What has happened to us??? - Page 3

Brian Pfleuger · August 20, 2009, 03:49 PM

That's pretty hard then.... cuz a woodchuck at 600 is pretty friggin' darn hard to hit. I would guess that the "average" shooter would not hit a woodchuck at that distance more than 1 in 20 chances, and that might be generous, especially without trying a couple and correcting, which is not something most living things are prone to allow.

langenc · August 20, 2009, 10:35 PM

Most 600-700 yd shots are really 150-175 yards.

emcon5 · August 21, 2009, 02:00 AM

Quote:

So, taking off 5-6" for the woodchuck's tail, the kill zone on an elk is roughly woodchuck-sized. Convenient, isn't it? If you can hit a woodchuck, you can probably kill an elk at the same distance, under the same circumstances.

The difference of course is that if you miss the woodchuck, you miss.

If you miss the woodchuck-sized-vitals of the elk, you may miss, you may have a cripple. Some people are evidently OK with that. I am not.

BillJunior · August 21, 2009, 04:41 AM

Fremmer said:

"So let him have fun with the gun he wants. If the guy practices with his mag and shoots it well, I have no problem with it. To each his own. He may be hunting in an area where you have to take long shots, and if he wants more power, well, more power to him. I wouldn't worry so much about what some guy uses to hunt elk.

What has happened to us? Maybe we worry to much about what other people are doing. "

I agree. However, personally I have been downsizing my deer rifle the last few years from 7mm Rem Mag to .270 and now I'm using a 7mm-08 this year. Even with the 7mm Rem Mag I limited my range to 300 yds maximum.

davlandrum · August 21, 2009, 10:19 AM

+1 emcon5. see my sig. line.

Peetza - agree, dang hard shot. Add in to that all the variables: wind blowing, freezing to death, fingers numb, heart pumping, etc.

Not something I could or would try.

Art Eatman · August 21, 2009, 11:36 AM

Making a long story short: I learned that at about 550 yards, a "breeze" if misjudged a tad can carry a .30-'06 bullet from a deer's nose to his hind foot. I'd figured on drift to around the heart area. (I'd also figured the distance at around 400, but that's not pertinent.)

At my 500-yard range here at the house, I've held two feet upwind of the target plate, to hit dead center--and it truly was just a gentle breeze at the shooting table.

IOW, if you know the distance, trajectory is the easy part.

lt dan · August 21, 2009, 11:56 AM

less than 7% of hunts that take place in Namibia and s-Africa are hunts with foreigners of which the most are British and German hunters and the rest n-Americans and some Russians and so on. according to the s-African hunters and wild life conservation's research. so amongst the odd 93 % of hunts are done by local hunters and of them the 338 was voted as one of the top 10 worst calibers to own in Africa with the 30-06 as the best.

so i agree with your uncle.

farmall · August 21, 2009, 12:12 PM

Other than prairie dogs, I don't hunt so I probably shouldn't comment but I will.

I honestly havent met that many "hunters" who were "shooters". I have tried to help alot of guys sight in deer rifles around here. The 1" high at 100 seems to be the gold standard in these parts, yet I've seen guys take the 4-500yd shots they have no business taking. There's also alot of 3 legged deer around!
Most of the "hunter" group will complain about the cost of ammo, fire 3-5 shots, and declare "thats good enough for me"!

You never hear stories about the guy who missed, or miserably wounded the deer at extreme range.

Damn few people have the time and resoursces to develop the skills needed to shoot effectively at these ranges. And all the range time in the world wont compensate for field skills.

I dont know.........but to me it just ain't ethical!

Andy

4406v · August 21, 2009, 01:06 PM

I consider myself an ethical hunter,I know my rifle and what it's capable of.I have been shooting the same model 700 7mm Rem mag for 21 years and I've killed alot of game with it.I was taught at an early age that you OWE it to the animal if you're going to shoot it to make its death as quick and humane as possible.Unless you are able to pin point a shot into the animals vitals it's UNETHICAL to take the shot.The only excuse for taking a 600 yd shot would be at a wounded animal you are trying to finish.

