Long range unethical?

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by airbornedeerhunter

How is it not hunting??? If I do the exact same prep, scouting, walking, glassing, sitting, calling, etc etc and do everything you do on your hunt except you take a critter at 100 metres and I take one at 800 metres (hypothetically)
how is my experience any different than yours in terms of "who was really hunting"??

One is spot and stalk, where you use your skills to try to sneak up close to it, the other is spot and shoot, no sneakage, the only effort required is spotting it.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by troutLakeJohnnie

Sir, I researched the Swarovski and Leica brands. They require a "reflective surface" after 700 yards. That does NOT include trees. Secondly, holding the ranger still enough to get a reading off a single tree is improbable. Thirdly, Swarovski and Leica admit a full 5% error after 875 yards. This equates to 55 yards at 1100. This variance (110 yards) makes range irrelevant when ballistics/GRAVITY are taken into account in perfect conditions.

No one... NOT ONE writer can tell me how they determine crosswind speeds at 1100 yards. How many eddies, puffs and changes of wind are there between target and "shooter" (not hunter).

You don't range the animal you range rocks snow covered hillsides, etc.
Of course no one can tell you HOW they do it - there is no app for that!!
As I said, you need trigger time at long range and good coaching .

As far as shooting as opposed to hunting goes,
You see a deer on the side of the river and hit he beach .
The deer tops the bank and so do you.
When you get up he's 100 yards or less and you drop him with one shot.

On another occasion you spot a deer you have been watching all summer .
You hit the gravel bar in the middle of the river and jump out, knowing you are halfway across the 400 yard river and the deer is at the top of the steep bank approximately 200 yards you hold the bottom of his lungs and drive a bullet into the spot with the bullet exiting out the top of the off shoulder .

Another time you spot a deer on top of a ridge and get set up with the Barr and Stroud , ranging him at 785 yards .
You dope the wind and put a 190 grain bullet through his lungs killing him.
Someone please tell me the difference here between the shots that were actually hunting and what was not hunting but shooting ?

And exactly where short range stops and long range begins, because everybody's idea is different .
However DO NOT question whether it can be done of nog and I still contend they there are as many animals wounded by slob hunters at short range as long because those people will shoot at any distance!
Cat

[troutLakeJohnnie]

Really??? What range finders work on a deer past 500 yards? None that I have found. All need a "reflective surface" past 700 yards. What they mean by "reflective" does not mean a deer. A tree is marginally POSSIBLE if you you can hold the device steady enough to focus on a single 12-14" tree. Swarovski reports say "No". The best report a .5% error which translates into 110 yards + or -. Crosswind of a mere 10 mph shows a 12' change of impact. This is IF the wind is constant all the way to target and exactly 90 degrees to shooter/animal.
After 500 yards it is really guess work and to my mind, unethical.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

There are rangefinders that can range animals to well over 1000 yards. As for estimating wind, that can't be measured all the way from the shooter to the target, and it can change direction and speed several times over 1000 yards. Therefore the only resort is to estimate the wind all the way to the target, and hope for the best. Of course the farther the target is away, the more likely the error in estimating the wind speed and direction. As well, the farther the target, the longer the bullet is in the air, and the greater the risk of the animal moving from the time the trigger is pulled, until the bullet arrives at the target. Yes people do hit animals at over 1000 yards, but the odds of a missed or wounded animal increase, as the shot distance increases. Of course the programs on Wild TV that feature this long range shooting, show the successful shots, and rarely if ever show the misses or wounded animals. Showing that misses and wounded animals do happen with long range shooting, regardless of the equipment being used, does not look good when your program is promoting specialized long range shooting products.

[Speckle55]

elkhunter11

actually that 975yd moose shot doubled lunged him and the bullet went to the other side and when I skinned him it fell out ..top of one lung into other

Just did that a few year ago on this Moose shot at 75 yards bullet fell out skinning on opposite side from entry

You should take a course from Rob or Len Backus
http://www.longrangehunting.com/foru...itters-145634/

David

[Au revoir, Gopher]

14 posts and onto my ignore list... new record!

