300 yards and beyond - is it "hunting" or just "shooting"?

[Ratltrap]

As I understand the terms in this thread, "hunting" implies efficient and clean harvest of game while "shooting" implies a less efficient means of harvest. To me "shooting" range begins where "hunting" range ends, whether that's 300 yards across a canyon or 30 yards in the woods. I would agree with those saying that there is no magic number where long range "shooting" begins. Some hunters are certainly more proficient shooters than others and some just don't know their limits. I would think that off a good rest any decent rifle shooter with a decent rifle chambered for a 300 yard game cartridge should over flat ground with no wind be able to make minute of deer shots at 300 yards. But, that 300 yard shot up a 45 degree slope in a 40 mph wind is a whole different discipline - and many hunters just don't get that or the gradation between the two.

To me this discussion illustrates much of why guides are required to hunt big game in many places. Some people either don't have the experience or simply aren't capable of making good decisions when it comes to something they want and feel they've earned through expense or effort. Doesn't really matter whether poor decisions are based on lack of knowledge, lack of proficiency, lack of humility, or lack of ethics, the result is the same - wasted game. I feel I've earned my skepticism of long range shooting and snap shooting in the thick through the use of many precious tags over the years cleaning up someone elses wounded game.

[40inarow]

I am getting into this thread late and so most people will probably not read my post. I have shot silhouette for many years and have shot thousands of rounds between 318 and 547 yards in practice and competition. The problem as I see it with shooting game over 300 yards is the wind. Often enough, the wind is doing something else "out there" from what it is doing where you are. In competition, you have a spotter and the conversation often  is nothing but about what the wind is doing. The wind can change in a 2 1/2 minute period. Sometimes you have to see it to believe it to see how much the wind can blow your shot.

Given this, I would be extremely reluctant to take a shot over 300. Wounding is not acceptable to me. I am not saying I would never do it. To take one shot at 300 or 400 or 500 means there is a great risk to make that shot. If you are going to take the shot, you better be damn sure you know what you are doing.

[jro45]

To make a long shot you need to have no wind or very little. If the wind is blowing to hard I wouldn't make the shot. You also need a solid rest.

[SDS-GEN]

I was hesitant to post on this issue, but I've had a couple of beers, so here goes.  I feel that you should get as close as possible before shooting at game, that is HUNTING.  If you can't get closer than 300 yards because you run out of cover, then you have hunted as close as you can, take the shot IF you can make it.  This happens from time to time in open terrain like tundra or prairie.  For me there is a point where I just don't get much of a thrill out of the hunt, the closer I am to an animal the more exciting it is.
The problem I have is with people who buy the latest super mag and a 24x scope and somehow think this makes them a world class sniper who can kill game at 500+ yards without even trying a stalk, that is SHOOTING.  This type of person needs to learn his shooting limitations and those of his weapon as well as some woodsman skills.

[SDS-GEN]

I would add that a big part of the problem is that people aren't willing to take resposibility for an animal they wound but don't find.  Guys I elk hunt with had a guy in camp one year that wounded an elk and tracked it for a couple of hundred yards and gave up.  A couple of other guys in camp tracked it for a couple of miles then ran out of sign.  The guy who did the shooting never burned his tag, he went back out hunting, he was never asked to hunt with us again.  This story, like some of the others posted here shows a lack of respect for the game we hunt and is completely unacceptable.

[NONYA]

"never burned his tag"?You expect a hunter who wounds game to go home and burn his tag?

[Drilling Man]

  In my hunting career to date i can only remember takeing one shot at a game animial over 300 yards, and that was at a dall sheep.  I always figured getting closer wasn't all that hard to do and i never wanted an animial so badly that i'd blaze away at stupidly long ranges.  I really don't understand why others do it either..  If i couldn't get closer, then it just got away... no problem.

  Many times even if i didn't want the animial i'd stalk close "just for the practise", like in the pict. below.  I took the pict. with a cheapo Russian twin lens camera that had a fixed 80mm lens, and yes i let them go.