LanceOregon · August 22, 2009, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Peetza - how big is a woodchuck? I would swag the kill zone on an elk at 12-18"

This is my biggest ever chuck. Easily the fattest and widest one I've ever seen too. He had really thick layers of fat on him.

For perspective, the shoe size in the photo is 10 1/2:

Most of the chucks we shot that day were bloodied badly, and had good sized holes in them. Some were even ripped apart pretty good.

But the 50 gr VAX bullet from a .223 went into this fella, and it never came out.

--

Fremmer · August 23, 2009, 08:51 AM

Holy Smoke! That is one FAT chuck, Lance!!!!

Huntergirl · August 27, 2009, 08:23 AM

I remember talking to a Game and Fish officer a couple years ago, who said that alot of elk found dead by F&G and not harvested, were from poorly placed shots. He said he watched hunters in the field taking ridiculously long and difficult shots, knowing from experience, that those hunters would never bother to track down a wounded elk. Most were not in good enough shape to even be hunting. I think that's a big point right there why some hunters go to a big boomer. They think a big magnum will compensate for poor placement. And we know that's not true.

longranger · August 27, 2009, 05:49 PM

Huntergirl,

You are spot on as well you have must have been talking to the same Fand G guy I did.Except he was talking about all of the the 3 legged Antelope that were going to die because of hunters not knowing ranges and expected trajectories for their rifles.

wyobohunter · August 27, 2009, 10:29 PM

This should make most of you happy. I went out Moose hunting w/my 30-06 because the boomer isn't all dialed in just right yet. I've got the 06' set up for 350 yds (max) and carry a rangefinder that compensates for shot angle. Only legal Moose we found was ranged at 504 yds (after angle compensation). Long story short, she was in grass so tall it looked like she was laying down and we were at the edge of that grass. Stalking in closer was impossible because once you drop down in you can't see a durn thing but grass (unless you are an NBA player). Had to let her go, but if I had the .338 all dialed in, nother story

Old Grump · August 28, 2009, 11:33 AM

It was a good hunt, you saw a moose and it was good sportsmanship. My hat off to you.

HiBC · August 28, 2009, 11:58 AM

You have no regret.Good for you.

Its funny,that 600yd elk rifle I built has taken a deer and an antelope,both inside 300 yds.

I haven't taken it elk hunting.

The rifle I have been using has a 1.5-5 scope on it,a 21 in bbl,and a 308 like trajectory.OK it is a 260 gr .375 bullet,but I always have liked Elmer Keith.

Sportdog · August 30, 2009, 12:08 AM

The funny thing about this thread is that it reminds me so much of the late, great, Jack O'Conner and his thoughts about distance shooting and the cartridges to avoid. The thoughts that he put down in his books and Outdoor Life articles were just as many feel here, don't take long shots UNLESS you have plenty of practice and skill behind that trigger finger and try to lessen the distance as much as is reasonalble. One of his big pet peeves he had was with what Joe Hunter was trying to do with his "rainbow trajectory" 30-30 "leg breaker". But he always blamed the Joe Hunter, not the 30-30. The reality is that no matter what rifle/cartridge combination you select, you need to know what YOUR limitations are. I won't be critical of someone taking a shot at "X" distance if he honestly believes that he can make the shot. I will be critical of someone who just blazes away. I will close with a quote from Mr. O'Conner, "The man who "hopes" he can hit almost never does. The man who "thinks" he can hit often makes a good quick kill, but sometimes wounds. The man who "knows" he can hit almost always does a neat job and almost never wounds." Whether you choose to hunt with a 243 or a 375, know your rifle and your limitations.

