# Hunting versus Shooting



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

The new RMEF Bugle has a good column about the issue and notes the Boone and Crockett position.

http://www.boone-crockett.org/about/LRS.asp?area=about&ID=6B455080&se=1&te=1


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

I personally feel like somewhere there has to be a limit, a line where we cross from one activity to another.

I don't believe that hunting and shooting are the same actions and one ought to seriously examine whether they ought to be mixed. I've made a couple of excessively long shots, but the majority have been less than 100yrds much preferred method!


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Good he!!, here we go again!


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

longbow said:


> Good he!!, here we go again!


Yep this might be a long one! o-||


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Getting old. I really could care less how someone else hunts as long as it is legal. Last I heard long range hunting was legal so quit whining and spend more time in the hills. Not my forte but who cares enough to whine about it on the internet


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> The new RMEF Bugle has a good column about the issue and notes the Boone and Crockett position.
> 
> http://www.boone-crockett.org/about/LRS.asp?area=about&ID=6B455080&se=1&te=1


Was the other thread not enough of kicking a dead horse?http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/104194-1036-yard-elk-kill.html


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

I praise those who can make a long shot and a clean kill. I loathe those who wound animals and don't follow up. I suffered through a follow up this year. It's not a fun thing to go through.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

berrysblaster said:


> I personally feel like somewhere there has to be a limit, a line where we cross from one activity to another.
> 
> I don't believe that hunting and shooting are the same actions and one ought to seriously examine whether they ought to be mixed


I just have to laugh. To "shoot" an animal you have to pull the trigger and "shoot" your gun.

The difference? One has a target in the scope, the other an animal.

-O\\__-


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

berrysblaster said:


> I personally feel like somewhere there has to be a limit, a line where we cross from one activity to another.
> 
> I don't believe that hunting and shooting are the same actions and one ought to seriously examine whether they ought to be mixed. I've made a couple of excessively long shots, but the majority have been less than 100yrds much preferred method!


I am still waiting on people that feel this way or feel that long range shots on game are wrong to do exactly what you're saying here: draw the line.

You'd think for as strong as some on this forum have openly condemned the practice that they'd have the ability to tell me at what number that one crosses the line.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

30-06-hunter said:


> Was the other thread not enough of kicking a dead horse?http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/104194-1036-yard-elk-kill.html


Someone checked the horse and detected a slight pulse. He ain't dead yet!!


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

RandomElk16 said:


> I just have to laugh. To "shoot" an animal you have to pull the trigger and "shoot" your gun.
> 
> The difference? One has a target in the scope, the other an animal.
> 
> -O\\__-


Again hunting, and shooting are not the same and if they are to you then we think and feel differently about what we do


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

berrysblaster said:


> Again hunting, and shooting are not the same and if they are to you then we think and feel differently about what we do


I know they aren't the same. You missed the point kiddo.

Distance is not the difference between the two.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

I hunt with a Remington Model 700 BDL in 30-06 it is still topped with the original Tasco scope that came with the rifle back in the day when my grandpa bought it to go on one hunt with my dad. After that hunt he decided he would give it to me as a birthday present. 

Anyhow with that set up I can confidently shoot my 3-9x40 scope out to 400 yards and I don't really care what people tell me I can and can't do. If I feel good about the shot I take the shot. If I don't then I try to get closer. 

If I had a Weatherby Mark V topped with a decent scope in 338-378 with a 26" barrel you can bet that my time on ranges out to distances beyond 1000 yards are going to be a frequent occurrence. 

As for addressing the Boone and Crockett Clubs statement... Those bolo tie (nothing wrong with a good bolotie) tape measuring hypocrites need to put a monetary limitation for the tags that are purchased for the high dollar entry's that get submitted by capitalistic scumbags that are politically ruining the sport before they nudge out the long range shooters. I will give a long range shooters a thumbs up or a like before I give some guided political banquet attendee that protected his buck to maturity on an island. 

Let's have an argument... I'm ready....


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

A few weeks back I saw some late night hunting show with two fat asses who had a large flat in front of them and then a slope with a bull elk towards the top. Yeah he made the long shot.

Why not swing right, cross the flat, climb the slope and kill the elk close?

You have to walk over to gut it anyway.

RMEF is pretty reasonable and it's a fair question. Hunting or Shooting?


----------



## JoeRandall (Jun 24, 2012)

I thought due to the title of this thread I was going to read about hunting as most of us here do, and shooting which meant paying top dollar to have someone go out and find an animal for a person. Have someone else do all the work and you go shoot it. 

As for my view of this dead horse if you can make a clean kill who cares about the distance. I have heard/seen many more 20-50 yard shots turn into a wounded animal then I have heard about 1000 yard shots resulting in a wounded animal. What about the guy who just buys his gun. Never shoots it and goes out and hunts? What about the average hunter that pulls his gun out once a year to hunt. Hits a 10in target at 100 yards and says that's good. The long range guy usually knows his gun and its limits. He hits a 10in target at 1000 yards. Shoots 1/2in at 100 yards and he's the "bad guy". As far as fair chase. Either way the point is for the animal to not know you are there. May that be a 10 yard shot or a 800 yard shot. I can shoot paper and steel all day at 1000 yards. I have put a limit on myself for game animals that pertain to the conditions. If no wind and I can lay prone I'll shoot 700 yards. I can hit a clay pigeon that far. Windy prone or standing with rest 500 yards. Off hand 300 yards. I shoot at least once a month. These are shots I can consistently make. With more practice and better equipment the range may grow farther. I've hit a clay pigeon at 900 yards but it took a few shots so their for I will not shoot a game animal that far. Common sense know matter who what when or how always should prevail.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

Nambaster said:


> I hunt with a Remington Model 700 BDL in 30-06 it is still topped with the original Tasco scope that came with the rifle back in the day when my grandpa bought it to go on one hunt with my dad. After that hunt he decided he would give it to me as a birthday present.
> 
> Anyhow with that set up I can confidently shoot my 3-9x40 scope out to 400 yards and I don't really care what people tell me I can and can't do. If I feel good about the shot I take the shot. If I don't then I try to get closer.
> 
> ...


