale and have to do other odd jobs to cover some expenses.

You can do the same also.

Lots of my practice time is dry fire, lots of practice ammo is bulk bullets, used cases, and surplus powder that I paid maybe 3 bucks a pound for in 200 pound containers.....

Its all relative. I don't have a 2500 dollar or more rifle here. And probably never will.

BTW with a factory tube, many times running fire lapping helps make the tube workable by far.

Jeff

Luv2 Safari

Only know what the wind is on the line? If thats the case I'd never shoot perfect targets in a match. I do rely on wind flags a lot on certain ranges. But if the wind is 12 mph or less(which it would have to be for me to take a long shot) I can read it to within 1 mph the whole distance to the target.
Ever hear of mirage? Focusing for it as you move in and out tells you what each layer of wind is doing. Most targets are surrounded by dirt, dust, grass, leaves, trees, limbs etc...... also.
If you know and learn there are tons of indicators, from here to there. And terrain changes indicate what to expect along the way, along with vegetation. For changes, the mirage always winks at you before it plays with you. You are shooting through optics(vs me lookign in a spotter and then rolling to irons to shoot quickly and rolling back to the spotter only to almost die by what changed for the 10 seconds it took me to shoot, or more... I'm talking my match shooting) so you can identify and see changes before they happen.

Its all in how much you have learned.

How do you think that 1000 yard shooters can lay there in a seminar, center up the sights, and then never touch the sights, but shoot shot after shot, telling you exactly where its gonna hit. They see whats changing and know how much it will affect each shot.

Jeff

Jeff,

You make MANY good points and speak the truth. Your experience will set you in good stead most of the time, but those long cross-canyon shots are the ones that can go very wrong at times. The wind along the way isn't near anything and is difficult to detect, plus sudden gusts are the norm.

My late friend, Skip Talbot, was a pioneer in long shooting. He lived about 12 miles from my place. I never ceased to be amaized at his ability to read winds. He was THE exception of all all exceptional 1000 yard shooters, IMO. He didn't try extreme shots while hunting, however, but he could shoot the eye-winkers off a frog at 400 yards with a sporting rifle.

rost, 378,

If your rifle doesn't hold MOA there is no sensein shooting it past 100 yards.
I prep all my "hunting" loads the same way I do my match loads. matter of fact I never have to worry about if I have the right box or not.
THere is no reason why anything hunting related should be "second hand" or not built or prepped the same. Even factory sticks should be tweek as much as possible and can be "tweeked" to hold MOA.

12" at 500 yards reguardless of caliber is not braggin rights. If you are afraid of the rifle.. sell it.

Luv2

Hear you clearly. The one thing folks just continue to miss or read past, IMHO, is that we have the right to pass on shots and often do. Rather than just blasting one across.

I totally hear you on gusts in canyons. Actually a 500 yard shot isn't much of a thing, even in a canyon. If I'm in tune, as I should be, I can anticipate the increase, its the letups that are hard to sense, read, feel etc.... which is just the same really.

I'd still venture to say that more shots are muffed at 300 yards, due to range estimation errors, no favor for wind and other factors than the LR folks do. I have not mentioned that most of my personal shots each year are under 100 yards... and I'm happy with that. But I won't pass the longer shot if needed.

Wyo
Wanna stir the pot a bit? How about rifles that are barely moa at 300 but seriously sub moa at 600? I've got a few. They are match rifles. I have to shoot different ammo at 300 than I do at 600-1000 yards.... But in reality a factory gun thats 1 inch at 100 is more than likely about 10 at 500, instead of the assumed 5 inches...
I fail to see why folks don't work on their guns the best they can, tons of stuff you can research and do on your own to help out. Including loading issues.
I wonder if 378, due to living in Canada, simply cannot access or afford good loading stuff or work on the rifles. We are lucky here to still be somewhat free, even with the recent advances of the demos, we still have fair rights, more so than other countries. Though Wildcat bullets are from Canada and are some really top line bullets that are match grade and could help 378s accuracy issues some as long as its not him.

Jeff

rost,

I hear what you're saying. My rifles are under MOA to about 1200. Typically if my groups at 500 are more than 3" I get a bit anxious and it drives me crazy. I understand the different load for different ranges. I turn myself inside out until I find the. best "all distance load"
378, I suspect is a bit afraid of the shoulder cannon based on his post. But I know some big bore factory stick that shoot much better than that. A little tweek here and they and lightening of the factory 12lb trigger would help.

Wyo
I suspect the same with 378 too. Seems like his other rifles he can shoot better. So its only 2 things the rifle/ammo or the shooter.

Course big guns can be tougher to master, but the basics are still the same. Would probably be interesting to watch me shoot a 378 non braked with dummy rounds mixed in too!

Last I shot was a 338 RUM no brake. It was ok, but for load testing about 15 pounds of lead shot against the shoulder sure made life better.

500 yard loads really should scare being under 2 inches IMHO. Can't always get there but 1-1.5 inches is really nice.

Jeff

Thanks for the tips guys, I know I have a hard trigger, but I'm happy with the results at 500 yards with my 378 magnum. 50% of the guys that shoot it walkaway with blood running down off their head from the cut over their eye. I reload for max hitting power and all my jugs are compression loads. Like I said "I can do better with my other rifles" I can load down for accuracy but I don't want that. I want to nail them hard whatever I shoot at. Don't forget that these rounds will have more hitting energy at 500 yards than your rifles have at the muzzle. I have shot moose through 12 inch trees and the moose dropped like a sack of shiit. Where I hunt is heavily forested and if you wait for the clear shot you go home with nothing. I wouldn't brag about accuracy but I will tell you honestly that I have left a lot of gut piles in the bush and skinned a lot of black bears. My deep freezer is full and it ain't beef. Remember you can't eat paper.

I hear what you are saying. I wonder about the dense timber and NO bullet deflection.... even the big boys come off target after hitting the smallest twig...

I know all you fellows are ex-miliary and I think there is a few snipers in the bunch. All of you benefit from the combined knowledge of years of rifle training and the newest technology. Also an unlimited budget thanks to all the tax payers in the USA funding your war machine. Remember Jed Clampett (Beverly Hillbillies) thats what most guys look like up here and they use the same gun. Just kidding. The 378 slug while travelling through trees deflects very little Wyo. I have a few guns that group better and are flatter shooting but I don't seem to take them hunting anymore, it seems the 378 always brings the bacon home. Even if you gave me Ros495's best shooter, I wouldn't take it hunting because I never seem to shoot very often over the 500 yd mark. Very seldom in fact. Animals are pretty small at that range, infact so small that you might not see them against brush or in amongst bush.

378-I am kind of curious as to what you have for rifles and rigs besides the 378?

Thx

Mark D

Power means nothing in the guts! Fixes are cheap and easy. Anyone that ignores that and looks simply forward to max power is missing part of the formula. Compressed loads mean nothing. You can over pressure with less than compressed, under pressure with compressed. You have so much "spare" energy, I would worry much more about accuracy.

So far so good for you. BUT in my experience, you can have max loads and accuracy. And to live with a heavy trigger.... unless rules force you to, thats just not a good deal IMHO.

Congrats on your impressive stash of meat though. Proves you are doing something definitely right. But have more to progress to.

BTW on brush shots. Nope, don't care what the range is. That is IMHO, unethical unless you have a clear shot. No way to know that the bullet makes to the target correctly. Certainly not through a tree.

Jeff

When all is said and done, I figure if I can hit a coyote where I want at 480+ yards using a field rest (and I have on multiple occasions), an elk isn't that difficult.

So far, though 350 is the longest. Wont go long if I have an option.

yote cazador-I've done my fair share of shooting chucks at 500 to 700.

When it comes time to dust a elk at 500 yds it is no big deal for me as long as I stay to my disciplines.

My favorite opening morning spot has a 500 yd canyon to where the elk show up. I've killed several bulls from the same spot all in the 480-520 range.

My 7 Mashburn is just made for that spot...grins

Mark D

Quote/ I won't appologize to anyone for my "lack" of experience. If you can't get close enough for responsible shots at something that can't shoot back, you're not hunting...just shooting./ Quote

I can only imagine your "job" counting coup on Russian engineers on "that little island"

But to the point of this thread I can bring up one example from my past very clearly. First of all, my main elk rifle has been a semi-custom .340 Wby, tuned trigger, blue-printed action, good barrel; the usual tuning we all do.

I practice through the summer out to 500 yds with field positions, using shooting sticks, shooting over packs, etc. after working up loads carefully. I'm shooting TSXs now but the bullet I was using in this example was a Lost River Tech bullet, 225-gr @ ~ 3000 fps. Very good BC and accurate.

On the last light of the last day of a Co elk hunt I found myself perched on a rocky outcropping at the end of a large meadow facing into a gentle breeze, less than 5 mph. After sunset with about 20 minutes of light left a cow comes out at the opposite end of the meadow with a 5x5 bull in tow; they meander to within about 400 yds. of my position...then turn back. I cow call loudy and the bull stops and turns broadside to look back toward me. 470 yds on the Leica rangefinder. Broadside, calm; slight breeze directly from the bull to me. I'm laying on a large rock, rifle over my pack, just about benchrest steady. What's wrong with this picture?

Nothing. One shot through both shoulders and he was down on his belly and could barely raise his head but just trying earned him another about three inches from the first.

Goodnews -

Nice story but we all know it can't be true because folks from Iowa can't shoot.

Oh, wait, never mind - I'm orignally from Iowa, too, farm raised...

Well done...

Ifn' ya practice to where you are confident you can successfully, ethically and quickly make the clean kill. No reason not to.

90% of shooting is mental. The rest is muscle memory and practice.

Yea, if that's true it's because there's corn in the way <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

NEWS,

Thank you for making my point for me! In that scenario, you took a responsible shot.

My issue is with taking very chancy shots at long ranges. Things don't get worse and more difficult in a proportional fashion, they get sideways squared!

All my rifles (about 35) are hunting rifles that are throwbacks from times gone by...pre and early post war... As such, I don't take shots over 350 yards, and seldom that far in fact. I've been Wrangling with snowballing back problems, and far shooters start looking attractive, but I realize that I'd miss the stalk and satisfaction in employing my hard earned hunting skills. I'm not D'nl Boone, by any stretch, but I've earned what I now know, and I like to spend some of it.

A well made l-l-l-o-o-o-n-n-n-g-g-g shot is sure as hell satisfying sometimes, <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> no argument here. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

This is a good discussion that is getting better. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Other rifles on the rack are 25-06, 300mag, 7mm mag. I have others but they are not worth mentioning. I was out hunting with a buddy(former client) from L.A. and he shot a moose through the neck with a 7mm mag. We tracked that thing all day and gave up after the blood trail expired in the snow. Several years later I hit a moose at about the same area in the neck with the 378. The damage was more extensive and it didn't go far and bedded down being to weak from loss of blood. I'll admit I have shot the odd animal through the guts. No big deal in cooler weather, it's not the end of the world. We flush out the cavity with snow. My buddy from L.A. shot one in the ass and the bullet travelled along the backbone dropping that thing like you wouldn't believe. We still joke about the "California heart shot". I'm not giving up on wounded animal, in fact I intensify my effort. My brother have told many clients that come 3000 miles to shoot a moose. Take the shot if it is in your ability to do so, but if your unsure let it go. He now hunts with a 300 mag and loads with heavier bullets. He hunts with us now for over 25 years and he shoots like you fellas. He can hit in the black at 600 yards but I have never seen him have to for over 25 years of hunting with him.

Not being picky, but a 600 yard highpower target black is huge. If thats what you are talking about target wise. 36 inches wide.

BTW the difference between the neck shot with 378 and 7 mag is shot placement. You stick the round in the same spot with both rounds, and both not being CNS shots, neither animal falls. Stick both through an artery and they both bleed to death. There is the issue of bullet diameter but other than that there is no difference. The difference is penetration and bone breaking ability, this assuming the 7 mag round didn't hit the spinal column but not break it(I've done that at under 150 with a 180 partition and 300 wtby on a 225 pound deer....)

Gut shots, I totally agree, in fact they are some of the easiest ones in the world to trail IF you know its a gut shot and have the patience to take the time needed, assuming no one else bumps them out of the bed. Can be cleaned without ever opening the gut cavity also. Can trim most all meat, assuming law doesn't require one to take the rib bones out...

Jeff

Hi Rost495 The targets we use are the 12 inch black, I believe they are shorter range and non-official. We set up the targets before hunting due to the temperature differences, 80-90 F in California and -10 in Canada. Also when guys come up some fly up and you know what baggage handlers are like, many guns barely hit the same as they do at the range. so they have to be reset. The first morn is spent doing this,studying maps, compass use, fire making skills that all military people know about. Many city people can't even build a fire. If they get seperated or lost at least they can survive if they know how to build a fire. This is harst environment and unforgiving up here and you need some basic skills. Some shooters have excellent shooting abilites, so confident in fact they try head shots, neck shots and many times wound instead of shooting for vital organs. The meat lost is minimal through the heart/lung area or the hump on moose, which is my preferred area. I'm not a scientist but they tell me when you hit an animal with high power rifles it is like shooting a bag of fluid. There is a shock wave that goes through the animal, that can even burst blood vessels in the brain. The harder the hit, the bigger the shock wave. This is of course all theoretical. You can sometimes hunt for weeks up here in northern Canada without seeing anyone else. Have a good day.

Curious to know what calibers the SR hunters are using. Especially the ones in this thread.

378
I feel for ya as an outfitter! You get all kinds. Sometimes the ones that can afford guided trips just don't have much going for them but the cash....
Hard to believe about fire starting etc... on one hand, believable though in most cases..
Jeff

Rost495 The quote at the bottom of your comments are words of wisdom. I've tried sneaking up closer to black bears while they dig around in ant filled rotten logs. If you see them at great distance and you start your stalk by the time you get there, he is finished cleaning up the ants and larvae and he's gone. However if he's eating on a berry bush he will stay longer and you will have a better chance to stalk closer. If you see a black bear with his nose into a log you don't have much time before he moves on. Similiarly for elk,moose,deer depending on wind direction if he's feeding you usually have more time to stalk. You don't have much time to decide to take that long shot or stalk closer. I'd like to see someone at least once in my lifetime make that long shot. Some of you fellas surely could, no doubt. I'll leave those long shots for you guys more capable than I am. I'm stickin to my 378 and sub 500 yard shots. I've been sucessful with this recipe and I'm to old to change now. Have a good non-windy day.

I'm curious at to consensus on the BEST reasonable long shooting round? 50 cal isn't in this mix.

Do any of you use custom barrels with fast pitch and very long, heavy bullets? ...much like we fooled around with in 6.5 bores thirty years ago...?

500 yards isnt that far, with the right gear and good conditions. A pard and I were shooting rocks at 550 yards yesterday with a 22-250 and a 223. Laying on the ground with a sandbag and no wind, it was easy.

Jamie

There is no "best" long range HUNTING round. .30 cals have the advantage because of the abundant variations, choices and weights of bullets.
My personal favorite is the 300wsm. Handles everything form 150 to 190 grs very well.
300wm is good
7wsm very good
300rum
284 win
7mm08
308

you can efficiently, cleanly and quickly kill deer to 750+ yards with a 308.

all my rifles are customs, barrels etc.
some built on Rem 700 actions, Stiller, Lawton.
all faster twist
9's on the 7's
10's and 11's on the 30 cals.

Bullets (oh man here we go again)
Berger VLD's
30's 175's on up to 210's
7's 168's 180's

Sierra Matchkings
30's 175's, 190's 200's 210's 220's
7's 168's 175's
Hornady A-Max
30's 178's
7's 162's

all long heavy and high BC bullets

I'm not totally settled in yet and think I never will be, it will often be target specific to game, territory etc.....

That being said I continually like 300-338 rounds.

All will have heavy for caliber projectiles due to wind instances.

378-- thanks for the no wind wishes!! I love that, but its very rare that there is not at least 1-4 mph winds. Pilot and hunting buddy were impressed with my bou at 802, having had a army sniper out a few years earlier that took one at appx 550 or so. They were impressed. I wanted to get closer to seal the deal but there were many factors that kept that from happening, and my buddy was a former 4H team shooter I'd coached a lot, it was his call to spot for me and he did and admirable job. Shot took a long time to make for all things to be right to shoot, and second shot also took probably 5 minutes to drop in just right. First shot was lethal but spotter was not exactly certain, though I was fairly sure I'd seen it impact correctly as I came out of recoil.

Wyo, those Amax have worked for me also, but in other calibers. Not a bad hunting round for a target bullet.
No wildcat bullets yet?

Jeff

Nope, no wildcat bullets yet. Never had a reason to go past any of the above. SMK's still tend to be my favorite as they have yet to let me down. Guess it is sentimental now... I wouldn't want to hurt their feelings for fear they my perform as asked... hehehe

Yeah that must have been a long shot if you came out of recoil and were able to steady yourself to actually see the impact. I shoot a target on a drum at 500 yards. You can shoot and hear the impact into the drum between 1-2 secs after pulling the trigger. I just barely can get back on target before impact. Our range is closed during the winter, so I have to go many miles to practice, which is not so easy for me. I wish I could shoot year round and not freeze my fingers out there like you guys. I don't know why some guys get so upset when they hear about fellas making long shots. If your capable and confident. Why not? Some argue that this is not hunting. Well buddy the definition of hunting in the Webster dictionary defines hunting as "Seeking game". As soon as you go out of your home with a rifle in hand, you are seeking game. So they have no legs to stand on. Keep on taking those long shots because I think it is jealousy that drives their anger. From what I hear from you guys is that you do your homework and practice a lot. These fellas that get upset need to reach for their rifles more often instead of the golf clubs. Have a good day.

378

I've got one other card up my sleeve. You drive miles to shoot. I've got a rifle by the door all the time. Shoot coyotes out the bedroom door with my AR.
Have my own range benches to 600 about 200 yards out the door. Coyotes have not figured out I know my distances on the range really good as I shoot most of them in the middle of the range. And have access to build one bench on a new tank damn now at 987.

Have one gun that we shoot where you pull the trigger and impact time is some 5-7 seconds later. Wouldn't shoot game that far though.

Your point is well taken, the real point here is not can it be done, but what is your responsible range? I've let game go well under 100 yard due to circumstances. And dinged it not quite to 1000 so far. Too many variables. My protocol is % ... If I'm 150% confident, then I"ll shoot.

Jeff

Forgive me, but is there such a thing as a wildcat bullet?Bergers are for tournament shooting. I load these for fellas that shoot tournaments. I know there is wildcat calibers coming on stream occasionally which is what the 30-378 was in it's enfantcy.

378 Can-

My situation is not so different than yours really. Right now it is -5 degrees without the wind chill. I have a hundred yard range about 25 mi away; not really convenient but a good place to test loads initially for accuracy.

In Iowa where I live and where farmers pay over 5k for an acre of ground there are very few if any things as frivolous as a gun range especially one offering long range shooting. My salvation so far has been a custom cattle feeder friend who is also a hunter who made a makeshift-very makeshift-range of a lane between two fields offering a reasonable place to shoot out to 450-500 yds. I'm one of a few acquaintances he allows to use it ( I give him a gift every year for it and it's well worth it to me). This is where I shoot often and at the various ranges after I've developed a load. Practice at longer ranges and in field positions is crucial to good shooting on a hunt.

I'm not going into the defense of a long shot if one is capable again but I burn a lot of powder and send a lot of bullets down range on that simple range; upwards of 500-750 shots a year. But not in weather like we're having now <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

Sounds like your one of the lucky ones in your state. We have plenty of places to shoot here. But at present the weather is -20 and 5 feet of snow. So I can't do any shooting until snow melts in March. By spring with the deep snow we are having this year there will probably be thousands of dead deer and elk. The last few years have almost been snowless and the game has multiplied rapidly thus coyotes/wolves also multiply parallel with food available. Now what are all these carnivores going to eat in the lean years ahead. Of course it will be the new born calves taking a shiit kicking. Wildlife management hard at work here, just as screwed up as in your country.

I don't see why not if you're comfortable with your rifle and know the trajectory and conditions? Sure I would!

378,
Yes there is such a thing as a "Wildcat" bullet.
Richard Graves out of Canada makes them and it is all I use with my center-grip 7mm Dakota XP-100.
His website which doesn't have all of the variations he makes is:

Wildcat Bullets

Not to keep this thread alive.........(grin)

Is there a consensus now on what range is considered too long??

500 yards seems to get a lot of votes as the "Magic Range", so I try to keep all my shots </= 499.............

For me, there is no rule of thumb, other then making a decision based on conditions. I've passed on 200 yard shots due to strong wind, no rest and/or animal would not stop. The key for me has/will always be, to be honest with myself concerning ability/conditions and know when to pass. Distance is only one factor.

RO

Man I hope not!

Only an individual can sort out what is too long for them and for the conditions they are facing!

Mark D

Ok, enough of this. I can't sit back and see this topic taken seriously. Why would anyone plan on taking a shot that long? I can see if they was disabled an' unable to leave the vehicle. Let's forget about the ethical issues, what about the fact that the fun in elk hunting is getting close to them? Then, has anyone considered the ramifications of entertaining such an idea on a board filled with people of mixed experience? Some 1st time elk hunter wannabe is going to get the idea that people actually do this with frequency. I knew some Oregon fellers that shot elk at long ranges with 340 Wbys. They all had the same cartridge (albeit different rifles) because they had learned some tough lessons over many years of hunting in open country. They all said they had lost elk and partially blamed the other cartridges (300 WM, 338s, etc.). But long shots to them were 350-400 yards! We're talking 500 yard shots on animals that can run like horses with half a heart, let alone a liver shot! Hate to piss on the parade but there has to be a voice of reason, even here in fantasy land.

I have no problem with a hunter taking a shot for which he or she is well prepared and fully capable of making. But its not always about planned shots. Sometimes its about what needs to be done when things go awry � such as stopping a wounded animal. Let�s face it some people shoot better at 500 yards � and further � than others shoot at 100 yards.




Getting close is not always an option. There are often factors beyond the control of the hunter, including restraints of time, terrain, game management boundaries, weather and so on. My buddy and I normally take a week off to go elk hunting. Last year we had exactly two days for elk and deer both. We both downed our elk at 9:40AM opening morning, Dave with an 80-yard shot and me with one at 260 yards. Had we been less successful I would have attempted longer and longer shots as the day progressed - with no regrets and no apologies. Don�t know that I would have attempted a 500 yard shot but I had practiced out to 600.




