Todd1700

Well the article mentioned that they had 5 different calibers but only mentioned two specifically. 6mm was one. A fine little round to be sure but certainly not something I'd trust to make a clean kill at 800 or more yards. The other mentioned was the 338-378. By this I assume they are talking about the Weatherby 338-378. A powerhouse round to be sure but at your suggestion lets examine some ballistics shall we. With a 200 grain bullet starting with a muzzle energy of 4983 even the 338-378 is down about 55% at 500 yards to 2213. Now ballistics beyond this range are scarce but even if the energy decline remained constant for the next 500 yards (which it most certainly will not) the 338-378 is down to 995 ft lbs at 1000. This is less than the muzzle energy of a 44 magnum handgun. And remember thats if the energy declines at the same ratio over the second 500 yards as it did over the first 500 yards. Which is not feasable. It will actually lose more energy over the second 500. So, the actual remaining energy at 1000 yards will be less than 995 ft lbs. Or as Rack implied way back when "down in the range where shot placement better be very good."

I also reread the article. No speed read this time. Here is the line that struck me most this time around.

Ahhh, now there's the hallmark of a man who's proud of what he's doing huh? NOT!

akbound

This is not a specific reply to anyone. But rather my general thoughts about this subject in particular. We have had very similar discussions on this board before.......where many posts openly supported long range shooting. And now faced with this incident......that support seems to be flagging, to say the least.

I contend there are only three situations that "long range shooting" should occur, and none of them are what we would commonly refer to as sport hunting. (Long range varminting being a partial exception. When an animal such as a prairie dog is hit with a high velocity midbore it is frequently shredded or even halved. The animal is so completely overwhelmed with shock that death is instantaneous, or nearly so.)

Long range shooting has a place in target shooting. Whatever the target happens to be. Paper, steel, etc., the only criteria is that it is a controlled, safe, environment. This is the best way to improve long range shooting skills. Especially when done in a structured situation, coached by an experienced shooter.

Long range shooting has a place in warfare. (But if you've missed your "target" 50 times......or even 10 times.....and you are still in position. You are a "DEAD MAN". You will not have that many opportunities to miss your target with impunity. A lesson that should be shared with the hunters in that first article.

And finally......if you were in a true life and death circumstance. Lost in the wilderness, survived a plane crash is the bush, etc., then a case could be made ethically to attempt to "stretch" the bounds of "normal" behavior. If someone were attempting to survive......it would be ethical and moral to do what ever was necessary to survive!

Other than those three circumstances I personally can find no ethical reason to shoot as live animals at the ranges we are talking about. And all the talk about what people do at a range is just that......a range, (and in some cases "just talk"!) Not hunting. If you slightly pull a shot into the nine or eight ring on the range your target does not crawl off to die a miserable death! A paper target does not take those two or three steps just as you finished the trigger squeeze. There is no intervening brush that you overlooked from 1000 yards away. There are no range flags to gauge the wind, (or its multiple shifts between you and the target). And you know your background and a certain range. Maybe it is because I have shot matches. The common leg course includes 200, 300, and 600 yard targets. But I've also shot 1000 yard any rifle, any sight. And because of that experience I have have very strong opinions on this subject.

This type of long range shooting has no place in ethical sport hunting! There are to many variables......too many things to go wrong.....and the practitioners frequently conveniently forget to mention those instances that didn't turn out well! And the best reason of all, is no animal deserves to die a slow, miserable, death in an effort to "massage someone ego"!

That is my opinion.....and everyone is welcome to theirs!

Dave

timberjack82

This isn't hunting. There is no chance for the deer. The article says the guy fired 10 shots before he got it? Thats insane, the deer doesn't even know where the shots are coming from. In my opinion this would not be much fun. Why dont you guys try grabbin a bow and letting the deer get 10 yards from you if you want some real excitement and stories to tell. Id much rather say " yea this buck came into my grunting and stopped quartering away at 15 yards" not " yea we were glassing all morning and finally saw some deer at about 700 yards, after my 14th shot I got one". Not cool