So, Who Regularly Hunts Past 600 Yards...?!?

[Garandimal]

Frank, who has never hunted before and has no knowledge about hunting decides to take it up. Because he is old enough to be beyond the cutoff date for requiring a hunter safety course he is not required to take one and so he doesn't. He buys a hunting license at a local sporting goods store on the first day of the season. At the same store he buys a rifle that is legal for the game he wishes to pursue, as well as a scope for it.

Frank has a friend with the proper tools and asks him to mount the scope. Neither knows how to zero the scope nor do they even know that it is required. Frank goes to Wal-Mart and buys the cheapest ammunition he can find in the caliber of his rifle--it turns out to be FMJ. He gets into his truck and drives to the nearest piece of public land and waits for a game animal to appear. When it does, he aims and pulls the trigger.

All perfectly legal. I am NOT all for it.

There is more to ethical hunting than simply not breaking the law. 'Tis to be hoped that we are openly critical of practices that need to be criticized while avoiding being judgemental without point.

You should write children's books.



Responsible hunting - is different than negligent (or ignorant) hunting.

...and an accurate < 3 MOA shot will cleanly take both deer and hogs out to 300 yards.

So we are back to marksmanship.




GR

 

[JohnKSa]

Responsible hunting - is different than negligent (or ignorant) hunting.

Correct.

Just to be clear, that's not the point I was addressing. The point I was addressing was the implication that hunters should support other hunters, no matter what they do as long as they don't break the law.

The provided example was to demonstrate that a person can hunt without breaking any laws and yet still do things that responsible hunters should not support.

My rebuttal is that in this case we AREN'T talking about Frank, we're talking about guys with tools, knowledge, and experienced to do the job properly.

I'm not claiming we're talking about Frank. Frank is an example provided to rebut the idea that we should support what other hunters do as long as they aren't breaking the law.

In reality there are definitely times when we need to be critical of what other hunters do, even when they aren't actually breaking the law.

 

[Garandimal]

Just to be clear, that's not the point I was addressing. The point I was addressing was the implication that hunters should support other hunters, no matter what they do as long as they don't break the law...

Your point may be a little obtuse.

However, I try not to be critical of others just because I don't agree with their methods. If they are utilizing a legal method to pursue game then I'm all for it.

Not the poster, but in the context of this thread take that to mean a responsible hunter within the law.

How, or more accurately at what range, a responsible hunter chooses to pursue game is the issue and topic.




GR

 

[MCgunner]

.308 and .30-06 have plenty of juice and consistency to make it to 600. A magnum is just asking for extra abuse, IMO.

7mm-08 would be even lighter recoiling and make it out there just fine. So would .243 Winchester. Lots of folks around here talk positively about the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser cartridge. I've got a friend with a 6.5 Swede-chambered in a CZ bolt action. He loves that rifle.

.223 will make it out there, even, if your goal is only to punch paper (and not critters). Be a lot cheaper than anything else I listed above.

I'd say get your favorite RemChester that fits well at the local sporting goods store in .308, and buy a couple of milsurp battle packs. Once you get a good feel for the rifle, either handload or get some Black Hills match ammo.

Well, if you're afraid of recoil, take up dominoes. But, yeah, .308 has plenty for me, at least on deer. It might fall a little short past 300 yards for elk hunters, but I'm not an elk hunter. What I like about my .308 vs my 7 mag is its light weight and compact size. Recoil doesn't bother me. I shoot 10 gauge on geese, after all.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I have often wondered how well folks would score in long range rifle matches if the targets moved up to a few meters back and forth and up and down and turned partially sideways at random intervals.

 

[Garandimal]

I have often wondered how well folks would score in long range rifle matches if the targets moved up to a few meters back and forth and up and down and turned partially sideways at random intervals.

A 300 yard shot at an average of 2700 fps gives you a flight time of 1/3 of a second. As stated, that is also a < 3MOA shot for deer/pig.




GR

 

[JohnKSa]

Your point may be a little obtuse.

The point is abundantly clear as it relates to the post I responded to.

How, or more accurately at what range, a responsible hunter chooses to pursue game is the issue and topic.

Your modification of the post I responded to is obviously quite different than what the post actually said. It should be clear that responses to a particular statement won't necessarily be applicable to any modified version of the original statement.

