Reading all these posts I figure I might as well add my 2 cents. First of all growing up in Iowa where we were limited to shotguns that at the time had a 100 yd range. If we were allowed to use rifles my walls would be full a giant bucks, but wait a minute, there wouldn't be any giant bucks because everyone would have rifles and the big old bucks sneaking away at 400 yds would be too easy of a target. I know this argument will never end and to each his own, but for me hunting is the challenge of out-witting an animal on his terms and getting as close as I possibly can. If the animal blows out of there before I get within 400 yds rifle or 50 yds bow then the animal wins and I will learn from my mistakes and move on.
Making 1000yrd shot is not what I call hunting. Your thoughts
- Thread starter Elkcrazedfrk
- Start date
bern0134
Member
Shooting a 1000 yards is an awesome feat. I am no where near the capability of shooting that far much less do I feel comfortable at shooting at anything beyond 250 yards. However I would like to be comfortable at shooting distances out to 600 yards but paper and steel only. That way I could be comfortable at shooting an animal to out to 400-450 yards. But keep in mind those shooters/hunters (what ever you want to call them) on BOTW get paid and have the equipment to shoot at those distances. Its their job to be able to shoot those distances. How many of us can afford the setups they own really? We all have our own ethics when it comes to hunting which is the reason for the mixed opinions. It would be interesting to see everyone's setups that have made a comment on this thread. By the way my largest elk and mule deer were shot within 125 yards. Well within my comfort zone. Sorry just wanted to put in my 2 cents (which is why I joined this forum). Good Luck on your draws this year
dito
Active Member
Elkoholic307
Banned
The Swaro will probably give you the most consistent readings at 1k+ but the Zeiss is definitely quicker and gives solid readings under 1k and also has a scan mode. The Leica model I was using was the 1200; I imagine they made improvements to the 1600. The 1200 was still good, just falls short to the other two.
The Swaro is probably better but the Zeiss is more compact and extremely clear. And, like I said, gives reading very, very fast and also has the scan mode where you can hold down the button and it will continually give you several readings. That way, you can double check, triple check, etc. and not get a 'false' reading that will throw your shot's placement off.
The Swaro is probably better but the Zeiss is more compact and extremely clear. And, like I said, gives reading very, very fast and also has the scan mode where you can hold down the button and it will continually give you several readings. That way, you can double check, triple check, etc. and not get a 'false' reading that will throw your shot's placement off.
I guess I really don't have a problem with how anyone hunts unless they are road hunting, on 4 wheelers chasing the game down to get a shot at it, or the people who blaze away at anything that moves and have no clue what ethics are. Most people who shoot long range have the equipment to do it. I understand that there are probably a lot of people who try those long shots and have no clue what they are doing. I respect the people who do know what they are doing. I don't have the equipment to shoot that far, 500 is my limit but have only shot that far once. I figured a rough estimate that most of my shots have been under 300 with probably 70% under 250. Of my biggest trophies, 8 were all under 300 except 1.
What about running shots? Where do you draw the line there?
What about running shots? Where do you draw the line there?
- Feb 21, 2011
- 232
- 0
Wow..I didn't expect this big of a response. After reading through all the posts I was initally frustrated in knowing how little chance an animal has when they are gett'n whacked from so far away. I guess what I really need to remember is that some are satisfied with that and there is really nothing I can do about it. What I can do is hold my head high knowing that I put the odds in the favor of every animal I hunt. The trophies I have harvested were earned by my ability to successfully hunt them and thats something to be cherished.
You are right Elkcrazedfrk, there is nothing you can do about it. I think maybe everyone might think about this a little more when they are making that shot at long range knowing there are a lot of people who do really have and issue with it. But it's not going to stop them.
Elkoholic307
Banned
elktracker
Member
Elkoholic307, how can you say Mike has a valid point but then disagree? To me you are saying you agree with Mike's comment but you just don't care because you would rather take the long shot and risk wounding an elk and not recovering it. (Not trying to put words in your mouth, that's just what I got out of your comment) Why not just get closer and take a shot that is more likely to put the elk down and where you could actually make a follow up shot if the animal bolts?
I am pretty sure any animal that gets hit with a bullet, whether or not it knows where the shot came from is going to take off and have its adrenalin up. I am sure they stand there looking around if you miss completely, but a wounded animal is not going to think about which way to run, they are just going to take off. If you are already a kilometer away, finding that blood trail could be pretty tough by the time you get over there.
By you saying that your experience has shown you these examples many times you are saying that you have not put an animal down on more than one occasion, and then you say that it's funny to watch them not know what to do?
I wasn't completely against long range shooting until I read this thread.
