Long Vs Short Range
01-11-2005, 07:05 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location:
Posts: 198
Long Vs Short Range
I am not trying to start any fights here! In my shop there is a "friendly" arguement, (debate) amoung my customers which will probably never end! It is over who is the better hunter, the still hunter who shoots his deer at distances measured in feet or the long range hunter who pops his deer at 1/4 mile.
I see two sides to this, but first let me say that I am not a long range shooter and limit my shots to under 300 yards. Most of the game I have shot were under 50 yards the longest shot I have taken was this past summer at an Eland and that was 270 yards.
My feeling about this question is that it takes much more hunting skill to get in close (if one is not using a tree stand) but minimal shooting ability and the close in hunter does not need the tack driving accuracy of the long range shooter. On the other hand the long range hunter has to have far superior shooting skills and the ability to judge range, wind mirage and more, but needs less in the way of stalking ability or hunting skill.
Either group if not compitent can and do wound and loose deer so lets leave sloopy shooting out of the discussion because there are some poor and unethical hunters on both sides of this question.
As for me, like I said I like in close, I do not have a range to practice over 200 yards and up here in Maine longer shots are few.
Funny thing about this is I build rifles for customers on both sides of this debate.
As far as who has the best hunting skills? My hats off to the bow hunter who stalks or still hunts with a recurve or long bow!
I see two sides to this, but first let me say that I am not a long range shooter and limit my shots to under 300 yards. Most of the game I have shot were under 50 yards the longest shot I have taken was this past summer at an Eland and that was 270 yards.
My feeling about this question is that it takes much more hunting skill to get in close (if one is not using a tree stand) but minimal shooting ability and the close in hunter does not need the tack driving accuracy of the long range shooter. On the other hand the long range hunter has to have far superior shooting skills and the ability to judge range, wind mirage and more, but needs less in the way of stalking ability or hunting skill.
Either group if not compitent can and do wound and loose deer so lets leave sloopy shooting out of the discussion because there are some poor and unethical hunters on both sides of this question.
As for me, like I said I like in close, I do not have a range to practice over 200 yards and up here in Maine longer shots are few.
Funny thing about this is I build rifles for customers on both sides of this debate.
As far as who has the best hunting skills? My hats off to the bow hunter who stalks or still hunts with a recurve or long bow!
01-11-2005, 07:12 AM
#2
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 7,208
RE: Long Vs Short Range
hunting skills-the person who gets the closest. Shooting skills-most likely the distance shooter. As long as the individual practicing the particular style is diligent in making clean kills, the rest shouldn't matter.
Personally I like up close hunting. But I'm sure not going to knock someone who can consistently pick off deer at 400-500 yds either, cause there's no way I could do that, without a ton of range time etc.
Personally I like up close hunting. But I'm sure not going to knock someone who can consistently pick off deer at 400-500 yds either, cause there's no way I could do that, without a ton of range time etc.
01-11-2005, 08:15 AM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Long Vs Short Range
As far as who has the best hunting skills?
These guys are superior hunters to me. The sneak into deer/elk homes without them ever knowign they are there. I have met one guy from WV that told me he only stalk hunts deer. He told me he started because he had back issues. But once he became successful at killing big deer, he figured out it was easier than stand hunting.
But on the other hand, most archers like myself have some much needed things working for them. First, the animals don't change thier patterns much. Second, they don't spook near as easy. This works against the gun hunters.
01-11-2005, 09:07 AM
#4
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,471
RE: Long Vs Short Range
Most rifle hunters should start out as bowhunters . The skills they pick up help immensely when they have a gun in their hands. They think Short Range shots. Depending on what I am shooting a 300 yard shot is plenty long. I have taken a couple of animals at that range plus maybe 50-75 yards but taken more in the 50-150 yard range.
01-11-2005, 10:22 AM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Gypsum KS USA
Posts: 1,289
RE: Long Vs Short Range
I've been guilty of bragging up my own achievements on threads like this...this time, I think I'll change my focus.
I have an uncle that prides himself on the fact that he bought 3 boxes of ammo with his rifle 38yrs ago and still hasn't needed to buy more ammo. He's a decent shot, and he takes smart shots, he takes a lot of trophy deer, some record holders, from Western Kansas...he also prides himself on never taking a shot over 45yrds. His son, however, is a competition shooter, he typically shoots 2 benchrest type matches per month all year round, running more rounds out of his rifles in a day than his father has in nearly 40yrs. His son boasts rifle and archery deer records as well, some ranging out around 650yrds.
Who's really the better hunter? "Hunter" is defined as a person who hunts..."Hunt" is defined as "to go out to kill or catch (game) for food or sport" from Webster's New world Dictionary. Both of them are successful at killing game, they've traded ranks in who's had the heaviest deer and who's deer scored better for years.
Long range shooting and long range hunting should not be confused. Most hunters have NEVER even SEEN a 200yrd rifle range, let alone shot at one. They are not capable of ethically making long range shots, let alone hunting at long ranges. Personally, I believe that anything over 200yrds is long range hunting and that anything over 400yrds is long range shooting, and the two are not necessarily the same. I've got two armalite rifles (.338Lapua and .50BMG) that I'd be perfectly confident in taking a whitetailed deer at 1000yrds with. I've got a Remington .308 40X that I'd feel fine taking a 600yrd shot with.
