Interesting comment relating to long-range hunting...

[Double Naught Spy]

A deer at 25 yards has 1/4 second from when it hears the bow string to when the arrow arrives. The human brain can not process reaction that quickly. There are multiple studies to prove that.

Cite them. Otherwise, some people are down below 0.2 seconds. People can test their own skills here, in fact, a game that shows up from time to time here on TFL. Some people are much worse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/sheep/reaction_version5.swf

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Reacting to a known, pending stimulus is completely different than reacting to an unexpected event.

 

[ZeroJunk]

A man can run 5 yards in 1/2 second. Between the time you commit to fire and the pin strikes a deer can move enough to make an off shot whether he hears anything or not. Hell, I've seen them jump straight up in the air for no reason that I could see. It's part of it.

 

[myfriendis410]

Regarding a deer (or human) reaction to a compound bow; Bowhunter Magazine TV set up a little experiment with a broadside deer target held by a human protected by a wall. The shooter was 20 yards away and fired at the deer target. The human had to react. Virtually every shot he was able to pull away from the arrow successfully. This was without anticipating the shot by watching the shooter. He was around a blind corner. So; a deer CAN react to the sound of the bow/arrow. Close distances help only so much.

What I don't like about long distance rifle shots are that if something WERE to happen the hunter is potentially unable to follow up effectively from so long away. Try making a running shot on a bull elk at 930 yards across a canyon after you gut shot it. Then you have a 2 hour hike to get down to where you originally shot it BEFORE you can start trying to recover from your bad shot. At least a deer shot badly at 100 yards provides you a reasonable chance at a follow up shot. Assuming you are equipped for it. I still think long range shooting, with the exception of some sheep hunting, is not showing proper respect for the animal.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Well, we need to get off that track as it's not the topic of the thread. We can take that up elsewhere if desired.

 

[JohnKSa]

Since the original story in the OP is a claim that a deer was able to move too much even at 100 yards.

It was 138 yards, not 100 and there was no claim that it moved too much. The hit was lethal and the animal was recovered--albeit after some difficulty--so it would be difficult to justify such a claim.

It clearly moved enough to make a good shot into a less than optimal shot, and at relatively close range. And clearly as the range stretches, the TOF delay will increase and the impact point will move even farther away from the aiming point.

Interestingly enough, I see no one able to quantify just exactly what is "acceptable risk".

The fact that it's difficult (or perhaps impossible) to precisely quantify risk does not mean the risk doesn't exist, and it certainly doesn't mean it should be dismissed.

The risk may be difficult to quantify, but it clearly exists and an ethical hunter needs to consider it. Pointing out that it's hard to count all the trees doesn't make the forest go away.

I think it's safe to say that anyone shooting at an unwounded animal so far away that they know that they can't react in time to keep a well-aimed shot in the killzone due to the delay induced by TOF combined with normal human reaction time needs to rethink the decision to take the shot.

 

[Sierra280]

Interesting thread, I think I have to largely agree that it is human error that causes most misplaced shots. Everyone who claims to have made a misplaced short range shot (-300yds) do you call your shots?

As for everyone who thinks it is acceptable to attempt long range shots at game; WHAT ARE YOU THINKING??? There is nothing more unethical than wounding an animal and you are exponentially increasing your chance of doing so. Just because you bought the expensive hardware, take long range shot off bags at the range and have read about snipers making uber long shots, doesn't mean it's even acceptable to try while hunting. BTW, that 2400yd shot with the 50 some years ago in Afghanistan, was his 3rd shot, first 2 hit nothing.

Anytime I hear about a 400-500+++ yard hunting kill, I automatically assume the person is lying, or just really extremely lucky.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

As for everyone who thinks it is acceptable to attempt long range shots at game; WHAT ARE YOU THINKING???

Based on the people I have spoken to, it is the same thing that short range hunters are thinking.

I want that deer/elk/boar/caribou/buffalo. I think I can make that shot.

---------------

BTW, that 2400yd shot with the 50 some years ago in Afghanistan, was his 3rd shot, first 2 hit nothing.

There was no 2400 yard shot 50 years ago in Afghanistan. If you are talking about Rob Furlong's 2430 METER shot in Afghanistan 5 years ago, the first shot missed. The second shot DID hit the knapsack of the target. The 3rd shot killed the target.

