What Changed?

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:29 am

If you haven't read Charles Petty's article by that name in the Aug. 2008 issue of HANDLOADER you might want to find it.

In this article he speaks a lot of good common sense things that challenges today's thinking. For instance he points out that in the 1920's the .25-20 and .32-20 were considered to be good calibers for everything from rodents to deer, yet today no one sees them like that. So what has changed?

He points to several things, such as people in those days being more careful shots (not necessarily better shots) and that today's marketing stratagies influence perceptions as to what is needed since today's people are geared to buy the biggest baddest latest whatever.

Many of us on this Forum already know these things. That's why I have to snicker when someone shows me their latest Short Body Wide Lipped Fat Ultra Magnum that can kill deer at 1000 yards like a bolt of lightening. I find out where they are hunting and stay out of that county.

Anyway .. check out Mr. Petty's article if you haven't done so.

popeye44 · Post by **popeye44** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:24 am

JT
I love Handloader because it does not perpetuate the "Bigger+Newer=Better" like all the gunmags seem to.
Gave my adopted son a Win M70 223Rem a few years for helping me. He's 38 and I adopted him at 35 so
he needed some Instruction in guns. Doesnt matter he was raised by his real daddy in the back of a cruiser.
Working as county sheriff the dad introduced him to fast cars and guns. To make a long story short his older
brother took him hunting for the first time in his life . The 223 put TWO large does on the ground. A week later a
LARGE buck was on the way to hanging on my "son's" wall. Three deer. THREE shots. The older brother who
KNOWS guns and shoots a 7mm STW says 223 is too small for deer. Big brother loses a deer a year w/STW.
So who knows better? Dead 223 deer in freezer or lost STW deer?
You tell me.

cnjarvis · Post by **cnjarvis** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:34 am

I have the mag but I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

I don't know what has changed. Maybe some common sense has filtered back in. I know that when I bought my first bolt action I settled on the 270 Win. because of its versatility. No, it's not a perfect prairie dog gun nor is it a perfect moose gun but with proper bullet placement and the proper bullet within responsible ranges it will get the job done. I've never felt a need for a "supermag".

I would like a 375 H&H though... a trip to Africa is in the dream stage.

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:59 am

JimT wrote:He points to several things, such as people in those days being more careful shots (not necessarily better shots)...

I heartily agree with his overall premise, but I think he's significantly off the mark on this specific point.

Back then, the "One shot, one kill" weekend sniper attitude was not dominant (existant?), as it is today. To paraphrase TR and other writers of the period, it was common to "shoot 'til the animal was down;" something that is beyond unpalatable to the majority of today's hunters who consider themselves "ethical." In that scenario, rounds like the .32-20 would definitely fit the bill.

Now that hunters want to vaporize their quarry upon the mere uncasing of their rifles, the Loudenboomers are seen as a "necessity." Therein lies the "change."

My 2 cents.

Scott

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:06 am

On a related note, my reading of the Wolfe publications will probably wane a bit, as they and John Barsness have parted ways this week. He was the best thing they had going and I know of no one who can fill his shoes there.

Scott

brucew44guns · Post by **brucew44guns** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:16 am

Times have changed. Old cars had chokes, and had a clutch to work when you shifted gears. Women could drive these cars quite well, but many today would have to stay home if that's all there was to drive. The first big truck I drove had a 200 HP Cummins engine, a 5 speed main and 3 speed auxillary. Young drivers today might well not be leaving the yard in a truck like that, they'd be stumped. So the old 25-20 rifle in the hands of a hunter of yesteryear, was lethal, because he used stalking, patience, good aiming, all sorts of skills that some who today only take a 300 yard shot with magnums and XXX powered scopes know nothing about. It probably amazes young folks how people back in 1900 ever put any meat on the table.

Mich Hunter · Post by **Mich Hunter** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:18 am

My two cents

Hunting has become to darn commercialized for its own good. I see it as driving people away more that bringing them in. Many who I talk to feel that it would simply cost too much money to get into it which is FALSE. That is a very valued perception. All you tend to see these days is how you have to have this or that to shoot your TROPHY animal. Bottom line, you don't NEED a short mag or $500 scent lock clothes. Don't even need to own land and have a private 30 acre food plot as seen on TV. You do need some warm clothes, box of shells and a rifle of choice. For example, the 30-30 has probably killed more game on earth than any other cartridge, but some would laugh if you told them you were bear hunting with one. Same with the 30-06. It will do anything most other .30's will do. Why try and re-invent the wheel??? Its all about marketing.