Elkoholic307
Banned
Yep, I said he has a valid point; meaning I understand where he's coming from but disagree with his point. If you haven't noticed, I've given up on this thread. It's like beating a dead horse. This thread is probably the most dramatic one on the forum and I'll take the blame for that. I knew full well what Eastmans' view on long range was when I signed up for this forum and decided not to bring the topic up or post yardages with my pictures. But, then I seen this thread and couldn't help myself. Now, I've decided it's a waste of my time defending it here because nobody else seems to have experience. I'd have to re-read the thread but I think Guy was the only one with a legitimate point why he doesn't take long shots. Most everyone else's posts against it were getting repetitive and based on emotion, not facts.
Before now, I had never heard of this 'invisible ethical line' that stops at 400. That just seems ridiculous to me. Yesterday I went out and shot a 6.5" 3 shot group at 1210 yards. A month ago my dad shot a 1.5" inch group at 757 yards. I think it's unethical for people to be satisfied with a 2" group at 100 yards and take that rifle hunting. How many of them are going to jump a buck and try 'leading' it because it's running off. Or, how many are going to try holding over the back because the buck is 'around' 300 yards?
But, once again, I am wasting my time. It has come down to you don't care what I have to say, and I don't care what you have to say. All I know is my personal limitations. I don't need a lecture on ethics. I know what my equipment is capable of and I know what I am capable of.
Before now, I had never heard of this 'invisible ethical line' that stops at 400. That just seems ridiculous to me. Yesterday I went out and shot a 6.5" 3 shot group at 1210 yards. A month ago my dad shot a 1.5" inch group at 757 yards. I think it's unethical for people to be satisfied with a 2" group at 100 yards and take that rifle hunting. How many of them are going to jump a buck and try 'leading' it because it's running off. Or, how many are going to try holding over the back because the buck is 'around' 300 yards?
But, once again, I am wasting my time. It has come down to you don't care what I have to say, and I don't care what you have to say. All I know is my personal limitations. I don't need a lecture on ethics. I know what my equipment is capable of and I know what I am capable of.
- Feb 21, 2011
- 232
- 0
Elkoholic has a good point. We are now beating a dead horse. So how about we all agree to disagree. I'll close by saying I'm right and Elkoholic is wrong..lol...I'm kidding. Spring is finally in the air, I'm headed out antler hunting.
T43
Active Member
xtreme
Very Active Member
I can't make the 1000yd shot, but I can make what I call a long shot. I am no longer able to walk very far so I practice through 600 yds and try to be 400 or closer for mule deer.
The older I get the farther I shoot.
The older I get the farther I shoot.
- Feb 21, 2011
- 232
- 0
MI-address-ROCKYMTN-heart
New Member
I'm new to this website and the serious idea of western hunting. I am planning to hunting elk and mullies this fall in Colorado. I live in southwest MI and rifles are illegal where I live and hunt. For us, a LONG muzzleloader shot is 200 yards, shotgun is 125 yards and archery is 40 yards. That is pretty much the norm for us. We have the same debates that I'm reading about in this thread. My only real concern is that I or someone I know is not put in harms way while in the woods. I choose to believe that every hunter has the same high standards as I do while chasing game. That they will know the limits of their shooting abilities, physical conditioning, equipment, terrain, weather and game before they set up for a shot. Let alone before they squeeze the trigger. In doing so it helps me to keep my debatable opinions to myself. The results will speak for themselves and on those facts I will clearly point out if a person had a lapse in judgment if they would dare to tell the truth. If they desire to be ethical, then they wont need my observations. And if they're not, then my opinion wont matter.
I marvel that people can shoot accurately at 1000 yards. I am expecting to be competent up to 300 yards this fall. I do have one request. If you find yourself setting up for a long-range shot and you happen to notice another hunter stalking closer to "our" prey, who appears out of place. Don't shoot. It may be me and I probably wont know you're there. And it would SUCK to see my prize drop in front of me. Happy hunting.
I marvel that people can shoot accurately at 1000 yards. I am expecting to be competent up to 300 yards this fall. I do have one request. If you find yourself setting up for a long-range shot and you happen to notice another hunter stalking closer to "our" prey, who appears out of place. Don't shoot. It may be me and I probably wont know you're there. And it would SUCK to see my prize drop in front of me. Happy hunting.
mthuntress
Active Member
I shoot out to 800 yards with my 270 win. and the only animal that I'll shoot that far is a dog got to keep my friends beef cows alive lost to my calfs in the last 10 years.The only deer that I've shoot over 250 yards was at 550 and ONLY took the shoot was the other hunter wounded it and didn't follow through.talk about making me mad.
nebowhunter
Member
I have my own opinion on the matter, but that is not what is important. It is not for me to tell someone else what they can or cannot do as long as it is legal. We as outdoorsman shouldn't be arguing amongst ourselves. This just gives those who want to do away with our sport more ammo when they are talking to that 80% that doesn't have an opinion either way.
CrimsonArrow
Very Active Member
This has been a great thread, with valid points on both sides. I think a hunter must decide for themselves how far to shoot, and the decision to shoot long range must be made with confidence that is based on experience. That being said, as a strict bowhunter, I personally need to feel a connection to any animal I hunt. I could never be satisfied with killing an animal from afar.