I was thinking the same, part of the thril of hunting dangerous game is the up close risk factor.
The risk of wounding a predator at long range is just to high if you ask me.
I'f it must be done, then i'd want something big. I'm with the .50 cal in some form or other.
The man is asking for information about how to do this.
It's his decision how to execute the hunt and I'm sure we don't know all the specifics about his time restriction(s) or other limitiations.
For a very long time I wanted to hunt black bears, my only interested in bagging one, distance mattered not. Now that I have hunted them several times I am becoming interested in other aspects of hunting them. Perhaps this man shares this type interest...to get a brown bear or to allow some other person less agile the opportunity to hunt them.
This is not an admonishment, just an offer at a different perspective.
I agree with most of your reply. Like you, I too believe that in your face contact with the most magestic animal on earth is the ultimate test of one's hunting ability. That's why I wrote in an earlier post that I like working the brush the best.
[ QUOTE ]
Alaska is a mixed bag for sure. I like working the bush better than most, guess I'm nuts, but want the equipment available in case the opportunity presents itself at distance. All the while keeping the weapon reasonable enough for close in stuff too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Having wrote that, I will not sit on a stump and wait for a long shot. But if a longer shot presents itself, why limit the final success/outcome. Most would agree that it is expensive to hunt in areas where dangerous game reside. I think that there is nothing wrong with making the best out of your hard work and the dollars spent.
[ QUOTE ]
I thinks it's remarkable when man and equipment can come together and take down an Elk with one shot at 1000 yards or a varmint at twice the range, but this is God's greatest predator (above us on the food chain) and I'd say that earns him a little more of a handicap on our part in this game.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with the first part of your statement. But, I personally feel that the griz or brownie in its territory, while on his turf... has a pretty darn good handicap already! Ask the many folks bitten if they need anymore help!
No, the game laws protect them as a species just fine. Given the way I will hunt them... on foot, off the beaten path... not on a boat... they already will have the edge. If I catch them in the open, possibly more vunerable... so be it. If they catch me short... well you probably know the outcome! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
I think any shot at legally acquired game... is an ethical shot... if made to the highest degree of accuracy and required spent energy on target.
IMHO I can not separate game species as you have done so easily. The magestic elk you spoke of, shot at 1000 yards is just as much one God's creature as is the bear. And rightfully deserves the same respect in the harvest. As much as you are one of God's creatures so is the lowly prairie dog! All of God's creatures need the same degree of respect.
I just recently returned from Iraq with a pretty severe head wound. I was shot in Mosul by an Iraqi terrorist armed with a Soviet Draganov, 7.62mm X 54mm Sniper Rifle. Given the nature and angle of my wound, and that I am still able to type this thread, he took me at well over 600 yards. We call it, a "spray and prey" lucky shot in this case. As a sniper I hold no ill regard for the man. However, my team killed him and his buddy the next day. He must have shot at me, and my team over 20 different occassions. He did unfortunately hit two of my NCO's just days before me getting it. Like in the bush, in the killing fields of the middle east, it's nothing personal... just business. If I had caught him in the open at long range, and if I had been properly equipped, I would have taken him earlier. If I had caught him at 5 feet, I still would have taken him... maybe with my 9mm (just to handicap myself, right?). Sorry about that shot. My only regret is that all I had for any serious long range counter-sniper work was a captured 30 year (+) old FN FAL (basicly a Belgium made Semi-Auto .308) with no scope.
As God's ultimate predater, I give no quater, and ask none in return. I believe the bear feels the same way. Just ask that bear friendly "photographer" fellow (rest his soul) who thought that the bear was his buddy. The bear didn't, and ate both him and his girl. The culprit bear was never killed I believe.
Sorry for the digression, but I just wanted to drive home the point that all creatures are equally respected by me.
Yes, I agree that the range tends to take the steam out of the confrontation. Some would argue that I am lucky for that very reason. Unlike the Iraqi shooter, I don't miss when I decide to pull the trigger at any reasonable range, no matter the target.