That said, here's my response to your modified version of the statement--it will be different from my response to the original statement because your modified version is different from the original. If we can accurately state that a hunter is responsible and also assume that the hunter is knowledgeable enough to achieve their goal of being responsible then that strongly implies that they are ethical. In that case, criticizing their legal methods would likely fall under the category of being judgemental without point.

Clearly saying we should support responsible, knowledgeable hunters even if their methods are different from ours is not at all the same as implying that we should support any hunter and their methods as long as they're not breaking the law.

 

[FL-NC]

I have often wondered how well folks would score in long range rifle matches if the targets moved up to a few meters back and forth and up and down and turned partially sideways at random intervals.

You just described a sniper match, and portions of a sniper qualification training table. Snaps and movers. Love my mil dot and Horus reticles!

 

[wankerjake]

I support responsible, knowledgeable hunters even if their methods are different than mine.

 

[wankerjake]

I support hunters than sit in stands

I support hunters that shoot rifles
I support hunters that shoot bows
I support hunters that shoot handguns

I support hunters that run dogs

I support hunters that sit in heated hunt houses

I support hunters that shoot varmints
I support hunters that shoot at meat
I support hunters that shoot for horns

I support hunters that can shoot long distance

I support hunters that use thermal gear to legally hunt at night

I support hunters that creep the low hills with their grandpas iron sighted 30-30

I support guys that legally sit bait

I support the average Joe that maybe isn’t the best hunter or the best shot but likes to get out and be a part of it all and maybe shoots a deer sometimes and maybe doesn’t but wants to try

I support the old guy that doesn’t give a rip if he kills something or not but wants to sit the field until dark

I support any hunter that stays within legal means to earnestly try to fill a tag

I RESPECT any hunter that stays within his/her skillset to always make the best shot possible, and does his/her best to not have anything get away wounded when things go wrong, because they will, and have the ability and judgement to make the good decisions most of the time and follow up when they don’t.There is honor in that regardless of the method of hunt

I don’t support looking down my nose at everyone who does it differently or even less effectively than me. At some point it’s more their business than it is mine

 

[Double Naught Spy]

A 300 yard shot at an average of 2700 fps gives you a flight time of 1/3 of a second. As stated, that is also a < 3MOA shot for deer/pig.


GR

My ballistic calculator says that 2700 fps with a BC of .50 will give you a flight time of .37 seconds, plus you have to add the .2 seconds it takes for the signal from the brain to reach the trigger find and cause the discharge, so you are looking at closer to 0.57 seconds of time from which you can't recall a shot.

A half a second is enough time for an animal to walk out from in front of a kill shot into a nasty wound shot. Extended out to 600 yards, and you are looking at over 1 second of lapsed time that the animal can move on you.

You just described a sniper match, and portions of a sniper qualification training table. Snaps and movers. Love my mil dot and Horus reticles!

You still can't recall or change the course of a round your brain has already sent the signal to fire. So if the target starts to move AFTER that, you miss or hit poorly. Same for if you are tracking a moving target and fire with lead and then the target stops and your bullet sails by in front of the target.

 

[Nature Boy]

One of the stands I hunt is in a winter wheat field with open line of sight out to 1,200 yards. I can shoot accurately enough out to 600 yards to be confident in making a lethal strike.

However, I don't do it because I like have a better look at the deer before making the decision, so that means 200 yards and in is my limit.

 

[Varminterror]

I’ve not read every post in the thread - although knowing this kind of thread and seeing it cross 6 pages already, I can be sure there is substantial silliness and level-headedness both present prior to what will now be my comments to the topic.

I do regularly hunt at long range, and have for many years. My first harvest past 600yrds would have been nearly 25yrs ago, and many others since.

Some realities I have witnessed:

• To be successful when hunting, a few things have to happen: the game has to reach an area where the hunter has line of sight to see the animal and sufficiently clear bullet travel to reach the animal. But lines of sight and flight are worthless if they don’t intersect an area where the animal might travel. This magical overlap of visible/shootable area where an animal will actually travel regularly is what I call the “kill zone.” No matter what weapon I carry, my stands and stalks are designed around these kill zones.