Yes. And I came down in favor of discussing it.



Some people DO do it with frequency.



Perhaps your friends would have benefited from better bullet placement, better bullets, or better determination of the actual range � no one can know. But I do know that .300�s and .338�s are more than adequate at 350 and 400 yards. And beyond.

Few quick thoughts.... A good elk rifle will be shooting 1.5 inches or less at 500 yards. Better than a lot of folks rifles and skills at 100 yards....

Fun is getting close, well maybe to you. The world spins because of different strokes. Its why we don't drive the same car, have the same wife etc.... Just because its fun for you, doesn't mean its not fun for otehrs to take a simple 500 yard shot.

I will admit(and read my sig line) that I do my best to get close, but I also have the skills to stop them where they are.

Finally -- trailing... its the same regardless the distance. You only have to find teh spot of the shot, and I know a friend that can't seem to do that for less than 100 yard shots reliably. LR shooting isn't for everyone(and 500 is far from LR, its a chip shot for anyone that takes a bit of time and dedication.....)but it is for some.

Don't split us up, like Zumbo tried to do. IMHO

Rost, Is this a typo?

"Few quick thoughts.... A good elk rifle will be shooting 1.5 inches or less at 500 yards. Better than a lot of folks rifles and skills at 100 yards...."

If not, then regardless of what the rifle can do, I know of no hunters who will shoot that sub MOA in a hunting situation at 500 yards..Maybe I ain't been around enuf tho..:)

Read a few comments that indicate that as the season get's toward closing or the day gets long shadows that the 'girls get prettier at closing time' and hunters are prone to take a more marginal shot for fear of not getting a shot at all.
Well, whatever winds yer watch but I would rather go home with an unfilled tag than hook up with a poor shot choice at closing time.Jim

JIm

Not a typo, a good custom tubed rifle will easily shoot under 2 inches at 500 yards in 3 shot groups.

As you well know, a longer shot needs some more support than just a snap shot. You know you can get away with an offhand snap shot most times in the woods, but the further the shot the more stable the position is required.

When you add to the fact that the gun shoots less than .5 moa and my hold with a sling or over a backpack has been measured at under .5 moa wobble, you have a 5 inch or less group out there. Then you factor some conditions and its still a chip shot. 5 inches is the size of the heart or less.

I"ve always said along, and thats where most folks just don't get it, you are responsible and should be ethical to only take a shot for which you are certain of. Some of us that means they have no business in the woods period, IMHO, and others can reach out a bit. I'm not a 1000+ shooter, I know my limits. I stay within them. I also, as mentioned many times, have other parameters that makes my max distance smaller, time, position, conditions etc.....

I"m not trying to diss anyone as they say, simply pointing out that for some, the ability is there, the ability is easy and why not use it if desired. I know you'd rather go home with an MT tag, I would do the same if not sure. Note my statement about (I think its in this messed up thread somewhere recently) passing an elk at 60 yards last fall. This after driving 1400 plus miles round trip etc..... I really WANTED an elk. Only had a cow tag but would not push the shot as though it was an easy shot distance wise there were other issues. Were I feel that a LOT of others would have shot and then went to see if all was well or not.
I am not preaching at you though, you know where your limits are as do I. And we stand ethically together for the most part.

ITs one thing I teach in hunter ed classes. Whats your max distance? Then I have them write it down, example is a doe for sausage meat. Max distance. Then the next day, they come back and tell me what they shoot. I give them the conditions, X wind, and see what the holdover and drift is. This equates to a miss or bad shot to most. And a HUGE eye opener. Yet the eye opener that pisses me off is most won't think of shooting past 200-300 yards. Yet I ask, what if this is the biggest buck of your life ever, and walking away at 100 yards past your imposed limit? Most will blast, and I blast them for the thought. They are all animals, regardless of sex or headgear. They all require our respect.

That respect, I keep preaching but folks don't seem to understand, means being certain. I"m actually against a running shot but many take them. I think there are too many uncontrollable variables there. And I also still think that a LOT of folks don't have any business past 100 yards in the woods without a rest period. And that more animals are missed or wounded at under 100 yards from folks that just don't know or care....

Another similar instance in skill levels is folks shooting bullseye pistol vs IPSC shooters. I shoot both and IDPA. Yep the combat boys can pour the rounds in up close, way faster than I can ever shoot. Yet give them a BIG target at 35+ yards and they'll often miss. While a bullseye pistol shooter can hit an orange every shot single handed at 50 yards in good conditions. We all have to know our parameters. Those bullseye folks can nail a deer at 100 with iron sights without blinking an eye, the combat folks will miss because they are trained to shoot close and fast.

Its all in the training and knowing your limits to the given situation. THe responsibility is yours, and has nothing to do with distance in reality.

Respectfully, Jeff

Rost, I THINK we are pretty much on the same page..:)
Sub 1/2 MOA at 500 yards even with a bench rest big game caliber rifle and great loads and a skilled shooter is some excellent shooting.
Not something I can do personally...nor have I ever really needed to as hunter of big game in five states over near 50 years.

I can position shoot well with sling in a hunting situation( not snap shooting) but consistent MOA out to 300 yards on big game with the excitement of the hunt is my best and so I have that self imposed limit...Jim

I took a guy like that to my local range last year. As I banged away at the 285 yard (12 inch) Gong, he was impressed that I could hit a target at 600 yards.

Hmmm . . . . . .

Off by more than 100%, makes his talk of a 9 inch unit seems suspect . . . .

BMT

Mule, your "fact" is a presupposition of yours rather than a fact. No flame, just noticed your comment and found it interesting. While I lean to your ethics on this subject and hold the same value about getting close to elk being fun, for a few folks here, obviously the fun is seeing how far they can shoot an elk. (An unbiased reading of the long range archives supports that.) Shooting long is as valid a fun factor as getting close. When we take any fun factor to extreme, it bumps into ethics: whether range, using ever smaller calibers, or truly "primitive" weapons.

One of the most consistent factors in disagreements on this board is our individual assumptions that my conscience and inner compass are universal "facts" and apply to everybody.

Jim,
What you have is basically a rig built to BR specs, but used for hunting.
My most common practice distance was 600 yards in 2006 (it will be further in 2007) and I would typically shoot somewhere between a 2.5-3.5 inch group @ 600 yards with no sighters/no flags under varying conditions. This would be a 2 or 3 shot group, mainly to confirm that the first shot was not a pulled shot.
If you want to know the order of your group you can mark the bullet ahead of the ogive with different colored markers and you will then know where your first shot landed.

"I"m actually against a running shot "

Your kidding of course.

My thoughts are if a hunter cant hit game on the move he has no business in the field.

95% of the game I've killed have been on the move.

I guess in Texas shooting from a stand over a feeder is different.
Not my style.

xphunter, Like I indicated, that is excellent shooting and there is probably a very small percentage of elk hunters who have such equipment, the skills and ever draw blood on a elk with such shots.Dan Lilja comes to mind..:)

Humorously, as a lad my Dad was watching me attempt to cast my bait and bobber way across the farm pond one day..
He asked me why, IF I wanted to fish way over there, I just didn't walk around the pond a bit..:)

I always figgered I'd need to walk over to track-trail and butcher-bone the elk anyhow so usually just hunted in closer or around to intercept them..

But for those who can and do make such shots consistently, you have my admiration as fellow hunter, shooter and reloader..Jim

Actually I don't hunt from a stand or over a feeder much here. I will when its down to a quick meat hunt( I"ll probably get snagged for calling it a hunt SO lets call it a harvest instead....) I do a lot of hunting over feed areas though, and sitting/snooping around in E tx in the pines and brush, setting up ambushes or slow hunting. But thats not the point of this conversation.

My point is you will hammer me for abilities I have, yet if I choose not to shoot a running shot I"m incapable? Why? My abilities at 500 yards group wise are probably much better than your running shot groups are at 100. You are capable of the shot and take it, why can't I? Division amongst the ranks Mr. Zumbo, gets us no where.

What distances do you shoot the animals? How fast do they move, are they in the wide open, what is your shooting position, your lead, holdover if any etc.... What I'm TRYING to point out in a running shot is there are a ton more of variables involved that are not really controllable unless you are a olympic class moving target shooter,and even at that, the target there is the same speed and wide open....

Finally yes you are right, different areas have different methods of hunting. Heck I'm not so sure I"d call an elk drive a real test of skill, but there are many skills involved in it to make it work and make it right. Doesn't make it right or wrong though.

As mentioned as long as everyone is in their ethical comfort zone, why the continual hassle? From a highpower shooter too IIRC??

Jeff

Jim, sitting at 300 in a sling, 3 inch groups--- thats not bad shooting at all, considering the position too!!! ITs a good quick position but far from stable. I can usually dink say 8 of 10 rounds at 300 from sitting, into a 3 inch group with irons, scopes don't make that much of a difference. At 300 I generally prefer to be prone.

I"d not feel handicapped at all with your skill though. And for the gun to hold that including your position and errors, well lets just say I bet your gun holds 1.5 inches at 300 then, nothing much to sneeze at for sure.

Jeff

[quote=SU35
My thoughts are if a hunter cant hit game on the move he has no business in the field.

95% of the game I've killed have been on the move.

I guess in Texas shooting from a stand over a feeder is different.
Not my style. [/quote]

SU35,
Style is the operative word.

By contrast, I haven't taken a shot at a running animal in years, though my first deer and first elk were both on a dead run. A lot of hunters, who may be capable of hitting running game, avoid running shots and move to shots on standing game as the years go by. Part of it is developing a different hunting "style" that maximizes the probability of a shot at stationary game.

I hadn't thought about it much but I call most of the game that I shoot, big game included. None of those are from fixed stands, just where I stop while still hunting. Other than calling, I still hunt and spot and stalk in alpine. With such styles, you can usually shoot animals that are not running.

And go easy on us handicapped geezers! You may want to hunt someday when you aren't as skilled as you are now. I hunted a season when I was way too blind to drive, with skewed double vision and slow acquisition time to "see" or recognize what I was actually seeing. Something had to stand still awhile for me to see it as other than jumbled images. No chance at quickly moving critters at all. I hung on to my son's shirt tail as he tracked a buck in light snow, and leaned on a tree long enough to scrunch my eyeball around to find a spot where it still worked. The buck cooperated and stood broadside long enough to make the shot.

It is a matter of discipline, to only take shots you know you can make, however small a percentage of game sightings and possible shots that is.

PS Due to good docs and the Good Lord I've got pretty good vision now.

"go easy on us handicapped geezers! "

Yes sir!


Very good post.

and by the way, something tells me I would have a difficult time keeping pace with you in the alpine.

[quote=SU35and by the way, something tells me I would have a difficult time keeping pace with you in the alpine. [/quote]

Nah, you'd walk my legs off.

If I recall right, you are somewhere down the I-5 corridor. We should grab a coffee sometime when I'm down that way, though my 60 year old paunch would disillusion you about my alpine abilities.

Would love to meet you. I've learned a lot off your posts.


6 miles east of I-5

Bob

xphunter, for the rifle built to 'bench rest specs' you describe with that sub MOA accuracy to 600 yards, what is the weight of such a rifle for real field use? Jim

I guess it depends on your style of hunting, conditioning and the type of terrain you are in.
Mine is actually a customized center-grip Remington XP-100 specialty handgun. With the Holland Quick Discharge brake it could have been lighter as the recoil is basically nothing (7mm Dakota w/200 grain Wildcat bullet at 2706 fps).
If I can do this with a sub 18" barrel, you can guess what could be done with 250-300 fps more speed.
This question could be better answered by the guys that shoot the rifles. I don't own a centerfire rifle, as my enjoyment comes from using the specialty pistols.
I did weigh mine last year with bi-pod and a Leupy Mark 4 8.5-25 mounted and I don't remember the weight off the top of my head but it was defintiely heavier than I have ever carried before in the mountains when using a Specialty Handgun, but it sure shot great (prone with a bi-pod) when the momoent arrived

I wondered from your handle if you had what we used to call the Rem Fireball.:)
Prone or off the leg works well with those I'm told, but have no experience there..
My own rifles for elk are pretty mundane..:)but they have and will serve me well here in western Oregon.

50's vintage M99 Savage R with 24" barrel in .300 Savage and a pair of old Swedish Mil config( mostly) Mausers in 6,5x55..

Optics are about as old and are Lyman 2.5 Alaskan and solid tube Weavers and Lymans in 4X..:)

My best aggregates in position shooting with sling ( from Brownells comp plus)are about MOA out to 300 yards..
You wouldn't want to be a clay pigeon or an elk at any range closer than that.:)

At close to 60 yrs and as former expert marksman Army rifle company ranger grunt, thankfully, my health, stamina, and visual acuity-eyesight are still excellent...and I like to hunt..

As strange as it may sound on a hunting forum, I have had less qualms about shooting at a known identifiable enemy human at unknown distance in the past than I do now at shooting at critters.

The former have been killed, wounded or got their heads down and so the effort was successful for the moment.The wounded or gut shot accomplished some objectives when in the field of war in former times.Jim

Jim,
I'm 46 yrs old, but with no military or LE experience.
I'm a preacher by vocation and grew up in the mid-west shooting small and upland game, but no big game until my mid-20's.
My user name is based on my joy of hunting with XP's.
I haven't used a rifle to hunt with since the late 80's (with a couple of exceptions).
I haven't done many comps, except a couple of 1k matches with my XP and one tactical match called the International Tactical Rifleman's Championship ( I.T.R.C. ) outside of Gillette, WY, which is put on by Dave Lauck. My hunting buddy and I both used our XP's for the 3-day comp. It is a roving field course engaging targets at unknown distances out to 1k (didn't have any that far the year we did the course).
We learned a lot at that shoot and would approach things differently if we do it again. We placed a little below the halfway mark with 49 teams competing. We were at a definite disadvantage with single shot pistols and LER scopes, but no one expected much from us anyway .
My 7mm Dakota XP began life as a stock 221 Fireball. Inital action work (about as much as can be done to a action in terms of tricking it out) was done by Greg Tannel of Gre-Tan Rifles (Greg also built my 6.5-284 XP I used @ ITRC) and it was chambered in the 30 cal short action Lazzeroni cartridge-7.82 Patriot (tight-neck) in the pre-WSM days. After a number of years I wanted something with more range ability to attempt to reach several LR goals I had and I had Kirby Allen of Allen Precision Shooting, rebarrel and restock it in it's current configuration.
I enjoy LR shooting, with my longest range goal (not met) is a PD just beyond 2,000 yards. The 7mm Dakota is one of the rigs that is capable of meeting that goal.
Nothing wrong with using old rigs. If you enjoy it, that is great. Your statement makes sense about the past/war from what has been explained to me by others who have been there compared to hunting now. I have never sent one down range with prejudice toward a man and I hope I never have to.

xphunter, With a hand held XP tricked out 7mm Dakota, a prairie dog at 2000 yards is beyond my comprehension..:)
( IF I am interpreting the 'PD' goal correctly)

Even with a spotter how do YOU see it?

Forgive me for my ignorance but that's a far distance and small target..:)
I used to kill 8-14# groundhogs as a lad with an old Mossberg .22 WMR at 200 yards or so on the farm, with open sights, but 2000 yards ..? Optics LEER?Jim

Yes, Prairie Dogs
As far as spotting goes we used Darrel Cassel's Big Eyes. We shoot off sturdy portable benches with tripod front rests. But I almost popped a PD shoooting prone w/bi-pod with the 7mm Dakota just over 1k when Steve and I had some extra time after the elk hunt this past Novemember. It was so close we walked to confirm. We had been coyote hunting earlier and we were in a PD town already.
My PD rigs are also my hunting rigs: 6mm-284 XP Broughton barrel 1-8 Twist, H-S Stock, shooting 115 DTACS had some expansion on a PD @ 1590 yards and he died before he made it to his hole. The optic was a Leupold Mark 4 8.5-25 M1 knobs w/the Tactical Milling Reticle. The 8.5-25 now has Holland's ART reticle in it.
The 6.5-284 rear grip XP has a weighted BR McMillan stock ( I also have a H-S center-grip stock for this-Same one I used in the ITRC), 1-8 Twist Kreiger, Jewell trigger set in the ounces, using 140 A-Max with a confirmed hit @ 1800 yards but dog went into the hole. Had blood all around it but no body
Optic was a 36x Leupold that was converted to 20x Long Eye Relief by Wally Seibert.
I have a 20 MOA pic mount by Near Manufacturing and on top of it was one of Elmer Laitala's SLR mounts which gave me another 100 minutes of vertical adjustment.
I will be using a couple of big 7mm's for 2k goal:
7mm Dakota and a beltless 7mm Rem Mag Improved (XP & MOA Maximum). I will have a 40x or 45x Leupold for my 2k goals.
I use rifle scopes a lot now on my handguns, but I don't see a full field of view on most of these.
We will typically have a narrow shooting time of early in the morning or late in the afternoon.
I got real lucky with the 1590 yard dog and nailed him with less than 10 shots.
I spent 2.5 days in October of 2005 going for LR dogs and only got two. A high body count gets it for some people, but we were intentionally going for LR goals.

Interesting..tho the technologies you describe are way out of my ken..
Do you use a reliable rangefinder for those distances and what is it?

Guess with a 20 power scope you see what appears to be at about 100 yards or so when at 2000 yards..so you can 'see' the target at least.
Sounds like challenging shooting.Jim

We had to multi-range ahead of time with a couple of Leica 1200's. Then we put a marker at the 1,500 yard mark, so as to know not to shoot in front of it. They are pretty small with 20x @ 1800 yards, but you could see better than one would think.
I dial in the scope so that the horizontal crosshair is just below the feet of the PD and the vertical crosshair is just to the right or the left of the dog so I can see the whole dog.
Distance/perception can be very decieving at that range. There was a large cholla (cactus) just behind the 1800 yard mound (This was a dedicated mound). Through the scope or big eyes it looked like it was right behind it, but once you got up to the mound it was further away than you thought. The lay of the land is where we are shooting NNE and it gradually goes up which makes spotting shots easier. It is really wierd how long it takes for the bullet to get there.
I want to see better is the reason for going up in magnification when we go for the 2k goal.

Both rigs set up on the bench.




Looking back from the 1800 yd mound (you can see the blood better in some other pics) to the Suburban.




This is the 1590 PD with the 6-284

I can understand why you hunt-shoot mostly early AM or just prior to sunset.There's usually a window of time when air rising or falling sort of stands still and wind mirage are less of an issue.
Depth perception can be problem in near flat country at distance..

One of the reasons why my own big game hunting and caliber choice is as it is relates to being able to bring the rifle up and simply make the shot from 40 to 250 yards and KNOW the bullet will be in the kill zone corridor even IF I don't mark the distance perfectly..
No bullet drop comps, no real issue with wind or mirage and no adjustments to make on the scope or sights..:)

My rifle and caliber choices are such that going from .300 Savage to 30.06 to 6,5x55 poses no mental adjustments and I can concentrate on hunting and then butchering:) Jim

Jim,
Nothing wrong with your choices or the way you hunt.
Some of us just enjoy walking a different path with the same result-Waipiti meat in the freezer
I have enjoyed the conversation.
500 yards is really not an issue for rigs set-up correctly with a good operator under good conditions.
There was a time when I would have doubted the statement I just made. Experience and some time have a way changing pre-concieved ideas (For some folks anyway).

Xphunter, So many different firearms and facets to the sport..just not enough time or money to properly investigate or participate..:)

Some of the funnest shooting I used to do was with a M27 Smith .357 at water filled milk jugs at 150 yards.Pretty amazing when one learns how to do it that the hits are well over 75%..:)
I know people who cannot keep three shots on a 8" bull at 25 yards with their SD handguns..?:) Jim

"Shooting long is as valid a fun factor as getting close."

I've found way too many dead elk in the timber to subscribe that it's just as "valid" to test the limits of practicality. Hunting elk is about stealth, reading the wind, calling, ambushing, and making the implement as unimportant as possible, not propping a bench rifle up on the hood of a vehicle and never getting your boots dirty. That's what paper is for. I guess I like elk too much to see them marginalized as mere targets for the plinking public wearing camo.

Good thing I ain't a writer, I could get banned for such honesty.

How do you know the larger percentage of those dead elk in the timber you've found weren't made that way by short range shots as they were running through the timber?

Just hard to know unless one was the shooter.

Important thing is for any who hunt to do their best with their skills and firearms to make the right decisions in that small moment of time when the game is in our sights..
Errors will be made ..and we can learn from them I think.Jim

I could maybe understand a thread about long shots on antelope.
Elk hunting isn't really about long shots. After the first bit of hunting pressure each season long shots are no longer even an option. I think the topic is kept alive by hunters that are frustrated by spooking elk. Years ago I recall feeling that it was impossible to get within normal shooting range of elk.

Shot placement is critical. With elk it is too easy to miss the kill zone and wind up torturing an animal with a poor shot. At 500 yards if the shot isn't perfect you have given it one-third mile head start. An elk walks faster than you can run even wounded. At 10,000 ft. you are even slower than normal (but he isn't).

Unable to approach them in open country is BS. Shooting better at moving target or at long range is BS.

DJ

Excellent Post !!

Could not agree MORE !!

All you Black and White BS'ers, maybe, just maybe, you should only take the shot, IF YOU ARE CAPABLE OF HITTING YOUR TARGET.

If you blast away, shaking like a leaf on crack.....

Spend more time with your rifle and figure out your LIMITATIONS.

Then be a RESPONSIBLE SPORTSMAN and only take a shot that you can make.

F!

Sounds like you're trying to set the std. for all of us Alamosa.

Let me see if I understand your position correctly:

1. Long shots at antelope are probably OK, but not so with elk even though they have a much larger kill zone.
2. Long shots are no longer an option after the first bit of hunting season even though I have been offered many long shots in Colorado�s 2nd and 3rd season.
3. Elk can always be approached in open country, regardless of terrain, cover and how spooked they are.
4. No one shoots better at 500 yards than others can at 100 yards.
5. The answers to the questions of ethics are the same for everyone because everyone has the same level of skill and preparedness.

Let me say that in my experience, all of those positions are simply wrong.

I have to say that I would rather see a qualified person attempt a long shot on elk than an unqualified person attempt a short one. And I have seen plenty of people for whom 100 yards is too far.

