Maximum Range for Stalking

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do think quite a few rifle and optics manufacturers would lose a lot of business if people bought equipment that suited their stalking ability .

With almost EVERY centrefire rifle 200m is point and shoot, there is no need for BDC reticles or Ballistic Turrets or Varmint/heavy barrels weighted precision stocks etc. a basicis 4x 6x or 8x by 42 or 50 scope will be fine and cheap ass factory bullets as long as it hits within a 4 inch target at 100m.

These days with innovation of rifle and bullet tech, including rifle harmonics, stock bedding, BAllistic turrets , data apps, Kestrels, BDC reticles, Schott glass Big mag scopes etc. all designed for shooting far longer ranges than 200 metres.

Both my CF rifles (223 and 308) carry S+B 6x42 scopes - the 223 has Warne QD mounts, the secondary scope is a Yukon Photon for night foxing.

I'm giving some thought to longer-range target work, which will require a lot more scope with dial-in, etc on the 308. But that will probably also mean QD mounts and rings on that.
 
I'd say that is possibly a bit harsh.

Not justifying/condoning this and I dinae ken Tulloch but he's made a very good job of defending himself and sounds like puts the time in practicing etc.

1 thing I will say is the way many sites are harvested now, there has been a trend in many places for bigger sites/clear fells, esp larger forested areas in Scotland.
Some sites ur now taking multiple coupes that in the past would be 3 or 4 different jobs, 1 I was on was 35K tonne ish, be a bugger to manage in the future the area it covers, bloody massive.
Bad enough walkng over clear fells/restock sites without trying to stalk over them so sometimes it will be easier gearing ur rifles up for longer ranges if and when needs must.

The main thing for novices etc is to really put the time in practicing esp at longer ranges if that is ur thing.
Ull soon see the effect wind can have no matter how skillfull u are or how good it equipment, at longer ranges it doesnae take much breeze

The other thing no matter how good u are and how good weather conditions are is reading the deer.
Is it likely to move etc, always important but even more so when going for ur smaller target area shots and at longer distances when u need the Der to be still for 1 second or so.

These are things that experienced stalkers will be doing all the time before taking shots and will know when a shot is doable 1 day but not the next.
Not really my thing so don't practice at these ranges but don't really have a problem with Experienced shots shooting to the conditions as long as not pushing them.

Be bloody hard enough work finding ur shot site 400yd away even with a dead deer lying there, esp if u drop into acouple of hollows, and lose sight of it. Again where exp comes in or a dog.

I agree. Clearfells are definitely getting bigger. Thank God that foresters with a brain will cut you quad tracks for recovery when it's being mounded. If they don't, some places nowadays would be borderline unshootable.
 
No publicity is bad publicity for some especially if you need to fill dozens of syndicate places each year. It was pretty obviously posted just to cause controversy in the first place so I wouldn't worry about the fact that you shared it. It has been a useful eye opener on the way deer are treated by some especially in scotland.
To be fair and answer the first point @Tulloch did not start this thread, those that have perpetuated it to 14 pages are the ones that have given him free, unrequested publicity.

On the second point, shooting deer is more that just about recreational stalking, in fact if it wasn't for crop protection requirements many on this forum wouldn't get the stalking opportunities the have.
 
I agree. Clearfells are definitely getting bigger. Thank God that foresters with a brain will cut you quad tracks for recovery when it's being mounded. If they don't, some places nowadays would be borderline unshootable.

Aye quad tracks are becoming more common a lot of mounders will dig them in, makes a difference be god send for stalkers even for the planters, or cutters in 40yrs time ( if still needing hand cutters then, hopefully I'll not still be doing it then :old:)
 
I'd say that is possibly a bit harsh.

Not justifying/condoning this and I dinae ken Tulloch but he's made a very good job of defending himself and sounds like puts the time in practicing etc.

1 thing I will say is the way many sites are harvested now, there has been a trend in many places for bigger sites/clear fells, esp larger forested areas in Scotland.
Some sites ur now taking multiple coupes that in the past would be 3 or 4 different jobs, 1 I was on was 35K tonne ish, be a bugger to manage in the future the area it covers, bloody massive.
Bad enough walkng over clear fells/restock sites without trying to stalk over them so sometimes it will be easier gearing ur rifles up for longer ranges if and when needs must.

The main thing for novices etc is to really put the time in practicing esp at longer ranges if that is ur thing.
Ull soon see the effect wind can have no matter how skillfull u are or how good it equipment, at longer ranges it doesnae take much breeze

The other thing no matter how good u are and how good weather conditions are is reading the deer.
Is it likely to move etc, always important but even more so when going for ur smaller target area shots and at longer distances when u need the Der to be still for 1 second or so.

These are things that experienced stalkers will be doing all the time before taking shots and will know when a shot is doable 1 day but not the next.
Not really my thing so don't practice at these ranges but don't really have a problem with Experienced shots shooting to the conditions as long as not pushing them.

