Boone and Crockett on Long Range Shooting

[Songdog]

A cautionary tone? Please.....

They should use a cautionary tone in a statement about shooting at stuff running 20mph.... I would bet that accounts for exponentially more wounded/lost game than shots outside 400. Or a cautionary tone in a statement regarding supplimenting deer genetics by introducing farm raised does to wild populations.... for the sole intent of growing bigger antlers. B&C should keep their collective mouths shut.... they aren't about "fair chase".... they're in the business of promoting the killing of the biggest critters.

Also, I'm sure B&C doesn't cash a cautionary check from Leupold for using their name in LONG RANGE SCOPES.

The best thing B&C could do to help "hunting" and "ethics".... is close "the Book". Shut'er down..... no more "world records".... only awards for habitat conservation and hunting related philanthropy. I don't give two flips about how big a buck some dude killed..... but a guy that has helped 100 kids kill their first deer deserves to be in "the Book"...

 

[Ridgerunner665]

B&C's first "article"...on Facebook...was a bit more abrasive...Broz engaged them with enthusiasm (and intelligence), Leupold too....he seems to have softened their stance some.

 

[wildgene]

...well, from the top...

...I don't know why anyone would consider a B&C reticle "long range", it has hold overs for 3 & 400yds. w/ windage & just tics for 5 & 600yds.

...gotta go w/ Dr. Mike here, elk are relatively easy to see around here...



...cripples w/ 3 legs, hanging jaws, large festering wounds dragging behind the herd are easy to spot, & while the buzzards have pretty much gone south, there's still lots of magpies, ravens, & eagles to mark unclaimed, unrecovered carcasses. See 'em every year...

...funny thing about "ethics" is while most Europeans would be aghast @ what we consider normal ranges (& most PH's in Africa don't think Americans should be allowed to shoot over 50yds & 30yds is better), running game is the sign of a true hunter . We have "Precision Tactical" matches, they have "Running Boar" matches where the object is to shoot as many fast moving targets as quickly as possible, offhand. Does that make "them" all "unethical"??? It's as big of deal & they take it just seriously as we take "tactical matches", & they're really very good @ it...

...I stand by my original comment, "Let your conscience be your guide", dependent on the conditions...

 

[Songdog]

It makes them unethical if they KNOW that's a low percentage shot, based on the fact that they've done it in matches.... then take that shot in the field.

If they know they can make that shot, based on EXPERIENCE... then no, it's not an 'unethical shot'.... even if the results are less that desirable.

I've taken a lot of shots at matches or in practice that I wouldn't take at an animal. Why? Because I know what a low percentage shot looks like.... and I'm unwilling to start bullets in a bad place, trying to drive them into a good one.

Just like DrMike.... you're assuming that this so called increase in wounded/lost critters is to blame on LR shooters.... rather than a loss of ethical hunting practices as a whole. I blame lack of hunting and shooting experience by the average Joe hunter... combined by TV Shows and marketing.... and that drive to get in "the Book". The LR issue is simply one of the worms in the can right now....

You're point about it hardly being a Long Range reticle is exactly to my point. It doesn't work well.... especially at 500 and 600.... but they put those dots there.... and they put an ads in magazines and on TV telling you that's where you're gonna hit.

Boone and Crockett put their name on a scope with a poorly designed and moderately accurate 600 yard reticle.... marketed it as a way to 'accurately shoot out to 600 yards'.... gained customer base and profited from it. Then they come out and caution against it... while still marketing said scope?

Genius if I understand it correctly......

 

[Vince]

It makes them unethical if they KNOW that's a low percentage shot, based on the fact that they've done it in matches.... then take that shot in the field.

If they know they can make that shot, based on EXPERIENCE... then no, it's not an 'unethical shot'.... even if the results are less that desirable.

I've taken a lot of shots at matches or in practice that I wouldn't take at an animal. Why? Because I know what a low percentage shot looks like.... and I'm unwilling to start bullets in a bad place, trying to drive them into a good one.

Just like DrMike.... you're assuming that this so called increase in wounded/lost critters is to blame on LR shooters.... rather than a loss of ethical hunting practices as a whole. I blame lack of hunting and shooting experience by the average Joe hunter... combined by TV Shows and marketing.... and that drive to get in "the Book". The LR issue is simply one of the worms in the can right now....

You're point about it hardly being a Long Range reticle is exactly to my point. It doesn't work well.... especially at 500 and 600.... but they put those dots there.... and they put an ads in magazines and on TV telling you that's where you're gonna hit.

Boone and Crockett put their name on a scope with a poorly designed and moderately accurate 600 yard reticle.... marketed it as a way to 'accurately shoot out to 600 yards'.... gained customer base and profited from it. Then they come out and caution against it... while still marketing said scope?

Genius if I understand it correctly......