I have hunted elk for 25 years and have taken my share, but have never called them. And shooting off the hood of a truck I Colorado violates the prohibition against having a loaded gun �in or on� a motor vehicle � regardless of the range.

While I agree that for myself getting as close as possible and �making the implement as unimportant as possible� is a worthy goal, others may or may not agree as to what constitutes �as close as possible�. Thank you all, but I�ll decide for myself. So far that has never been further than 350 yards at trigger tickling time, although I have let elk walk at further ranges. (For that matter I have let elk walk at ~50 feet on several occasions even though it meant going home empty-handed.)

'Kill zone' sounds like a diagram of the vitals from a hunter's ed class. Something you learn from actually hunting, is antelope have the larger (for lack of a better word) 'kill zone'. That sounds absurd to a novice. Almost all hits on antelope are debilitating. It is difficult (but not impossible) to have a non-lethal hit. The reverse is true with elk. One the most common themes in elk hunting lore is someone not finding the elk they shot until it was too late.



The pressure a given elk may actually feel or experience has no correlation to elk that you claim to have seen or when.
Basic fundamental stuff - elk seek cover when pressured.



I can't do it every time either. That doesn't mean it's OK to go ahead and shoot anyway.
I probably wouldn't call it hunting nor would it hold my interest if it was that easy.



Sometimes my articulation is poor I admit, but your interpretation deliberatly misrepresents what I said. If you can't support your position on merit alone why are you trying? Again, fundamental. Longer shot = more difficult.





So..
you go from trying to clarify, to mis-paraphrasing, to judging as simply wrong - yet you have offered no evidence to support your assertion..?

Lets cut the crap.

Hunters that know how to hunt don't resort to long shots.

Hunters take those shots because they aren't confident in their ability to move closer.

The reason people are looking for someones OK to take this shot from an anonymous source on the internet is because they know it is wrong in the first place.

It is not distance affecting marksmanship that makes that shot a poor choice (mostly). Rather it is distance that puts the shooter too far from the quarry to close the deal.

Right.

You have a herd of elk across a canyon at first shooting light. If they step 50 yds to the north, the direction they are heading, they will be on private land. The elk are 450 yds away, and there is no way to close the gap quickly. Further, the wind is swirling, and will be blowing toward them in 5 minutes.

YOU go approach them, and tell me how successful you are. On 2nd thought, don't bother, I know the answer.

I'll hunt them the way I do every year, and will actually have to pack a couple out.

Some of you guys sure talk a lot for having little to no experience.

kcm270,
Your point is valid.I posted this on another thread yesterday concerning the 45-70 Marlin as an elk rifle to take on a first ever elk hunt for another fellow, encourageing hio consider taking a second elk rifle on the hunt also:

"Over 45 years of hunting RM & Roosevelt elk with longbow, iron sighted and scoped firearms in 3 states I have filled the bull elk tag about 85% of those seasons I drew a tag or bought one OTC.
I've never had to shoot over 250 yards and never lost any elk hit.
If you have another firearm besides the Marlin 45-70 that has more trajectory and down range power, I'd take it along also.

There will be times when one gets into elk, but they are a distance off.Elk don't stand around in the open very long and usually will be moving/feeding along as they head to their bedding/cover. To be able to KEEP up with them can be a challenge and closing the gap for a closer shot ( without them getting wind or seeing you) can be impossible, even IF you ar at a dead run..:)
Much will depend on where the elk are when you get to your hunting area, weather and all the other variables.Having some options on firearms may make the difference.Jim

Alamosa,
You have done a great job in judging the inner motivations of all who choose to shoot at distances beyond your self-imposed limits.
I know the Good Book says, "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?"

Do you really believe you know the collective thoughts and hearts of those you accuse?

In your attempt to make a good point for your convictions, you have ended up "shooting yourself and your cause in the foot (I'm not sure of the range though)", in that you have moved into personal attacks and have played the role of God in assuming you knew the hearts and abilities of all those you speak against.
Calling people immoral by implication, by saying that they/we, "know it is wrong in the first place" sounds quite judgemental and arrogant.

I'm not sure of what your motives are, but I respect the convictions of those who are against LR hunting and express it.

It is their right to disagree as it is yours, but if you desire respect from those read (And I do not know if you do) regardless of where they stand on this issue, stay on the issue.

If you have read many of these posts over a period of time, you can't help but notice some LR hunters also enjoy archery, black powder hunting, and using revolvers.

I would consider that hunting with a bow, revolvers, and at least some types of BP requires some basic skill levels to get close consistently to kill animals.
Do you agree with the above sentence?

Could it be possible that at least one of the reasons some guys & gals choose to hunt at longer ranges is that they simply want to hunt that way at that given time?

I seriously doubt that the LR hunters I am referring to and know are looking for your permission or anyone elses for that matter, on internet forums like this.
Again, I seriously doubt they make posts looking for anyones "OK" to pull the trigger on others self-imposed limits.

Your statements have cut a large swath, and I know that there are those who are typically called "slob hunters" who make attempts at all kinds of ranges-short and long.
None of the hunters I know personally, regardless of their own self-imposed distance limits, defend that that type of mindset.

Shooting at an elk at 450 yards because if he goes 50 he will be on private land is unethical. Period. Elk can run 50 yards without a heart, let alone a hit a lil' high or a lil' back. It sickens me to hear people talking about "hunter choice" as if the game didn't matter. I know this is the "me" generation, but used to be people had respect for their quarry. I'd track a poor hit elk to hell if I had to, and something tells me the yahoos popping off at 500 yards wouldn't. Hate to seem like a mean ol' man 'bout this, but it gets my dander up plenty. Next, we'll be talkin' about doin' 500 yard shots at elk with 243s. Sheesh.

xphunter. Well spoken. Your point is taken.
You deserve an honest response.

No question that I was bold to judge anyone's motives. I'm willing to put that out there because I believe it is true with at least 8 of 10 LR advocates. Credibility is important to me. I am not one to stir the pot just for the sake of causing a dustup. I absolutely believe that the desire to take these shots is almost always rooted in frustration within shorter ranges and to a lesser extent not really anticipating the mess that a long shot frequently causes. I am equally convinced that there would be no discussions of this nature if LR advocates really believed it was OK.

To give you a little of my perspective, I walk a lot while hunting, and I find a dead cow, shot and unclaimed, almost every year.

I recoil at the notion of taking longer shots because it is more fun. I'm a relentless hunter but that is because it's my instinct, legacy, connects me to my own primitive ancestral hunters, because I believe in the conservation aspects, and I am confident in my ability to execute it humanely. I spend sick amounts of time at the range each year to do all I can for a humane kill. The idea of killing these quarry for 'fun' is something I just can't get on board with.

I am open to the idea that my style is too abrasive. I do appreciate the need to stay on topic.

I've said this, but I think it's worth repeating. I have no gripes about long range marksmanship or anyone's shooting ability. My thing is that you have to get to the area where the animal was hit and you have to get there fast. If you put yourself 5 minutes away (or 45 minutes away in these examples of shooting across canyons) you are out of the game. Essentially you bet it all that the elk would collapse in a heap. Few people realize how slowly they move at high altitude.

Alamosa,
I appreciate the way you responded-It is easy to miss intent when reading type, not hearing the tone of voice, and seeing facial & body language.
My conversations must be primarily with the 2 of 10 LR advocates, because I just don't believe that level of frustration is there-I could be wrong though.

Is it possible that we entertain these kind of discussions, simply because we believe it is right or okay?

There is not embarrassment or shame, if anything we want to educate those who do not understand.
I hunt public land in Colorado almost every year, and choose terrain that is hard to access, and that is suitable for spot and stalk hunting. We also do a lot of moving around.
Of the elk I have shot or have witnessed shot by my partner (around 20 give or take), I can't think of one that went over 30-40 yards and only one went that far. Most went down on the spot or in 5-10 yards. FWIW all of these elk were shot using specialty handguns. Two were over 400, two were over that 500 yards, and one was over 600 yards. Most were in the 150-350 range, with two in the 385 range.
I keep shooting until the animal is down.
Now I have missed up there on two occasions, both were under 200 yards. One, I had done a serious amount of trotting/running trying to head the elk off before they crossed a saddle and the other one I was seriously taxed. I had a shot at around 200 yards, but wanted to see how close I could get.
I am not afraid to admit that I missed, but I am not proud of it.
I had chosen to make that shot at the 200 yard mark , while well rested and the animal was clueless I have no doubt I would have filled that tag shooting prone.
NO meat report and no blood (snow was heavy that year).
I know elk can be fatally hit and act like they have not been touched.
I hate it when I miss, but I make mistakes in the field-probably will again.
I do try to learn from my mistakes.
I take hunting seriously and we intentionally choose an area where ATV's or 4-wheelers cannot access and the climb to get to the place we hunt is very discouraging to road hunters.
I admit it, hunting is fun for me.
If I wanted closer shots on average we could choose other places, but we would be around more hunters and we enjoy this style of hunting.
It angers me to see any animal unclaimed, but I would be cautious to draw the conclusion it came from a LR attempt.
I hunt the way I want, yes, because I enjoy it.
My choice of weapon is because I like them.
Although I hunt with a bow and revolver some, yes and have been successful I don't enjoy using them as much little alone a rifle. Why? Personal preference.
We pack out our animals on frame packs, Why? We enjoy it, although part of it is finances
Now I don't kill just for fun as I love to eat elk meat.
The shots over 300 yards or whatever is the "too far" distance I have not lost an elk or missed.
Since I am not rushed or extremely winded (I do get in excellent shape BTW) my shot placement is better than if it was the other way around.
Yes, I have confidence in my XP's and in my ability to use them in field conditions.
Prone with a bi-pod or over a pack I do not feel handicapped and believe that I will put my first shot better than most rifle hunters (not all ) at ranges over 350 yards out to about 700-800 yards.
No, not on moving game and no, not rushed. The last statements could be construed as arrogance or being cocky, but I have no business considering shots that are further than the typical shot unless I know that I am up to the task.
Since I don't hunt alone, my hunting buddy is spotting for me and he can see well where an animal goes it is not downed quickly-which has not been the case for us. We hunt in an area that is more open, but that being said elk can disappear into the scrub oak rather quickly.
I respect your convictions, and I don't think we are as far apart as some might assume. From your own description of yourself, it suggests a lot of hunters who go to the field leave a lot to be desired in your opinion as they don't approach it with the same intensity/passion you do.



Is it possible that a good number of LR hunters have the same committment to their style of hunting that you do to yours?

I don't expect elk to pile up in a heap, but I sure like it every time they do
Some people consider this distasteful but I will, have, and will in the future if afforded the opportunity shoot elk in their bed. With no chance of movement, it ensures better shot placement and cleaner kill.

This �novice� has only been hunting Colorado elk for 25 years and antelope for around 12, and still has a lot to learn. That said, I�ll stand by my statement that the kill zone on an elk is larger than that of an antelope. Considerably larger, I�ll add, and if shooting at long range I�ll take the elk, thank you.




Apparently you have never been north of Craig to see the annual migration where elk cross the open sage by the dozens during 2nd and 3rd seasons. It is not at all unusual to find a herd of 80 or so and there are many smaller groups, all the way down to ones and twos. The range of shot opportunities will vary from very near to very, very far. Even at higher altitudes in the aspens and pines there are often opportunities to take an animal at extended ranges. Last fall I took my 3rd season cow at 260 yards but passed on innumerable opportunities at ranges of 500 and beyond.



Feel free to judge for yourself, as I will also do. I will not pass on a far shot that I am capable of making just because someone else cannot or will not. Nor will I take it simply because it is offered.




I think my interpretation was correct. I�ve spent too much time at shooting ranges to believe that all shooters are equally capable. The fact is that some people do shoot better at 500 yards than others do at 100.






I think the paraphrasing was pretty accurate and I stand by my assertion that those positions are wrong.



In my world �hunters� get as close as possible. A shot at 100 yards is too long for some and 500 yards is easy for others. Regardless, getting closer is not always an option. In general I would rather prepare for and take a 500-yard shot than return home empty-handed, although some years I have turned down shots at rock throwing distances and returned home empty-handed.



There are many reasons why it is not always possible to get closer. Indeed, if getting closer was always an option we could all save a lot of money and hunt with knives. The fact, however, is that constraints of time, hunting seasons, terrain, weather and other factors do not always allow a hunter to get closer. Frankly, I have more respect for the well prepared hunter who takes game at 500 yards than for slob hunters who manage to take game at 100 yards in spite of themselves.



If you can read the hearts and minds of men, good for you. I think it is a legitimate question and would disagree that �it is wrong in the first place�. Instead I would suggest it is at best a questionable practice for those that are incapable or unprepared. At the same time there are those that are well prepared and can make such shots as easily as some folks make shots at 100 yards.




Again, the concept of �too far� varies from shooter to shooter. What some can do easily others cannot do at all. That does not mean that it is wrong for those that can.

Muleskinner, you're dead wrong.

Most of the time, when I shoot at an elk, he drops right there. I have never it an elk and lost it.

If they don't drop immediately, I've already spoken to the DWM, and he can get me on the ranch to pack them out.

It always amazes me to watch people reach conclusions without a lick of data.

Gentlemen,
This whole argument is really a misunderstanding. The idea of shooting an animal isn't about where we are when the bullet leaves the muzzle, it's about being able to make that bullet strike where we want it to on an animal. If I have practiced relentlessly at ranges of 500 or less yards in all sorts of terrain, wind conditions, doping mirage, etc, and can place my bullet 9 out of 10 times where I want it to end up at 500 yards, then that's what I'll do if I feel it plausible to recover the animal. I really don't believe that we all get AS CLOSE AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE before taking shots at game. If we can get within OUR effective range, we put the bullet where if belongs. End of story.
I really don't think that you short range guys try your darndest to get within 15 yards of an elk when you are already 45 yards away. At least not every time. If you saw as elk at 100 yards and didn't make a lick of effort to get closer, are you taking a long shot because you didn't try to get closer? I would guess that you will say no because that elk is well within your effective shooting range.

There are open country elk that can be found on a flat with no bush for hundreds of yards around. I wouldn't feel bad about putting my 7mm 160 gr TSX in the boiler room from 500 yards away in this type of scenario. Now taking a shot across a canyon with bush all around the animal is another story. We all know how different the terrain looks from far away compared to when you actually get there.
I repeat, I would take the long shot if I felt I could put the bullet in the vitals with confidence and then RECOVER the animal after walking for 45 minutes.

It is one thing to do something from the range and bench and another to duplicate that in hunting circumstances.Canyon winds comapared to ridge top vary and your never going to get an Elk to be exactly in the right spot at the right time for the perfect,if there is one at 500 yards,shot.

I have passed a few times on 400 yard shots from wind/grade and other unknown variables at that particular time that could make the difference in a quick clean kill to just a hit,if that.

If everything was perfect..Maybe, but it never is,atleast in the terrain I hunt.Funny how bragging rights go and I grew up with Military Marksman with the key to the range..It just is not the same unless you have a spotter with you. I have seen the best of the Military screw up big time and also seen them make some amazing shots.

Jayco

Poor choice. An elk is not more vulnerable simply because it is a larger animal.


That phenomenon is well documented. No I haven't personally witnessed it. Neither will 99% of the readers. So that is the example you want to use? You are going to bring that as what a hunter might expect to encounter?


As previously noted, the decision to shoot is (should be) far more complicated than marksmanship alone. Many other factors. Not much time to decide I know. No one said it would be easy. If every elk you�ve shot has collapsed before taking another step you are lucky. If you expect that to happen each time you are a fool. Good marksmanship will not guarantee that. Plan a step ahead and be at least as smart as the elk. It will have an escape route planned. Think ahead � like a chess player.


Reread what you responded to or get someone to read it to you. There is no disagreement that marksmanship skills vary.


And next season I�ll find a dead, unclaimed cow. Maybe because a young man, trying his best, read somewhere that there is nothing wrong with taking shots at 500 yards.


It�s not always about you. Did you ever consider that perhaps everything posted here is not directed at you personally? Everything you have ever writer is �I�ve this ..�, �I won�t that ..�, me, me, me. No one is going to know what distance you shoot unless you tell them. The good that can come of a forum of this nature is that the exchange of info can help someone. The most important person here isn�t you or me, It�s the man faced with the decision to shoot or not. Your point about preparation is a good point but it is buried so deep in your narcissism that any reader has to really work to get any benefit from it.


That is a slippery slope. You are getting close to allowing factors affecting you personally to interfere with making the most humane kill possible. You went even futher some time ago with this.

Longer and longer shots with less and less time available. That�s a recipe for disaster. If an animal doesn�t go down after a shot then what? Don�t compromise in sending the most lethal shot possible, and you�ve got to be prepared to see it through.


OK. Well said.


Few hunters have any business taking shots longer than 300 yds. Most of those that do realize that what they do isn�t the norm and have sense enough not to advocate that practice on the internet. Hunting elk is a learning process that spans a lifetime. The notion that you can take a �shortcut� by spending lots of time at the range is irresponsible. (But .. spending lots of time at the range can�t be emphasized strongly enough).

What you say is true, but nobody said anything about the range! If a person routinely shoots in the same types of environments as he would when hunting, then the practice is beneficial. I'm not only speaking about canyon's either, there are many open country elk that are to be found in large meadows where I'm from...those are easier shots (albeit a little long) than across a wind-shifting canyon. Easier to walk up to the animal too.

Alamosa �

In the interest of brevity and consideration for others here, I will only post my responses to your previous post. Those that are interested can match up my comments to your post.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
No one said elk were more vulnerable than antelope, I said the kill zone is larger. Shooting with the same precision to the same distance, there is more room for error without wandering outside the heart/lung area. I would not be happy with a gut-shot goat even if it went down. As a result I would make the no-shoot decision sooner with antelope than for the larger elk.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Elk migrations occur in many areas, not just north of Craig, and they are witnessed by many hunters. Do I want to use that as an example? Sure � a lot of elk get taken out in the sage. No matter, though, there are plenty of other opportunities for long shots � above treeline, across canyons, from high perches, across parks etc., etc. It�s a rare year when I don�t see elk further away than I care to shoot, and I hunt mostly 3rd season.

One thing about the elk migrations � the smart hunters know about them and use them to their advantage.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

You know what? I am a chess player. My high school team took 2nd in the nation one year and 4th the next. One of the players I played with a lot (and occasionally beat) won a National Championship a couple years later. Another player took the state (Iowa) championship. I�ve managed to win a couple matches and have trophies to prove it. So maybe � just maybe � I do think like a chess player. By the way, I'm a pretty fair "Go" player, too.

In the 25 years I�ve hunted elk I�ve never lost one. No, they didn�t all drop in their tracks, but I can only think of two that made it 30 yards and a fair percentage HAVE dropped in their tracks. Good marksmanship has played an important role, but so has careful shot selection.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I can read for myself, thank you. And I still think I got it right. Those that can should not be limited by those that cannot.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Nowhere in what I write will you find a suggestion that everyone should be attempting long shots. Indeed I repeatedly stress the importance of being prepared. Do I think there is anything wrong with 500 yard shots per se? No. Do I think ALL shots should be taken at 500 yards? Obviously not. Do I think every hunter should attempt such shots? No again.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

You re right � it is not about me. Nevertheless when using examples to make a point I often draw on �my� own direct experience and write in the first person. Why? Because its what I know and I can explain the rationale behind my decisions. I�ve seen a lot of others take shots that I would not (often with predictably poor results) and can only guess what they were thinking. You�re right that I stress the need to be prepared and its my hope that new hunters will read and be persuaded by my arguments. If not at least I tried.

By the way, an absence of narcissism is considered very unhealthy, just as is too much. Moderation, my friend, but if you�re looking to others for validation you�re in trouble.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Do factors affecting me personally influence my shoot/no-shoot decisions? You bet! Is the freezer empty of game meat? How hard will it be to get the meat to the truck? If I pass on a shot, what are my chances of getting another? (Which entails a lot of questions, like how much time do I have left to hunt, what is the weather forecast, are animals scarce or plentiful, etc.) On several hunts I have made the decision not to shoot on the basis that I had had my fun and didn�t want to ruin a perfectly good hunt by ending it with a lot of hard work. In one case it was a 20-yard shot at a cow that I passed on. Had the rifle up and the cow in the scope, finger on the trigger. Instead of shooting I put the rifle down, told her to get gone, and started walking back to the truck which was downhill and less than a mile away. In two other cases I had trophy bulls at 100 yards and let them walk. Why would I do such a thing? Simple - personal factors affected my shoot/no-shoot decision. Regardless of the range I don�t shoot beyond my ability, so it�s no big deal - and no apologies will be forthcoming.

By the way, if I wanted to make the most humane kill possible I would use my .45-70 and wait until I could plant the muzzle in the ear canal or between the eyes.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Being a bit overdramatic, aren�t you? Did I suggest I would attempt a shot for which I was not prepared or that was risky? No.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Thank you. Did you notice my point about the need to be prepared wasn�t buried very deep at all?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

At least we agree about the importance of practice and I would agree that many hunters don�t shoot well enough to be taking shots at 300 yards or beyond. But what those shooters can or cannot do is irrelevant to my contention that there is nothing wrong with a prepared hunter taking a 500 yard shot.

"By the way, if I wanted to make the most humane kill possible I would use my .45-70 and wait until I could plant the muzzle in the ear canal or between the eyes."

This is the logical fallacy of reductio ad absurdum. I would posit that most hunters believe that we have a fundamental ethical obligation to make a quick, clean kill. If you agree with this position, than a variable like "this is my last chance this season for a shot" should only be a secondary or tertiary consideration. This is why the example of shooting at an elk because it is headed to private ground demonstrates flawed ethical reasoning. Setting aside the legal and regulatory considerations, the hunter has primary concerns. Is this is "safe" shot to take? What is my confidence that shooting at this animal with this rifle at this range will result in a quick, clean kill? The "go/no-go" decision should first consider primary ethical principles. Only after these principles are properly evaluated should one consider issues like "do I want to pack this elk out from this place" or "how empty is my freezer."

