Hunter kills moose with 1100 yard shot

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder what he was using.
Click to expand...

Either a lack of ethics or a faulty rangefinder.

That's quite a zoom on that camera; great resolution for 1100yds...i call shenanigans on that range estimate.
 
I agree. Terrible hunting ethics. More likely to wound the creature than get a clean kill. Then what? Is there a fast way to get over to that side of the lake? Might take hours to pack up the camera, gear, and hike or even 4wheel over there to find the trail...

Abysmal - good shot or not - should never have attempted it.
 
Ugh.. quick to judge, quick to judge. Tisk tisk.

Ethical hunting = being sure/confident in your shot. This encompasses all of, knowing what lies behind your target, being sure of your target's ID, and the effective range/accuracy/humane kill portion as well.

If he was confident in that shot, he was hunting ethically. Maybe YOU should never attempt such a thing. Maybe nobody you know should attempt such a thing. But if a guy knows his limitations, his rifle's limitations, his ammo's limitations, his rifle's abilities, his own shooting abilities, and his ammo's abilities, then there's no reason not to perform according to those limitations and abilities.

Some "hunters" shouldn't take 100 yard shots. Some rifles shouldn't be used for 400 yard shots. Some ammo isn't adequate for 600 yard shots.

But not all.
 
Either way it was a great shot. If he knew he could hit it accurately at that range, it's not that unfair. The moose was literally completely motionless broadside. It was a perfect target. He's clearly a hell of a shot. I suspect he'd already sighted in across the lake before the season. As for worrying about it being a clean kill, just LOOK at it. He could have been a fair bit less precise and it still would have only run a short distance and died. Instead it just dropped. He was clearly confident in his shot.
 
It's called using and animal as a target and putting ego ahead of ethics.... Shameful.

At least he got to it before wolves or bears got to it. How long do you suppose it took him to get to the animal? It's a good thing it was dead right there or it would have been gone forever. Just because you can do something does not mean you should.
 
No wind. Water was dead still. Perfect shooting conditions.

The 1100 number could be internet BS, but it could as well be dead on. I'd like to find accurate info on this video. The guys at Sniper's Hide aren't questioning much about it, just giving kudos.

Just because you can't do something, doesn't mean nobody should.
 
I wonder if he set up on that lake because it was the only place he could find that kind of range?

Good for him.... super macho.

Just because you can't do something, doesn't mean nobody should.
Click to expand...

Do you have any experience at these ranges?
 
I just re-watched that; since my above post. This time with volume. I though i had missed something.

Observe the 3-4 frames between shot and impact; depending on most any digital camera, that is a fraction of a second. (they're generally around 8 to 16 frames a second) I don't know his load, but that is one fast bullet to travel 1100 yds that quick.

Second, take a look at the pines silhouetted above the moose...most every pine stand i look at at that range doesn't have that definition...maybe that's just my poor vision.

Third, i think the moose was hit pretty far back in the spine....not the vital i'd be aiming for.

And lastly, if i made that shot, I would be whooping like drunk indian about the yardage; and just might mention it to the camera...on account of documenting it for posterity, anyways. That guy doesn't.

My conclusion: It's not a hunting ethics issue or an absurdly good marksman issue. It's an Whoever posted that video pulled a long-range yardage number out of their posterior issue. That wouldn't be the first time on the web...
 
There is no shot that is 100%. At 1100 yards or at 30 yards. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. I was bow hunting once and had the drop on a spike buck. I drew back just as he passed my 15 yard marker. When I let the arrow fly he dropped so low it caught the top of his back. He took 2 steps and fell. (I guess his momentum allowed him. It was more like he fell 2 steps.) The arrow paralyzed the deer. There is no worse feeling than having an animal like that right in front of you. Was that unethical? I had him dead with my sight perfectly behind his shoulder. It just goes to show that anything can happen.

I feel like this. If they want to take a shot at 1100 yards then that's their decision. You drive a SUV and he drives a Prius. Are you unethical? I hunt mostly with a 12ga loaded with 00buck. You guys might think I'm unethical for that. I don't care. I've killed alot of deer with one shot drop using my buck shot. I've killed alot of deer running. Deer that you wouldn't even find in your scope much less get a good shot on.

Ethics is a matter of opinion. I respect everyone's opinion and hope mine is too. Thanks fellas.

Btw. If it is a real shot and real video then Atta Boy. I couldn't do it. Yet. :D
 
It may have been a great shot, but not ethical. The chances of wounding the moose and it escaping are too great.
I'm also not sure what he thinks he did except make a long range shot. It certainly is not hunting.

Jerry
 
I wouldn't try a shot like that, nor would I "gear up" to be able to make a shot like that.

However: If the shooter had a range finder, and was using one of the more potent cartridges, the remaining item is knowing the trajectory--which is why folks in the rifle forum regularly post about the available online data which is available.

