How Big is Big Enough?

COSteve · Post by **COSteve** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 2:44 pm

Rather than divert the thread on Recoil Sensitivity, I thought I'd state my comment in a new post.

I've tried my share of heavy, smokeless powder calibers and I agree with the comments about the rifle ergonomics making a big difference in perceived recoil However, in truth as I get older I see less and less need for these belted magnums and chest thumping, fire breathing recoil monsters that have become so popular these days.

I'm not recoil sensitive but rather sensitive to the fact that by learning and using good hunting techniques, one should be able to hunt up to the game for a humane shot with a reasonable caliber. To my way of thinking, a 180grn 30-06 is all any good hunter really needs to take any game in North America and because I don't plan to hunt in Africa, I'm just fine with an 06 as my heaviest caliber.

I'm sure many of you will disagree, but I see a trend away from the 'hunt' in hunting in favor of just setting up somewhere and waiting for the game to get within 400 yds of your seat and just going for a shot from there. Where is the hunting skill in that? It seems to me many 'hunters' are really becoming just bullseye shooters rather than taking the time to enjoy the 'hunt'.

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:06 pm

Most of my hunting is done with a longbow or .54 Cal Flintlock. I have some "African" firearms I'm playing around with and I have a 30-06 for an all around "North American" rifle. I'm not recoil sensitive, though I have been bit by a .375 H&H with a scope that I didn't respect enough. The .458 Lott I have coming may change my mind on that but I don't think so.

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:24 pm

My three go to guns are the 32-20,the Marlin .338EX and the 45-70. the .338 shoots so well I couldn't ask for more. specially the Remington 250grn.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:47 pm

Steve,

You and I are in total agreement. I shot the 458 Win Mag because it was there and for my own personal education.
I'll shoot anything ... once.
But I have zero use for a rifle such as that.
Anything that 458 can do here, can be done by the '06 you mentioned or even a regular black powder level 45-70.

Hunting in many places is no longer hunting. I refuse to accept sitting in tree stand or a blind and waiting for an animal to walk up to a bait trap as hunting. Ambushing or sniping, yes; hunting, no.

Joe

L_Kilkenny · Post by **L_Kilkenny** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:55 pm

I'll agree with this. Me? I don't see myself hunting moose or big browns so my needs are actually less than the .30-06 and I don't see myself owning anything more powerful than a 7mm-08.

I also think that bullet construction has come a long ways in the last 20-30 years. Not so much in the larger calibers where sheer power can make up for mediocre bullets but when you get down to the .224's and 6mm's, better bullets have definitely moved them up a notch or two.

LK

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:18 pm

The 6.5MM's in almost all thier configurations are enough for me.
And I shot .458 Win Mag. for 5 years straight, professionally.

86er · Post by **86er** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:38 pm

I shoot most stuff nowadays with the 35 Remington. If I may have to reach out or the animals is elk sized I have my 7mm Rem Mag - the same one I shot for 30 years exclusively. It is not loaded hot, just a 160 grain at 2950 fps. I've been swithing around some for variation and fun but I use 300 Savage, 7mm-08 and 275 Rigby most frequently for deer-antelope sized stuff. If I know it is a close range situation I like either of my 50 caliber muzzleloaders and if it is an ambush close range set-up I'll take my bow. For elk/moose/big bear I now have a 35 Whelen for many of the reason you cited, particularly plenty of performance with less recoil than even a 300 Magnum. Now for PH work protecting clients, or for dangerous game that's another story where I will use or carry a 375 H&H or 450 NE.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:20 pm

J Miller wrote:Hunting in many places is no longer hunting. I refuse to accept sitting in tree stand or a blind and waiting for an animal to walk up to a bait trap as hunting. Ambushing or sniping, yes; hunting, no.

Of course in states like Indiana, where the game laws used to limit you to 12 gauge slugs, you either had to be one heck of a good stalker, or just sit in a tree-stand and 'ambush' your deer like many of the bow-hunters do. At least 'baiting' is not legal here. Finally we got the laws changed to where we could use less 'raw power' than the 12 gauge slug, and get humane kills fairly easily out to 100-150 yards with .44 Mag or .45 Colt leverguns.

...but....

COSteve wrote:...I see a trend away from the 'hunt' in hunting in favor of just setting up somewhere and waiting for the game to get within 400 yds of your seat and just going for a shot from there.

We still have lots of Hoosiers who seem to think deer hunting is all about sitting in the trees with your 7mm Rem Mag looking over a 400-acre corn-field, and shooting 300 yards or so at a deer that may or may not be running at the time...

If I were hunting something with claws or fangs, I'd want a .444 Marlin, warm-loaded .45-70, or something similar, and if it were in Africa, more like a .416 Rigby or Ruger, but for other stuff I agree with the folks saying a .30-06 or .35 Remington or something in-between would be my likely choice.

I think part of our 'culture' these days is sitting our lard-butts around the television-set, watching cable-shows about hunting expeditions, buying the latest power-technology, then taking that same lard-butt out and plopping it on a seat somewhere to wait for game to come by, preferably lured there by a bait-station. That is pretty sad, but yet another aspect of our 'fast-food' society.

2X22 · Post by **2X22** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:33 pm

I guess that is one of the reasons 98% of my hunting anymore is handled by the .44 mag, in both rifle and pistol form. I like seein' the whites of their eyes before I pull the trigger. Plus, 99% of all my shooting is with cast bullets and the .44 and cast are like...peanut butter and jelly!

If I need more power than that, like for longer range elk (the .44 handles elk out to 100 yards very nicely) then I will change to a .444 or .348. I don't often shoot elk past 200 yards and both of these do very nicely.

I like the huntin' part of hunting, getting close and putting a cast bullet right in the boiler room.