There are normative values established by the hunting community. Walk through the RMEF convention and tell folks you made a 1200-yard on an elk and watch the reactions. The values established by elk hunters reflect a collective knowledge of making shots in real world conditions. These serve as guidelines, not strict ethical rules. There are world-class marksman capable of accurate shooting at much greater than "average" ranges. There are also individuals who are less capable than average. What we, as a hunting community, hope is that hunters are realistic and cautious about a maximum range. Those of us with a more philosophical bent also hope that the "go/no-go" decisions are made based on the primary factors rather than the secondary or tertiary factors.

I am probably more cautious than many hunters about my maximum range. Why? Because it is the animal, not me, that pays for any mistakes in my judgment. Every archery season I establish my maximum range. Even under perfect conditions, I won't shoot at anything even one yard over my maximum range... and I adjust downward on a hunt-by-hunt basis to reflect ambient conditions. My confidence level in making a shot must be 100 percent or I won't load a shell or touch my safety.

I hope there's a young hunter or two with the attention span to read through all these posts. Elk are the finest big game animal on the planet. People are distractable, hurried, and generally too selfish anymore to take an ethical approach to the outdoors. We are an adulterous lot, and we typically yearn only to justify what makes us feel good. The more people I meet the more I like horses. I see nothing honorable about testing the limits of technology while hunting a fine species in the finest country on the planet. Minimizing the game ain't 'sposed to be part of the game. I reckin' it's old school to preach hunter ethics and respect for nature. If they don't get it by the time they're pulling the trigger on their own dime, then I reckin' it's like takin' a baptist to a catholic mass. Most of it's lost on him and the rest he ain't ever gonna buy outta principle, or lack therein.

Muleskinner,
Shucks, many of the posts WERE long..:0

I hope that folks, young or older, assess and follow their own abilities when hunting any critter..from squirrels to biggest game....not just to do like the Gals do and " talk and dress up for each other.."

I also hope they learn the skills for tracking and butchering, boning and packing when they make a killing shot on and elk....unless of course, they are all richnfamous and have someone else attend to the downed game...and yes, I'm a dinosaur...:)Jim

Hampstead �

Like you, I tend to be conservative in the shots I will take. The longest to date was a nice 5x6 bull at 350 yards (as measured with a GPS) and all others have been under 300. And like you I hope that "go/no-go" decisions are made based initially on the primary factors.

That said, the secondary and tertiary factors do play a role, and rightfully so. Safety should be the #1 concern � a shot that is not safe should not, IMHO, be taken. Legal issues come next (I won�t shoot a big game animal illegally no matter how sure I am of a humane kill). The issue of making a quick, clean kill is very important to me personally, but I am not a subsistence hunter. If I was, the issue of �how empty is my freezer� might well take precedence.

But the primary reason for my response was about your statement �This is the logical fallacy of reductio ad absurdum.� Either I misunderstood what you meant (entirely possible and maybe probable) or I disagree. Reductio ad absurdum arguments are not necessarily logical fallacies � in fact they can be quite correct if constructed properly, as I believe mine is. Backing off to a range of 2 miles pretty well assures a �miss�. As the range decreases the chances of a hit in the proper place only increases. Conversely, planting the muzzle in the ear canal pretty much guarantees a good hit. (Although one should never underestimate the ability of their fellow man to screw things up.) I actually know a guy that shot a deer by placing the muzzle in the ear � it had gone into the barn with the dairy cows and was making its exit when a .22LR ended its escape.

Muleskinner -

Recently I saw a video clip where some "hunters" were videotaping their long-range "hunt". It consisted of sitting at a portable bench and shooting deer way out beyond 500 yards. Of the three deer I saw them shoot, two looked to be hit poorly. Nothing I saw indicated that it would have been difficult to get closer - quite the opposite, in fact. While they were quite happy, all I could feel was disgust.

But while I agree with you in principle, some folks regularly shoot better at 500 yards than others do at 100. Inevitably the guys that get good at the long ranges do so through practice, study and dedication while the guys that can't shoot well at 100 get there by essentially doing nothing.

Which one is more ethical - the long range shooter who takes an elk at 500 yards with a single perfectly placed shot or Slobhunter Joe who manages to take an elk at 100 yards with a shot to the gut?

From my limited experience of 40+ years in killing bull elk, I wonder why more consideration isn't given to the :

" can I find him after this great shot( 30 to 530 yards) and how am I gonna butcher and pack him out" topics?

You all have guides and muleskinners who do all that as you wait in camp drinking chardonnay or Jack Daniels??
I don't...and never have...It's my decision and my responsibility.

Any shooter can "kill" given enough time , equipment/technology and opportunity..BUT what about securing the kill, the weather, the temperature and the distance to the fry pan or freezer?

I will assume that each big game hunter here hopes to enjoy eating the critter they worked so hard to bring down,and aren't just seeking some fireside beer barbecue photo op with their buds.

What about prep and experience with the butchering, boning or packing?

Those things ALWAYS were and are still my prime considerations when readying for a shot.

And I have passed on some great critters because of negative factors on one or more of the 'tertiary' issues.

The shot itself was something I had trained for, calculated and planned for years before that moment.

The 'other issues' after the killing shot always were my primary concerns...and should be yours..Jim

Good point. Know what the most important piece of equipment a elk hunter owns, jimbo? Ain't anything posted on this site.

Well, I'd hazard a guess and say it's heart-respect for all living things..and that covers alot...Jim

Here's a hint:

Brand names - Nike, Reebok, Adidas, New Balance

Get the picture? Although, a good mule or two come in pretty damn handy.

Not to sound pedantic, but reductio ad absurdum arguments are logical fallacies by definition. The definition of a duck is "Any of various wild or domesticated swimming birds of the family Anatidae, characteristically having a broad, flat bill, short legs, and webbed feet." You can argue that the bird swimming in your pond is not a duck, but you can't argue (at least not logically) that the duck swimming in your pond is not a duck.

There are a range of reasonable ranges we can discuss the hunting and killing of elk. I respectfully suggest that this normal range of shots does not begin at .001 inches where a rifle barrel is sitting against the elk's head. This is a silly, hyperbolic example ergo it is reductio ad absurdum.

Should a hunter take a 500-yard shot at an elk? Can that same hunter, under varying field conditions, put 99 out of 100 shots into a pie plate at 500 yards? Personally, I'd like to see an elk "golf course." Set up nine full-sized decoys. Have a "station" at each decoy. The range between the fake elk would vary from 300 to 500 yards... but the hunter would not have any idea of the actual range. Include changes in elevation, angle and shooting conditions. The course would be easier than real life because the elk wouldn't move, but I would find it interesting to see how many self-proclaimed 500+ yard shooters would go nine for nine.

I have a mental checklist, deeply ingrained after years of hunting. If the answer to any of my internal questions is "No," I pass on the shot. The final question... does this feel "right." Sometimes our gut instincts tell us things that we may not be consciously aware.

Hampstead


"Personally, I'd like to see an elk "golf course." Set up nine full-sized decoys. Have a "station" at each decoy. The range between the fake elk would vary from 300 to 500 yards... but the hunter would not have any idea of the actual range. Include changes in elevation, angle and shooting conditions."


There is a shooting school in West Virginia that offers something very near your request. For the last two years there has been a special class given with lifesize elk targets, shooting is ranged to determine and demonstrate the limits of the shooter (less than 900 yards). Search for Storm Mountain Training Center, (304) 446-5526 speak with Rod Ryan. Once you successfully complete that class a 500 yard shot on a elk is pretty easy.

I would not mind taking a peek at the course, or shooting it if the cost was not too high. In truth, though, I have no interest in shooting elk at 500+ yards. I'm not sure I could ever be comfortable if it felt like the ghost of my grandfather was scowling at me the entire time.

You may well have gifts I do not possess, Dave, but in the country I hunt it is hard for me to consider any 500-yard shot "pretty easy." In fact, after humping up and down some hard country for a few days, I can't even say that putting one foot ahead of the other is "pretty easy." One of the things I love about bowhunting is the sense of "nearness" to an animal. I understand every man feels something different. To me, a 500+ yard feels like shooting. A 50 yard shot feels like hunting. Your mileage may vary.

Hampstead,
I would also enjoy a course like that, just a little closer to where I live.
With that being said, I do not enter the hunting field without being able to determine wind speed, angles, range, and atmospheric conditions.
For a course, it would be fun to mil range targets of which 3 of my hunting scopes have that ability, even though I am not as experienced in that area as I would like to be. My hunting buddy is chomping at the bit to do a mil range course of fire, but I would want it to be 500 yards or less for sure.
We set-up portable steel targets and shoot from all kinds of angles, but we use rangefinders to determine distance.

I know what you mean about it being hard work in the mountains. Sometimes we push it so hard, it seems like you can't go any further sometimes-but somehow we do. There have been several times where I was not able to shoot and hte opportunity passed because I was to winded to make the shot. Other times the animals stayed in the area and I was able to get my heart rate down enough to be accurate for a clean kill. When you get the animal down the hard work begins
As far as brand names when the animal is down, for me it is "Rocky" I have large size-14 and very narrow feet AAA, and my feet can get in serious blister trouble unless I am a good steward. A Camp-Trails external frame pack is what carries my animal out-deboned of course. Steve and I have never had to track an elk we have shot.
My mileage varies-sometimes I use a bow or a revolver for big game, whereas my partner hunts with a bow every year for elk then uses a specialty handgun for deer and antelope. I am primarily dedicated to using the specialty handguns.
I do appreciate that you understand that what gives you that special feeling or what you love about hunting is not the same for everyone else.

While I appreciate the kind words, I'm inclined to say, "Not too quick now." I don't want tolerance to be confused with approval. I am not inclined to interfere with a man's right to hunt in accordance with the law. Unlike many, I am also not inclined to have the law changed to suit my personal preferences. After years in the field, I have my own ethics of hunting. I follow those rules and prefer to associate with hunters who share my values. Those who engage in practices I consider unethical... well, everyone may be entitled to his or her opinion; they are not entitled to a place around my campfire. As for hunting at "extreme" ranges, I have known gifted marksman who could make incredible shots. I'm not one to tell another hunter what his or her maximum range ought to be. All I can say is every hunter is responsible for the bullet that leaves the barrel. There is no room in the business for excuses.

I didn't intend for my words to suggest your approval. To insinuate that, would be to manipulate your statements into something they are not.

I just appreciate the fact that you can accept that not everyone feels the same way you do.

This is one of the most ridiculous threads I have ever seen.....it just needs to die a quick and merciful death from a 500 yard heart shot, with a 300 mag and 180 grain TSX's.

MM

It was not my attempt to insinuate anything. There have been times when my natural Montana tolerance for ignoring my neighbor has been interpreted as approval. I would be remiss not to thank you again, xp, and say that the naturally tolerant are always welcome in my camp.

When a man breaks the rule of law, he has to answer to a judge and jury of his peers. When he breaks ethical laws, at least insofar as hunting, I suppose he only answers to his Maker... and maybe the grumpy old grandfather than taught him how to hunt elk.

As for this thread being "ridiculous," I believe it could only appear so to one with a closed mind. One of the most important things the hunting community can do is talk about ethics. I am not so old or so wise that I cannot learn something every day... but I can only do that if I am willing to listen, particularly to things with which I disagree.

MontanaMan,

I think I get the gist of your post..that you personally have no difficulty hunting-killing cleanly at 500 yards.

If I misunderstood please clarify.

IMHO,
The thread is NOT ridiculous for most big game-elk hunters.

THOUSANDS DREAM AND PLAN AND SPEND BIG BUCKS FOR ELK HUNTING EQUIPMENT ..but FOR EVERY THOUSAND THERE ARE TEN WHO HAVE DONE THE TIME AND PAID THE PRICE IN THE FIELD.

Maybe 500 yard shots with your rifle and loads are commonplace and is in perspective for you with your firearm, bullet-reloading and skills.
_____________________________________________________________

Not to back you into a corner, but what is your total experience in years and hunting elk and killing and burchering and eating them?
Maybe I should move to Big Hole and work part time on the old man's ranch and shoot elk at the haystacks at 500 yards off a bench on the bunkhouse porch while drinking a hot cup of coffee ..:)Jim

Ouch. That ain't 'xactly fair, but what a mental picture. Who said life was 'sposed to be fair anyhoo?

Well, I worked a cattle ranch in Big Hole a couple of summers and falls..years ago..:)
Just honest questions..No offense intended..Jim

Jim,

I have no particular axe to grind either way; my comments were / are intended to mean that this is a discussion or argument that has been beaten to death by people on both sides who are convinced they are right and both see very little of the other view.

My own position is that some people are capable of killing cleanly (given favorable conditions) at 500 yards and more.

By far and away, most are not, but many of those think they are capable and cannot be convinced otherwise until such time as they take such a shot (with witnesses) and miss or maim.

Similarly, many who say they would not take a 500 yard shot for whatever the reason, say so to mask their own shortcomings.

Would I take it?.....yes, been there done that, successfully on both elk & deer, with witnesses.

Is it ideal? No, and I would always prefer to have the odds at 100% rather than 90%, meaning closer is better, but sometimes it just happens that way. In a meat hunting situation though, I sure wouldn't do it, 'less I was starvin'.

Done enough, elk, moose & deer hunting to be able to think about each situation as it is, not with a preconcieved notion or set of rules.

Like I said previously, useless thread, in the end really doesn't help change anyone's view.

JMHO

MM

MM, Thanks for the reply.
I do think that such discussions can help folks solidify maybe and re-assess their own course af action for hunting when the time comes for the bullet to hit the bone...tho they may not acknowlege it here on this forum.

You didn't say much about your own experience in time with hunting, killing, butchering elk.
I'll leave that to you.Jim

Jim,

In hunting elk in 4 states, as well as deer and moose for that matter, I've always been fortunate to have horses or mules, and in one case, llamas, to pack out with, so doing other than quartering in the field has not been an issue for me.

My highest respect and regards are for the hunters that hike into an area, kill an animal, be it elk or some other critter, and then dress it, bone it and make several trips in & out on foot to pack out the meat w/o the aid of a pack animal.

MM

Sorry, but I�m going to disagree and repeat myself - reductio ad absurdum arguments are not necessarily logical fallacies. The definition of reductio ad absurdum, according to Princeton University�s Wordnet, is �a disproof by showing that the consequences of the proposition are absurd �. Logical fallacies are defined as errors in reasoning, as differentiated from factual error. In other words, logical truth may in fact represent a factual error.

My contention was that it is not always possible to get closer to an animal, to which Alamosa responded that I was �getting close to allowing factors affecting you personally to interfere with making the most humane kill possible.� Alamosa�s obvious implication was that �making the most humane kill possible� was paramount. It was this contention that I was refuting. The fact is that if I wanted to make the most humane kill possible I would use what I consider my most effective rifle (my .45-70) and get as close as possible (plant the muzzle in the ear canal or between the eyes). Logically, that is truthful. Whether or not I could ever succeed is a totally separate issue.

By the way, Wikipedia agrees with me:

�There is a fairly common misconception that reductio ad absurdum simply denotes "a silly argument" and is itself a logical fallacy. However, this is not correct; a properly constructed reductio constitutes a correct argument.�




Impractical, yes. Which is why �making the most humane kill possible� is never my priority. Making the most humane kill possible given the current circumstances is another matter entirely.

Where the �normal range of shots� begins is rather irrelevant. I�ve seen a .300 Win Mag kill an elk at less than 10 feet and I�ve been close enough to deer to reach out and touch them. No matter how impractical or difficult, however, I would contend that planting the muzzle in the ear canal is not impossible. Perhaps we just need, to paraphrase some others, to �learn to hunt� and to �get closer�.



A lot of hunters can�t put 9 out of 10 in to a 9� plate at 100 yards, let alone 99 out of 100. I would contend first that a) the kill zone on an elk is considerably larger than 9�, b) that some people shoot better at 500 than others do at 100, and c) that a well prepared hunter that cleanly takes game at 500 yards is more ethical than the slob hunter that gut shoots an animal at 100 yards.

I have killed a lot of prairie dogs at a measured 600 yds.

Elk are a lot bigger.

Get the picture?

And to think I was worried about being pedantic. Let's just agree to disagree. I don't think your .45-70 in the ear argument is relevant, correctly constructed or particularly useful. If you do, so be it.

Before I leave, the discussion here is about taking a 500-yard shot. Comparing a successful 500-yard shot by a "well prepared hunter" to a poorly made 100-yard shot by a "slob hunter" presumes a given result favorable to your argument. Let us set aside your characterizations of "well prepared" and "slob." It may well be that the hunter who made the 500-yard was lucky. Furthermore, the 100-yard "gut shot" may have been due to a bad break like a unseen twig or branch. The relevant ethical question is: Did the hunter take a safe, legal shot within a range where he or she has a demonstrated ability to make a quick, clean kill on the animal in question? And personally, I don't think the abilty to sit over a bench with a varmit rig and pop prairie dogs at 600 yards is the same making a shot on an elk in field conditions. Maybe it's just me, but I could never see dragging my shooting bench up the hill into elk country.

Hampstead �

OK, I can agree to disagree on the reductio ad absurdum argument.

My argument about the �well prepared hunter� is the direct result of my belief that fortune favors the prepared. I do not suggest that every person should attempt 500 yard shots or even that any person should attempt them � only that 500 yards is not all that far for a well prepared hunter.

Are there people that shoot beyond their capability? Absolutely. I�ve seen enough misses at 100 yards or so to know that is too far for some folks.
Last year a friend gut shot an antelope at 85 yards. I�ve been to the range with him on one occasion and would have to say that, while he is a great guy in other respects, he falls into the poorly prepared category � he shoots different ammo all the time and never goes beyond 100 yards for his all-too-rare practice.

Conversely I�ve seen some of the guys that spend more time at the 500-yard line than I do shoot some very nice groups. Can they consistently take an elk cleanly at that range or further? Some have already proven they can.

The questions posed by the originator of this thread were �Would you?�, Could you?� and �Should you?�

Obviously people do make the attempt. Some people even have the skills to do it with relative ease. As to �Should you?�, I�ll leave it up to the individual hunters to judge for themselves.

By the way, I also agree that I could never see dragging a bench into elk country, although I have seen them used by �hunters� who were sitting outside their hilltop tent watching a far hillside. A bench and a varmint rig certainly isn�t necessary to reliably put one in the kill zone at 500 yards, though. A reasonably accurate rifle will do, and there are many fine natural and artificial rests that will do as well. While I generally shoot from the kneeling or sitting position, I carry shooting sticks as well and often have a bipod on the rifle. Over the years I have made many impromptu but sturdy rests with my backpack, heavy coat, trees, stumps, logs, fence posts and rocks

One other thing � if you are under the impression that all hunters do all their long range practice off a bench you would be mistaken. Its pretty common at my range to see guys verifying their rifles off the bench and then dropping down into the dirt and shooting with impromptu rests.

Elk ain't vermin, dangnumbit! So you gut shoot a dog, it crawls in a hole an' dies an' there's one less rat hole for a horse to break a leg in. A gut shot elk ain't a joke, it's a tragedy. Equating elk with gophers, my god these people are nuts!

+100!!

101

Mule,
Do you really think that was his intent?
Or is it possible he was talking about is that if he can consistently hit a PD @ 6 (or for that matter a very close miss on a PD @ 600 would still be in the kill zone of an elk) then a elk @ 500 yards is not as difficult for him as some are suggesting?
I know I don't treat PD's in the same way I do big game.
Only he can explain the actual intent of his post, but if "these people"(whoever that is) include myself about equating elk with gophers, then you are way off base.

The intent was perfectly clear. Some care more about twisting things around in order to make their way the only "ethical" way than they do having an honest discussion.

Muleskinner �

Are you referring to my post? I�ve reread it several times and don�t understand how someone could come to the conclusion that I am equating elk with varmints of any kind.

My intent is clear: There's way too many people huntin' elk that don't respect what a wonderful resource these animals are. More people we get in this sport, seems like the more we get that musta been raised in an ammoral atmosphere in terms of hunting. I blame video games. Real live game animals ain't targets. There's consequences and responsibilities that come with pullin' the trigger. It don't prove manhood to hit one with a specialized piece of equipment that has been designed to take all the skill outta the event. And I don't care how much "skill" you imagine you have and how you think that squares with takin' shots that push the ability of the equipment to compensate for judgement, the environment, the unpredictable nature of animals themselves. We sit here on this board analyzin' every aspect of the equipment as if that was the really the end purpose of the sport. We've bred all the traditional hunting ethics outta the sport, turning it into a rifle geek's pastime, not an outdoors experience. Don't mean to offend anybody but I usually do rantin' on like this. All the purdy rifles and neat gadgets in the world don't mean squat to an outdoorsman if there ain't no decent game to hunt and no decent place to hunt 'em in. Maybe these forums ain't the right place for folks like me. They seem to pander to the same folks who buy the new generation hunting magazines. Outdoor Life and F&S used to be more about the experience of hunting, not the consumerism and not the ammoral plinker's guide to animate target shooting. Nowadays, only Bugle seems to have stories that make you wish you could smell the air the writer was describing, feel the snow crunching under his boot. Differnt class of hunter these days, an' I reckin' I can't square it with hunting at all, as I know it. 500 shots at the best game animal in the world, in the best country left on the planet? All seems to be a stupid, self-centered bunch of crap to me, an' that might get me ignored by some who prefer not to have their imaginary bubble burst, but maybe I just need to ignore them too so's I wouldn't get my blood pressure up readin' such garbage whent there's good basketball on TV.

Good post Muleskinner.

Many of us have restated out points several times.
I'd like to resubmit mine.

There is a huge responsibility attached to the rhetoric we use on these threads. (Probably not this one anymore because it has grown so long that no one would read it)

The typical elk hunter, (the person that might benefit from a topic like this), is probably a young man, kills an elk once in 4 years (Colo statistic.), lives in a western state, and probably depends heavily upon his deer hunting experience.

Many here take a logical responsible assertion or guideline and take it as a personal affront then use it an an opportunity to jump up, beat their chest, and claim they can do this or they are better than that, make long shots, make running shots, and so on. They try to ignore what may be reasonable sound advice so they can spout off about how that is all wrong because they personally can do this or that.

Consider a young man who may fit the mold of this typical hunter - doing his best to learn what he can, gathering information where he can, and then, consider someone with self proclaimed decades of experience advising that there is nothing wrong with these long shots.
Which one is the 'slob hunter'?

Instead of trying to expand upon what is different or special about hunting elk, the talk goes to how far you can push the limits.

Muleskinner �

If your intent wasn�t clear before, there isn�t much doubt about it now.

