JMHO - Those two or more long range shooting/hunting shows make me want to barf. In fact I did, so don't/won't watch again. Anyone who has to take a LR shot like these clowns do at big game animals are't "hunters" and obviously have self esteem problems as well. Professing "stunts" like they perform is in some way related to "hunting", well, way off base. They are right up there with the guy who hunts gators, snakes and such with a spear. Only watched that one once also.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

Andy,

I'm of the age that if you remember the 60's and early 70's, then you probably weren't there (if you know what I mean).
GWB

Right away the knuckle draggers start pounding their chest.
I don't care how many of anythings you've killed. I'm not at all impressed when folks start talking about being "forced" to take a shot. And that is my real problem with this. I've killed a lot of game but I've never been "forced" to make a shot.
I've read some papers by folks that shoot animals at long range. It's not my cup of tea but they work hard at what they do. With special gear and practice, practice, practice. I'm gonna guess that not one hunter in a thousand has the needed eq for the task and if they do, they aren't willing to put in the time to use it.
Now all of you folks start telling me about all of the animals you've kilt waaaay out there because you couldn't hunt well enough to get closer. When someone sez they had to make the shot 'cause they couldn't get no closer, it tells me a lot about them.

Beeman,

Your guess is wrong. There are little pockets of long range shooters all over this country. It would probably suprise you how many there really are and how successful they can be.

What about the Camp Perry Shooters? If a person can consistantly put rounds in the x ring why not the same in the kill zone?


Why would you make a blanket statement that a hunter would not be willing to put forth the time and effort?

Why indeed!

For the record...I have no ability to watch hunting shows on TV. I do not have cable or satellite. I rely solely on a piss poor antennae and only get 6 channels.

I feel no need to justify myself further.

Those interested will be and those that won't will whine about it.

There is a big difference between whining about something, and just flat not agreeing about something.

quote:

For the record...I have no ability to watch hunting shows on TV. I do not have cable or satellite. I rely solely on a piss poor antennae and only get 6 channels.

An example of whining above.

Not promoting something that the average or below average hunter, notice I did not say shooter, because if a person wants to go out and put holes thru paper at 4 million yards is damn fine with me, but ethical Hunters, should not be promoting simply because it is a stunt.

Just like the business I see folks getting into the AR type rifles promote about double tapping something. Many of them seem more worried about getting that second tap off than making the first one count.

This is yet another one of those divisive topics that seperate/segregate the hunting community, not the shooting community, because there is a difference.

Hunters are supposed to be employing methods that result in as quick/clean and humane kills as possible, not doing stunt shooting that has potential for wounding and losing an animal.

The show I mentioned earlier where the guys turned down a less than 200 yard shot on a bull elk because he was too close is a prime example.

They did not want to shoot that bull sim[ply because they wanted to shoot something waaaayyyy out yuonder, and they did.

Toward the end of the show they killed with one shot a bull at 800 or 900 yards.

Of course, they were on a high fenced property in Utah I believe and had a whole damn crew of folks with them so the bull was recovered.

But one thing that was quite noticeable, at least in my opinion, and I forget what caliber oif ICBM they were using, but there was no exit wound.

Get some gung ho charlie out in the un-high fenced real world and even a 500 or 600 yard shot on something that is not a DRT, and with no exit wound for a b;lood trail, and you have a lost critter in all likely hood.

But you can add this type of hunting to the same group as people that have begun to worry more about recovering just the antlers and not caring if the coyotes or feral hogs get the meat.

Somebody wants to thing that is whining so be it, it is all in individual interpretation.

I have no problem with long range target shooting, I don't think promoting long range hunting especially of game animals is a wise choice.

quote:

Originally posted by drewhenrytnt:
...would you openly invite someone to your party knowing they were going to piss on your leg and try to convince you it is raining? ...

When I infrequently disagree with someone , it provides an opportunity - for at least one of us - to learn something. The trick is to keep an open mind and figure out why the other persons "experience" has led him to a different conclusion.

Once I understand why the other person believes the way they do, I may agree with them, partially agree, or still disagree. It just provides a chance to understand why someone would disagree.

I believe there would be a lot of folks interested in a L-o-n-g range shooting discussions, whether there is a separate Board or not. You can crank up all the Threads you want right here. You will get people on both sides, but that would be no different by having a separate Board. Even though some will disparage shooting at distance, many are secretly learning everything they possibly can.