CraigC · Post by **CraigC** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:24 am

RSY wrote:Now that hunters want to vaporize their quarry upon the mere uncasing of their rifles, the Loudenboomers are seen as a "necessity." Therein lies the "change."

And you have to wonder, with so many hunters heading afield with a rifle they either just bought and only boresighted or have had for years without going through a box of ammo, what killed the need for proficiency? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:32 am

Gun mags thrive on what is new. They survive by selling advertising. Then read what Paco says about the 32-20 in his book. How many of those who buy guns and magazines are going to see that as their cup of tea as opposed to the euivalent of the 500 hp Mustang which also isn't at all needed. How many here have killed a deer with a 32-20??? At what range.

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:54 am

Old Savage wrote:....as opposed to the euivalent of the 500 hp Mustang which also isn't at all needed.

Hey, hey, hey, hey.......we don't need talk like that. Everyone needs to get to work early.

rangerider7 · Post by **rangerider7** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:35 am

I killed a doe this year with a Winchester Model 53 32-20. They were hand-loads by a friend so they had a little more kill power. I used them on hogs successfully so I used it on the doe. The shot was at 65 yards. One shot kill. I limit my shots within 100-125 yards most of the time with the revolver cartridges. They work fine for me. I do have a 257 Weatherby but I only take it along in far West Texas between Snider and Post on a 3000 acre ranch.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:21 am

Back in 1991 my Marlin 1894CL .32-20 took a nice 8-point Whitetail buck at about 30 yards. Used the 100 gr. Speer JHP over 12 gr. 2400. One shot. At those distances and when the deer does not know you are there, it's fairly easy to put the bullet where it needs to be.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:30 am

RSY..... My experience does not validate your point that older generations of hunters were less careful with their first shot than today s shooters. My experience is 180 degrees opposite.

I started hunting in the 50's and my teachers were the folks hunting in the 20s and 30s to whom Petty made reference in his article. The were quite insistent that the hunter should make one shot kills and should wait until he could be 100% certain of his shot before making it. I was taught that all rifles were single shot and the magazine was just a handy place to carry a few extra round.

Most of the men I know that were pre-WWII hunters were indeed very careful shots.

I did not hunt with TR, so I can only speak about those hunters I did know and I knew many a fine man, none of which are still with us.

When I go to the range these days, it sound like a fire fight in downtown Bagdad.

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:26 pm

Charles:

Part of the point that I was trying to make was not that those folks were careless shots, but that they didn't feel like failures if they had to shoot an animal more than once; which seems to me to be the prevalent mindset, currently. Hence, our more and more powerful rounds to supposedly ensure one-shot kills for the masses.

The difference in mindset between today's sport hunters and the true pot hunters of yesteryear cannot be underestimated, either. I'm sure they were careful when they could be in order to conserve precious ammo, but if it meant the difference between feeding or not feeding the family, they would take whatever shot was presented while shooting as much as needed in order to bag their supper. And, they wouldn't think twice about it.

Scott

jdad · Post by **jdad** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:38 pm

Wasn't the record whitetail(?) shot with a 25-20? It took 5 shots......

I would love to learn how to hunt, especially with iron sights and traditional calibers, but have heard & read too many horror stories here in OR. If you're under 18 you must take hunter safety. If your an "adult" you just need to buy a license......experience, safety, and common sense isn't required

44LVR · Post by **44LVR** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:04 pm

That was the first article I read when my issue came in. I devoured it!

Sure glad my Dad didn't know that 25-20's and 32-20's are under powered. He took his deer every year with a '92 in 25-20 and an 85gr bullet he cast and loaded over too much 2400.....at least I 'think' it was too much!