I'm in a similar boat, my $300 Savage 30-06 with old school Bushnell Sportvieiw scope is good for 400 yards, down the road I may look at upgrading and go after longer distances. I have been around guns since I was a kid and then in the Army, so knowing how to shoot is not the issue. But I am not too worried about that right now, where I hunt I don't "need" to shoot longer distances and the average shot is around 300.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> A few weeks back I saw some late night hunting show with two fat asses who had a large flat in front of them and then a slope with a bull elk towards the top. Yeah he made the long shot.
> 
> Why not swing right, cross the flat, climb the slope and kill the elk close?
> 
> ...


Like I was saying in the other thread. They are doing this because it's easier to film the money shot from a distance. So they can sell more DVD's and tv shows.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

As somebody who shoots recurve bow. I think compound bow guys are not hunters. They are shooters


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Berry, I ask AGAIN....

What is that distance?


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> A few weeks back I saw some late night hunting show with two fat asses who had a large flat in front of them and then a slope with a bull elk towards the top. Yeah he made the long shot.
> 
> Why not swing right, cross the flat, climb the slope and kill the elk close?
> 
> ...


What's the difference between a guy that shoots an elk at 1,000 yards or the guy that has a guide lead him by the hand and puts him on elk at 200 yards? If both individuals hit where intended, the elk is still dead. How much more "hunting" was it for the guide to do the majority of the work in getting the second hunter closer?

After thinking about that, what does it really matter? Why do people (hunters included) need to put down other groups of individuals because those other groups don't do it "their way"? It's ridiculous. If it's legal, go for it!


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

TS30 said:


> Berry, I ask AGAIN....
> 
> What is that distance?


TS, that's a fine question, one that no one has the answer too. I don't bag on long range guys, but do say it's not MY cup of tea. I leave it at that, it's not my place to question a guys personal ethical compass.

Suffice it to say I believe hunter has the responsibility to get within a RESPECTABLE distance of the quarry. For me that means 500 yards with a quality rifle, 75 yards with a compound bow. Now those are just my thoughts not to be taken in such a way that condemnation is garnered for those who feel differently.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Well, at least we finally have a number! Of course these are just your opinions and everyone is free to disagree. 

Can I ask a follow up question? What made you settle in at 500 yards as the "RESPECTABLE distance of the quarry"?


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

I hunt with an old musket muzzleloaderI think the guys who shoot with the inline muzzleloaders are just shooters.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Three words.........BLAH BLAH BLAH!--------SS


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

berrysblaster said:


> For me that means 500 yards with a quality rifle, 75 yards with a compound bow.


I agree with berry... 500 yards with a rifle, 75 yards with a bow, and I would add 200 yards with a muzzleloader. This is my opinion and the distances are arbitrary, but in every case I would look through the scope or peep sight and say, "[email protected], that's a long shot."
If you are proficient with your weapon of choice beyond those distances I applaud and say, "Good for you."
The bull elk I shot this year with my muzzlelaoder was 242 yards so by my own definition it was a long shot and I knew it. I spotted the bull at 600+ yards and by the time I got to 242 it felt like the jig was up so out came the shooting sticks... and I am prouder than h*ll of the shot that I made. I got the best of both worlds with that experience, closing the gap with an extended stalk down a nearly bare hillside and making a very challenging shot. I've killed a good handful of critters but when I stood over that bull I felt like a woodsman.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

I hunt public land I think guys who hunt private land are just shooters not hunters


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

TS30 said:


> Berry, I ask AGAIN....
> 
> What is that distance?


I think BC worded it well stating it depends on the situation. On the flip side I came out bashing long range guys in a thread a month or so ago but have since found a new respect for the guys that do it right. If the shot is ethical, the shooter is confident in his shot and the bullet has enough energy to make a quick clean kill than there is no reason to bash our fellow hunters. It's the guys that take unethical shots at any yardage and don't follow up on shots and so many other unethical things these are the guys that us as community need to be worried about. The long range guys should be at the Bottom of our list of worries.


----------



## Doc (Sep 11, 2007)

I find it a bit hypocritical when they have allowed "hunting enhancements" over the years and want to take a stand now. When I grew up when you wouldn't find a scope and very few bolt action guns in the group of hunters. And for the "purists", a compound bow was not available, sights and releases were non-existent and cedar arrows were standard.

"Long range" shooting began when scopes began topping rifles and compound bows were introduced.

What's more, I saw many big racks discarded rather than packed out unless it was a "HUGE" set of headgear.

So from my rocking chair perspective, it's a bit hard to draw the line on some improvements that have been introduced through the years but not on others. Ever hear the saying "Get on board or get the H*ll out of the way"?

It isn't my style but for those that want to become proficient ...... this old coger ain't sayin they can't.


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

TS30 said:


> Well, at least we finally have a number! Of course these are just your opinions and everyone is free to disagree.
> 
> Can I ask a follow up question? What made you settle in at 500 yards as the "RESPECTABLE distance of the quarry"?


My paltry understanding of flight time, ballistics, and human error leads me to think that shots inside of 500 yrds leave less to chance and more to skill. Skill being something a fella can plan for. The flight time inside of 500/75 yrds doesn't give an animal much time to move or the variables time to change.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

How many times have we all said if I could shoot my bow 70-90 yards I would have that animal, Or if I could shoot my muzzleloader 300 yards that animal is dead. Or if I could shoot my rifle 800+ yards that animals is mine. Longrange hunting seems to be a greedy, selfish way to get the animal before some else and then brag about the shot, the animal the trophy etc. Trophy hunting at it's best. I have more respect for the hunter who takes the time to outwit the animal in the animals home, Now that is impressive. 

I also think as humans we are always looking for the easier way as well. Long-range hunting is easier. You don't have to be in shape, You can sit at a high point and wait till something moves into place and shoot.

I not sure anything is wrong with long range hunting, We now have cameras doing the scouting for us, radios, between groups, to tell where the animals they jumped went. before long we will probably have a computer that will pull the trigger when that animals is in the cross hairs. 

I get all confused with the technology we have now days. My memory must be bad 25 years ago we didn't have cellphones, radios, camera, long-range shooting. How did we kill anything?