Be bloody hard enough work finding ur shot site 400yd away even with a dead deer lying there, esp if u drop into acouple of hollows, and lose sight of it. Again where exp comes in or a dog.
2 dogs are with me now all the time , I never stalk without a dog these days .
 
Both my CF rifles (223 and 308) carry S+B 6x42 scopes - the 223 has Warne QD mounts, the secondary scope is a Yukon Photon for night foxing.

I'm giving some thought to longer-range target work, which will require a lot more scope with dial-in, etc on the 308. But that will probably also mean QD mounts and rings on that.
If your looking to aim at using true return to zero mounts look into the US defence branded ones .
 
I think I have exhausted everything I can say about this to be honest , and I am so very glad this has opened up a good debate and very mature too at points,

I see a couple mentioning publicity, I don't need that and I don't want that, I am not representing anyone or any brand it is just me myself and I, and any guest that thinks they will be allowed to shoot past 200yrds if they come along with me will be in for a shock haha.

I run my equipment tight and I shoot literally every day, if it is not deer (like this moment in time) it is rabbits and foxes, I made a statement earlier in this thread mentioning I know ALL my rifles , the fact is that there is one I just do not know and I am working on learning just now and that is my .17hmr, it has been a challenge to say the least , not about long shooting but more shorter ranges, but that is a topic for another thread.

Like I said before my original post on instagram was never intended to be aired on here and the OP himself in a previous post admitted he did not know I was a member of this site.

I have NOT taken any offence of anything that was said in this thread, neither by the original post or any the subsequent posts that followed so rest assured it has not bothered me at all . I actually found out about this thread by someone texting me haha and was curious and immediately I said it was me, why would I not?

The deer I shot was dead immediately, the shot was taken into a 500 acre clear fell which was unstalkable, a decision was made that I took , I had a very long time to prepare for the shot that stag was happy munching on trees and as it was my tasked job to keep deer off that replant I made the decision to try a long shot. Was it a stupid decision I honestly probably would have given you a different answer if it was not so successful, would I have posted the post I originally made about the bullet extraction and how I was impressed on its retention, probably would have if I had recovered the bullet.

This thread has been very educational, not just for Novices in regards to shooting but also how public forum scrutiny works. In many ways I am still very much a Novice in some respect when it comes to shooting as every day is a school day, like me relearning how fickle the .17hmr is, but I am far from a Novice in regards to other stuff. 90% these days I work alone just myself and my dogs, unless I have a guest most of the management I do is on my own, clearfells are dangerous places and sometimes the safest shot is a long shot in regards to my wellbeing, taking a loaded rifle into a clear fell can be very silly.

This thread has been good though, and it shows the different points of view. I will finish with one thought that most of you need to understand,

Not all deer that are shot are stalked, and not all stalks result in deer being shot, crop protection does not always include a physical stalk, when I shot that deer I was not stalking, I will never say I was, I was doing a job it was not recreational there was no fun in it, only pleasure taken was when I got back to the truck. That particular deer I kept for my own consumption if I had not prepped it myself I would not have even bothered about the bullet and noone would have even known anything about the deer. As I said I had no intentions for this to spark a conversation the way it has, it was all about the bullet NOT the shot in the end.
 
Even a 500 acre restock, that's some size and could be a real bugger to manage, I imagine depending on shape.

On lower ground many farms are not 100 acres, never mind 500, just to give some perspective.
That's many people's permissions laid out bare with potentially little cover or access.
Imagine if ur 500 acre permission which is a nice mix of fields, hedges and wee woods,( ie easily stalkable no matter the wind) was just 1 bare field??
And not just a flat level field restock sites can be a bloody nightmare full off upturned stumps, rotten brash matt's and dolp ditches any can swallow u 'baw' deep almost with out warning
 
Wow. Fourteen pages in less than two days. At some point I'll sit down and read all of them. But to be fair, what needed to be said was probably covered in pages 1 and 2 and most of the rest is just bitchin' and Lockdownitis.

Fact #1: 420yd is not a long shot, nor is it long range. It is (technically) medium range, which starts at 300yd and runs to 600yd. Some will say 700yd.

Fact #2: Clearly, a medium range shot like this is not stalking, never was, never will be. But neither is any shot much further than whatever range equates to the distance within which the deer stands a reasonably good chance of detecting the shooter. So a lot of what are classed short range shots - technically - are actually a lot further than can logically be classified as stalking. A lot of this is really semantics, what applies to you will not apply to someone else, somewhere else, and so on. It must be remembered that most centrefire small-bore hunting cartridges shooting a bullet in the 130-180gr range have a Maximum Point Blank Range of about 250-300yd.

Fact #3: Few sports are as bound up in culture and tradition as deer stalking, game birds, fly fishing etc, i.e. game animals. The minute someone steps on the toes of local culture and tradition, people loose perspective and start ranting. Culture and tradition rarely directly reference technology and skill. This is a problem.