Legionnaire · August 31, 2009, 10:47 AM

What has happened to us? Too much saturation by marketing-driven media from companies that make their money selling "stuff," especially new guns and new cartridges. Heck, look at all the new stuff at Cabela's every year! One doesn't need the latest "leafy camoed gore-tex scent-blocking 3-D polar fleece" outfit every season. But we've become easily-influenced consumers. Too few of us left that really enjoy the out-of-door experience; "the hunt" has, for many, become an endless search through catalogs, magazines, and stores for the gratification that comes from a new purchase. Sigh.

I used to be a hunter safety instructor before my last move (unfortunately, PA wouldn't recognize my NY credentials and I don't have time to get recertified). I miss the interaction with the kids who really wanted to learn about hunting. Some of the best conversations started with the question, "What do I need to hunt (insert favorite game)?" "No, you don't need a six-inch-tanto-blade-combat/survival knife for deer ... a folder with a three-inch blade is plenty for field dressing." You get the point.

Can't really blame the companies who keep coming up with more stuff; we're suckers for it, and it keeps them in business. But we're losing the connection to the outdoors and are spending too much time on the "virtual" hunt, which takes us through pages of new "stuff." Too bad that time isn't spent honing field skills, or just getting and staying in shape!

ZeroJunk · August 31, 2009, 10:59 AM

Quote:

What has happened to us? Too much saturation by marketing-driven media from companies that make their money selling "stuff," especially new guns and new cartridges. Heck, look at all the new stuff at Cabela's every year! One doesn't need the latest "leafy camoed gore-tex scent-blocking 3-D polar fleece" outfit every season

.

Ninety percent of the time I wear blue jeans unless I'm bow hunting and sometimes even then.
It's kind of nutty to have on a bunch of camo and then put a full size orange vest on top of it.

But, try and buy a good hunting jacket with good pockets and compartments that is not camo. They don't make them.

darkgael · August 31, 2009, 12:21 PM

I very much agree with the OP.

Quote:

I can't see an ethical hunter that I've hunted with all my life trying to call this hunting.. It just seems kind of wrong...

Don't know about ethics and long shots but...
600 yards....775 yards....400 yards.
That's finding an Elk.
Taking the shot....that's shooting the Elk.
Getting close....stalking it.....crawling up if need be....THAT is hunting the Elk.

A quick story: I know a fellow, a friend of my son, who travels every year to Alaska to hunt caribou up North. He is a bow hunter. There are no trees on the tundra. He will glass an animal at those long distances and then make a decision....then he gets down and crawls toward the animal until he gets close enough to take a bow shot. He may have to crawl nearly as long a distance as those Magnum shooters shoot. He takes a caribou each year. THAT is hunting.
Pete

PS -

Quote:

a woodchuck at 600 is pretty friggin' darn hard to hit.

Very true. It ain't hunting though.

oneounceload · August 31, 2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

But, try and buy a good hunting jacket with good pockets and compartments that is not camo. They don't make them.

http://www.llbean.com/webapp/wcs/sto...rom=SR&feat=sr

I've always liked this one - have used one similar to it for years

wyobohunter · August 31, 2009, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Don't know about ethics and long shots but...
600 yards....775 yards....400 yards.
That's finding an Elk.
Taking the shot....that's shooting the Elk.
Getting close....stalking it.....crawling up if need be....THAT is hunting the Elk.

... By your definition only. The guy who uses a compound with all the goodies may not consider going out with a rifle "hunting", the trad bowhunter may think that the guy with training wheels is cheating a little, the fella with a self bow could think the same thing of the guy with a bow that is laminated, the hunter with atlatl in hand etc etc... It's pretty easy to find fault in somebody elses way of doing things and say "this aint that & that aint this", it's nonsense IMO. Do what you do so long as you do it well, call it whatever you want and "judge not".

darkgael · September 1, 2009, 08:20 AM

Quote:

The guy who uses a compound with all the goodies may not consider going out with a rifle "hunting", the trad bowhunter may think that the guy with training wheels is cheating a little, the fella with a self bow could think the same thing of the guy with a bow that is laminated, the hunter with atlatl in hand etc etc... It's pretty easy to find fault in somebody elses way of doing things and say "this aint that & that aint this", it's nonsense IMO. Do what you do so long as you do it well, call it whatever you want and "judge not".

