BrentD
Well-known member
Is there ANY distance that is too far? When the equipment exists to reliably kill deer at a mile, will that be too far? At 2 miles? Or is it really just, "if you can, it is good."
Long range ethics
- Thread starter Cubguy
- Start date
std7mag
Well-known member
It would depend on your comfort level, and equipment.
For instance, i shoot alot at 500-600 yards. So my comfort level for that distance is pretty high.
If something were to present itself at say 800, i'm not shooting. But i'm working on closing the distance to something i'm comfortable with, say 400 yards.
You also need to look at the mechanical aspect also ( something not too many people do).
Just because you target shoot alot at say 1,200 yards, doesn't mean you should while hunting.
Most hunting bullets will need 1,800 fps to expand reliably.
So if your 6.5 Creedmore, with that bullet falls below 1,800 fps at say 800 yards, then you have no business shooting at 1,200 yards.
For instance, i shoot alot at 500-600 yards. So my comfort level for that distance is pretty high.
If something were to present itself at say 800, i'm not shooting. But i'm working on closing the distance to something i'm comfortable with, say 400 yards.
You also need to look at the mechanical aspect also ( something not too many people do).
Just because you target shoot alot at say 1,200 yards, doesn't mean you should while hunting.
Most hunting bullets will need 1,800 fps to expand reliably.
So if your 6.5 Creedmore, with that bullet falls below 1,800 fps at say 800 yards, then you have no business shooting at 1,200 yards.
What do you find as a barrier to not being able to make a 350 or 400 yard shot?
300stw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 863
how bout a drivers license then,,, same iq
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I agree with jtm307 300 is my very limit. Personally I don't have a tricked out rifle or scope, I'm terrible at judging wind, I'm not super confident in my applied knowledge of parallax, bullet drop, etc and I definitely don't spend enough time at the range. I know that if I sight my gun in at 200 yards with my scope on it's lowest power I can group well at 300 but past that I'm not consistent. In the field I struggle sometimes with finding rock solid shooting positions and early on I muffed a lot of shots so I don't have a ton of confidence in my ability... I had a great '15 season and filed 7 tags with one shot each, all were 150 yards or less. After that experience I just kinda realized there wasn't a reason for me not to just get closer.
I'm sure if I took a class... or even just spent some time at the range with someone like you I would probably be able to increase my range, but I don't really have any friends who own guns let alone are experienced enough to be able to help me extend my range... so it is what it is...
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Can't speak for jtm, but as a hunter who grew up in thick woods taking 40 yard shots with no wind with a 30-30, it is the wind that reduces my confidence. In MN where I have shot at the range over a dozen times this summer I have not had more than a measured 12 mile an hour wind. If wind under 12 miles I have confidence at 425, but I just don't feel good about judging the winds of WY at that distance so I am going to cap myself at 325 yards and try to get inside of 250 yards on my trip this fall. Maybe it will be less of a problem than I expect, but for now I would prefer to error on the side of a clean kill - I surrendered manly ego many years ago.
Last edited:
Ridge Ghost
Active member
For the bubbas who slapped a long range scope on their rifle, went to the range twice that year, and want to lob long shots to "see if they can hit one of 'em". No, it's not ethical.
For those who have put their time in at the range, know their weapon inside and out, and have made many practice shots before shooting at an animal at similar distance- yes, it's ethical.
For those who have put their time in at the range, know their weapon inside and out, and have made many practice shots before shooting at an animal at similar distance- yes, it's ethical.
deer_shooter
Well-known member
I have an acquaintance who practices regularly with top end equipment and is consistent out to 1000. Conversely, I've met and talked to folks at the local range who have no business shooting beyond 75 yards. As many others have said, what is long range depend on the individual and their ability. I am completely comfortable out to about 400 so that is may self imposed limit under perfect conditions.
The one debate where there are always stories on each side. It comes down to what you want out of the 'hunt' and practicing. If you shoot an animal at 998 yards and that's an enjoyable 'hunting experience' for you, along with plenty of practice prior too, go for it. Personally, I'm against long range hunting, yes I can share stories of good and bad long range shooters too, it's not the hunt that I want. Engaging in the animals senses and out smarting them is something I enjoy.
On the other hand there are plenty of short range hunters that shoot 300 yards and under that I dislike more than most long range hunters. These are the ones that say long range hunters don't practice enough, but yet because they shoot at a closer distance they assume they are sighted in every year, or shoot 5 rounds prior to season to make sure a scope is still zeroed in. The closer you are to the animal the more margin of error you are allowed, so why practice right?