  DM

[Redhawk1]

This whole thread is full of I's. I wound not do it, I don't think others should do it. I, I , I. What a lot of you don't understand, there are some people that can do it, and have done it.
Myself 95 % of my hunting and shots have been under 100 yards. On a couple of occasions I have made long shots. I was confident in my equipment and my skill as a shooter to know I could make the shot.
Sometime's there are certain circumstances that one can't get close, and a far shot is all you have. But if I am up for the task and I have the equipment to do the job, then why not take the shot?  Why, because some of you think it is not hunting because your self imposed limitation on yourself should be everyone else's?? Sorry that crap don't fly with me.

Everyone has to know the personal limitations and what there equipment is capable of. Also make sure you practice for such a shot, it is another important aspect of shooting well at a long distance.

But don't expect others to agree with you, just because you personally think it is wrong.

[nomosendero]

This whole thread is full of I's. I wound not do it, I don't think others should do it. I, I , I. What a lot of you don't understand, there are some people that can do it, and have done it.
Myself 95 % of my hunting and shots have been under 100 yards. On a couple of occasions I have made long shots. I was confident in my equipment and my skill as a shooter to know I could make the shot.
Sometime's there are certain circumstances that one can't get close, and a far shot is all you have. But if I am up for the task and I have the equipment to do the job, then why not take the shot?  Why, because some of you think it is not hunting because your self imposed limitation on yourself should be everyone else's?? Sorry that crap don't fly with me.

Everyone has to know the personal limitations and what there equipment is capable of. Also make sure you practice for such a shot, it is another important aspect of shooting well at a long distance.

But don't expect others to agree with you, just because you personally don't think it is wrong.

Yep!

Hashed & rehashed.

[Ratltrap]

Everyone has to know the personal limitations and what there equipment is capable of. Also make sure you practice for such a shot, it is another important aspect of shooting well at a long distance.

Everyone that hunts in your area may know their limits, I can only relate my own experience which is that few hunters practice enough to know their limits let alone enough to take 300+ yard shots. Present company excepted, many hunters I know buy a box of 20, maybe fire 1 or 2 at 100 to see if it's on the paper, and go hunting. They know their 300 Blaster will work at 1000 yards 'cause they read it in Carlos Hathcock's book and when the animal limps away - no worries, there's always more. I see little value in telling tales that might encourage those guys to take long shots.

Certainly poor shooting decisions are only part of the reason, but our local game laws are now written to mitigate for the skills of visiting hunters. No matter how well prepared or practiced, if you come from outside to this part of the country to hunt big game you will very likely be required to have a guide. If you look around a bit you will see that is a pattern around the country. I hate to see that pattern because at some point it will price many of us out of big game hunting altogether.

[jdt48653]

many who would not shoot at this distance would however not hesitate to use a bow in range
when there is never a 100% surety of a clean kill!

[nomosendero]

Everyone has to know the personal limitations and what there equipment is capable of. Also make sure you practice for such a shot, it is another important aspect of shooting well at a long distance.

Everyone that hunts in your area may know their limits, I can only relate my own experience which is that few hunters practice enough to know their limits let alone enough to take 300+ yard shots. Present company excepted, many hunters I know buy a box of 20, maybe fire 1 or 2 at 100 to see if it's on the paper, and go hunting. They know their 300 Blaster will work at 1000 yards 'cause they read it in Carlos Hathcock's book and when the animal limps away - no worries, there's always more. I see little value in telling tales that might encourage those guys to take long shots.

Certainly poor shooting decisions are only part of the reason, but our local game laws are now written to mitigate for the skills of visiting hunters. No matter how well prepared or practiced, if you come from outside to this part of the country to hunt big game you will very likely be required to have a guide. If you look around a bit you will see that is a pattern around the country. I hate to see that pattern because at some point it will price many of us out of big game hunting altogether.

These folks wound up close as well, now what? In fact, far more are wounded up close by these folks you describe who shoot a round or two & go hunting, & we all know that is a fact!

Yes Redhawk, it is still Groundhog day.    It even looks like I am paying the same bills every day. 

[Redhawk1]

These folks wound up close as well, now what? In fact, far more are wounded up close by these folks you describe who shoot a round or two & go hunting, & we all know that is a fact!

