JohnB, I was probaly the first one in your face regarding long shots on this forum, but now I am starting to feel sorry for the beating your getting, but I guess you asked for it when you posted the question. I admire how your not dodgeing your opponents and that says something about your own personal character as I am sure it would be a lot easier to tell everyone to go pi$$ off. My feelings and views have not changed on the subject and I am not going to be giveing this issue anymore of my energy at this time, but my curiosity has been aroused and I will be watching your program on April 7. I will be in touch, Respectfully, Bobby

I must confess that John has posted with a lot of class and patience. I am actually starting to believe that he is on the level. John, you have to have been here long enough to see that anyone can claim anything on here anonomously. Many hoaxes have been put forth in the past. Looking at your website, I would say I will probably eat crow and say I was wrong about your honesty about the show.

However, I believe that there are too many kids and and even adults that will see your show that will go out and try shots of 800 yards without the rifles and training you have/give. There are too many people now that take 5-600 yard shots that shouldn' t. I hope that you stress that making an 800 yard shot is difficult and has to be done only within VERY, VERY strict guidelines. Even so, when someone starts to believe that he can make such a shot, and sees a trophy bull at 800 yards and the wind is blowing a little, the bull is at a 30 degree down angle, etc., how many of them are going to pass? All mistakes are twice as bad at 800 as 400 yards.

Something that has been mostly ignored in this conversation so far is the type of rifle that is required for such a shot. How many foot lbs. do you feel you need to kill an elk? A 7mm 150 gr bullet fired at 3400 fps has 1800-1900 ft lbs at 500 yards. How much does it have left at 800? I doubt it is over 1000-1200 ft lbs. Still enough to kill an elk cleanly if the shot goes slightly off? I am not so sure.

John you have told your facts and that your show is lagit.
I will still stand my ground on this sugject and that is TV is no place to show this even if you tell people what training is needed to accomplish shooting that far. I have asked this question in a few chat rooms and the answer is it would be ok to watch but 95% say its not ethical and it takes away from what true hunting is all about and they feel the same as I do TV is no place to show these long range shots.
When you air your show with long range shooting be prepared to take the heat both from hunters and antis.

I have a few questions that were not answered in the previous post on the other thread.

First off, Prairie boy, you are proof of what this show encourages. Your 2,000 yd. story is ridiculous.

I asked a question on the last thread about the round' s velocities at these ranges. Txhunter also brought this subject up with no response. It needs some verification.


Why are you not going to show the bad shots? Are you afraid of a negative reaction? Are the shots clean misses, or are wounded animals the result? I assume that these shots will never be shown.


Ringman,

As far as being against long range shots, and then being compared to an anti, is an idiotic statement.
How many squirrels have you wounded in this process? I venture to believe that we will never know this either. If this is all the closer you an get to a squirrel, you had better hang it up. Where is the thrill of the hunt? If you want to blow something away at 400+ yards, use a tin can. That way when, and you do miss just like all of us, you are not wounding an animal to suffer an long death. Where is the safety in shooting a rifle round of that speed into the air anyway???

John B,

Your statement on " if you jerk a 100 yards, its a gut shot" is not a true statement at all. Not all " jerks" are the same, so there is no factuality to this at all.

Why couldn' t you get any closer to the game on the statement earlier?? Was there an uncrossable void?? Seems to me that you retreived the game at hand, so why couldn' t you get closer?? All voids can be crossed that I have seen and you know that, it is just a matter of deciding to be greedy on a long shot, or put in the time to cross it. If it is truly uncrossable, you should have called no joy and pursued another animal. There is no hunting skill involved with these type of shots. There is no need for these type of shots. It seems to me that the lack of hunting skills is being replaced by shooting skills. One of the major magazines even suggested that such ranges are usually exagerated, if not, unthinkable.

800 yards shots are not usefull unless your life is on the line......

Like I said in the other thread.........

If you want to impress me, make a shot at a silhouette at 1000 yards.

If you want to depress me, mess up a shot on an animal at 1000 yards.

You want to offer up challenges?? Here is a challenge to you,

Show what happens when you miss and include the " bad" shots in your show. Then see what kind of reaction you would get from it. Show the disclaimer saying " This is what happens when you mess up a shot on an animal at 800 yards."

I will bet a substantial amount you don' t do that either......................

You asked for veiwpoints to this, so take the bad with the good.

RITCHIE3,

Your input is exactly what I want. If I thought everyone would agree with me on this issue then what would be the point of asking? I mean it when I say THANK YOU.

