It has been bugging me…

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

In my opinion. I think that long shots are taken by lazy shooters not hunters. Not much different than road hunters. It is not fair chase.

 

 

So I guess if your talent was art work, then by drawing or painting pictures (doing what you're good at and enjoy) that would automatically make you gay?!

 

 

Well.... Well put, Mike.

[Mr. Jonathan]

In my opinion. I think that long shots are taken by lazy shooters not hunters. Not much different than road hunters. It is not fair chase.

 

 

So I guess if your talent was art work, then by drawing or painting pictures (doing what you're good at and enjoy) that would automatically make you gay?!

 

 

Well.... Well put, Mike.

 

 

Wow, that is really funny.

[ThomC]

It is not fair to the animals that you are good at it. Now if you are perfect and don't wound and nobody else does it. You know darn well that other people will try and will wound animals. At the very least you need to not brag about it. I think that the original post was to get opinions and that is mine.

[Guest Lobo]

In my opinion. I think that long shots are taken by lazy shooters not hunters. Not much different than road hunters. It is not fair chase.

 

 

So I guess if your talent was art work, then by drawing or painting pictures (doing what you're good at and enjoy) that would automatically make you gay?!

 

Well now that depends. Would this artist be drawing or painting naked men or men engaged in sexual acts? If so I say yes - gay. And YUK.

[willhunt4coues]

I was finnaly able to get my gun all the way out to 800 yards the other day but in all truths I would get as close as I could to take the shot. Now if I saw the buck at 1000 yards and decided to go after him and the closest I could get was 600 I would shoot because I feel confident that I know I can hit my spot "BUT" if the wind was high or I could not just get still no I would pass and come back the next day to get it done. I am NOT LAZY but I know I could easily hit that deer at 600 and could get closer I would get as close as I could before spooking the game. I am pretty sure that is what everyone would do. You are not going to say "hey that bucks only 300 yards lets BACK TRACK and get to 700 yards to take the shot". That just would not make since. Leave that shooting to the targets. Just my opinon.

[wackycouesaddict]

I was finnaly able to get my gun all the way out to 800 yards the other day but in all truths I would get as close as I could to take the shot. Now if I saw the buck at 1000 yards and decided to go after him and the closest I could get was 600 I would shoot because I feel confident that I know I can hit my spot "BUT" if the wind was high or I could not just get still no I would pass and come back the next day to get it done. I am NOT LAZY but I know I could easily hit that deer at 600 and could get closer I would get as close as I could before spooking the game. I am pretty sure that is what everyone would do. You are not going to say "hey that bucks only 300 yards lets BACK TRACK and get to 700 yards to take the shot". That just would not make since. Leave that shooting to the targets. Just my opinon.

 

some body did so he could get 1000+ yards but im with you leave that to the range

[wackycouesaddict]

Just because we are able and have the equipment doesn't mean we should be taking shots over 300 yards. Leave the LR shooting to the range or go find a prairie dog town. Show your true hunting skills by getting within 300 yards. This also applies to the bowhunter who takes a 70 yard shot.

 

 

i shoot a 5 inch group at 70 yards so if i believe that i can do it i will and i have shot a deer at 75 yards and he only went 60 yards after. Do i personaly like or take shots over 250 yards with my rifle no. but if you know where that bullet will hit exactly at 700, 800, 900, or 1000 yards take it. Personaly i think your more shooting then hunting but in the end no matter how we view it were all in the same boat and no style of hunting is better then the other and we all have to work together to keep the boat flowtin.

[billrquimby]

"So I guess if your talent was art work, then by drawing or painting pictures (doing what you're good at and enjoy) that would automatically make you gay?!"

 

Drawing and painting help me relax, and early in my career I was an art and creative director for advertising and public relations agencies. Three longtime friends are well-known, world-class wildlife artists whose paintings and sculptures regularly sell for $50,000 to $100,000 each and more. Not one is gay, nor am I. Your comment deserves the scorn I have for it.

 

I shot more than a few animals at long ranges when I was younger. I also spent a couple of years competing in silhouette matches fired offhand without slings or rests from 100 to 500 meters at half-size metal cutouts of animals. That's not 1,000 yards or even 800 yards, of course, but it taught me how little it takes for a shot to go astray as distance increases, no matter how much I practiced or what type of equipment I used.

 

When calculating a hunter's skill, his or her ability to get close enough to an animal that it can be killed cleanly must be included and given more points. If that distance is 1,000 yards for you, more power to you. You enjoy long-range shooting, and have practiced enough to be capable of taking such shots. You also have the personal restraint to know when not to shoot. Again, more power to you.

 

However, the difference between putting a bullet into a deer's vitals or shooting off its jaw and forcing it to a miserable death from starvation is only an imperceptible wiggle or a slight shift of wind at such distances. Few hunters are as skilled and as practiced as you, and few have any business shooting at game more than 250 to 300 yards away, if that.