Yes Redhawk, it is still Groundhog day.    It even looks like I am paying the same bills every day. 

It never stops, just like that other debate. I got a headache just thinking about it. 

[Ratltrap]

These folks wound up close as well, now what? In fact, far more are wounded up close by these folks you describe who shoot a round or two & go hunting, & we all know that is a fact!

No doubt much more game is shot at under 300 yards so it makes sense that more is probably wounded at under 300 yards as well - but I've not seen any hard evidence supporting that as fact. However, that really has nothing to do with my argument. I'm saying that given all else is equal game is probably wounded at a higher rate at long range because as distance increases so does error. Again, I'm not aware of any hard evidence that is true, but the premise is easily demonstrated by punching paper.

My real point here is not that there is some specific limit for taking difficult shots at game, but that even if you are an advanced shooter that can make difficult shots, you must be mindful that there are consequences in promoting that to less skilled shooters. I hope we can all agree that wounded game is an unacceptable consequence of testing the limits of our shooting skills.

[kyelkhunter3006]

IMHO, hunting has nothing to do with the distance of the shot, or even taking a shot for that matter.  I go hunting all of the time, without ever taking a shot.  Hunting is scouting, locating the game, being in the animals home element, trying to figure what the animal is going to do and why.  Then if you choose to take the animal, you are shooting it, whether it's at 5 yds or 500 yds.  When you take an animal and call your buddies, do you tell them "I hunted a good buck today"?  No, you say "I shot a good buck today."

It is an endless (and pointless, really) debate about how far is too far, blah blah blah.  You should not shoot further than your skill.  Period.  Most of us realize that, but there are also many that do not.  I can hit clay pigeons or pop cans at 200 yds with any rifle I have, be it a .22 mag, a 30-30, a muzzleloader, or a 30-06.  I can hit those targets at 400 yds with my 30-06 or something similar.  Would I shoot at a deer 250 yds away with my in-line? Yes, without any "morality or ethics" issue on my part.  Would most other people?  Probably not. 

This topic started about animals shot or wounded at long range, and now it's about poor shots at close range??  Where's the happy medium going to be?  Shoot whatever ranges you are comfortable with.  If others don't agree, so what?  If you know you can kill a deer at 500 yds, be my guest.  I've read numerous times that you shouldn't shoot unless you are 100% sure of a clean, killing hit on the animal.  How can you ever be 100% sure of anything?  Are you 100% sure that your bullet isn't a defect?  Are you 100% sure that your scope didn't break on that last shot at the range?  No, you aren't.  Regardless of your skill level, you are always taking something for granted when you're out in the field. It might be your equipment, your ability, etc.  Murphy's Law is the rule for anything.  I watched a deer take a 165 grain Partition from a .300 Weatherby, the shot was quartering toward the shooter, aimed for the front of the shoulder, and the bullet passed through and out the other side.  Distance was about 60 yds.  You know what?  That shot didn't kill that deer.  It was killed a year later by the hunter's brother.  We know it's the same deer because it had a bad eye and a torn ear.  You could see where the inital shot entered, and you could see the scar on the rear leg where it exited.  How in the world did that shot not kill the deer?  Beats the hell out of me, and I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't been there.  I would have called that shot 100%, and so would everyone else.

We should all be glad that there are people of all skill levels that want to hunt and shoot.   That way, the tradition keeps going, even if some of them use bad judgement.  Regardless of the topic, there is someone that will make a bad decision.  For example, there are many many more people that use bad judgement or go beyond their skill level everyday while they are behind the wheel of the car than there ever will be in the hunting fields.  I don't see anybody on the soapbox talking about things like that.............

I think it's time to let it go........for now.   

[nomosendero]

Who's promoting? If telling how something is done is promoting, then any how-to articles are taboo, because someone may try it that should not. We need more watchdogs to protect us from harm I suppose.


Kyelhunter3006, good post! You said "It is an endless (and pointless, really) debate about how far is too far, blah blah blah. You should not shoot further than your skill, Period."  True, and some of us have been saying that from the start. It really is that simple, some can do as well at 300 yards as some can do at 75 yards. If this was viewed in a logical manner, this would be a favorabe conclusion that we all could agree on.
Sadly, this reasoning is never pleasing to those at a higher level than some of us.


