Interesting comment relating to long-range hunting...

[Brian Pfleuger]

See, now, I think it's pretty clear that 1,700 yards is beyond the limits of an ethical shot.

Why? Because there's not a gun in the world that can group smaller than an elk's vital zone at 1,700.

To me, that's the limit. ToF isn't the factor. For one, as per the OP (if we take that scenario at face value) even 100 is too far in terms of the animal having time to move. Two, at long range, we have no idea if the animal moving will be bad or good. One step makes it a bad hit. More steps makes it a clean miss. Clean miss is good. Might be better off at 500 than 100 in some situation that is completely random and unpredictable. Three, if ToF is the issue, almost the entire history of bow hunting has been unethical at almost any distance.

The limit should be that range at which the hunter can no longer guarantee within an acceptable % that the bullet will land in an area within the animals vitals as they are when the shot decision is made.

In almost all cases, that puts the limit well below 1,000 yards but it's not at all hard to imagine pretty easily above 500, gun and shooter dependent. Very few guns can guarantee a bullet inside a game animals vitals at 1,000 yards regardless of the shooters skill, a great many can do it at 500.

[TimSr]

Anytime I hear about a 400-500+++ yard hunting kill, I automatically assume the person is lying, or just really extremely lucky.

I have found that most hunters estimate distance in their stories the way fishermen judge the size of their bass. For some reason that 200 yard head shot with a 12 guage slug can be covered in 60 steps of my 3' stride!

[Sierra280]

^^I agree with that, just fish stories.

Are there really even any standard hunting rounds that even stay stable out to these huge distances. I would guess the .308 hunting rounds are dropping to transonic speed somewhere around 700yds. Maybe 1100yds with some sort of magnum. Personally, I will stick to the close shots and leave the barrett at home when hunting, I don't like to make elk burger out of the entire animal.

Edit--BTW, hitting dirt, then a knapsack, then connecting; doesn't exactly count as 1 shot, 1 kill in my book.

[Gunplummer]

That pretty much sums it up. Most people can not judge distance. Example: Guys talk about how much their deer weighed. It seems the farther they dragged the deer, the heavier it got.

[reynolds357]

I dont judge distance too well either, but my laser rangefinder does. Sometimes on the real long stuff, I have to range rocks close to the animal. Rocks range much better than fur at long range.

[Todd1700]

If I were consistently seeing game animals 800 to 1000 yards away then I would move my stand. Because obviously it is set up in the wrong place. A little scouting will help you out in that regard. I scout my hunting grounds and as a direct result have not had to take a shot farther than 200 yards in over 20 years. Like I said before, people taking shots at these ranges are hanging back that far on purpose just to see if they can still kill an animal from that range. If they do then they run to the internet to brag. And if they blow the lower half of the animals front leg off? Well you just won't ever hear about that.

[reynolds357]

Todd, without seeing where someone hunts, is it possible for you to really know that their stand is in the wrong place? I have stands where my longest shot is less than 25 yards.
95% of the deer seen in this field are seen less than 430 yards away. Its 430 to a wood line. The woods in the bottoms are about 70 yards thick. Past that, you cant see for a long ways due to line of sight blocked by trees. Above the line of sight blockage there is about 80 yards of another oat field(rye this year) that you can see. The back of that field is just over 800. I hunt this set of fields out of a box stand. It has a very solid bench built in it. It is 45 feet tall, and built on steel legs. It has guy wires, and is very solid unless the wind is blowing too hard. If the wind is kicked up, I wont shoot long anyway. I drag a set of my 1000 yard rests up in the tower and leave it there all season. If the shot necessitates, its really just like shooting 1000 yard bench rest. The only variable being the target can walk. Once the bullet is in the air, flight time from the 7 rum is not that bad.

I do have a stand in the other field by the way.

[old roper]

Our hunting has changed here in Co with all the beetle kill. Getting down into the timber in some units is near impossible with the down timber and only thing the Forest Service is doing clearing about 100ft each side of the more traveled roads in the National Forest.