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Brookie.....with all do respect, you have no idea what you are talking about regarding long range hunting. Easier? Don't have to be in shape? Sit in one place and wait? I think you are confusing long range hunting with the classice Utah deer drive.--------SS


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

I use to be a long range shooter, before my eyes went. I shot competitively in ROTC, and some days can still hit things. 

These days I keep it under 250 with a rifle, and more typically under 100. When an animal does not know you are there at 20 yards with a bow, it can still easily get away. When an animal does not know you are there at 1000 yards with a rifle, it never feels that it needs to get away. 

There is no definitive "distance" at which to define fair chase, it is a question of personal ethics. But I do think the conversation should be framed in that context of chase, as that is a part of defining hunting. Long range shooting, and getting close are both hard won skills, but contextually they are not equally comparable. 

One can make the argument that a deer that died by an arrow from an archer at 10 yards, that he never saw, is the same as a deer that died by a bullet from a rifleman at 1000 yards that he never saw. But ultimately it is the nuance and possibilities in between that make all the difference. 

Individually these differences are a matter of personal ethics, collectively they define us all, and have implications for all of us. That is why the debate is good to have.

I think I saw that horse twitch......


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

I don't understand the thought that long range hunting is lazy.. You still have to get out and find the animals right? The only thing that takes less effort is stalking closer to the animal. So much hate on these threads! Why can't we all be friends


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

SS maybe your right maybe it is a Utah thing. But I do know what I'm talking about (from experience). Long Range hunting is easier (lets dial the turrets). Technology by definition makes life easier. Now if you're shooting with open sight out to 1000 yards and hitting your target that is impressive.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

(Brendo)Sorry but all I said was that it's easier have to be in shape. but maybe it does mean lazy, Treestand included, blinds so forth. Horses to pack out your animal. Why do we always have to think negative. Easier is not negative.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

I have a shot planned out. It's a place where there is no way to approach because of swirling wind and the deer scatter whenever they hear an approaching boat. It's 803 yards. I placed a target where the deer come out of the trees and went back to my perch and shot a 6" group. Hopefully I'll kill a deer this coming Christmas week. If I do, I'll post it here and all you longrange haters can kiss my ass. I earned it.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

Not pick on you longbow, I do believe you've done your homework. But you just made my argument. It is easier to just shoot the animal at 803 yards than to try and play the wind or some other plan.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

Not negative, just misread your post I could have sworn I read lazy the first time. I do agree it's easier in the respect of getting closer to the animals but it is a skill to be a proficient shooter at long range it's a skill I don't have. I just don't understand why we have to judge. just get out hunt and have fun!


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

Brendo that is my point, people get upset because someone else has taken the time to learn and practice the skill and most hunters haven't. (long-range), Sometimes I get jealous because people shoot well at long distances with their bows, or they have more time to scout. I shouldn't though. Nobody cares, I just should figure out a way to work harder at it.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I hunt to find my prey, I hunt to get close enough... then I shoot the **** thing. 


-DallanC


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

hazmat said:


> I hunt public land I think guys who hunt private land are just shooters not hunters


I hunt with mud dressed all over my body and leaves and sticks for camo. I also collect elk urine from a latrine that I built by the water hole and bathe in it daily. You guys who use artificial scent control and camo are shooters not hunters.

I am saying that the Boone and Crockett Club has no authority over bragging rights for me. They lose all their credibility when they position themselves against long range shooters when so many lame incoherent self absorbed denver broncos buy their way into the books.

Saying that a specimen does not belong in the books because of the distance it was shot at is like saying that someone was not really born because they were delivered via C-section.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Brookie said:


> SS maybe your right maybe it is a Utah thing. But I do know what I'm talking about (from experience). Long Range hunting is easier (lets dial the turrets). Technology by definition makes life easier. Now if you're shooting with open sight out to 1000 yards and hitting your target that is impressive.


Let's dial the turrets he says!!:rotfl: if I had any doubts that you didn't get it before, I certainly know now. Is that what all you who are against long range think? You just spin the turrets and the bullet magically hits a target 500 yards away?

You should apply to work at the gun counter and sell Vortex scopes for a living.-----SS


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

-BaHa!-You should apply to work at the gun counter and sell Vortex scopes for a living.-----SS

Classic! Not a single Vortex scope sits in my gun cabinet anymore... :mrgreen:


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

What's the point of the thread again?


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

Brookie said:


> SS maybe your right maybe it is a Utah thing. But I do know what I'm talking about (from experience). Long Range hunting is easier (lets dial the turrets). Technology by definition makes life easier. Now if you're shooting with open sight out to 1000 yards and hitting your target that is impressive.


What is this "experience" you speak of?


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

SS You don't know anything about me. You assume way to much. I could be a great long range shooter/hunter. Just playing a point. By the way 500 yards is to close to use turrets.

Why would I want to sell vortex scopes? ANYONE Please tell me. Is this cause SS thinks I'm and Idiot. Or is he insinuating this. hum, can't tell

The Point is this from the article.
Position 
The Boone and Crockett Club believes the term “long-range” shooting is more defined by a hunter’s intent, than any specific distance at which a shot is taken. If the intent of the individual is to test equipment and determine how far one can shoot to hit a live target and if there is no motivation to risk engagement with the animal being hunted, this practice is not hunting and should not be accorded the same status as hunting.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

30-06-hunter said:


> What's the point of the thread again?


 Nobody has specifically mentioned it yet! All we've seen is a debate about what happens in the field. What we ignore is what happens in the Wildlife Board Room when some people realize that long distance hunting/shooting is more efficient in terms of trophy buck harvesting or even general buck harvesting, if you will. More permit cuts? Higher buck to doe ratio objectives? More primitive weapon hunts? More limited entry hunts? EVERY change we make, whether official or otherwise, has unintended consequences (good or bad) that effects ALL hunters sooner or later. And by the time they show up, it's usually too late (or difficult) to do anything about it. Is long distance shooting good for the hunting community? I guess we'll find out, won't we!