2x22

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:41 pm

I have one of theMAS49/56 .308 rifles that works.
I also have ALL the parts for another one.
Playing around with it,I find that the 6.5x55MM will fit and function in the magazine.
The plan is to strip the 7.5MM barrel of it's parts, machine a 6.5x55MM to fit and assemble.
The 6.5x55MM cartridge is closer to original design features.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:42 pm

I guess I don't know what "hunting" means. Maybe it's a sport? Like car racing?

I fed a family of 5 by taking game, or making venison. There was no sport in it. I used my knowledge of their habits and behavior to take them. It's not an achievment really, it's just the job that feeds the hungry stomachs. And I shot all of them, as opposed to, say, wrestling or boxing or out-racing them. No sport in it. It was certainly not recreational. It was wet, cold, windy, steep, painful, and somewhat dangerous by turns. We took as many as we could process at one time, with the weather for hanging them properly factored in. It was the occupation of gathering-in the subsistance to support us.

Sometimes I sat by a tree, sometimes I stalked them, sometimes I shot them from the water, sometimes I called them in, sometimes I walked up to them, and sometimes they walked up to me. But there was no sport in it because the score was never in doubt. However many tags I had is how much meat I made. Baseball is a sport. Making venison is self-employment.

As for others making meat, I could care less how they do it. I don't see any difference between a 400 yard shot and a 4 yard shot. Or a shot from up a tree or under a tree. It's a job of work, not much to get excited about, is it?

Oh, size matters when big brown bears are around, maybe stalking you, maybe jumping you; then size, and the immediate effects of point blank ballistics, are subjects of great interest...

Best,
Grizz

86er · Post by **86er** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:11 pm

Getting a little OT here, I have 97 acres surrounded by private property. If I decided to spot and stalk deer on this property most of the deer would leave before I got through half of it. On a small property the most successful tactic is to figure out the likey spots, beat them to it and wait for them. Perfectly legal hunting and serves my purposes just fine. This also limits the range of the shots. The furthest opportunity of a straight-line sighting and therefore shot is 225 yards. Anything else would be the 100 yard vehicle trails (before they change direction and there is no longer a view) or under 50 yards in the thick. Any moderate rifle and most heavy pistol cartridges would do for this property as far as killing power. Now on the other hand, if the deer crosses the property line the law requires that you gain permission to retrieve it. The neighbors live elsewhere and I have no idea what their phone #'s are. Instead of taking a chance or disregarding the law, we hedge our bets by using a little more "powerful" cartridges than is needed to kill in the hopes of quick anchoring, heavy damage and a lot of blood and broken bones. How much is enough? It would depend on what and where you're hunting. I don't disagree with being moderate with cartridge selection but it bothers me that people put up artificial parameters that they expect me to stay within if I am to avoid the rolling eyes. Not for nothing, my 375 H&H and my 450 NE happen to knock deer down hard, and they are really accurate and easy to shoot. The # 1 and #2 cartridges that have caused me to look for game shot by clients - statistically, proven by my collected data - not knocking the cartridge and there is no explainable reason for it but it is what it is - are the 270 Win and 243 Win respectively with the 30-30 tied for 3rd. So are they enough or not enough?

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:15 pm

Thanks 86er,
That is interesting info about those cartridges.

Bigahh · Post by **Bigahh** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:36 pm

A co-worker decided he needed a 300 RUM for its extra long range ability. He took 1 shot sighting it in, and decided that he would shoot Remingtons Power Level 2 ammo out of it. It is equal to a 300 Win Mag now, and the recoil is tolerable anyway. He told me this past weekend he wishes he would have taken my advice, and bought the same rifle in 30-06 !

madman4570 · Post by **madman4570** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:00 pm

To me the perfect combo for power for the least recoil is the 7MM Rem Mag in a good bolt gun.
I shoot factory 154gr Hornady loads out of a 1984 Winchester model 70 XTR.
Everytime I pull the trigger I am amazed how little it kicks.
Most of my deer have been taken with a short barreled 12ga slug gun(yep,they kick)but you can still make it a little more interesting with even a 7MM Mag.
Dump the scope,go open sights and hunt on the ground with no cover/lure scents.

Last fall I shot what I consider my dream buck(the perfect 8 point) that way at 70yards in the hemlocks and it didnt move an inch except on its way to the ground.

piller · Post by **piller** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:16 pm

The .45-70 is what I would take if I went to Alaska and any of their huge brown bears might be around. I have a .30-06 and for anything else here on North America have never felt undergunned. I will say that I have made a bad shot before, and it doesn't matter what you are shooting, a bad shot is a bad shot.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:51 pm

This topic comes up from time to time.

Sorry if I don't agree with most, but I have a variety of rifles I like a lot. One of my favorites is a 338 Win mag. If you aren't comfortable shooting one, fine, but that doesnt mean anyone else is trying to prove anything by using one. I've always found it one of my favorite rifles to shoot and hunt with, I don't find it the least uncomfortable to shoot, tho I've shot a 300 Win that was decidedly uncomfortable to shoot. Reckon it depends more on the stock fit than the number on the side of the barrel. I may go to smaller caliber rifles at some point, but like what I use. I shoot the 30-06 some, and think it's a great all around rifle, and a 35 Whelen a bit, I like both. I do like the extra power of the 338, not because of what I'm hunting, but what I may run in to when hunting. We only have little grizzlies compared to Alaska, but they are impressive enough to see what they can do if they get frisky. I don't have to look down on anyone that doesn't use what I do, or feel the need to call them names, or say they have non-magnumitis. It says more to me about one who does that than who they are talking about. I can accept that others make different choices than I do for whatever reason and place they hunt or shoot. I like having the range option, I'm out to make meat, not cultivate a sporting activity with certain parameters of gun/cartridge, sight type, and range to be acceptable. I can enjoy being out in the mountains whenever I want to, and frequntly do get out. When I hunt, its to make meat, and I use the best tool I have to do the job. I don't make a practice of making long shots if I don't have to, but I like having the option, and sometimes you have a choice, make a longer shot, or don't make meat. I make meat. I know anything within 300 yards is a done deal, and I will shoot a bit farther if need be. If anyone else make a differnt choice, that's ok by me. I carry a variety of guns as daily or enar daily carry guns, but when I go to make meat, the rifle wears glass and will do anything I ask of it, and it will shoot to my abilty.

