quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

The longest I have killed a buff is 308 yards.

Tanzania/Wendell Reich/Scott ? was PH/Mod 70 Win mod by Gordy Gritters/shot was in the lungs.

Wendell used my rifle and shot one at 350 a few days later. Killed him with one shot through the heart.


I like to climb mountains as well as hunt. I can guarantee you more guys die climbing mountains than hunting dangerous game. In fact, I bet golf is more dangerous than hunting DG for the simple fact that lightning kills more people, probably even per capita, than DG ever did. It isn't exactly dangerous.

Not at 308 yards!

That would be the equivelent of driving or taking a tram up the mountains you speak of.

Its a different game at 10 or 15 yards, especially elephants.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Wendell used my rifle and shot one at 350 a few days later. Killed him with one shot through the heart.

Get your story straight! It was 355 yards on your Leica rangefinder.

There wasn't a blade of grass taller than 6" between me and him. No way to get closer.

Would I do it again? Sure. It was day 12 of a 14 day hunt and I saw the Buffalo that I wanted.

Would I prefer to shoot him at 20 yards? Oh you bet! Just wasn't meant to be on this Buff.

Half-an-hour later, I followed that up by shooting another Buffalo at 132 yards with the .470 with iron sights.

Did you know if you hit a Buffalo in the ear with a 500 grain soft, it will kill him where he stands?

Really makes no difference that I was not aiming there.

Details ...

It wasn't that long ago when we hunted Elephants with spears, pit traps, or ran them off a cliff (ala North American Buffalo).

It won't be long before personal laser rifles or rail guns take the place of our archaic combustion driven implements.

Where do you draw the line? Did the NA Indian call rifles "unsporting"?

I dunno, and I can't claim to having ever hunted in Africa. Or, for that matter, having done much hunting at all having had a late start on this in life. What I do know is that I am leaning more and more towards the grand old game of stalking and woodcraft.

Perhaps it would be a greater challenge to work to within 25 yards, and then just leave without the mark ever knowing?

Nah, I'm sure I'm just naive. Better to shoot a critter at 700 yards without it never knowing you were there. It's safer that way, yes? Certainly takes a lot of effort (in a different way) to make a 700 yard shot when it counts.

I'd have to say it's all about free will and choice.

Great stuff and great stories! I have been embarrassed because I have taken a couple of buffalo at 150 yards, which I have considered very long shots on buffalo. I see now that I am just a piker! As Saeed said so well, you take the shot you get . . . provided you have the equipment and the confidence, and you can get steady enough. There are those who say shooting sticks are for sissies, and others who feel the same about scoped rifles for buffalo and such. I often use iron sights, and I often shoot unsupported . . . but iron sights and offhand shooting have very sharp range limitations! I have taken a couple of buffalo with iron sights at ranges a bit beyond a hundred yard. I consider that serious long-range shooting, and much more risky than shooting with a scope at twice the range! My goal is always to take the animal as cleanly as I can, preferably with the first shot (which doesn't happen all that often no matter the distance or caliber). Within reason I would rather have a steady shot at a bit longer range than a rushed situation up close. I love the big doubles with open sights, but I KNOW you can kill more buffalo and bigger buffalo with a scoped rifle, and these stories bear it out. The only reason I have never taken a buffalo beyond 150 yards is because I've never had to! But with a scoped .375 or .416 and a steady position one clearly can shoot farther. For me it is much more fun to get a whole lot closer, but sometimes you just can't, and if it's a really big buffalo or you're running short on time, decisions must be made.

quote:

Originally posted by SableTrail:

I think when you start maiming animals, and losing game from long distance shots---that's when it starts to get ugly for the hunting community. It's then up to the individual to stop the practice of risky long distance shooting. The animal deserves better and as hunters we must first and foremost always carry out our mission with responsibility.

Moja

Even better yet you know your personal and equipment limitations before you shoot and have the dicipline to limit your distance/stop yourself if you shouldn't shoot, so you aren't wounding game.

