Piet, ek dink jy en Ludwig het dieselfde ding ingedagte, maar julle praat net bietjie verby mekaar! Soos ek dit sien, probeer Piet amateurs daarteen waarsku om te dink dat 'n duur en akkurate geweer en teleskoop kombinasie outomaties sukses gaan beteken op 800m+ en Ludwig se standpunt is dat elkeen self sal bepaal wat vir hom/haar haalbaar en derhalwe eties is of nie (so ook afgelei uit Dimitri se post).
Ek dink nie Mnr Carlock het een oggend opgestaan en 'n bok gaan skiet op 1500y nie en as jy nie op papier kopskote (of bladskote) op enige afstand kan skiet nie, gaan jy dit beslis nie in die veld op 'n lewendige dier regkry nie, daarvoor sal bokkoors en adrenalien sorg!
Langafstand jag en Etiek
-
Eugene
- Hero Member
- Posts: 6027
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Aim small, miss small
-
Piet Breedt
- Hero Member
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:54 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Eugene, jy slaan die spyker op sy kop.
Ludwig, ek is ernstig oor die plek om op te skiet. Ek kan reel dat jy daar kom skiet as jy wil. Dit is n bitter lekker plek om vanaf te skiet. Die plaas behoort aan Willie "Camo" hier op die forum.
Ludwig, ek is ernstig oor die plek om op te skiet. Ek kan reel dat jy daar kom skiet as jy wil. Dit is n bitter lekker plek om vanaf te skiet. Die plaas behoort aan Willie "Camo" hier op die forum.
-
Piet Breedt
- Hero Member
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:54 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ludwig en ander.
Ek het nou mooi sit en dink oor die saak, en my gevolgtrekinge is as volg:
As ek terugdink oor die jare wat ek skiet, dan sien ek hoe my eie veld verbreed het tov hoe v?r ek bereid was om n bok n kopskoot te kan skiet. Ek het in die vro?e 80's met my .223 Sako baie bokke ge oes in die Zululandse bosveld waar skoot afstande gewissel het van 10m tot so maksimum 120m tot miskien 150m by uitsonderings. Daardie jare was n 4 x 40 scope die aangewese teleskoop, met n Dual X kruishaar. Variable scopes het eers so teen 1984 hul verskyning daar by ons gemaak, en toe was hulle maar nog baie onbetroubaar en het baie van hulle se POI geskuif as jy aan sy vergroting draai.
Latere jare het hul kwaliteit baie verbeter en het ek self n Weaver 3 - 9 x 40 aangeskaf wat my skiet afstande ook vergroot het. Ek het ook na die Ho?veld getrek waar die skietafstande sommer baie langer geword het, en ek aangepas het om naderhand 250m as my self opgestelde maksimum te beskou. Daar was nog nie rangefinders gewees, en bokke se afstand was geskat. Dit het veroorsaak dat ek afstand baie effektief kon leer skat, maar foutjies het nou en dan ingesluip. Toe die eerste rangefinders begin beskikbaar raak, het ek vir my n Bushnell 800 gekoop, en dadelik het my kopskoot skiet sukses sommer baie verbeter en die afstande gerek.
Toe ek my eerste Burris scope met die ballistic plex kruishare aangeskaf het, gepaard gaande met die Rangefinder het my kopskoot afstande na 300m verskuif en het ek baie bokke suksesvol so geskiet.
In 2005 het ek weer begin kompetisie skiet na baie jare en toe met al die oefening en opgradering van toerusting en kalibers het die afstand weer groter geraak.
Met dit in ag geneem, en dit wat ek nou beleef het met slegs 3 dae se skiet op die 800m en 850m, het ek nou dit alles mooi in perspektief geplaas. Behalwe vir die v?r gonge wat ek suksesvol raakgeskiet het, en die dag gewen het tydens David Tubb se besoek, het ek nog nooit voorheen op hierdie afstande gonge geskiet nie, behalwe tot sowat 600m en 700m al n slag of twee, en veral met die toets van die Burris Eliminator scopes. Nou my eerste dag op die 825m gong waar ons Saterdag geskiet het, het ek maar een keer raakgeskiet. Die tweede dag so bietjie meer sukses met sowat 8 raakskote, sonder n spotter. Verlede Saterdag het ek hulle heelwat meer keer raakgeskiet met behulp van n spotter.