• Hunting past 600yrds is no different in most parts of the country than hunting under 600yrds with a rifle. My “kill zone” area really isn’t much different - the world really isn’t so flat and featureless as some might make it seem, and animals utilize terrain and vegetation as concealment as they travel. When a hunter designs a stand looking for an 800yrd shot, most likely half of the field in front of them will be occluded, whether by slight terrain features or by trees/brush/tall grass. Animals don’t walk out into the middle of nothingness without reason very often. If you’re hunting a quarter section beanfield or only 40 acres (400yrds vs. 800yrds), the realistic kill zone doesn’t really change much. Animals stay alive by avoiding unnecessary exposure - walking out into the middle of a mile wide field doesn’t make much sense.

• Seeing game is not the same as having a shot on game. Long range rifle hunting isn’t so different than bow hunting. I have had lots of deer walk in front of my bow, and lots walk in front of my rifle which simply did not present me with a viable shot. There are many reasons the shot may not be available - potential movement of the animal is one reason. Angle of impact is another. While both are long shots, my bow has about the same ToF at 60yrds as my deer rifles at 600. This pontification calling the flight time too long because reaction time and flight time total somewhere around half to three quarters of a second are just silly - if you call .2sec reaction time, an arrow at 30yrds is more than half a second from stimulus to impact, yet nobody calls bowhunting at 30yrds an irresponsible endeavor (Note: this is considering my Bowtech Destroyer which runs 323fps with a 427grn arrow of approximate BC of .06, a very powerful bow - lesser bows are even longer in flight!). The shot must be taken when the hunter knows it will reach the animal, but where it should, and be capable of doing the needed job.

• Lots of folks who have never done many things have opinions about many things, both in support or against. Very few of these opinions are as meaningful as actual experiences by those who HAVE done these things.

 

[FL-NC]

I’ve not read every post in the thread - although knowing this kind of thread and seeing it cross 6 pages already, I can be sure there is substantial silliness and level-headedness both present prior to what will now be my comments to the topic.

I do regularly hunt at long range, and have for many years. My first harvest past 600yrds would have been nearly 25yrs ago, and many others since.

Some realities I have witnessed:

• To be successful when hunting, a few things have to happen: the game has to reach an area where the hunter has line of sight to see the animal and sufficiently clear bullet travel to reach the animal. But lines of sight and flight are worthless if they don’t intersect an area where the animal might travel. This magical overlap of visible/shootable area where an animal will actually travel regularly is what I call the “kill zone.” No matter what weapon I carry, my stands and stalks are designed around these kill zones.

• Hunting past 600yrds is no different in most parts of the country than hunting under 600yrds with a rifle. My “kill zone” area really isn’t much different - the world really isn’t so flat and featureless as some might make it seem, and animals utilize terrain and vegetation as concealment as they travel. When a hunter designs a stand looking for an 800yrd shot, most likely half of the field in front of them will be occluded, whether by slight terrain features or by trees/brush/tall grass. Animals don’t walk out into the middle of nothingness without reason very often. If you’re hunting a quarter section beanfield or only 40 acres (400yrds vs. 800yrds), the realistic kill zone doesn’t really change much. Animals stay alive by avoiding unnecessary exposure - walking out into the middle of a mile wide field doesn’t make much sense.

• Seeing game is not the same as having a shot on game. Long range rifle hunting isn’t so different than bow hunting. I have had lots of deer walk in front of my bow, and lots walk in front of my rifle which simply did not present me with a viable shot. There are many reasons the shot may not be available - potential movement of the animal is one reason. Angle of impact is another. While both are long shots, my bow has about the same ToF at 60yrds as my deer rifles at 600. This pontification calling the flight time too long because reaction time and flight time total somewhere around half to three quarters of a second are just silly - if you call .2sec reaction time, an arrow at 30yrds is more than half a second from stimulus to impact, yet nobody calls bowhunting at 30yrds an irresponsible endeavor (Note: this is considering my Bowtech Destroyer which runs 323fps with a 427grn arrow of approximate BC of .06, a very powerful bow - lesser bows are even longer in flight!). The shot must be taken when the hunter knows it will reach the animal, but where it should, and be capable of doing the needed job.

• Lots of folks who have never done many things have opinions about many things, both in support or against. Very few of these opinions are as meaningful as actual experiences by those who HAVE done these things.

Well said, VT.

 

[Garandimal]

My ballistic calculator says that 2700 fps with a BC of .50 will give you a flight time of .37 seconds, plus you have to add the .2 seconds it takes for the signal from the brain to reach the trigger find and cause the discharge, so you are looking at closer to 0.57 seconds of time from which you can't recall a shot.