We have two game violations which cover lot. First one it's a felony to kill and abandon big game. Other one is not a felony so won't face lifetime license suspension if convicted but can pull your license for a certain amount of time depending on how many points you get. You have to make a reasonable attempt to track and kill animals you wound or may have wounded. Here your not going to shoot and just say I missed you have to go and check.

[reynolds357]

I think that is some common sense regulation Roper.
Hunters definitely need to take more responsible shots.
Having said that, responsibility varies much depending on equipment and skill level. I am a member of a local gun club. For entertainment value, I usually go to the rifle range the weekend before and the afternoon of opening day of deer season. To see some of those people "zeroing" a rifle is hilarious. To see them trying to figure out how they missed the deer is even more funny. The ones that usually shoot the worst have $1k rifles and $1k scopes. I am not knocking good equipment. I have good equipment, but it seems that many think high end equipment can substitute for lack of training and lack of trigger time. On the other end of the spectrum, you have the crowd that thinks a 336 Marlin with a blister pack scope is a 300 yard rifle. The ones I think are almost the funniest are the ones who zero at 100 and then take the trajectory printed on the back of their ammo box of factory loads as "gospel."
The "my scope got bumped" crowd always shows up in large number. There is always someone fussing about their poor group who inevitably answers "its been 15 years since I cleaned it." People shooting off coats, sticks, blocks of wood, drink bottles, etc, for their rest. Usually, the poorest shooters are the ones running around giving everyone else advice about how to shoot.

[Kimbercommander]

So to all the people that say taking long range shots on animals is only for the poor hunters, I say you are a bad shot. However that would be as incorrect as your own speculation. I take long shots on game because of a injury that has left me without the ability to walk as well as i once could. I was a bow hunter before i got hurt and loved to spot and stalk. Calling elk into less then 10 yards was my drug of choice. However I have spent a considerable amount of money on my equipment to insure that there is little chance the equipment i use will fail. This season so far I have taken a mule deer at 481 yards. Using a Ziess range finder. Which is far more accurate then the old bushnell i used to for bowhunting. I took this animal while it was sleeping in its bed in the middle of the day. I carry a handheld with a ballistics calculator and a kestrel weather / wind meter. Just because you wont/cant make a shot does not make it bad ethics if someone who takes the time and spends the money is able to with good results. Just like i dont believe sitting in a tree stand or a groundblind is "Hunting" doesnt make me correct. To me this is way more unethical then long range shooting. However thats just my own opinion because where I grew up and learned to hunt its impractial. To all their own. If you take your quary with a clean killing shot no matter weapon or range then I believe its ethical.

[myfriendis410]

Kimber: you are just the person to be making the long shots. You've obviously considered the pros and cons, gotten good equipment, TRAINED WITH IT, and when the rubber meets the road you took a high-percentage shot.

We could spend weeks going over the myriad possible scenarios where a long shot might be needed. Some good examples have already come up. Those hunters that choose to take the long poke simply need to be very very confident that the shot they take is going to be an ethical kill.

I think the criticism is more aimed at the poorly prepared, poorly equipped hunter who wants to do it "like they did on that long-range hunting show".

[Todd1700]

"like they did on that long-range hunting show".

I have seen people on those long range hunting shows miss badly with their first shot. And if they are off enough to miss entirely then you can bet your aunt Bippies ash can that they are often off a little less and wound animals also. You just never see those shows. I think the Outdoor Channel has a policy that they will not allow a show to air a hunt in which an animal is hit but not recovered. That being the case they come off looking like they have a 100% kill ratio at those extreme ranges. Reality, I'll wager you, is another story.

A very mild wind of say 10 mph can drift a bullet 60 or more inches over a 1000 yard flight. Sure you can gage the wind in various ways where you are sitting but across a 1000 yard gap it could be blowing 3 different speeds and at several slightly different angles. Misjudge the wind by 5 mph at that range and you can be off with your shot by 3 feet. Without absolutely knowing exactly how much wind to allow for the first shot or attempt to "dope" the wind at such a distance is a guess. I'll fully grant you that with some people who practice this a lot and use the right tools and equipment it's a highly educated guess. But a guess just the same.

