As I read here and in the various mags about "long-range" hunting I thought of something that might be a concern.

As the old fashioned hunters start disappearing (along with their equipment and tactics), will the young punks (along with their WizzBangMagnums and telescopes for sights) start to change accepted hunting methods?

Right now we're in between, with the old guys lamenting all the lazy newcomers taking shots at ridiculous ranges. They have a valid point, that it's not hunting. That it takes skill and patience to get close enough for a clean shot with a 30-30.

But maybe in a few years the young punks will be in the majority and they'll say that anyone can get in so close you can't miss, but it takes skill and patience to take a 600-yard shot.

The various companies are undeniably marketing towards this second group. Maybe this isn't something to discuss, but if you have any opinions, disagreements, or solutions please share them.

Edited to add this disclosure: I'm a "young punk" myself. I didn't mean "young punk" as a slight to young hunters, rather it's a shot at the guys who think they know better than the old-timers.

[ 11-25-2003, 05:34: Message edited by: Gonzo FreakPower ]

I guess you could call me a "young punk" (I'm 23), and I prefer to hunt, as opposed to merely shooting, my game. I like old-fashioned stuff, I often hunt with an iron-sighted Marlin .44 mag. It's rare that I shoot over 150 yards, but if an opportunity presents itself for a 300 yard shot, I'll take it (With my .30-06).

Part of the reason the old-timers didn't shoot far is that their equipment wasn't up to reaching way out. Cartridges and optics have come a long, long way in the last 50 years. Some of the changes brought about by changing hunting technology are good, and some are bad.

People hunt the way they're comfortable with, or barring knowledge, the way they assume it is supposed to be. I was 35 before I owned my first CF rifle. Lots of folks are limited by law to short range hunting, some are required by nature to take long shots. Or at least nature suggests that option. I find satisfaction in both short and long, and do not think ill of another's choice.

kjjm4, I would not be to quick to suggest the old timers couldn't reach way the hell out and tap something. We have better equipment ON AVERAGE today, but some of the guns and shooters of yesteryear were quite extraordinary by any standard. For a little perspective see if you can compete with an accomplished Schutzen owner, or perhaps somebody who does the BPCS routine.

I was thinking of posting this question elsewhere, but this may be a better place. Anybody out there have any thoughts as to where the next technology boost in LR shooting might come from? Bullets, metalurgy, propellants? My own opinion is that longer range means higher velocity which means better barrel/receiver alloys. Something that can handle upwards to 100kpsi maybe, and a progressive propellant that will do it in a barrel of 36" or less. All of this in a package that will not require a crew or vehicle for transport and recoil that is managable. 5500-6000 fps for a goal.

The Farthest ive ever shot was 300 yards give or take 20 yards on a doe like 20 minutes into doe season my dad dropped his as soon as we got into the meadow and he wispers " Theres a deer right over there and it takes me a while to see it. I was 10 at the time and pull my .243 line it up in the genral area of the sholder and missed the first time but for some reason the doe didnt book it out of there. Anyways the secound shot hit her in the spine dropped her so fast my dad thought i missed her as the others booked it out of Dodge. Man you should of seen my face when my dad finlly spotted her and said she was down EAR to EAR!!! But nowadays my shots for anything around here are 100 yards of less. I am now Nineteen and have grown into quite the predator.

You make a good point about the long range shooters of the past. Maybe what I should have said is that long range shooting is much easier today than it was before, what with the improvement of scopes and guns. Of course, most of the long range hunting in the past was done in the western states. The short range .30-30 stereotype mostly comes from the eastern woods.

5500 fps is almost unattainable using the technology employed in modern firearms. The gases from the powder combustion exit the muzzle at 5300 fps, so I'd say 5000 fps is about as fast as you could ever get.

I am not sure what is ment by "long range" but I would rather shoot well in the first 400 yards than shoot crappy in the next 400 after that. Everyone will shoot better, closer.