Well said. [emoji106]

 

[SJB358]

Gene nailed it, no matter what club, sport, association you belong to, you have to be honest with the guy in the mirror. Bad shots occur. Just a fact of life. Well, I say that but it's pretty hard to find someone that owns their poor shot, but I've made them. I practice shooting a lot both on and off the field and feel like I'm capable to my max range to max the highest percentage shots possible, but in hunting, I'd rather make a poor wind call closer than further. There all going to be poor hits, but as we get along in range the shot gets worse.

Another piece of this thing that's weird or odd is how all the long shots are necessary. I haven't hunted a huge number of game animals, mainly elk, deer, bear. I've found very few opportunities hunting in Oregon, Wyoming, and Idaho where shooting 600 yards or more is really unavoidable. So for me, yeah I like the ability to hit far, but moving in and hunting closer seems like better odds. Maybe not all of the time, but it's worked decent for me.

Besides that, a lot of the ground I find and kill elk would be damned hard to lay prone, supported to consistently put 1st round hits on target. In the flat lands I'm sure it's easier, but in the denser mountains I've looked around and there just isn't a lot of great places to get that awesome position.

I think my longest shot to date was just over 400 on a game animal. That was plenty far enough for the conditions it was taken. 400 yards is still a long shot under field conditions shooting off a ruck or loop sling.

 

[Vince]

Having gone back and re-read the Boone & Crockett position I find that while it's not saying to not take long range shots I do detect a certain attitude towards them that is negative.

Gene, as I journey through this world I always try to let my conscience be my guide. Thank you for that often needed reminder.

Ethics cannot be legislated, my opinion, but acts can. I fear that regulations may be imposed based on the ethics of groups like Boone & Crockett. Not all hunters are ethical but that's an individual thing. I can only judge based on my ethics and what is ethical for one may not be for another.

Is it ethical for me to take an 800 Yard shot on game? For me, at this time, no. 600 maybe, given the conditions, but I've also seen conditions where 200 Yards could be unethical.

Overall, very poor delivery by Boone & Crockett, IMHO. It's not what is said that often matters but how it is said.

Vince

 

[longrangehunter]

My own experience growing up in Michigan was all short range shooting, with either gun or a bow measured in feet not yards.

But when I first went out west to hunt Pronghorn, those shots grew to be hundreds of yards, but I also was more then comfortable with my ability to take Game cleanly with a single shot. I'd get as close as possible and kept shots to under 450 yards. That was my own personal limits and if I didn't like the shot I wouldn't take it! Period.

I later moved out West to Montana and finding cover is or shall I say can or does get a little tricky depending on where you're hunting? I've guided friends to deer as close as 10 feet only to be forced not to take a shot because she couldn't move to make the shot on the standing deer below us. Only a few days later to have them make a shot at almost 300 yards. Both times these were by anyones terms great hunting and ethical.

I've let go more then 100/1 more game then I've ever taken in my lifetime. Long range shooting does have a place in hunting simply because your window of opportunity is diminishing with each moment you wait in some instances.

I missed taking one of the largest Bears I've ever seen because I felt I should get closer? Dumb because I had already killed a Moose in the same spot a few years earlier at 319 yards and a Woodland Caribou two days before across a lake at 449 yards. We watched this Black Bear feeding on the opposite hillside of us after spotting it over a mile away. The Bear was only 300+ yards away, but my thinking was this is a big Bear and it may be more prudent to get closer? I could have clearly taken my sweet time to get settled in behind my rifle and send one of those 210 XLC when I felt the perfect moment to release the bullet. After all I was sitting on the mountain top where I could have gotten prone and made a perfect shot but No I thought I should get closer!

But no that didn't happen. I may have gotten closer but we somehow managed to get upwind of that Bear and it was seen running full blast for over a mile toward Ottawa and we were in Newfoundland! Later that day I did see another Bear near the top of a mountain from the lake below that I hiked up to. As I got closer towards the top I found a crack to stay out of site of where I thought the bear was? Little did I know when I reached the top of the mountain through this crack that Bear was feeding right towards me less the 20' feet away!

I stood and watched that Bear walk within less then 8 feet of me! I didn't even raise my gun because that Bear was too small. It was a Bear but I don't collect Bears like people collect baseball cards. Point being for me it's a personal thing to harvest an Animal or not and how I do it. I either do it for meat and/or the sport of the game.

Hunting is just that..... hunting. Which has nothing to with the killing aspect of the sport, that's the end result which doesn't always mean my time was successful or not? To me if I see Game or get to the point of no return whether or not I take an Animal has little to do with how exciting it was? Sometimes the rush is just getting there, but anytime I lose due to my own fault that sucks and I learn from those mistakes!