Jim Zumbo wrote one of those " I know how far you should shoot & you don't" articles at about the same time that he wrote one of
those "I know what kind of gun you should shoot & you don't" articles.  These elite types who know EXACTLY how far is too far for everyone sure provide good anti fodder just as Zumbo did in both of these articles. To make it complete let's tell people the method they must hunt, still hunt, stands, drives, etc. & which calibers are too big.                     

[Mac11700]

Everyone has to know the personal limitations and what there equipment is capable of. Also make sure you practice for such a shot, it is another important aspect of shooting well at a long distance.

Everyone that hunts in your area may know their limits, I can only relate my own experience which is that few hunters practice enough to know their limits let alone enough to take 300+ yard shots. Present company excepted, many hunters I know buy a box of 20, maybe fire 1 or 2 at 100 to see if it's on the paper, and go hunting. They know their 300 Blaster will work at 1000 yards 'cause they read it in Carlos Hathcock's book and when the animal limps away - no worries, there's always more. I see little value in telling tales that might encourage those guys to take long shots.

Certainly poor shooting decisions are only part of the reason, but our local game laws are now written to mitigate for the skills of visiting hunters. No matter how well prepared or practiced, if you come from outside to this part of the country to hunt big game you will very likely be required to have a guide. If you look around a bit you will see that is a pattern around the country. I hate to see that pattern because at some point it will price many of us out of big game hunting altogether.

Poor shooting skills have nothing to do with the guide requirements in any state of this country...Most folks already know who's money has been used to get the adoption of these regs...so...even equating this as a possibility in part of your statement is rather foolish...Big money talks...all the rest walks...

There's always going to be someone who wants to stick their noses in someones business...be it how far they shoot...what caliber they can shoot..whatever...It's real sad...it really is...To bad we can't really tell these self centered morons what we really want to tell them...We can't though...because if we did... they might get their wittle feelings hurt...and that wouldn't be politically correct...  ...but I can say this...For those who don't my caliber choice...and how far I shoot...T.D.B....Get a grip...get a life...and get over it..When you start paying my bills...or for my hunts...Then you have a right...Now...if I am wantonly wounding animals and making no attempt to recover them..... then it is you duty to report me to the appropriate authorities...and you can't rant and rave all you want about me...

Mac

[Ratltrap]

Poor shooting skills have nothing to do with the guide requirements in any state of this country...Most folks already know who's money has been used to get the adoption of these regs...so...even equating this as a possibility in part of your statement is rather foolish...Big money talks...all the rest walks...

As I said, shooting skills are only part of the reason for Alaska's guide requirements, but wanton waste due to poor shooting decisions by nonresident hunters was one of the primary reasons. You didn't say where you got your information, but mine came from the 1982 Alaska Game Board minutes where much of that guide requirement was decided.

You are on target that just like any legislated entitlement, now that an economy has developed around that requirement it will never go away. No matter how you label it, our cartridge choices are also being legislated out by caliber and fpe requirements.

IMHO most of those who post on this board are on the same side - i.e., pro-hunting. Call it politically correct if you want, but it seems to me we need to keep that in mind as I'm guessing the antis love to see us calling each other 'self centered morons' as much as they did Zumbo's rant and anyone new to hunting has to wonder if this is really where they want to be.
 
Finally, I will point out that since hunting is an activity based on harvest of public resources, we all help pay for your hunts.

[nomosendero]

Did that 1982 decision say anything about the range where most of these bad shots were made? No, I think not & since the subject is 300 yds. & beyond, it is a bit off topic as I would bet most of these shots were under that, oh I forgot that you don't have those numbers.

Like Mac said, not the real issue anyway.

[Drilling Man]

As I said, shooting skills are only part of the reason for Alaska's guide requirements, but wanton waste due to poor shooting decisions by nonresident hunters was one of the primary reasons. You didn't say where you got your information, but mine came from the 1982 Alaska Game Board minutes where much of that guide requirement was decided.