Nearly every year he took his buck off the little spring we got our water from, some 110 yards away from the back door. I can remember all of us sitting at the breakfast table with my Dad keeping a sharp eye on them while he ate. Pretty soon he would send one of us boys to his bedroom to get his rifle, which was always loaded. He'd walk out the door, take careful aim off the porch and then after the crack come in and tell us boys to get our work clothes on. I cannot for the life of me remember a second shot.

My Grandpa couldn't understand why my dad (home from the Korean war) would use a small bore .25 caliber rifle. I mean, he had the BIG artillery. He had a pump in 32-20 that he and my Uncle took THEIR deer with every year................

44

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:12 pm

JimT wrote:If you haven't read Charles Petty's article by that name in the Aug. 2008 issue of HANDLOADER you might want to find it. ........................snip....................................... That's why I have to snicker when someone shows me their latest Short Body Wide Lipped Fat Ultra Magnum that can kill deer at 1000 yards like a bolt of lightening. I find out where they are hunting and stay out of that county.

Anyway .. check out Mr. Petty's article if you haven't done so.

Yep, that's pretty much what I did when I read about the new 327 mag. In my mind it aint nothing but a hot loaded 32-20.

don Tomás · Post by **don Tomás** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:29 pm

44LVR,
Great story, thanks for sharing!
Tom

44LVR wrote:That was the first article I read when my issue came in. I devoured it!

Sure glad my Dad didn't know that 25-20's and 32-20's are under powered. He took his deer every year with a '92 in 25-20 and an 85gr bullet he cast and loaded over too much 2400.....at least I 'think' it was too much!

Nearly every year he took his buck off the little spring we got our water from, some 110 yards away from the back door. I can remember all of us sitting at the breakfast table with my Dad keeping a sharp eye on them while he ate. Pretty soon he would send one of us boys to his bedroom to get his rifle, which was always loaded. He'd walk out the door, take careful aim off the porch and then after the crack come in and tell us boys to get our work clothes on. I cannot for the life of me remember a second shot.

My Grandpa couldn't understand why my dad (home from the Korean war) would use a small bore .25 caliber rifle. I mean, he had the BIG artillery. He had a pump in 32-20 that he and my Uncle took THEIR deer with every year................

44

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:11 pm

Technology has improved. And dare I say situations have changed. Therefore materials and markets have changed around it.

My 2 cents is that at the beginning of the 1900's the gun industry was on the cusp of the breakover point as the start of todays market. The '06 was still new. The 270 came along in 1925. New ground was beginnging to be explored with faster cartridges/powders. Think back to the 38 Special & 357. Elmer Keith helped create the 357 same as he did the 44 Mag, by lenghtening the parent case. The need was that military & cops were having problems with weak cartridges. While on the other hand the 45ACP was ready, willing and able to do the job. But big, better and faster was called for. Media also took a major part in it as well for getting the latest and greatest out to hunters and shooters and time has gone on.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:14 pm

Another example may be the 44 Mag vs the 45 Colt issue. Didn't Elmer Keith choose the 44 Spl because of the balloon head cases being weaker in the 45 Colt? If he'd would have had todays cases he may have been creator of the 454 instead of Dick Casuall.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:33 pm

Blackhawk wrote:Another example may be the 44 Mag vs the 45 Colt issue. Didn't Elmer Keith choose the 44 Spl because of the balloon head cases being weaker in the 45 Colt? If he'd would have had todays cases he may have been creator of the 454 instead of Dick Casuall.

Actually I believe you find that Mr. Keith chose the .44 because the guns themselves were stronger than the .45 Colt sixguns. I have balloon-head cartridges in both calibers and there is no difference in strength of them.

Mr. Keith wrote a number of articles mentioning some .45's that cracked or had the cylinders let go. Because of this he went to the thicker chamber walls of the .44 Special sixguns.

Remember, we are talking Colt SAA's which don't have very thick chamber walls, even in the 44 Special, as compared to a modern Ruger.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:06 pm

Ok, I haven't read Keith in a very long time.

Only thing I have to stick too then would be the point of my first post. Technology changes making changes in the materials we have and how we use them. IE bigger & faster = better by todays standards, even to the point of overkill.