Met dit alles in ag genome, en met slegs 4 dae se oefening op hierdie ultra afstande, en die suksesse wat ek gesmaak het op die 800m en 850m gonge, en met die verberering wat ek elke dag getoon het, dink ek as langafstand skiet leuk regtig nie dat Ludwig se verwagtinge te hoog is nie. Ek dink dat as ek so baie tyd spandeer met al die toewyding wat ek teenoor my huidige skiet dissiplines toon, en my toerusting so goed op datum kry op die tipe skiet as wat ek op die ander skietdissiplines waar ek baie suksesvol in is, kan dit regtig vermag word soos wat Shawn Carlock bewys het.
Ek het tot die slotsom gekom dat ek my glad nie kan uitspreuk oor die saak met slegs 4 dae se ondervinding daarin. Ek glo dat as ons n man soos Shawn Carlock wat baie jare se ondervinding het hierin in aksie moet sien, sal ons bekke oophang.
Ja, dit sal definitief vir my oneties wees om self nou na slegs 4 dae se ondervinding te gaan probeer bokke skiet op daardie afstande, maar dit is nie te s? dat dit dan ook oneties is vir die wat dit reeds suksesvol beoefen. Ek dink die meeste van ons het nie die vaagste benul wat se baie oefening en voorberieding en ondervinding hulle reeds ingesit het om dit te kan vermag.
Ludwig, ek sal graag saam met jou die paadjie wil stap en saam skiet elke keer as jy gaan. Ons kan vir mekaar spot en baie leer daaruit.
Ek het nou mooi sit en dink oor die saak, en my gevolgtrekinge is as volg:
As ek terugdink oor die jare wat ek skiet, dan sien ek hoe my eie veld verbreed het tov hoe v?r ek bereid was om n bok n kopskoot te kan skiet. Ek het in die vro?e 80's met my .223 Sako baie bokke ge oes in die Zululandse bosveld waar skoot afstande gewissel het van 10m tot so maksimum 120m tot miskien 150m by uitsonderings. Daardie jare was n 4 x 40 scope die aangewese teleskoop, met n Dual X kruishaar. Variable scopes het eers so teen 1984 hul verskyning daar by ons gemaak, en toe was hulle maar nog baie onbetroubaar en het baie van hulle se POI geskuif as jy aan sy vergroting draai.
Latere jare het hul kwaliteit baie verbeter en het ek self n Weaver 3 - 9 x 40 aangeskaf wat my skiet afstande ook vergroot het. Ek het ook na die Ho?veld getrek waar die skietafstande sommer baie langer geword het, en ek aangepas het om naderhand 250m as my self opgestelde maksimum te beskou. Daar was nog nie rangefinders gewees, en bokke se afstand was geskat. Dit het veroorsaak dat ek afstand baie effektief kon leer skat, maar foutjies het nou en dan ingesluip. Toe die eerste rangefinders begin beskikbaar raak, het ek vir my n Bushnell 800 gekoop, en dadelik het my kopskoot skiet sukses sommer baie verbeter en die afstande gerek.
Toe ek my eerste Burris scope met die ballistic plex kruishare aangeskaf het, gepaard gaande met die Rangefinder het my kopskoot afstande na 300m verskuif en het ek baie bokke suksesvol so geskiet.
In 2005 het ek weer begin kompetisie skiet na baie jare en toe met al die oefening en opgradering van toerusting en kalibers het die afstand weer groter geraak.