 

Bill Quimby

[Coach]

Man, I stayed away from this thread as long as I could. There is, without a doubt, a certain machismo in a lot of hunters these days that has to do with "long-range-hunting". It wasn't that long ago that a 400 yard shot at a deer with a rifle was considered extreme, or a 70 yard shot with a bow.

 

In the past 2 days, I've had some random encounters with other hunters talking about effective range, etc that got me thinking about this again. Yesterday, I was preparing for a HAM hunt in 27 for Javelina with my grandfather's old Hawkins .50 cal. A buddy and I decided we would try one traditional black powder hunt. For us, that means no conical or sabot bullets, no fiber optics or magnified scopes. Basically, round ball, patch, iron sights and black powder. We relaxed the rules enough to allow for loose pyrodex or other synthetic powder. I was able to establish that within 50 yards I was competent with the cap-and-ball Hawkins, but to follow up with my 1858 Remington Navy pisotl( .44 cal cap and ball) I had to be inside 20 yards.

 

While pounding away at the cinder pit with Grandad's old Hawkins and the repro 1858 rovolver, I met up with a guy waiting for part of the range (the part I was using). The guy was nice enough, and well intentioned, but all he could seem to talk about was long range shooting. How his 356 fps bow made 120 running yard shots OK, etc. He told me how his cousin was having a sweet 22-250 set up to take 900 yard shots at deer. Now, not wanting to come across as some "know it all" I had to ask, just what grain of bullet are you guys planning to shoot out of a 22-250 at 900 yards. He responded something like 45-50 grains. You know where the conversation goes from here - over 3200 fps, only drops x inches, yada yada - so I ask, <b>how much energy do you think that bullet has as 900 yards...</b>You would think I just insulted his mother. Fact remains, a .225 cal bullet at 45 grains might not even penetrate most game animals' skin at 900 yards regardless of the muzzle velocity. Of course, my line of questioning was dismissed by stories of grandpa X, taking a huge something or other at over 1000 yards back when things were simple.

 

Another guy, just today, my brother-in-law, lives somewhere way in the West valley. Good guy, ended up in the white tanks area 140 yards from a nice muley buck during archery season. His buddies gave him a ton of crap for not taking the shot - 140 yards!!! I told him I'd be pissed if he DID take the shot - granted, he's around 7' tall maybe 320 pounds and pretty f'ing lean. I didn't say I'd kick his butt for it - LOL. His buddies told him just hold over by 4 to 6 feet....Go figure.

 

My point is, there is a disturbing trend going on. Right now, technology is byassing skill levels, and people think they can buy "long-range-hunting" tools, but they aren't willing to put in the time and practice to make use of those tools, whether they're archery or rifles or even black powder.

 

You can buy the technology today to shoot 120 yards with a bow, 1000+ yards with a rifle or 500 yards with a muzzle loader. However, that technology still depends on people. People who have an acellerated heart rate when the shot comes up, or who are shooting offhand, or any number of circumstances. Anything can and will go wrong at that point.

 

I have nothing but admiration and respect for the guys who can consistently make tough, long yardage shots. My complaint is that for every hard-core guy out there who puts in the time and effort to extend their hunting range, is 8 guys who think they can buy the same proficiency by slapping down a credit card.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[billrquimby]

Man, I stayed away from this thread as long as I could. There is, without a doubt, a certain machismo in a lot of hunters these days that has to do with "long-range-hunting". It wasn't that long ago that a 400 yard shot at a deer with a rifle was considered extreme, or a 70 yard shot with a bow.

 

In the past 2 days, I've had some random encounters with other hunters talking about effective range, etc that got me thinking about this again. Yesterday, I was preparing for a HAM hunt in 27 for Javelina with my grandfather's old Hawkins .50 cal. A buddy and I decided we would try one traditional black powder hunt. For us, that means no conical or sabot bullets, no fiber optics or magnified scopes. Basically, round ball, patch, iron sights and black powder. We relaxed the rules enough to allow for loose pyrodex or other synthetic powder. I was able to establish that within 50 yards I was competent with the cap-and-ball Hawkins, but to follow up with my 1858 Remington Navy pisotl( .44 cal cap and ball) I had to be inside 20 yards.