ARG

[troutLakeJohnnie]

Yes Sir, you get a "number" but from Leica themselves, with all of THEIR research, they admit to a .5% error after 875 yards IF you can get a reading and if the reading is actually of the target. They also do NOT claim accurate readings on elk/moose to those ranges. A number given by your rangefinder does not equate to accurate range.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The only research that I have done with my Leica Geovids, is actually ranging animals with them. I have ranged deer to over 600 yards, elk to 900 yards, and moose and cattle to over 1000 yards.

[grinr]

Originally Posted by troutLakeJohnnie

Really??? What range finders work on a deer past 500 yards? None that I have found. All need a "reflective surface" past 700 yards. What they mean by "reflective" does not mean a deer. A tree is marginally POSSIBLE if you you can hold the device steady enough to focus on a single 12-14" tree. Swarovski reports say "No". The best report a .5% error which translates into 110 yards + or -. Crosswind of a mere 10 mph shows a 12' change of impact. This is IF the wind is constant all the way to target and exactly 90 degrees to shooter/animal.
After 500 yards it is really guess work and to my mind, unethical.

Hmmmmm...I wonder how military marksmen range and hit targets at 2000m and beyond......ummmmmm....BETTER THAN AVERAGE OPTICS!!!
Duhhhh....ya think?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by troutLakeJohnnie

Really??? What range finders work on a deer past 500 yards? None that I have found. All need a "reflective surface" past 700 yards. What they mean by "reflective" does not mean a deer. A tree is marginally POSSIBLE if you you can hold the device steady enough to focus on a single 12-14" tree. Swarovski reports say "No". The best report a .5% error which translates into 110 yards + or -. Crosswind of a mere 10 mph shows a 12' change of impact. This is IF the wind is constant all the way to target and exactly 90 degrees to shooter/animal.
After 500 yards it is really guess work and to my mind, unethical.

Obviously, you didn't read my following post.

The only research that I have done with my Leica Geovids, is actually ranging animals with them. I have ranged deer to over 600 yards, elk to 900 yards, and moose and cattle to over 1000 yards.

I won't debate wind drift with you, because some of your points concerning wind drift are actually valid. However, you obviously don't know nearly as much as you think you do about range finders. Perhaps you should spend more time actually using the Leica and Swarovski range finders, and less time reading about them. Your math is also badly flawed, as a .5% error at 1100 yards is only +/- 5.5 yards.

[Speckle55]

troutlakejohnie this is for you

then watch the others on the side

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L48Eok5hQZo

David

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by troutLakeJohnnie

Yes Sir, you get a "number" but from Leica themselves, with all of THEIR research, they admit to a .5% error after 875 yards IF you can get a reading and if the reading is actually of the target. They also do NOT claim accurate readings on elk/moose to those ranges. A number given by your rangefinder does not equate to accurate range.

Yep can't be done.
1000 yd shot on a moose, ridiculous.

BTW is the moose dead?

I never did the two step with an ugly woman, but I'm sure someone has.

YMMV.
Hope this helps.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

elkhunter11

actually that 975yd moose shot doubled lunged him and the bullet went to the other side and when I skinned him it fell out ..top of one lung into other

Just did that a few year ago on this Moose shot at 75 yards bullet fell out skinning on opposite side from entry

You should take a course from Rob or Len Backus
http://www.longrangehunting.com/foru...itters-145634/

David

Even if that was true, and you had a way to accurately measure the shot distance, that doesn't change the fact that the military chart that you keep posting, is not applicable to big game hunting. The military actually prefers if large numbers of combatants are seriously wounded, because it ties up considerable resources to look after wounded soldiers, whereas a dead man requires no immediate attention. On the other hand, it is our goal as hunters to provide quick clean kills, when we shoot at game animals.