All,

Just playing devils advocate, but I keep hearing about having an idea for what shooting distance we should limit ourselves to, but it being alright to break them if it's a really nice animal? My understanding is that we limit ourselves in the first place to avoid wounding game out of respect for the game. So do we throw caution to the wind and not respect a really fine animal as much as just a mediocre head that we would exercise caution on? Again playing devils advocate, but I keep seeing this mind set.

I guess what I'm getting at is that if you are willing to take the shot on an excellent trophy you should be willing to take the same shot on a mediocre/representative animal.

Brett

To assasinate a noble animal like an elephant from long range is shameful.No gentleman would consider a shot at an elephant over 25yds.
If it's just about shooting go after rabbits at 400yds.If a man wants to experience dangerous game hunting it has to be dangerous-otherwise what is the point?

I suspect many of us will be lucky to go for buffalo, once. That will certainly have an effect on how we view this subject, as will our background. Having farmed off and on most of my life. I've had some up close discussions with large livestock with the xrays to prove it. I've put a lot of meat on the hook. Trophies are not a big part of the hunting experience for me, while they are for others. So those things greatly influence my perspectives on hunting.
For me, and only for me, I would want to pack the most fun in the hunt, killing a bull would be a plus. Up close and personal, (pee your pants, close) is my dream. That would be the best, but... experience tells me that hunting situations don't always play out the way you plan, sometimes they are better. The important thing is meeting your individual needs and desires with the hunt. It is not a question of ethics. It is a question of meeting your desires. I have an aquaintance who lives to hunt and shoot elk at extreme distances(1000 yards+). It is all he can think about. Practices year round, for a week of sitting on a mountainside with his trusty bench and rifle. Sounds boring to me, but it makes his socks go up and down! If it excites you, and you're capable, go for it. I don't believe ethics have to do with the range, but have more to do whether you are personally properly prepared.
Bfly

Best quote so far on this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I enjoy hunting, and I take it as it comes.

If I follow an elephant or buffalo or lion into thick bush, and he appears a few yards from me, I will shoot it.

If I follow an animal for hours, and then catch up with him in an open area where there is no way in hell to get any closer. And I think I am capable of killing him, then I shoot it.

The distance becomes immaterial.

I have only taken 6 Buffalo. 4 of them were 100 yards or more. 2 of them were under 30 yards.

Only one was taken with a scoped rifle! Every other one was with iron sights.

It wasn't a lack of effort, as a couple of the 100+ yard shots were after some serious hunting.

The easiest hunting I have ever done for Buffalo were the two that were under 30 yards.

Each experience is unique in it's own way.

quote:

Originally posted by craig boddington:
I see now that I am just a piker!

Hardly!

If anyone wishes to be REALLY ethical on his hunts, he should:

1. Get on a raft that he had built himself, then rows to Africa.

2. Once he gets there, he should use stone tools to make himself a spear.

3. Find the animal of his choice, be it elephant or buffalo, and spear it to death.

This silly notion of using an aeroplane, then cars, then living in a moder tent with all amenities, then using a moder high power rifle with smokelss powder, is highly unethical

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If anyone wishes to be REALLY ethical on his hunts, he should:

1. Get on a raft that he had built himself, then rows to Africa.

2. Once he gets there, he should use stone tools to make himself a spear.

3. Find the animal of his choice, be it elephant or buffalo, and spear it to death.

This silly notion of using an aeroplane, then cars, then living in a moder tent with all amenities, then using a moder high power rifle with smokelss powder, is highly unethical

Don't forget the laser rangefinder and the capuccino machine!
Seriously as Saeed said in a previous post, plans are made but may change depending on the cicumstances. I'll bet there isn't a poster on this forum that wouldn't take a 150yd poke at a 45+ inch buff late in the hunt if he had the right rifle and couldn't get closer. Even if he were (gasp) a little soft in the boss!
Circimstances change and it's all hunting which is what we love.

quote:

I'll bet there isn't a poster on this forum that wouldn't take a 150yd poke at a 45+ inch buff late in the hunt if he had the right rifle and couldn't get closer. Even if he were (gasp) a little soft in the boss!

Hahahaha... true, true. I once heard ethics defined as what we do when no one is looking. It is one thing to post from an armchair perspective on the internet, quite another to have blood, sweat, miles and serious money tied up in a buffalo hunt in Masailand on the last day and see that bull you described! That would be the true crucible!