Fact #4: A 420yd kill shot is easy. I do it all the time without a second thought. In my world, it's not even a long shot, and I'll rarely turn it down. It has to be blowing Gale Force Fortybastards for me to turn that down. This for the purpose of pest control. Deer, goats, wallabies and pigs. I shoot rabbits and hares with a .223 way past 300yds on autopilot. I'm bloody good at it. I have to be. But I have come to realise I don't particularly care for it, especially after two solid weeks of pinging deer and goats at ranges far, far in excess of 420yd. I tire of the killing and yearn for the intensity and excitement of the stalk. I'll say this absolute honesty - when I come home from pest control, I feel quite empty and hollow, and my wife will attest to the fact that the sheer scale and intensity of the killing wears me down. This is something I have come to recognise quite acutely in the last few months. I won't stop though. I can't stop.

Fact #5: The technical skills required to make these shots is learned, honed with practice and perfected through experience. Those that haven't done it at all, yet light up like Apollo 11 to speak against it, and denigrate those that do, are simply blowing hot gas out of the hole in their face. It's meaningless twaddle.

Fact #6: The issue of the point of impact. I aim for the high shoulder. It gives me a very high probability of a bang flop, and any failure to incorrectly target the animal will either result in a fast death or a clean miss. You can work that bit out for yourself, it's not hard. The stag in this story was hit in the neck. I don't aim for the neck at that kind of range. But the animal is dead, next time the shooter might do something differently, or he might get a different outcome. Read into that what you will.

Fact #7: There is a world of difference between the recreational stalker - often very quick to pass judgement - and the professional deer shooter. I'm not a professional, but I might as well be, considering the number of deer I shoot and why I shoot them. I'm shooting them for my financial benefit in the long run - less deer and goats means more sheep and honey. And a freezer full of perfect venison. Simply really. Helluva lot cheaper than hiring someone else to do it, and the meat and homegrown vegetables is extremely satisfying. There is also a world of difference represented by the 18,052km between Whanganui and Inverness. Might as well be different planets. What is so interesting here is that in New Zealand, a post claiming a kill at 420yd wouldn't even get a mention. Not so much as a batted eyelid. FOURTEEN PAGES OF RECRIMINATIONS? You'd get laughed out of the pub. It's that simple.

Fact #8: Shite happens. A message to all the anti-420yd shooters, those who sit high and mighty in their throne of self-rightousness. We all know that deer are shot, wounded and lost, at ranges that actually are proper close range. So close you can smell the buggers. That's why we have the likes of the dog tracking services and so on. Because it happens. All the time. Frequently. It's happened to you. Doesn't happen to me of course, because I'm a superhero from Ásgarðr. It will happen again, to you and maybe to me. I hope you find it as humbling as I have. Get over it.

Lastly, I'll say this again, because I've said it before on here. I've had lots of visitors to NZ & Aus over the years, family and friends, friends of family and so on. There's been a handful that subscribed fully to Facts #3, 5 and 8 and those fellas were generally a pain in the arse to have to take out on the hill. Because things are different here, very different. But in every instance I can remember, those fellas that got over themselves, and under guidance ended up shooting a deer at well over 400yd, they freakin' smoked them. And you know what? They had a smile from ear to ear and were even tempted to holler a bit, yankee style. We don't holler. Don't ever holler.

Hypocrisy? You betcha. But it's forgivable, because they didn't know, they just thought they knew, but they didn't. Ah well, life goes on.

If you're uncomfortable, then don't do it. I respect the individual's choice, their call. My choice, my call. Mr. Original Poster's choice and call too.
 
Yes, some of them. Quite fussy about which ones though. Yearling billies and nannies are good, much older and they are either ropey or smelly.

A fair few are used for dog food, and a lot are left for the pigs.
 
Excellent post #273 from dodgyknees. Swedish hunting is normally close range shooting often sub 100 mtrs at a moving target. So to be a good ethical hunter it pays to learn how to shoot moving targets. I consider myself a reasonably competent shot at driven game. If i was young again and living and hunting in NZ or even some places in Scotland i would be learning how to shoot well at longer ranges. There are plenty of people in the stalking game in the UK who could do with honing their shooting skills at normal UK stalking ranges-
 
@jagyour post proves a point. Different views for different people and different cultures.

Shooting moving deer in th e uk would provoke just as an intense reaction as this post.

That doesn't mean its wrong, it's just different
 
I have stated this many times and people don't get it. I first found this with 243, sent at stupid fast pace a sp would go straight through roe at 20 meters, at 150 id dropped them. Slow them down a lot and the same bullet would drop them close but not far. Hence the reason I started using lighter bullet in the HP as that dropped them clean at any range. But some bullets can go too fast to expand in soft flesh. Try tapping a lead nail through a wooden plank, not possible! hit it fast with a hammer and it goes in, same principle.
No, I’m not buying that. Your asking me to accept that bullet deformation/upset is reduced as impact velocity and energy increase?
No way , as velocity tails off at range bullets deform less, there’s less energy at work there are lots of pictures out there to prove it. One of the biggest challenges the bullet manufacturers face is to produce a bullet that will hold together at short range but still expand at distance.
I’ve shot a lot of deer with varmint type ammo both near and far, the only time I had a bullet zip through was when I used a 55gr fmj, my bad
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top