This may be a regional discussion also. I think in general, hunting in the West is somewhat different than hunting in the East. Hear me out on this, no slight is intended. Geographically, alot of the western areas are mountainous, and 200 to 400 yard shots are not uncommon, although, myself, usually, I am shooting from 75 to 250 yards. In the west, 30-30's are what the kids start out with, and rapidly go to a rifle that can reach out further. Why? Because in the west, we usually arent hunting from tree stands, etc. We are out spot and stalking, driving, etc to find deer. The vast wide open spaces themselves lend it to longer range shoots often, but not always. I am 51, and over my life, most people want to be capable of making a 300 yd shot, some longer. Weather the hunter is cabable of making a real long shot is for another discussion, but frankly, I have always considered western hunting to be more of a long range situation. When I was a kid, people were already reloading, using scopes, and bolt actions. 30-06, 270, 300 win mag, 257 Roberts, etc were common hunting rifles. So I guess what I am leading up to is I already think western hunters have been more of a long range hunter if for no other reason than from the country and conditions that exist in the west. I sense you may also be perhaps stating that alot of younger hunters tend to go with the super wizbang wonder magnums, but I know alot of people who have been there and dont that many years ago. For some of us, perhaps it is a cycle, to go try some of the newer wizbangs, only to realize for our selves, we were already hunting with some great cartridges. In general, you could point out that eastern hunting shooting situations tend to be alot shorter distances, thus the ole 30-30, 300 Savage, etc get raves because under those types of conditions they are in their element. Of course there are always exceptions, but that is what I am thinking. So I dont agree older hunters arent long range hunters is I guess what I am saying. Alot of it has to do with the part of the country you are used to hunting. Hope that makes sense.

Hunting beyond a certain range, 400/450 yds if I had to put a number to it, the animals cease being animals......they are just targets. There is no longer the interaction between hunter and hunted. I have seen bullets "walked" into unsuspecting animals that were so far away they didn't even understand they were being shot at or where it was coming from. Is this really "hunting?" Seems to this old timer that something has been lost along the road.

Sure we've got some far out technology in optics and range finders etc today. And I admire the guy who can RELIABLY hit something at 700, 800, 1,000 yds. That's quite an accomplishment. But is it hunting?

How do you judge an animal at that range? That's why whenever I want to play the "long range game" I just go shoot rocks. Same challenge and really the same satisfaction. But is it hunting? No. It's long range shooting. The good news is you don't need a license and there's no bag limit and nothing to clean and dress.

Perhaps someday we will just kill with lasers at 2,000 - 3,000 yds at the speed of light. Hunting? Hardly. Just high tech killing.

Maybe I'm just an old fart, but I never want to forget or get away from "the old way" of stalking and getting to the best position possible before a certain shot. And if you can't achieve that "certain shot," you shuffle the cards and play the game again. THAT'S HUNTING. IMHO. You haven't just gone into the woods and killed something with a vastly superior weapon. You have HUNTED IT, STALKED IT and OUTSMARTED IT in it's own element. That's what hunting is about.

Pecos 45
I agree when an animal can be shot at repeatedly with out knowing it's being shot at -That's target shooting, not hunting!! I think what needs to happen is for these (long range hunters) is to loose and animal to a poor shot then they might understand why you need to get closer. Watched a hunting show this morning and the guy held off on his shot so long -so the camera guy could get his stuff together he ended up with a shot at 400+ yds and they though they miss the deer, come to find out (Thanks to the Guide he underestimated the distance and the were looking at the wrong set of tracks -went further out and found the blood trail and the buck-they almost gave up and would have left the deer to rot except for the guide doing a great job. Lesson if it's so far away you can't tell if your shot was good don't shoot!!

And I disagree that just because your out west you'll have a longer shot- my first Mule deer was shot at 80 yds!!! I've been out PDog shooting/Dove hunting and had Antelope come bed down with in a 100 yds while I was still shooting!!!! I was elk hunting in Nov walking out on a trail and dam near got trampled by seven Muley's that cut my trail 5' away!! It's all in the way you hunt-tool around in a truck or four wheeler -yep all your shots will be long cause they know your coming!! Get your lard ass off the moto's and you'll see them real close!!!