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

30-06, Well my dad was a marine in Vietnam, Shot professionally with the military for 20 years(shot long). I learned mainly from him. My antelope hunts have been long-range hunting. Instead of trying to get close easier to just shoot longer. My cousins all shoot long range(they like the ease of killing at a distance.) The range in carbon is a great place to learn. I prefer the desert out past salina to practice now though. Seems more real. Not set up. I hunt deer muzzleloader though, and elk I like to smell them before I shoot them. Although my kids are just starting to hunt and has been fun teaching them how to shoot long and short. Although I like how Wyogoob uses pistols. Might want to get into that


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

The only time that I landed a 1000 yard shot (not at a live animal) has been under the following conditions:
1. The rifle and scope did not belong to me and were well out of my monetary budget
2. I had a spotter
3. The spotter had to develop a load catered towards long rang shooting 
4. The spotter had to spend an enormous amount of time on the range to familiarize with the load and ballistics
5.The spotter had to determine wind direction and strength
6. The spotter had to calculate a whole bunch of other stuff that I didn't even want to know about. 
7. After firing the first shot the spotter had to tell me where it landed. 
8. I had to make adjustments

After that experience I concluded that Long Range Shooting was not my cup of tea. I am not a fan of math or calculations. The thing that I did learn however is that those who do have the skill worked hard to refine it. I would not consider Long Range Shooting a shortcut in harvesting an animal. Just as I spend time familiarizing myself with the habits and routes of game Long Range Hunters still do the same. They also study terrain the same way that I do as well. The difference is that they are out on the range toying with loads and unlocking mysteries about ballistics that makes my mind shut down. 

Seems like those guys are burdening themselves with the long route to killing an animal if you ask me......


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Hey Hey Hey... Let's leave Vortex outta this!


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Nambaster said:


> Seems like those guys are burdening themselves with the long route to killing an animal if you ask me......


This is probably one of the most accurate statements on this thread. Be thankful for people who try to rely only on long range shooting as a sole means of hunting. They will not kill very many animals. The real "threat" is the guy who can do it all. Those are the ones who are killing animals, killing big animals, and killing lots of animals. I hope to be one of them some day.

Hard to begrudge someone wanting to improve their odds when it takes several years to get a tag in a lot of cases. If I draw an LE buck tag next year and I see a buck that I WANT to take; I will sneek, spot, range, run, climb, sit, and shoot.....whatever situation presents itself and I will enjoy every minute of it.

I find the B&C clubs position a bit hypocritical considering the number of massive animals in their books that are killed on specialty hunts on winter range during the rut with the help of a whole posse of professionals. Scenarios like this make the long range guy perched on the side of Provo Peak during the general season look pretty darned ethical to me.-----SS


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

As far as I can tell. The biggest problem with long range harvesting is the same problem boy scouts had in goblin valley.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

So with all this technology and skill how much has the success percentage changed?
Are tags being reduced because the success ratio is too high? Or the is it the deer quanity in general? Or is it just a perception that the "long range shooters" are stealing deer from the "short range shooters"

I'm pretty much a short range guy in my hunting, but I love to watch my sons shooting out to 1800 yards and doing it quite well.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Brookie said:


> Not pick on you longbow, I do believe you've done your homework. But you just made my argument. It is easier to just shoot the animal at 803 yards than to try and play the wind or some other plan.


Kinda like bowhunting from a treestand. Right?


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Brookie said:


> Not pick on you longbow, I do believe you've done your homework. But you just made my argument. It is easier to just shoot the animal at 803 yards than to try and play the wind or some other plan.


So you say you shoot LR huh? You would know at 803 yards you do have to play with the wind.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Brookie said:


> By the way 500 yards is to close to use turrets.


What gun are using for 500 yards? My Edge has a 43" drop at 500yds. My .257 wildcat shoots 28" low.
Or are you using the stadia lines?


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Too close for missiles.......switching to guns.------SS


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

Sorry for the late response I was trying to sell a vortex scope. I love how things get picked apart. We have some great readers. It what makes the forum fun.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

I bought a long range rifle, so called, put a long range scope on it, so called, over a year ago. I've taken it to the range at least 50 times and put over 350 hand loaded rounds down the tube. When I can hit an 8" target at 1000 yds, ever time, regardless of the conditions, I'll take it hunting, not until. If I see an animal I want to kill, I'll kill it. I've killed a lot of them at 50 to a 100 yards. Killing one at 1,000 yards won't give me a moments worth guilt and I'll feel great about the time and effort it's taken to learn how to do that, the same as I felt when I learned how to get within 30 yards of deer or elk with archery equipment. If they outlaw lone range equipment, or any other equipment, I'm just fine with that as well. I'll hunt with a long bow or a single shot 45-70, makes no difference to me. It's all hunting/shooting/learning/challenging/and rewarding. Limit yourselves if you want to, not me.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

I was being sarcastic longbow about the turrets. Randomelk a ethical long range hunter would choose not to shoot if the wind is swirling. Or figure a way to get closer. But longbow said he has it planned out and has done the practicing. I hope he makes the shot.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

I'm glad the "dead horse" comments have died down and the thread has reverted to a serious discussion.

By the way, it's pretty clear that a lot of you are way better shots than me.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

massmanute said:


> I'm glad the "dead horse" comments have died down and the thread has reverted to a serious discussion.
> 
> By the way, it's pretty clear that a lot of you are way better shots than me.


It's just sad we don't have a dead horse emoticon, so this will have to do O*-- horse


----------



## Bo0YaA (Sep 29, 2008)

I guess the only problem I can see with LR hunting is this. How many people actually hike 800-1000+ yards to check for blood if the animal does not appear to be hit? I know my daughter shot her cow at 408 yards and it didn't even flinch, just walked off into the trees. The guide gave us the option of chalking it up as a miss or hiking over to check for blood. If not for the fact my daughter was extremely confident she hit it, we may have moved on to another animal because we were loosing light quickly. The reason we may not hear more stories about animals wounded at long range could be because in some cases, if the animal doesn't fall over DRT its chalked up as a miss.


----------



## muzzlehunter (Nov 29, 2009)

BoOYaA... Your guide gave you the option of chalking up as a miss or hiking over to check for blood?! Talk about lack of ethics! I'm glad your daughter felt she made the shot and wanted to check.