As for a long distance shooting course, I am not the slightest it interested at shooting at game animals past 500 yards, and I have no interest in long range target shooting.

[Dick284]

Your handle Johnnie, dictates that you know the correct lure to use far behind the boat.
Take your trolling elsewhere.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Your handle Johnnie, dictates that you know the correct lure to use far behind the boat.
Take your trolling elsewhere.

He may know trolling, but his math sucks.

[Icatchfish]

Not a big shooter here, but there are many videos that show how to estimate drift and drop at long range look it up on YouTube specially by gunwerks.
The ethical point arise from the competence of the shooter. I've seen many videos of crazy accurate shots taken by pro shooters ( I mean snipers and long range competitors not pros like Jim shocky)

Practice practice practice

[Skytop B]

Try a pair of these bud, they will make a believer out of you

http://vectronix.ch/mission/en/handh...inders/plrf25c

Your not going to find these in Canadian tire or Cabelas though.........

[catnthehat]

I have owned two of these over the years , and they are super accurate if not heavy.
We have used them for setting up ranges, ranging woodchucks, coyotes, and deer.
I had one set with a standard height tripod on it an another with shoulder straps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXRtj4Hripo
Cat

[Speckle55]

elkhunter11 ..

wow you don't shoot past 500yds ..don't want too

please post some proof that others can't or shouldn't kill at 1000 yds and beyond

on the ballistic chart please post another if you can

your just venting your dislike and saying that my moose picture is fake

and that my Leupold range I saw saying 1200yds is bs

wow you guys are very negative

you should go to the Edson range and try some shots you may learn
http://edsonfishandgame.ca/the-longest-mile-range/

Be the change you want to see in the world

David

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Bushrat

One is spot and stalk, where you use your skills to try to sneak up close to it, the other is spot and shoot, no sneakage, the only effort required is spotting it.

So as a bow hunter where my shots are under 40 yards, I could say anyone who uses a rifle and shoots game over 80 yards away is not hunting. Got it.

[Skytop B]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

elkhunter11 ..

wow you don't shoot past 500yds ..don't want too

please post some proof that others can't or shouldn't kill at 1000 yds and beyond

on the ballistic chart please post another if you can

your just venting your dislike and saying that my moose picture is fake

and that my Leupold range I saw saying 1200yds is bs

wow you guys are very negative

you should go to the Edson range and try some shots you may learn
http://edsonfishandgame.ca/the-longest-mile-range/

Be the change you want to see in the world

David

I will be working 10 minutes away from there next week. Already have the 338packed and ready to make some noise out there!

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

elkhunter11 ..

wow you don't shoot past 500yds ..don't want too

please post some proof that others can't or shouldn't kill at 1000 yds and beyond

on the ballistic chart please post another if you can

your just venting your dislike and saying that my moose picture is fake

and that my Leupold range I saw saying 1200yds is bs

wow you guys are very negative

you should go to the Edson range and try some shots you may learn
http://edsonfishandgame.ca/the-longest-mile-range/

Be the change you want to see in the world

David

No I don't care to shoot past 500 yards at animals, because I don't feel that I have anything to prove by doing so.

I wouldn't post a chart that is not applicable, just because I don't have one that is applicable.

Where did I post anything about your moose being fake?

So now you are saying that the moose was 1200 yards away rather than the 950 yards that you claimed earlier? You must tell some great fish stories.

And I have no desire to go to Edson to watch people shoot long range, because I am just not interested.

[hardy]

TLJ you are a little misinformed about ranging. "MY" Swarovski Laser Guide can range deer past 500y very effectivly. How do I know....The same reason "ELK" said. Ive done it. My range finder has an accuracy reading of +/- "1 yard" at 1000 yards that equates to 0.036% margin for error.

Lets do some math at my home shooting range if i were shooting a 7mm 168vld
3000fps
3680 feet
26.05 inches mercury
50% humidity
I would be 214.37" low at 1000 yards. So if a moose vital is around 12-16" lets say then a 0.036% error equates to 7.72" error. That still lands me in the vitals if I were a good shot and there was no wind.