Johnny

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:08 pm

jdad wrote:If you're under 18 you must take hunter safety. If your an "adult" you just need to buy a license......experience, safety, and common sense isn't required

Don't be too enamored with testing and safety courses as often mandated and implemented; all too often they start out as a good idea, delivered sensibly, and twist into hurdles and fees purely for their own sake, to perpetuate the testing/licensing bureaucracy, with little regard for their true 'mission.' I think when private organizations do it and encourage it, that is way less likely, but in our nation, we're used to assuming our church/club/organization won't need to do it because some 'official' or 'authority' will do it better.

mav · Post by **mav** » Sat Aug 02, 2008 5:26 pm

This has probably has been touched on before, but, I wonder how much of the popularity of the smaller caliber rifles had to do with the cost of ammo. I don't know about factory ammo, but for the reloader/caster, less lead and less powder may have been a consideration. Just thinking out loud.

junkbug · Post by **junkbug** » Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:57 pm

Hasn't the law changed?

I'm fairly certain today, that if I went deer hunting, with all other legalities properly attended to, with a 25-20, 32-20, or .30 cal carbine chambered rifle, I would be in technical violation of the minimum firearms regulations, which I believe is 1000 foot pounds, at least in Virginia. And Virginia is not alone in this.

I have never tried to push the point, so I don't know how game wardens or DNR officers actually react to hunters carrying such rifles.

Same with the .223 Rem, or Savage 22 Hi-Power for that matter.

Sean

FWiedner · Post by **FWiedner** » Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:58 pm

I'm going to walk on the opposite side of this coin and say that today's hunters are much more focused on ethical hunting involving clean kills using adequately powered firearms than the hunters of yester-year. You don't often see hunters bringing down whole herds of deer or bison, or wiping out flocks of birds in the modern age.

While rounds such as the 25-20 and 32-20 are certainly capable, they were borne of a time when hunters didn't hesitate to "pour on the lead" and pump as many rounds into any given beast as it took to put it down.

Don't misunderstand. I am not talking about slob hunters.

It's my observation that today's hunters are considerbly more careful shots than the hunters of the past, and the "one shot, one kill" supergun approach is borne more of necessity than machismo, because modern hunters are much more concerned with ethical and humane kills. I'm not saying that hunters of old were heartless slobs, I'm saying that they simply didn't have as much political and legal pressure on them due to the simple fact that they own a gun and hunt.

What has changed? The public's attitude on every subject in discussion.

Most men used to hunt, now most men freak out at having mud on their shoes, and get weak-kneed at the sight of blood.

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Sat Aug 02, 2008 11:20 pm

FWiedner wrote:....and get weak-kneed at the sight of blood.

Hey, I can see it......I just can't touch it.

Ridgerunner · Post by **Ridgerunner** » Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:09 pm

Pistols and revolvers are lawful for deer and bear hunting only in those counties where hunting deer and bear with rifles is lawful. Cartridges used must be .23 caliber or larger and have a manufacturer's rating of 350 foot-pounds muzzle energy or more.

Rifles must be .23 caliber or larger.

Virginia 2008 Hunting regulations. A .223 Rem. is illegal, but the .25-20, .32/20 and .30 Carbine are legal in rifles.

footlong · Post by **footlong** » Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:39 pm

I once heard that the 32-20 was the basis for the 30carbine in rimless and pressure raised. Must be a pretty good
cartridge. That true?

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 8:41 am

Just one more thought on the subject at hand. I have noted a few posts suggesting that today's hunters are sportsmen and the pre-WWII generation were pot hunters. The idea being that sporting ethics are something of a post-war notion.

I suppose in some parts of the country, the older hunters might have been guys in coveralls trying to get some meat to eat. But such a picture does not square with my experience with hunters of that era.

Most of the Texas hunters I have known from that era, were sportsmen of the highest order. They were not hungry hard scrabble folks, but men who hunted for sport and placed a strong emphasis on the carefully placed single shot to kill the game cleanly without undue suffering.

In fact, Sportsmanship in Texas today is almost non-existent. Todays hunters hunt on land that is high fenced, where the deer have had their genetics enhanced for big horns. They sit in a heated blind, watching a feeder or food plot, selecting the deer they want from several in front of them.

Place on of these sportsmen on the ground, on his feet in country where the deer are not penned and fed and they couldn't find a buck, much less kill one. In Texas at least I find the current state of hunting to border on disgusting.