[MarkCO]

It is a matter of skill/desire/training/knowledge.

When I take a new hunter out in the field for the first time, he/she has previously shot from a variety of positions as the range and then in a natural terrain environment so we can practice, improve and set limits. I will bet a dollar to a doughnut that there is more game hit badly/wounded on shots inside 100 yards than outside 500 yards. Most hunters, in field conditions can't hold a paper plate sized group, much less on running game at 100 yards. Is a 100 yard shot on running game more or less ethical than a 400 yard shot on stationary game? Depends on the person.

I have set my personal limits based on energy, velocity, bullet, position, what animal, weather, and range. My limit with one of my rifles is purely based on getting the precise range. Being off by even 10 yards is just not acceptable in some situations. In other situations, my limit only allows me to shoot point blank out to the limit of that systems range.

Shooting long range requires so much more than the TV shows imply and the ranges should only be expanded based on knowledge, practice and proven skill. I still assert that for most people, long range is anything past 100 yards.

I shot a cow elk with a 10mm handgun at 40 yards...that took more preparation and skill than hitting a deer at 400 with a .30-06. I shot a 6 point bull elk with a a slug gun at 80 yards...that took more preparation and skill than hitting a coyote at 800 yards with a .260. I have been hunting since I was of legal age, and I've seen a lot of stuff happen while harvesting over 100 head of big game. Bottom line is knowing your limitations and having some self control. I have passed up shorter shots for longer shots due to the former not being within my pre-set limits.

[reynolds357]

Todd, you are definitely correct about wind. It can be blowing totally different directions across 1000 yards.

[Kimbercommander]

I suppose you are also telling our military snipers / marksmen that they cant dope wind or judge it thru a spotting scope? Its all boils down to experience. If you WANT to hunt long range I recommend attending a shooting school. There are many out there and most are well informed and very knowlegeable. Then after attending that school, find a range and become buddies with the range masters. After you have sat there for a year or two (actual time on range not just being a member) and have fired 10,000-20,000 rounds, replace a barrel or two and gained the knowlege of how the wind in most cases around where you live will effect your shot. Then start trying to increase your range on live animals. You can learns to judge wind at long range you just need to be shown how to do it. Most people base long range as 1000+ yards. Long range is when you cant hit your target 5 for 5 in my opinion. That is when the hit to miss percentage is to high for me. For me on a deer about 700 is when i will not sling lead at a stationary animal. Elk goes to about 900. However i wont shoot a moving animal. There is no need to at that range. The animals should never even know they are on the same planet as you at those ranges. Patience is key.

[reynolds357]

I am not telling military snipers anything. I am just stating the simple fact that you can have wind blowing in two totally different directions in 1000 yards. I am a L.E. sniper, and I have shot with many military snipers over the years. I have been at the 1000 yard range with some of the best snipers uncle Sam has, and a couple of them missed a human target at 1k before they got on it. Does not matter how good you are, wind can be your worst enemy. That particular range, shoots across a river. Until you figure out what the air does around that river, the range can throw you some twists and turns.
Hunting is not 100%. Long range shooting is a calculated risk. I am not going to be 100%. No one else will be either. That does not mean I am going to limit my deer hunting to 100 yards to make some people happy.

[Todd1700]

I suppose you are also telling our military snipers / marksmen that they cant dope wind or judge it thru a spotting scope?

Despite the BS you see in Hollywood movies where snipers are hitting people perfectly between the eyes at 1000 or more yards first shot, every time, the real life goal of a military sniper shooting at someone that far away is to hit them....anywhere! Because any solid hit is going to put that person out of commission.

Now it may seem strange that I think we should aspire to a higher standard when shooting at animals than humans. But if that human is an enemy of this country that would gladly kill Americans if given the chance then yes, that is exactly how I feel. I could care less where one of our snipers hits a member of Al Qaeda or how long they suffer before they die. Blow their leg off, arm off, gut shoot them, I could give a rats @$$ about such scum.