----------



## fastcamo (Aug 27, 2012)

After reading 6 pages of ****ing bull****.......nevermind


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Bo0YaA said:


> I guess the only problem I can see with LR hunting is this. How many people actually hike 800-1000+ yards to check for blood if the animal does not appear to be hit? I know my daughter shot her cow at 408 yards and it didn't even flinch, just walked off into the trees. The guide gave us the option of chalking it up as a miss or hiking over to check for blood. If not for the fact my daughter was extremely confident she hit it, we may have moved on to another animal because we were loosing light quickly. The reason we may not hear more stories about animals wounded at long range could be because in some cases, if the animal doesn't fall over DRT its chalked up as a miss.


Good for you guys. Your daughter was sure of her shot and wouldn't believe she had missed. A lot of longrangers would have said " I didn't think I could hit it anyway but it was worth a try". Like I've said before, you should be shocked if you miss not shocked if you hit. Most hunters shouldn't be shooting past their gun's point blank range.
Congrats to your daughter for filling your freezer.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Brookie said:


> Sorry for the late response I was trying to sell a vortex scope. I love how things get picked apart. We have some great readers. It what makes the forum fun.


Brookie, here's a belated explanation about the Vortex comment. My only pet peve about long range is that many people try to take shortcuts.

Vortex, as part of their marketing scheme, offers salesman a generous point program that gets them extreme discounts on vortex products. As a result I have heard more than a few whoppers being told at the gun counter, usually something to the effect of, "buy this scope and stick it on any super-magnum and 1000 yards becomes a chip shot". Your "just turn the turrets" comment reminded me of one of these sales pitches. Nothing against you or Vortex scopes......just a major oversimplification of a multifaceted process.------SS


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

Could we please talk about something else? Like selenium deficiency or elk numbers on the Wasatch.


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

bugchuker said:


> Could we please talk about something else? Like selenium deficiency or elk numbers on the Wasatch.


There are no elk on the Wasatch nor will there ever be any elk on the Wasatch. We do have plentiful wolves and Sasquatch populations seem to be healthy.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

No wolves on the Satch. Only big coyotes. That population of big coyotes could use a little thinning out...


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I've got a question for you guys. When do you draw the line on how close you can camp or set up from another LR shooter/hunter?
Remember when I was threatened by a couple hunters last year?
It was mainly because they were upset that my friends camped within 1,000 yards of their shooting spot. My friends had found a buck of a lifetime the night before and decided to camp within 500 yards of where they saw it just in the next canyon. My friend did get within 250 yards of the buck the next morning but got a little buck fever and couldn't get a shot off. Those other guys were mad because they felt their spot from across the other canyon from 1,000 yards away was a much better, undetectable spot and we should never have made a play on the buck.
Does a LR hunter have any grounds on demanding that other hunter keep their distance and don't even hunt the same canyon as them if they can't stay at least a mile away?
I say, heck no. They can kiss my rear.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

ridgetop said:


> I've got a question for you guys. When do you draw the line on how close you can camp or set up from another LR shooter/hunter?
> Remember when I was threatened by a couple hunters last year?
> It was mainly because they were upset that my friends camped within 1,000 yards of their shooting spot. My friends had found a buck of a lifetime the night before and decided to camp within 500 yards of where they saw it just in the next canyon. My friend did get within 250 yards of the buck the next morning but got a little buck fever and couldn't get a shot off. Those other guys were mad because they felt their spot from across the other canyon from 1,000 yards away was a much better, undetectable spot and we should never have made a play on the buck.
> Does a LR hunter have any grounds on demanding that other hunter keep their distance and don't even hunt the same canyon as them if they can't stay at least a mile away?
> I say, heck no. They can kiss my rear.


What does your common sense and the law tell you where the line is?


----------



## SLCHunter (Dec 19, 2013)

ridgetop said:


> I've got a question for you guys. When do you draw the line on how close you can camp or set up from another LR shooter/hunter?
> Remember when I was threatened by a couple hunters last year?
> It was mainly because they were upset that my friends camped within 1,000 yards of their shooting spot. My friends had found a buck of a lifetime the night before and decided to camp within 500 yards of where they saw it just in the next canyon. My friend did get within 250 yards of the buck the next morning but got a little buck fever and couldn't get a shot off. Those other guys were mad because they felt their spot from across the other canyon from 1,000 yards away was a much better, undetectable spot and we should never have made a play on the buck.
> Does a LR hunter have any grounds on demanding that other hunter keep their distance and don't even hunt the same canyon as them if they can't stay at least a mile away?
> I say, heck no. They can kiss my rear.


I couldn't agree more with you. Otherwise, a LR hunter in a good spot would command all the surrounding hills. That's ridiculous. If you've got "SR" hunters on the same mountain, you have to point your gun in a different direction. Period.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> I've got a question for you guys. When do you draw the line on how close you can camp or set up from another LR shooter/hunter?
> Remember when I was threatened by a couple hunters last year?
> It was mainly because they were upset that my friends camped within 1,000 yards of their shooting spot. My friends had found a buck of a lifetime the night before and decided to camp within 500 yards of where they saw it just in the next canyon. My friend did get within 250 yards of the buck the next morning but got a little buck fever and couldn't get a shot off. Those other guys were mad because they felt their spot from across the other canyon from 1,000 yards away was a much better, undetectable spot and we should never have made a play on the buck.
> Does a LR hunter have any grounds on demanding that other hunter keep their distance and don't even hunt the same canyon as them if they can't stay at least a mile away?
> I say, heck no. They can kiss my rear.


It's nice and simple. Until that buck or bull is on the ground, no one has a claim on him. Long range shooter or spear thrower.


----------



## SLCHunter (Dec 19, 2013)

berrysblaster said:


> There are no elk on the Wasatch nor will there ever be any elk on the Wasatch. We do have plentiful wolves and Sasquatch populations seem to be healthy.


Here's how to connect things: Missing testicles are NOT due to selenium (or ball?) deficiency, but LR shooters inadvertently relieving the poor critters of their manhood. Shrugging, "oh just a testicle, this one'll get away."


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Iron Bear said:


> As far as I can tell. The biggest problem with long range harvesting is the same problem boy scouts had in goblin valley.