A practiced shooter who has followed "all of the above" then has only one real factor: Wind.

On a calm day I gotta say it's not an ethics problem.

As far as arguing whether or not it meets one's definition of "hunting"? Why worry about it? I'll do my notion of hunting my way; others can do their notions of hunting their way. That way we're all of us satisfied and can sit around the campfire and swap lies. :)

There's a lot of stuff which I don't consider as being any of my business...
 
If its only the Antlers he wanted, and could judge them legal at that range, well he got what he wanted.


I like to look an animal over as close as I can to judge their health,because I eat them. If I have to take a long shot, its because I am confident in my skill and the animals are most likely fleeing stage left, prehaps having paused for a look back or relaxing enough to walk a bit, then I judge again, and take the shot.

I'd like to see 'em do it twice.
 
The shot could be at the alleged ranged. Knowing the load would help determine that.
The gunshot didn't overload the mic, so you can hear it go off, and see when the moose first reacts. That gives you a time estimate based on the average FPS the shot was traveling over the course of the alleged distance (easy to determine with a ballistic calculator.)

So you could double check the range and it should be within a couple hundred yards, limited only by the fact that you cannot tell precisely when the moose was hit, only pretty close based on the reaction.

I think I measured around 1.7 seconds between audible shot and moose reaction.

1100 yards would be 3300 feet. That means the round would have had to have been traveling an average of 1,941 FPS. While a 1.8 second time just in case the initial discharge was muffled would put it around 1,833 average fps.
Obviously more initially and less at the end.




So after doing a search:
Found same video on you tube, with the poster claiming this is them:
http://youtu.be/cWAXQUCv8qo

They say it is "300 win. mag....McMillan Bros. MCRT"

You can search for the likely round, get the general details, and plug it into a ballistic calculator and see how long the round should have taken to reach 1,100 yards.
I would say that round lines up close with my earlier estimated average FPS.

Those rounds start over 3,000 FPS and it took about 1.7 seconds to reach the target.


Does that leave much room for error? He certainly would not have been catching up to it from that range if it had ran off wounded, and by the time he started tracking it, with his camera, little girl, rifle etc put away...
Probably not an ethical shot.


I found it interesting the video had the tag "This video has been age-restricted based on our Community Guidelines". It would appear hunting videos are not suitable for children anymore.
 
Last edited:
I must have watched a different video. The time latency was closer to 0.5 seconds on the one I watched.
 
Who knows if the shot was legit. Maybe it's camera play, maybe it isn't. Either way, the result was a dead moose.

Just because you can't do something, doesn't mean nobody should.
Click to expand...

Uh -huh. Of course that offends a lot of people but it's the truth. The thing about long range shooting (and hunting) is that most people don't get it. Most people who don't shoot at extended ranges have no idea what is involved. They don't know how much time and money people put into their rigs. So when they hear of people making a 500-600+ yard shot they call BS and bawl about how "unethical" it is. There are a bunch of GOOD shooters out there. People like that, who put the trigger time in, and know their limitations undoubtedly wound far less animals than the general population because they know their limitations! Knowing your personal limitations and sticking with them are what ethics are about. There's no way to prove it, but I'd bet money that guys who practice this stuff wound far less game at 600+ yards than the average Joe does at 300 yards.

As far as arguing whether or not it meets one's definition of "hunting"? Why worry about it? I'll do my notion of hunting my way; others can do their notions of hunting their way. That way we're all of us satisfied and can sit around the campfire and swap lies.

There's a lot of stuff which I don't consider as being any of my business...
Click to expand...
Exactly. You buy your tags and do it your way. I'll buy mine and do it my way.
 
16shells said:
I must have watched a different video. The time latency was closer to 0.5 seconds on the one I watched.
Click to expand...

No if you look the round is fired while the liveleak clock is at :41 and the moose drops on its rear while it is at :43. Didn't take the video, copy it and go into an editor frame by frame to get a precise time, but a quick check gave me about 1.7 seconds between shot and reaction.
 
Wankerjake: I agree with you. We all hunt differently. Some folks get their panties bunched up because others hunt over bait but they put decoys out during spring gobbler and duck season. Or they say its unethical to use a tree stand but they use attractants and cover scents while stalking. I guess the completely ethical way to hunt is to arm the game or hunt with spears and knives. If your stalking you shouldn't use binos to glass ridges. Its just bogus. We all hunt differently. Folks in my neck of the woods run dogs for whitetail. Lots of people think that's unethical. Its a way of life in my part of the country. Different strokes for different folks.
 
At that range there is many gambles taken. A slight gust of wind during flight and the round is several inches in another location. While at close range it deviates slightly but is still in the kill zone.
If the wind is different at different points due to topography, then a wind measurement at the shooter may mean little as it crosses a canyon or other wind funnel.

