Taking something useful from something controversial.

mchughcb

Well-Known Member
Offended? No sir. This thread is talking about acquiring hunting skills that you don't believe you or anybody else in the UK doesn't need. However given this forum advertises for hunts outside the "stalking genre" and people do use those services. I therefore i say good luck to those prepared to open their minds and get proficient with other skills they may use anywhere their hunting takes them.
 

Monkey Spanker

Well-Known Member
Okay Dokey then whats the next logical step? Everyone should have a single shot because nobody needs a follow up shot and if they do they can do it at their leisure. I hunt with a Stutzen, double and repeater. If I could have my semi-auto back without a bunch of legal rigmarole I'd have one of them as well.
There isn't one! You are trying to fix something that isn't broken! In the UK we generally aim to fire a single lethal shot at a stationary animal. You expect every head or neck shot animal to drop on the spot. If they don't, then the firer has usually exceeded their own limitations which can only be discovered by experience. This is the only time really that I would expect to take a swift follow up shot, but the deer will usually be stunned and often stationary for a brief period. This is why single shot rifles are discouraged.
If you chest shoot a deer as most people do, then a good percentage of them will run on a bit. However, they are technically already dead! Encouraging stalkers that have had the courage of their conviction to deliver what should be a fatal shot to fire again at any runners is not a great idea. I believe this could promote recklessness where individuals may take shots beyond their limitations with the belief that they can sort out any mess with subsequent running shots.
So the next logical step in my opinion is to carry on what we have been doing successfully for years.
MS
 

Dalua

Well-Known Member
In my view any time spent on the range getting familiar with your kit is time well spent. Shoot at different ranges, standing up, sitting down, lying down etc etc. Too many of us (and I am guilty of this) go to the range and shoot at 100y off a bench. Useful for checking zero but thats about the extent of it, because you're not going to be shooting deer off a bench when you're stalking.
I agree. The ability to shoot again at a beast that needs it depends on the stalker being a competent general rifleman and having and being familliar with the with appropriate equipment. It would be a pity to be unable to take such a shot because, for example, one was incapable at shooting in an unsupported position, or didn't know one's drop at 300yds, or felt incompetent to shoot a moving beast when it would otherwise have been reasonable to do so.
 

Dave881

Well-Known Member
I agree with MS stalkers in uk are trying to get 1 shot and drop, and 99% of training and advice, is aiming for this result, so we are set up for relatively high mag with faster smaller bullets, and the wisdom is take the shot observe the amimals reaction and wait 10 mins before approaching, not to get set for a shot on a running animal, with the quality of "stalkers" nowadays I would not like to encourage second shots on the move,,,,, if this is modern thinking I can only say I am glad we no longer have large bore semi auto rifles any more,
Ray
Hi ray,
Thanks for your reply, you are absolutely right that 99% of training is focused on one shot drop and that should always be the objective. Unfortunately we are all human and it is very easy to make a mistake. Maybe a little more consideration should be given to the ways we can deal with a poor first shot in relation to training and how we set ourselves up to go stalking. I am not suggesting that inexperienced stalkers should be learning these skills but more that they could be useful to experienced shots, particularly those that have the ability to take new stalkers out in the field. No matter how much training we do at the range you can't guess how a new stalker will perform when faced with live deer in front of them, if it did go wrong and the animal could be put down immediately by a shot to the boiler room by a suitably trained and experienced stalker surely that's the best outcome if the situation is safe to do it, even if it is a light fast bullet. Even if it is not safe immediately and correct procedure is followed, you find the deer some 15 minutes later and it gets up to run because it has seen you first being able to shoot it on the run would surely be better than waiting for it to stop and starting all over again. My post is entirely questioning the use of this skill as a last resort by a competent and trained person. With the greatest of respect, your comment about the quality of stalkers contradicts your own opinion that this skill isn't useful, surely if the quality of stalkers is going down then the likelihood of wounded deer is going up?
Unfortunately these days it is far less common for people to start shooting at a young age so there are far more people going shooting that haven't been taught the basics with air rifles and then worked up the scale to larger calibres creating far more chance of a bad shot. Training is theost important thing and I feel the more we can learn the better.
Dave
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
The notion that somehow those who have only started shooting recently are at a disadvantage I would query. Apart from rolling a barrel down a hill, the only way in the past to practice shooting at a moving target with a rifle was to do it on live quarry. At least with the advent of shooting cinemas and running boar set ups it is possible to practice without maiming the local rabbit population.