Yep.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

ridgetop said:


> I've got a question for you guys. When do you draw the line on how close you can camp or set up from another LR shooter/hunter?
> Remember when I was threatened by a couple hunters last year?
> It was mainly because they were upset that my friends camped within 1,000 yards of their shooting spot. My friends had found a buck of a lifetime the night before and decided to camp within 500 yards of where they saw it just in the next canyon. My friend did get within 250 yards of the buck the next morning but got a little buck fever and couldn't get a shot off. Those other guys were mad because they felt their spot from across the other canyon from 1,000 yards away was a much better, undetectable spot and we should never have made a play on the buck.
> Does a LR hunter have any grounds on demanding that other hunter keep their distance and don't even hunt the same canyon as them if they can't stay at least a mile away?
> I say, heck no. They can kiss my rear.


No, they don't. It seems outfoxing the other hunters is just as important as outfoxing the game animal in some areas.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

middlefork said:


> So with all this technology and skill how much has the success percentage changed?
> Are tags being reduced because the success ratio is too high? Or the is it the deer quanity in general? Or is it just a perception that the "long range shooters" are stealing deer from the "short range shooters"
> 
> I'm pretty much a short range guy in my hunting, but I love to watch my sons shooting out to 1800 yards and doing it quite well.


 Those are all good questions, but I don't think we've seen enough long range shooting/hunting to answer them. Besides, how would we know the numbers anyway? Also, any increases in success rates could be attributed to any number of things besides long range technology. And how would we enforce any shooting distance laws? It would be a nightmare!


----------



## bkelz (Dec 3, 2010)

I think its good to keep the conversation going. But in order to maintain a health discussion, we need more subscribers.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

bkelz said:


> I think its good to keep the conversation going. But in order to maintain a health discussion, we need more subscribers.


Here you go....http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/104194-1036-yard-elk-kill.html


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

If you don't like long range hunters just get 1100 yards from a road. 


Just got up to pee and to see if I could get to the top of a thread page. Did both, good night.

.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

TS30 said:


> No wolves on the Satch. Only big coyotes. That population of big coyotes could use a little thinning out...


Any videos?

.


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

I know my issues with the subject stems from the idiots that think they can shoot well, when in fact they can't. My beef is not with the folks that are effective LR shooters.

One problem with the commercialization of long range hunting is how it undoubtably leads unqualified shooters to feel overly confident in their own shooting abilities. I have come across many hunters that feel as if they can shoot LR because they have a "LR caliber", a turreted scope, and a box of shells. Thank goodness some people do understand that most run of the mill rifles are not any where near 1,000 yard rifles even with a $2000 scope on top.
I believe a very low percentage of hunters actually have the required skills to shoot past 300 yards.

I was wondering, is it unethical to take a 2,000 yard running shot at a coyote and not go look for blood?


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

blazingsaddle said:


> I know my issues with the subject stems from the idiots that think they can shoot well, when in fact they can't. My beef is not with the folks that are effective LR shooters.
> 
> One problem with the commercialization of long range hunting is how it undoubtably leads unqualified shooters to feel overly confident in their own shooting abilities. I have come across many hunters that feel as if they can shoot LR because they have a "LR caliber", a turreted scope, and a box of shells. Thank goodness some people do understand that most run of the mill rifles are not any where near 1,000 yard rifles even with a $2000 scope on top.
> I believe a very low percentage of hunters actually have the required skills to shoot past 300 yards.
> ...


I defiantly agree with that!


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

blazingsaddle said:


> I know my issues with the subject stems from the idiots that think they can shoot well, when in fact they can't. My beef is not with the folks that are effective LR shooters.
> 
> One problem with the commercialization of long range hunting is how it undoubtably leads unqualified shooters to feel overly confident in their own shooting abilities. I have come across many hunters that feel as if they can shoot LR because they have a "LR caliber", a turreted scope, and a box of shells. Thank goodness some people do understand that most run of the mill rifles are not any where near 1,000 yard rifles even with a $2000 scope on top.
> I believe a very low percentage of hunters actually have the required skills to shoot past 300 yards.
> ...


I'll go shoot past 300 anytime you wish.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

longbow said:


> I defiantly agree with that!


You defiantly agree, bit of an oxymoron there. Kidding aside, I definitely agree as well, too many joes think they have what it takes based off watching videos and playing games.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

30-06-hunter said:


> You defiantly agree, bit of an oxymoron there. Kidding aside, I definitely agree as well, too many joes think they have what it takes based off watching videos and playing games.


Ha! Good catch. And I can't blame it on spellcheck either.:redface:


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

uh oh... now those people that think they can just go out buy an expensive gun and kill stuff at 1000 yards really can....


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

brendo said:


> uh oh... now those people that think they can just go out buy an expensive gun and kill stuff at 1000 yards really can....


 And before long, 2 miles!

Reminds me of the old Twilight Zone (or Outer Limits) episode where a gangster dies and is sent to a mansion with all the rooms full of pretty women, buffet tables, booze, one hand card games that he keeps winning and finally a pool room where he runs the table every time. It's great! But he eventually gets bored and asks to be sent to hell because he doesn't deserve or want to be in such a heavenly place and the answer he gets from the host is, "What makes you think this is heaven?".

Eventually, it won't make sense even to the long range shooters!


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

The only thing that makes any sense is to eliminate all rifle and muzzleloader hunters from hunting all species in Utah. Archery hunting solves all of these issues and is the only honorable and responsible way to hunt big game anyway. With the low wounding ratios per shot, the stealth and woodsman's-ship required to actually harvest an animal, a great many more hunters could take the field without destroying the herds. 

Long range shooting, unchecked shots, wounded, suffering animals, hunters accidently killing one another, etc are all directly related to rifle and muzzleloader hunters. Many States do not allow high powered rifles already, it's high time we do the right thing and petition the Wildlife Board and the Legislature to get these issue resolved, once and for all.

Personally, I'm really tired of this constant arguing when the obvious solution is the elephant in the room.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

osageorange said:


> Personally, I'm really tired of this constant arguing when the obvious solution is the elephant in the room.


Sooooooooo we need to shoot elephants with a bow?

