Red Rock Precision lack of ethics

[laxwyo]

Best post yet

 

[packmule]

Policing how far people can shoot opens up a big can of worms, bc then people have a legit right to judge peoples' ethics for what they choose to shoot.

 

[ScottR]

Hey all, this is a debate we need to have. Keep it civil and constructive, no smart remarks. What will divide us is talking down to others rather than having constructive talks about the issue at hand which is the ethics of long range hunting.

 

[mntnguide]

I am usually against LR shots at big game. I don't find it necessarily "hunting" anymore when you are taking an animal at extreme distance. A few years ago though, a good friend of mine built up a gun mainly for wolf hunting. A .260 rem and by the time the loads were made up and plenty of time spent into it, it was no problem hitting targets over 1000 yards and was a blast to do. I still do not agree you should be taking 1000 yard shots at an animal though based on respect for the game. I have seen animals hit at long distances and no matter what caliber is being shot, at distances that great the ft. lbs and energy is lost to the extent it is hard to recognize a hit, let alone guarantee you hit the right spot. I just believe as hunters, it is not an ethical thing to do.

 

[woodtick]

Hey all, this is a debate we need to have. Keep it civil and constructive, no smart remarks. What will divide us is talking down to others rather than having constructive talks about the issue at hand which is the ethics of long range hunting.

My thoughts exactly!!

 

[Hilltop]

I think there needs to be more studies on the actual equipment being used by todays hunters to show the average guy what his equipment is truly capable of. I limit myself to 500 yards if the situation is perfect. I do that because I have researched extensively on my chosen caliber and bullet combination. With my abilities, I believe this is the furthest range that my equipment will ethically harvest big game. I doubt that many novice hunters even understand the true capability of their caliber and bullet combination or what the ethical limits are.

For instance I have seen a 7mag used for some of these super long shots on TV. I'm no expert with this caliber but I know it is only producing about 750 pounds of energy at 1000 yards and it has a bullet drop of around 20 feet. This bullet is dropping almost 1" per yard at this range. If the shooter gets his yardage wrong by just a few yards it could easily lead to a wounded animal. How can anyone justify this as ethical is beyond me.

I think the hunting industry needs to put information like this out there for the average guy to see. When I was younger, I had no idea what my hunting setup was capable of and based all my knowledge off of what I heard from others. I'm guessing many people out there watch these shows and then regard their setup as capable of duplicating the results. At the very least I think a disclaimer should be put on these shows- a do not try this at home kind of thing to at least get people thinking.

 

[ScottR]

People need to shoot tracers at least once at long range to really see how this works. You wouldn't believe how much a .50BMG drops at long range, and even though it is based on math and ballistics there are constant variables that change.

 

[Againstthewind]

I think that thread by 406Precision was really good and pretty much summed it up. I agree that there should be more studies on the capabilities of the equipment, but the user needs to have some responsibility to understand the limits of their equipment and skills and prepare like Hilltop described earlier. I have heard a few stories this year of people taking these pot shots at animals at 12 or 13 hundred yards like the first post's story. None of the stories ended up with an animal on the ground, and they were all told by people angry about it. Maybe there could be something like the outdoors pledge or whatever that was going around for people to sign to establish an accepted standard of conduct for at least this community of hunters. Maybe that could spread to other hunters. Sorry I couldn't remember the name of that pledge deal that was on here, its been a long week. Maybe that is part of the problem with pledges, I need a reminder sometimes. I think the B and C statement link could be a good starting point, especially the part about risky and excessively long shots. They are trying to be pretty inclusive of a broad range of people, so I don't think something like that would be too offensive.

 

[laxwyo]

I think comparing it to night shooting is appropriate. We have the means and the equipment to make shots in the dark, but we've chosen not to hunt that way. I don't see much of a difference

 

[quicknick]

This thread has been beat to death in the past and tempers have flared. There is a native american saying, "no man can tell another what to do."

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

People need to shoot tracers at least once at long range to really see how this works. You wouldn't believe how much a .50BMG drops at long range, and even though it is based on math and ballistics there are constant variables that change.

I used to shoot BP single shot buffalo rifle 1000 yard matches. Mine was a 45-70, lots of other calibers too. If I remember correctly, the bullet drop at 1M yards was something like 60 feet.