Met dit in ag geneem, en dit wat ek nou beleef het met slegs 3 dae se skiet op die 800m en 850m, het ek nou dit alles mooi in perspektief geplaas. Behalwe vir die v?r gonge wat ek suksesvol raakgeskiet het, en die dag gewen het tydens David Tubb se besoek, het ek nog nooit voorheen op hierdie afstande gonge geskiet nie, behalwe tot sowat 600m en 700m al n slag of twee, en veral met die toets van die Burris Eliminator scopes. Nou my eerste dag op die 825m gong waar ons Saterdag geskiet het, het ek maar een keer raakgeskiet. Die tweede dag so bietjie meer sukses met sowat 8 raakskote, sonder n spotter. Verlede Saterdag het ek hulle heelwat meer keer raakgeskiet met behulp van n spotter.
Met dit alles in ag genome, en met slegs 4 dae se oefening op hierdie ultra afstande, en die suksesse wat ek gesmaak het op die 800m en 850m gonge, en met die verberering wat ek elke dag getoon het, dink ek as langafstand skiet leuk regtig nie dat Ludwig se verwagtinge te hoog is nie. Ek dink dat as ek so baie tyd spandeer met al die toewyding wat ek teenoor my huidige skiet dissiplines toon, en my toerusting so goed op datum kry op die tipe skiet as wat ek op die ander skietdissiplines waar ek baie suksesvol in is, kan dit regtig vermag word soos wat Shawn Carlock bewys het.
Ek het tot die slotsom gekom dat ek my glad nie kan uitspreuk oor die saak met slegs 4 dae se ondervinding daarin. Ek glo dat as ons n man soos Shawn Carlock wat baie jare se ondervinding het hierin in aksie moet sien, sal ons bekke oophang.
Ja, dit sal definitief vir my oneties wees om self nou na slegs 4 dae se ondervinding te gaan probeer bokke skiet op daardie afstande, maar dit is nie te s? dat dit dan ook oneties is vir die wat dit reeds suksesvol beoefen. Ek dink die meeste van ons het nie die vaagste benul wat se baie oefening en voorberieding en ondervinding hulle reeds ingesit het om dit te kan vermag.
Ludwig, ek sal graag saam met jou die paadjie wil stap en saam skiet elke keer as jy gaan. Ons kan vir mekaar spot en baie leer daaruit.
-
Koos Barnard
- Hero Member
- Posts: 2150
- Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:28 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ludwig, Piet en ander
Baie dankie vir die mooi manier waarop julle jul verskillende en soms baie uiteenlopende standpunte beredeneer het. Ek haal my hoed vir julle manne af. Die forum raak nou weer die plek waar 'n mens graag wil kom lees en deel met ander.
Bakgat, doen so voort
Mooi loop
Baie dankie vir die mooi manier waarop julle jul verskillende en soms baie uiteenlopende standpunte beredeneer het. Ek haal my hoed vir julle manne af. Die forum raak nou weer die plek waar 'n mens graag wil kom lees en deel met ander.
Bakgat, doen so voort
Mooi loop
-
Sam Kelbrick
- Full Member
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:44 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
KoosKoos Barnard wrote: Ludwig, Piet en ander
Baie dankie vir die mooi manier waarop julle jul verskillende en soms baie uiteenlopende standpunte beredeneer het. Ek haal my hoed vir julle manne af. Die forum raak nou weer die plek waar 'n mens graag wil kom lees en deel met ander.
Bakgat, doen so voort
Mooi loop
Ek stem 100% saam met jou. Ek het die thread nou van die begin af gelees en dit baie geniet en ook leersaam gevind. Ek is ook veral beindruk met die respek wat die manne teenoor mekaar openbaar, ongeag die uiteenlopende standpunte.
Groete
Value has a value only if its value is valued
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Mooi verduideliking oor hoekom nie LR jag
Nogal n mooi verduideliking vir voor jy besluit om n bok oor ver afstande te skiet
Long Range Shooting
by Craig Boddington • July 21, 2011
When it comes to hunting, long-range shooting doesn't equate to artillery nor sniping.
We all have our definitions of what constitutes “long range shooting,” and we all have our personal range limits as well. For me, I think long range starts when you have to abandon a dead-on hold with your center crosshair and start to figure either the holdover or the alternative aiming point. At this point there’s really no mystery and no magic; you have to figure out the shooting solution, and now it’s just a matter of magnitude. In that regard it’s a bit like artillery fire. The longer the range, the more complex the solution. Fortunately, even the most rabid long-range riflemen aren’t quite yet to the point where the rotation of the Earth has to be factored into the shot.