Yeah, OK. I can go with that. The bow, however, was just a fact of the story, not its point. It isn't the weapon that makes the hunt; it's the weapon that ends the hunt. What I was thinking about primarily was not the instrument but the whole act of getting close, of hunting an animal close enough that, in the case of that anecdote, a bowshot was practical - or an atlatl throw if you wish. Maybe a close, accurate shot with a pistol or a flintlock.
Or...as the late Peter Capstick once tried after stalking a water buffalo, a spear thrust.
Pete

PS: In a way, the answer to the OP's question is in here. The human condition and the search for an easier, softer, way. The progression from old to new - the spear, the atlatl, the bow, the rifle. Each more efficient, more accurate, easier on the operator.

wyobohunter · September 2, 2009, 08:08 AM

Quote:

PS: In a way, the answer to the OP's question is in here. The human condition and the search for an easier, softer, way. The progression from old to new - the spear, the atlatl, the bow, the rifle. Each more efficient, more accurate, easier on the operator.

Agreed...Great observation.

DiscoRacing · September 2, 2009, 08:14 AM

Ive always had a 30.06.. probably always will.... I wouldnt hesitate to shoot any animal with one of my reloads.... if a 200grain 30 caliber bullet wont kill it..give it up...... but I dont hunt out west... there are NO places here to shoot 300 yds.... let alone 700.... the only 300yard shots made here..... are the ones that you hear of in the local bar after the hunt....knowing full well of the 50%gain in distance after the first beer.

August 20, 2009, 03:49 PM	#51
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,578	That's pretty hard then.... cuz a woodchuck at 600 is pretty friggin' darn hard to hit. I would guess that the "average" shooter would not hit a woodchuck at that distance more than 1 in 20 chances, and that might be generous, especially without trying a couple and correcting, which is not something most living things are prone to allow. __________________ Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley

August 21, 2009, 10:19 AM	#55
davlandrum Senior Member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: Lane County Oregon Posts: 2,547	+1 emcon5. see my sig. line. Peetza - agree, dang hard shot. Add in to that all the variables: wind blowing, freezing to death, fingers numb, heart pumping, etc. Not something I could or would try. __________________ U.S Army, Retired Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do. -Potter Stewart

August 21, 2009, 11:56 AM	#57
lt dan Senior Member Join Date: March 4, 2008 Location: south africa Posts: 328	less than 7% of hunts that take place in Namibia and s-Africa are hunts with foreigners of which the most are British and German hunters and the rest n-Americans and some Russians and so on. according to the s-African hunters and wild life conservation's research. so amongst the odd 93 % of hunts are done by local hunters and of them the 338 was voted as one of the top 10 worst calibers to own in Africa with the 30-06 as the best. so i agree with your uncle. __________________ If youth is wasted on the young, then Africa is wasted on the Africans

August 27, 2009, 10:29 PM	#64
wyobohunter Senior Member Join Date: August 21, 2008 Location: Back in Wyoming Posts: 1,125	Well... This should make most of you happy. I went out Moose hunting w/my 30-06 because the boomer isn't all dialed in just right yet. I've got the 06' set up for 350 yds (max) and carry a rangefinder that compensates for shot angle. Only legal Moose we found was ranged at 504 yds (after angle compensation). Long story short, she was in grass so tall it looked like she was laying down and we were at the edge of that grass. Stalking in closer was impossible because once you drop down in you can't see a durn thing but grass (unless you are an NBA player). Had to let her go, but if I had the .338 all dialed in, nother story Last edited by wyobohunter; August 28, 2009 at 09:21 PM.