 

[Sfjeeper]

IMO, the most important thing is to truly be comfortable with your shot what ever the distance. That goes for all types of shooting, rifle or bow. The field is not the place to test our limits. That should be done at the range. There are too many other variables involved while shooting at game. Our accuracy shouldn't be one of them. The animals we hunt deserve our respect. We should always try for a clean and ethical kill.
The sport is called hunting, not shooting. We owe it to the animals to attempt to close the distance as much as possible before taking the shot. Trying to read the terrain, and figuring out what the animal is doing is the most challenging part of the hunt. Once we've exhausted all options, and determine that there is no other way to close the gap, and it is a distance we've practiced over and over again, than take the shot. It doesn't really matter if it's 1000 yard with a rife or 80 yard bow. If you truly feel like it's a shot you can make, than take it.
Just don't take a long shot outside your comfort zone just so you can brag about it later. Chances are, you'll miss or wound more animals than you'll hit.

 

[Hilltop]

IMO, the most important thing is to truly be comfortable with your shot what ever the distance. That goes for all types of shooting, rifle or bow. The field is not the place to test our limits. That should be done at the range. There are too many other variables involved while shooting at game. Our accuracy shouldn't be one of them. The animals we hunt deserve our respect. We should always try for a clean and ethical kill.
The sport is called hunting, not shooting. We owe it to the animals to attempt to close the distance as much as possible before taking the shot. Trying to read the terrain, and figuring out what the animal is doing is the most challenging part of the hunt. Once we've exhausted all options, and determine that there is no other way to close the gap, and it is a distance we've practiced over and over again, than take the shot. It doesn't really matter if it's 1000 yard with a rife or 80 yard bow. If you truly feel like it's a shot you can make, than take it.
Just don't take a long shot outside your comfort zone just so you can brag about it later. Chances are, you'll miss or wound more animals than you'll hit.

I understand and agree with part of your post. However accuracy is only part of the consideration. Very few rifles have enough energy at 1000 yards to produce humane kills every time. Most of todays bullet manufacturers make bullets to expand at realistic velocities. Almost all hunting rifles fall below these velocities well before 1000 yards. My point is that even if the shooter is super talented and makes a perfect shot, the bullet will likely not expand properly upon impact. This will create a small wound channel causing a slow death- not humane in my book.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

I understand and agree with part of your post. However accuracy is only part of the consideration. Very few rifles have enough energy at 1000 yards to produce humane kills every time. Most of todays bullet manufacturers make bullets to expand at realistic velocities. Almost all hunting rifles fall below these velocities well before 1000 yards. My point is that even if the shooter is super talented and makes a perfect shot, the bullet will likely not expand properly upon impact. This will create a small wound channel causing a slow death- not humane in my book.

I'm not for this LRH when we start talking distances that an animal has no chance to use it's senses to escape a predator (man), but I have to say that you need to read up on ballistics and what is being used for these long shots because many rifles and the bullets being made nowadays are more than capable of killing big game at extreme distances. I'm on the LRH website and it's not because I condone that long distance stuff, but because I want to keep up on what is going on in that field. It's amazing the energy a lot of this ammo has at long distance even though it is dropping like a stone when it gets way out there. The secret is knowing the drop at the various ranges and knowing the exact distance the target is that you're shooting at. I have a young (28) acquaintance that shoots a 300 Win Mag and handloads Berger bullets. He has a custom gun with a Nightforce scope on it and can hit a target the size of a basketball most of the time when there is no wind at 900 yards. The 6x6 elk he shot this year was at 590 yards slightly quartering away and because of a canyon between him and the bull he couldn't get any closer. It was calm and he said he set up with his bipod and his pack under his stock/shoulder such that he was 100% sure of that shot and drilled that bull like it was only 200 yards away. I helped him butcher and pack that bull out the next day and the bullet had entered the near side in front of the last couple ribs and a big part of it was lodged in the off shoulder. It's not my idea of how hunting is done, but I couldn't argue one bit as to his equipment being able to do the job with all the practice he puts in. He's single and probably shoots more in a month or two than most do in a lifetime to do that type of shot. It's the "wannabes" that can't shoot or hunt worth a lick to begin with that I'm disgusted with that go out and buy that type of equipment and don't even shoot a box of ammo, then think they can go out and do what he did at 1000 yards when they can't hit the side of a barn at 200 yards! The shows on TV make it look so easy that I can see why there are people buying the equipment and IMHO it's symptomatic of our culture nowadays where many want something right away without having to do anything to earn it.