I don't think anyone here is talking about taking 2400 yard hunting shots.

 

[ZeroJunk]

Well, I have hunted with a lot of guys for elk and deer for forty years and the farthest I have ever seen anybody take a shot is about 400 yards on an elk. One friend killed a deer at about 380. And even those are extremely rare to see.
I see a lot of weird stuff on YouTube and entertainment TV shows. Doesn't mean that everybody decides they can ride a skate board off a three story building.
I think this may be getting blown out of proportion. Most hunters are well aware of the problems with trying to make these shots for all the reasons mentioned here.

 

[Kimber84]

Based on the people I have spoken to, it is the same thing that short range hunters are thinking.



---------------



There was no 2400 yard shot 50 years ago in Afghanistan. If you are talking about Rob Furlong's 2430 METER shot in Afghanistan 5 years ago, the first shot missed. The second shot DID hit the knapsack of the target. The 3rd shot killed the target.

I don't think anyone here is talking about taking 2400 yard hunting shots.

Just to clarify I think he was saying " with the 50, some years ago".

Anyways, I just spoke with someone a few months ago who claimed a 1700 yard shot on an elk out west. Essentially a custom built rifle was used (sniper rifle, in a custom cal) I can't say I doubt the individual, as I wasn't there, but in my opinion that is truly pushing the boundary of my personal ethical compass, if you will. When you get to ranges like that it feels as though you are getting off on seeing if you can hit something and using the animal instead of a steel gong.

I can't say where I would draw the line on long range shooting. I guess, if my life's in the line and I think I could make a 1700 yard shot to take out a threat then I'd do it.

On the other hand, do I have a problem shooting 500 yards on a deer? Not with the right setup... And maybe that's where this guy was coming from with a 1700 yard shot... I'm not going to judge him on that, but my skills and conscience wouldn't let me try to pull that off.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

See, now, I think it's pretty clear that 1,700 yards is beyond the limits of an ethical shot.

Why? Because there's not a gun in the world that can group smaller than an elk's vital zone at 1,700.

To me, that's the limit. ToF isn't the factor. For one, as per the OP (if we take that scenario at face value) even 100 is too far in terms of the animal having time to move. Two, at long range, we have no idea if the animal moving will be bad or good. One step makes it a bad hit. More steps makes it a clean miss. Clean miss is good. Might be better off at 500 than 100 in some situation that is completely random and unpredictable. Three, if ToF is the issue, almost the entire history of bow hunting has been unethical at almost any distance.

The limit should be that range at which the hunter can no longer guarantee within an acceptable % that the bullet will land in an area within the animals vitals as they are when the shot decision is made.

In almost all cases, that puts the limit well below 1,000 yards but it's not at all hard to imagine pretty easily above 500, gun and shooter dependent. Very few guns can guarantee a bullet inside a game animals vitals at 1,000 yards regardless of the shooters skill, a great many can do it at 500.

 

[TimSr]

Anytime I hear about a 400-500+++ yard hunting kill, I automatically assume the person is lying, or just really extremely lucky.

I have found that most hunters estimate distance in their stories the way fishermen judge the size of their bass. For some reason that 200 yard head shot with a 12 guage slug can be covered in 60 steps of my 3' stride!

 

[Sierra280]

^^I agree with that, just fish stories.

Are there really even any standard hunting rounds that even stay stable out to these huge distances. I would guess the .308 hunting rounds are dropping to transonic speed somewhere around 700yds. Maybe 1100yds with some sort of magnum. Personally, I will stick to the close shots and leave the barrett at home when hunting, I don't like to make elk burger out of the entire animal.

Edit--BTW, hitting dirt, then a knapsack, then connecting; doesn't exactly count as 1 shot, 1 kill in my book.

 

[Gunplummer]

That pretty much sums it up. Most people can not judge distance. Example: Guys talk about how much their deer weighed. It seems the farther they dragged the deer, the heavier it got.

 

[reynolds357]

I dont judge distance too well either, but my laser rangefinder does. Sometimes on the real long stuff, I have to range rocks close to the animal. Rocks range much better than fur at long range.