 

While pounding away at the cinder pit with Grandad's old Hawkins and the repro 1858 rovolver, I met up with a guy waiting for part of the range (the part I was using). The guy was nice enough, and well intentioned, but all he could seem to talk about was long range shooting. How his 356 fps bow made 120 running yard shots OK, etc. He told me how his cousin was having a sweet 22-250 set up to take 900 yard shots at deer. Now, not wanting to come across as some "know it all" I had to ask, just what grain of bullet are you guys planning to shoot out of a 22-250 at 900 yards. He responded something like 45-50 grains. You know where the conversation goes from here - over 3200 fps, only drops x inches, yada yada - so I ask, <b>how much energy do you think that bullet has as 900 yards...</b>You would think I just insulted his mother. Fact remains, a .225 cal bullet at 45 grains might not even penetrate most game animals' skin at 900 yards regardless of the muzzle velocity. Of course, my line of questioning was dismissed by stories of grandpa X, taking a huge something or other at over 1000 yards back when things were simple.

 

Another guy, just today, my brother-in-law, lives somewhere way in the West valley. Good guy, ended up in the white tanks area 140 yards from a nice muley buck during archery season. His buddies gave him a ton of crap for not taking the shot - 140 yards!!! I told him I'd be pissed if he DID take the shot - granted, he's around 7' tall maybe 320 pounds and pretty f'ing lean. I didn't say I'd kick his butt for it - LOL. His buddies told him just hold over by 4 to 6 feet....Go figure.

 

My point is, there is a disturbing trend going on. Right now, technology is byassing skill levels, and people think they can buy "long-range-hunting" tools, but they aren't willing to put in the time and practice to make use of those tools, whether they're archery or rifles or even black powder.

 

You can buy the technology today to shoot 120 yards with a bow, 1000+ yards with a rifle or 500 yards with a muzzle loader. However, that technology still depends on people. People who have an acellerated heart rate when the shot comes up, or who are shooting offhand, or any number of circumstances. Anything can and will go wrong at that point.

 

I have nothing but admiration and respect for the guys who can consistently make tough, long yardage shots. My complaint is that for every hard-core guy out there who puts in the time and effort to extend their hunting range, is 8 guys who think they can buy the same proficiency by slapping down a credit card.

 

 

 

Well said.

 

Bill Quimby

 

[wackycouesaddict]

Man, I stayed away from this thread as long as I could. There is, without a doubt, a certain machismo in a lot of hunters these days that has to do with "long-range-hunting". It wasn't that long ago that a 400 yard shot at a deer with a rifle was considered extreme, or a 70 yard shot with a bow.

 

In the past 2 days, I've had some random encounters with other hunters talking about effective range, etc that got me thinking about this again. Yesterday, I was preparing for a HAM hunt in 27 for Javelina with my grandfather's old Hawkins .50 cal. A buddy and I decided we would try one traditional black powder hunt. For us, that means no conical or sabot bullets, no fiber optics or magnified scopes. Basically, round ball, patch, iron sights and black powder. We relaxed the rules enough to allow for loose pyrodex or other synthetic powder. I was able to establish that within 50 yards I was competent with the cap-and-ball Hawkins, but to follow up with my 1858 Remington Navy pisotl( .44 cal cap and ball) I had to be inside 20 yards.

 

While pounding away at the cinder pit with Grandad's old Hawkins and the repro 1858 rovolver, I met up with a guy waiting for part of the range (the part I was using). The guy was nice enough, and well intentioned, but all he could seem to talk about was long range shooting. How his 356 fps bow made 120 running yard shots OK, etc. He told me how his cousin was having a sweet 22-250 set up to take 900 yard shots at deer. Now, not wanting to come across as some "know it all" I had to ask, just what grain of bullet are you guys planning to shoot out of a 22-250 at 900 yards. He responded something like 45-50 grains. You know where the conversation goes from here - over 3200 fps, only drops x inches, yada yada - so I ask, <b>how much energy do you think that bullet has as 900 yards...</b>You would think I just insulted his mother. Fact remains, a .225 cal bullet at 45 grains might not even penetrate most game animals' skin at 900 yards regardless of the muzzle velocity. Of course, my line of questioning was dismissed by stories of grandpa X, taking a huge something or other at over 1000 yards back when things were simple.

 

Another guy, just today, my brother-in-law, lives somewhere way in the West valley. Good guy, ended up in the white tanks area 140 yards from a nice muley buck during archery season. His buddies gave him a ton of crap for not taking the shot - 140 yards!!! I told him I'd be pissed if he DID take the shot - granted, he's around 7' tall maybe 320 pounds and pretty f'ing lean. I didn't say I'd kick his butt for it - LOL. His buddies told him just hold over by 4 to 6 feet....Go figure.

 

My point is, there is a disturbing trend going on. Right now, technology is byassing skill levels, and people think they can buy "long-range-hunting" tools, but they aren't willing to put in the time and practice to make use of those tools, whether they're archery or rifles or even black powder.

 

You can buy the technology today to shoot 120 yards with a bow, 1000+ yards with a rifle or 500 yards with a muzzle loader. However, that technology still depends on people. People who have an acellerated heart rate when the shot comes up, or who are shooting offhand, or any number of circumstances. Anything can and will go wrong at that point.