My point was, and still is, that if given the opportunity at taking one of God's magestic bears, or other dangerous game for that matter, at longer ranges, what epuipment best fits the bill?
Dimecovers3, as far as anti-hunters are concerned, I've discovered that they don't and or won't understand, no matter the equipment or technique(s) used. Fortunately, they don't get close enough to me to discuss the issues involved, thanks to God.
Any input from an experienced shooter would be greatly appreciated.
I've given bear hunting a lot of thought lately. I have never killed one simply due to the fact that I never really wanted to. I also don't see the utility in shooting prairie dogs, except for the advanced practice gained. A crow is another matter all together! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Now that I am headed to Alaska for at least the next three years, and probably for the rest of my life, I know that the chances are high that I will get the opportunity... sooner rather than later... to bag one. If I am humping back so far already, I just want the increased capability.
Besides, like Ian, I don't want anything to be able to steal my "porridge" in camp either!
You are not the average or for that matter even the above average long range shooter. You , I would guess are in a very, very, elite group of marksman that could make this shot on the majority of occasions. But this is a Bear and there are no small coastal browns. My concern like Pete's is shot placement and wounding. It is hard enough to kill one of these bruts at 200 yards with a the proper equipment. I don't have personal experience, but I would imagine shoot placement must be exact and wind, yardage, and even the animal moving during time of flight of bullet could all result in a bear in the bush or worse---a lost bear to die unfound. I have no doubt the Army has taught you the skills needed to do this and I also realize your open to any shot, close or long, but don't want to pass up a shot you could make and the rest of us could only dream of, so I understand where you are coming from given the cost of the trip, I just don't see how you are going to carry the damn thing LOL---seems like a quick brush stopper and an ultra long range rifle with high power scope might leave you slow on the draw at a high noon encounter on one of those little side creeks. I have no creditionals to preach to you on this subject, in fact, I doubt anybody on this board could answer your questions better than you yourself. I think the heart of the matter is the hunting of the great bears (blacks excluded) and Mt. Lions has always bothered me. Seems the higher predators should give way to same. I know it sounds gooffy, but it's more a matter of professional courtesy. It's just not for me. I was the first first person on this board to congradulate our moderator on his kill featured in NRA and I can enjoy, support, and protect the rights of others to do it, even if it's not my cup of tea. I hope your wounds heal and I thank you for your service from the bottom of my heart and I hope you do get a whopper in Alaska ( I was up there last year myself) and I hope you get the exact shot you will remember for a lifetime be it ten yards or 1000.
Thanks from the bottom of my heart. Thanks mostly for supporting our great Nation which has kept me gainfully employed... doing what I love... for so long.
Your right, what I need is a rifle that is truely accurate and stable enough to execute the appropriate amount of energy at longer ranges, while being handi enough for the in your face stuff so often found in good bear country.
I also want the hunt up close and personal. I just want the ability to do it out there, if needed.
I want .338 WM performance at 200 yards out to 1000 yards is all. Once I decide on caliber and action, I will probably keep the barrel contour at .700" diameter and under 28". Any input is appreciated and needed.
A side note: After much research my gunsmith will be Chris Mathews. Chris question? Did Mr. Carl Carcaba send you his .30-378 Weatherby, for a rebarrel to .338-378 with a new A-5 stock? I told him that you are one of the good ones on this site.
I sent you an email, however I will respond here also.
I have Carl's rifle as we speak.
I am proud you have chosen me as your smith...it's the least I can do to build you the best rifle possible after what you have done for me and the rest of this country. Thank you.
Now as far as my two cents worth on this subject. While I see Dimecovers3 point and respect his choice. I feel that it is slightly skewed...."the great bears- excluding the black bear" how is that fair? A black will eat you twice as fast a grizz...most people underestimate them way too much.
Are we really the top predator? Sorry I think God and Ma Nature are....
In my experience, animals (and people) react poorly to bullets. Put the bullet where it belongs at any distance and you have the recipe for a clean kill.