44LVR · Post by **44LVR** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:25 am

Charles wrote: Place on of these sportsmen on the ground, on his feet in country where the deer are not penned and fed and they couldn't find a buck, much less kill one. In Texas at least I find the current state of hunting to border on disgusting.

I'm with you 100% Charles.

44

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:07 pm

FWiedner wrote:I'm going to walk on the opposite side of this coin and say that today's hunters are much more focused on ethical hunting involving clean kills using adequately powered firearms than the hunters of yester-year. You don't often see hunters bringing down whole herds of deer or bison, or wiping out flocks of birds in the modern age.

While rounds such as the 25-20 and 32-20 are certainly capable, they were borne of a time when hunters didn't hesitate to "pour on the lead" and pump as many rounds into any given beast as it took to put it down.

Don't misunderstand. I am not talking about slob hunters.

It's my observation that today's hunters are considerbly more careful shots than the hunters of the past, and the "one shot, one kill" supergun approach is borne more of necessity than machismo, because modern hunters are much more concerned with ethical and humane kills. I'm not saying that hunters of old were heartless slobs, I'm saying that they simply didn't have as much political and legal pressure on them due to the simple fact that they own a gun and hunt.

What has changed? The public's attitude on every subject in discussion.

Most men used to hunt, now most men freak out at having mud on their shoes, and get weak-kneed at the sight of blood.

Is there an echo in here???

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:41 pm

Charles:

Sorry to buck the stereotype, but I've lived and hunted all my life in Texas from Ozona to Nacogdoches and have honestly never even been behind a high fence.

As for feeding deer, it wouldn't be legal if TPWD didn't have a good biological reason for it. Look at the deer herd numbers our state has. Now imagine how much smaller the annual "harvest" would be if significantly fewer deer were killed as a result of banning feeding and the resultant lower hunter success rate.

I guess if large annual starvation die-offs and more dead deer on the highways is someone's idea of a desirable set of circumstances, then that'd be the route to take. Doesn't sound good to me, though.

Scott

KCSO · Post by **KCSO** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 2:40 pm

The biggest change for deer hunters in this area is where you can hunt. 25 years ago if you shot a deer on X's farm and had to trail it to Y's no problem. Now most of the farms are leased or owned by city folks and if you step foot on the other guys land he's calling for your arrest. If you shoot a deer and watch it jump the fence and it's 50 feet onto somebody elses land you might not get the deer. That means that most of our hunters want to drop a deer right now and are not patient enough to wait out for the right shot. My old landlord just died and his boy brought in his deer rifle for cleaning, a Model 92 Winchester 32-20 that has killed over 30 deer ove rthe years and most with one shot.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 2:55 pm

KCSO wrote:The biggest change for deer hunters in this area is where you can hunt. 25 years ago if you shot a deer on X's farm and had to trail it to Y's no problem. Now most of the farms are leased or owned by city folks and if you step foot on the other guys land he's calling for your arrest. If you shoot a deer and watch it jump the fence and it's 50 feet onto somebody elses land you might not get the deer. That means that most of our hunters want to drop a deer right now and are not patient enough to wait out for the right shot. My old landlord just died and his boy brought in his deer rifle for cleaning, a Model 92 Winchester 32-20 that has killed over 30 deer ove rthe years and most with one shot.

+1.

Here in Indiana if you don't drop it right here and right now you have a good chance of losing it... 'cause once it crosses over into someone else's property you're done if you don't have, at least, "tracking rights".

That said, I'm still amazed at the number of guys who talk about hitting a deer a couple of times with a 12ga Slug and still have the thing run 200yds. I've only ever shot deer with a .357 & .308 - and none have gone farther than inertia allowed.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:15 pm

RSY The Texas deer population began to skyrocket after WWII when the government went in and constructed many, many thousands of dirt "tank" on Texas farms and ranches as part of a giant flood control, soil erosion programs. Then the USDA did the Screw Worm eradication program. The Screw Worm was a great cattle pest, but killed far more deer than cattle. As a result of these two programs the deer population of Texas boomed.

Today there are many areas of Texas that are "deer rich", that had a zero deer population when I was young.

