Strikey wrote:As I said use more than enough gun, its preferable to have overkill then have game walking around with horrific injuries due to inappropriate calibre/projectile choice, put them down with shot is the only ethical thing to do.
I have just come back from a roo cull and would say that nearly all shots under a spotlight were taken less than 150yds, looked further but weren't, some were around the 50-60yd mark, 200m under a light is a bloody long way and things look a lot further at night then they actually are I know a few pro roo shooters in my area and they will tell you most of their shooting is less then a 100yds so if you are taking them past 200metres good onya
Have a Happy New Year
Chronos wrote:Range finders don't know it's dark
Steve
bigfellascott wrote:Chronos wrote:Range finders don't know it's dark
Steve
Yep I use mine to range foxes when out spotlighting (long shots) comes in handy at times
Chronos wrote:bigfellascott wrote:Chronos wrote:Range finders don't know it's dark
Steve
Yep I use mine to range foxes when out spotlighting (long shots) comes in handy at times
Yep. I'm bad enough judging distances in broad day light let alone at night and the leupold illuminated RX1000TBRi gives you drop as well. A valuable tool when you start shooting small things beyond 100m
Happy new year mate.
Chronos
Strikey wrote:Agreed, shot placement is still crucial even when using a larger calibre but over the years I have seen people using .17Rem, 222Rem., 22/250s etc on everything from foxes to pigs and everything in between, poor shot placement, wrong projectile choice for the intended game have resulted in some nasty wounds that the animal did not deserve, some of these blokes thought they had pulled off a good shot. There are a lot of inexperienced shooters/hunters out there who may think that their mighty .204/.223 or even the all conquering .17HMR will take down all manner of game at insane distances, this I believe is why we should not be advocating that it is possible to shoot something such as deer with what is essentially a varmint cartridge
Interesting that I disagreed with you all but still pass on a Happy New Year but can't get the same back, go f*** yourselves
Oldbloke wrote:"Interesting that I disagreed with you all but still pass on a Happy New Year but can't get the same back, go f*** yourselves "
Obviously a gentleman.
This is an old argument.
If you are an excellent shot in ideal situations, yes you can use smaller than usual calibres for many animals, not just deer (Correct 222 was used widely by pro shooters in NZ to cull red deer in the 60-70s)
If you an average bloke/shot like me you should stick to the tried and true or recommended. Eg I no longer use th 22lr on foxes, only 223 or 12g.
Ps this is a discussion forum, not argument forum. The above type of comments are now rare on this forum and the better for it IMO. Being civil cost nothing.
ps. Happy new year.
Chronos wrote:Range finders don't know it's dark
Steve
dhv wrote:Chronos wrote:Range finders don't know it's dark
Steve
Did you just admit to spotlighting deer in NSW?
dhv wrote:No mate, cant spotlight deer in NSW unless you are the landholder in which case the regulations don't apply.
I have no argument that some skilled shooters can reliably pull off headshots, and I have no argument that a headshot is humane.
My discomfort over posts such as this is that many less skilled people read it and believe it to be normal, resulting in deer running around with jaws shot off and the like.
I have personally witnessed a fallow buck carry a good hit from a 30/06 @ 100m and require a 2nd shot to put it down, so whilst they may go down MOST of the time, you should arm yourself to ensure they go down ALL the time.
It's the same with "long range hunting". Some can achieve it consistently, but for every one of those there are a dozens more where ambition exceeds ability.
As a hunter (as opposed to a shooter) the whole point is to get closer. The stalk is more important than the shot.
David Brown wrote:Why there are laws in other places is beyond me.