Not sure were all your confusion is founded? But if you make all your truth statements based on how a bushnell rangefinder preforms well thats to bad. Save some bucks and buy a better rangefinder you might not be so discouraged.
Cheers

[coreya3212]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Yep can't be done.
1000 yd shot on a moose, ridiculous.

BTW is the moose dead?

I never did the two step with an ugly woman, but I'm sure someone has.

YMMV.
Hope this helps.

Never?

[Redfrog]

Never. !!!!! I don't two step.

[JD848]

Originally Posted by grinr

FYI Johnnie,the current sniper kill record(according to wiki) is 2475m(2707y)....a full 2.5x farther then an 1100y moose shot on a human 1/5 the size of a moose.

Canadian PPLCI soldiers held the #1 and #2 distance records prior to that^^ shot by a UK sniper....GO CANADA GO!!!

Fwiw......
1)Nov. 2009,Afghanistan,Cpl Craig Harrison,United Kingdom(Household Cavalry)
2475m(2707y) .338Lapua

2)Mar.2002,Afghanistan,Cpl Rob Furlong,Canada(3rd Battalion PPLCI)
2430m(2657y) .50BMG

3)Mar.2002,Afghanistan,Master Cpl Arron Perry,Canada(3rd Battalion PPLCI)
2310m(2526y) .50BMG

I Wouldn't wanna be a moose anywhere within 2 miles of these ^^ guys,lol.

What were the number of rounds fired in total to get this point in war time,including every sniper in the world because every round has to be taken in to acount for these rounds to count,i respect these guys but putting something like this up is totally different than hunting.There professional shooters no doubt about that doing this for a living with the best of the best tech at there reach with countless hours of discipline behind them.Your putting up the 4 best in 7 billion people on the planet.

[coreya3212]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Never. !!!!! I don't two step.

Horizontal hula?

[JD848]

Johnny stay within your comfort zone ,that should be all that matters to you,i stopped thinking about what the next guy does decades ago,my gun,my brain how good can I get .
Every person has a different peak in almost every kind of sport in this world,fine your peak and stay in your comfort zone ,shot as much as you can and practice your heart out and what ever the results,it is what it is.

No one cuts my tags or ties my shoes and I wear my own kind a hat and so does every body else.TAKE CARE

[troutLakeJohnnie]

YES!! My point exactly. Many guys are wannabe Vasilly Zheitsev's. Also, they are shooting at game. A soldier shooting at enemy is not bound by ethical terms. his job is to kill or injure enemy. As sad as it sounds, shooting a human is more ethical than a moose. Go figgur! Wounding an enemy is acceptable.

Hunters should be held to account for shots over 500 yards. Boasting about anything over that should be shunned by the HUNTING community.

Originally Posted by JD 848

What were the number of rounds fired in total to get this point in war time,including every sniper in the world because every round has to be taken in to acount for these rounds to count,i respect these guys but putting something like this up is totally different than hunting.There professional shooters no doubt about that doing this for a living with the best of the best tech at there reach with countless hours of discipline behind them.Your putting up the 4 best in 7 billion people on the planet.

[Tall Texan]

Man: do you guys ever get hard up!

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by troutLakeJohnnie

YES!! My point exactly. Many guys are wannabe Vasilly Zheitsev's. Also, they are shooting at game. A soldier shooting at enemy is not bound by ethical terms. his job is to kill or injure enemy. As sad as it sounds, shooting a human is more ethical than a moose. Go figgur! Wounding an enemy is acceptable.

Hunters should be held to account for shots over 500 yards. Boasting about anything over that should be shunned by the HUNTING community.

Can you tell me how you arbitrarily arrived at 500 yards as the baseline for a maximum shot ?
Have you ever shot an animal at that distance?
Cat

[JD848]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Never. !!!!! I don't two step.

I heard you could put FRED ASTAIRE to shame after a half a dozen doubles.