I agree there are too may �hunters� out there that do not respect the game � any game. Several years back a herd of elk had just crossed #13 north of Craig. A number of vehicles had stopped and the hunters had gotten out to take a look. One young man (older teen it looked like) rested his rifle on a fencepost and fired into the herd from about 75-100 yards out. Nothing dropped at the shot and he turned to his father and shrugged. They then walked away to their truck and drove off. Over the last couple decades I have seen many other incidents where the game was not respected and a common thread in all but one or two of those incidents was the range was well under 500 yards.

It appears you are contending that a) there is no such thing as an ethical 500-yard shot on elk, and b) that anyone who would attempt such a shot does not have any respect for the animal. While the first is arguable as it is a judgment call, the second is factually and demonstrably wrong, just as it would be wrong to think that everyone who prepares for such a shot a) will only take such shots, and/or b) will take such shots regardless of the circumstances. I would suggest that a relatively high percentage of those that prepare such shots have high respect for the animal � otherwise why bother preparing for the shot, why not just go out and bang away?

Are there those that go out and take such shots just to pump up their ego? Sure. Does that mean that everyone who takes such shots is doing it for that purpose? No.

Back in the �good old days� when nearly everyone hunted with open sights, do you suppose everyone limited their shots to ranges where a good hit was guaranteed or do you suppose that more than a few shots were taken at ranges well beyond that? I would bet big money on the latter.

Perhaps you are right. Perhaps we should ban high-tech equipment. The first thing to go should be the laser rangefinders since once an accurate range is known people are more tempted to take a shot. The second thing that has to go is drop-compensating reticles, because they, too, might lead a person to temptation. Target knobs on scopes should go for the same reason and in fact variable power scopes and any fixed scope above 4x must go as well. While we�re at it let�s get rid of all the Magnums because they surely lead to uncontrollable temptation. Nothing bigger than a .30-06 or its progeny are needed at �ethical� ranges anyway. Matter of fact, since so many people can�t hit squat beyond 100 yards, let�s just make it illegal to shoot at longer ranges. Then we can get rid of scopes all together and, because a .30-30 would be perfectly adequate at that range, we could outlaw all other cartridges. Think of the benefits - .30-30 ammo, which is already cheap, would get even cheaper; people could afford to practice more which hopefully would lead to less wounded game; everyone would save money since they could no longer buy scopes; and people would actually have to �learn to hunt� and �get closer�. Utopia, right?

Not for me. Thanks, but I�m moving in the opposite direction. Two of the last three scopes I�ve purchased were Burris Fullfield II�s with Ballistic Plex reticles and the third had mil-dots, target knobs and an illuminated reticle. When I hunt a laser rangefinder can be found in my breast pocket. The .300 Win Mag in the safe was purchased for the primary reason of enabling longer shots at elk (although I�ve only used it on one elk and that was a chip-shot at 260 yards). Over that last couple years I have been shooting at longer ranges (300 yards and up) on a more frequent basis. Last fall I took Zack, a friend of Daughter #1 who hadn�t shot in 4 years, out to the local range. He felt clay pigeons at 300 yards were �too easy�, and he was right. So we moved back to 500 yards where both of us shot two more, one each with a heavy-barrel .22-250 and one each with a sporter-weight .257 Roberts. Since I had never fired either rifle at that range I took two ranging shots with each, both using the same aim point. Including the 4 ranging shots we fired a total of 7 shots. All were very close to the clay pigeons and 4 were hits. All were easily in the kill zone of a coyote, let alone an elk. We then backed off to 600 yards and broke out the .300 Win Mag, which I had never fired beyond 300 yards. Once again I took two identically aimed ranging shots, which just missed the top of the steel gong at the 10:30 or 11:00 position. My next shot was about 3� out from dead center at the same 10:30-11:00 position. I handed the rifle to Zack and he proceeded to put a round on target about 2� from mine. Including the ranging shots we took 4 shots total. Even the ranging shots were in the kill zone for an elk and the other two would have made for a very dead coyote. While I do not feel prepared to go shoot elk at 500 yards or beyond, I don�t think that it would take a great deal to get there, either.

The pictures posted by xphunter demonstrate very well that 500 yards is not necessarily a barrier to accurate shooting.

I would at least like to be sighted in at 300 yards using a target at that distance before I would think about making a 500 yard shot. Yeah it's one thing to calculate the trajectory and windage based on your round and caliber but having some real world data to back it up is another. Most hunters only sight in at about 100 yards and may hit the target a couple of inches high but I don't know.......

Aside from romantic notions about our fathers attitude about hunting, which I would assume was more about getting the job done to survive and or provide. I love being in nature myself and I even enjoy articles written that way.
Amoral attitudes or video game are not for me.
I have helped a number of people start shooting and introduced them into hunting and my hunting buddy has taken a number of youth that didn't have family to take them. Neither of us encourage these young people or the adults we help to shoot beyond their abilities. Our goal is to teach them how to be safe first of all and the basics of shooting and hunting. A good number of them know we shoot at longer distances. A little time on the bench is usually revealing and then when you get to field shooting positions it is even more revealing. Some have terrible habits, while others are extremely good shooters.
Sometimes you guys share your convictions you spread a wide swath judging the character and motives all into one cubby hole.
People who are going to be irresponsible do not need a post like this to give them license. You guys probably kill an elk every year you hunt. Same here, as it has been a long time since I have had an unfilled elk permit. Don't use guides, never have even attempted running shots, don't have horses, mainly hunt cows, public land, we expend a tremendous amount in our effort-Why? We enjoy it. It pleases us and we are consistently successful at it.
BTW I have not seen one "self-proclaimed" LR hunter that encourages others to do what they do if they cannot ensure a clean kill. You make a huge assumption by suggesting we give license to LR hunting to those who have poor ability, improper equipment, or approach hunting with no concern. The guys I know approach hunting with first shot connection in the vitals. And when it comes to elk most will be ready for a follow up if needed.
FWIW I never hunt elk alone (with the exception of 3 days one season a number of years ago). I am with one and sometimes two people. Shooting in the field whether hunting or on steel has been witnessed a number of times by those who happen to be there and friends. My primary elk XP has only been shot with a bi-pod on or over a pack. A typical tri-pod front rest has never graced it's forend.

Not the best analogy- I admit, but it is the one that came to mind:
Many know of Lance Armstrong and his amazing cycling ability. For the men and women that race Cat 1-5 and pro's I wonder what they would think if a number of people should tell them that what they are doing is unethical and or wrong because it will encourage novice cyclists to try things they are not ready or prepared to do and thus injure themselves and others.
I do not and have never raced road bikes (bicycles-not the motor powered ones ), but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that some people are more gifted, have more time, give more time, more experienced, and are more driven in a given activity. If you do something stupid on a road bike while group riding or racing it can literally kill you, not to mention severely injure others (potentially be life threatening). Just because I see Lance and company flying down a mountain at amazing speeds, although it is exciting to watch I would never try it and I would never encourage a novice cyclist too either.
With sarcasm fully intended, maybe the reason Lance retired is that he thought his riding style would cause a novice cyclist to attempt something he shouldn't.
Road cycling is what I use to stay in shape and I do a number of 100 mile rides 5-6 hour-span each year. Just this past year in trying to help a new rider (extremely talented/fast) to get used to group riding. It was his second year of riding & at will he could drop us like a hammer, but he was not used to close-quarter riding. So around mile 50 something of a 75 mile ride one Saturday morning I began to work with him-just the two of us. The other two riders, both Ex-racers backed off and gave us some space. Long-story short is he got nervous and flinched and took us both down. Both of us were hurt and he had to spend a couple of days in the hospital. I admit I made a bad judgement call. I tried to help him do something he wasn't ready for. Why did I do it? He is a friend, and I knew he was going on two big rides with people he would not know and because of his ability speed wise he would be at the front with expereinced riders who will not tolerate a unstable rider.
Personally, I don't know of anyone that does it "right" all of the time.
But in my opionon the true "rhetoric" of this thread has been the name calling and the judging of people's character.

Many here take a logical responsible assertion or guideline and take it as a personal affront then use it as an opportunity to jump up, beat their chest, and claim that something they do not agree with is unethical, stupid, amoral, that only someone that has no respect for an animal wouild even think of it and that people just do it to compensate for a small penis, yadda, yadda, yadda. They try to ignore what may be reasonable for others so they can spout off about how that is all wrong because they personally can not or will not do this or that.

Consider a young man who may fit the mold of this typical hunter - doing his best to learn what he can, gathering information where he can and studying the habits of his quarry as well as the arts and skills of hunting and shooting. Although his practice takes him further, he learns that his comfort level with a 12� target is about 600 yards. While hunting he is presented with a perfect broadside opportunity at 510 yards. He takes the shot and drops an elk with a single shot placed exactly where he wanted it. Later he runs into someone with self proclaimed decades of experience who has gut shot an elk, which escaped, after he shot it on the run at 100 yards and who insists there is nothing wrong with taking running shots.

Which one is the 'slob hunter'?

Instead of trying to expand upon what is different or special about hunting elk, the talk goes to how no one should attempt something others can not or will not do, no matter what differences in skill may exist.

So, in other words you're saying hunting in the mountains is just like riding a bike?

Nah, I hear ya. I've been living in the city and hunting from the same tower blind on the same property in the UP of Michigan for the last couple of years. I'm going mountain hunting next year with a 65 year old man and would like some pointers as far as what I need to do to be prepared? Please, thanks.

"So, in other words you're saying hunting in the mountains is just like riding a bike?"

Sure, that is exactly what I meant

I sent you a PM

Worst hunting analogy, ever.

Well, I've never taken a 500 yard shot at an elk and don't plan to any time soon. But I've shot steel and targets at 500, and been fortunate enough to get some good advice from a very experienced long-range shooter.

He told me that if I wanted to be able to make 500 yard shots consistently, I should practice a lot at 700 and 800.

Not 300.

Good advice.

I agree. Excellent advice.

Show me a man that does all his practicing off a bench and I'll show you a man that fantasizes about his marksmanship, and really has none. Show me a man with "romantic notions," and I'll show you a man with values.

I couldn't agree more. I need to get me a shooting sling and at least make a trip up north to my firing lane this summer and practice from different positions. It's only 300 yards long but it's the best I can do. Maybe I should limit my range for Elk to 400 yards then? I have a 7mm Rem Mag by the way.

Not sure which post this one was aimed at, but I didn't see anybody say anything about shooting off a bench. The guy I was referring to always shot prone at long ranges, using a bipod and a sandbag under the butt. Just like he does when he takes long shots at game, and just as he advised me to do. That's my favorite position too.

Lemme ask you this, when they come out with laser guided sighting systems, that'll reach a mile and track a moving animal once electronically tagged, would you use it for "hunting."

I can imagine all the fun you'll have testing yourself against nature with that rig!

What are you talking about?

No one ever suggested that all shooting should be done off the bench, although the bench is a very good place to start. Headed for one myself in just a few minutes...

Let me ask you a few questions:

1. In a previous post you stated that �It don't prove manhood to hit one with a specialized piece of equipment that has been designed to take all the skill outta the event.� Couple of questions: Do you hunt with a modern firearm or a blunderbuss? Do you use rifle sights or a scope or is your barrel clean of all sighting devices like the early ones were? Do you use modern powders and ignition systems or do you hunt with black powder and a matchlock?

2. At what range does hunting turn from a hunter�s pastime to a �rifle geek's pastime�?

3. At what range does a shot become responsible and moral as opposes to irresponsible and �amoral�?

4. What is the maximum range a hunter can shoot at while still being respectful of the elk that is his quarry?

A man goes into to see a doctor to ask about a surgical procedure. The doctor says, "There are two way to do this procedure. The easy way that any 'slob' doctor can do or the hard way. Now, those 'slob' doctors will tell you that the easy way is better, but they just don't acknowledge my superior skill and preparation. In fact, I'm so good that the opinion of the other of doctors just doesn't matter because I can do the difficult technique with more consistency than they can do the easy technique." Naturally, the man asks, "If the easy technique is really easier and safer, then why don't you do the easy technique? It should be a piece of cake for you."

"Well," the doctor says, "I really don't feel challenged by the easy technique. Besides, I might run into something that would delay the easy technique until next week or even next month. All of the worries you hear from those other doctors is just a bunch of hype. The difficult technique is really not difficult at all, particularly for someone with my skills. So, when should we schedule you for surgery."

"It's not for me," the man says, "It is for adult daughter who is developmentally disabled. I have to make this decision for her."

*****

I think the man has the legal right to make the medical decision either way. Any surgical procedure involves an element of risk. If he is undergoing the procedure himself, then he bears the risk. Is there a different ethical responsibility when he is making the decision for another? I believe so. I believe people have the right to place themselves at risk for all sorts of reasons I might think are silly. Where I become concerned is when people make decisions and others must bear the consequences.

While animals like elk do not have rights, they do deserve moral consideration. This is why animals are considered chattel, but may not be abused... by law or the standards of common decency. I think most hunters generally agree that the ethical foundations of the hunt are fair chase and a quick, clean kill. If a hunter is going to shoot at ranges the elk hunting community thinks are excessive, I think asking the long range hunter "why" is a legitimate question. Is it ego? It is some self-imnposd challenge? Is it simply because he or she can?

Is the spirit of the hunt the ability to make a 500-yard shot? Is it the skill to stalk within 200 yards? Is it the shot not taken?

My concern, if you will, is that the hunter rarely ever bears the consequences of his mistakes. The elk pays the price for a poorly placed shot. This is why dangerous game is interesting. Replace "elk" with cape buffalo. What do you suppose your friendly, local PH would think about 500-yard shots at buff? Frankly, I don't know.

So, let's go back to the medical procedure. If the world-class surgeon pulls off the difficult procedure, does that make his actions ethical? If the local surgeon makes a mistake and there are complications, does this make him a slob? The ethical quality of an action is not determined by the results, but by the action itself. Shooting at a police officer because he pulled you over for speeding is not ethical... even if you miss.

The elk hunting community has a rough sense of reasonable ranges for shooting. I don't think this thread would exist for shooting at 100, 200 or perhaps 300 yards. At 500 yards, there are enough members of the community who are skeptical to have this thread. Does this mean elk hunters are a bunch of near-sighted school marms who couldn't hit the ass-end of a bull elephant at 500 yards? No, I think it's that the collective experience of the community results in a certain skepticism about 500-yard shots in field conditions. Perhaps this skepticism is misplaced. On the other hand, perhaps elk hunters have an intuitive sense that it is the species we admire that pays the price for our mistakes... and a noble desire among us to minimize those mistakes.

Whew, this stuff is realllllllllllly gettin' far out and is challenging my already challenged thinkin' capacity.

Can't wait for the next analogy!!!!!

MM

Those are all very good questions, Coyote hunter, and they are the reason I try not to judge other hunters by what range they take game at. I used to think long-range shots were "unsporting" and I still think it's more of a challenge to get close, but I can't tell you the range at which it becomes "unsporting" or unethical other than it's the range where the individual can no longer reliably hit what he's shooting at under field conditions.

That's the reason I don't plan on taking any 500 yard shots at game any time soon--I don't personally have the time and inclination to practice enough to know that I'll hit every time at that range. Others do have the time and inclination. I tip my hat to them, but I prefer to hunt in my own way.

And as far as what range is "sporting" that's an individual judgment. I hunt most of the time with a muzzleloader so I'm limited (in CO, no scopes)to around 125 yards max. but that doesn't mean I'm any more or less "sporting" than a centerfire-toter. As a matter of fact, with the special seasons, IMO it's easier to kill an elk with a muzzleloader in CO than with a centerfire.

And I know of guys who hunt with nothing but traditional archery gear and never take a shot beyond 25 yards.

Does that give them the right to declare the rest of us "non-sporting" and look down their noses at us?

I don't think so.

Very enlightening post Hampstead, thank you sir! And an excellent topic to be discussing. I think the bottom line is practicing, knowing one's self, integrity, then making the right deciscion based on your skill level. I will not be making 500 yard shots any time soon either. Gonna need some practice and some xperience'

Exactly, and well put.

In other words, its all about the equipment? Give an unskilled shooter the rifle used to win the last National Match and suddenly that person is a world class shooter? No ....



Show me a man with �romantic notions� and quite often I�ll show you a person guilty of wishful thinking and self delusion. Regardless, it isn�t enough just to HAVE values. Hitler had no shortage of romantic notions, such as the superiority of the Master Race. Southern white slave owners had no shortage of romantic notions about the inferiority of Black people.

Hampstead �

You are correct that there members of the elk who are skeptical about 500-yard shots. And that is to be expected. There are also those that are well prepared for such shots, and further, and can place a shot at 500 yards as well as many and better than some can at 100.

At one time I was among the skeptics, but I rarely shot beyond 100 yards in those days. After joining a club that had ranges out to 600 yards, my views gradually changed. These days I rarely shoot less than 200 yards unless I�m doing load development. Shooting clay pigeons at 300 yards, in the words of a friend, has become �too easy�. The 400-yard line is becoming a more frequent stopping place. I have already proven I can hit clay pigeons at 500 yards with good frequency, now the task is to get better at it. My one trip to the 600-yard line served a very useful purpose � first it showed me what is possible under good conditions, and secondly it convinced me to spend more time there simply because it is fun. Its amazing how much shorter 500-yards seems today than it was a few years back.

That is not to say that I am ready for a 500-yard shot or that everyone should be taking them. Rather I am simply stating what should be obvious � there are those who are ready and can make such shots with ease and have the good judgment to withhold the shot when conditions are not right. To dismiss such people out of hand as amoral, irresponsible and disrespectful of the game animal, as Muleskinner has done, is simply not a supportable position.

IMO each individual and each situation must be evaluated on their own merits. If we can agree on that then we are not so far apart in our thinking.

The collective experience of a few people who by their own admission have about zero experience shooting at 500 yds in "field conditions"--who think it requires a benchrest, etc. For skepticism to mean much, the skeptics ought to have a little bit of knowledge and experience on the subject. The truth is you have absolutely no idea how difficult or easy a shot at 500 yds can be in "field conditions," so your skepticism taken in that context by poeople who send more rounds downrange at 500+ in a year than 99% of hunters do at any range.

I have been involved with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation since very close to its inception in 1984. Attending fundraising banquets, national conventions and other corporate functions, I imagine I have spoken in depth with hundreds if not a thousand elk hunters. It is my impression, based on my experiences, that if you start talking about shooting elk at 500 yards, more than a few brows will furrow. Now I readily admit that I can only speak to my own experiences. What I don't understand, Jon, is how you can speak to my experiences without the benefit of knowing anything about me. I won't question your long-range shooting skills, but I'm a little dubious about the psychic powers you have that allow you to question mine.

The question you have evaded, Coyote Hunter, is the simple, "Why?" If a good hunter can put on a stalk and get to 250 yards, why pull the trigger at 500? I'm just curious.

#1) Because you would have mentioned it by now. If you spent significant amounts of time shooting at 500+ that would have given you a basis from which to support your opinions on its difficulty very strongly and I doubt you would have kept them secret when that's what this thread is about.

#2) If you had done the above, you wouldn't be quite so "skeptical." Your opinion on whether it should or shouldn't be done might not change, but you wouldn't be "skeptical" on whether it could be done with a high degree of certainty by the right people under the right conditions.

I have not been evading the question. The specifics of why such a shot might be taken are simply not particularly germane to the subject of whether a 500-yard shot would, could or should be taken (from the original post in this thread).

That said, I did address the subject in general back on page 7:

�There are many reasons why it is not always possible to get closer. Indeed, if getting closer was always an option we could all save a lot of money and hunt with knives. The fact, however, is that constraints of time, hunting seasons, terrain, weather and other factors do not always allow a hunter to get closer.�

At some point one either has to acknowledge that �getting closer� is not always a reasonable, practical or feasible option, or one must come to the conclusion that a long stick with a sharp stone attached to the end is all we really need. Once one acknowledges that getting closer is not always an option, one then has to ask at what range is it no longer possible to get closer? There is no answer to that question because it can happen at any range.


Suffice it to say that over the years I have seen good stalks blown by other hunters who blindly stumbled into the area unaware elk were present, stalks blown by changes in the wind, opportunities lost because the animals moved onto private land or into another game unit, opportunities lost due to changes in the weather (snow and fog) before the gap could be closed, opportunities lost due to the end of both shooting hours and the end of the season (in one case at the same time), and opportunities lost because the elk were on the move and simply outdistanced the hunters. I have watched elk for hours trying to figure out how to get closer and realizing that there really wasn�t any way to do so.

Is it possible to get closer? Often it is, yes. Is it usually possible? Probably. Always? No.

While you were shooting the people you are trying to persuade were out scouting elk. Don�t ask me how I know.


A dependable, predictable firearm and a hunter that knows his/its limits.


Pick up a copy of Bugle, Field & Stream, Hunting, American Hunter, go to biggamehunt.net, spend some time with a professional hunter. There are numerous other sources as well. You will get an answer. It will be considerably less than 500 yards.


What a crock. It�s because no authoritative source will support your position.



It looks like whatever that responsible range is you are prepared to cross it.



Again with this going round and round. This Q&A repeats constantly in various forms. Draw the line.


But pulling the trigger IS always an option? How about trying? If you fail you can say you hunted.


That statement should tell you a lot. I would venture a guess that none of the hunters here who actually hunt elk are stepping out of their motor vehicles to shoot.

.

It's not fair to tell someone that they are not entitled to have an opinion on something because they haven't personally done it.

Besides he probably has. More people participate in LR shooting than you realize.

I would be very careful about asserting what someone else has or hasn't done. Like most other encounters of this nature, the voices you hear boasting loudest are almost always covering some inadequacy, desperate for recognition, or something like that you know. We have all seen it.

The long range shooters I know would not have a dog in this hunt and would never enter this discussion. This is the wrong venue and audience.

I have a friend who likes to hunt whitetail deer here in Alberta where the terrain can vary from thick bush to wide open prairies. This particular friend generally shoots his animals at 100 yards or less, but practices out to 300. He shoots a 25-06 with 115 gr BT's. One year I remember him telling me that he wouldn't be going deer hunting that year. I asked him why. His reply was that he hadn't practiced with his rifle enough that year to be prepared enough to be confident in his ability to give a clean death to the deer. I commended him for that wise and responsible decision. If there are people out there (I could be included) that practice enough during a year to be confident in their ability at 300, 400, or even 500 yards, then are they being any less responsible shooting at an animal than the lazy slob hunter who only pulls the trigger once a year at a deer or elk 150 yards away? People here don't tend to have many qualms with that....