First about the ballistics:

150 gr Barnes XBT W/ G5 BC of 0.325
30 Deg Temperature
7000 ft Altitude

At Muzzle 3400 fps 3850 ft.lbs

At 800 yds 2208 fps 1623 ft.lbs. About the same as a 30-30 at 100yds

As to showing the misses we will in certain situations where it adds to the story of the hunt. We have about 60 successful hunts on video. We just sat down thought about what we have and we have had a couple bad hits with archery tackle but the only screwed up shot I can think of with a rifle is one I made on a bear that was feeding on an elk carcass. At the shot he spun and then dove into a small patch of brush on the hillside. It was at pretty long range but I was sure he was dead when I crossed the canyon to get him. I found a little blood but he had hit the bottom of the canyon and I lost his trail. The next day he had moved his elk into the brush so what ever had stung wouldn’t find him again. That is the only animal I have lost shooting at what would be considered long range. I have done a lot of shooting at the range the bear was at and don’t know exactly what happened. This and a whitetail buck a friend shot are the only ones that I have seen hit and lost at what is considered long range. Of course a few have required more than one shot. If you never need a second shot I will say good for you but in the real world it doesn’t always work out that way for me.

I want to say I have nothing against archery hunting, in fact some of my best friends are archers( a little attempt at humor), but in my opinion more animals are lost that way than any other. Maybe I shouldn’t say that but it is my opinion based on actual experience and discussion with outfitters. I want to say again, before you archers sharpen up your knives, that I have nothing against archery hunting so don’t hammer me on this.

I assume we will have some bad shots sooner or later. We will not show an animal suffering on TV. Never happen. The Sportsman Channel will not allow it, our sponsors will not allow it and we will not do it. I question your judgment if you want us to show animals suffering.

I am not trying to slam you but your question to Ringman about the safety of his rifle, based on the muzzle velocity, indicates to me you do not have a great deal of experience with firearms. Nothing that can be called a rifle has a slow enough muzzle velocity to be safe to shoot “into the air”. He never said he was shooting “into the air” either. He is obviously a big boy and able to answer for himself but your comments again indicated a lack of experience about firearms and high performance firearms in specific. Have you ever shot a rifle at the ranges we are talking about?

I will stand by my statements about trigger jerking. You don’t have to agree but believe me I am very convinced my statement is true. If a shooter is jerking he will have trouble at any range. Gun fighting stats prove you cannot be close enough to make trigger jerking irrelevant.

The question on why I didn’t get closer is because the elk would not have been there when I got there. I KNEW I could kill him so I did. Should I have let him go? You have your opinion and I have mine. I wonder where you hunt if you ask that question? Some times there is not time to get closer, either take the shot or wait for another day. Everyone who hunts much has been in that situation. The decision is a personal matter based on each hunters past experiences. Would you stand and watch a deer walk away at 100 yds because you could not get closer or would you say “I have the knowledge and ability to make this shot so here I go”?

Lets follow the logic of this question to the end. If I shot at 580 yds why didn’t I get to 480 yds? 380yds? 280 yds? 180 yds? 80 yds? 8yds? Pick the range at which you think is close enough and I will find the guy who does not have the knowledge and ability to hit at that range. Does that make me unethical because I can and a lot of the people I know can?

txhunter58,

I guess the bottom line is do we suppress information because some one might do some thing stupid with it? I have used the NASCA analogy before and think it is most appropriate again. I will agree that almost certainly some one will try and imitate some thing they see on TV. Good or bad. But we all agree that most of the dummies are already shooting beyond the range they are qualified to anyways, sort of what defines them as dummies in this discussion. Will they now try even further ranges? I don’t see how as most are shooting at any elk they can see. It is hard to imagine how they can get further away and if they did, they would have even a lower chance of hitting and wounding the animal anyway.

As for the contentious hunters like you guys seem to be (notice me kissing up here) I hope to show how to determine personal limits and how to extend them through. If a hunter is not trying to extend his abilities in all the areas of hunting, which shooting is just one, I wonder how ethical that is?

You are right that when the bull is big the temptation to try something beyond what you know you should is strong. That is part of what makes hunting so great: real decisions made under pressure. We all have to live with those decisions and hopefully learn by them to. I have made a few mistakes in the past and will most likely again in the future. I do sleep pretty well at night and try my best but I am human. I cannot expect anyone to do better than I do although a lot do. Best answer I have for you.

Thanks for spending the time.

Buck59

Thanks for helping me out with your opinion.

If I missed anybody sorry but as you can see this is getting pretty long. Keep the questions coming if you have them and I will try and keep up.

Thanks again to all of you guys even if you don’t agree. If I wanted everyone to agree I wouldn’t be doing this.

John

There is no need to question my judgement, infact, you should be questioning your own in this case, and this my point. I know, and you know, that you will not be showing any of the " bad" hits. This little wager or challenge towards you is my way of showing to everyone that there is probably some questionable long shot footage being made on animals. In no way do I want to see this at anytime. My point is to prove that you have made some questionable shots on tape. I know you will not show them, it would be too detrimental to your cause.

I am gad you know me so well as to predetermine that I know nothing about the sport. It is a given that he didn' t shoot all of those squirrels on the ground at that range. Where did I say it was safe?? You better go back and read my last post again. This is a feeble attempt to make me look foolish. Nice try.