But, there will always be the folks who inject Porn into the threads. You learn who they are and skip right on by.
-----

I don't waste money on Cable or a Dish either, because I can fall asleep to whatever is on.

Guys, the forum has been created by our gracious host.

Long Range Shooting, just under Double Rifles.

thanks saeed!!!
i found the LONG RANGE HUNTING forem,
but for the life of me i can't locate
the TEXAS forem.....
and still with the personal jabs wussieBman
grow up cowgirl,
the world doesn't spin on your axis.
here's one for you

quote:

But, there will always be the folks who inject Porn into the threads.

Surely you don't object to my explaining who John Holmes was to a youngster in re: "long" range thread?

GWB

Geedubya
as "LONG" as you don't mention the
"BULL BARREL" i think we're safe

I would like to have a long range forum.My longest shot on a game animal was less than 500 yards.I have shot prairie rats quite a bit further than that.I really enjoy trying to stalk as close as I can to an animal,but know others can shot accurately at longer distances than I can.I have nothing against those that can and could maybe pick up some good tips.As far as Johnny Wad goes,what good is a 12" limp noodle????

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
Right away the knuckle draggers start pounding their chest.
I don't care how many of anythings you've killed. I'm not at all impressed when folks start talking about being "forced" to take a shot. And that is my real problem with this. I've killed a lot of game but I've never been "forced" to make a shot.
I've read some papers by folks that shoot animals at long range. It's not my cup of tea but they work hard at what they do. With special gear and practice, practice, practice. I'm gonna guess that not one hunter in a thousand has the needed eq for the task and if they do, they aren't willing to put in the time to use it.
Now all of you folks start telling me about all of the animals you've kilt waaaay out there because you couldn't hunt well enough to get closer. When someone sez they had to make the shot 'cause they couldn't get no closer, it tells me a lot about them.

You were the original knuckle dragger that began pounding his chest when you mentioned you 15 DIY hunts to ravenr's home state of Wyoming. Did you forget?

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
I made 15 DIY elk hunts to WY and killed 12 elk. NONE were further than 300 yards and damn few were further than 200 yards. And that is consistant with what other COMPETENT HUNTERS said that I've talked to.
I can understand how not having the truck hood to shoot acrost and getting out of sight of the road might cause security issues with you but, with work, that can be overcome.

You tried to impress with your "experience" and it backfired, hence the John Holmes analagy.

If you'll go back and reread my posts you might be surprised to see that I dislike shows like Best of the West. I hate the fact that there are companies out there that will sell people rifles that will shoot a mile and blow smoke up peoples asses and tell people that it isnt that difficult to do. The thing I hate the most is the idiot that has never practiced out past 100 yards and will sling lead at much greater distances. That being said, THERE ARE GUYS OUT THERE THAT HAVE THE EQUIPMENT AND THE ABILITY TO SHOOT MUCH GREATER DISTANCES THAN YOU OR I I would love to have discussions with people like that so I can have a better understanding of how its done. It will make me better at what I do which is basically spot/coach a shot in the field.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
Now all of you folks start telling me about all of the animals you've kilt waaaay out there because you couldn't hunt well enough to get closer. When someone sez they had to make the shot 'cause they couldn't get no closer, it tells me a lot about them.

This is just an IGNORANT statement. Whats considered way out there to you might not be considered way out there to another person. People have different skill sets. I've seen guys that were forced into taking a shot that wasnt what they would have liked as a first choice but was well within their capabilities to make. How is that unethical? I would love to shoot at an unsuspecting animal thats broadside at 100 yards or less but it doesnt happen very often. It forces me to make a more difficult shot but a shot that is well within my capabilities. I have seen ravenr shoot coyotes,on more than one occassion, at greater than 500 yards. His capabilities are greater than mine as it pertains to shooting. He reloads and shoots his rifle all year long, he does it in all sorts of weather conditions. He knows his equipment better than most people. Whats long range to him and whats long range to you and I are two totally different things. Ravenr, out of curiosity, how many barrels have you run through on your rifle?