I certainly think the OP has a point...be prepared. The huge advantage of practising before hand is that you learn your limitations. And if you realise that a moving shot beyond a few metres is unlikely to connect, then you redouble your efforts to ensure it won't ever be needed. I don't think it would ever encourage recklessness to practice...quite the opposite. I might even book a session.

As a beater on a couple of shoots where the experienced guns' prowess varies between 10 and 4 to 1 at under 80 yards with all the practice of clays that is available to them...shots at a moving target with single projectile would be a skill that needs a lot of practice. Be interesting to know what the shot to hit ratio is for driven boar.

Alan
 

Monkey Spanker

Well-Known Member
I agree. The ability to shoot again at a beast that needs it depends on the stalker being a competent general rifleman and having and being familliar with the with appropriate equipment. It would be a pity to be unable to take such a shot because, for example, one was incapable at shooting in an unsupported position, or didn't know one's drop at 300yds, or felt incompetent to shoot a moving beast when it would otherwise have been reasonable to do so.
I would agree, but isn't that just basic marksmanship? We should all know how our rifles perform at extended range for instance in case a long range humane dispatch is required. Easy on static targets, but quite difficult to simulate on moving targets for most people. I would also agree that at times we get too wrapped up and reliant upon shooting rests. I remember faffing about with a set of quad sticks to shoot a deer about 25m away when I could have easily shot it free hand at such close range. How many people learn to shoot prone and off sticks to pass the DSC 1 course and then go on to shoot their first ever shot from a high seat at a deer? Any time on the range is well spent, but I think that shooting at moving deer should be viewed as more of an 'advanced' technique? I'm sure many novice stalkers are excellent shots that are more than capable of hitting the target, but I think you need a lot of experience shooting deer to be able to fully understand shot reaction and when a follow up shot is actually required.
 

Pine Marten

Well-Known Member
Be interesting to know what the shot to hit ratio is for driven boar.

Alan
So it's only a proxy of an answer, but in France it takes an average of 10 shots for each killed large game animal, be that boar or deer, and almost all large game hunting in France is driven, quite often with shotguns loaded with slugs, an overwhelmingly by people who don't practice. It's a pretty poor figure. Of course, it hides huge variations.

Anyway, to try and answer the OP, when I started stalking is was always clear that I may participate in driven hunting in France, so from the outset I chose a setup that although mostly used for stalking in the UK at static game, could also be used occasionally for moving game in France. Hence my 7mm-08 fullstock Steyr with a 3-12x scope on top. Ideally you'd want even lower magnification than 3, but it's a compromise. More to the point, I joined the BSRC in Bisley where I can practice in moving targets so that when the day comes, I'd not be totally clueless.

When I started, I could hardly put a round on the lifesize deer and boar targets. I don't actually attend very much as it's a half day trip there and back and has to fit in with work and family life. However, when I do go now, I can put something like 75% of the bullets in the target zone. Not in the bullseye, not in the bang-flop zone always, but definitely in the going-nowhere-and-expecting-a-follow-up-shot area. That's not ideal, but it's a lot a better than if I hadn't sought out what practice I could. It's no substitute for field experience, and I'm always ready to try and gain that, but at least I have a degree of confidence that when it comes, I will not be totally devoid of the necessary skills.

Shooting a moving target with a rifle is different to both shotgun shooting and shooting static targets, it's its own thing.
 

Dave881

Well-Known Member
The notion that somehow those who have only started shooting recently are at a disadvantage I would query. Apart from rolling a barrel down a hill, the only way in the past to practice shooting at a moving target with a rifle was to do it on live quarry. At least with the advent of shooting cinemas and running boar set ups it is possible to practice without maiming the local rabbit population.

I certainly think the OP has a point...be prepared. The huge advantage of practising before hand is that you learn your limitations. And if you realise that a moving shot beyond a few metres is unlikely to connect, then you redouble your efforts to ensure it won't ever be needed. I don't think it would ever encourage recklessness to practice...quite the opposite. I might even book a session.

As a beater on a couple of shoots where the experienced guns' prowess varies between 10 and 4 to 1 at under 80 yards with all the practice of clays that is available to them...shots at a moving target with single projectile would be a skill that needs a lot of practice. Be interesting to know what the shot to hit ratio is for driven boar.