Well, at the risk of ruffling some feathers, how about the Huskemaw ad now running in Sporting Classics that shows a far away cliff, a line to that cliff that says "973 yards" and then a 13 mph crosswind. Piece of cake, it says. "Anything within a half a mile is smoked" it says.

I spoke with an outfitter who said these guys are constantly asking him to put them up for a hunt for their TV show. He was reluctant. I said, "Hey, have them come out and if they wound the animal, their hunt is done. And if they wound it, they pay full price for their hunt."

As a guy who does a ton of long range shooting, to say a 973 shot in a 13 mph wind is a piece of cake is pure bullshit. A 300 grain .338 SRA HPBTMK bullet at 3200 fps (who shoots that anyway?) will blow 42.5 inches in that wind. A 180 grain Nosler BT at 3300 will drift 70 inches. A run of the mill .30-06? Almost 100 inches or nine feet.

More and more outfitters are taking the position of "you wound it, and your hunt is done."

Obviously, such a policy won't stop an unguided guy from shooting up the zip code, but it is a start.

Wasn't there a gal a century ago who snuck up on rhino and painted a mark on them?

quote:

To assasinate a noble animal like an elephant from long range is shameful

So it is not shameful to sneak up to him, get real close, then assasinate him?

quote:

Originally posted by craig boddington:
I see now that I am just a piker! As Saeed said so well, you take the shot you get . . . provided you have the equipment and the confidence, and you can get steady enough.

Two important things about hunting:

1.) You can't call back your shot.

2.) Except those few times when you are close and need to save your butt or someone else's, you don't need to take any shot. You can pass.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by wombat:
To assasinate a noble animal like an elephant from long range is shameful.No gentleman would consider a shot at an elephant over 25yds.

With all due respect, that is just an absurd remark.

quote:

Maybe I hang out in an unusual crowd, but I've never once ever heard anyone say they were going "dangerous game hunting" in an attempt to impress anyone or assert their manliness. Rather, most for say they are going after lion, buff, etc. Nor have I ever heard anyone refer to themselves as a "dangerous game hunter."

Yeah. The problem with these threads is that it is usually a lecture from somebody, possibly from somebody that accidentally got close to a buff and has now declared himself a dangerous game hunter!

Can you imagine sneaking up on whitetail deer like you can on buffalo or elephant? Ha!

It's a good thing that one can get as close as one can on dangerous game, so as to make the shot as certain as possible, which is why one gets as close as one can on dangerous game.

An elephant is a lot bigger target at 5 yards than it is at 50.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If anyone wishes to be REALLY ethical on his hunts, he should:

1. Get on a raft that he had built himself, then rows to Africa.

2. Once he gets there, he should use stone tools to make himself a spear.

3. Find the animal of his choice, be it elephant or buffalo, and spear it to death.

This silly notion of using an aeroplane, then cars, then living in a moder tent with all amenities, then using a moder high power rifle with smokelss powder, is highly unethical

As much as I may disagree with you on some things, you are quite the guy sometimes.

To Saeed-when the elephant is looking down his nose at you it is not assasination from some hidden distant point-I don't know why you would bother,the danger is gone,where is the thrill?

To mrlexma-no,it is not absurd,Buzz Charlton-more specifically Alan Shearing- showed me how you go elephant hunting and it was explained just so.It was also accepted just so.No dispute was expected and none was offered.How do you hunt your elephant?

I have never hunted dangerous game but I always thought you got close as you can for saftey so you do not wound an animal. I thought the animals were dangerous not the hunt. I bow hunt deer and getting close to an animal is more exciting but I also enjoy gun hunting. I would think it would be more dangerous to shoot an animal at long distance since you will have a greater chance of wounding it. Ethical shots on game is a personal opinion knowing your own skill level so you do not wound the animal dangerous or not. JMHO.

So how much adrenalin do you imagaine would flood your body if an ele alerts on you at 20 yds vs 200yds?

I watched a guy shoot his first Buffalo (50 yards), and then seemed very disapponted and aggitated. The ph and I looked at him and asked what was wrong.

