How far is too far?

[Hogpatrol]

Same shit, different day, these threads always wind up an exercise in pontification.

 

[Pat McP]

I can honestly say that in over 50 years of hunting with both rifle and archery equipment that I have only lost one animal. That on was a buck mule deer that I shot from 20 yards. We tracked him from where he was hit down almost to our camp and then back up the hill before we lost the blood trail. So a close shot doesn't guaranty a killing shot, at least a fast kill.

Another hunter found that deer I found out a few days later and tagged it himself. It didn't matter to me since I was done hunting.

Do you think you were so close that the bullet just went right through the buck and was moving too fast to expand? Or was it a hasty shot?

 

[MS 9x56]

One of our hunting group has bought a 300 WM to take long shots. He is an excellent shot, but is it 'right' to take a long shot at an animal when you could have got closer? Is there a sensible upper limit that hunters should adhere to? Do, or even should powerful optics excuse fieldcraft?

Not my cup of tea but I believe it is a personal choice every hunter should have the right to make.But I also believe that with actions come consequences and that the hunter should consider them before making his or her decisions.

 

[Tanks]

So, hit vs killing shot. It is necessary to hit the vitals, but that isn't sufficient in of it's own. To guarantee recovering the animal it is necessary to hit the vitals devastatingly. As someone said earlier the probability of achieving the killing shot drops off with distance, and extremely so with extreme distance. So why do it? Ego is the jester in the hunting world.

That goes back to using enough gun. Your buddy's .300 WM is sufficient to drop Elk at 700+ yards (I have seen it done) and would be sufficient "to hit the vitals devastatingly" at whatever range he is comfortable with.

It is funny how in these type of discussions whether it is big bores for DG or long distance shots for PG the assumption is that the hunter doesn't know how to handle his firearm enough to do the job.

 

[Hogpatrol]

That goes back to using enough gun. Your buddy's .300 WM is sufficient to drop Elk at 700+ yards (I have seen it done) and would be sufficient "to hit the vitals devastatingly" at whatever range he is comfortable with.

It is funny how in these type of discussions whether it is big bores for DG or long distance shots for PG the assumption is that the hunter doesn't know how to handle his firearm enough to do the job.

Tanks, it's the new paradigm of life in this country, to whit: If I can't do it, or don't want to do it, I don't want anyone else to do it either.

 

[JimP]

Do you think you were so close that the bullet just went right through the buck and was moving too fast to expand? Or was it a hasty shot?

It was a arrow through the lungs.

I should also say that two years later I shot a buck deer in almost the same location, through the lungs at 30 yard with a 7mm Rem mag. He went over 100 yards with no lungs left.

 

[gillettehunter]

If you are close enough to see him blink, that's hunting and a good stalk. If not, it's target shooting with little or no true HUNTING skill involved. A modern long shot may be a sign of good marksmanship, or good equipment, but not necessarily good sportsmanship. The sport is in getting close.

I like getting close myself when possible. Come on out pronghorn hunting. I’d love to see how close you can get. Doubt you can see him blink. Unless you use a blind at a water hole.
Or how about when you have drawn that one in a lifetime sheep tag here in Wyoming. You may want to reconsider not taking that 250 yd standing broadside shot on day 10 of a 10 day hunt when there is no way to close the distance. Be prepared. Get closer when you can.
Some of my best hunting memories are about close encounters. 6-8 yrs ago I was hunting Tahr in NZ. I had torn up my knee 3 days earlier and was mobility limited. We went to a farm that had nannies year round with few bulls until the rut. We were there just as the rut was starting. Spent an afternoon in the middle of a herd. Had a young bull come up to us. We were sitting on his rock. He wanted to know what we were and why we were on HIS rock. I literally hit him with a small pebble to shoo him away as he was making too much of a commotion. At one time we had 8 animals at less than 100 yds from us.
Cape buffalo in Zambia last year in the middle of a herd. That is a lot of fun too. 50 plus buffalo with in 100 yds and a lot at 30-50 yds gets your attention and adrenaline going. I know what hunting is. Sometimes its going to require a long shot. Most of the time hopefully it doesn't. A lot depends on the terrain and the general spookiness of the animal. Vaal Rhebuck can be very difficult to get close to. Pronghorn and most of the sheep species. Lots of times little to no cover to get close.
Lots of species in the bush will allow the opportunities to get close. That is a lot of fun. My point is there are places and animals where a longer shot is necessary to be successful most of the time. I want to prepare for that and then get close whenever possible. I'm working with my 6.5 right now. Developing a handload to consistently produce .40 MOA or better at 100 and then at 500. Right now .7 MOA is relatively easy. I'm shooting and working to get better so if that longer shot is all thats available then I can take advantage of it. YMMV
Bruce