Grizz wrote: "...Sometimes I sat by a tree, sometimes I stalked them, sometimes I shot them from the water, sometimes I called them in, sometimes I walked up to them, and sometimes they walked up to me. But there was no sport in it because the score was never in doubt. However many tags I had is how much meat I made. Baseball is a sport. Making venison is self-employment.

As for others making meat, I could care less how they do it. I don't see any difference between a 400 yard shot and a 4 yard shot. Or a shot from up a tree or under a tree. It's a job of work, not much to get excited about, is it?

Oh, size matters when big brown bears are around, maybe stalking you, maybe jumping you; then size, and the immediate effects of point blank ballistics, are subjects of great interest..."

I quite agree with his sentiments. I haven't killed nearly as much game as he has, but feel the same way about the hunt. Call it whatever you wish, to me, killing game is hunting, and I do it the best way I am able when I want meat. I dont get very excited about it, or really enjoy killing things, but have no reservations about making meat when I need or want it.

No rule says large caliber rifles can't be shot well, tho that seems to be the general thought most times this comes up. Never had any problem hitting anything I wanted with the 338 out to 350 yards. It would usually do 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" @ 100 yards sitting on the ground when I shot it on paper. I'm OK with that. It will make meat.

Pillar is correct, a bad shot is a bad shot, and nobody should use more gun that they can handle or shoot well.

firefuzz · Post by **firefuzz** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:24 am

COSteve wrote: I'm sure many of you will disagree, but I see a trend away from the 'hunt' in hunting in favor of just setting up somewhere and waiting for the game to get within 400 yds of your seat and just going for a shot from there. Where is the hunting skill in that? It seems to me many 'hunters' are really becoming just bullseye shooters rather than taking the time to enjoy the 'hunt'.

Back when I was a kid my cousin used to come and stay with us for a month at a time during the summer. He lived in the city but was as much a country boy as anyone ever born and we loved to "stalk" game when all we had to shoot was anemic Daisy BB guns, before we advanced to the .22LR and 20ga. We honed our stalking skills on the dog, who got to where he'd only sleep either well hidden or in the middle of the yard with 360* of open view, and later the cat who didn't appreciate being suddenly grabbed in the middle of a nap. We got to where bellying up on a bullfrog or rabbit was nothing, most of the time we'd just scare the pee out of them by jabbing them with a stick. As a deputy sheriff I tracked more than a few escaped felons from two state prisons next to my county so I can relate to stalking just about anything.

As I've gotten older I seem to have developed an adversion to crawling in the mud, nettles, and cactus. Trashed out knees and ole "Arthur" prevents me from dropping to and rising back up from my belly or my knees hiding from game, getting downs not too bad, getting up is another story. My dogs nap in peace never realizing the stalking fool their human used to be. Walking 20 miles a day like I used to ain't happening anymore either. Climbing trees is not something to be contemplated unless I'm out of ammo, have dropped my knife and something with LARGE teeth is trying to make me its lunch, so now adays my large game (deer) hunting is pretty much confined to the setting up and using ground blinds after determining the animals routines by scouting (notice I didn't say stalking). I'm glad to be able to just do that. Sometimes circumstances beyond our control dictate how, when, where and how much we get to "hunt" anymore not any lack of skill or desire to do it the old way.

BTW, I totally agree with you on the .30-'06, I have 6 of them, for hunting in North America. My Miroku/Winchester '86 and Ruger #1 in .45-70 both kick harder than any of them with moderately heavy loads but I love shooting both of them as well as my .375 H&H Ruger #1. I have that gun certainly not because I have elephants in the alley, but I'm ready if any just happen by

, and I do love that old cartridge just like I do my almost useless .22 Hornet.

Rob

madman4570 · Post by **madman4570** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:48 am

Malamute wrote:This topic comes up from time to time.

Sorry if I don't agree with most, but I have a variety of rifles I like a lot. One of my favorites is a 338 Win mag. If you aren't comfortable shooting one, fine, but that doesnt mean anyone else is trying to prove anything by using one. I've always found it one of my favorite rifles to shoot and hunt with, I don't find it the least uncomfortable to shoot, tho I've shot a 300 Win that was decidedly uncomfortable to shoot. Reckon it depends more on the stock fit than the number on the side of the barrel. I may go to smaller caliber rifles at some point, but like what I use. I shoot the 30-06 some, and think it's a great all around rifle, and a 35 Whelen a bit, I like both. I do like the extra power of the 338, not because of what I'm hunting, but what I may run in to when hunting. We only have little grizzlies compared to Alaska, but they are impressive enough to see what they can do if they get frisky. I don't have to look down on anyone that doesn't use what I do, or feel the need to call them names, or say they have non-magnumitis. It says more to me about one who does that than who they are talking about. I can accept that others make different choices than I do for whatever reason and place they hunt or shoot. I like having the range option, I'm out to make meat, not cultivate a sporting activity with certain parameters of gun/cartridge, sight type, and range to be acceptable. I can enjoy being out in the mountains whenever I want to, and frequntly do get out. When I hunt, its to make meat, and I use the best tool I have to do the job. I don't make a practice of making long shots if I don't have to, but I like having the option, and sometimes you have a choice, make a longer shot, or don't make meat. I make meat. I know anything within 300 yards is a done deal, and I will shoot a bit farther if need be. If anyone else make a differnt choice, that's ok by me. I carry a variety of guns as daily or enar daily carry guns, but when I go to make meat, the rifle wears glass and will do anything I ask of it, and it will shoot to my abilty.