-DallanC


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

osageorange said:


> The only thing that makes any sense is to eliminate all rifle and muzzleloader hunters from hunting all species in Utah. Archery hunting solves all of these issues and is the only honorable and responsible way to hunt big game anyway. With the low wounding ratios per shot, the stealth and woodsman's-ship required to actually harvest an animal, a great many more hunters could take the field without destroying the herds.
> 
> Long range shooting, unchecked shots, wounded, suffering animals, hunters accidently killing one another, etc are all directly related to rifle and muzzleloader hunters. Many States do not allow high powered rifles already, it's high time we do the right thing and petition the Wildlife Board and the Legislature to get these issue resolved, once and for all.
> 
> Personally, I'm really tired of this constant arguing when the obvious solution is the elephant in the room.


Sorry guy, but this is one of the least intelligent things I have ever read on here. And FYI, higher powered rifles are not allowed in some areas because of the human population density and lack of backstop or distance in that area for a bullet to exhaust its energy, has nothing to do with the prey being hunted. Education is your friend.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

osageorange said:


> Personally, I'm really tired of this constant arguing when the obvious solution is the elephant in the room.





DallanC said:


> Sooooooooo we need to shoot elephants with a bow?
> 
> -DallanC


At 100+ yards


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

Critter said:


> At 100+ yards


With recurves only, and you must hire a professional hunter to judge whether you need to check for a hit


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

osageorange said:


> The only thing that makes any sense is to eliminate all rifle and muzzleloader hunters from hunting all species in Utah. Archery hunting solves all of these issues and is the only honorable and responsible way to hunt big game anyway. With the low wounding ratios per shot, the stealth and woodsman's-ship required to actually harvest an animal, a great many more hunters could take the field without destroying the herds.
> 
> Long range shooting, unchecked shots, wounded, suffering animals, hunters accidently killing one another, etc are all directly related to rifle and muzzleloader hunters. Many States do not allow high powered rifles already, it's high time we do the right thing and petition the Wildlife Board and the Legislature to get these issue resolved, once and for all.
> 
> Personally, I'm really tired of this constant arguing when the obvious solution is the elephant in the room.


Low wounding ratios per shot? Pahaha.. If you are serious, you are an idiot.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

No name calling please.

.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Awe shucks boss, they didn't mean no harm. I called them "boys" so it's okay for them to call me an idiot. Truth is, what I said was idiotic, that's why I said it. I was mirroring and echoing a previous post but the boys still can't figure it out. When they call me out, it's cause they don't like it when I repeat back to them what they have already said. I'm just spelling it out more openly. Even though I've told them over and over that what I post isn't what I believe or express any of my opinions they are so reflex driven they can't help but shout out. Watch, I'll do it again in few days and they'll still gobble like a shock called tom turkey. It's fun.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

This thread still has life hilarious. Shows people worry to much what other people do.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

I drive a ford I think chevys are not real trucks


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

hazmat said:


> This thread still has life hilarious. Shows people worry to much what other people do.


And back to the root of the issue. Not hilarious. It reflects erosion of fair chase ethic. 


> Position
> The Boone and Crockett Club believes the term "long-range" shooting is more defined by a hunter's intent, than any specific distance at which a shot is taken. If the intent of the individual is to test equipment and determine how far one can shoot to hit a live target and if there is no motivation to risk engagement with the animal being hunted, this practice is not hunting and should not be accorded the same status as hunting.
> 
> The Boone and Crockett Club maintains that hunting, at its most fundamental level, is defined by a tenuous and unpredictable relationship between predator and prey. This is an intrinsic, irrefutable and intimate connection that cannot be compromised if the hunter is to maintain the sanctity of this relationship and any credible claim that hunting is challenging, rewarding, respectful of wild creatures, and in service to wildlife conservation. This connection is built upon many complex components that differentiate hunting from simply shooting or killing.
> ...


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The definition of fair chase as some of you on here are making it went out of the window the day that gunpowder was invented and we took up the rifle that can shoot further than 100 yards, and that measurement is arbitrary. I couldn't even begin to tell you the number of animals that I have killed that had no idea that I was there, weather it was at 20 yards or 500, they had no clue what was about to happen until that arrow or bullet hit them.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Everyone on here is forgetting that when you kill an animal:

1. It did not want to be killed.
2. It did not know you were there, or by the time it did it was too late.
3. To it, the chase was one sided and not fair.

Sounds like PETA, and thats what happens when we get high and mighty with eachother.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

osageorange said:


> Awe shucks boss, they didn't mean no harm. I called them "boys" so it's okay for them to call me an idiot. Truth is, what I said was idiotic, that's why I said it. I was mirroring and echoing a previous post but the boys still can't figure it out. When they call me out, it's cause they don't like it when I repeat back to them what they have already said. I'm just spelling it out more openly. Even though I've told them over and over that what I post isn't what I believe or express any of my opinions they are so reflex driven they can't help but shout out. Watch, I'll do it again in few days and they'll still gobble like a shock called tom turkey. It's fun.


Then how about quoting those you are "mirroring" so it actually makes a bit more sense??


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Dukes_Daddy said:


> And back to the root of the issue. Not hilarious. It reflects *SOME PEOPLES OPINION REGARDING THE* erosion of fair chase ethic.


There Dukes....fixed your post for you. Funny how aganda driven people like to talk about their opinion like it is fact. Just because you or the "Boob and Crockosht" club think a certain way does not make it a reality. I do think that this is a worthy subject to discuss, but also feel that there are many other issues that merit attention ahead of this one. Mainly because the real effects of long range hunting are purely speculative and largely contrived by the creative imaginations of the biased.....in my humble opinion.

Long range shooting and it's relation to hunting is a FAD. I've seen it cycle before. Most people will give it up when they realize that it takes a lot of time and money to get and remain proficient for very little if any advantage in the hunting world. If you're really serious about putting a big animal in the "books", there are much better ways than long range shooting to put the odds in your favor....most involve money and they are all considered "fair chase" by the self-appointed ethics police.-----SS


----------



## fastcamo (Aug 27, 2012)

Shooting a elk at 850 yards is just as ethical as Utah having the LE any weapon usually during the best time of the rut. To some its right, to some its not, but its here to stay.