The trend of hunting over feeders from deer stands began in the Brush Country of South Texas. That country is so dense, that a hunter cannot walk or ride through it. The brush makes an ideal habitat for white tail and the protein content of the forbes makes for huge antler growth (Muy Grande)

The use of corn and now protein cubes in South Texas feeders was not done because the deer were hungry. It was to entice them out of the brush where they could be shot on the senderos and open places.

There were always a few deer stands and blinds in the Hill Country, but feeding was not common back in the 60's when I hunted there.

Today, the larger South Texas ranches are being broken up in to smaller tracks most of which are being high fenced. Semen from huge bucks is being bought and sold for thousands of dollars. Recently one buck sold for over one million dollars. High fencing is done to control genetics and manage the buck to deer ratio. Buck who will never grow big horns are culled from the gene pool behind the high fences.

The reason behind all of this is money, pure and simple. It is not unusual for a ranch to charge $6,000 to shoot one of their trophy bucks. Cull or management bucks go for lesser money.

Ranchers have figured out they can make more money on game, than they can on cattle. There seems go be no shortage of fools who will pay that kind of money to be a might hunter.

The result of this is the whole balance of nature has gone to hell in some parts of Texas. Folks shoot deer under circumstances that require no hunting skills. The whole things is money driven and hunting as it was known and practiced when I was young is almost gone.

Last year my son killed three bucks in five minutes near Junction. He was watching a feeder from a blind. When the timer when off and the feeder spun it's feed, the deer heard the sound and came running to the feeder, where they got shot.

The deer are conditioned to come to the sound of the feeder timer, just like cattle when you bang on the side of the truck while feeding.

This type of hunting require no knowledge of deer habits, no woods skills. Just sit and shoot then the timer go off and the deer come scampering out of the wood for a free meal. Disgusting!!! But that is just my opinion.

Everybody needs to eat and in this free country, everybody can make a buck in any legal way. But I find the status of deer hunting in Texas to be abominable.

octagon · Post by **octagon** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:00 pm

Feeders are a highly efficient tool for culling females from Texas deer populations. Most ranchers I know are too happy to let you come out and shoot all the does you like. Is it fun? No. Does this method fill the freezers of many year after year? Easy.
My favorite hunting method is walking with the same Win 30-30 I have used since I was twelve. If at the end of the season I still have tags left, I cull does. If I have hunted (walking) all my deer for that year, I take some friends to cull does. The ranchers love it, the freezers love it. Nothing disgusting about it.
Like RSY, I am a lifelong Texas hunter (mostly west) who has never hunted a high fenced ranch. But if a rancher can supplement his cow crop by bringing in some town dudes to pay to hunt, I have no problem with it.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:05 pm

octagon wrote:Feeders are a highly efficient tool for culling females from Texas deer populations. Most ranchers I know are too happy to let you come out and shoot all the does you like. Is it fun? No. Does this method fill the freezers of many year after year? Easy.
My favorite hunting method is walking with the same Win 30-30 I have used since I was twelve. If at the end of the season I still have tags left, I cull does. If I have hunted (walking) all my deer for that year, I take some friends to cull does. The ranchers love it, the freezers love it. Nothing disgusting about it.
Like RSY, I am a lifelong Texas hunter (mostly west) who has never hunted a high fenced ranch. But if a rancher can supplement his cow crop by bringing in some town dudes to pay to hunt, I have no problem with it.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:20 pm

Boys, I am not without deer hunting experience in Texas. I have hunted Whitetail in the Hill Country, The Brush Country and the Davis Mountains. I have hunted Mule Deer in the Glass Mountains, the Chalk Mountains and the deserts of the Trans-Pecos. This is over almost a half century.

That said, I don't think this is about who is the genuine Texas deer hunter. I will just stick by my views and comments as they are based on experience. I continue to be concerned and distressed by the turn Texas deer hunting has taken in the past 25 years or so. Everybody is entitled to their own views, perspectives and opinions and I have expressed mine on the subject at hand.