Grizz wrote: "...Sometimes I sat by a tree, sometimes I stalked them, sometimes I shot them from the water, sometimes I called them in, sometimes I walked up to them, and sometimes they walked up to me. But there was no sport in it because the score was never in doubt. However many tags I had is how much meat I made. Baseball is a sport. Making venison is self-employment.

As for others making meat, I could care less how they do it. I don't see any difference between a 400 yard shot and a 4 yard shot. Or a shot from up a tree or under a tree. It's a job of work, not much to get excited about, is it?

Oh, size matters when big brown bears are around, maybe stalking you, maybe jumping you; then size, and the immediate effects of point blank ballistics, are subjects of great interest..."

I quite agree with his sentiments. I haven't killed nearly as much game as he has, but feel the same way about the hunt. Call it whatever you wish, to me, killing game is hunting, and I do it the best way I am able when I want meat. I dont get very excited about it, or really enjoy killing things, but have no reservations about making meat when I need or want it.

No rule says large caliber rifles can't be shot well, tho that seems to be the general thought most times this comes up. Never had any problem hitting anything I wanted with the 338 out to 350 yards. It would usually do 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" @ 100 yards sitting on the ground when I shot it on paper. I'm OK with that. It will make meat.

Pillar is correct, a bad shot is a bad shot, and nobody should use more gun that they can handle or shoot well.

I guess under the conditions of living maybe out in the wilderness and having your life depending on meat to live is one thing.
Most people hunting deer spend far more on their hunt than the cost of what the meat is(and thats cool,not a bad thing)

Myself, I get excited about hunting.(its a very big deal)To me its all about fair chase and respecting the animal.
I think if more people actually witnessed what these deer go through and how they flourish they would have a much deeper respect for them. Example: This year "every" single day this last winter I talked my wife into walking our log roads(from Dec 1 on)
Were talking even the days we got 20" of snow.Me and our Lab broke trail and she and our schnauzer followed.

I think this year was the worst I have ever seen(from Jan 1 through early April) she now thinks 100% diffrent about deer.
As far as survial toughness goes a bear is a wimp compared to a deer.(at least the black bears here)
Why, when the going gets tough they say(screw this, time to do a shelter dig in /nap time/see ya when its over)

Around these parts I see far too many people that abuse the system (like having their wife get a license,when she dont even hunt) so the yahoo can have like 8 tags to go out and whack a bunch of deer,many which are way too small to be taken.

Why? These are people that can afford meat(if not maybe they should get food stamps then?) Then why do they do it?
Because they are like the people at a all you can eat buffet and take the last 4 pieces of fish to put on their plate when they only need one(being a pig is a pig)
To me its all about the hunt and getting the meat is just a nice bonus.I have a lot to hunt on (but I take 1 buck a year)and if that big buck out smarts my tiny brain(good on him)cause I am as happy,thats what makes it real! I call that hunting.

Sarge · Post by **Sarge** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 9:30 am

Grizz wrote:I guess I don't know what "hunting" means. Maybe it's a sport? Like car racing?

I fed a family of 5 by taking game, or making venison. There was no sport in it. I used my knowledge of their habits and behavior to take them. It's not an achievment really, it's just the job that feeds the hungry stomachs. And I shot all of them, as opposed to, say, wrestling or boxing or out-racing them. No sport in it. It was certainly not recreational. It was wet, cold, windy, steep, painful, and somewhat dangerous by turns. We took as many as we could process at one time, with the weather for hanging them properly factored in. It was the occupation of gathering-in the subsistance to support us.

Sometimes I sat by a tree, sometimes I stalked them, sometimes I shot them from the water, sometimes I called them in, sometimes I walked up to them, and sometimes they walked up to me. But there was no sport in it because the score was never in doubt. However many tags I had is how much meat I made. Baseball is a sport. Making venison is self-employment.

As for others making meat, I could care less how they do it. I don't see any difference between a 400 yard shot and a 4 yard shot. Or a shot from up a tree or under a tree. It's a job of work, not much to get excited about, is it?

Oh, size matters when big brown bears are around, maybe stalking you, maybe jumping you; then size, and the immediate effects of point blank ballistics, are subjects of great interest...

Best,
Grizz

Same here. Oh, I had some fun doing it & got in on some memorable kills, the best of which were when my wife or boys made a good shot or swatted a nice buck. Then I started doing my own butchering it became more like work than recreation.

On the OT- I could kill about anything I needed to with a 220 grain '06 or 325 grain .45 Colt. I'd still prefer a .338 WM or 45-70 for anything that might kill me back.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:20 pm

Agree. Although I've never owned a 30-06! They are splendid for taking game and all round rifle uses.

My neighbor in Alaska killed more than 50 brown bears with a 30-06. He hated them. Being a native he did it 'because he could'.

I hunted with rifles that ranged from 25-20 to 338 WM and 45/70; and with hand guns in .357 and .44 mag.

I eventually came to realize that the 44 with hard cast bullets was a higher probability CNS stop than a .338 with the bullets I loaded then. They were not happy to stop suddenly inches in front of the muzzle and would not give reliable coherent results. Thus my excursion into wide-body jumbo bullets, which I have a fair amount of confidence in.

It's my hearing, or lack thereof, and my reaction times, or lack thereof, that are working against me now!

Best,
Grizz

NFG · Post by **NFG** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:52 pm

I pretty much agree with Griz having done the same thing...and have probably killed more deer sized game with a 22 LR than with anything else. COSteve, LK, 86er all have good thoughts and lean the same way as I do.