A big difference between long-range field shooting and artillery is that “almost” doesn’t quite cut it. A near-miss doesn’t do you any good at all. There is, however, another similarity in that, at extreme range, the target may not know exactly what’s going on, so it’s occasionally possible to “adjust fire” and walk a bullet into the target. This is exactly the way artillery is brought on target, as in “right 50, add 100, fire for effect.”
This is just one of the problems I have with the concept of extreme-range shots at game animals. Although we are definitely trying to kill a specific animal, we aren’t at war with the critters. Near misses do us no good. So when a range is reached when there is no longer a very high probability of a first-round vital hit, we are actually out of range. Obviously this varies tremendously with the conditions. With my .300 Weatherby set up as it was, a 300-yard shot, just three inches of holdover, shouldn’t be an issue. But add a 30-mph crosswind, and maybe even 300 yards is a bit too far.
In my day military snipers were almost a dirty secret. The terrible way we treated Carlos Hathcock is a prime example. Therefore I think the way we admire, almost revere, our modern-day snipers is wonderful. They deserve the respect they currently receive. On the other hand, I think it’s extremely inappropriate to transfer what they do in combat to what we as hunters do in the field. Oh, sure, the “hold ‘em and squeeze ‘em” part is great. But in most cases the sniper doesn’t have to achieve a clean kill in order to accomplish his mission. In fact, it could be argued that a wounding shot is even better than a killing shot; the guy that’s hit is out of action, as are the guys who have to take care of him.
It could be argued further that the sniper doesn’t necessarily have to hit his target to accomplish his mission. Doctrinally, an important part of the sniper’s role is to demoralize the enemy and break up troop formations. This can be done by taking out leaders and crew-served weapons…but it can also be accomplished by near misses. In hunting this doesn’t work.
This article is an expanded excerpt from Boddington’s “The Shooting Solution” article, which will appear in the September/October issue of RifleShooter magazine.
Read more: http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2011/07/ ... z2LKQn9vXD
Long Range Shooting
by Craig Boddington • July 21, 2011
When it comes to hunting, long-range shooting doesn't equate to artillery nor sniping.
We all have our definitions of what constitutes “long range shooting,” and we all have our personal range limits as well. For me, I think long range starts when you have to abandon a dead-on hold with your center crosshair and start to figure either the holdover or the alternative aiming point. At this point there’s really no mystery and no magic; you have to figure out the shooting solution, and now it’s just a matter of magnitude. In that regard it’s a bit like artillery fire. The longer the range, the more complex the solution. Fortunately, even the most rabid long-range riflemen aren’t quite yet to the point where the rotation of the Earth has to be factored into the shot.
A big difference between long-range field shooting and artillery is that “almost” doesn’t quite cut it. A near-miss doesn’t do you any good at all. There is, however, another similarity in that, at extreme range, the target may not know exactly what’s going on, so it’s occasionally possible to “adjust fire” and walk a bullet into the target. This is exactly the way artillery is brought on target, as in “right 50, add 100, fire for effect.”
This is just one of the problems I have with the concept of extreme-range shots at game animals. Although we are definitely trying to kill a specific animal, we aren’t at war with the critters. Near misses do us no good. So when a range is reached when there is no longer a very high probability of a first-round vital hit, we are actually out of range. Obviously this varies tremendously with the conditions. With my .300 Weatherby set up as it was, a 300-yard shot, just three inches of holdover, shouldn’t be an issue. But add a 30-mph crosswind, and maybe even 300 yards is a bit too far.
In my day military snipers were almost a dirty secret. The terrible way we treated Carlos Hathcock is a prime example. Therefore I think the way we admire, almost revere, our modern-day snipers is wonderful. They deserve the respect they currently receive. On the other hand, I think it’s extremely inappropriate to transfer what they do in combat to what we as hunters do in the field. Oh, sure, the “hold ‘em and squeeze ‘em” part is great. But in most cases the sniper doesn’t have to achieve a clean kill in order to accomplish his mission. In fact, it could be argued that a wounding shot is even better than a killing shot; the guy that’s hit is out of action, as are the guys who have to take care of him.