Take care and keep em in the X-ring!

foxtrapper · Post by **foxtrapper** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:02 pm

I have to admit that watching whitetail hunting on the outdoor channel really opened my eyes

Crawling out of a 5 star cabin walking 20 feet to a waiting truck with a deer feeder attached to the hitch. Riding to my "stand' which has a easy chair TV and air conditioning. Slide open the window while your rifle is nested in a shooting cradle, size up the deer making sure it's in the right class that you paid for and pose for pictures. WTF they make you feel like you did something wrong for shooting a spike or forkhorm,let them grow they say. I guess if you have a high fence you get to see the deer grow up and are able to take them in there prime. It's a joke ,it's not hunting. Go ahead and do it more power to ya but don't call it hunting.

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:48 pm

Charles wrote:Boys, I am not without deer hunting experience in Texas. I have hunted Whitetail in the Hill Country, The Brush Country and the Davis Mountains. I have hunted Mule Deer in the Glass Mountains, the Chalk Mountains and the deserts of the Trans-Pecos. This is over almost a half century.

That said, I don't think this is about who is the genuine Texas deer hunter. I will just stick by my views and comments as they are based on experience. I continue to be concerned and distressed by the turn Texas deer hunting has taken in the past 25 years or so. Everybody is entitled to their own views, perspectives and opinions and I have expressed mine on the subject at hand.

Take care and keep em in the X-ring!

I hear what you're saying, Charles, and I know you have solid experience here. The only exception I take to your argument is in limiting it to Texas: The state of hunting is becoming more and more bizarre across the entire country, not just Texas.

Also, I think you have to recognize the overpopulation problems we would have to face here without feeder hunting. At any rate, feeders are no guarantee of individual success: I hunted specifically for does for a 3-year stretch once and came up dry each of those years, over feeders the whole time.

Scott

Paladin · Post by **Paladin** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:22 am

44LVR wrote:
Charles wrote: Place on of these sportsmen on the ground, on his feet in country where the deer are not penned and fed and they couldn't find a buck, much less kill one. In Texas at least I find the current state of hunting to border on disgusting.
I'm with you 100% Charles.

44

+1

Bluehawk · Post by **Bluehawk** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:50 am

Two points
on the whole NOT EVERY ONE BUT THE MAJORITY to day "Sports man " are not as ethical or careful as would be perceived by one post here. THis is MHO only but based on working part time for almost 20 years now in a gun store /archery shop .
The mentality today AGAIN IN MY OPINION is that the "Faster" MAGNUM rounds will make up for the lack of time that people today CLAIM they dont have to practice . I have seen hundreds of people complaining that they missed deer because WE did not sight the rifles in for them carefully enough .When it is explained to them that they guns were only "Bore sighted " after the scope was installed we get the question of why we dont have anything that can sight it in in this day and age and can only bore sight it? They then state they dont have time for such things , and "Oh by the way do youhave something that can reduce the KICK on this gun so it wont hurt me again ?"
I took my grand son up to my place in the mountains last wek and he was allowed to take a friend along. ( they are both 14 ) the friend was very anxious to shoot a REAL gun he had never done that before and his parents did not mind me teaching him .
ON arrival we went through all the safety,work and issues and he was very respectful of the guns and the potential for destruction they had. I then went over aiming and he told me flat out " Im not worried I shoot a lot on thevideo games I have

"
I started him out with an older Stevens single shot 22 ,that my grandson loves and shoots well He coudnot hit the pepsi cans at about 40 feet and was very frustrated . He thne complained that it was because he did not have scope on the rifle and "Eeryone knows you need a scope to hit !!!!!!!" My grandson and I chuckled and then got my grandsons savage bolt 22 with scope outand let him try needles to say no matter what i tried to tellhim and correct him HE knew better and continued to be frustrated at not hitting well .
He finally jsut wanted to ride the quad runners and watch tv
THAT is the attitude I have been seeing in the shop for almost 10 years now IF its not INSTANT success its not worth the effort to the people these days . SO big rifles OFFER that instant success
By the way my grand son shnot his first deer last deer season with the very modern Winchester 94 30/30 wtih iron sights at about 40 yards . NO PROBLEM
Secons is an old story i have told before to go back to the orignal theme Jim had presented
I used to hunt a farm in PA in the 70s the OLder Gentleman there had been hunting that farm since he grew up on it for 30 some years he used NOTHING but his older trusy 22 Hornet to soot his deer every year and cull deer that were destroying his crops . ONe year ( about 1976 or so ) he lost a deer and could not find it after hundreds he had had killed . He decided then the maybe he would try one of the new MAGNUM rounds as he did nothave the eye sight any more he used to and needed to make up the diference he showed us his new MAGNUM the day he got it and was skeptical that it might be WAY too big and was askingus if we thought he had made a mistake He showedus the new 788 REmington he bought in 243 Win .
He finally bought a New DAiry farm in Upstate PA and last I heard he has not lost a deer or Black Bear to that NEW FANGLED MAGNUM