Wasbeeman, your so emotional right now you cant see the forest through the trees. Just like a woman, you hear one thing out of entire conversation and you focus on it and start bitching. You hear "Long Range" and just come apart at the seams. Burying your head in the sand wont make it go away, open your eyes, understand that your way isnt the only way and try to learn something. Thats what I'm planning on doing. I'm not trying to be a jerk but a post on AR about Long Range shooting isnt going to be the death of our sport. I would say that what sets AR apart from most other hunting message boards is the people that frequent it. It seems like a more mature crowd that really takes shooting, reloading and hunting very serious. I dont think that a long range forum on AR is going to encourage every one of its members to run right out and try to shoot beyond their capabilities. I think that it will offer up conversation that could help every one of us become better marksmen at the distances we are comfortable with. My hope is that some really knowledgable people come on and share their thoughts.

quote:

I dont think that a long range forum on AR is going to encourage every one of its members to run right out and try to shoot beyond their capabilities.

Some days, 100 yds. seems beyond my capabilities

chances are, this old fart ain't gonna do all that it entails to shoot accurately at 1,000.

GWB

Well, I hope the new thread is created just to follow it for the entertainment value. I'm a fan of long-range shooting but must confess that here in Pa. I have yet to shoot at any critter further than 225yds. They all died so apparently I'm in my comfort / talent range. That doesn't stop me from practicing at longer range to hone my talents and learn the usefullnes of my chosen equipment. Many of you folks have really gotten your shorts quite wrinkled over this and I assure you that you will never apply enough ranting to dissuade shooters / hunters from taking the long shots on game. So it might be well advised to take it easy on your blood pressure by avoiding continued exertion of your opinion, especially since it's already been noted several times. Unless you just enjoy pissing contests. It would be more beneficial to try to help people learn and understand the topic than argue ad-noseum. Sheeez..lighten up dudes.

At the risk of anyone thinking I have my knickers in a bunch, when do we, hunters, as a group stop doing actions that can be or are counter productive to our sport and its continued existance?

I have no problem with folks wanting to or shooting at paper or other inanimant objects at long ranges. It ain;t really my thing, but if they enjoy it that is great.

I have no problem with folks practicing shooting at long range targets when trying to enhance their shooting skills, even long range shooting at prairie dogs/coyotes or other vermin does not bother me.

When it comes to taking long range shots at game animals, when in the real world so much can go wrong at closer ranges, I have a problem.

That problem is enhanced when I realize that people that aren't really that experienced at taking normal range shots, will try and emulate some more experienced shooters feats.

If long range target shooting is anyone's "Thing", that is great, glad they are doing something they enjoy and are good at.

I believe I stated in an earlier response, wounded targets don't bother me and losing a piece of paper is not going to trouble me one second.

Turn that piece of paper into a deer or an elk or any other game animal, and start chunking bullets at it at ranges that are not necessary and chances for wounding and losing are multipled, then yes I have a problem with that, and I think other folks have a problem with it.

One question I have for the "Dedicated" long range hunters out there, how many of you will set up and take a 500+ yard shot on an animal that could or would make say B&C book, and how many of you would make every effort to get closer.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Slinging bullets at extended ranges at game animals is only for experts, if for anyone.

Why thank you! Thank you very much.

Alan

the chance of a wounded and lost animal
occurs the moment paper is replaced by flesh.
pistols,archery,muzzleloaders or high powered rifles. doesn't matter the weapon, or the range.
if it is a B&C animal or just one i want to "wrap in white paper"
read the situation
can i get closer? if not? how far is he?
are the conditions within my capabilities?
wind? room enough for a followup shot?
can i get prone? can i get a pony to him?
if the stars align and all this fits into my narrow window of conditions.
then i lay down and kill'em.

Want to flame?
Click Here

quote:

Originally posted by olguy:
I might as well jump in here too. For those who can CONSISTENTLY make LR shots AND recover the game, have at it. Vast majority cannot do it due to lack of skill. And will never develop the skill.

My concern about it, if promoted, is that it encourages the wrong people to think they can do it. And, ethics IS a factor!

As far as not being able to get close enough for a reasonable shot, say 400-500 yds just for discussions sake, why not pass up a shot amd look for another opportunity. Even if you go home empty handed its not the end of the world. Its why its called "hunting" and not "killing".

Sometimes egos overtake hunting ethics. For example, I have known duck hunters who go home PO'd if they did not limit. Same thing with some who do not get their bull , or buck, or ?

I think we've been through this a hundred times. There are plenty of folks who blow shot under 100 yards. They're the ones who blow the dust off of their deer rifle the day before the season opens. Ther's plenty of inconsistency in every discipline, but on the whole I think that the long range hunters tend to take their craft more seriously and are therefore more prepared than the seasonal hunter. JMHO.