Mistakes or not sometimes getting closer may or may not have a better outcome? Long distance does tend to keep the game Animals at ease if they don't have any clue you're there vs. being alert because they sense something is "not right" with this picture? In the end everything has to be thought through of what's the best option for the moment, but that window of opportunity doesn't always get better. Luck or not does play a role in hunting to some extent, but not when to pull the trigger in my opinion. That should be thought through on a individual basis on whether or not to take the shot? A offhand running shots at close range may or may not have a great outcome and one I would more then 99% of the time pass up vs. the long range standing shot less then 600 yards away. But that's my personal feelings, which has nothing to do with B&C's opinion on the matter.

Advancements have come a long way in the last few years towards more ethical LR shots on game. A guy behind a custom tack driving rifle with a tactical scope using a ballistic app and range finder is not like twenty years ago. BDC reticles are far from perfect but so was Kentucky windage, either way the game has evolved into making long range shots more doable as long as the person behind the gun has done their homework.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Being disabled by lung disease, I have usually been restricted by terrain as to what range my shots are. I have never shot at any "game" at over 425 yards and my abilities for one shot kills about match that range. I do get as close as I can which in the western mountains, often is 300 yards or so. I haven't failed to one shot, DRT any deer that I have shot at in many years.

One shouldn't just blanket state a position. There are often extenuating circumstances involved.

 

[Guy Miner]

One shouldn't just blanket state a position. There are often extenuating circumstances involved.

Roger that.

And Best of Luck to all you hunters, be your shots at 10 paces or 600 yards!

Regards, Guy

 

[PJGunner]

"As far as I'm concerned.... the B&C club has brought as much of this on as anyone.... with the advocation of shooting larger and larger animals, and the acceptance of animals shot on their winter ranges using auctioned "Governor's Tags". Guys want their name in "the Book"... and they'll always push the limits to get there."

Someone suggested that maye they should stop putting animals in the book. I'm not so sure that's such a good idea. What I would suggest is a hunter gets a qualifying animal for the book, he can enter it but not his name. The reason there is so much skullduggery and cheating is so some dude can fulfill he ego trip and say, My deer, elk, antelope whatever, "Made the book." No name in the book, end of ego trip. Nothing to identify the hunter. If one cannot point to the picture of a trophy animal with his name under it and say, "See I shot that one." it just might make a difference. Just a thought I've had for a few years now.
Paul B.

 

[Vince]

I like that.
No Name. Makes a lot of sense to me and an idea I could get behind. If I ever take a "book" animal maybe I'll do that.

 

[Oldtrader3]

The largest deer (whitetail) that I ever shot was approximately 170 B&C points. I shot it 44 years ago and have not matched it since. I don't have $150,000 for the Governor's Trophy in Utah or anywhere else. So what has been, is and I am too old to worry about it.

 

[Vince]

The largest deer (whitetail) that I ever shot was approximately 170 B&C points. I shot it 44 years ago and have not matched it since. I don't have $150,000 for the Governor's Trophy in Utah or anywhere else. So what has been, is and I am too old to worry about it.

I'm not much for "book".
I'm hunting for myself to live in, for however short a time, nature on nature's terms.
I don't base my hunts by the mounts on the wall but by the experiences and memories. I will admit to liking to have something on the wall but that's not the primary purpose of what I do. Besides, I'm to cheap to pay to include my name in somebody's book.

Vince

 

[Ridgerunner665]

So nobody gets the wrong idea...I just want a nice mount on my wall...something to look at when my hunting days are over...a reminder of sorts.

Don't care if it happens to be the next world record....it will not be entered into any books.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I am not complaining. I have three mounted animals, a whitetail, mule deer and a Pronghorn. Would have liked to have a nice elk but it never happened. My wife is happy and okay with the three mounted animals. She really does not want any more.

 

[Vince]

I am not complaining. I have three mounted animals, a whitetail, mule deer and a Pronghorn. Would have liked to have a nice elk but it never happened. My wife is happy and okay with the three mounted animals. She really does not want any more.

[emoji106]

 

[Guy Miner]

Hasn't the money raised by Governor's Tags and other "trophy" type hunts been very important in wildlife conservation?

 

[Guy Miner]

A few years ago a buddy of mine, just a local guy, drew a bighorn sheep tag for an area just north of town, where we both hunt mule deer often.

He made over 20 scouting trips, pared his weight down, hunted hard and ended up with... The World's Record "California" bighorn ram. What a beast.... No big dollars involved. Lots of hard hunting involved. Twenty trips on foot, into some rugged country here above the Columbia. Steep, really steep country. He got his ram!

It's in the record books, and is one mighty impressive trophy indeed. The whole local hunting community here was very happy for him, knowing that he'd "done it right" the very epitome of Fair Chase hunting.

Guy

 

[Guy Miner]

My 2010 bear won an award here in Washington, as tied for the biggest that year, entered into that particular contest. Even though he wasn't huge.

I thought it was kind of cool to get my name on the perpetual trophy that gets passed around every year.

The bear wasn't big enough for the B&C book!

Guy