He was shaking his head and walking backwards, muttering, "It wasn't supposed to be like this ... this is not how it was supposed to be."

Turns out he had watched a video of Buffalo hunting in the Okavango and thought Buffalo were supposed to stand in the open grass, with no trees around, when you shoot them.

Preconceived notions of the outcome of the hunt cause some hunters to be disappointed in their experience, no matter what the notion is.

Distance, grass (in this case) was the wrong color and there were trees that were not "supposed" to be there.

There are no rules, there is no script. If you can not tollerate the variables that accompany a dangerous game hunt, and accept that it may not play out as it did in your mind, you may consider taking up knitting.

There is a preconceived notion that Buffalo must be shot under 50 yards.

If you want to do that, it is fine with me, and it is your choice, but please understand it will limit your opportunities.

Stalk as close as you can, and take the shot if it is a "doable" shot.

Remember, you are hunting, not filming a MS video!

quote:

2.) Except those few times when you are close and need to save your butt or someone else's, you don't need to take any shot. You can pass.

Why would I want to get into a situation where I have to save either my butt or someone else's?

It is supposed to be an enjoyable hunt.

If I wanted to get myself or others in danger, there a lot more "sports" than hunting.

I think anyone who goes hunting, and claims he is hunting dangerous game for the danger it affords is lying.

After all, if he comes back alive that proves he has failed miserably!

I go hunt because I enjoy hunting.

I have never mentioned that I hunt "dangerous" game.

I have gotten close enough to elephants if I had stretched my hand I would have touched him with the muzzle.

He was fast asleep, and I had no intention to "assasinate" him.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

2.) Except those few times when you are close and need to save your butt or someone else's, you don't need to take any shot. You can pass.

Why would I want to get into a situation where I have to save either my butt or someone else's?

It is supposed to be an enjoyable hunt.

If I wanted to get myself or others in danger, there a lot more "sports" than hunting.

I think anyone who goes hunting, and claims he is hunting dangerous game for the danger it affords is lying.

After all, if he comes back alive that proves he has failed miserably!

I go hunt because I enjoy hunting.

I have never mentioned that I hunt "dangerous" game.

I have gotten close enough to elephants if I had stretched my hand I would have touched him with the muzzle.

He was fast asleep, and I had no intention to "assasinate" him.

Just walking through the bush looking for a warthog can lead to too close encounters with buff or elephants.

Aside from that, for some hunters, myself included, it is the height of fun and enjoyment to close on dangerous game, even more fun that closing on non-dangerous game. And even more fun when you approach close enough that the game becomes aware of you. Some PH's enjoy it too, some do not.

To suggest that going dangerous game hunting for the danger and returning alive is failure is beyond absurd, beyond laughable even. Using that ridiculous rationale:

Skydiving and having your chute open must be the epitome of total failure.

Racing at Daytona and winning, coming in second, or just finishing then are equal failures.

Climbing the face of the Eiger and not falling is just a disaster of a failure....

Tempting fate, anywhere from illusorily to really, truly, is great fun for some, not so fun for others. Dangerous game hunting can run from the illusory tempting of fate to really truly tempting fate to approaching suicide. I think most prefer the illusory end of the spectrum, but not all. 500Grains likes to really truly tempt fate, Kelly Gxxxls is another. I do as well, maybe not so much as Dan or Kelly, yet.

You don't seem to like closing on dangerous game and seem to prefer emphasizing longer range sharpshooting, that is all. Other's enjoy the close encounters. But where is the difference between shooting a deer and shooting an elephant or buff if they are all shot at 100yds? None to me. I truly enjoy deer hunting, but much prefer hunting elephants close.

As far as closing on oblivious elephants, its fun, but its a hell of a lot more fun approaching aware elephant.

JPK

quote:

You don't seem to like closing on dangerous game and seem to prefer emphasizing longer range sharpshooting

That is far from the truth.

I will get as close as I know is practical - WITHOUT the animal knowing my existance if at all possible. And then shoot him.

Going on purpose to alert the animal to you is not much different than Mark Sullivan claim of letting the buffalo "choose how to die".