We need to be careful how we phrase our arguments. If you believe that long range hunting/shooting is unethical because it MIGHT result in wounded animals when the wrong person attempts the shot, then the logical conclusion is to ban all hunting since there are definitely thousands of wounded animals every year, the vast majority of them shot by hunters under 200 yards.

I'd suggest that serious long range hunters wound or lose a significantly smaller percentage of the animals they shoot than the average hunters out there.

BTW I argued vehemently against long range hunting years ago on 24hr Campfire but after quite a few friendly discussions with Dave King, who posts on here very occassionally and is a serious shooter, I realized that LR hunters are more serious about their hunting and shooting skills than the vast majority of people who go afield. As mentioned above, they are extremely careful about the shots they take, and they know how to make them count at ranges where most couldn't hit a refrigerator. Personally I'm not a long range hunter but I certainly respect their skills and discipline.

Personally, I prefer to shoot animals as close as I can get. Preferrably under 200 yards.

Most of the animals I have shot have been under 200 yards.

But, I have had occasions where a long shot is the only option one gets. Sometimes I have taken these shots, and on others I decided not to.

And as Gatogordo mentioned, I have never wounded and lost any animals I have shot at long range.

I think a hunter needs to be honest with himself, and should not take an iffy shot, regardless of the range.

quote:

I think a hunter needs to be honest with himself, and should not take an iffy shot, regardless of the range

or the weapon.

I had my first encounter with a long range "hunter" this past elk season here in Colorado. He was a friend of a friend and we both drew limited tags for unit 61. According to the "shooter" he was completely proficient at 600 yards. He could shoot farther of course, but because he was "ethical" he limited his shots.

Long story short he shot a 340 bull through the guts at 525 yards. Then through the hams. I know this because my mutual friend was with him. I hunted 5 more days and took a smaller bull at 200 yards. I wouldn't trade my bull for his as I'd be ashamed of it.

At what point in time did it become acceptable to simply take the entire "hunt" out of hunting?
You "shooters" can argue until you are blue in the face, but no animal deserves to be sniped at from half a county away. The stalk is the essence of hunting. Take that away and there is nothing left but killing.

My opinions. Take them or leave them.

Good points DC.

The same could be said about your 200 yard shot. Why didn't you get closer?

Why didn't you use a smaller caliber? That big one was overkill.

Why did you have to use a scope? That's cheating! Iron sights is only fair. Scopes take the "hunting" out of hunting.

Why did you even use a metallic cartridge? So unfair. Even an inline muzzle loader is too much technology. Only a "front stuffer" would be fair.

Of course you'd have to get closer.

My God, the high tech gunpowder and saboted bullet you used for that 100 yard shot out of your "front stuffer" was so easy and wasn't really hunting

You really should use a compound bow! You'll really have to close the gap there and really HUNT!

But wait, that high tech compound really zings 'em! So unfair and makes it too easy. You're really not a hunter and anything you shoot with it is nothing to be proud of.

I'd be ashamed if I killed a 340 bull from 40 yards with one of those!

A real hunter would simply use a recurve and get reeeeeel close! Wait! That damn recurve is laminated and is shooting carbon arrows! How lame! Need to use hand-made wooden arrows that HC fletched with turkey feathers he picked up in the woods.

Etcetera, etcetera until you're down to your Swiss Army Knife.

Wait!..............

I recently watched a video of a pig that was shot with an arrow. Complete pass through from less than 5yds. Not only did the pig see the arrow coming and flinch before getting hit, it took over 3 minutes of stumbling and sufferring before the pig hit the ground and started to paddle. Nothing deserves to die that way. Thats why I chose a rifle, usually a big one!

quote:

Originally posted by DC Roxby:
I had my first encounter with a long range "hunter" this past elk season here in Colorado. He was a friend of a friend and we both drew limited tags for unit 61. According to the "shooter" he was completely proficient at 600 yards. He could shoot farther of course, but because he was "ethical" he limited his shots.

Long story short he shot a 340 bull through the guts at 525 yards. Then through the hams. I know this because my mutual friend was with him. I hunted 5 more days and took a smaller bull at 200 yards. I wouldn't trade my bull for his as I'd be ashamed of it.

At what point in time did it become acceptable to simply take the entire "hunt" out of hunting?
You "shooters" can argue until you are blue in the face, but no animal deserves to be sniped at from half a county away. The stalk is the essence of hunting. Take that away and there is nothing left but killing.