I think the concept of hunting is all in a persons mind...promulgated by all the hype garbage surrounding Madison Avenue ad campaigns...I stopped hunting when I stopped going after "trophies" to impress others, I never had any problems with killing things at ranges beyond most people's abilities to hit anything but the barn door. I haven't cared what anyone thinks for a very long time which makes it much easier to live.

I guess I'm a little masochistic...I like getting whacked by those large cals and I have at least one rifle or barrel in all the large bores up to 50 cal, including a 12GaFH using modified and reformed 50 BMG brass at 3.85" shooting 1500 gr slugs...and I like my 45-70, 450M, 458 American and 45-120, and my 510 Makatak for shooting all those HUGE slugs...I just use those beasts for paper for the most part and the odd sage rat...and pick something from 6mm to 338, or a pisto to fit the situation.

If I had only one large(r) cal rifle to pick, I would have a controlled round feed 30-06 or 9.3 x62 caliber, depending on the country I lived in. They are both ubiquitous throughout the world and will take any game either is pointed at. I would also want a 22 LR for small game, and a 44-45 cal single action pistol for simplicity. Any more shooters are just wants, not needs...but which caliber you choise is YOUR choice...doesn't matter to me and isn't worth arguing about.

When you've sat and listened to deer and elk talking to each other as close as touching distance and watched the animals interacting like my dog and cats with their young, it takes all the blood lust out of it and just becomes meat gathering to feed your own family. Besides I live in the boonies. I have deer, elk, antelope, bear, cat, varmints, etc., wantering around my yard pretty regular...or had, they're getting a but scarce nowdays...meat hunters have just about cleaned out the edible animals.

I think most societies that live WITH nature rather than trying to dominate it have always had a reverence for the animals they needed to survive on. Most of that concept is long gone if it ever was part of other societies thought process.

I've played with shooters for a very long time and in my early years had "magnumitis"...the faster the better so all my cannons were of the small cal, big case variety...somewhere along the way I found out that those lazerguns just blew away a lot of good eating and I gyrated to larger cals with heavy bullets at lower velo's so I could eat right up to the hole...and the animals seemed to die much quicker without as much trauma and the meat just tasted better. The only thing horns and teeth are good for is showing off and making buttons and geegaws from.

I still don't "hunt"...I go out and take a few steaks, roasts and hamburger from mother natures meat locker and thank the gods for the bounty.

Griz and I are rowing the same boat.

Luck

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:55 pm

firefuzz wrote: . . . and I do love that old cartridge just like I do my almost useless .22 Hornet.

"...almost useless...???"

Don't tell Paco that...

COSteve · Post by **COSteve** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:34 pm

NFG's post is well stated. I too have gone past hunting to prove to myself or others that I can. I've come to the realization that 'hunting' these days for me is mostly just enjoying the mountains and meadows, listening to the sounds of nature, watching the creatures of the forest, and occasionally plinking at a stump or such; usually at extreme ranges and always just for the heck of it.

BigSky56 · Post by **BigSky56** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 9:47 pm

Having taken alot of animals over the years to include hunting, stock depredation shooting and wrangling for outfitters its the shooter not the gun I seen elk taken with a 22 lr to 460 weaby. last year a rancher I know on the Blackfeet Rez east of Del Bonita was on a quad rode up on a grizz eating his cow in a gully before he could get out of there the bear came at him a he dumped it with a ruger 10-22 in the throat and chest area, Ill say it again its the shooter not the gun. caliber or power doesnt make up for bad shot placement. My suggestion to hunters is get your rifle and practice off hand at a clay bird keep moving it out till you miss, then try sitting then prone over a rest you will know your max range for all three. Animals deserve our best effort, just my view from the saddle. danny

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:55 pm

Danny - thanks for the info. Around here a 243 or 6mm is big enough.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:16 pm

Joe - always interesting - your focus usually seems to be practicality. Lane Simpson wrote a pair of articles titled What 63 Dead Brown Bear Tell Us. He had an opportunity to review the records of a professional hunting operation in I think NorthWest Territory. They had ranges, calibers and shots per bear stats in them. He found the the fewest shots per bear were in the 270/30-06/7Mag category. Not intended as an argument just something I thought you might find interesting.
It was in Rifle Magazine I believe, might have been Handloader. I have it somewhere.

madman4570 · Post by **madman4570** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:51 am

AJMD429 wrote:
J Miller wrote:Hunting in many places is no longer hunting. I refuse to accept sitting in tree stand or a blind and waiting for an animal to walk up to a bait trap as hunting. Ambushing or sniping, yes; hunting, no.
Of course in states like Indiana, where the game laws used to limit you to 12 gauge slugs, you either had to be one heck of a good stalker, or just sit in a tree-stand and 'ambush' your deer like many of the bow-hunters do. At least 'baiting' is not legal here. Finally we got the laws changed to where we could use less 'raw power' than the 12 gauge slug, and get humane kills fairly easily out to 100-150 yards with .44 Mag or .45 Colt leverguns.

...but....

COSteve wrote:...I see a trend away from the 'hunt' in hunting in favor of just setting up somewhere and waiting for the game to get within 400 yds of your seat and just going for a shot from there.
We still have lots of Hoosiers who seem to think deer hunting is all about sitting in the trees with your 7mm Rem Mag looking over a 400-acre corn-field, and shooting 300 yards or so at a deer that may or may not be running at the time...

If I were hunting something with claws or fangs, I'd want a .444 Marlin, warm-loaded .45-70, or something similar, and if it were in Africa, more like a .416 Rigby or Ruger, but for other stuff I agree with the folks saying a .30-06 or .35 Remington or something in-between would be my likely choice.