I suppose it never entered his mind that the animal would rather choose NOT to die.

Okay…so why the heck hunt buffalo in the first place, given that "dangerous game" inherently costs more, and not stick with hunting plainsgame? You can track eland or most anything else, and still experience "Africa", given the proper environment, for a lot less money. If somebody wants to just walk around Africa, or have a pleasurable outdoors/camping experience with friends, there are cheaper ways to do it.

And why is buffalo hunting more fun (to some addicting) then hunting American Bison? If somebody wants to shoot a bovine, why not just whack a village cow…last one I bought was only $150 and I got to get nice and close (18-inches to be exact, lucky I had my .416!).

I could be wrong and an open for enlightenment as frankly I don’t really get a charge (forgive the pun!) out of buffalo hunting anymore, but I think it is because of all that we have read and watched and heard and dreamed of…somebody wants to hunt a buffalo because of the perceived danger, real or not (sure there is more as buffalo hunting forces that one has the complete African Experience which they might otherwise not know to seek out). I think it is the "benchmark" of African hunting for most guys, which is cool with me. Requiring the use of manly rifles, combined with the perceived danger as evidenced by "THE LOOK", this is the core essence and allure of cape buffalo hunting.

Hard to get "THAT LOOK" at 150 yards!

In fact, now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure that the ones I shot at and beyond this distance were SMILING at me!

One tremndous difference between MS's rumored method and mine, Dan's etc, the elephant is healthy when we approach.

If you prefer to approach as closely as possible, why are so many of your shots on buff and other game at such extreme ranges.

No shot, except that rare saving shot, ever needs to be taken.

Getting as close as you can for a shot may mean passing on a shot for another approach or even for another herd or group of duga boys. Just killing things is no end.

JPK

quote:

If you prefer to approach as closely as possible, why are so many of your shots on buff and other game at such extreme ranges.

If I follow buffalo for several hours, and then catch up with them across an open plain, without any chance of me getting any closer, I see absolutely no reason not shoot tem if I thought certain of making a killing shot.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

If you prefer to approach as closely as possible, why are so many of your shots on buff and other game at such extreme ranges.

If I follow buffalo for several hours, and then catch up with them across an open plain, without any chance of me getting any closer, I see absolutely no reason not shoot tem if I thought certain of making a killing shot.

Quite right..if you have sufficient firepower and you know your limits, why not take the only chance you may have?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

If you prefer to approach as closely as possible, why are so many of your shots on buff and other game at such extreme ranges.

If I follow buffalo for several hours, and then catch up with them across an open plain, without any chance of me getting any closer, I see absolutely no reason not shoot tem if I thought certain of making a killing shot.

There lies the difference, I would pass and either wait for an opportunity to close or defer to another day and have.

I just don't see the point of taking the shot without the fun and the thrill of closing. A dead animal is not the goal, though it is inevitably required to achieve the goal.

Same with elephants, though with a tight schedule and a lot of quota I have shot a few at 25 or 30yds.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

If you prefer to approach as closely as possible, why are so many of your shots on buff and other game at such extreme ranges.

If I follow buffalo for several hours, and then catch up with them across an open plain, without any chance of me getting any closer, I see absolutely no reason not shoot tem if I thought certain of making a killing shot.

There lies the difference, I would pass and either wait for an opportunity to close or defer to another day and have.

I just don't see the point of taking the shot without the fun and the thrill of closing. A dead animal is not the goal, though it is inevitably required to achieve the goal.

Same with elephants, though with a tight schedule and a lot of quota I have shot a few at 25 or 30yds.

JPK

I wish you the best of luck in the type of hunt you enjoy. And I will continue to enjoy the type of hunting I do.

Neither of us wrong, as long as we do not try to ctiticize the other's way of hunting.

Video of the buffalo shot at 270 yards.

Please right click and download to your computer.

how much of this "up close and personal"
type of shooting and hunting evolved over the yrs from clients who couldn't hit what and where they were supposed to,and PH"s who were trying to reduce the amount of wounded dangerous
game they were having to dig out of the thick stuff.
earlier accounts i have read,written by those
who got there first make no bones about shooting them where they found them and at
ranges that insult alot of those who came later.