tman · Post by **tman** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:52 pm

look at the ancient .30-06 springfield. all medium and big game in north america will drop out to 400yards. the biggest, meanest, kodiak bear charging , gonna fall to the 220 coreloct factory load. did we really need a new cartridge since 1906?

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:04 pm

A big reason I settled on .357 as my "main" lever, besides Paco, was looking at te old histories of the .32-20, .38-40 & .44-40.

The .357 is every bitof tose plus a couple of notches.

If I need more it's time for the .45-70.

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:14 pm

tman wrote:did we really need a new cartridge since 1906?

If you want to go that route, I'd move the date back to 1888 for the .30-06's perfectly capable parent: the 7.92x57 Mauser. They coulda called it quits then for bolt-action cartridges.

Scott

WCF3030 · Post by **WCF3030** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:09 am

Who here has a 454? Or a 44 mag? I've heard many a time on this forum that the 45 Colt at its original Vel was more then enough for most critters.
Who has a 356, 375,358, 348?
Won't the 38-55 work just as well?
Who has a 300+ HP 1/2 truck or a 3/4 to 1 ton truck, and then drives it around without a full load or a trailer. Heck I see plenty of them without even a hitch.
Who loads there 45-70 to exceed the original load?
Who owns more then one muzzle loader, one 22, one pistol, one shotgun? Why?

Who has recently bought a 8-10 grand bike to save money on gas? How long will it take to pay for that bike with the 15-30 miles per gallon you save.

If it was not for CAS where would the leveraction be today?
If everyone took notice and realized that they could get most everything done with half of H&R's product line where would the firearms industry be today?
I for one like the new products and I hope they sell millions of them. If for no other reason then to keep the highwalls and cowboy leveractions in stock.
I don't own any of the new rounds but I could see myself buying a 325WSM in a model 70 or BAR. But right now I'm trying to justify buying a 30/06 or 405 Win in a #1. I won't "need it" over my 30-30 unless I go after brown bear. I just like the idea.

winchester1886 · Post by **winchester1886** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:09 am

How many game animals are running around right now with a bullet in them because some one took a shot at three or four hundred yards or what ever because he thought him and his new rifle were good enough or just to show his buddies how good he was, people were different in the old days they didn't have the money to waste, and a missed shot might mean no meat on the table for mum and the kids. Correct me if I am wrong but I have always heard that a saying among old time American hunters was that you take two rounds with you just in case you lose one, The old timers were hunters not shooters there is a big difference.

piller · Post by **piller** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:00 pm

I have to admit that the first animal I shot which took more than 1 shot was a Water Buffalo Hybrid, and it took a bunch of lead before it went down. I used a .270 on deer for quite a while and never needed a second shot. I hunted in Kansas more than anywhere else, and feel sure that a .30-30 would have done quite well for all but two deer. I am not fond of being overgunned, but I must admit that there are times when you need all the power you can get. That is admittedly a rare situation.

I don't care for high fences and hunting over feeders, and I didn't see any feeders at the ranch 86er uses near Hondo, TX. It has a high fence and a lot of area. You do have to go looking for your animal there. I have learned in 10 years here in TX, that the old saying "When in Rome You'll do as the Romans do" does hold true. The time I went to Colorado to hunt Elk, I didn't get one. I had more fun than should be told of at a PETA convention, but I didn't kill an animal. As I have learned, things which are entrenched in a State are not going to be changed just because you think they are wrong. You must convince a majority of your viewpoint first. I agree with most of the viewpoints about hunting on TX leases, but those opinions will not change anything. Rather than make each other mad and chance messing up a great website again, why don't we agree to disagree and let it lie there.