August 28, 2009, 11:33 AM	#65
Old Grump Member in memoriam Join Date: April 9, 2009 Location: Blue River Wisconsin, in Posts: 3,144	It was a good hunt, you saw a moose and it was good sportsmanship. My hat off to you. __________________ Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern will, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. --Daniel Webster--

August 20, 2009, 10:35 PM	#52
langenc Senior Member Join Date: August 19, 2007 Location: Montmorency Co, MI Posts: 1,551	Most 600-700 yd shots are really 150-175 yards.

August 21, 2009, 04:41 AM	#54
BillJunior Junior Member Join Date: February 22, 2009 Location: SC Posts: 7	Fremmer said: "So let him have fun with the gun he wants. If the guy practices with his mag and shoots it well, I have no problem with it. To each his own. He may be hunting in an area where you have to take long shots, and if he wants more power, well, more power to him. I wouldn't worry so much about what some guy uses to hunt elk. What has happened to us? Maybe we worry to much about what other people are doing. " I agree. However, personally I have been downsizing my deer rifle the last few years from 7mm Rem Mag to .270 and now I'm using a 7mm-08 this year. Even with the 7mm Rem Mag I limited my range to 300 yds maximum.

August 21, 2009, 11:36 AM	#56
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Making a long story short: I learned that at about 550 yards, a "breeze" if misjudged a tad can carry a .30-'06 bullet from a deer's nose to his hind foot. I'd figured on drift to around the heart area. (I'd also figured the distance at around 400, but that's not pertinent.) At my 500-yard range here at the house, I've held two feet upwind of the target plate, to hit dead center--and it truly was just a gentle breeze at the shooting table. IOW, if you know the distance, trajectory is the easy part.

August 21, 2009, 12:12 PM	#58
farmall Senior Member Join Date: December 7, 2004 Location: Beatrice Nebraska Posts: 613	Other than prairie dogs, I don't hunt so I probably shouldn't comment but I will. I honestly havent met that many "hunters" who were "shooters". I have tried to help alot of guys sight in deer rifles around here. The 1" high at 100 seems to be the gold standard in these parts, yet I've seen guys take the 4-500yd shots they have no business taking. There's also alot of 3 legged deer around! Most of the "hunter" group will complain about the cost of ammo, fire 3-5 shots, and declare "thats good enough for me"! You never hear stories about the guy who missed, or miserably wounded the deer at extreme range. Damn few people have the time and resoursces to develop the skills needed to shoot effectively at these ranges. And all the range time in the world wont compensate for field skills. I dont know.........but to me it just ain't ethical! Andy

August 21, 2009, 01:06 PM	#59
4406v Member Join Date: May 14, 2009 Location: Ellwood City,Pa Posts: 58	I consider myself an ethical hunter,I know my rifle and what it's capable of.I have been shooting the same model 700 7mm Rem mag for 21 years and I've killed alot of game with it.I was taught at an early age that you OWE it to the animal if you're going to shoot it to make its death as quick and humane as possible.Unless you are able to pin point a shot into the animals vitals it's UNETHICAL to take the shot.The only excuse for taking a 600 yd shot would be at a wounded animal you are trying to finish.

August 23, 2009, 08:51 AM	#61
Fremmer Senior Member Join Date: June 19, 2005 Location: Nebraska Posts: 3,482	Holy Smoke! That is one FAT chuck, Lance!!!!

August 27, 2009, 08:23 AM	#62
Huntergirl Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2005 Location: Wyoming Posts: 907	I remember talking to a Game and Fish officer a couple years ago, who said that alot of elk found dead by F&G and not harvested, were from poorly placed shots. He said he watched hunters in the field taking ridiculously long and difficult shots, knowing from experience, that those hunters would never bother to track down a wounded elk. Most were not in good enough shape to even be hunting. I think that's a big point right there why some hunters go to a big boomer. They think a big magnum will compensate for poor placement. And we know that's not true.