Alan
With all the best intent I do believe that a new stalkers reaction to shooting a deer is completely unknown and does have a slightly higher chance of going wrong. Will all the training on the world there is no emotive response to shooting a paper target because if it goes wrong it doesn't matter,any decent human being will become nervous to some degree when shooting a living creature because of the potential to cause harm and not kill it, how they deal with that will vary from person to person, most will be fine but some may not. As an example, I used to be a motorcycle instructor for a living and saw first hand how nerves can effect people, I saw people who were perfectly competent riders in the off road trading area fall to pieces when taken on the road, the same could happen in shooting. I think that experienced shots could benefit from this skill as there are now means for training to do it that don't involve animals. I do believe being prepared for as much as possible is important.
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
What is that old truism? You prevent mistakes through experience...but you only get the experience by making a few mistakes!

As Pine Marten describes, at least with the moving paper targets you get to practice the coordination and make your initial mistakes. It is not a disadvantage to have practised on paper for that first time encounter with an actual animal in field conditions. It reduces some of the unknowns.

I practice off the bench at the range for sight picture, trigger control and load development; off sticks and close-quarter-freehand in the garden to replicate the likely field or RTA scenario. Because I had no intention of shooting running boar or driven deer I had not considered the advantage of trying one of the moving target set-ups...so thank you for the prompt.

Alan
 

Dave881

Well-Known Member
I would agree, but isn't that just basic marksmanship? We should all know how our rifles perform at extended range for instance in case a long range humane dispatch is required. Easy on static targets, but quite difficult to simulate on moving targets for most people. I would also agree that at times we get too wrapped up and reliant upon shooting rests. I remember faffing about with a set of quad sticks to shoot a deer about 25m away when I could have easily shot it free hand at such close range. How many people learn to shoot prone and off sticks to pass the DSC 1 course and then go on to shoot their first ever shot from a high seat at a deer? Any time on the range is well spent, but I think that shooting at moving deer should be viewed as more of an 'advanced' technique? I'm sure many novice stalkers are excellent shots that are more than capable of hitting the target, but I think you need a lot of experience shooting deer to be able to fully understand shot reaction and when a follow up shot is actually required.
Thanks MS, I agree that this should be an advanced technique only, not only in respect of making the shot but also identifying when it's needed. I have sadly experienced a gut shot and that sound is one I shall never forget. Luckily it stood still but the 3-5 seconds it took for me to reload, compose myself and shoot it again felt like an eternity. It knocked my confidence so hard it was 4 months and a lot of practice before I shot another one. I was incredibly cold that day and was not particularly comfortable in my shooting position, needless to say I learned a lot from this horrible experience. I think the only thing that stopped it from running was that I hit it very low just behind the diaphragm which I can only assume knocked the wind out of it. Only with experience can you read what is happening and I have taken a lot from it happening. Thankfully these days we have got facilities to learn all sorts of techniques of shooting without using animals. I think we have more chance to learn more than ever before and that can only be a good thing.
Dave
 

Ray7756

Well-Known Member
Hi ray,
Thanks for your reply, you are absolutely right that 99% of training is focused on one shot drop and that should always be the objective. Unfortunately we are all human and it is very easy to make a mistake. Maybe a little more consideration should be given to the ways we can deal with a poor first shot in relation to training and how we set ourselves up to go stalking. I am not suggesting that inexperienced stalkers should be learning these skills but more that they could be useful to experienced shots, particularly those that have the ability to take new stalkers out in the field. No matter how much training we do at the range you can't guess how a new stalker will perform when faced with live deer in front of them, if it did go wrong and the animal could be put down immediately by a shot to the boiler room by a suitably trained and experienced stalker surely that's the best outcome if the situation is safe to do it, even if it is a light fast bullet. Even if it is not safe immediately and correct procedure is followed, you find the deer some 15 minutes later and it gets up to run because it has seen you first being able to shoot it on the run would surely be better than waiting for it to stop and starting all over again. My post is entirely questioning the use of this skill as a last resort by a competent and trained person. With the greatest of respect, your comment about the quality of stalkers contradicts your own opinion that this skill isn't useful, surely if the quality of stalkers is going down then the likelihood of wounded deer is going up?
Unfortunately these days it is far less common for people to start shooting at a young age so there are far more people going shooting that haven't been taught the basics with air rifles and then worked up the scale to larger calibres creating far more chance of a bad shot. Training is theost important thing and I feel the more we can learn the better.
Dave
Dave I totaly agree with you that a second shot option should be available, my deer rifle is a bolt action (5shot) .308 and I always make sure the mag is full before I go on a stalk, but the emphasis should be on proper placement of the first shot, I always go stalking with a mate, its his permission, and our rule is, if he thinks my shot is badly wrong he will take the second shot without waiting for me to give him the go ahead, do I think people should train for a second shot ,,,YES,,,, but I believe the emphasis should be PROPER placement of first shot, there are people out there that have access to semi auto weapons, do I believe people will missuse semi auto weapons YES
Cheers
Ray
 