  HA HA HA HA  come on, you know that the REAL reason nonresident hunters in Ak. have to have a guide is for $$$$$$$$ reasons!  If that wasn't true then moose and caribou would have been required LONG time ago...  I know the guides would love to get "them" in there fold too, because they would make more money!!  They keep trying but so far haven't been able to...

  I lived in Alaska for 25 years and i hunted all over the state.  I saw that over and over again... With the guides i  met in the field, or was friends with.

  It's also true that waaaaaay too many folks come to Alaska and are only worried about the horns!!  They don't want to pack out all that meat, it's too much work!!  I was happy when it because law that you had to take the meat from the ribs, and that the antlers had to be the LAST thing packed out!

  You BS your friends and i'll BS mine, but lets not BS eachother!!!

  DM

[Redhawk1]

 Drilling Man, well said. 

[Ratltrap]

Did that 1982 decision say anything about the range where most of these bad shots were made? No, I think not & since the subject is 300 yds. & beyond, it is a bit off topic as I would bet most of these shots were under that, oh I forgot that you don't have those numbers.

Like Mac said, not the real issue anyway.

As a matter of fact, it did. There were several cases discussed, but the ranges of the goat incident in question were over 450 yards.

[Ratltrap]

You BS your friends and i'll BS mine, but lets not BS eachother!!!

  DM

To quote Elemer Keith "Hell, I was there." Until you actually read what went on at those hearings I got no time for your BS.

[jdt48653]

its like riding a harley,at best you are never in control

[nomosendero]

its like riding a harley,at best you are never in control

So at what magic speed does this "out of control" situation occur with the Harley & at what magic range does this "out of control"
situation occur when shooting rifles? Is it the same with everyone & why?

[Redhawk1]

its like riding a harley,at best you are never in control

Sounds like someone need to learn how to ride. 

[nomosendero]

Did that 1982 decision say anything about the range where most of these bad shots were made? No, I think not & since the subject is 300 yds. & beyond, it is a bit off topic as I would bet most of these shots were under that, oh I forgot that you don't have those numbers.

Like Mac said, not the real issue anyway.

As a matter of fact, it did. There were several cases discussed, but the ranges of the goat incident in question were over 450 yards.

So a decision was made over "A" Goat incident.  Sounds like some Goats were in attendance!

Sorry, but the fact that some people cannot find their butt will both hands will not influence whether or not I shoot at a particular yardage.

[jdt48653]

i just mean that under the best of conditions you are at the mercy of whats all around you.
like wind down range,animal movement at time of shot,angle of shot.

its like riding a harley,at best you are never in control

So at what magic speed does this "out of control" situation occur with the Harley & at what magic range does this "out of control"
situation occur when shooting rifles? Is it the same with everyone & why?

[454Puma]

Mac11700
    What's ethical to me may not be your standards -I'm fine with that !  So you may think it's just peachy for a shooter to shoot at game with a 50 BMG at 1000+ yds!  So far away that they can't even tell if they killed the animal! With a rifle they can't even carry unless its on a tripod mounted to thier truck? So when they shoot that 1000yd elk or what ever tell me what do they take when they do(if they do) go and actually check to see if they killed that animal! They sure as heck are not going to carry that 50 cal up and down two mountains?  And no there is no magic distance as a cut off for an ethical shot- some gifted/profesional shots can and do take longer shots and make them cleanly and ethically!  But even you I hope can agree there are not many of them! I know the limitations of my firearms and myself! Techinically I could hit an animal with my rifle at well past 1000yds will I No!  Can they be killed at that range yes! Dosen't mean one should!

[nomosendero]

i just mean that under the best of conditions you are at the mercy of whats all around you.
like wind down range,animal movement at time of shot,angle of shot.

its like riding a harley,at best you are never in control

So at what magic speed does this "out of control" situation occur with the Harley & at what magic range does this "out of control"
situation occur when shooting rifles? Is it the same with everyone & why?

No, under the best of conditions, you know the conditions & how it relates to the shot. If you do, you are good to go, if you don't, don't fire.
Some know how & some don't.