August 27, 2009, 05:49 PM	#63
longranger Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2008 Location: Buffalo WY Posts: 1,056	Huntergirl, You are spot on as well you have must have been talking to the same Fand G guy I did.Except he was talking about all of the the 3 legged Antelope that were going to die because of hunters not knowing ranges and expected trajectories for their rifles.

August 28, 2009, 11:58 AM	#66
HiBC Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2006 Posts: 8,286	You have no regret.Good for you. Its funny,that 600yd elk rifle I built has taken a deer and an antelope,both inside 300 yds. I haven't taken it elk hunting. The rifle I have been using has a 1.5-5 scope on it,a 21 in bbl,and a 308 like trajectory.OK it is a 260 gr .375 bullet,but I always have liked Elmer Keith.

August 30, 2009, 12:08 AM	#67
Sportdog Junior member Join Date: February 28, 2006 Location: Southwestern Michigan Posts: 369	The funny thing about this thread is that it reminds me so much of the late, great, Jack O'Conner and his thoughts about distance shooting and the cartridges to avoid. The thoughts that he put down in his books and Outdoor Life articles were just as many feel here, don't take long shots UNLESS you have plenty of practice and skill behind that trigger finger and try to lessen the distance as much as is reasonalble. One of his big pet peeves he had was with what Joe Hunter was trying to do with his "rainbow trajectory" 30-30 "leg breaker". But he always blamed the Joe Hunter, not the 30-30. The reality is that no matter what rifle/cartridge combination you select, you need to know what YOUR limitations are. I won't be critical of someone taking a shot at "X" distance if he honestly believes that he can make the shot. I will be critical of someone who just blazes away. I will close with a quote from Mr. O'Conner, "The man who "hopes" he can hit almost never does. The man who "thinks" he can hit often makes a good quick kill, but sometimes wounds. The man who "knows" he can hit almost always does a neat job and almost never wounds." Whether you choose to hunt with a 243 or a 375, know your rifle and your limitations.

August 31, 2009, 10:47 AM	#68
Legionnaire Senior Member Join Date: July 25, 2000 Location: Central TX Posts: 1,503	What has happened to us? Too much saturation by marketing-driven media from companies that make their money selling "stuff," especially new guns and new cartridges. Heck, look at all the new stuff at Cabela's every year! One doesn't need the latest "leafy camoed gore-tex scent-blocking 3-D polar fleece" outfit every season. But we've become easily-influenced consumers. Too few of us left that really enjoy the out-of-door experience; "the hunt" has, for many, become an endless search through catalogs, magazines, and stores for the gratification that comes from a new purchase. Sigh. I used to be a hunter safety instructor before my last move (unfortunately, PA wouldn't recognize my NY credentials and I don't have time to get recertified). I miss the interaction with the kids who really wanted to learn about hunting. Some of the best conversations started with the question, "What do I need to hunt (insert favorite game)?" "No, you don't need a six-inch-tanto-blade-combat/survival knife for deer ... a folder with a three-inch blade is plenty for field dressing." You get the point. Can't really blame the companies who keep coming up with more stuff; we're suckers for it, and it keeps them in business. But we're losing the connection to the outdoors and are spending too much time on the "virtual" hunt, which takes us through pages of new "stuff." Too bad that time isn't spent honing field skills, or just getting and staying in shape! __________________ Cogito, ergo armatus sum.

September 2, 2009, 08:14 AM	#75
DiscoRacing Senior Member Join Date: December 19, 2008 Location: milton, wv Posts: 3,640	Ive always had a 30.06.. probably always will.... I wouldnt hesitate to shoot any animal with one of my reloads.... if a 200grain 30 caliber bullet wont kill it..give it up...... but I dont hunt out west... there are NO places here to shoot 300 yds.... let alone 700.... the only 300yard shots made here..... are the ones that you hear of in the local bar after the hunt....knowing full well of the 50%gain in distance after the first beer.