Super Guns

[Millwright]

I see a lot of articles on such long range hunting cartridges as the RUM, WSUM, etc not to mention such things as "Sendero Rifles", "Beanfield Rifles", "Pronghorn Busters", etc. Add to that range-finding/compensating super scopes. Then we have nimrods using rests and seats in elevated blinds placed long before the season opens.

One can make the argument these rifles/cartridges are "rich boys' toys' for those too lazy or inept to hunt, but want the 'thrill of the kill' . At the distances cited deer haven't a clue anyone's about.

Making a killing shot on an animal as large as a deer from a rest in a stand across open country at 300-400 yds isn't much of a challenge. At least to those used to shooting 'minute of wood/rock chuck/ Pdog ' at the same or greater distances, IMO. I suspect if we're to preserve the tradition of hunting we're going to have to address the ethics of this sort of 'hunting'. >MW

 

[trueblue1776]

I agree with you, but everybody has their own style.

 

[rcmodel]

I agree, but some places, thats the only way to "hunt", I guess.

That "Texas Whitetail Killers" TV show gets my dander up every time I see it.

I mean, $10-grand mobile tree stands with windows and A/C, mounted on top of new 4x4 pick-up trucks!
Come on!


rcmodel

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I really can't figure out how all that stuff beats a dual-X set of crosshairs and a lot of practice. If you can't estimate range that way accurately enough to get a hit, you probably can't shoot accurately enough, either.

 

[Millwright]

But is this sort of 'hunting' really "hunting" ? That is, does it embody the attributes and virtues we claim for hunting ?

'Back when' I first got involved with hunting most of the stories by Tappan, Rouark, etc, all centered upon the hunter pitting his wits/skills against the game. Reams were written about evaluating the country, tracking and stalking, reading the wind and cover and lots of other topics. The reader, with little imagination could place himself in the hunter's shoes. IOW there was a descriptive/informative tale associated with that account of the hunt and the firearm.

How much transferrence of interest/curiousity and skills to the upcoming generations of hunters is involved in describing what amounts to going to the den/living room to shoot a deer or hog ? How does this appear to the non-hunting public ? >MW

 

[MCgunner]

I hunt from a tripod with a feeder, so sue me. My range limit is 350 yards, won't shoot over that, just too many variables. I know I can make a good hit, conditions dependent of course, out to 350. But, I can't see further than a couple hundred yards at the most where my place is.

Out west, I did a lot of spot and stalk, never used a stand. But, you can't hunt that way here, well, if you want to put something in the freezer. You have to get elevated. And, it's a myth that you go out and just shoot all you want over a feeder opening day. I've killed deer at the feeder a few times, more often that not they're moving around in the area, but not feeding. It does keep 'em in the area, though.

First year I hunted my place, I had a 12 foot tower blind, but no feeders, and shot two moving through, so feeders, while they help, aren't necessary if you're in a bedding or feeding area or somewhere on a game trail between. Actually, I have all three on my place and it's barely 10 acres! I wish I could have afforded more land at the time, but I've been a working stiff all my life and it's not so much how much land you have sometimes, but where it's located. I looked a long while before I found this little paradise.

There is no such thing as public hunting (that's worth a toot) in Texas. You either have to be a rich land owner, be rich enough to afford a lease (1000 dollars for a cheap place with nothing on it), or buy a small tract like I did and put a stand on it. Ain't gonna do a lot of scoutin' on 10 acres, just go set out my feeder and stand and wait til opening day, but I quite enjoy the place.

If I owned that 13,000 acre place I leased out in west Texas, I'd spot and stalk the rest of my life, but it's just not done in the eastern 2/3rds of this state. If it goes against your grain to hunt the way I do, I invite you to stay home and don't come to Texas. We got too damned many yankees here as it is. The one thing we do have more of is deer, though. They ain't big, but they're plentiful.

 

[mustanger98]

Well, I consider myself both a hunter and a shooter, so I'll address this from both sides.

Sitting in a box blind of any sort... I set up in the window of my Granddaddy's garage a time or two. It was dark and cold in there and the limited field of view killed one major reason I hunt... to be outside.

Thinking of "beanfield guns", seems to me my old K98k can do that job with open sights. I've been playing with the ballistic calculators and the trajectory for a 150gr or 196gr .323" bullet ain't that high at the speeds the 8x57Mauser was meant to run... except for one thing- the sight calibration. But all I really figure I need to kill a deer is my old .30-30 and some patience to wait for the right shot. And with the right shot, hopefully I don't have to track.

Well, now you got my $.02.

 

[MCgunner]

BTW, how do you "track" a deer? Does it have to snow? I got to hunt in snow once, at 7K feet in the Guadalupe mountains of New Mexico. That was mulies and they're pretty stupid compared to whitetail, stand right out in the open and let you spot 'em with a spotting scope....morons. Whitetail, I swear, can bed down and hide behind a blade of grass when there's no cover. When there's cover, forget it, they'll bed in there during the day and don't move. How're you going to TRACK 'em? Look down at the ground on my place and you'll see thousands of fresh tracks leading everywhere, fresh sign. The cover is so thick you could be standing ten feet from one and never see it.