And a good time was had by all.





That answer pretty much ducks the questions asked other than one can assume you do not use a blunderbuss or a matchlock, which would have been assumed anyway. It does not answer the questions about sighting devices, black or smokeless powder, and the part about the hunter is a complete non-sequiter. The point I was working toward was that most modern bolt guns, when topped with halfway decent glass, are sufficient out to ranges well past that of most shooters. In many cases a �specialized piece of equipment that has been designed to take all the skill outta the event� provides only a slim margin of improvement in accuracy or ease and often no improvement in the final result. When it comes to elk, an inexpensive scope and any reasonably accurate production rifle will get the job done at 500 yards.




If I wanted their answer that is where I would have gone. Muleskinner is the one that made the statement the quote came from and as a result the question was directed at him. He has not answered, nor have you.




I will accept as an authoritative source those that have prepared for, can and have taken elk cleanly at 500 yards and beyond. And they do support my position.






No place did I state that I would have taken a shot that I felt was irresponsible, but feel free to create all the straw men you like. What is the maximum range at which I would have taken a shot? It depends on what the circumstances were at the time. And it would have been my decision alone. As it turns out I took my elk that day at 260 yards, seconds after allowing my buddy to take the first shot. He passed on several 40-yards shots which I would have happily taken, and finally took one at 80. I passed on shooting the first elk our guide urged me to shoot and took a larger cow a bit further out. It turns out our guide�s clients had pulled 11 elk out in the previous week and only 1 or 2 had been taken with a one-shot kill. Dave�s 80-yard elk was taken with one shot, as was mine.

Again you duck the question. Did my shot at 260 yards cross the line into the territory of irresponsible range? What if I had shot at 350? How about 400? Is 500 really a magic number or is 425 too far?





I did draw a line and have stated pretty unequivocally in this thread that 500 yards is not too far for the well-prepared hunter. It is you who refuse to draw a line and once again have ducked the question. Give us a number, that�s all I ask.




Pulling the trigger IS always an option. It is often, however, neither the best option nor even a good one, hence it is often rejected. In my own case, since you asked, I have often passed on a shot. Many have been at long ranges I was not comfortable with, others at rock throwing distance.

If you have taken shots at distances beyond muzzle contact range, you have already answered the question of whether or not it is always possible to get closer, or you are a hypocrite.




There was a typo there, it should have read �in Colorado�, not �I Colorado�. Unfortunately it is too late for me to correct it. Page 7 for anyone that is interested.

My statement was in response to Muleskinner, who stated the following:

�Hunting elk is about stealth, ... not propping a bench rifle up on the hood of a vehicle and never getting your boots dirty."

I was merely pointing out that shooting off the hood of a truck would be illegal in Colorado. That said, every year there is a fair number of hunters who do spot elk from their vehicles, then jump out and take a shot.

My interest is in discussing ideas, not people. Other than mentioning to my long-term involvement with the RMEF, I have avoided personal references. By Jon's logic, I must not own a sub-MOA rifle, have shot anything at 500 yards or even killed an elk because I have not engaged in a rodomontade about my hunting accomplishments.

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that discusses "ought" not "can." Just because I have the ability to make a shot under a particular set of circumstances does not mean I should pull the trigger. This same discussion occurs when archers talk about taking a 60- or 70-yard shot at an elk. While hunting is intensely personal, I think community standards are useful. I understand there will always be hunters who feel these standards do not apply to them because of their superior ability, training or whatever. If the only thing this discussion accomplishes is to make a few people think a bit longer and harder about taking a 500-yard shot, then it has been a success. It is also good to show those outside the hunting community that we care enough about the the species to discuss ethical issues, preferably in a manner that involves a minimum of chest beating and crowing.

Whole thing kinda reminded me about a competitor friend of mine. I kept telling the world how you could work hard, get the right load, a better bullet, spend time on the range, learn the wind and become as good as I was(I generally won every local match I attended at the time-though nerves usually got me somewhat at state and nationals....)

He kept saying, just tell em it doesnt' take practice, shoot a slow round bullet and all will be fine. That way I eliminated more of my competition.

SOrta the same here, I see a handful of folks capable and have explained it over and over again, it is easy to do, IF you take the time to practice, but if you don't, then avoid the longer shots. In my estimation, lots of folks still have no business at even 200 yards, though I"d take a 500 yarder in a heartbeat cause its easy for my skill level.

The same shows in all weapons. I can shoot to 200 with irons and an MZ. Most want it less than 100.

And in reality IMHO,speaking of averages, the average joe should be maxed at 200- maybe 250 with a rifle. Should be maxed at 30 yards with a pistol. Should be maxed at 75 yards irons MZ. Should be maxed at 40 yards with a bow. And the bow depends on the game, our WT here, max range should be 20 yards or less, they will jump the string past that. ITs not the archers issue but the deers issue there that is limiting.

Jeff

Rost495 do you think this thread will go 40 pages or forever? I know you can drop them at 500 yards. No doubt in my mind. If you can hit an egg at 500 yards, I can't see how an elk gets more difficult because it has fur and weighs 500 pounds and is about 750 times bigger.

I didn't and never would tell anybody he is not entitled to an opinion. It's a free country, everybody is entitled to an opinion.

That does not make their opinion valid.

Poor logic. You made statements that displayed a lack of long range shooting experience. I called you on it. You haven't made similarly inaccurate (pun intended ) statements about MOA rifles or elk hunting in general. Well, I guess the "don't ever see elk far away after the first day" thing was a bit suspect, but I gave you a pass on that.

378

It might go on forever. Have almost seen that here.

Wasn't quite defending the shot on my last post I didn't think. Simply adding to the earlier comments its not for everyone thats for sure.

Size doesn't matter to me really, if I think I could hit a clay pigeon or extremely close on the first shot out of the barrel, then I"ll take the shot, regardless of elephant or mouse.

Jeff

I have not said anything about not seeing "elk far away after the first day." I think you have confused what I have written with someone else. It also seems that confusion applies to your assertion that I have made statements that "displayed a lack of long range shooting experience." I don't have a problem with a person calling me on something, Jon, but I really prefer it be something I have actually said rather than something imagined or invented.

In my first post on this thread, I readily acknowledge that, "There are world-class marksman capable of accurate shooting at much greater than 'average' ranges." In a later post I said, "I have known gifted marksman who could make incredible shots. I'm not one to tell another hunter what his or her maximum range ought to be."

I haven't said taking a 500-yard shot at an elk was unethical, but that it simply wasn't my cup of tea. Specifically, I said, "To me, a 500+ yard shot feels like shooting. A 50 yard shot feels like hunting. Your mileage may vary."

I have gone to some trouble to express my thoughts in a way that did not condemn the excellent marksmen who choose to shoot a distances I might not. That said, I think it is valid for hunters to talk about the ethical implications of "long-range" shots on elk. Now, you might consider 500 yards an easy, short-range shot, but I respectfully suggest that many members of the elk hunting community will disagree. I'm sure a few of those folks will give you the argument you're so keen to have.

What is the time of flight for a 500 yd shot with say a .300 win mag or "whatever"?

At some point, the length of time that the bullet is in the air makes it simply impossible to predict with certainty that the target will even be at its orginal position when the bullet arrives. Never mind how accurately it was launched at the target's position initially.

I deliberatly choose the word "target" instead of naming a game animal. This is all about target shooting in my opinion. Shooting a mobile and somewhat unpredictable target.

Brent

.6 of a second-not a 300 WM though.



True, animals move. Calls, for one will sometimes stop an animal.
Bedded animals, move their head around some at times, but the vitals pretty much stay put.
Observing a un-spooked animal for a period of time gives you a pretty good indication if it is a go or no go on the shot.

Not enough to worry about TOF at 500 yards.

No one can guarantee anything an animal will or will not do. Nothing says a snort at 100 yards doesn't propel the animal just as the trigger is starting to break.

One has to use caution with any distance of a shot, but 500 isn't in the ball park of worrying about. My 50 at 1700 yards with TOF around 4.6 seconds, that one would be iffy.

Then you start to compare apples again, MZ TOF at 150 yards, Arrow TOF at 50 yards and so on.

I was refering to this:

Assuming a bench would be needed or even desired for such a shot was telling. We aren't talking about a P-dog at 1000+ yds, here.

Keep in mind, while I quoted you originally I was also calling on "The collective experience of a few people" that you were using to back your "skepticism" so please don't feel picked upon personally.



I guess you're right, all you've done is implied it with your "collective consensus of skepticism" (while others have flat out said it).

Whether you feel that way or not, I really don't care. All I was doing was helping you base your "ethical decision" on correct information which you didn't seem to have. Seemed like the ethical thing to do.


You're right. It was Alamosa. Sorry. Good thing I had given you a pass on it.

Well, Jon, you're not the first person to misread my dry sense of humor. The line about dragging a shooting bunch up the hill was simply meant to semi-humorously illustrate what I feel is the substantial difference between shooting varmits (prairie dogs) and hunting elk.

As for the "few" people, that's your word, not mine. Maybe the hundreds (or more) elk hunters I have encountered constitute a "few" in your mind. Tell you what, I'm going to ask my good friends at the RMEF if they will run a poll in the Bugle or on the website asking elk hunters what is the maximum range at which they would feel comfortable shooting an elk. We can take this up again when we have better data on hunter attitudes.

Finally, I don't think your intent was to "help" me, Jon. If you were sincere or interested in an honest discussion, you would have asked a few questions before making assumptions. I do appreciate the apology, despite the fact that it was qualified and felt a bit smarmy.

Hampsted

I find your poll suggestion interesting and would like to see the results posted.

I would also like to offer that the question(s) be verbatim submitted at several sites to poll differing communities, RMEF as you suggest, perhaps on this site in the either the elk hunting area or general and also over at a pair of "long range hunting" sites.

I believe it'd be interesting to overlay the distribution curves and perhaps poke into the common area for similarities.

It was clear I was refering to the "few" in this thread.

I guess I should have recognized you as a lost cause as the other "few" obviously are. If you want to base your ethical decisions on false information* it's no skin off my nose. Just don't ask me to agree when you try to apply them to me.

* The premise that a well prepared, well practiced guy with the proper equipment in the right circumstances with the right conditions faces an unreasonably high risk of wounding and/or losing the animal with a 500 yd shot (relative to "normal hunters" at "normal ranges" which is obviously "ethical").

I say the above is FALSE. I know it to be false. You are "skeptical." Frankly I don't care if you find 10 million hunters who all say a 500 yd shot is "unethical," if they are all basing that upon the belief the above is true (usually out of ignorance) then their decision on the subject means nothing to me. Why should it?

It all becomes unethical when the animal is no longer being "chased" as in "fair chase." If the animal has no reasonable ability to sense your presence, or if his natural alarm mechanism is not apt to cause flight due to habituation at the range at which you are plopped down, then you aren't chasing anything, you are target shooting at unwary animals. You aren't testing anything, but your luck. You aren't accomplishing anything worthy of such fine animals.

I agree, blasting stuff from treestands at close range isn't accomplishing anything. Not really fair "chase." Doesn't do a thing for me. But that doesn't make it unethical, just not my preference.

Err, wait, that is what you were talking about, right?

Don't get me started on treestands.

Well, that would be one opinion, but one I do not share.

My goal is to get into a shooting position without the animal sensing my presence � whether the range is a few feet or much further. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I do not. Regardless, my goal is to make the kill as swiftly and cleanly as possible. In my efforts I make a lot of decisions about whether or not to try to get closer, whether or not to try a shot, when to take a shot and from what position. I consider the range, the terrain, the weather, the wind and a host of other factors. Only when I am certain of a swift, clean kill do I actually take the shot. To me, such a shot is ethical, regardless of whether or not the animal is aware of my presence or what others might think.

By the way, you have not answered the question as to the range at which a shot becomes �amoral�, irresponsible and disrespectful. We are still waiting...

It's like pornography...hard to define, but you know it when you see it. How's that for being judicial?

I think it is a non-response that only serves to highlight how unsupportable your position is.

500 yards is too far for many, not all.

...Everyman must answer the question of "how far is to far" I suppose,but for me 500 yds is well beyond what my conscience would allow. For me, target shooting is target shooting, and hunting game a completely different undertaking. Yes it is a moral question for me,my respect for my quarry would preclude my sniping them from afar.,.BUT I do acknowledge the question is for each man to resolve for himself. I do pray in behalf of hunting's future that fair chase always at the heart of hunting's ethic. That being all the more so as we see hunting equiptment continue to evolve...

When I bowhunt,the animal has no real chance at winning either. I'm downwind and doing it all right. Its rare that they ever find me out until they are bleeding....

I don't see it much different than a longer shot. Most times they don't know Im' there either. But sometimes....

Jeff

Take a half-minute rifle, give it to alot of "hunters", and they couldn't keep their shots at 100 yards within a 12 inch circle. These people think NO ONE should shoot at an elk at 500 yards. No amount of reasoning will convince them otherwise, for the simple reason they can't see it as possible if THEY can't do it. It's just Greek to them.
This thread is alot longer than it would be if everyone practiced shooting enough to understand and utilize the capabilities of the tools available today. Put another way; some people can't hit chitt and never will, and some can because they've worked at it, and the former will never understand the latter. Mild rant over...

Well all I can say is what my comfort zone is, 300 yards is about a far as I will shoot, since that is the longest range I can shoot at where I live. Besides I don't see as well as I use to either. My last elk was a long 128 steps from were I squeezed the trigger till were it dropped. One of the most memorable shots I ever made. Plenty of good eating, I had elk strogonoff for dinner tonight. As for my rifle, a Sako 75 in 338 winchester, 3x -9 x Ziess, set on 4x at the time, Federal Factory Load a 225 gr Speer Sp. Any number of rifles and cartridges that I have would have done the job as well. This one just became my go to rifle since the first 5 shots I put down range when I fist got it in 1996. 500 yards is a long ways out, Its doable, of course the kind of rifles and sights you would need is a little more than this flat lander would what to carry or subject himself to that kind of recoil. I on the other hand don't have a problem with those that do.

gmsemel �

Your .338 Win Mag is a great elk rifle and can easily manage 500-yard shots. Making it easy might require a couple of changes, such as your zero range and changing to a scope with a drop-compensating reticle of some sort. Target knobs on the scope work, too.

My Ruger .300 Win Mag was purchased especially for elk and is easily capable of 500 yard shots. I shoot a 180g bullet (North Fork, TSX and now MRX at a nominal 3030fps. The rifle is zeroed for Maximum Point Blank Range for a 6� diameter target, meaning the bullet is never more than 3� above or below line of sight from the muzzle to MPBR. With the MRX that works out to a 256 yard zero (+ 2.56� at 100 yards) and MPBR of 301 yards. A Burris Fullfield II with a Ballistic Plex reticle is mounted in the rings.

The rifle and scope weigh about 8.3 pounds. If your .338 and scope weigh the same, I estimate the .300 has about 5 foot-pounds less recoil, at 29 and change versus 34 and something. At 500 yards the bullet is down 31.5� but the Ballistic Plex reticle makes it easy � just use the bottom cross hatch as the aim point. At 600 yards the top of the bottom post is very close...

The point is you don�t need an Ultra Mag and shoulder-breaking recoil to get the job done.

If you get a chance, try shooting at longer ranges. If nothing else it is a confidence builder for those 300-yard shots.

Here is something for you 500 yd shooters to contemplate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC2-nK80Bt8

Brent

Something for you 200 yd shooters too.

Wait, please don't tell me you think that guy would think you are any different than the "500 yd shooter?"

Caution, delusions of "Ethical" grandeur detected.

I'm sure Muleskinner would dissapprove of the high-tech equipment used - the modern shoes, the metal-tipped spear, the plastic water bottle - never mind the camera crew...

I stopped posting on this thread for a simple reason. Philosophy is a science. Ethics is subfield of philosophy. In my experience, it is impossible to engage in rational discourse about matters of faith. Jon stated that he "knows" what is "false" and the conclusion of 10 million other hunters would be invalid because he "knows" their conclusion is based on a faulty assumption. To me, continuing a conversation with Jon about long-range hunting is like walking into a Baptist church and talking to the preacher about the Risen Christ.

The basic argument here is that some hunters, because of skill and/or practice, are better shots at 500 yards than some hunters at 100 or 200 yards... therefore, it is ethical for these hunters to shoot an elk at 500 yards. By this logic, if I am better driver at 80 miles an hour than my elderly neighbor is at 20 miles an hour, it is ethical for me to tear down our private road doing 80. If my neighbor complains about my high speed driving, it is because she will "never understand" because she isn't capable of doing what I do. Right.

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that examines not what we CAN do; it asks what we OUGHT to do. Medical science is full of these dilemmas. If we can choose the sex or other characteristics of our child, should we? If we can clone humans, should we? In hunting, we have dilemmas presented by technology. We can use airplanes or helicopters to scout for game, should we? What happens when we can access to satellites for thermographic imaging? Is it ethical to use this data to locate game? What happens when we have rifles with electronic sensors that eliminate any vibration from the shooter, that have eletronic imaging devices that automatically measure range, wind drift and elevation change? Is the ability to deliver a quick, clean kill the ONLY ethical consideration in taking a shot? Does it matter that we can effectively kill game at distances where we, as hunters, cannot be detected?

The technology available to hunters is changing all the time. For the thoughtful hunter, this creates ethical questions. Personally, I think the elk hunting community has a responsibility to the sport and the species to engage in discussions about these questions. Is it ethical to shoot at elk at 500 yards? That is a question I am still thinking about... unlike those who have already reached an iron-clad conclusion.

Yes

Hampstead �

There are so many flaws with your driving analogy its difficult to know where to begin. Let me just dispense with it by saying that doing 80mph on a crowded road where everyone else is going slower would pretty much equate to a �no shoot� situation. Doing 80mph on an empty dragstrip would be altogether different. Some folks go a lot faster on the strip � I for one wouldn�t care to even get close to their top speeds.


No, at least not for me. But it is a primary consideration. There are others.



Not to me. In fact remaining undetected is the ideal situation as far as I�m concerned.


Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends.


By the way, in my quest for elk I use satellite imagery, aerial photographs, topographic maps, electronic ranging devices, high-quality optics and electronic databases available over the internet. Concerns about the ethics of using them doesn�t cost me a moment of sleep.

Also, ethics to me are a personal matter. It matters not what 10 million others might think, unless you are a sheep. Thank you, but I will decide for myself.

The reason I cited "our private road" in my example is that 1) traffic laws do not apply; 2) it is not "crowded" or used by members of the general public; 3) my behavior can have an impact on my neighbors who share the road (no pun intended); and 4) it provides an example showing that the ability to perform a specific action is not necessarily related to whether or not the specific action is ethical.

I write carefully, CH. Please try to read more carefully.

Furthermore, I think you are confusing morality with ethics. Saying your ethics are a personal matter is like saying your mathematics or your physics are a personal matter. As for your remaining points, it seems you are being deliberately obtuse. I trust you know that there is a difference between remaining concealed through skill (and luck) where an animal has a chance to detect you and remaining concealed because the animal has no meangingful chance to detect you. I also trust that you know using a plane or helicopter to spot game and "drop hunt" or simply shoot from a plane is illegal in most jurisdictions. Why? Because many of those "10 million hunters" you don't care and other participating members of democratic societies have concluded that it is unethical and unsporting.

While I am not an expert at shooting from a plane, I imagine it takes skill. Legal issues aside, how is shooting from a plane different than shooting from 500 yards? If you practice shooting from a plane and become very skilled you could argue that you have a better chance of a quick, clean kill than some "slob" hunter shooting from 200 yards on the ground.

What 10 million others might think doesn't matter to you, but it should What "other people" think shapes the laws of the United States and Canada. Your right to hunt depends on the majority of the population believing that hunters and the hunt are ethical. Even if you don't care about philosophy (which seems pretty apparent), I hope you have enough simple self interest to see that public perception matters.

Anti-hunters are not stupid. They know time is on their side. America is becoming more urbanized. More children are raised in single parent homes where a father is not available to pass down the tradition of hunting. The population is growing while the number of hunters is declining. The average American hunter is white, male, 42 and not getting younger. The number of young people participating in hunting is dropping.

Twenty years ago, do you think anybody cared about "cruelty-free" chicken eggs or banning foie gras? The animal rights movement has gained ground. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation was started in 1984 and is arguably the greatest recent success story in hunting organization. It has 160,000 members. PETA, founded in 1980, has 750,000 members. In my opinion, we damn well better care about what others think... at least if we want our sons and daughters to have the right to hunt.

I'll post this for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.

890 yard shot on a deer
http://www.richardscustomrifles.com/...006%20DEER.wmv

Very impressive.
Definitly not hunting.

Not sure why he includes the deer that runs off. It has a heck of a head start. If it is an elk it runs further, is probably at higher altitude, probably more difficult terrain.

Hampstead -

There is nothing wrong with my reading ability. Not having specifics of the private road you mention I created a known situation that would make my point. Unless everyone drives 80mph down your private road, people are going slower and crowded is a relative term � even one slower moving car can make it very crowded if another car is overtaking the slower one at relatively high rate of speed. Especially if the road is narrow or has loose gravel, like the one I live on, or has curves, kids, dogs, people, etc. walking along and across it. My �crowded road� was apropos, as was the reference to an empty drag strip for comparison purposes. I probably wouldn�t drive 80mph on your private road but I wouldn�t have any hesitation doing so on an empty drag strip. Just like I wouldn�t take a 500-yard shot if the circumstances were not appropriate to do so � and would have no problem doing so if the circumstances were favorable.

No, I am not confusing ethics with morality � they are synonyms. Here is one definition of ethics, provided by the Internet Encyclopedia of Philoshophy (University of Tennessee): �The field of ethics, also called moral philosophy, involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior.� The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines �moral� as �1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ETHICAL <moral judgments>�. Merriam Webster further provides a list of synonyms for �moral�: �synonyms MORAL, ETHICAL, VIRTUOUS, RIGHTEOUS, NOBLE�.