I think part of our 'culture' these days is sitting our lard-butts around the television-set, watching cable-shows about hunting expeditions, buying the latest power-technology, then taking that same lard-butt out and plopping it on a seat somewhere to wait for game to come by, preferably lured there by a bait-station. That is pretty sad, but yet another aspect of our 'fast-food' society.

I am not getting guys!
How in the heck when hunting on a mountain (in the woods)is it not hunting because your butts on the ground and your being silent/not move/choose correct wind direction for scent control on and on and on? Must be Turkey hunting isnt hunting either?
Some of you guys must have some special skills never heard of before. Being in a densely wooded area and keeping it together enough to have a mature buck come close in being in thick trees angling for a correct shot without him knowing your there takes skill(hunting skill)
Anyone that thinks,
At least in these parts its easy to go out by yourself and just bag a mature buck on a densely wooded mountain is easy/not hunting/ or not respecting the animal (I cant beleive really has ever hunted in the woods or hunted at all?

For at least myself,the shot is the easiest part(its getting to that point)
400 yard shots around here would be some lazy person riding around the roads in a warm truck eating a sandwich hoping to jump out and shoot at somthing from the roadside arcross a mountain or such.
If your not in the woods after about the first two hours of the first day of seasonyou might as well whistle Dixie!
The wooded sections are big with maybe some very small fields mixed throughout.

Also in the woods the shotgun gives up (nothing)to a rifle especially with the slug barrels/sabots.
Shooting my 20 gauge out does my .454 casull Raging bull and the 12 gauge runs close with my 45-70 even with the hot Buffalo Bore 405gr stuff.There would be nothing in North America that I would refrain it on,claws/teeth or not in wooded areas.
The shotgun with these loads are 200yd game killers and not what most think!

I get that same feeling when hunting and Mr.big Buck comes a knocking, that I got when being a kid coming down the stairs Christmas morning to see what Santa brought. Its about being a good hunter /to myself/to the animal being hunted etc.
It has nothing to do with showing off or just getting meat (though it is all eaten like cherished bounty) .

Sarge · Post by **Sarge** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:54 am

it's OK madman... get five guys together to talk about hunting and you gotta know the bulchit is gonna flow like lava from a volcano.

olyinaz · Post by **olyinaz** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:52 am

Why question anything other than bad/poor shooting? I don't care if a guy wants to hunt with a 460 Weatherby or a 357 lever gun - just place your shots well and take the game humanely please.

Why poop in anyone else's corn flakes? I should care if a guy gets a thrill once a year with his magnum laser gun? Have a ball brother! Please vote to protect the 2nd Amendment! Enjoy your eats! Y'all drive safe now!

Moving along,
Oly

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:39 pm

OS,
I have that article also.
What matters is skill and accuracy.
A hit with a .222LR is superior to a miss with a .458.

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:40 pm

Heavy fingers, that should have been .22LR.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:01 am

I think it's not fair to disparage one style of hunting over another, you may not be considering some of the challenges other hunters face. Having a long distance rifle is really just being prepared. You may not think it necessary to take a 400 yard shot but some of us have to be ready - it's likely to be our only shot of the season.

I have a pet peeve about hunters driving back and forth and only getting out to take a shot, but it gets the job done. It's a valid way to hunt, especially in areas where you need to cover a lot of ground. I don't enjoy hunting that way but I usually end up making tag soup when the season's over. About sitting and waiting for game to come by, my proudest moment was staking out a clearing and waiting for a deer to come through it. I would have had meat if "she" had been a buck! And most hunters hunt from stands. A person's health and age might lead them to hunt that way as opposed to going out and scaring up game. It's what works for your area and its challenges.

I agree that a "big" gun is not necessary, and I prefer the idea of using just enough bullet for the job. I wouldn't go rabbit hunting with a 45/70. But some do, probably because they like their 45/70's.

Also, there is skill involved with taking a 400 yard shot, and my hat's off to those who do it; I don't think they're lazy for not stalking in closer. Personally I prefer to take an animal that doesn't see it coming, that hasn't detected me. I once passed on an easy shot on a buck that was down in the creekbed below me. He saw me first and started climbing out of there, and it didn't seem fair to shoot him like a rat in a barrel. I'd probably do it differently now but that was my mindset at the time.

L_Kilkenny · Post by **L_Kilkenny** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:15 am

Mescalero wrote:OS,
I have that article also.
What matters is skill and accuracy.
A hit with a .222LR is superior to a miss with a .458.

That may be true with defence and pest control, not so with hunting. I'm far from thinkin you need a magnum to hunt game in North America and I think many hunters are over gunned but dang, use enough gun. A hit on a deer with a .22 is far worse than a miss with an acceptable caliber and the results are not in your or the deers favor.

As for anyone disparaging any "legal" means of taking game, that really tee's me off and some people must just talk (type) to hear them self blow smoke. I've been following this thread since the beginning and actually posted on PP1 but I have really had a hard time with coming up with a nice way to call some an idiot for their loose mouth(s). Some things just ain't possible.

LK

gak · Post by **gak** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:45 am

I'll generally go with COSteve (OP) and LK on this one. While I think it's any one's right to shoot "as much" gun as they can/want, I'll +1 also in not thinking magnums are particularlynecessary in the lower 48, and--again generaly--think an '06 ought to just about do it. Since I no longer have a .30-06, but a .270 (lifelong fan/shooter)--to which '06 now would be redundant for me, I can see a .35 Whelen as a "dedicated" elk (etc) gun in my future, just to bracket things a bit more and "just because" - I like the round and the 70 I shot it in before. IF I pared myself down to a two (bolt) gun battery, I can also see IF I did that, then jettisoning the .270 for a 7mm-08 "mountain rifle" (note lower case, though a Rem Mt Rifle DM (disc) would be just dandy, as would a Win Classic Featherweight). But I can see one of these w/o losing the.270 though I admit there'd be a bit of redundancy there oncethe.35 joined the family. Those two (or three) and the required .30-30 carbine and .22LR bolt (Win 69Ain my case) and you're all set--asa huntingbattery--south of the 44th parallel

That said, I'll also + 1 "enough gun" and it does get my dander up seeing .223 "black rifles" and Mini 14s galore out in the woods come deer season. I don't like to see a pistol caliber generally smaller than .35--though I'll grant the new .327 may be ok with "proper loading (see.32-20 comment below) but it's not yet available (factory) in a rifle,...or a rifle caliber .22 and smaller...as appropriate for deer sized game and above, I don't care what the bullet construction is.