Last edited:

Dave881

Well-Known Member
Dave I totaly agree with you that a second shot option should be available, my deer rifle is a bolt action (5shot) .308 and I always make sure the mag is full before I go on a stalk, but the emphasis should be on proper placement of the first shot, I always go stalking with a mate, its his permission, and our rule is, if he thinks my shot is badly wrong he will take the second shot without waiting for me to give him the go ahead, do I think people should train for a second shot ,,,YES,,,, but I believe the emphasis should be PROPER placement of first shot, there are people out there that have access to semi auto weapons, do I believe people will missuse semi auto weapons YES
Cheers
Ray
Hi Ray,
I think some wires have been crossed somewhere along the way. I am in no way suggesting that any emphasis should be taken away from proper shot placement nor should any novice be taught to shoot at moving animals under any circumstances. My question is about people's opinions as to whether this is a useful skill for experienced stalkers and those of us that are lucky enough to be able to teach new stalkers. I would have no hesitation in shooting a deer that someone has wounded while stalking with me, that's why I carry my rifle when teaching, if that person were to then get shirty about it they wouldn't stalk with me again, animal welfare is paramount. I would also expect someone to do the same for me if I were to make a mistake. I feel that as we now have the tools to train in this style of shooting it would be a useful skill in an emergency. I would also like to say that I don't see any place for semi automatic rifles either. Sorry if I have been misunderstood and hope this clears up my intentions.
Dave
 

Monkey Spanker

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what to say about that comment from an experienced stalker. How does one get into a position of indecision?
It was several years ago on a large piece of very flat ground where I shot pretty much 100% off sticks - usually at a good range. I suppose it was just habitual really, but it wasn't until I started to mount the rifle that I realised how daft it was! Dropping them would have made a noise so I just used them as a single stick and shot it! Sorted!
 

Dalua

Well-Known Member
I would also like to say that I don't see any place for semi automatic rifles either.
For my part, I can see that self-loading rifles might be a great advantage to physically infirm shooters, and no disadvantage to anyone else. As far as I'm aware, SLRs didn't turn sportsmen into a trigger-happy cowboys.
I think we should note that the same suggestions about a particular kind of rifle encouraging wild shooting and unsporting conduct were formerly made about our current favourite, the bolt-action magazine, when that shocking piece of military technology threatened to replace the double as the sporting rifle of choice for most applications.
 

johngryphon

Well-Known Member
Shooting paper has no ANTLER FACTOR and AF can make those sights shake and wobble all over the place,believe me I have had it on an occasion or two ha ha.


At least with the advent of shooting cinemas and running boar set ups it is possible to practice without maiming the local rabbit population.
There is NO recoil factor or muzzle blast factor in a cinema Al,there are people about that can excel in video type games but put the old 9.3 x 62 unmuffled in their claw and they often will go to water.

The notion that somehow those who have only started shooting recently are at a disadvantage I would query.
I wouldn't query that at all Al, from my experience with a lot of shooters/hunters,the blokes that have done the yards over the years generally can outshoot the new chums by miles...it can be many shots fired that count immensely in learning.
However there are some that couldn't hit a bull in the arse with a long handled shovel no matter what they effn do whether it be paper or fur ha ha.


Shooting a moving target with a rifle is different to both shotgun shooting and shooting static targets, it's its own thing.
Both require hand/eye/brain coordination and suit each other to learn with. With you saying that I could believe that you haven't done much with either PM.

and close-quarter-freehand in the garden
No recoil factor..no antler factor! Real life shooting is what everyone learns from and if there is only paper so be it,that counts for starters...then there is the field and there is no substitute for that.
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
off sticks and close-quarter-freehand in the garden
No recoil factor..no antler factor! Real life shooting is what everyone learns from and if there is only paper so be it,that counts for starters...then there is the field and there is no substitute for that.
Umm Not quite sure what you are basing that response on. The practice off sticks I was referring to is with the .308 and even though it is a moderated there is a bit of recoil.... Oh! and these two roe I shot in the garden were bucks and definitely had antler factor....true, the two does that are visiting at the moment don't. :)

Alan


IMG_0358.jpg

IMG_1095.jpg
 

Top