Track? Okay, right Daniel Boone, you go guy. I can understand tracking mulies, especially in the snow, or elk, maybe, but whitetail? I think not. Still hunting I understand. In the cover I'm used to, all you get to see is a white flag or three when you're still hunting. Still hunting is just walking slowly and being observant. It ain't real successful in the heavy cover. Setting a stand is the only way, whether it be a ground blind, a tripod, or a tree stand. Sitting still is the only way you're going to see deer in my experience, here anyway. I've been successful still hunting out west or in the hill country where it's more open and in the hill country the deer density has to be experienced to be believed. Yeah, I've shot a nice buck up near Llano by still hunting. I've never ever been successful still hunting around here, though.

So, now you're going to say, "it ain't about taking a buck, it's about the stalk?" Well, if I don't wanna kill something for the freezer, I'll leave that rifle at the house. That's 6.5 lbs of dead weight I don't need to tote if all I'm gonna do is walk around in the woods. As thick as the deer are here, I feel more successful when I get one in this cover even stand hunting than I do out in the hill country, tell ya the truth.

 

[Clipper]

It's nice that the ethics police have the time and financial recources to devote so much effort to year-long scouting and all the driving and it's associated costs (like gasoline) to be able to smugly tell the tens of thousands of us that simply can't devote that kind of time and money to the research and accumulation of woodscraft to live up to your expectations of an ethical hunt! I have to drive about 100 miles to get to the public land I have to hunt on, and I can't afford to spend two weeks chasing deer around the woods. If setting a few carrots & apples out will help, or if a treestand or blind on the edge of a field will increase my chance of bagging a deer and getting a return on my hunting investment, good. You can set there on Mount Holier-Than-Thou and cast all the aspersions you like, but if you had your way, there are litterally tens of thousands of hunters who would likely not be able to go hunting, and the loss of revenues generated by their non-participation would be devastating to the states, manufacturers, and eventually, YOUR ethics police-approved hunts as well, so take that self-righteous attitude down the hall to someone who gives a s***

 

[john1911]

I really don't understand all the "if you don't hunt the way I do you're not ethical" crap floating around lately. Hunters should embrace the freedom of choice afforded in this country to hunt the way the individual wants. Just because someone uses a different method, doesn't mean they are unethical.

This "hunting is getting to be a rich man's sport" is getting tired as well. Can anybody name any state that doesn't offer some type of big game hunting opportunity? Any state that doesn't have some type of huntable public access land? Of course not. Resident firearms deer permits are $15 here in Illinois. $15! That's not a whole lot of scratch. I would say there is some type of public hunting land within an hour drive of every resident of the state.

These may not be easy hunts or even highly successful hunts. They are hunts! That's the important part, being outdoors with family and friends. Not the method or $$$ spent.

 

[salthouse]

MC- A lot of the hunting I do in northern maine is stalking. The deer pop there is very low compared to many places 1-3 deer per sq. mi. means you got to go find them. Most folks there drive around in their trucks till they see a deer. Most folks there that get deer, stalk.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

to be able to smugly tell the tens of thousands of us that simply can't devote that kind of time and money to the research and accumulation of woodscraft to live up to your expectations of an ethical hunt!... I can't afford to spend two weeks chasing deer around the woods. If setting a few carrots & apples out will help, or if a treestand or blind on the edge of a field will increase my chance of bagging a deer and getting a return on my hunting investment, good. ... and the loss of revenues generated by their non-participation would be devastating to the states, manufacturers, and eventually...

So, you see hunting as something where you spent good money and are going to get something for your money, no matter what.

I feel very bad for you, Bub. Why do you continue hunting if it's only an economic exchange? I'd certainly rather do other things, if that were all I got out of it.

You can buy wild game, you know.


Or am I reading you wrong here?


And, yes, I think the Super guns are ridiculous.

 

[Clipper]

wheelgunslinger, You have no idea how I think about hunting, or any other kind of ethics. Just so you know, I've only recently started rifle hunting, as I have spent the last 30+ years handgun hunting...Not exactly beanfield guns, .357 Blackhawks. I like to fish with ultralight tackle...In fact, my heaviest rig is spooled with 4-pound test. I usually don't keep most of my catch, going mostly for the fun of it, but i fish just a few miles away, so it's no big economic deal. I go hunting to enjoy going hunting, but since I'm there and I've either spent or lost (from missed work) a lot of money, I don't think it's unreasonable to want to bring some venison home...Because A, I like it, and B, since I'm now on a fixed income, that hunt is a major monetary outlay for me, and though I spent my younger years not worrying about actually tagging a deer, now I have to take the harvesting part more seriously, to at least partially offset the cost of the hunt if possible. If you still feel sorry for me, you feel free to join the other ethics police down the hall...

 

[GunTech]

Hoo boy.