The goal when shooting at a game animal however is not just to hit it anywhere but to hit it in a rapidly lethal spot that makes finding it much more of a certainty. The goal of hunting isn't just to render a deer ineffective. The goal is to kill and recover it so the meat can be used. The kill zone on a deer is a heck of a lot smaller target than the entire human body. That makes a successful shot on a game animal at 1000 yards even tougher than what our military snipers are trying to do. Blowing a terrorists leg off at 1000 yards is still a good shot and still eliminates your enemy as an effective combatant. Blowing a deer's leg off at 1000 yards is a total fail.

[myfriendis410]

I think you would both agree; that coming prepared in both equipment and experience will allow you to shoot an animal ethically at ranges most hunters aren't able to.

What I have a problem with and have stated so in the past repeatedly is that the long range hunting shows do a disservice to the sport. The rank-and-file hunter is simply not capable of reliably shooting and killing a big game animal at, frankly, ridiculous ranges. I have witnessed shots taken on animals that took them 3 hours to get to. If that animal had been gutshot it would have been lost. That's simply unethical.

I like to hunt. I kill a lot of deer and hogs here. There is simply no reason to shoot at one beyond 150 yards or so. Deer are a little different, but that's where the HUNTING part comes in. Sheep hunting might demand more yardage. Chamois might. There are certain circumstances that absolutely would dictate a long shot. Come prepared for it and if you are able then go-ahead-on. Someone else raised a good point that a lot of animals are wounded and lost at 100 yards. It's happened to me. Probably most of us if we've hunted long enough. That still doesn't make it okay to shoot at an animal that far away without being prepared.

[reynolds357]

I agree that many hunters are not capable of long range shooting. My premise is that what is and is not an ethical shot is determined on a person by person, case by case basis and cant be painted with a broad brush.

[MarkCO]

I generally agree with the last three posts, but I will add something else anyway...

Even if you possess the skill (and DOPE) to hit a target, you pretty much have to be handloading to humanely shoot game animals past some distance, which of course varies by caliber. Will you have enough energy to take the animal cleanly at that range and how will that bullet perform at that range. Have you shot ballisitic gel or a fackler box at that range to prove bullet effectiveness. Most bullet makers list the minimum effective expansion velocity for their bullets now.

On Saturday, I told my Dad I felt a little guilty during my Pronghorn hunt. Met an older gentleman hunting with open sights. So much so that I walked out into the valley with the hopes that some of the scattered animals would go by him. They did, but not close enough. Don't know if he filled his tag or not.

Pronghorn (what some call Antelope) live primarily in parts of Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Idaho and Utah and they are some skittish animals. They don't let you get any closer than about 500 yards once the road hunters start lobbing lead. Rarely will they bed down in the afternoon where a stalk is even possible. Where I was hunting, there was 5 inches of wet snow, not a tree for 5 miles and the bushes were a maximum height of maybe 20 inches. In my hunting experience, they often require more yardage than sheep or goats.

[Kimbercommander]

Seems to me that for the most part we all agree. Animals can be taken at long range however its dictated by the weather and equipment used. However the most dictating thing is the experince of the person doing so. A light drizzle and no wind is about perfect conditions because you can actually see the wind currents in the rain. However, how often do you ever get idea conditions. In my opinion, and this is just my opinion, point blank is about as far as 99% of all hunters should shoot. This being the range where the bullet does not raise or drop more then three inches of point of aim. However this conversation could go on forever because even then you will get green hunters out in the field that see someone do something on TV and think they can too. Just because Bob Beck can take a elk at 925 yards with his custom built rifle with custom loaded ammo doesnt mean you can take a animal at that distance with your walmart special and remington cor-locks.

[TRex99]

I've passed up way more shots than I have taken, for lots of reasons, not just distance. To me, it's about making an ethical kill. Longest shot I ever took was 341 yards on a mulie and I almost passed it up because it seemed too long.

[Art Eatman]

I've seen many people do highly-skilled actions of one sort or another. But, just because they can does not mean that I can--unless I go through the training and practice invested by that performer.

Gymnasts, car racers, shooters: Nobody was ever born an expert.