My opinions. Take them or leave them.

I know of hunters (I am sure others do also) who have messed up shots at 100 yds or less. Does that make it better? Where is the "hunt" when the shot is at 100 yds or less and the hunter messes it up? Maybe the guy can actually shoot well out to 600 yds, but he just messed up. It happens. I am all for long range hunting if one has the proper equipment and knows how to use it. I think a good long range shooter would have a better average at long range hunting than some hunters I know who would shoot 100 yds or less. They usually shoot once a year just before they go hunt.

quote:

According to the "shooter" he was completely proficient at 600 yards. He could shoot farther of course, but because he was "ethical" he limited his shots.

Claiming to be something doesn't make it true. I'd suggest he was a wannabe LR hunter. OTOH he apparently got the elk, so he wasn't all that bad.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

According to the "shooter" he was completely proficient at 600 yards. He could shoot farther of course, but because he was "ethical" he limited his shots.

Claiming to be something doesn't make it true. I'd suggest he was a wannabe LR hunter. OTOH he apparently got the elk, so he wasn't all that bad.

I've hunted with "that guy" quite a bit. Hunt with "that guy" enough and it's not hard to pick him out of the crowd

quote:

I've hunted with "that guy" quite a bit. Hunt with "that guy" enough and it's not hard to pick him out of the crowd

hypotenuse?

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

I've hunted with "that guy" quite a bit. Hunt with "that guy" enough and it's not hard to pick him out of the crowd

hypotenuse?

I literally just shot ice water out both nostrils all over my damn computer! YES! Hypotenuse! Damn that was funny!

quote:

I'd suggest he was a wannabe LR hunter. OTOH he apparently got the elk, so he wasn't all that bad.

Yea, he "wasn't all that bad". If you are OK with gut shooting elk and letting them die a slow miserable death. Maybe the dumbass should have actually stalked a bit closer? He was lucky, that's all. Could just as easily have blown off a leg and never seen the bull again. I am constantly amazed at the utter lack of ethics displayed by people in this sport.

And no he wasn't a "wannabe long range hunter". He IS a long range hunter.

quote:

Originally posted by 338zmag:

I know of hunters (I am sure others do also) who have messed up shots at 100 yds or less. Does that make it better? Where is the "hunt" when the shot is at 100 yds or less and the hunter messes it up? Maybe the guy can actually shoot well out to 600 yds, but he just messed up. It happens. I am all for long range hunting if one has the proper equipment and knows how to use it. I think a good long range shooter would have a better average at long range hunting than some hunters I know who would shoot 100 yds or less. They usually shoot once a year just before they go hunt.

The possibility of error increases substantially with distance. In 35 years of big game hunting I can think of exactly 0 instances
where I had an animal at 525 yards and could not close that gap substantially. In 35 years I have never fired a round beyond 350 yards. In 35 years I have never wounded and lost a big game animal with a rifle. My average shooting distance at elk is 101 yards. I have hunted everything from sea level swamp in Florida to Rocky Mountain Basins at 13k. If I, and everyone I hunt with, can routinely get within 200 yards of game then so can anyone else.

There is no "need" to shoot at 525 yards with only the rarest of exceptions (sheep hunting perhaps) and every reason to avoid it. This fad of long range "hunting" is going to damage our sport if hasn't already. There is no way to justify a video of someone shooting a black bear at 800 yards to a non-hunter. I can't justify it to myself. It is a disgrace.

Is there some magic distance that is acceptable? Of course not. It should however be obvious to anyone that claims to be a "sportsman" that every effort should be made to get as close to our targets as possible. If you can't get closer than 525 yards to an elk, then you are a dangerous hack who shouldn't be in the woods.

quote:

Is there some magic distance that is acceptable? Of course not.

I guess that kind of sums it up. No one is suggesting you have to shoot at LR, but some people like it. If you don't, don't.

Trying to dictate other's actions is a very slippery slope and claiming your way is the ethical way and every other isn't, isn't very smart. Just because you claim never to have wounded a big game animal doesn't make that a universal truth. (As an aside, IMO there are three kinds of hunters, those who haven't wounded a big game animal YET, those who have, and liars) If wounding an animal, whether one "gets lucky" and winds up killing him or not is the qualification, then hunting is on it's way to being banned because tens of thousands of hunters,using bow, rifle, and pistol wound game every year. Be careful what the basis of your argument is.