Next it will be something about how black rifles shouldn't be used for hunting. Zumbo, are you listening?

I've hunted with everything from flintlocks to one of those 'wonder rifles'. It's not my place to tell someone else how to hunt, although even I draw the line at shooting penned animals.

Think about it, is hunting any animal with a rifle 'fair'? Unless you chase down you deer on foot, and kill it with a stone axe, you really can't make the argument that it really fair - unless perhaps if you are going for dangerous game.

 

[Deer Hunter]

If it kills and can be shot with aptitude by the hunter, I don't see a reason why any gun shouldn't be used for any of the various types of hunting done on this continent.

 

[TimboKhan]

I've no problem with stand hunting, because stand hunting is just another form of still hunting, which is a technique that has been used for eons. Moreover, in some areas, stand hunting is about the only way to hunt safely, given diminishing land on which to hunt. I've also no problem with hunters taking long shots on game, provided they have the skills to pay the bills. To me, if a particular hunter is skilled enough to take a shot at a longer range, then that hunter is ethically hunting. Heck, there are people who aren't ethically hunting when they take shots at 100 yards!

 

[jmorris]

If everyone stuck with the 30-06 (arguably all one needs in the USA) many firearms companies would be out of business. Believe it or not but they make money selling all that stuff (if you don’t believe me just ask my wife). The RUM for instance I find particularly funny as you can buy it then special ammo to make it shoot like a 30-06 (at a much higher price). As for the scopes, if you ever shot with a Shepard you would buy one, if you ever shoot over 100yds. I thought the point of camouflage or sitting still and being quite for that matter was so the deer didn’t have a clue you are around. Is that cheating? Think of a blind as a pre made ghillie suit.

“Making a killing shot on an animal as large as a deer from a rest in a stand across open country at 300-400 yds isn't much of a challenge. At least to those used to shooting 'minute of wood/rock chuck/ Pdog ' at the same or greater distances, IMO. I suspect if we're to preserve the tradition of hunting we're going to have to address the ethics of this sort of 'hunting'.”

I assume you are one of those that can make the 400yd shot at the chuck. If so are the ethics we need to address the ones of killing animals with no intent to utilize? As I have no problem getting out of the elements and hunting. 19* out side sleeting have to switch to iron sights as you can’t see through the scope, been there done that, not fun anymore.

 

[trueblue1776]

If so are the ethics we need to address the ones of killing animals with no intent to utilize?

That's one that really chaps my @##, but I assume it does for everyone.

I worked with a hunter who was always bringing me deer meat, I was happy, then he told me he didn't eat it, that's why he gave it to me.

 

[Art Eatman]

What we don't need is sarcasm. And for sure we don't need the sort of misguided nonsense of, "I don't like that style, so it must be evil and badnasty!"

So back to the original subject: For many hunters, deliberately putting a package together for long-range shooting is a challenge. The use of higher-power, flatter-shooting cartridges fired from longer barrels reduces the problems of range estimation. That maintains the "clean kill" requirement. To have the precision necessary to hit the kill zone means work on the package to have tight groups--which is more challenge. Then there is some amount of challenge in the waiting and watching, and then judging the quality of the animal which could be "The One!"

Not my style, but I ain't gonna knock it.

Art

 

[brerrabbit]

I just got a brush gun, a 30-30 with open sights. The 30-06 was killing me.

My technique is just going out to areas that I have planted forage at or find a deer run, pull off a ways, sit down and wait.

I will probably never see a shot at a deer over a hundred yards in my neck of the woods.

As far as the long range shooters go:

Are they making clean kills?

Are they utilizing the meat?

If they are doing both, I have no problems with them.

 

[koja48]

To each his/her own. I'm no longer capable of long-range shooting . . . at anything . . . 400 - 500 yards is my limit. I prefer to still hunt big game, when that approach is appropriate, but have NO problem sitting and watching. As long as folks can make CONSISTENT clean kills with their tool of choice, go for it. And to those who are capable at extreme ranges, I acknowledge the "trigger-time" you have amassed to be so capable and envy your ability. I don't hunt/shoot to please someone else; I do so in the manner I enjoy to please me. Others should do the same, as they see fit and are able.

 

[Sergeant Sabre]

I suspect if we're to preserve the tradition of hunting we're going to have to address the ethics of this sort of 'hunting'.

But is this sort of 'hunting' really "hunting" ? That is, does it embody the attributes and virtues we claim for hunting ?

We really are our own worst enemy. If we're to preserve the tradition of hunting we're going to have to stop jumping on each other's backs all the time.

When the antis want to ban "long range hunting", they can count on the support of hunters

When the antis want to ban baiting, they can count on the support of hunters

When the antis want to ban crossbows, they can count on the support of hunters

When the antis wanted to ban doves in Michigan, they got the support of hunters

When the antis want to ban anything, they can count on the support of hunters who have a "that's not 'hunting'" attitude.

 

[koja48]

Well put, Sarge. We "hang together, or we will surely hang separately."