You argue that there is no such thing as personal ethics. Wikipedia disagrees, providing this definition: �Ethics..., a major branch of philosophy, is the study of values and customs of a person or group and covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right and wrong, good and evil, and responsibility.� Note the reference to �a person or group�.

Yes, I am well aware of the difference between remaining undetected at close range versus far. In either case it is my goal to remain undetected. When I do get close and remain undetected I do not jump up and yell �Here I am� in the spirit of fair play � rather I tend to announce my presence with a rather large �BANG�, same as I do at longer ranges. I hunt with the intent to kill and will � or will not, as I choose - take advantage of opportunities as I see fit, without apology to others who disagree with my actions.

What 10 million others think should not matter to me � I will make up my own mind, thank you very much. Ten million thought slavery was ethical. Were they right? PETA members think I shouldn�t hunt � at any range. By your estimate they outnumber me 750,000 to 1. Are they right?

Hampstead makes some really good points. If anyone cares about the future of hunting in our country, they would do well to consider what he says. I'm afraid too many of us take our privilege to hunt for granted.

And yes, just because you can do something does not make it right.

McInnis �

This thread is about 500-yard shots (�Wouldja? Couldja? Shouldja?� from the first post). There is very little difference between shooting at 500 yards than there is at say 350 yards, yet very few would bellyache about 350 yards being unethical, amoral, irresponsible or disrespectful. Nevertheless there are hunters who cannot make good shots at either range just as there are hunters for whom neither range is difficult. Does the ethical hunter consider factors other than range when making a shoot/no-shoot decision? Of course. The point is that hunters have different skill levels and levels of preparedness. People can easily make all the same statements about hunting at 350 yards that have been made about 500, and with the same justifications.

Making the leap from 500 yards to an airplane is comparing apples to oranges. It is like comparing fishing with a rod and reel to using nets, dynamite or draining the water and picking up the fish as they flop in the mud.

Where Hampstead�s argument went wrong was he confused the ethics of a situation with the legality of the situation. Slavery was legal but in my book was not ethical. Hunting big game with a semi-automatic rifle with 30 rounds in the magazine is no less ethical per se than using one that holds 5 rounds, but in Colorado the 30-round magazine would be illegal. Similarly, using a rifle capable of full-auto in semi-auto mode is no less ethical per se than using a semi-auto-only rifle, but again in Colorado the former would be illegal.

And yes, Hampstead, twenty years ago people DID care about how chickens were treated � I was one of them. I don�t eat veal due to concerns about how the animals are treated and would refuse foie gras for the same reason (although it has never interested me in the least anyway). Maybe that comes from growing up on a farm where I raised calves for 4-H and the chickens were well treated right up until the time we twisted their heads off.

Un-ethical in the terrain I hunt.Period..
You guys that bust gongs and eggs at 500 yards from a bench need a reality check.I have personally been under two logging helicopters that went down because of unseen winds.One was a Chinook with a senater from our State at that time I cut logs for named Sverstein(SP) and the other was an outfit from Oregon with the yellow choppers than lit right in the middle of the landing and both had no apparent wind,from our standpoint.Atleaast not that much..To spend the money most spend to hunt Elk,why even think you no the winds of an unfamiliar terrain that alot hunt and even those in there own territory,ask the dead pilots how wind changes.

Hunters do not take chances on wounding game.

Jayco

Jayco,

If you knew a lot about reading wind, you'd understand that looking through a scope allows one to read the mirage which indicates what the wind is doing. And focusing on each area allows one to define the winds in each corridor along the way. Plus the fact that a trained shooter can glance to a target and instantly tell where the problem areas will be and know where and what to be looking for.

Of course any responsible shooter(since we arent' hunters) will not be shooting in weird or wild wind conditions anyway. Remember(and folks just dont' get this part for some reason) we dont' shoot 1 million yards in 1 second and in any condition. The ethics are there. I use them anyway.

And this isn't a knock on your hunting or wind reading skills. I have the skills to pick up a set of elk tracks at daylight and follow all day if needed to where the elk is. I also have the skills to shoot longer and read winds and know when to shoot or not. Just like tracking the elk. They constantly set you up for backtrails and wind giving you away. You have to know what you are doing there, much like you must when shooting. I'm just trying to say that many folks can read wind that others cannot.
I'm decent enough that I'm giving a seminar and coaching next week for some 600 yard shooters...

I'm with you totally though, I dont' take chances on wounding game. And have still managed to do it once. Though that shot was 70 yards or less.... at a still animal, with a perfect shot.... but a vine was in the way that I never saw...

Jeff

I guess the chopper pilots were just dumb and rookies and the professional fire fighters and smoke jumpers that get killed because of wind are not as gifted as some although they did it for 20 years.

I added already way baaack about the military marksman I grew up with making some really good shots but some were bad anyway you look at it.

Unless your God,you don't no the wind 500 yards away over a deep canyon.

Course that is just my opinion not taking away anyones skills they say they have.

Jayco

Jayco -

All due respect, not every 500-yard shot is across a deep canyon, and sometimes you have to work to detect even the slightest breeze. Conditions vary and often I have passed on shot opportunities that were much closer. It seems we agree a shot isn't worth it if there is a chance of not making the shot.

If you pull the trigger, you are taking a chance on wounding game. It does not matter how good you are - the chance is always greater than zero. Always.

I don't think that the chance of wounding is the only factor here however.

Brent

CH

I admit I don't get to hunt Elk in the flatlands but 16 pages of bravado,sends what message to the new Elk hunters out there?Would you recommend 500 yard shots to every sole that reads this thread?

We all have to live and learn by experience but we don't need people shooting 500 yards because they read it on a forum it is very doable,taking them.

I won't say I would or wouldn't even though it is unlikely but I do no what an Elk looks like at 500 yards with a 3-9X scope and a Deer at 400..Maybe I am just getting old and think about the younger or new Elk hunters hoping they don't make the mistakes some have,for the games sake,not the bragging rights should it turned out successful.

We all no this forum is full of Elk Studs but we have to think of the new guys watching and listening to the post of everyone that shot 6,000 Elk in 600 years.

Were a legend in our own minds.....

Jayco

Hopefully any new hunters will read this and get the idea that such shots are not for the unprepared. If you read the thread you will see that I qualify my comments over and over by talking about the �well prepared hunter�.

Even for the well-prepared hunter such shots are not necessarily easy, depending on conditions, which is why such shot opportunities are often rejected. I do not recommend everyone attempt such shots any more than I recommend that only such shots should be attempted. Indeed I expect that even for most 'well-prepared hunters' such shots are the exception.

Have you ever once met a hunter that thought himself other than "well prepared"? I don't think I have. Esp. in the elk hunting world.

Have you ever met any hunter that thought he was better prepared than you thought he was? I have met a few. Especially on the internet, and most especially on 24 hr.

Again, the attempt to limit this to an issue of ability is, in my opinion, disingenuous at best.

Brent

BrentD �

Actually, I have met quite a few hunters that knew they were not well-prepared. Several of my friends fall into that category and they are honest enough to admit it. When it comes to 500-yard shots I�m not well-prepared either and I have so stated. Have I met hunters that thought they were better prepared than I am? Absolutely. And some of them were.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion including you � no matter how wrong it is. I�ve said over and over that some people shoot better at 500 yards than others do at 100. Both the well-prepared and the unprepared will take shots at 500 yards, something I have no control over. I have no problem with the well-prepared taking such a shot if they are certain of the outcome. When the unprepared attempt such a shot I have to agree with Muleskinner that they are irresponsible and disrespectful of the game.

HunterBug, that is one of the funniest Smiley's I have ever seen. An Instant Classic.

CK

Hunterbug
I agree but can't help myself...

Jayco
You are not understanding what I'm typing. Or I'm not typing clearly.
The tools are there to read the winds. MUCH more so than a pilot that just flies up into a scene. VS a shooter thats been there for quite some time, and has the tools to be able to see what the wind layers and currents are. To study them and decide if its a workable shot etc... This is NOT a through the gun up and snap off a quick shot type of deal.

The firefighters and smoke jumpers are dealing with an uncontrollable set of conditions. Ones that NO ethical hunter or shooter would take a chance in ever. Those caused by fires heat and wind storms created by those fires. Thats not apples to apples but apples to pigs comparison so I'll let it go at that.

Another note. Scope X has nothign to do with the skill level. The skill level comes from years of practice. And probably half a million rifle rounds for me personally.
If thats not enough for the newbies to read and understand that yes its workable for some, but takes LOTS of skill and practice then I just simply don't know how to write it any better.

I think we've all said before-- many many times in 16 pages..... that we don't take every shot. Or want to shoot at every animal. We are, as a whole, more ethical than your run of the mill wally world hunter and as ethical as the best "non LR" hunter. We generally have more capable firearms and ammo. Ones that group 2 inches or less at 500 yards from the prone(not benchrest...)in field conditions. We are very picky about ammo. Takes hours and hours of tweaking loads, prepping brass, weighing cases, primers,powder charges, checking neck tension, etc... unifying bullet meplats and so on. But as a whole, the rifle won't look (for a 500 yard rifle) any different than your good rifle, the ammo will look the same and I'll look the same. But you won't know that I run through thousands of rounds of ammo a year, constant practice, hundreds of hours on the scope reading wind as a wind coach and instructing prone mid range shooters on the 600 yard line....

Sorry if thats not perfectly clear.

Regards, Jeff

Generally speaking there are all kinds of things people may have the skills for that no responsible person would advocate on the web. No doubt there are people with the skills and equipment to for instance, ride a wheelie on a crotch rocket, drive over the speed limit, drink alcohol, or ski off a mountain top. It is absurd to expect any responsible party to tell you to go ahead and do any of that stuff even though the initiator of these acts pays the consequences.

What�s different, and what makes this topic so intense is that it is the elk that pays the consequences of a shot mistake, and unfortunately the consequences are torture.

I made the comment about elk not being seen at long range after the first season. While that was an exaggeration, it was only a slight exaggeration. I should qualify that by saying I do see them on safe private land during those late seasons. My group hunts low percentage units, late season, public land, undersubscribed. I remember how frustrating it was for me years ago. I�ll admit that back then if I had seen late season elk at great distances I probably would have done whatever necessary to tune my marksmanship to the maximum range possible. It just doesn�t happen that way in the units I hunt (10 separate units but some were years ago). By and large we hunt on the wind and if it is windy enough to be good elk hunting then it is too windy for a long shot. Regarding suspect statements (or the lack of, and something I meant to bring up earlier) is that I find it absurd that none of those the advocated of LR shooting mentioned wind conditions until just recently. Wind is fundamental to shooters that actually use that method.

I am happy that some of this dialogue is touching on the subject of preparation. It is certainly possible to do all of your preparation at the shooting range and then use a guide to simply find a target for you. By contrast, for others scouting is a year-round thing. It is fundamental to the hunt to see the first calves being introduced to the herd in spring, bulls wearing only one antler, or the bachelor bands of bulls, as much as is the autumn rut. The bulls I am scouting now are the ones I intend to hunt in 2008.

From a very personal standpoint, each year there are some young men in my hunting party. No, not my kids and not clients, and not real young. They are college graduates. Each of these guys are pretty sure that they can win any fight, make any shot, convinced they are immortal, etc. I often ask myself why it can�t be one of them instead of me that finds a dead cow to drive home the lesson of the aftermath of a poor shot. They don�t like the idea of not getting a shot because of trying to get closer to an elk. If they read somewhere that it�s OK to take a long shot they are sure to raise that issue. I worry about lots of things with them but I worry a lot that they will shoot at something and not get it. Then late that night the headlamp bobbing through the dark looking for it will be mine. These younger fellas know in their hearts that I do everything wrong and that I have not adapted to modern hunting equipment (I don�t even own a camelback) and I am unable to discard the old methods probably used for mammoth hunting. I tell them to smell the location of elk and that it is easier than they realize. I tell them that closing their eyes more often will help. They say I should wear my glasses more often. They are perplexed and confused that I kill an elk each year. These young men only tolerate my advice because we all share the same goal, i.e., that they will kill an elk. They have helped carry out elk but never one of their own. I would much rather see them be successful than me. I try to be a good teacher and a good example. For myself, killing one more or one less cow doesn�t make much difference to me except that I like to see everyone end the hunt with some meat. My personal ultima thule is bulls, but right now it is seeing the youngest and the oldest hunters in this group be successful.

This isn�t the very first forum or place that the subject of long shots has come up. Anyone contemplating this shot needs to know that in the National Forests word of a long shot, successful or not, spreads through the elk camps fast, and not in a good way. Hunters fear for the safety of their sons and fathers in that environment. Talk to someone from Montana Decoy and they will tell you about their products being shot. By contrast, something I�ve always admired in bowhunters is how they are in tune with the quarry but also with the entire cadence and atmosphere of the forest. I don�t like to get too far away from that bowhunter mindset. These are the kind of ideals that I try to share with all the hunters in our camp. For sure, I also hound my guys relentlessly to get out to the range with me, but �elk hunter� is not a title that is worn for one week each year and, to my way of thinking, it can�t be given � only earned. I feel the need to build any hunt on a foundation of conservation. Guys who have sons that hunt must have similar concerns about what lessons they teach.

Throughout this discussion, I have tried to respect the distinction between "legal" and "ethical." There is also a distinction between "moral" and "ethical," at least according to what I learned studying philosophy at a Jesuit university. Of course, we didn't have the benefit of "Wikipedia."

According to some religous beliefs, drinking alcohol (even in moderation) is immoral. It is not, however, generally considered unethical. In some dry counties (even today), drinking is illegal. Abortion, an action some consider both unethical and immoral, is legal. Murder is immoral, unethical and illegal. Law, ethics and morality comprise something that looks like a Venn Diagram. In a free country, there is always a dynamic tension of people trying to "move the circles." Societies generally prohibit unethical behavior. Immoral behavior is hit-or-miss. America tried Prohibition and it was a complete failure. Some would call the "War on Drugs" a big mess. So, why is a bottle of Jack Daniels and a carton of unfiltered Camels legal and a marijuana "joint" is not? The answer is that America legislated morality, not ethics.

I'm sure you cared about chickens 20 years ago, CH... but society didn't care enough to make McDonald's alter its corporate policy about cage sizes. Fur was high fashion. There were no "pet therapists." Leg traps were legal. No one knew what "dolphin-safe" tuna was and "free range" chickens weren't sold in the local grocery. Organic was a "hippie" thing, not the cornerstone of a chain of successful grocery stores (Whole Foods). Attitudes towards animals are changing in a way that bodes ill for the future of hunting.

Look what has happened with cigarette smoking. Fifty years ago, John Wayne was smoking in the movies, and posing for cigarette ads. Things changed. Today we're on our way to a society where the only place a person will be able to smoke is in their house (and even that could change). While I am not a smoker, I find this a cautionary tale. Hunting is permitted in our society because people still believe hunting is an ethical activity and that hunter's are generally ethical. Your right to hunt depends on society's consent. What you think personally isn't worth a cup of warm spit when it comes to making laws. All that needs to happen is for PETA to keep growing and the number of hunters to keep shrinking. Look at the growing number of private property owners who simply will not allow any hunting... because they think hunting is wrong.

I have a fair amount experience working in the legislative process and on hunting issues in particular. I have seen hunters show up at public hearings with the "I'm right; they're stupid" attitude evident on this thread. It is not exactly an effective way to build public support. Frankly, Joe or Jane Citizen has far more sympathy for "Bambi" than for a hunter who says he doesn't give a rat's ass about what 10 million other people think because he knows he's right. You may not see this at the rifle range banging away at the 800-yard targets, but we are slowly losing ground in this cultural war.

Finally, enjoy "beating the dead horse." We have the luxury of arguing the ethics of the 500-yard shot because we still have the right to make the decision. In 25 or 50 years, it could be our kids arguing on the Campfire over how we lost our right to hunt elk.

Whats that old saying about teaching an old dog new tricks.I guess we just hunt different areas.I spent most of 40 years judging winds to keep 100 foot tree's from smashing my pretty face into the earth while trying to lay them down where they belong.Unbelievable how a wind can just come out of no where and cause trouble in the little time it takes to drop one, once the saw is engaged.

To each his own.Your not going to convince me in my hunting area that there is time, 99% of the time, for what you explain is your process of setting up and judging winds and shoot in a prone position or I am hunting in the wrong spot.

I want some of those migrating Elk or the ones in the fields lazily eating grass giving lots of time for prep work rather than the hurry up and take the shot or he is gone and he lands wedged between two tree's in a 75% grade where you can't even get the horses....I would like to shoot one more Elk that I could load "whole" into my pick-up like I see so often

Not with my luck,it appears. I am not doubting you,Rost in your area,I am doubting it would work int the steep rugged country I have been hunting and worked for so long, but never say never..

Jayco

Jayco

I don't know much about elk hunting per say. I'm not seasoned as they say. Kinda tough living in Tx and shooting for the last 15+ years left no time to hunt. Takes all year to tune up for nationals...

Anyway I know that I can stand back and watch the wind through glass, and read whats going on. And I can know what the wind does by its cycles. Gusts only come at certain times in cycles. I'm always watching teh wind cycles. Just like I always watch inspection items whereever I go. Its part of me to watch for things I do. I shoot and I am an inspector. I also have to keep tabs on the winds due to scent and especially thermals.

All that being said I wouldn't haev a clue what to look for on falling a tree. Especially in areas where I can't see out for hundreds of yards to be able to judge, but thats moot. Last 3 elk I saw were just at 105 and the 3rd was 126 yards slope distance. (never worried about horizontal htat close) Up that close its all moot and I'm tickled to death to have a close shot. Now if I'd had a bull tag on top of it.

I don't know how twisted around this thread got, but I'm about to go to the 1st page and read a bit again.

I think the bottom line was can you make the shot. YES, almost anyone can GIVEN the right conditions and practice and confidence and ability to pass the shot. Now whether I can see an elk at 500 yards during season, thats another issue altogether.

You'll note my sig line. I've said this enough on posts. I'll do what I can to close the gap. Even prefer the 100 yard and under chip shots. I will use whatever I have to though in certain cases.

Just remember we, in reality, are probably on teh same page, maybe not same paragraph though...

Jeff

Looked on page 1. My first post says yes I can. But you cannot unless you are prepared and that is shown by what students in hunter ed normally reply. I think that starts to cover, don't do anythign unless you have the skill, and what is preached to new hunters all the time.

Jeff

It's pretty bad when you can't get the horses to it...

Final thoughts at this time. After re-reading about the first 3-4 pages. Plenty of data there, contrary to an earlier opinion, that states use of practice, rangefinders, conditions, etc... Enough to say that if I was new I would know its not for me, but yet I'd have the idea I could get tehre IF I WANTED to or NEEDED to.

Thats pretty clear cut.

Just like I'm a stumbling pistol shooter. I shoot in IPSC with my carry 45 single stack. I'm no threat but I do it for CHL practice. But there are thigns I learn at each match that make me better and closer to the top. Its also interesting to watch the top competitors at a local match, with 3500 buck pistols and optics easily and repeatedly miss a steel target out past 35 yards while I ding it first shot each time with my 3 inch iron sighted 45. Nope I am not a winner, but I've got some skills learned over the years. But I do see the light, if I WANTED to win in that game I could get there. I WANTED to win in highpower and got to that level.

I just hope and pray that through 16 pages of bickering folks can read that this is workable but only if you haev the skill. Seems that was clear and evident from page 1 right away to my eyes. But hope it is to everyone else that reads this.

Jeff

" No doubt there are people with the skills and equipment to for instance, ride a wheelie on a crotch rocket, drive over the speed limit, drink alcohol, or ski off a mountain top."

Oh, to be young again! That used to be a morning's activity! Seriously, though, quality practice is the most important factor, and thinking like a bowhunter is what I've tried to do since I started hunting at the age of 38. Having started so late, I pretty much lost the infallible/invulnerable BS before I ever picked up a rifle. Now as I prepare for my first ever elk hunt (guided in MT this November), I'm practicing out to 300 yards on my gun club's range, and out to 450 on an improvised range in a Wildlife Mgt Area. Even if I get competent at 450 on my range, my ethical hunting range wil be somewhat less because the only place in NH that it gets as windy as Montana is atop Mt. Washington. Not much to shoot up there except Mass. tourists. My outfitter tells me that about 20% of the shot opportunities are between 300-500 yards. I am prepared to eat my tag if my opportunities don't meet my standards. I've gone home empty handed with a clean conscience before, and I'll do it again. FONMAN

Fonman

You have it exactly correct. Long practice makes short shots seem gravy. I used to struggle at 100 yards as a kid. Even less at times.(depended on how bad I was shaking.....)

Yet keep that practice up and learn to shoot in conditions on other ranges(reduced course practice, IE a tiny target at a shorter range and the wind patterns will reveal themselves also) and you'll increase your ability. But it might take years.

And I applaud you for tag soup. I've done it a number of times. Even passing up some shots others might take but that I was not sure of. I did it again last year, on a shot under 100 yards because I was not sure.
BTW the wind doesn't blow every day, 24/7. Sometimes being prepared might give you the opportunity to take a 400 yard shot that you'd otherwise not be prepared for. Much the same as why I know how my 10-22 shoots from 25 yards out to 150 yards. Most folks don't have a clue. But if I need or want to shoot at a target, clay pigeon, turtle or whatever on a longer shot its not a prayer but a known. And I know that its extremely hard to make a 150 yard or even 200 yard shot with a 22 in the wind. Its why there is a 1000 yard reduced target for 22s at 200 yards. A tough little bugger.

Good luck!!

Jeff

So you're one of thoes people that drives by a car wreck and has to slow down and look right?

Nah, not me, I'm only slowing down cause everyone else is...

Yep you are right I suppose, like the rest of us.

Jeff

Hampstead: Very inciteful, thought-provoking post that emphasizes the need for wide-spread public support for our activities if we are to be allowed to pursue them in the future.Problem I see so much is the "gotta have an elk/deer" syndrome as if to go dry for a year or two is somehow the ultimate fall from grace.This leads to the purchase or aquisition of the technology;as with any human endeavor,some use it properly,with great skill and restraint, many others are clueless and believe OWNING the technology confers skill.Following illustrates my point: I was asked by a gun shop customer if he should get a 300UM and 4-14 or some such thing for his first elk/deer hunt in Montana.After asking a few questions concerning his shooting experience(I already knew the answer to that one),I told him I'd suggest something a tad friendlier,and a bit less scope.He kept insisting on the UM and said he "needed it" for those "long" shots he expected out west.Asked what "long" was ,he thought and responded 500-700 yards.I got annoyed with his stupidity and asked did he intend to burn 500-1000 rounds at those distances before his hunt so that he knew his rifle.His response was that would be unneccesary because he was BUYING THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WOULD LET HIM HIT at those distances.