It could be argued further that the sniper doesn’t necessarily have to hit his target to accomplish his mission. Doctrinally, an important part of the sniper’s role is to demoralize the enemy and break up troop formations. This can be done by taking out leaders and crew-served weapons…but it can also be accomplished by near misses. In hunting this doesn’t work.
This article is an expanded excerpt from Boddington’s “The Shooting Solution” article, which will appear in the September/October issue of RifleShooter magazine.
Read more: http://www.rifleshootermag.com/2011/07/ ... z2LKQn9vXD
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
James Wilson
- Hero Member
- Posts: 4596
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:38 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Bok, die stuk is baie goed. Soos verwag kan word van n mens soos Craig. Homself n afgetreede kolonel in die vsa magte. Die doel en aanwending van skerpskutters in die moderne slagveld teater, is seker van die mees misverstane doktrines wat bestaan.
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ludwig geen probleem
James
Hier waar daai applikasie doel van die 338Lap wat ek en jy oor gepraat het inkom.
James
Hier waar daai applikasie doel van die 338Lap wat ek en jy oor gepraat het inkom.
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ludwig
Waar het jy die boek gekoop, sien op die site as ek hom direk bestel gaan hy eers gepos word December 2013 so ek behoort hom eers dan seker te kry 2014, effe lank om te wag sou ek se.
Waar het jy die boek gekoop, sien op die site as ek hom direk bestel gaan hy eers gepos word December 2013 so ek behoort hom eers dan seker te kry 2014, effe lank om te wag sou ek se.
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Dankie Ludwig
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
Eugene
- Hero Member
- Posts: 6027
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Is daai boek beskikbaar as 'n e-book? Ek het op amazon gekyk, maar hulle praat net van 'n hard copy...Ludwig wrote:Blok, ek het die boek by Accuracy 1st bestel: https://www.accuracy1stdg.com/store/
Jy kan hom ook by Amazon bestel: http://www.amazon.com/Accuracy-Precisio ... 909&sr=1-2
Aim small, miss small
-
Eugene
- Hero Member
- Posts: 6027
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Nou maar scan joune dan mak ons hom 'n e-book....Ludwig wrote:Eugene, nie wat ek van weet nie. Glo nie.
Net 'n grappie julle, voor die sedebewakers hulle komkommertoebroodjies uitspoeg!
Aim small, miss small
-
Eugene
- Hero Member
- Posts: 6027
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Nee die prys is nie die probleem nie, maar soos Blok sê, hy moet nog tot hier kom! Met 'n e-book is die prys skaars afgetrek van jou bankrekening, dan lees jy al hoofstuk 2!Ludwig wrote:Ja EugeneKoop die harde band kopie. R350 gaan jou nie armer maak nie, maar die inligting daarin gaan jou beslis ryker aan kennis maak.
Aim small, miss small
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Eugene
Bestel jy nou twee dan gooi ek die geld vir jou
Bestel jy nou twee dan gooi ek die geld vir jou
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
Eugene
- Hero Member
- Posts: 6027
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:41 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Blok, laat ek net eers bietjie soek of hy nie in e-book formaat is nie! Het e-pos gestuur en wag vir terugvoering, indien ek niks kry nie, dan maak ons so!BLOK wrote:Eugene
Bestel jy nou twee dan gooi ek die geld vir jou
Aim small, miss small
-
BLOK
- Hero Member
- Posts: 5982
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ek wag vir jou terugvoering
"n Jakkals verloor nie slaap nie, oor die opienie van n skaap nie"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
204Ruger - Ticking off the Big 5, one at a time
"SPEED KILLS"
-
W.K.
- Newbie
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:10 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Sjoe dit was nou 'n mondvol!
Het nou net die hele thread gelees.