I include in my "banned" list the .30 carbine, which I love dearly (and have) for its "intended purpose," but no longer carry (as I did as a youth with my father) on deer hunts. As many have said "just because you can--or IT can--doesn't mean you should." I'll grant many a .32-20 brought home venison in the old days, and that the .30 carbine and .223 has as well, and I wouldn't hesitate with one of these--or a .22LR--if thrust into a "Red Dawn"/survival mode and those were all I had to chose from, and where "humane kills" aren't first and foremost on one's mind. Otherwise, get enough gun. Get *much* more than enough if you must, but for me the question then is "why?" A friend, actually a very seasoned rifle man, got magnumitis a few years back and decided his '06 no longer "did it" for him. He "had"to have the then new 300 RUM. After finally observing ammo prices and ultimately also not appreciating the sturm und drang as much as he fantasized about, He's back to the ol' '06 now. Does it just fine for him afterall--from Arizona's diminutive whitetail (Coues)--though a bit overkill there! (There's a.243 deer if I've ever seen one)-- through big desert and Kaibab Mulies through some monster elk we're known for.

Mescalero · Post by **Mescalero** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:14 am

LK,
I do THINK I said anything idiotic.
Perhaps I am wrong.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:22 am

Two very different 'views' on hunting clearly exist among those of us who hunt, as exemplified by these quotes:

Grizz wrote:But there was no sport in it because the score was never in doubt. However many tags I had is how much meat I made. Baseball is a sport. Making venison is self-employment.

and

madman4570 wrote:To me its all about the hunt and getting the meat is just a nice bonus.I have a lot to hunt on (but I take 1 buck a year)and if that big buck out smarts my tiny brain(good on him)cause I am as happy,thats what makes it real! I call that hunting.

BOTH points of view are valid - perhaps 6pt-sika said it best:

6pt-sika wrote:My own personal view is hunting is what a person wants to make it.

I only dispute a person's idea of 'hunting' if they don't do it safely, humanely, and within appropriate ecologic constraints. The guys around here who take running-deer shots with their 7mm Magnums out on flat cropland are violating two of those criteria. On the "Hunting from a Junk Car" thread, I posted:

I think the first priority is that you have to hunt safely, in such a way not to put other humans at risk. Secondly you should hunt with your highest priority being a humane kill, and I don't think gut-shot qualifies there; it can be nearly instant death, but it is likelier not to be than a thorax shot. Even a not-quite-right 'head' shot, or any shot with the wrong gun/bullet, can be inhumane. Thirdly, the hunting should be ecologically sensible - obeying bag limits, seasons, and so on.

If a person accomplishes the above, I won't criticize how they hunt, because not everyone views hunting as a form of "recreation" that is a sort of lethal sporting-game between hunter and hunted. Some just view it as a harvest not all that different from picking tomatos, and being myself sometimes too hyper to want to sit still all day to wait for Bambi, I understand that viewpoint; I'd rather spend my 'sport' time shooting a few hours at the target range, and sometimes just want to get the hunting over with and fill the freezer as quickly as possible so I can get on to other things. Besides, unless I were out there with a pointed stick or personally-made bow, it seems like I've already "stacked the deck" and my hunting is not much of a sport at that point. Also, to the degree I make it 'sporting' by using less technology, there is a point where it becomes potentially more inhumane, and I don't feel comfortable putting the animal at an increased risk of suffering just so I can have a more challenging experience.

As far as our contemporary culture, the reality is that the majority of people are out of shape, watch too much television, and are infatuated with technology, so that causes many to buy a far higher-tech and more powerful weapon than they 'need', and to hunt by 'ambush' rather than 'stalking'. That isn't an indictment of deer-stand hunters as being somehow 'bad', or even less 'sporting' than stalk-hunters - it is just a fact about our modern culture. I'm in decent shape, and watch maybe ten hours of television per year, but I love tinkering with modern firearms, and I usually hunt from a deer-stand (...or sitting at the picnic table in our back yard, and once from my bedroom balcony...). Of course many 'rebels' and more physically-fit individuals relish the challenge of stalk-hunting, and/or using more 'primitive' weaponry, or enjoy a sort of solo re-enactment of a simpler time when hunters were more connected with the process of hunting, and had to rely more on their skills due to having less sophisticated equipment. It IS pretty cool to be afield with the same gear someone would have used in the 19th Century; there's a 'connection' you feel that transcends the other aspects of the hunt.

It's ALL "hunting" - just do it safely, humanely & ecologically sensibly, and nobody (not even fellow 'hunters') can fault you.
Sounds like several others here agree...

FWiedner wrote:Different folks in different places use different hunting methods. As long as it's legal, it's nobody's business but theirs.

6pt-sika wrote:I won't make excuses or apologies for what I do and do not really care if it's agreed with or not as I am the only one that has to live with my actions .

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:39 am

El Chivo wrote:. . . I once passed on an easy shot on a buck that was down in the creekbed below me. He saw me first and started climbing out of there, and it didn't seem fair to shoot him like a rat in a barrel. I'd probably do it differently now but that was my mindset at the time.

Now I'd be thinking, "If I shoot him in that creekbed, I have to drag him out of it!"

