long-range hunting

as per mr. jack o'connor, here are some "rules" for long-range hunting. i believe that they can be agreed on by most of us here, even the long-range hunters!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• a long-range shot should never be taken if there is a reasonable chance of getting closer.
• a long-range shot should never be taken if the rifleman feels doubtful of his ability to make a good, solid, well-placed hit.
• a long-range shot should never be taken if the hunter cannot get into a solid position - prone with a sling, from a rest, etc.
• a long-range shot should never be taken at any dangerous animal - a brown, grizzly or polar bear, a lion, a tiger, a leopard, a cape buffalo.
• a long-range shot should never be taken at an unwounded, running animal.
• a long-range shot should never be taken if the animal shot at can get out of sight so quickly that it would be difficult to ascertain the effect of the shot.
• a long-range shot should not be taken if the range is so great that a hold on top of the shoulders will not drop a bullet into the chest cavity.

these rules may seem ultra conservative to many, and i must admit that there have been times when i did not follow them myself. however, the more i hunt and the more i see others shoot the more convinced i am that they are wise and sensible rules and if they were universally adopted the number of game animals that get away wounded to suffer and die would be greatly reduced.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the question then remains, what defines a long-range shot on a game animal?

i believe that each hunter has to make an honest evaluation of his own abilities (not the rifle's) and let his moral and ethical judgement guide his choice when the game is sighted.

well, let's just say it seems a good topic of discussion lately.....

besides, i find them to be pretty good guidelines~~i just finished o'connor's book on hunting in north america and have to say i find myself quite influencced by his thinking.

Never cared for O'Connor much either. The guideline is a good one as far as I am concerned.
Around here, depending on where you hunt, shots can be from 50 yards in the Texas Hill country cedar brakes
to 500 yards in the brush country down south. VERY few have any business attempting a shot at game at that distance.
I personally know of ONE 500 yard shot that was succesful in the years I have hunted. I've seen a
lot more "500" yard shots that magicly shrank to 200 when measured.
My own guideline depends on the rifle I am carrying. With a flat shooting scoped sporter, I'm good for about 200 yards.
With military rifles, muzzleloaders, and iron sighted levers, 100 to 125 yards. More under ideal conditions, but not a whole lot more.
I shot about 1000 rounds a year from rifles, about the same from handguns. I practice offhand as well as from a rest, and practice
field conditions as well.
My pet peave around here is not "long range hunters". It is the "not challanging enough hunters". They are
not content to whack a doe at 125 yards. They make a game of head and neck shots. I've seen way too many
snouts and jawbones shot off by idiots that laugh about it afterwards.

I wasn't going to but I can't help myself.I grew up on the plains country of western NSW.Most shots we got were 400 to 500 yards.So I never felt that 500 yards was a long shot.I guess if I had been raised in hills and timber my attitude would be different.

I have shot silouhette since it started down under and I do bloody well.That is to 500 yards freehand no sling.I also had to meet government criteria for my pro hunter license each year which required me to head shoot all animals to 300 yards.The pass percentage is 100 no misses allowed regardless of conditions on your accreditation day.I never failed to pass.Helicopter shooting allowed a little more latitude pass of 95%.So I feel qualified to take my shots at most ranges.My long is now(as of last weekend)981 yards.The rifle was a 30 lb 300 rum with 36 inch tube.The game feral pigs.One shot one kill repeated 9 times from 600yards to 981 yards.The day was perfect, still and low mirage.I never doubted I could make any of the shots I took.Is this ego.Damn right it is.I shoot because I like to shoot and I shoot accurately.I shoot nearly every day.It is my main interest after my family.The range is irrelevant,it is the result I seek.One clean shot placed were I want it.Clean kill.

Do I think everyone should shoot at these ranges.Hell no.The bulk of hunters/shooters who shoot 20 to 50 rounds a year should stick to 50 yards or less.I have seen more wounded game at 200 yards and under then I have seen at 500 plus.

If a hunter/shooter practices , has the equipment and the moral conviction to shoot only in the right conditions then he is no different to anyone else.My expierence is that the majority of long range men/women have high ethical standards.Maybe better then mr o'conner and his pinning and texas heart shots.

I have taught my son every animal game or pest deserves to be killed cleanly.I do not think the range is as important as the ability of the shooter.

Sorry this was long winded but I get sick of people bagging all long range shooters as unethical and that they are not hunters but snipers.Have a good one macca.

Will sumbuddy tell me, jest which "hunt'n skills" are needed, or used,...... when shoot'n a big game critter at 1/2 mile+????

"Hunt'n",.... to me is, use'n skills thet'll allow me to git within 100 yards of tha critter with my muzzleloader'n roundball, or within 30 yards with my longbow.

Very best regards!!
rollingb/Rondo

klallen,.... Ya might be right 'bout good "marksmanship" be'n a "hunt'n skill",.... but,....as yardage increases, tha "NEED" fer actual "hunt'n skills", wood appear to decrease,.... because of such factors as noticable, "smell", "noise", "movement", and etc., this is tha "make-up" of a hunted critter's "ALARM SYSTEM".

By use'n "marksmanship" only (as in tha case of "long-range kills") to harvest a big-game animal,....which speaks highly of what kind'a "shooter" a fella is,....can this "shooter", also "hunt" successfuly on a more even "play'n field" with a MUCH LESSER weapon??