 

I have nothing but admiration and respect for the guys who can consistently make tough, long yardage shots. My complaint is that for every hard-core guy out there who puts in the time and effort to extend their hunting range, is 8 guys who think they can buy the same proficiency by slapping down a credit card.

 

 

+1 i have been wanting two say this (with own refernces) but hate writing. thank you this thread gives me a head ache and itll be the last time i look at it haha

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

Man, I stayed away from this thread as long as I could. There is, without a doubt, a certain machismo in a lot of hunters these days that has to do with "long-range-hunting". It wasn't that long ago that a 400 yard shot at a deer with a rifle was considered extreme, or a 70 yard shot with a bow.

 

In the past 2 days, I've had some random encounters with other hunters talking about effective range, etc that got me thinking about this again. Yesterday, I was preparing for a HAM hunt in 27 for Javelina with my grandfather's old Hawkins .50 cal. A buddy and I decided we would try one traditional black powder hunt. For us, that means no conical or sabot bullets, no fiber optics or magnified scopes. Basically, round ball, patch, iron sights and black powder. We relaxed the rules enough to allow for loose pyrodex or other synthetic powder. I was able to establish that within 50 yards I was competent with the cap-and-ball Hawkins, but to follow up with my 1858 Remington Navy pisotl( .44 cal cap and ball) I had to be inside 20 yards.

 

While pounding away at the cinder pit with Grandad's old Hawkins and the repro 1858 rovolver, I met up with a guy waiting for part of the range (the part I was using). The guy was nice enough, and well intentioned, but all he could seem to talk about was long range shooting. How his 356 fps bow made 120 running yard shots OK, etc. He told me how his cousin was having a sweet 22-250 set up to take 900 yard shots at deer. Now, not wanting to come across as some "know it all" I had to ask, just what grain of bullet are you guys planning to shoot out of a 22-250 at 900 yards. He responded something like 45-50 grains. You know where the conversation goes from here - over 3200 fps, only drops x inches, yada yada - so I ask, <b>how much energy do you think that bullet has as 900 yards...</b>You would think I just insulted his mother. Fact remains, a .225 cal bullet at 45 grains might not even penetrate most game animals' skin at 900 yards regardless of the muzzle velocity. Of course, my line of questioning was dismissed by stories of grandpa X, taking a huge something or other at over 1000 yards back when things were simple.

 

Another guy, just today, my brother-in-law, lives somewhere way in the West valley. Good guy, ended up in the white tanks area 140 yards from a nice muley buck during archery season. His buddies gave him a ton of crap for not taking the shot - 140 yards!!! I told him I'd be pissed if he DID take the shot - granted, he's around 7' tall maybe 320 pounds and pretty f'ing lean. I didn't say I'd kick his butt for it - LOL. His buddies told him just hold over by 4 to 6 feet....Go figure.

 

My point is, there is a disturbing trend going on. Right now, technology is byassing skill levels, and people think they can buy "long-range-hunting" tools, but they aren't willing to put in the time and practice to make use of those tools, whether they're archery or rifles or even black powder.

 

You can buy the technology today to shoot 120 yards with a bow, 1000+ yards with a rifle or 500 yards with a muzzle loader. However, that technology still depends on people. People who have an acellerated heart rate when the shot comes up, or who are shooting offhand, or any number of circumstances. Anything can and will go wrong at that point.

 

I have nothing but admiration and respect for the guys who can consistently make tough, long yardage shots. My complaint is that for every hard-core guy out there who puts in the time and effort to extend their hunting range, is 8 guys who think they can buy the same proficiency by slapping down a credit card.

 

 

+1... this was my point in the begining... and still is... your stories are a perfect addition to this thread. Thank J!

[308Nut]

"So I guess if your talent was art work, then by drawing or painting pictures (doing what you're good at and enjoy) that would automatically make you gay?!"

 

Drawing and painting help me relax, and early in my career I was an art and creative director for advertising and public relations agencies. Three longtime friends are well-known, world-class wildlife artists whose paintings and sculptures regularly sell for $50,000 to $100,000 each and more. Not one is gay, nor am I. Your comment deserves the scorn I have for it.

 

Bill Quimby

 

Sir, that was my point. Just because some one is good at art and enjoys it does NOT automatically make them gay. I have been known to draw wildlife art as well. I am not gay either. That was my point.

 

It has been said that if you shoot long range then you are lazy. Just because I like to shoot long range and am good at it does not make me lazy either.

 

Sorry if you took my coment the wrong way.

 

M

[bobbyo]

I'm not gay either, but if I crawl into your sleeping bag in the middle of the night with my long-range rifle would you tell anyone?

[Ernesto C]

All depends who's in the bottom!

 

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAA LOL