Following thermal spotters, has the need for top quality binos decreased, or increased in recent years ?

[Heym SR20]

Head keeper on the lamp would of sacked me if I was to fanny about with binos and second guess everything he lit up for me.
Set of eyes he deemed to be a fox.
Lights out drive to a safe position if required.. out the truck rifle on bonnet confirm quarry and backstop in the scope rack up a round. Job done in seconds.
I’m sure the majority of shooters who do this for a living do it the same way only now we do it with thermal and night vision.
Nothing dangerous if you are competent and operate safely.

And they also carry a shovel so when they shoot the laird’s wifes pet terrier, that is out for an evening wander by mistake its buried quickly.

If you are foxing on a golf course, or close to villages, or towns you have any number of dogs, cats courting couples etc out and about at all hours.

It’s only going to take one or two accidental night time shootings to be widely publicised and there will be another plethora of restrictions.

Just cos the head keeper is shouting at you doesn’t mean its safe.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

I think that you still need both, but the binos can now be smaller and lighter. I was sitting a high seat in a wood when a whole herd of fallow suddenly appeared and I needed to scan through the animals to find a pricket. You wouldn't want to be moving a rifle barrel around like that.

I have some ex army, toughened case, fantastic optics but a little heavy Leicas. It has crossed my mind that I could swap those for my wife's much, much cheaper, smaller, and lighter Vortex but still with pretty high quality lenses.

We're they all in a safe shooting position ? There's zero chance that a stray dog walker was amongst a heard of wild deer. If the one on the left was a safe shot, as was the one in the middle, and so was the one on the far right- is moving a rifle between the three positions unsafe?

Not best practice I accept. But actually unsafe ?

Unless they were surrounding you or some were in an unsafe position and you wanted to examine them in case they moved to a safe position I suppose.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

And they also carry a shovel so when they shoot the laird’s wifes pet terrier, that is out for an evening wander by mistake its buried quickly.

I agree with this. No way would I shoot with a thermal scope having identified with a thermal spotter.

I must admit- I fox and rabbit with a thermal spotter and a night vision scope. Quarry is confirmed with a pard. A roe doe head looked *exactly* like a rabbit head once. It was only with the night vision that I confirmed it wasn't a wabbit!

For night use, One almost needs a thermal spotter with built in night vision and IR to spot quarry, confirm quarry, then shoot with a rifle ?

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

What utter utter bollocks!

Perhaps the word "potential" is missing. I have no military background- but I would imagine that treating everything as a potential threat, until confirmed as friendly or neutral, was wise.

Also I hope civilian casualties are treated- at least by Nato- very seriously. One civilian death can undo months of hearts and minds work.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

And they also carry a shovel so when they shoot the laird’s wifes pet terrier, that is out for an evening wander by mistake its buried quickly.

If you are foxing on a golf course, or close to villages, or towns you have any number of dogs, cats courting couples etc out and about at all hours.

It’s only going to take one or two accidental night time shootings to be widely publicised and there will be another plethora of restrictions.

Just cos the head keeper is shouting at you doesn’t mean its safe.

That's a good point. I have heard of more than one person hiding a shot sheep from a farmer Will never happen to me as I will never ever pull the trigger on a thermal heat source. But the probability of domestic pets is far greater near a town for sure.

A few accidental human shootings in France is considered an occupational hazard it seems. But the public attitude to shooting is far more positive there.

 

[HallyButt]

Impossible to say and harder to judge whether people are right or wrong without being there. Enough antis already without squabbling on a public forum, everyone should be held responsible for the consequence of their actions taken based upon their best judgement and expecting to be held accountable, the end.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Impossible to say and harder to judge whether people are right or wrong without being there. Enough antis already without squabbling on a public forum, everyone should be held responsible for the consequence of their actions taken based upon their best judgement and expecting to be held accountable, the end.

It's a bit late by then though isn't it ?

Establishing a general consensus- or at least what the majority considers "best practice"- is still useful IMO. Provided ones ego isn't too fragile- it's v interesting to hear others opinions on the subject.

It's actually made me think about a lighter smaller pair of binos would mean I would be more likely to carry them. Especially if they contained a laser rangefinder. Say 8x30 or 10x32. They may not perform as well as a pair of 42s. But they would likely outperform a 50/56 objective rifle scope.

 

[jimmer.13]

And they also carry a shovel so when they shoot the laird’s wifes pet terrier, that is out for an evening wander by mistake its buried quickly.

If you are foxing on a golf course, or close to villages, or towns you have any number of dogs, cats courting couples etc out and about at all hours.

It’s only going to take one or two accidental night time shootings to be widely publicised and there will be another plethora of restrictions.

Just cos the head keeper is shouting at you doesn’t mean its safe.

Read my post thoroughly

 

[HallyButt]

It's a bit late by then though isn't it ?

Establishing a general consensus- or at least what the majority considers "best practice"- is still useful IMO. Provided ones ego isn't too fragile- it's v interesting to hear others opinions on the subject.

It's actually made me think about a lighter smaller pair of binos would mean I would be more likely to carry them. Especially if they contained a laser rangefinder. Say 8x30 or 10x32. They may not perform as well as a pair of 42s. But they would likely outperform a 50/56 objective rifle scope.

Swaro do lrf monocular which is very capable

 

[jimmer.13]

Off out to find a few red gentlemen… no your limits and stay safe

 

[jimmer.13]

Know ffs

 

[VSS]

Head keeper on the lamp would of sacked me if I was to fanny about with binos and second guess everything he lit up for me.
Set of eyes he deemed to be a fox.
Lights out drive to a safe position if required.. out the truck rifle on bonnet confirm quarry and backstop in the scope rack up a round. Job done in seconds.
I’m sure the majority of shooters who do this for a living do it the same way only now we do it with thermal and night vision.
Nothing dangerous if you are competent and operate safely.