Are sum hunters extend'n ther shoot'n range on game, because they consider it as more of a "challenge",....or,....because tha new modern HP's allows them to do so??

I quit use'n modern rifles over 20 years ago,.... I do however, hunt dur'n "regular rifle season" with my traditional muzzleloaders, and I NEVER feel as if I'm "undergunned",....call it confidence in my "hunt'n skills", or sumpthin like thet.

Very best regards!!
YMHS
rollingb/Rondo

HA! HA! HA!....OK!!..but I'll haf'ta borrow a .22 (smallest I got is .45).

How 'bout .75 cal.????

Evening ROLLINGB  >> 

"as yardage increases, tha "NEED" fer actual "hunt'n skills", wood appear to decrease"  I disagree.  We've already established that marksmanship is most certainly an actual "hunt'n skill".  With the increase in distance of shot, an individuals marksmanship skills (and all that goes with that) MUST increase proportionally.

"By use'n "marksmanship" only (as in tha case of "long-range kills") to harvest a big-game animal,....which speaks highly of what kind'a "shooter" a fella is,....can this "shooter", also "hunt" successfuly on a more even "play'n field" with a MUCH LESSER weapon??"  Interesting question.  I suppose an equally valid question would be, could that master stalker, using his muzzleloader or .30-30 at close range be able to belly up to a benchrest quality LR hunting rifle and instantly have the capabilities and knowledge to successfully implement an anchoring hit on an animal at, say, 850 yds.?  Reading the wind?  Understanding the ballistic properties of the weapon he's about to pull the trigger on?  I feel real comfortable saying that the close range hunter behind the LR rifle would be more a "fish out of H20" type thing then would be the LR hunter heading into the deep with a .30-30.

This is one of the sillier ideas of LR hunting.  That they can't and don't also hunt at close ranges.  Folks can't seriously think this.  I do love airing things out with my longer range cartridges at distances that I'm comfortable with when the need arrises, but I also enjoy hunting with my handguns and lever action rifles (things that would never be mistaken for LR equipment).  I hunt the river bottoms.  I hunt the mountains.  I hunt the plains.  I get to taste it all.  When you suggest that the LR hunter is one dimensional in what he can do, I believe you're way off base.  LR hunting is a baby step kind of thing.  Everyone that I know who takes it seriously, to a man, has started at conventional ranges with conventional cartridges.  When confidence is built and success is achieved, then and only then, you move outward.  Not until.  Point being, just cause a preference of shot might over time morph into those of a longish nature, the ability to stalk and hunt with the smaller stuff is something that isn't forgotten or never experienced again.

And this notion about "leveling the playing field"?  I've never understood this one.  One of the many complaints against LR hunting is the inability for the shooter to predict what the animal will do at extended ranges, compromising the ability to make a quality shot.  Then I hear these same folks pushing for the "stalk closer" method, where you're playing right into the animals strengths.  An animal outside of 300 yds. is a very predictable creature.  Unaware; unstartled; predictable.  One under 100 who can hear, smell and sense ya long before you get to him, is far from predictable.  Seems wierd to think that just cause a person sneaks within 200 yds. with a 30-30, he's playing on the same field as the animal.  If this be the true desire, I suggest you folks leave all your firearms at home and enter the field with just your wits.  Now this, would be a level playing field.  At least from the animals perspective.

Hunting ain't fair.  I've never thought it was.  The tools we have at our disposal make it so.  Weather I'm a master stalker working for the close shot with a muzzleloader or you're a master marksman set up for that 600 yd. shot with a .338/.416, we have the edge in this game.  Period.  In the end, the idea of "leveling the playing field" is a useless notion that close range proponents love to use to discredit a way of hunting that they don't particularly enjoy or participate in.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.  Least that's my opinion.  Chat with ya later.  >>  klallen

i was trying very hard to stay out of this one, but no longer can...

i will shoot/hunt animals at whatever range i damn well please. i put forth the practice time. i have drop charts put together, the turrets on my scopes marked, and a rangefinder. i study the wind. i burn a lot of powder. if i am comfortable w/ a given shot, i'm taking it. i also know when to not shoot.

as far as 'can i get closer'... i'm a bowhunter. i poked a doe that was 2 feet away. another time, i saw a buck. i stalked to 12 yards on him before deciding against the shot. so do i have the skills to get close? i think so.

i spend a lot of money on a given rifle to make sure it shoots well. in fact, i have a rifle headed off to the smith on monday. it is a brand new, unfired remington 700. it will cost me $940 plus shipping to get the rifle back (and that is for the rifle only...the leupold, sling, mounts, etc i bought were seperate). but, it will shoot.

if someone doesn't have the skill, equipment and hasn't put forth the practice time, they have no business shooting at extended ranges. but for those of us who have the equipment, have the skill, and have practiced, there is nothing wrong w/ taking long shots. just because you can't does not mean i can't.

Yeah ROLLINGB, this topic is a hot-bed of opinion.  Certainly isn't a lack of activity when it pops up on these chat sites.

"At what distance does this "SPORT",....stop be'n "sporty"??"  No answer to the question from me.  Yet to hit the point where it doesn't feel like a sport.  Although I ain't hunting game at 1000 either.  Either way, I like to hold to the opinion that if a fella is enjoying what he's doing and experiences a high level of success while he's doing it, then this defines the "sport" of hunting.  Later.  >>  klallen