----------



## Dukes_Daddy (Nov 14, 2008)

Springville Shooter said:


> Long range shooting and it's relation to hunting is a FAD.


When did this happen?

RMEF supports the B&C position and I agree it's a good measure of hunters to practice fair chase.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

B&C has a position? And you agree with it? Awesome! So what is it?

At what distance do we cross that line? When is it no longer 'fair chase.'


----------



## Dodge360 (Nov 2, 2014)

Such a waste of time it makes my head hurt. But it's none of my business what you guys do in your free time


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Dodge360 said:


> Such a waste of time it makes my head hurt. But it's none of my business what you guys do in your free time


I actually think this one has been better than most. ----SS


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

This is a hard thread to stay out of. The rhetoric that the Boone and Crockett club uses to describe what is a hunt and what isn't a hunt is a joke. You need to refine your skills but not too much. You need to take advantage of situations but not to the extreme with the exception of the peak of the rut you can take advantage of hormone driven animals all you want. You can also manipulate state regulations in order to seclude animals from hunters in order to protect them and dull their senses so that those with the financial means can hire a 3rd party to do all the "intimate connecting"

The Boone and Crockett Club also does not discount "Long Range" shooting from crossbow, muzzleloader, and handgun hunters either. So make sure that when you buy a new firearm to harvest an animal that you do not use the latest and the greatest or you may be excluded from their club. 

Use of rangefinders and radios are also prohibited as well. I would love to go through their list of qualified individuals and filter out every single guided hunter that had cronies out perched on hills with radios and sat phones. Are you trying to tell me that Doyle Moss did not use a radio, rangefinder, or cell phone to get Denny Austad on the spider bull? I think there are some changes that need to be made withing the Boone and Crockett Club.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I am fine that RMEF has that opinion, but I have personally seen, and now will laugh, that their giveaways include things like Quigley-Fords, 300 Ultra's, 7MM Ultra's, etc... Those don't usually go in the "short-range" column...

I do respect that Wayne Van Zwoll helped write the position. Although his book was a major stepping stone and huge resource for knowledge that helped me love long range hunting and shooting... I think the fact that he has done a huge variety of hunting and ranges gives him a good basis to have that opinion and I respect that. I would rather someone that knows what the h*** they are talking about say short-range is better than someone that honestly doesn't have a clue about things.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

There is no hard line because conditions change. Even archery ranges should be closer on very windy days vs no wind days. Similarly, rifle ranges will vary dramatically due to wind and other factors. How many Long distance shooters know the velocity difference of their loads from a 70 degree day vs a 40 degree day? Depending on powders and other factors it can very alot, maybe not enough to care about for a 300 yard shot but at 800 yards you can be off a ton.


-DallanC


----------



## HuntinFoolUtah (Jan 11, 2013)

It's pretty simple to calculate how temperature effects velocity/trajectory with any decent ballistics program.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

HuntinFoolUtah said:


> It's pretty simple to calculate how temperature effects velocity/trajectory with any decent ballistics program.


Ya think? You do know I'm the author of a very popular Ballistics software program right? I've only been studying this for 15 or so years... but yes you are correct in that the trajectory differences can be computed for different air temperatures.

Unfortunately, that is not what I was referring to. I specifically was referring to muzzle velocity changes due to temperatures affecting burn rates. I've chatted with people who never consider cartridge loads might vary by several hundred fps just due to temperature changes. This is a reason why some of Hodgdon's "Extreme" powders are so popular, they are relatively uneffected by temperature swings.

-DallanC


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

The chronograph is your friend.------SS


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Springville Shooter said:


> The chronograph is your friend.------SS


Absolutely.

-DallanC


----------



## Skally (Apr 20, 2012)

This argument will never END!


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

I'm getting 22000 FPS out of my crossman slingshot and about 13000 lbs/sq inch at 1500 yards. I feel like I can shoot an elephant with it at any distance and get a good blood trail to follow


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Ya think? You do know I'm the author of a very popular Ballistics software program right? I've only been studying this for 15 or so years... but yes you are correct in that the trajectory differences can be computed for different air temperatures.
> 
> Unfortunately, that is not what I was referring to. I specifically was referring to muzzle velocity changes due to temperatures affecting burn rates. I've chatted with people who never consider cartridge loads might vary by several hundred fps just due to temperature changes. This is a reason why some of Hodgdon's "Extreme" powders are so popular, they are relatively uneffected by temperature swings.
> 
> -DallanC


You're right Dallan. I have a screaming-fast .257Wby load with RL22 that I can't shoot in high temps without showing high pressure signs. I know I'm roasting my throat out but, hey, barrels are consumables to some of us.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I've learned one thing from all this LR talk. 
I will never include the distance that I shot an animal in any of my hunting stories in the future. Whether it's 50 yards or 500, it just doesn't matter. 
I don't think 99% of us when reading a hunting story, whether it be here on this forum or in a magazine, never think or wonder about how far the animal was shot. 
I know I never have thought about it in the past.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Many folks just aren't sharing their stories at all anymore. Especially those who have been around for a while. It's really sad but who can blame them? You post a nice deer and someone says you shot it too far. You shoot a nice elk and someone says it has weak thirds. You shoot a huge bison and someone questions it's bovine genetics. Who needs all the BS?------SS


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

ridgetop said:


> I've learned one thing from all this LR talk.
> I will never include the distance that I shot an animal in any of my hunting stories in the future...


Me too. If I do someone will think I am a whimp for not taking a long enough shot.

Actually, my hunting stories are so meager that most wouldn't be interested in hearing them anyway.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

massmanute said:


> Me too. If I do someone will think I am a whimp for not taking a long enough shot.
> 
> Actually, my hunting stories are so meager that most wouldn't be interested in hearing them anyway.


We love all hunting stories that have a happy ending, even if you didn't shoot anything!


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

massmanute said:


> Me too. If I do someone will think I am a whimp for not taking a long enough shot.
> 
> Actually, my hunting stories are so meager that most wouldn't be interested in hearing them anyway.


I think you're smart for not taking a shot you're not comfortable with. That's the way it should be.


----------