 

[Todd1700]

If I were consistently seeing game animals 800 to 1000 yards away then I would move my stand. Because obviously it is set up in the wrong place. A little scouting will help you out in that regard. I scout my hunting grounds and as a direct result have not had to take a shot farther than 200 yards in over 20 years. Like I said before, people taking shots at these ranges are hanging back that far on purpose just to see if they can still kill an animal from that range. If they do then they run to the internet to brag. And if they blow the lower half of the animals front leg off? Well you just won't ever hear about that.

 

[reynolds357]

Todd, without seeing where someone hunts, is it possible for you to really know that their stand is in the wrong place? I have stands where my longest shot is less than 25 yards.
95% of the deer seen in this field are seen less than 430 yards away. Its 430 to a wood line. The woods in the bottoms are about 70 yards thick. Past that, you cant see for a long ways due to line of sight blocked by trees. Above the line of sight blockage there is about 80 yards of another oat field(rye this year) that you can see. The back of that field is just over 800. I hunt this set of fields out of a box stand. It has a very solid bench built in it. It is 45 feet tall, and built on steel legs. It has guy wires, and is very solid unless the wind is blowing too hard. If the wind is kicked up, I wont shoot long anyway. I drag a set of my 1000 yard rests up in the tower and leave it there all season. If the shot necessitates, its really just like shooting 1000 yard bench rest. The only variable being the target can walk. Once the bullet is in the air, flight time from the 7 rum is not that bad.

I do have a stand in the other field by the way.

 

[old roper]

Our hunting has changed here in Co with all the beetle kill. Getting down into the timber in some units is near impossible with the down timber and only thing the Forest Service is doing clearing about 100ft each side of the more traveled roads in the National Forest.

We have two game violations which cover lot. First one it's a felony to kill and abandon big game. Other one is not a felony so won't face lifetime license suspension if convicted but can pull your license for a certain amount of time depending on how many points you get. You have to make a reasonable attempt to track and kill animals you wound or may have wounded. Here your not going to shoot and just say I missed you have to go and check.

 

[reynolds357]

I think that is some common sense regulation Roper.
Hunters definitely need to take more responsible shots.
Having said that, responsibility varies much depending on equipment and skill level. I am a member of a local gun club. For entertainment value, I usually go to the rifle range the weekend before and the afternoon of opening day of deer season. To see some of those people "zeroing" a rifle is hilarious. To see them trying to figure out how they missed the deer is even more funny. The ones that usually shoot the worst have $1k rifles and $1k scopes. I am not knocking good equipment. I have good equipment, but it seems that many think high end equipment can substitute for lack of training and lack of trigger time. On the other end of the spectrum, you have the crowd that thinks a 336 Marlin with a blister pack scope is a 300 yard rifle. The ones I think are almost the funniest are the ones who zero at 100 and then take the trajectory printed on the back of their ammo box of factory loads as "gospel."
The "my scope got bumped" crowd always shows up in large number. There is always someone fussing about their poor group who inevitably answers "its been 15 years since I cleaned it." People shooting off coats, sticks, blocks of wood, drink bottles, etc, for their rest. Usually, the poorest shooters are the ones running around giving everyone else advice about how to shoot.

 

[Kimbercommander]

So to all the people that say taking long range shots on animals is only for the poor hunters, I say you are a bad shot. However that would be as incorrect as your own speculation. I take long shots on game because of a injury that has left me without the ability to walk as well as i once could. I was a bow hunter before i got hurt and loved to spot and stalk. Calling elk into less then 10 yards was my drug of choice. However I have spent a considerable amount of money on my equipment to insure that there is little chance the equipment i use will fail. This season so far I have taken a mule deer at 481 yards. Using a Ziess range finder. Which is far more accurate then the old bushnell i used to for bowhunting. I took this animal while it was sleeping in its bed in the middle of the day. I carry a handheld with a ballistics calculator and a kestrel weather / wind meter. Just because you wont/cant make a shot does not make it bad ethics if someone who takes the time and spends the money is able to with good results. Just like i dont believe sitting in a tree stand or a groundblind is "Hunting" doesnt make me correct. To me this is way more unethical then long range shooting. However thats just my own opinion because where I grew up and learned to hunt its impractial. To all their own. If you take your quary with a clean killing shot no matter weapon or range then I believe its ethical.