[ 11-25-2003, 11:15: Message edited by: Gunnut 45/454 ]

A lot of it, I suspect, comes from experience. Long range shooting sounds very easy and neat to a new hunter. Once you chased a wounded animal down, and deal with that emotional experience, a sure shot starts looking better and better, all the time. I must confess I went throught this "cycle of life". Those that start hunting without good mentors (like I did), probably are most susceptible to this. JMO, Dutch.

Gunnut, I didn't mean to imply that just because you live out west it naturally follows that you'll never see an animal closer than 300 yds and a hunter should EXPECT something like 500 as the norm.

That's not true.

And you're right about getting in close, even for the western hunter. THAT is hunting......to locate the game and maneuver yourself into a good position. Using difficult terrain and making it work regardless is what hunting is all about.

Well we have been saved by the American ingenuity.....

By the time todays hunters find the animal in their binocs, scan him with a range finder, set up their shooting sticks, twist the scope up to 20 power, then back down to 12, then back to 4, now they can find him in the target, oops he left for parts unknown, probably Montana!

I lost a hunter last year, he had so much camo on I couldn't find him! He will show up this spring surly

Here are some thoughts along the same line.

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/article.cfm?tocid=1153&magid=82

I believe there is a ethically limit to the range at which hunting stops and target shooting starts. I think for most folks that is in the 400-500 yard range.

I'm in the "young punk" category myself and enjoy hunting with an open sighted double, or my little .44Mag carbine.

That said, most of the time I take a scoped rifle out hunting.

Other times, when I'm culling, and I do a lot of culling during the year, I'll different means to harvest the game. I'll often set up for a long shot, because it mean I can sometimes get more than one animals down before they work out whats going on.

For the moment those long shots are around 300m, but I am head shooting because I still get to keep the cull animals.

But I will confess that I have recently purchased a rifle with the specific purpose of using it out to and past 500meters.
Not for hunting, for killing animals I have been delegated to kill and have some pressure to complete the "plan" I am assigned.

It's really just a bug I'm enjoying working on.
I like to shoot target, most weekends so this is just an extention of that activity, just that I end up with some meat at the end of it.

Would this method ever become my preffered method? No.

I share your concerns Gonzo, good post.

I guess I am kind of a "tweener" and have gone at it from both sides, sort of. I have shot at longer distances for deer (over 400 yards) and also gone for the shortest shot possible. Once I did the long range stuff and was quite good at it, I found no particular pleasure in it any more. The animal was just as dead, it just took me longer to get to it. For the last couple of years I have gone the other route. I bought a muzzleloader, in-line but open sights, and started hunting with my handgun a lot. It is a revolver, not a hand cannon. It is just more of a thrill to me to be within 50 yards and "look the animal in the eye" so to speak. It has also taught my daughter about stalking and getting close. I think the way out there crowd may eventually find the same thing is true as they get older in the sport and need more thrill.

Just my .02

When I saw this post "worrisome trend" I automatically thought of ATVs. This is in and of itself a similar topic of discussion. I am a young punk, and I would categorize myself as a Taylor and not a Weatherby. Meaning I am interested in big bores and big bullets, not high velocity and small bullets. This limits me to open sights and ranges 200 yards and less...usually less.

To each his/her own, however, when I go out hunting I don't feel comfortable shooting past even 150 yards w/open sights. When my 600 OK is eventually finished it will stay at 100 yards and less. In actuality, this is fine because I rarely see opportunities for shots at game in my area over this range.

Also, the more I use open sights the more I like them over scopes. They aren't pin-point accurate, but I never have to fish around in magnification world trying to find a running deer. I'm one young Taylor punk who will be out there slow heavy bullets and good open sights.