Problems on both sides of the issues because no one wants to admit that they don't practice enough, but still go hunting. If you don't practice enough, should you go hunting still should be the real question. Whether or not your max distance is 250 or 850 yards... what if the the biggest animal you have ever seen is an additional 75 yards past your abilities? Would you still shoot? 75 yards isn't that far with technology, right?
On the other hand there are plenty of short range hunters that shoot 300 yards and under that I dislike more than most long range hunters. These are the ones that say long range hunters don't practice enough, but yet because they shoot at a closer distance they assume they are sighted in every year, or shoot 5 rounds prior to season to make sure a scope is still zeroed in. The closer you are to the animal the more margin of error you are allowed, so why practice right?
Problems on both sides of the issues because no one wants to admit that they don't practice enough, but still go hunting. If you don't practice enough, should you go hunting still should be the real question. Whether or not your max distance is 250 or 850 yards... what if the the biggest animal you have ever seen is an additional 75 yards past your abilities? Would you still shoot? 75 yards isn't that far with technology, right?
PrairieHunter
Well-known member
Just wait until we are shooting lazers from drones.
I am expecting to see "hunts" being done from the comforts of home, no matter where you live. Just imagine sitting at your computer back home in Texas/Florida/PA/etc as the guides in Colorado take the drones out and release them. Then the guides start flying the drones around looking at animals as the computer estimates score/price and allows the hunter to watch everything on the computer screen and choose is he wants to engage the animal with the lazer and kill/buy it.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,722
I would be willing to be my paycheck that 90% of the people on this forum could not hit a pie plate at 400 yards under a normal hunting situation.
I will double down on that and say that 60% of the people on this forum could not hit a pie plate while rested on a bench with sandbags at 400 yards 2 out of 4 shots.
These numbers may in fact be low. I'm conservative and giving a handful of people on here the benefit of the doubt.
People think just because they have a cds dial means they can shoot an animal at almost any distance.
They can shoot at a mile if thats what they would like to do. But I dont think they should be shooting at an animal that far.
That is all I am going to say on this topic.
I will double down on that and say that 60% of the people on this forum could not hit a pie plate while rested on a bench with sandbags at 400 yards 2 out of 4 shots.
These numbers may in fact be low. I'm conservative and giving a handful of people on here the benefit of the doubt.
People think just because they have a cds dial means they can shoot an animal at almost any distance.
They can shoot at a mile if thats what they would like to do. But I dont think they should be shooting at an animal that far.
That is all I am going to say on this topic.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
With satellite imagery and retrieval by RC helicopter right to your driveway or favorite sausage processor.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I think a rifle course like the Total Archery Challenge the do in MT, where you had to shoot animal sized targets at various ranges from hunting positions after hiking would be humbling for most.
Last season an elk, across canyon, partially obscured by oak brush with a stiff breeze, with tall oak brush around me that made it impossible to find a decent rest made a 208 yard shot too far.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
We are closer than you think...
https://www.tracking-point.com/weapons/shadowtrax8-338-lapua-magnum-bolt-action/
1) I don't spend enough time at the range for longer shots.
2) I'm cheap and don't use high quality bullets. I'm concerned that beyond 300 yards, there are too many variables for the bullet to reliably kill a full sized elk quickly if I happen to hit the shoulder. Deer and antelope would be less of a concern.
3) I don't want to worry about bullet drop too much. I want to keep it simple. I want to aim at one spot on the animal, regardless of distance, and make a lethal shot. My rifle is zeroed at 225 yards. If I'm close, I'll aim at the lower 3rd. If I'm pushing 300, I'll aim at the upper third.
Plus, getting close is half the fun.
I have no problem with guys shooting in the 500-750 yard range if they are skilled enough to do it. Most people probably overestimate their own skill level. I wouldn't hunt with a person who would take a 1000+ yard shot. I wouldn't necessarily call them unethical, but I just don't trust their judgement.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
It all started when man first gandered thru shaped glass. The rest is embellished efficacy and equivocated advantage.
In my mind the ethics questions in this debate is not can you/should you take a shot at 650+ yards across a canyon. I am sure lots of people can make that shot. The ethics question is whether or not the shooter is willing to cross that canyon after the shot to see if there is blood, even if he thinks it was a clean miss. I've seen elk shot at 300 yards that show no visible reaction to getting shot, and tip over 30 seconds later. What percentage of long range shooters actually follow up on their shot and walk to the spot where the animal was?
BrentD
Well-known member
As is so often the case in these discussions, the only currency to be considered by most people is "can you make the shot". Not, "should you make the shot." This depresses me when I think about the future of hunting, but thankfully, I'm old.