Next time you copy my comments try including the whole argument:

"Is there some magic distance that is acceptable? Of course not. It should however be obvious to anyone that claims to be a "sportsman" that every effort should be made to get as close to our targets as possible."

My argument is quite simple. Hunters should make every effort to avoid wounding game. Purposely shooting an elk at 525 yards because you think it's cool is idiotic.

I'm not trying to ram "my" ethics down anyone's throat but I am going to call a spade a spade. I'm used to dealing with moral relativism when dealing with liberals. Not easy to stomach in fellow hunters.

I've had some close calls with poorly hit animals. As I've gotten older I've become a better hunter and I've become more conservative in my shot selection. That's why I've never lost an animal. Not rocket science.

If it's now acceptable to fling bullets down range as far as you can see, because it's your new hobby then maybe hunting should be banned.

FatCat and DC,

It all boils down to your hunting and shooting skills sorry to say (DC).

I agree that there is a contingent of folks who think it's easy and try to do it to be cool. That's kinda why I started this thread. When you read it, you'll see some of the things a guy needs to do to become skilled.

Even the most skilled knows his limits, the atmospheric conditions that limit accuracy, the angle of the shot, and all. He uses his experiences while becoming skilled to determine whether or not to shoot, just like a guy who sites in a 200 yards and goes hunting.

I present to you that a guy who sights in at 200 yards and shoots at longer ranges is guessing at hold over and is less ethical and experienced than a guy who has done the work and practice, gets an accurate range, dials in his confirmed data, holds right where he wants the bullet to go and squeezes.

If it's a varmint or a steel plate, let'er rip. As for big game, pick your shots, use care and everything you can muster from experience and ethics before you decide to
squeeze.

There are consequences at both ends of the rifle.

quote:

If you can't get closer than 525 yards to an elk, then you are a dangerous hack who shouldn't be in the woods.

quote:

Originally posted by ravenr:

quote:

If you can't get closer than 525 yards to an elk, then you are a dangerous hack who shouldn't be in the woods.

X2

There's been many times on bowhunts I couldn't.

Terrain, animals on the move, possibility of being busted, etc

If I had a rifle....

These long range threads always draw a lot of emotional oh my god you can't do that without being WRONG and UNETHICAL responses. I have had an intense interest in long range shooting and hunting since I was a kid. My goal this year is to break a half mile-880 yards- on marmots. It has taken a lot of practice and learning to get to this point. 500 yards is really not such a long shot after all, with the right equipment and knowledge. IMO virtually all big game rifles are capable of killing shots and accuracy far beyond the skills of most hunters. If you're not into it, so be it. For me, I vote for a long range forum.

(I actually began this response early Friday but am getting slower and slower on the keyboard as pain tends to get the best of me. So I apologize if I ramble or get off-topic as this start-and-stop method of typing wreaks havoc on one’s train of thought. )

Because some health issues have severely limited my mobility, my favored method of spot and stalk hunting is not something I can do anymore, so the “get closer” recommendations aren’t a viable option for me. Now, I am relegated to a couple of shooting platforms near the house, and shots on game are generally between 180 and 300 yards. Opportunities present themselves for longer shots, but I pass on them – and sometimes, I’ll pass on the 180 yarders if conditions aren’t right.

Those are simply my personal decisions. My equipment is certainly capable of longer distances, and my proficiency comes from years of experience and engaging small, inanimate targets at much longer ranges. But just because I can put bullet after bullet into a half-size silhouette of a ram at some ungodly distance doesn’t mean I should be taking that same shot on a whitetail buck, hog or anything else for that matter.

Nonetheless, just because I elect to exercise restraint doesn’t mean I should be pushing my views onto anyone else and professing them as gospel. For those who are up to the task and can consistently make good judgment and clean kills, more power to you. But if you are going to be like the one individual who last year admitted losing 3 mulies in a row with his Huskemaw-scoped rifle, then please have the common sense and respect for the animals to STOP what you are doing, learn a valuable lesson and either get closer or simply give up the long range shot attempts.

The animals deserve better than that.

Andy, as to getting the ball rolling for the new forum, I say thanks to both you for your efforts and to Saeed for giving the green light and paying for a little more bandwidth. There’s likely to be much valuable information shared. While I’d have nothing to contribute as long range hunting is not something I participate in or aspire to do, I still plan to drop by on occasion, peruse the topics and maybe learn a thing or two.