A half a second is enough time for an animal to walk out from in front of a kill shot into a nasty wound shot. Extended out to 600 yards, and you are looking at over 1 second of lapsed time that the animal can move on you....

So... you want a static, "Perfect" world.



Watch - deer and pigs move through the woods. They go from, "looking to grazing to looking to moving to looking to..."

They are different when grazing/moving then when they are looking.

Rhythms - when grazing/moving are 3-10 seconds. Plenty of time to make a shot when they are relaxed and preoccupied... if you are watching and tracking them.

And they don't go from grazing/moving to bolting - unless they are spooked, and a spooked animal will screw up a 25 yard shot.


So you hunt them... and not just shoot at them.




GR

 

[JohnKSa]

This pontification calling the flight time too long because reaction time and flight time total somewhere around half to three quarters of a second are just silly - if you call .2sec reaction time, an arrow at 30yrds is more than half a second from stimulus to impact, yet nobody calls bowhunting at 30yrds an irresponsible endeavor...

I was talking about stimulus to impact delays close to a second and with a bow like yours, that would happen at distances well past 30 yards--more like 70 or 80.

I was reading this article about bowhunting distances and found the comment following the article interesting in light of the discussion on this thread. Although I'm not sure I fully agree, there is at least one person who says that depending on circumstances, 30 yards with a bow might be an irresponsible shot.

https://www.gohunt.com/read/how-far-is-too-far-archery

"If the deer is alert or has spotted the hunter then 30 yards may be an unethical shot distance as the deer is likely to start moving when the hunter shoots; thus increasing the likelihood of a wounded animal."​

However, although it might be overly conservative, it's worth noting that statement is consistent with Garandimal's comment that:

"... a spooked animal will screw up a 25 yard shot."​

Understanding the game being hunted is definitely part of the equation, as is assessing the specific circumstances of each shot, not just measuring the range.

 

[LoonWulf]

"If the deer is alert or has spotted the hunter then 30 yards may be an unethical shot distance as the deer is likely to start moving when the hunter shoots; thus increasing the likelihood of a wounded animal."
However, although it might be overly conservative, it's worth noting that statement is consistent with Garandimal's comment that:

"... a spooked animal will screw up a 25 yard shot."
Understanding the game being hunted is definitely part of the equation, as is assessing the specific circumstances of each shot, not just measuring the range.

I agree with that statement. Most any hunting situation boils down to the hunters understanding of the animal, conditions, and there own ability.
An archer trying to get a shot on an alert animal, or animal that knows your there, is IMO a more complex situation than a well trained rifleman taking a 5-600yd shot on a completely sedate animal.

Im VERY confident of being able to make a clean shot at 30yds, but im not horribly sneaky, a lot of the time animals at that range know im there. Ive still taken a few with my traditional designed bows, which launch at 190fps max, every single one knew i was there, they just decided i wasnt an issue.
Ive had to pass on way more that allowed me to get that close, but remained on alert the whole time.
With my compound im MUCH more comfortable with taking a 50-60yd shot, as its much louder, and usually at the longer distances animals arnt always aware of me.

 

[JeffG]

I have shot targets at 600 yards. If my sight adjustment, wind conditions, or trigger press were off, there was a piece of paper at stake.
I welcome all hunting, and I will not tell another person how to hunt.
It's just not for me.

 

[Nature Boy]

This is a picture from last year out of one of the blinds I hunt that overlooks a winter wheat field



Many opportunities to take long shots here, and I’ve been tempted a few times, but I prefer to wait for the right one. To know its the right one means I also have to get a good look at it, which means it’s got to get closer.

I’m not the most patient person so the waiting part isn’t easy. There have been some early reports of a few monsters roaming the property this year so it will be even more important to sit tight and resist the urge to take a low percentage long shot and spoil the opportunity at a better buck

From a different blind last year, I watched this 8 pt (top pic) for about 40 min. He was nice but young. Just as the sun started going down I spot the 10 pt in the bottom pic



Glad I waited

 

[d2wing]

I am capable of hitting deer at 400 plus yards but have found that one shot kills are not likely at that range due to not always able to be precise enough and also bullet performance becomes unpredictable. I consider 400 yards my ethical maximum limit under ideal conditions and 300 a better limit and more comfortable at under 220 yards.

 

[caribou]

The only animals Ill put a bullet into with out thought to meat destruction is Fur, and at 600 yards, its Wolves, with iron sights from a much advantageous higher ground. Put a bullet in them and go to them.