You are right gun nut, that's why my boy and I got off our ATV's, hunted a mountain north of Mountain Home that most hunters wouldnt go hunt,because it was tough hunting, and harvested a nice muley from about 150 yards away. That's after we sat there and glassed him for along time. I love fat asses, they make life easy for me.

I am sure that when bows came out the guys who hunted with knifes and spears cryed out. Then when fire arms came out the guys with cross bows and long bows cryed out. Then when better firearms came out the guys with the older ones are crying out. I hunt with bows and firearms each one is a little differant. I do hunt close and far. Just two days ago I shot a very nice 10 pt at 15 feet with my 300 sav. I wished I had my redhawk just to say I did it with a pistol. The results would have been the same a dead deer. In the last couple of days before that I shot deer at over two hundred yards. Before gun season I shot a couple of deer with my bow at around 20 yards. Each and every one give me a trill. What one give me the most was it the 10 pt at 15 feet or the running doe at 220. Damm they were all nice deer and I had a lot of fun taking them all.

I qualify as an old far+, I shoot varmints from as far away as I can see em.

I hunt game, My all time longest shoot is far short of 300 yds and averages less than 100 yards.

My son is better than I am, he even get's closer. He's only 14!!!

Mike

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The vast majority of hunters have no business shooting beyond 200 yds or so in good conditions, regardless of the fps and ft/lbs they are churning out of their sporter weight rifle.

IMHO, the magnum is an entirely superfluous invention, save for the possible exception of large bore dangerous game rifles.

Also, long range shooting while seemingly inherent to western hunting, is only slightly less common in the south and midwest, and any other place where there is a nontrivial amount of agriculture. Bean fields, corn fields, hay fields, meadows, and clearcuts all make long range shots quite common all over the US.

I started centerfire rifle hunting fifty years ago. After a few tries at woodchucks at long range it was obvious I could not figure the distances well. Neither could anyone else. We did not have rangefinders of course.

Some cartridges ran out of power also at longer ranges like 300 yds. The .222 Rem was one of those.

Now I finally have a laser rangefinder. I may be the last person to get one. I now carry data printed out from "PointBlank" and this has made rifle hunting more interesting to me.

Due to a set of circumstances I have a stand right now that watches a spot where deer come out at 375 yds. When the wind is right I use that stand. The rifle is a 7mm Mag and the bullet has plenty of velocity to expand at that range. I use a rest, a target scope and in fact I may fill a doe tag this afternoon if that wind is not NW.

That's as far as I am going to shoot at game. Without the laser I would not have picked that stand. There is no target shooting allowed on this land at anytime of the year so technology has enabled me and made it more interesting as well.

even with all the modern equipment, and more coming out every year, I am sure a lot of the " young " crowd will start to mature also.

Maturity has made me realize that anyone who does not hunt with at least a 30/06, IS NOT really a wussie.

I DON'T need 3000 foot pounds to take down an elk.

MAGNUMS are not better hunting cartridges.

My Scope does not have to be 4 x 12 or bigger for big game hunting.

I am sure a lot of the younger crowd will probably learn a lot of this also as they mature.

Hunted some mountaineous and rainy terrain for Elk this year, in Central Western Oregon. I saw quite a few hunters who had all of that High Tech equipment, Magnum rifles in big calibers, and Big Power Scopes with Big Objectives etc.

In ages from early 20s to in their 60s. Most of all of those guys were ROAD hunting. Almost 90 percent of all the hunters I saw were road hunting.

I get out and walk myself. Most of the other guys I saw walking were the "young punks", and maybe it was just strictly lack of budget, but most of the them walking were pretty much the "old Basic" hunter outfitted. Most toted a magnum, and a lot had 50mm objective scopes. Besides that, they were a lot more traditional than " more mature" hunters in the front seat of their 4WD Diesel Pickup, Road Hunting.

However, since they were not " raddling" up the road in a Diesel F 250 4WD, looking out the windows from sun up to sun down, I have alot of faith in the younger generation as hunters. I can't say I have a lot of faith in the younger generation who don't seem to be hunters.