Why wold I try to attempt to shoot at these ranges, when it is the " range" question under scrutiny?? My lack of long 800 yard shots, or my lack of being a self proclamed expert on the subject, doesn' t mean that I am an idiot, ignorant to the ways of a gun. Again, nice try.

You trigger jerking comment may be true to some measures, but it is not an actual fact in every situaton by any means. Making these shots is admittedly impresive, but should not be percieved or promoted as obtainable by all.

Yes, going on the things that you have stated on missing long shots on tape, then my reply is " yes" , you should have let him go and tried again another time. It doesn' matter where I hunt, whether it be Missouri, Montana, or Mississippi. I wouldn' t attempt these shots whether I was profficient at them or not. It flat takes away from the thrill of the chase. Shooting is a part of the hunt, but it isn' t everything. I have gone many a day without even so much as raising the weapon, and enjoyed hunts to the fullest.


Everyone has missed at all ranges. But these chances of missing are greatly increased at longer ranges, you can' t deny that. So why promote it? Isn' t it our obligation as sportsman and women to narrow the extent of pain and suffering of an animal we hunt to the absolute minimum, humane kill?? Let me tell you something else, I have passed on shots alot closer than 100 yards due to the fact that it wasn' t a good shot. The decision to make or pass these type of shots lets everyone know the type of sportsman or woman you are.

An extension of hunting abilities is also knowing the ethical limits on taking game. It is my thinking that taking game at these ranges is not ethical, due to the lack of woodsmanship, hunting ability, and dramatically increased chances for everyone to seriously cause unneeded pain and suffering, instead of a quick humane kill.

RITCHIE3,

I owe you an apology. In rereading my post I can see how you took offense at what I said and I meant none, I hope you will believe me when I say I am sorry for the way my statements came across. In no way do I consider you or anyone else on this site an idiot. (Well maybe I am once in a while).

We are victims of our circumstances in this situation. I assumed you understood what Ringman was talking about when he said squirrels. In the west there are GROUND squirrels. This is a completely different creature from a tree squirrel. Think of a gopher and you will be right on the mark. I assumed we were all talking about the same thing so I did not understand your remark concerning shooting in the air. My mistake and I again apologize for it.

I think a lot of the disagreement is that fact we all are looking at this through our own experiences. If you have never seen long range shooting (and I don’t know that you haven’t) it would be hard to know what is possible. We also hunt under different conditions. I don’t know if you have spent much time above timberline but in my experience the shots come at longer range than some people understand.

I was also not clear when I asked if you had any long-range experience. I meant at inanimate targets. I firmly believe a hunter should never attempt any shot in the field he has not proven capable of at the range. This is how I determine my personal limits, on targets, long before I head into the field. What I was asking was how have you determined you personal limits. What is the longest distance you have personally shot at and what were the results. Have you pushed your own abilities until you can see by the results, on target, that you have reached the max distance that you personally should shoot under those conditions?

I don’t know if you caught my post about the fact that when we are trying to get video of a hunt if the animal is gut shot or some other poor shot we have lost that opportunity. I care as much as anyone about not causing unnecessary suffering but I am trying to use this as an example as to why we cannot afford to screw around shooting at anything just to see if we can hit it.

I do not believe I am a great shot. I have some technical knowledge about shooting. I am a competent field shot. I do know and have shot with a lot of guys who are truly great marksmen, and I know my present limitations. I am right now working on becoming a better shot. What we are going to show is obtainable to anyone who will put some time into the homework. I am absolutely convinced that you have the inherent ability to reliably hit big game at what is considered long range. You may choose never to learn the knowledge required (you may already have that knowledge) and you may never choose to use it in the field. Personal choice. But to say it is unobtainable is not true.

When you say I should have passed the 580 yds shot on the elk we will have to agree to disagree. I had proven in the past that I could reliably hit a target the size of that elk’s vital zone at twice the distance I was then shooting. I killed him with one shot. I would do the same again today in the same circumstances.

Thank again for the time you have given this.

I watched over 200 tank headed to Baghdad today. I am glad my name is not Saddam.
Kick a** boys

John

John-you sound like an ok guy. You seem to miss the point on the negative comments. That is WHY? I only hunt high country and love to elk hunt. That being said I could fill my bull tag when I' m lucky enough to draw on the first day of every hunt. I always manage to see a 6x or better bull in the first two days at 500 to 1000 yards. So what is the big deal killing it at this range if any rope a dope can do it? If everyone took these kind of shots we would definitely have a shorter season and fewer tags as there would be a higher success rate. I just don' t see your point in making this a hunting subject when it is more suited to consistently hitting at distance on the range. No challenge in the kill if joe city can do it with little or no effort. ????

Anyone know a ballistics calculator that will verify the energy left at 800 yards? An eternal skeptic, I have to see things for myself. I suspect that John' s figures are accurate, but wanted to double check.

So far, I haven' t found anything that will let me plug in his numbers and check his ballistics/retained energy.

Thanks

MinnFinn i suggest you re-read my post. i never said i made those shots. i said i know people that do.