 

[35bore]

So, hit vs killing shot. It is necessary to hit the vitals, but that isn't sufficient in of it's own. To guarantee recovering the animal it is necessary to hit the vitals devastatingly. As someone said earlier the probability of achieving the killing shot drops off with distance, and extremely so with extreme distance. So why do it? Ego is the jester in the hunting world.

So, I have noticed, that even with the examples given for western style hunting where the shots are IN REALITY long shots. Yet, it's an Ego thing in your mind? Fancy me this, history shows that it didn't take the native Americans long to start using firearms, once they were introduced to them, and they took full advantage of this new technology. Both for defense from whitey and for hunting. Sorry bubba, the new technology and advancements in scopes, ammunition and firearms cannot and should not be ignored.... As far as I'm concerned, for the same 2 reasons as our ancestors. BTW, I'm a Missouri woods hunter, my furthest shot to date was 268 yards with a 308. The other 99.9% were taken in that 50 to 80 yard range. I'm glad I have my Ego I guess, because i practice with that rifle out to 530 yards. Would I feel comfortable an an "animal " at that distance, NO. I felt comfortable at 268 though.... If you guys don't like it, don't do it, but you guys are nobody to be telling someone else they are wrong for doing so, or insinuating that it's an ego or arrogance attached to long range hunting.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

You are right 35Bore, I meant no offence by the ego comment, but it was silly nevertheless, apologies.

 

[Von S.]

This is easy to answer......

You will get to know many things if you just stop and think about it for a while.

Of course you can shoot anything on the planet that you want with a a modern 4 bore sxs made by that Smith in Austria, and with the 30,000 + foot pounds it puts out a good shot should drop anything of course it goes for 1,000,000.00 bucks and I doubt that you're gonna hit well at 1000 yards with it.

You could get a 375 Warlord which has been named "The King of the 2 mile ramge" and with a 400 grain Berger experimental bullet that comes screaming out the barrel at unbelieveable speed....... mostly due to the case is so gig that a whole 378 Weatherby round can fit inside it........and stays supersonic 2 miles from the muzzle.

Yea.... both are extremes but I do know someone who has them both and I wouldn't want him slinging lead at me at any distance.

It does make me somewhat suspicious that the mechanism in the brain that responsible for the formation of words that co me out of someone's yap that I and others call "the truth" might be broken, or at least bent all to hell, when anyone verbally pounds the air with there daring-do of long range expertise with their walmart noise maker, but yet says that they would not ever pop a deer in the melon at 50 yards because they could miss. I can also imagine that they also take precautions that a plane full of rubber dog shiit from China doesnt hit them in the head on a daily basis when the leave the house.

To simplify it all .....pick the animal, pick a round with enough power at the maximum distance you plant to shoot. Practice like a madman.

When you think your ready go out and shoot a deer in the head at 50 yards and if you fail. ......... throw the rifle away and take up fishing.