Funny how the older (and fatter) you get, the more you think about these things.
I shot a deer two years ago, and the next thing in my mind was that the truck was 1.5 miles away. Luckily I was able to drag him downhill to a pasture road and go get the truck.

I've taken those 300+ yard shots and some 15 yard shots. The long shots make me feel good about my marksmanship, but the close ones make me feel alive. Nowadays, I let plenty of game pass before I finally take the one I want. I eat what I shoot, but that don't mean I got to shoot the first thing I see.

I usually use a .308. Smaller calibers will do it, but all other considerations aside, a larger hole is more likely to hit something that bleeds. Of the hundreds of deer-sized game I've taken, I've lost two

and both of them were with a pistol caliber carbine. I was hasty and forgot the limited range of my cartridge when I am used to being able to hit where at point up to 300 yards with no hold over.

I think Big Enough is whatever it takes to put your game down with one, clean shot.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:54 pm

I appreciate this page of analysis. Well thought out.

One thing about my background is that I shot a LOT.

I grew up shooting. My Dad had me pulling the trigger before I started school, and we shot often. Mostly plinking at any range practical and safe, mostly standing and shooting offhand. Paper was just for zero, everything else was just for fun.

During the commercial season in Alaska I shot lots of rifle and hand gun ammo at moving targets: kelp heads, the odd beer can, maybe a sack of garbage that needed to be sunk, driftwood, etc, on a moving ocean from a moving boat. That definately builds muscle memory and eye-hand coordination. I don't know of any other way to duplicate that.

I think a couple of generations ago this kind of thing was very common. Shooting from horseback or stagecoach. Such that when the time to make venison ocurred it happened quickly without any fanfare, and the outcome was never in doubt.

Now days we see people in full camo gear whispering to a camera inside a digital camo shelter. I used to walk around in jeans and a tee or maybe a flannel shirt, or full raingear, with my southeast sneaker fishing boots on. About as camoflauged as a pink cadallac at a tractor pull.

I'm not saying that either way is righter or wronger, but I am saying that there may be far more t.v. taught hunters than experience taught ones by now.

A large part of the problem is that, unless you're blessed to own a thousand acres adjacent to national forest, or you actually live in the NF, you're not too likely, outside of Alaska, to have much free range opportunity. Hunting times, places, limits, restrictions, and the rest of the myriad checklists, clipboards, oversight and other detritus of the bureaucratic overclass conspire to make the digital hide or junk car hunting shack more of a response to the overclass than the requirements of a simple hunt.

Anyway, I hope I have not left the wrong impression. I realize that I was blessed with unique opportunities and my reminiscences are nothing but one man's memories, with the hope that someone else will be inspired to copy-cat them and keep the old ways alive, and pass them along.

Best Regards

Grizz

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Jun 04, 2011 6:32 pm

Grizz wrote:A large part of the problem is that, unless you're blessed to own a thousand acres adjacent to national forest, or you actually live in the NF, you're not too likely, outside of Alaska, to have much free range opportunity.

Those of us who own farms or have backyard shooting ranges really should be sure to INVITE FRIENDS TO SHARE our opportunities. I see too many seasoned outdoorsmen and women who lament the 'younger generation', yet don't really go out of their way to make sure their neices, grandkids, nephews, or the local scout troop, get a chance to hunt/fish/target shoot on their place. Think about getting more involved, if you're not already...

Grizz wrote:Hunting times, places, limits, restrictions, and the rest of the myriad checklists, clipboards, oversight and other detritus of the bureaucratic overclass conspire to make the digital hide or junk car hunting shack more of a response to the overclass than the requirements of a simple hunt.

GOOD point - that same 'bureaucratic overclass' is pretty much ruining every business, every recreation, and every sense of economic or social stability our society once had. Time to flush the clipboards, regulations. . . and those who regulate...

Grizz wrote:Anyway, I hope I have not left the wrong impression.

I, for one, respect your 'perspective', and would be honored to meet you sometime if the occasion arose. Same for many here on this forum.

Grizz wrote:I realize that I was blessed with unique opportunities and my reminiscences are nothing but one man's memories, with the hope that someone else will be inspired to copy-cat them and keep the old ways alive, and pass them along.

We must ALL try to "keep the old ways alive", as the human 'generation' time is too short for most people to have much sense when before they're old enough to vote or affect public policy.

hightime · Post by **hightime** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:41 am

I've been hunting now for fifty years. Last season I figured out how everyone but, me could hit the broad side of a barn.................For me at least, I climb in and shoot from the inside.

I agree in Northern MN a 30-06 just might be the best all round caliber for white tail deer.
I don't own one. I've done forty years with a Model 70 270 standard that my dad got for me at twelve years old. Worked for me, but it's too fast and light for our woods. It's mine and I'll use it.
In the last few years I've stopped using it. I accuire and shoot with something different almost each season and sometimes changeup durring season. I have no favorite cal.
They're all good........I think....I need to try several more yet.

Owen

L_Kilkenny · Post by **L_Kilkenny** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:51 am

Grizz wrote: During the commercial season in Alaska I shot lots of rifle and hand gun ammo at moving targets: kelp heads, the odd beer can, maybe a sack of garbage that needed to be sunk, driftwood, etc,

Wow, they have a commercail season on kelp, beer cans, garbage and driftwood? Guess things really are tough all over!

LK

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:11 pm

L_Kilkenny wrote:
Grizz wrote: During the commercial season in Alaska I shot lots of rifle and hand gun ammo at moving targets: kelp heads, the odd beer can, maybe a sack of garbage that needed to be sunk, driftwood, etc,
Wow, they have a commercail season on kelp, beer cans, garbage and driftwood? Guess things really are tough all over!

LK

actually it's a sign that the rubes will buy anything!!!