Wolves are big enough to see at 600 yards with open sights.
I shoot from a place Eskimo have been driving Caribou up into a ''trap' of snares that were set apon the top of the hills and ridge between, for thousands of years until a hundred or so years ago.
The traps are no longer set , but the Caribou still go about their ways and means.

Some things are a given; Caribou winter in the area, Wolves hunt and follow Caribou.
When spooked, Caribou always run uphill, well, ...90% of the time.

When shooting down the steep slopes at walking or still Wolves, I do wait untill they are as close as I can get them, but the advantage is that setting my rear sight to its lowest, minimal setting, (150M on an M-39) and theres no ballistic curve in a steep down hill shot. Shooting them at 100 yards or 600 has the same setting used the entire time.
Shooting at a fleeing Wolf is a straight shot, as they tend to run straight, and therefore leadable if necessary, but never by much.
As well, its open tundra where I do this, and I then drive down and pick them up or track them down.

I hunt Caribou from this place , too, and have a good look before I take a shot at them, and get as close as I can, usually 100 yards or so, if they are not already spooked.

 

[d2wing]

Good to hear from you Caribou.

 

[H&Hhunter]

I meant 8 gauge. Yeah, that's funny.

There is in fact such a thing as a 14 gauge shotgun. The only time I’ve ever seen one was in a Greener Martini that a game scout was carrying in Tanzania. Here is an example.

https://www.antiqueswords.com/produ...II-14-Gauge-Egyptian-Police-Riot-Shotgun.html

 

[Double Naught Spy]

So... you want a static, "Perfect" world.



Watch - deer and pigs move through the woods. They go from, "looking to grazing to looking to moving to looking to..."

They are different when grazing/moving then when they are looking.

Rhythms - when grazing/moving are 3-10 seconds. Plenty of time to make a shot when they are relaxed and preoccupied... if you are watching and tracking them.

And they don't go from grazing/moving to bolting - unless they are spooked, and a spooked animal will screw up a 25 yard shot.


So you hunt them... and not just shoot at them.




GR

A static, perfect world would be static and not very perfect.

Knowing the timing math for ballistics is important in the sense we are talking about hunting at distance. It is far more predictable than the irregular rhythms that you mention for hogs and deer, at least for hogs. In other words, it is the known part of the equation that far too many hunters don't actually know.

Sometimes deer and hogs are in a rhythm and sometimes not. The problem I see for hunters when anticipating a rhythm (which you have now used as a redefinition of hunting, LOL) is the assumption that it will be at least X amount of time. I am a big fan of shooting hogs during their security checks, but not all hogs do security checks. For those that I like to shoot during security checks, I like to watch and wait. I don't like to shoot 2.5-9.5 seconds into, but as soon as they stop and freeze, thereby having the best chance of the bullet arriving while the hog is still frozen in its security check.

A spooked animal can ruin a 25 yard shot, no doubt, but a casually moving animal can ruin a 600 yard shot and it can go from stationary to casually moving without being spooked.

 

[Garandimal]

A static, perfect world would be static and not very perfect.

Knowing the timing math for ballistics is important in the sense we are talking about hunting at distance. It is far more predictable than the irregular rhythms that you mention for hogs and deer, at least for hogs. In other words, it is the known part of the equation that far too many hunters don't actually know.

Sometimes deer and hogs are in a rhythm and sometimes not. The problem I see for hunters when anticipating a rhythm (which you have now used as a redefinition of hunting, LOL) is the assumption that it will be at least X amount of time. I am a big fan of shooting hogs during their security checks, but not all hogs do security checks. For those that I like to shoot during security checks, I like to watch and wait. I don't like to shoot 2.5-9.5 seconds into, but as soon as they stop and freeze, thereby having the best chance of the bullet arriving while the hog is still frozen in its security check.

A spooked animal can ruin a 25 yard shot, no doubt, but a casually moving animal can ruin a 600 yard shot and it can go from stationary to casually moving without being spooked.

Except for your obvious bone-pickin'... we are of the same point.

It is the dwell time - you shoot into during the hunt.

If they are going to be "doing Security checks," or feeding, and you anticipate this by their rhythm of movement, you set up for the shot and wait for the dwell to start and then shoot.

Shooting at random - and complaining that the game "moved," is just an excuse for poor hunting skills.




GR