Ravenr,

Try both and compare.

They don't.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:

quote:

Originally posted by wombat:
To assasinate a noble animal like an elephant from long range is shameful.No gentleman would consider a shot at an elephant over 25yds.

With all due respect, that is just an absurd remark.

quote:

Originally posted by wombat:
To mrlexma-no,it is not absurd,Buzz Charlton-more specifically Alan Shearing- showed me how you go elephant hunting and it was explained just so.It was also accepted just so.No dispute was expected and none was offered.How do you hunt your elephant?

It is neither an assassination, nor is it shameful, and one is not rendered ungentlemanly, as long as the shot is taken inside 26 yards.

I am shocked that Buzz Charlton and Alan Shearling did not know that.

adrenalin junkies still talking ethics....oh my

quote:

Originally posted by wombat:
To mrlexma-no,it is not absurd,Buzz Charlton-more specifically Alan Shearing- showed me how you go elephant hunting and it was explained just so.It was also accepted just so.No dispute was expected and none was offered.How do you hunt your elephant?

Funny. I've hunted with Alan Shearing, and he told me to take the first shot available on my elephant. The wind had shifted and he and his buddies were about to take off.

We didn't pace off the distance, but we estimated it at just over 20 yards. Had it been 30, I'd have still taken the shot he told me to take.

Point being, I didn't get some sort of lecture on how far or how close I needed to be before pulling the trigger. The subject never came up. And I left with the impression that Alan Shearing has his clients shoot at whatever range he's comfortable they can shoot at.

I think everyone needs to start cutting each other some slack when it comes to hunting ethics. The reason we still have something called "hunting ethics" is that they are not legal obligations. I would never suggest that other hunters violate game laws. But by the same token, I don't demand they act in accordance with how I think things ought to be.

I've gone places with preconceived notions of "how things ought to be" and ended up modifying the demands I placed on myself once I found out that "ought to be" and "are" are two different things.

I can see no reason why I shouldn't give others the same consideration.

Other than meeting the demands of the law, when it comes to hunting I only have to please myself. I can make things as hard or as easy on myself as the law allows. That's my decision. Right now, I make things hard on myself. But I can foresee a time when my legs or eyes start to fail me when I ease my personal requirements.

I don't shoot birds on the ground, for instance. But in Alaska, you can still get a subsistence hunting license. If you can qualify for a subsistence hunting license, YOU DAMN WELL OUGHT TO BE SHOOTING BIRDS ON THE GROUND! YOU NEED THE MEAT, AND YOU DON'T NEED TO BE WASTING SHELLS ON WINGSHOOTING! YOU ARE IN A SURVIVAL SITUATION; HENCE THE SUBSISTENCE LICENSE!

I'm not a huge advocate of "situational ethics," but the fact of the situation is that what is completely out of bounds under some circumstances might be justifiable in others.

I wouldn't recommend cannibalism as a habit, but if you're lost at sea or in the Sierras over the course of a long winter it just might be justifiable. Ask the Donners.

Naturally, the demands of a sporting activity like hunting doesn't carry the same sort of weight. Which is exactly why we ought to shut up about what methods other hunters might use, which we might disagree with, as long as those methods don't cause undue suffering or harm to the animal.

Q. for the distance ethics zealots,
...what is the offical distance that it simply becomes shooting potentially DG and not hunting game dangerously?

Some people get their kicks hunting game that can be potentially more dangerous than other species, more so if they choose or end up having to engage them in closer quarters.
..others may get their kicks hunting in an environment where they may take 450yd shots but where the topography offers most of the risk and danger.

Getting close to my buff along with the one accompanying him,right before I fired the head shot,was a spiritual experience for me.I came face to face with the game that I flew across the globe to hunt.The game that I read about in hunting magazines as a youngster.I remember the mean look on the second buffs eyes as he lowered his head and set out in a direction which was unsure enough to send all my trackers looking for cover.There are times when I feel it is better to return home not having killed my buff,than shooting one from far away.I may have not always felt like this throughout all my years of hunting,but do so more and more.But,on second thought,I would rather shoot one at long distance than come back empty handed.