This is not uncommon today and I do not know how you educate these people because they read this bunk about long-range shooting and buy-in whole hog,not understanding the amount of prep that goes into obtaining the confidence, and wisdom of restraint, involved in that type of shooting.

I am no paragon of virtue when it comes to long distance shooting,having stretched things a bit on more than one occaission,but never at distances I had not actually shot before.Largest elk I have ever seen alive stood on a north slope in Arizona across a yawning canyon.Using a 4x Leupold's duplex as a rangefinder (preLRF)I "guesstimated" the distance at app 550,give or take.I was shooting a 300 Win Mag that had been fired many times at our 600 yard range,so knew the drop, but could not figure the wind drift since the wind was leaning big pines over that day.I would not shoot for fear of wounding him and the only B&C class bull I,ve ever seen got away.It costs $25-30,000 to hunt that place today and I sometimes regret not taking the shot,but that's hunting and sometimes there is more satisfaction in letting them walk.

Would today's hi-tec gear have gottenme that elk? Uh-uh;all the B&C,TDS,mil-dot reticles in the world would not have helped and anyone who tells me they could predict with certainty the effect of that wind at that distance has suffered the ill-effects of MadisonAve marketing or too much recoil.

No one can buy whats needed to make longer shots. Not the skill anyway.

I often wondered about magnumitis even. How much better is a 300 win mag than an 06 at say 500 yards? The drifts and drops are not that much better. But they are enough better to sell. And as the speeds get better the companies have to have something to push. If the 300 win is better for say 400 yards than the 06, then the only way to sell the 300 wtby, 300 RUM, 300 Kong and so on is to make out the ranges are further.

Maybe its marketings fault more than any of us out there?

Even just buying and wind speed meter doesn't buy you much of anything. I was going over some notes I'm making for the prone class this coming Saturday and was re-realizing how much absolute trigger time IN CONDITIONS is required to really know a bit about wind. And rethinking how bad field accuracy is for most folks period. Not to mention how poor some of the actual guns shoot and close ranges.

I'd have not shot at that bull!! Not in those conditions. Big pines over is more than 20mph. Depending on size of trees and angle could be substantially more than 30mph. Once wind is over 12-15 mph its hard to read anything into it close enough for me to take any kind of shot past 300. I'd be still thinking about it. Heck I still think about the cow elk I had last fall with my MZ but could not take the 60 yard shot in good faith..... But I think the most about the 6 point at 75ish yards that my bullet deflected off an unseen vine and ran off with broken leg. 4-5 hours later and one jump shot at him, he continued to go and we could not find the trail back..... I seriously doubt he died, but he was wounded... its those that I dont' want to think about, the ones that walked away unscathed are actually some of the best results. I'll add that antler size will never make me add distance to my comfort zone. In fact the larger the gear the shorter I'll take a shot. Cost me a B/C muley in 2003 with an MZ. A shot I'm about 90 percent I could have made, about 2-3 mph wind, but just a bit on the long side....

Jeff

This thread has gone pretty far afield at times.

Wouldja? Its safe to say some people do.

Couldja? Its safe to say some people can - and many people cannot.

Shouldja? Its safe to say �It depends.� Even those that can often choose not to because of conditions at the time, and most hunters shouldn�t even consider it.

Duplicate post - text deleted

Rost: You read conditions exactly and understand why I held my fire.Those pine trees told the story and you're right .That wind was licking at 90 degrees,and I figured I'd get maybe 3 feet of drift,but could not be sure because I'm not good at judging wind-drift.I stayed behind the scope for 45 minutes aiming at him,and finally decided to cross the canyon,which took over 2 hours.It was thicker over there than it had looked from the other side and I got within 50 yards when he jumped from his bed;I can still see those big horns cutting oak brush,but no shot.C'est la vie!

Bob in NH

Good post & comments.

There are a lot of people hunting today who are just not real hunters (same for fishing). They buy the equipment and the hunts and go hunting (or fishing) but many will never be "hunters" or even "sportsmen" in the true sense of the word.

A real hunter, and especially a genuine trophy hunter, will walk away from shots as you did on the bull in the wind; the neophyte and yuppie-turned-hunter would not.

Hitting in the kill zone of an elk at known 500 yards under GOOD conditions is not hard for many people and you don't need a Superwhozis Mag to do it either, 270 or 'o6 works just fine. But for the vast majority if hunters, that is too far under any conditions.

However, guesstimating range at those kinds of ranges is never good enough. When comparing my guesstimates vs LRF under a variety of conditions & terrain, I surprise myself on how many times I am off more than I care to admit.

But wind is the really big kicker......any time it's blowing enough that you would have to hold off the animal, all bets are off and the shot should NEVER be taken on a game animal, at least I would never have the audacity to take it.

MM

MontanaMan: Thanks for your comments.No wind' I would have shot.Hunt took place on the Dry Lake unit of the San Carlos Apache reservation in the days before it became so expensive, but it still cost a lot.Was not an easy place to hunt.I swear that bull grossed way over book minimum.Big by my standards.

Dry Lake man would I ever love to hunt that place!

Mark D

Mark: Last time I knew, I think the hunt was like $30,000;if you wer lucky (?)enough to kill a bull over 400,cost you pay another 20-40K,I think.I did not pay near that but you were more or less on your own.I had a guide but he only knew how to get around the reservation;no elk hunter at all.Had to find them myself which is OK.Would love to go back!

$70,000 for an elk? Wow. Does Robin Leach give commentary? What do people making the big "ethical stink" over the minutia of X number of yards think of things like this? Any issues? Just curious.

Don't know,Jon. That's about what it cost last time I checked,because they started to manage the reservation for BIG elk and the place produces them.When I hunted there the cost was about$4000 for 10 days;you could go where you wanted so long as you had a "guide".The place does not crawl with elk,at least then.You earned them.The reservation is about 1.5 mill acres.Lots of ground to cover; and BIG coues deer if you wanted.But it is REALLY expensive now.

Hmmmmmmmm,

What's the cost at White Mountain now?

MM

It is not $70,000 for an elk; it is $70,000 for permission to go onto tribal lands and hunt an elk.

The White Mountain Apache Tribe is essentially a government within the United States with its own Constitution and Tribal Council. The Tribe controls the 1.67 million-acre reservation and all outdoor recreation therein. Given the size of the reservation, I presume the elk roamly freely and that the hunts are "fair chase." I also presume there are no guarantees given to hunters.

Is it ethical for the Tribe, a legally-constituted government, to charge for permission to hunt an elk on land it controls? How is this any different than what state fish and game agencies do?

This year, Montana is selling "Super Tags" for goat, sheep and moose. These are essentially raffle tickets. For $5 a pop, a hunter can buy chances at drawing a Super Tag. Is there an ethical difference between an elk tag going for $70,000 at auction or selling 14,000 raffle tickets at $5 each?

Let's turn the question around. Is it ethical to hunt on private property without the permission of the owner? I think most hunters would say, "No." And I think most Americans recognize a property owner's right to invite or not invite folks onto his or her property without having to give anyone a reason. There isn't anything unethical about a property owner allowing family and friends to hunt on his or her property and not others... insofar as the hunts themselves are legal and ethical in nature. If you think $70,000 is expensive, think about the cost of marrying into a family with a really good hunting property.

The White Mountain Apache Tribe has the right to manage its elk herd. They also have the right to charge hunters what the market will bear. Montana charges resident hunters a fraction of what it charges out-of-state hunters. Montana FWP is not engaging in unethical behavior. They are simply trying manage the resource and secure the greatest amount of revenue (which coincidentally, they use to improve habitat and better manage the resource).

In point of fact, a guy with a thick wallet can buy permission to hunt on private property where the hunts are perfectly ethical... but because of herd management and low hunting pressure, the chances of killing a record bull are much higher than in other areas. Whether or not the hunt is ethical is determined by the hunt, not by the price tag. A "pet-and-shoot" is unethical even if it's free of charge. An honest hunt is ethical, even if it cost $70,000.

a bit of the history on the WMAT Elk hunting..Their own websites are very slow or in need of updating.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:X5DlqlJRXcMJ:www.uleth.ca/man/programs/majors/first-nations/case/1999/doreen_gatewood.pdf+elk+hunting+white+mountain+apache+reservation&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

I lived in Show Low and hunted Northern Az for elk for 20 years back in the mid 70s thru the 90's.
I did a lot of work directly with the WMAT principally with their FortApache Timber Company down in White River and Cibecue.
Got to fish alot on the res and saw some great bulls but never hunted elk as it was expensive even then.
We DID have great success hunting elk( archery) in the State lands bordering the WMAT reservation.
Several of the biggest bulls I killed were shot withing 1/4 mile of the reservation boundary; the elk didn't always know where they were safe and IF you spent the time around the perimeters of the res, you got some good opportunities.
The elk are supposedly all transplanted Roosevelt elk, replacing the original Merriam's elk which were <supposedly> exterminated a century before.
The WMAT and I believe the Merriam's elk inbred at least to some extent with the RM elk to produce some of the largest elk with heavy, palmated racks..
Of all the indian reservation lands I've worked on or visited, the WMAT has what I consider to be the most beautiful and bountiful piece any tribe ever was given.( or allowed to keep..:)
They have struggled to maintain their sovereignty over the years and done a fair job of doing it.Jim

I didn�t mean to imply there was anything unethical about the hunting at all, or that they don�t have every right to charge whatever they want. Or that I wouldn�t jump at the chance if I could. That wasn�t my intention at all. I simply wanted to know what you and others thought of it given your mindset.

Just from a philosophical standpoint: If you can draw some arbitrary yardage line and declare anything beyond it is no longer about hunting but about shooting, can or do you do the same thing with money? When people are basically buying themselves a better chance at seeing their own name in the recordbook, is there some point at which you declare it has become more about ego than about hunting?

Sorry for the tangent., it really has nothing to do with this thread. Different can of worms.

Montana: I don't know any more.I know they charged a lot for the hunt and a lot for the trophy fee.

JIM: Was that adjacent public ground the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest? My "guide' pulled me over to the boundary one day up in the Milay(sic) Gap country of the SanCarlos.

JON: The hunt is not a cake-walk; I did it in January and the big bulls were real solitary, in remote country.Kept getting up earlier each day and dropped about 10 pounds from the hiking.Plus, the Apache guides went out on "strike",and we set the tent on fire when the woodburning stove blew up...the whole hunt was a HOOT!

BobinNH, Yes the National Forest lands are part of the Apache Sitgreaves, San Carlos Apache Res borders it on the south, WMAT on the north, west and eastern ends.
It's a huge and diverse country and you're right, hunting any of it for elk even with a proper guide is hard work..Jim

Jim:I would love to go back,as it is intriguing country,but can't afford it!Tell you what,it has monster Coues deer.They were in the rut and we saw some whoppers.I have never seen elk antlers like that place had.If I could afford it,I'd stroke the check in a minute.

Bob in NH,
Things have changed some in the AZ country since I lived and hunted there.
AZ has had a pretty severe drought for almost ten years and it's impacted the hunting.
Best bet is to put in for an out of state hunt draw for perhaps unit 27 on the east side of the WMAT reservation and get with a competent guide..Maybe Enrique who posts here sometimes?Jim

My "mindset" is to critically and consistently examine ethical issues related to hunting. Insofar as arbitrary lines, I have not drawn any. What I said was, 50 yards feels like hunting; 500 yards feels like shooting. The choice of the verb "feels" was deliberate, indicating it was a personal sense, nothing more. I have greatly enjoyed archery over the past few years because of the sense of "closeness" to the animals I have hunted. And, frankly, September is the nicest month of the year in Montana.

There are guys motivated by B&C "points." Some are willing to spend thousands of dollars to have a better chance at a trophy bull. They kill a 340 bull and immediately want a 360. They kill a 360 bull and want a 380. So it goes. I don't have an ethical objection to trophy hunting, but it's not my cup of tea. Part of the reason is that I know that I can drop $10,000 or $20,000 on a premium guided hunt on private land where the herds are carefully managed and I have a good chance to drop a B&C bull. And if I don't, I can just keeping spending money until I do. I know guys who go to Africa and drop over six figures shooting everything in sight. For me, it would be easier to have the local taxidermist stuff and mount my wallet. I don't know how to explain it fully, but something about being able to buy a trophy hunt makes me less interested in one.

Some hunters are driven by ego. I'm not. These days, the most important aspect of hunting is spending time in the woods uncluttered by the distractions of modern civilization and the chance to sit around a campfire with my father and brothers. It is not a matter of ethics... just of personal preference.

You said a mouthful there, Hampstead.

Hampstead

Thats well put. Seems like you and I can sit around the fire, equal. You choose bow, I choose a long range shot(not all the time) and we'll both be just fine with each other.

I frankly fail to see how folks can't enjoy it all IMHO. I love everything from a recurve to a longer precise shot. And everthing in between(ok so I'm not all that keen about pistol hunting but I don't know why...)

Jeff

Well, it sure sounds like you have.

Sounds like a firm, definitive answer as one would expect from a mathematics or physics problem. Sounds like you've drawn the line.

And yes, it sure sounds like you're saying 500 yds is over that line, no matter the circumstances.

OK, now you're making sense again. It's no longer a math or physics problem but a personal "feeling" you have. I'll never fault you nor anyone else for that. Because I agree.

As I said before, blasting something unaware from a treestand at 40 yds doesn't feel like "hunting" to me. Spotting something from way off and stalking to within range can be a great hunt even if the final shot is farther than Mr. Hampstead is used to. Of course you say 500 yds "feels like shooting" to you but that's only a feeling you've made up. You've never shot a big game animal that far away. That it would make you "feel like shooting" is only a guess on your part.

I'll once again agree with your quote directly above which disagrees with what you said before that:

The word "ethics" doesn't even have a place in the conversation unless you are taking an unreasonable risk of wounding the animal (which you and others insinuated must be taking place earlier). You're putting forth your personal preference, nothing more.

Just because you can, may not mean you should. That you don't desire to but others do does not make their choice "unethical." Your personal preferences are not the definitive definition of ethics beyond your own mind. Personal preference does not equal ethics.

I have no problem with those sentiments, in fact I agree wholeheartedly. I would also add �unsafe� and �illegal� to the list of taboos.




It looks like we also pretty much agree on these points. One difference, perhaps, is if I know a person is not prepared for a shot I will tell them so in no uncertain terms.

I�ll reiterate the essence of what I have been saying � 100 yards is too far for some (a relative few), 500 yards is not too far for the well-prepared (also a relative few). To draw a hard line at 500 is both arbitrary and illogical. It is not the range alone that determines whether a shot is ethical.

Ethics, like math, physics or other sciences, is not simply about "answers." It is a methodological approach to analyzing choices, a set of "rules and tools" if you will. In my opinion, ethics do not provide a definitive answer to whether or not a 500-yard on an elk is ethical... but it does provide a logical, coherent and consistent way to examine this kind of "is-ought" question.

The "shooting from a plane" question is legitimate and one you have not answered. As I read your argument, you contend that your 500-yard is ethical because 1) you have high confidence of a quick, clean kill at that range; 2) your percentage chance of a quick, clean kill is greater than "other" hunters at lesser ranges; 3) your superior skills and/or training allow you to do this. So, once again, how is that different from a guy who trains seven days a week making difficult shots from a plane? A simpler question, Jon, is shooting an elk from a plane ethical? Why or why not? Or is it just a matter of personal preference?

It is a simple fact of physics that your accuracy as a shooter will be greater at 100 yards than at 500 yards. The effect of ambient conditions like wind will be greater. Even with a MOA rifle, the inherent physical accuracy changes from about 1" at 100 yards to roughly 5" at 500 yards. The wind drift of a 300 Win Mag shooting a 150 grain bullet in a 90 degree 10 mph wind moves from less than an inch at 100 yards to over two feet at 500 yards. If the rifle is zeroed at 250 yards, the ballistic drop of the bullet in flight is about 2" high at 100 yards, about 33 inches low at 500 yards. I don't normally shoot a 300 Win Mag, but I selected it because it seems a reasonable choice if one decides to shoot at elk at 500 yards.

So, Jon, what is an "unreasonable" risk of wounding the animal. If someone can shoot with 95% confidence at 500 yards, he or she could probably shoot with 100% at 250 yards. So, does the hunter have an ethical obligation to pass on longer shoots... or is it ethical to lose five elk per 100 taking shots at 500 yards? Do you think losing those five elk at 500 yards is ethical because some other hunter will lose 10 or 20 elk at 300 yards? Is ethics simply a matter of being better than another guy... or is it an obligation to yourself a la Aldo Leopold?

There are guys on the planet as accurate at 800 yards as you shooting at 500 yards. I have shot a target rifle chambered for a .50 BMG capable of extraordinary accuracy at extreme ranges. So, do you think there are any ethical concerns shooting a rifle chambered for a .50 BMG at an elk at say, 1200 yards? Do you think dropping elk at 1200 yards with a 40-pound rifle will have any effect on public perceptions of hunting? Or are do you even care?

How about this. I'll take some time away from archery practice and hit the rifle range and practice at 500 yards this summer. You enroll in an undergraduate philosophy class. By the time hunting season rolls around, we can have a much more productive conversation.

Hampstead -

Back to the original questions:

Wouldja?
If I felt certain of the outcome and depending on other circumstances, yes.


Couldja?
Today it would be questionable even under otherwise favorable conditions. The problem is not my rifle or the scope but rather that I simply haven�t put in the time at the range and don't feel qualified. By this fall, with otherwise favorable conditions, I expect to feel confident out to 600 yards..


Shouldja?
In the end the only matter of ethics that concerns me is my personal sense of right and wrong. No one else is pulling the trigger for me and no one else has to live with the results. The question that concerns me is not �Should I?� but rather �Is there a reason I should not?� There is a subtle but very real difference.

PETA says �No� at any range. Others say �No� at ranges shorter than 500 yards. SU35 says you shouldn�t even be in the field if you can�t hit running game at 100 yards because 95% of his shots are at running game, a type of shot I reserve for coyotes.

Thanks, I�ll evaluate the situation and decide for myself.

What is the point of having the ability to shoot an elk at 500 yards if you lose the right to hunt?

The public perception of hunting is influenced by every decision, every action and every public statement made by hunters. The selfish "I don't care what anyone else thinks" attitude is perfect... for anti-hunting activists to use to sway the opinion of the vast majority of non-hunting Americans. Personally, I think the exploration of hunting ethics is important in and of itself. In purely pragmatic terms, it is critical because if hunters are perceived as a bunch of selfish jerks who only care about killing, we will lose the "hearts and minds" battle with the American public. If you don't think these rights are under attack, I can only suggest you spend a bit less time at the range and bit more time in your state capitol.

Finally.

I didn't answer because you didn't ask me. The person you asked the first time answered it well pointing out what a flying leap it was, as is the BMG comparison above. The latter equating gets back to this:

I wonder where you guys are finding all these deaf, dumb and blind elk with broken noses. Just how far do you think 500 yds is? No, that's not a trick question.

If you were prepared for such a shot or tagged along with somebody who was, maybe someday you�d experience a very enjoyable hunt that happened to end in a long shot. Maybe you wouldn�t feel nearly as �dirty� as you must think you would. Maybe you�d realize that the exact yardage of the final shot wasn�t all that important in the grand scheme of things. Your buddy telling you the reading from the rangefinder shouldn�t make or break your experience.

I�m just getting the feeling you have some sort of mental image of a guy sitting at a benchrest looking at animals on the side of the next mountain and casually deciding to blast one. Now there are those who do that but that�s a different subject and has nothing to do with 500 yd shots. 500 yds won�t get you across many clearcuts, much less to the �next mountain.� It really isn�t that far. I�d venture to guess many here, when in unfamiliar territory (as many are when elk hunting), would have no idea when asked if a given terrain feature is 350 yds or 500 yds away without a rangefinder telling them. I know I�ve been fooled by that much, both ways, more times than I�d like to admit. So it would be pretty hard for one to �feel like� one thing and the other to �feel like� another thing if they couldn�t tell the difference in the first place.

You are again feeding your "methodological approach to analyzing choices" bad information. Garbage in = Garbage out.

It doesn't work that way. I'll take plenty of shots at 250 that would be out of the question at 400, much less 500. Breathing rate, wind, shooting position, animal movement, being rushed, etc. In short, the farther it is the more careful one should be and the better the conditions need to be. Most here wouldn't hesitate to take an offhand shot at 100 yds. They'd probably not try at 250 unless they could get into a steadier position. Does that make their 100 yd hunting more "ethical" than their 250 yd hunting?

Not sure I want to hit philosophy....course this one ain't at me I realize, just couldn't resist myself....

How far do you make archery shots?

Jeff

and.... I weren't saavy enough to block out my replies in the quote.....

No matter how many times you try to side track it, this thread is about "Wouldja?" "Couldja?" and "Shouldja?" If you want to start a new thread on how hunter attitudes are perceived by the anti�s, I think that would be entirely appropriate. Frankly, if I ever take a 500 yard shot the chances of the public being there to witness it are slim and none.

But, in spite of your not having drawn a line in the sand, you obviously think 500 yards is too far. So here is your big chance to help every hunter out and tell them � how far is too far?

Well Sirs, I have kept my yawp shut on this whole interesting thread. I am not an elk hunter, not by choice but by opportunity,

Now Coyote hunter has posed a simple question and I quote. "How far is too far?"

Simple question with a complicated answer.

I am not the best rifle shot in the world, there are some that are way better than I am. So good they are scarey.

But, I ain't the worst shot either by a long shot. No pun intended.

Here is the way I figure is a fair answer to the question of how far is too far.

What is the sure kill hit circle's diameter?

Meaning if I put, say an 8 inch circle over the kill zone and put a bullet inside that circle I am going to kill that elk grave yard dead right there or pretty quick.

So then the question becomes how far off can I shoot and be 100 % sure I can put every shot in there. After all the point is to kill not just poke a hole in that old elk.

Therefore, any distance where I can't lay every shot in there every time is too far off for me.

Is that fair or not?


BCR