For guys that are skilled shooters, it simply expands the range at which they can be successful hunters. I've taken deer at ranges from 8ft to 437yrds with everything from a recurve bow to a centerfire bolt action heavy bbled rife.
I've instructed and helped instruct a few firearms courses, pistol, shotgun and rifle...in the rifle courses I've helped with (have yet to solo in rifles), pretty much any student can be taught to make 200yrd shots regularly within a day or two. BUT, they've got to actually shoot at 200yrds. These "John Igodagun" shooters that take their guns out and sight in at 100yrds, leaving the strike 1-2" high thinking it'll be right on at 200yrds. Then they go out and luckily get a deer at 50yrds and make a decent shot...then they tell their buddies, "Oh, he was sittin right about 125, 130, I just leveled up and nailed him"...it's these guys that give long range shooting and hunting a bad name.
I have an uncle that prides himself on the fact that he bought 3 boxes of ammo with his rifle 38yrs ago and still hasn't needed to buy more ammo. He's a decent shot, and he takes smart shots, he takes a lot of trophy deer, some record holders, from Western Kansas...he also prides himself on never taking a shot over 45yrds. His son, however, is a competition shooter, he typically shoots 2 benchrest type matches per month all year round, running more rounds out of his rifles in a day than his father has in nearly 40yrs. His son boasts rifle and archery deer records as well, some ranging out around 650yrds.
Who's really the better hunter? "Hunter" is defined as a person who hunts..."Hunt" is defined as "to go out to kill or catch (game) for food or sport" from Webster's New world Dictionary. Both of them are successful at killing game, they've traded ranks in who's had the heaviest deer and who's deer scored better for years.
Long range shooting and long range hunting should not be confused. Most hunters have NEVER even SEEN a 200yrd rifle range, let alone shot at one. They are not capable of ethically making long range shots, let alone hunting at long ranges. Personally, I believe that anything over 200yrds is long range hunting and that anything over 400yrds is long range shooting, and the two are not necessarily the same. I've got two armalite rifles (.338Lapua and .50BMG) that I'd be perfectly confident in taking a whitetailed deer at 1000yrds with. I've got a Remington .308 40X that I'd feel fine taking a 600yrd shot with.
For guys that are skilled shooters, it simply expands the range at which they can be successful hunters. I've taken deer at ranges from 8ft to 437yrds with everything from a recurve bow to a centerfire bolt action heavy bbled rife.
I've instructed and helped instruct a few firearms courses, pistol, shotgun and rifle...in the rifle courses I've helped with (have yet to solo in rifles), pretty much any student can be taught to make 200yrd shots regularly within a day or two. BUT, they've got to actually shoot at 200yrds. These "John Igodagun" shooters that take their guns out and sight in at 100yrds, leaving the strike 1-2" high thinking it'll be right on at 200yrds. Then they go out and luckily get a deer at 50yrds and make a decent shot...then they tell their buddies, "Oh, he was sittin right about 125, 130, I just leveled up and nailed him"...it's these guys that give long range shooting and hunting a bad name.
01-11-2005, 04:01 PM
#6
Fork Horn
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Goucester Maine
Posts: 264
RE: Long Vs Short Range
the long range hunter has better shootign skills and the close range hunter has better stalking skills.
i don't need to be a long range hunter. in maine i probally will never have a shot oportunity past 200 yards.
i don't need to be a long range hunter. in maine i probally will never have a shot oportunity past 200 yards.
01-11-2005, 05:07 PM
#9
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location:
Posts: 198
RE: Long Vs Short Range
I know several people who hunt both ways as the mood or weather moves them. However, they all put in extensive range and scouting time and are all excellant shots and for lack of a better word woodsmen. I built one of these guys a 30-378 and this guy is one of the best shots I have met his rifles with his accuracy loads will shoot under 1/2" at 100 yards or they get sold or rebuilt. That 30-378 went, not because of accuracy but because Rodney said the recoil was heavy enough so it was not enjoyiable to practice with and he also felt that it was not needed for deer under 400 yards. It is now a .270 Weatherby and getting shot very often. Though Rodney pops all sort of stuff like crows and wood chucks at impressive ranges he will not shoot at deer over 400 yards. According to him, and I agree there are just to many factors to deal with at longer ranges and under hunting conditions defication happens and he does not want to risk wounding and loosing a deer. One of the biggest problems of the long range stuff is that with out snow it is very hard to find where the deer was standing and pick up a blood trail if the deer runs off, hell it can be hard at any distance!
01-11-2005, 05:38 PM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13
RE: Long Vs Short Range
You make a good point, I made what had to be a 400yd kill only to find out it was about 220yds once I stepped it off. Course thats not the story I told around the fire. 200yds is a long way for some one who only runs a box of shells down the tube every year. Im sure Ill take heat on this but most of the time the rifle thats carried in the woods is much more accurate then the person carrying it.