When the projectile takes nearly 2 seconds to reach the target a lot can happen even with the perfect shot. It can be fired when the animal is doing one thing, and reach the target when it has moved and is doing something else.

A lot of gambles are taken, which if they don't work out result in completely different shot placement, even by someone that did everything right.


When that far away a second shot is also nearly impossible because of how long it takes to reach the target. If the animal begins moving at any speed after the first shot, unless it travels in one direction at a constant rate of speed, calculating where it will be 2 seconds later in full sprint towards cover is unreliable.

Lots of gambles to make the impressive shot. The videos they won't be posting for all to see and marvel at will be the ones with wounded animals running off.
 
On a calm day I gotta say it's not an ethics problem.
Click to expand...


I agree.
What range is ethical and what range is not, depends on the man behind the rifle. If I were to try a shot at half that distance, it would be unethical. I'm comfortable at no farther than 300 yds. That doesn't mean everyone has to abide by my guidelines though. They may be that much better than me.
 
SmokeJensen said:
There is no shot that is 100%. At 1100 yards or at 30 yards. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. I was bow hunting once and had the drop on a spike buck. I drew back just as he passed my 15 yard marker. When I let the arrow fly he dropped so low it caught the top of his back. He took 2 steps and fell. (I guess his momentum allowed him. It was more like he fell 2 steps.) The arrow paralyzed the deer. There is no worse feeling than having an animal like that right in front of you. Was that unethical? I had him dead with my sight perfectly behind his shoulder. It just goes to show that anything can happen.
Click to expand...

Same can be said while hunting with a bow. This happened to me. We all know that when you release an arrow the deer drops due to instinct. I accounted for a little drop and still made a bad shot. No shot is 100%. There have been alot of deer crippled because of bow hunters who make bad shots at just a couple 10 yards. And alot from gun guys who don't know their limits. It happens alot. This guy knew his stuff and had a rifle made for it.
 
One thing that's really noteworthy was this guy wasn't hooping and hollering to celebrate the kill. He was very calm, very collected, and not at all surprised. This was NOT some guy taking an ill-advised, unethical shot. This was a professional shooter who knew his stuff and who made a precision one-shot kill that most people can't achieve on a moose at half that range.
 
my rant

I am not impressed in this ridiculous range shots on game. It's irresponible and is not hunting. Its target shooting at animals. It only serves to encourage the average joes that they too can do it. In my neck of the woods, the discussed distances are now 500+ yards. Everyone wants to be a sniper now. All you need is a bipod and a high power scope, right? There are very few places to even practice that distance around here and I'll wager that none of them belong to the only club with a range that long. A long shot that has't been practiced and perfected is just a stunt and a stunt on live targets is not a responsble shot. There are a handful of shooters with the skill level to make these shots but even they should be able to get closer than that. Too much can go wrong at distance when you're on the range, is that not considered when hunting?
 
First of all, in response to someone taking a 1000+ yard shot while hunting: :barf:! Second, what is all this stuff about people "whooping and hollering" after the animal goes down?! Do people really do that? I have been hunting for a LONG time and honestly, I have never seen anyone do that. If I did see someone do that, I would immediately think they were an idiot.

"He didn't whoop and holler after the animal went down, therefore he must have been confident in his shot. Because he didn't freak out and he was confident, it means his attempt at an 1100 yard shot is not unethical. The man is a freakin' cold-blooded killer." SERIOUSLY??!!!

I have never seen anyone behave like this after they have killed an animal. Yes, they are excited and smiley, but they don't freak out. haha! What is this nonsense? 1100 yards is too far while hunting. I don't care who you are and what kind of gun you have. I don't care that you were some sniper. I have enough experience to tell you that 1100 yards is too far for hunting...but go ahead and tell me that it's ok because the guy didn't yell around after the shot. Oh and that it's ok because at a certain frame rate the trees don't move, and therefore there was no wind. And that he took into account the ripples on the water. And that. And that. And this.

A real hunter would be worried about how he is going to get that moose packed out of there. Does he have enough day light left to get the moose all out of there before dark? A REAL hunter would have gotten closer. I guarantee the next time he tries that, he is going to wound a moose. He isn't going to be able to find it, (for the same reasons you don't take game at 1100 yards) and he's going to loose it. But you know what? It won't matter to that guy, because he isn't a hunter...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
  • Poll
Moose Kill Question From An Ex Hunter....
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Nevertoomanyguns
N
T
  • Locked
300 win mag effective range on moose
2 3
Replies
68
Views
10K
Art Eatman
A
W
  • Locked
Video: Worst hunter ever
Replies
23
Views
1K
MikePGS
M
R
  • Locked
Alaska Moose Kill Criminal Charges
Replies
6
Views
918
Frostbite
F
H&Hhunter
  • Locked
Epic Shiras Moose hunt 2015
2 3
Replies
64
Views
4K
Dr.Rob
Dr.Rob
Back
Top