 

[Cam Moon]

Ok, so I don't REALLY want to hijack this thread. In fact, I was thinking of starting another one, however I thought I would just ask here, as I have a feeling that it won't have near as much debate. How far is too far for archery equipment? Compound bow approximately 80 lb draw weight.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I know I’m not the first to say it, but IMO if you have practiced at that range, and are confident, it’s not to far. When you are not confident the bullet will hit its mark it becomes too far.
When Carlos Hathcock was asked the maximum distance he could guarantee a kill shot, he said 700 yards. And proved it on two separate occasions on high value targets.
For me it would be around 200 to 250 yards. For most hunters I think 250 is a safe number, for others 500 may be there limit.
I would also like to point out that nobody stalks groundhogs or prairie dogs. They are “sniped”. Does a groundhog not deserve as swift of a death as a deer? Should a “real hunter” stalk a groundhog to 75 yards?
So my parting shot is that the line of ethics is wide and grey.

 

[Tanks]

... How far is too far for archery equipment? Compound bow approximately 80 lb draw weight.

Based on my previous attempts at archery about 15 yards for me. Anything further I will need to switch to a rifle.

 

[Rum Runner]

One of my favorite rifles is my .300 RUM (I know, there is a love/hate thing going on with this caliber now). Three hundred yards is very doable. Five hundred? Maybe. An old timer once described the "Dinner Plate Theory": if you can keep your variables, wind and slope, for example, to stray the bullet less than 4.5" from center (or, a 9" dinner plate), you're golden. Works for me... That way, things stay simple in the heat of action.

.
I shot this ram at 300 yards.

One thing's for sure, that rifle is capable of going out so much farther than 500 yards, but for me that starts to get beyond practical; beyond ethical. What I'm saying is, that 300 RUM is proficient at distances I'm not.

 

[Cam Moon]

Based on my previous attempts at archery about 15 yards for me. Anything further I will need to switch to a rifle.

That sounds like me with a pistol! I can legitimately shoot better with my bow at 50 yards then I can with a handgun at 15!!!

 

[Foxi]

For me it is not possible to determine this in meters.
Those who live in desert landscapes, or in the mountains grow up with completely different situations than a forest hunter. The latter are totally overstrained (and hopefully don't do it) when a roe has to be shot at 170 m. But they are used to check the situation quickly and are faster than John Wayne in his best times.
I never like shooting far .
GEE is my border (means +4cm /100m) at home.
If it goes on Plains Game or in our mountains I train before (as a reloder,Im always in training .
But when a dog is needed, 70% of our shooters are those, who have been tried it by long distances.
If we have a guest who does this more often, he will not be invited anymore.
Foxi

 

[BRICKBURN]

Tanks, it's the new paradigm of life in this country, to whit: If I can't do it, or don't want to do it, I don't want anyone else to do it either.

This is an international forum with a variety of cultures participating. Have an open discussion and enjoy it.

The nature of the question at the start of the thread: “Is it right?”.
It certainly begs an opinion from the crowd.

Want to start a brawl just start a conversation with a directive:

You should.....
You should not. .......

 

[Hogpatrol]

This is an international forum with a variety of cultures participating. Have an open discussion and enjoy it.

The nature of the question at the start of the thread: “Is it right?”.
It certainly begs an opinion from the crowd.

Want to start a brawl just start a conversation with a directive:

You should.....
You should not. .......

Agree. I needed to replace "this country" in my post with "the United States".

 

[Fastrig]

I think a person shoot limit themselves to a range they can put in an immediate follow up shot on a running animal, for me I feel that is about 350 yards max. I don’t like how long range shooting (500+ yards) and hunting is being mixed because they can’t put in a quick second shot on a wounded animal at extreme distance.

350 yards is the max in my book as well, with 200 or less being the preferred. If I can’t stalk, crall to, or setup up from that distance I’m not doing my job, IMHO. Ethical kills are what we are supposed to be doing and that second shot to insure you are is not optional, it’s your responsibility. This topic, to me at least, is one of those “just because you can doesn’t mean you should” items.

 

[Longwalker]

It's easy and tempting to take a shot beyond ones skills if there are no consequences. I think the limit of range ( or running game) should be this: hunters may shoot at game at whatever range they are willing to take a shot, with the following consequences: pay the trophy fee ( or cancel the tag ) for any animal hit and not recovered, and stop hunting that species for the duration of the hunt. No preaching, no judgement, just clear, unequivocal consequences. My prediction is that almost all extreme distance shots at game would cease.