So, you're happy to pull the trigger on a set of eyes that someone else deems to be a fox, without confirming that for yourself? You must be completely off your rocker

 

[Tim.243]

So what about shooting at night?

I use thermal to pick up the heat source of what I believe to be a fox.
I then use night vision mounted to my rifle to confirm the identity of my quarry and the target is not obscured.
Am I doing something wrong in your opinion.
I would argue that if you are not competent to know the state your rifle is in and that you can’t aim it in a safe direction without fear of accidentally discharging it…….. then probably you shouldn’t even own one.
To the military are taught to use their weapon mounted optics to scan and observe. It’s not that difficult really

Quite, the stalking world seem to miss the point that many people don't use binos as they are next to no good at night,
Rabbits hares foxes at night are a prime example.
This use of "cull numbers" being selected as if you had 20 on your list and your neighbour has a heap of maize being raided by "Your Fallow" and they put a good team out and cane them. All the glassing and selecting in the world is down the pipe.

 

[Tim.243]

Know ffs

I get that wrong all the time....no know their there bullets heads "tails" lol

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Quite, the stalking world seem to miss the point that many people don't use binos as they are next to no good at night,
Rabbits hares foxes at night are a prime example.
This use of "cull numbers" being selected as if you had 20 on your list and your neighbour has a heap of maize being raided by "Your Fallow" and they put a good team out and cane them. All the glassing and selecting in the world is down the pipe.

Its a fair point- but not quite comparable IMO.

Those who feel strongly on the need for bins seem to particularly dislike

1) the idea of scanning multiple targets before choosing a suitable one (eg a a suitable cull animal).

2) They also dislike (quite rightly) the idea of pointing a rifle at a thermal source, without first confirming with binoculars that it's the target quarry. Although in daylight this can be done with the naked eye, a rangefinder.

Point 1 is nullified when one is doing pest control. All rabbits/fox etc are cull targets. Thus one doesn't need to scan around to find the most suitable rabbit.

Point 2 still stands, however IMO. Although huge numbers of people do it. I suppose one could argue there's less rush at night- one can watch a quarry through thermal with little pressure- and can >99% be identified as the intended species- its shape and walk etc etc- before switching to a rifle.

 

[Bowland blades]

Yes in my opinion.

As for standard operating procedure’s for military - well soldiers when on patrol are doing a very very different job to a deer stalker of fox shooter.

In military, if you are in an active war zone every person is viewed as a threat. And if a civilian should happen to be shot it’s probably treated as collateral damage, or the person was running the risk.

Any body using their rifle sight in a civilian walk of life to identify and confirm targets should not be using a rifle.

It is the fundamental reason why I am opposed to night vision optics on rifles. I do not think image quality is good enough. I still think a decent optic and a spotlight is much much safer.

I agree the gun should not ever be used for making positive ID . Scanning with a loaded or so called unloaded is simply not good practice - The loading Pixie has been responsible for many deaths and serious injuries of people and other living things we did not intend to kill .

 

[Tim.243]

Its a fair point- but not quite comparable IMO.

Those who feel strongly on the need for bins seem to particularly dislike

1) the idea of scanning multiple targets before choosing a suitable one (eg a a suitable cull animal).

2) They also dislike (quite rightly) the idea of pointing a rifle at a thermal source, without first confirming with binoculars that it's the target quarry. Although in daylight this can be done with the naked eye, a rangefinder.

Point 1 is nullified when one is doing pest control. All rabbits/fox etc are cull targets. Thus one doesn't need to scan around to find the most suitable rabbit.

Point 2 still stands, however IMO. Although huge numbers of people do it. I suppose one could argue there's less rush at night- one can watch a quarry through thermal with little pressure- and can >99% be identified as the intended species- its shape and walk etc etc- before switching to a rifle.

You missed the part out of your glassed deer crosses the boundary with the man watching it with his TI and it is in the Game Dealer the next day.

A friend farms policy is to shoot every muntjac that come through, thermal spotter digital scope seeing dark small deer against a dark back ground when the bino boyz are half way home lol

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

I agree the gun should not ever be used for making positive ID . Scanning with a loaded or so called unloaded is simply not good practice - The loading Pixie has been responsible for many deaths and serious injuries of people and other living things we did not intend to kill .

I think it's important to distinguish between

a) Positive ID of the target species

b) Confirmation of which individual animal is to be shot- provided they are all in a safe suitable location/backstop

The former does sound very risky to me. Although I suppose many of us do it- even if we are ratting with an airgun and thermal spotter and foxers do it on occasion.

But if one watches deer walk and move through a thermal- they are unmistakable as deer. IMO selecting which target animal to take through a scope is not unsafe. Using it as quarry identification is.

 

[Cyres]

Leica all but redundant. Thermal all the time. If optics needed Leica Rangefinder monocular. Nv is digital so better for identification at night. If you can't I'd it they you can't shoot it simple.
Thermal transformed winter squirrel control spot them hundreds of yards away and is fast. Tiniest glimps of heat in a tree is all you need. You would never spot them with bins.
D

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

You missed the part out of your glassed deer crosses the boundary with the man watching it with his TI and it is in the Game Dealer the next day.

A friend farms policy is to shoot every muntjac that come through, thermal spotter digital scope seeing dark small deer against a dark back ground when the bino boyz are half way home lol

That's not to my taste. Treating deer as vermin. These digital scopes desensitise us IMO.

Personally I would rather see more quarry species brought up to the high respect levels that deer recieve, rather than some species being degraded and treated like vermin.

The way some people treat foxes But I shan't go all anti on everyone here