 

[Hilltop]

Fair enough- but the hunter you mention is not the average guy. I didn't say none- but said very few. I didn't say all, but said most. I do admit I could stand more research on these rifles and bullet combinations before forming a full opinion. However, I see average guys trying to duplicate the results with standard off the shelf rifles and off the shelf ammunition. I really think most just don't understand their setups limitations.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Fair enough- but the hunter you mention is not the average guy. I didn't say none- but said very few. I didn't say all, but said most. I do admit I could stand more research on these rifles and bullet combinations before forming a full opinion. However, I see average guys trying to duplicate the results with standard off the shelf rifles and off the shelf ammunition. I really think most just don't understand their setups limitations.

I couldn't agree with you more on this post! It's both guys that buy the fancy stuff they see on TV and don't have the time to practice to do it, as well as ones like you mentioned that just fire away at long distance with equipment that probably isn't even set up for a 300 yard shot!

 

[tim]

the tactical revolution has many drawbacks, wether it is the sheriffs office running around in armored vehichles or guys thinking they are snipers.

 

[libidilatimmy]

The ire that this type of hunting spawns from other hunters is largely due to the light it is painted in on the LRH style TV programs. Many of these shows are set up more like a infomercial or paid-programming style in an effort to make it look like anyone can do what they're doing if you buy the rifle setup that they're using. Being how there are many thousand impressionable people watching these programs, old and young alike, I have serious disdain for the TV station showing a guided elk hunt where the hunter sets up on top of a run down trailer house and shoots a raghorn bull at 900+ yds when they could have easily closed the gap. Yes, this was actually aired on national TV. Of course, it's hard to justify telling someone to pay several thousand dollars for a setup that kills from 350 yds when you can go down to Wal-Mart and pick up a combo deal that could get the job done so thus the excessively long shot and the true intent of the TV show being to sell a product rather than be informative about the style of hunting they're engaging in.

 

[packmule]

I understand and agree with part of your post. However accuracy is only part of the consideration. Very few rifles have enough energy at 1000 yards to produce humane kills every time. Most of todays bullet manufacturers make bullets to expand at realistic velocities. Almost all hunting rifles fall below these velocities well before 1000 yards. My point is that even if the shooter is super talented and makes a perfect shot, the bullet will likely not expand properly upon impact. This will create a small wound channel causing a slow death- not humane in my book.

A lot of that will be bullet design. Here are some numbers from a few of my rifles calculated for 9000'. Minimum fps for accubonds is published for 1800fps. Top one is 270 short mag and it runs out of dial well before 1000, but still above fps minimum. Other 2 are of the 300cal variety and that middle one is too hot still for VLDs to not splatter hitting bone or hard tissue.

1000yd 1966V 1201E (186.9) 17.8 MOA

1000yd 2161V 1741E (152.9) 14.6 MOA

1000yd 1896V 1437E (202.2) 19.3 MOA

 

[micropterus79]

The ire that this type of hunting spawns from other hunters is largely due to the light it is painted in on the LRH style TV programs. Many of these shows are set up more like a infomercial or paid-programming style in an effort to make it look like anyone can do what they're doing if you buy the rifle setup that they're using. Being how there are many thousand impressionable people watching these programs, old and young alike, I have serious disdain for the TV station showing a guided elk hunt where the hunter sets up on top of a run down trailer house and shoots a raghorn bull at 900+ yds when they could have easily closed the gap. Yes, this was actually aired on national TV. Of course, it's hard to justify telling someone to pay several thousand dollars for a setup that kills from 350 yds when you can go down to Wal-Mart and pick up a combo deal that could get the job done so thus the excessively long shot and the true intent of the TV show being to sell a product rather than be informative about the style of hunting they're engaging in.

Can't entirely blame the hype but a good point from TIMMY above. It is the idea that "Hey, all you need is this rifle, this scope, and this type of camo and you can shoot accurately at 1000 yds too!" While MOST people know that is absurd, there are enought that don't and that is how advertising works.

I think, based on what I have read in the posts, that is what people are upset about; not long range hunting in its self but the hype around the notion that it is easy with modern equipment. I am upset at the few here and there that watch a LRH show and think "man, I can do that, all I need is that rifle, etc..." and totally forget about all the hours and money spent at a range to really EARN the skillset to be a competent shooter beyond 300yds. Maybe there should be just a little more responsibility on the shoulders of these companies to at least make a disclaimer that says something like "yeah, we want to sell you our product but don't think for a second that our gear is going to replace practice and skill." Sound obvious to most folks but lets face it, most laws, regulations, and warning lables are to manage the lowest common denominator anyway.

I have an old Savage 30-06 with a 3X9 Leopold scope that, in ther right hands with correct ammo would kill out to 500+ yds. However, my hands are NOT the right hands to be doing that. Someday maybe but I am really addicted to archery these days!! Talk about a rough time of establishing max effective range!!