Gaan nou 'n thread soek wat meer vertel van die toerusting wat jy nodig het vir vêr skiet. Ek is juis opsoek na 'n nuwe geweer...
Het nou net die hele thread gelees.
Gaan nou 'n thread soek wat meer vertel van die toerusting wat jy nodig het vir vêr skiet. Ek is juis opsoek na 'n nuwe geweer...
-
Beyers
- Hero Member
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 12:41 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Net 'n stukkie gecopy uit die long range forum wat boekdele spreek (uit Turrets 101)
Keeping it Real
Let’s assume that everything works perfectly and you now have a turret on your rifle that has numbers out to 900 yards. I wish this could go without being said, but this does not automatically mean that you can accurately hunt at this distance. Long-distance shooting requires an immense amount of research and practice. Even though the best hunting rifles are capable of three-shot groups of .5-1.0 inches from a concrete bench, most shooters will give up one inch when forced to shoot from the ground, and a common 10 mph wind can add one more inch to our inaccuracy. This all adds up to a 9” group at 300 yards - and we haven’t even added in the effect of adrenaline, shortness of breath, frozen fingers, elevation, variable winds, and about a dozen other factors.
Keeping it Real
Let’s assume that everything works perfectly and you now have a turret on your rifle that has numbers out to 900 yards. I wish this could go without being said, but this does not automatically mean that you can accurately hunt at this distance. Long-distance shooting requires an immense amount of research and practice. Even though the best hunting rifles are capable of three-shot groups of .5-1.0 inches from a concrete bench, most shooters will give up one inch when forced to shoot from the ground, and a common 10 mph wind can add one more inch to our inaccuracy. This all adds up to a 9” group at 300 yards - and we haven’t even added in the effect of adrenaline, shortness of breath, frozen fingers, elevation, variable winds, and about a dozen other factors.
-
Beyers
- Hero Member
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 12:41 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Nog een uit selfde artikel
Some real-life proof: For the past two summers Vortex has hosted the Vortex Extreme Challenge, a rifle shooting competition that involves packing your rifle and gear over several miles at altitude and shooting at distances between 200 and 1000 yards. Some of the finest hunters/shooters compete each year sporting some of the best custom rifle and optics packages I’ve ever seen. You’d be hard pressed to ever find a group of sportsmen who are more talented and dedicated to long-range precision. As well prepared as these shooters are, I don’t believe a two-man team has finished the course yet and actually hit more than 50% of the steel targets! Again, they have the best equipment money can buy; they are shooting on the ground but on concrete slabs; they know the exact yardage; they have their own spotter to help with wind doping; and the majority have shot the course before…yet they still miss (i.e. wound) half of their targets. Again, there is a big difference between long-range shooting and being a responsible hunter, and it will never be redundant or cliché to keep mentioning it.
Some real-life proof: For the past two summers Vortex has hosted the Vortex Extreme Challenge, a rifle shooting competition that involves packing your rifle and gear over several miles at altitude and shooting at distances between 200 and 1000 yards. Some of the finest hunters/shooters compete each year sporting some of the best custom rifle and optics packages I’ve ever seen. You’d be hard pressed to ever find a group of sportsmen who are more talented and dedicated to long-range precision. As well prepared as these shooters are, I don’t believe a two-man team has finished the course yet and actually hit more than 50% of the steel targets! Again, they have the best equipment money can buy; they are shooting on the ground but on concrete slabs; they know the exact yardage; they have their own spotter to help with wind doping; and the majority have shot the course before…yet they still miss (i.e. wound) half of their targets. Again, there is a big difference between long-range shooting and being a responsible hunter, and it will never be redundant or cliché to keep mentioning it.
-
Frikkie Coetzee
- Hero Member
- Posts: 2151
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 10:30 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Beyers
Kom kuier een dag vir my en dan wys ek jou dat in n 10 myl per uur wind skiet jy op 300m maklik n groep onder 3 duim. Dis maar 1 moa.
Kom kuier een dag vir my en dan wys ek jou dat in n 10 myl per uur wind skiet jy op 300m maklik n groep onder 3 duim. Dis maar 1 moa.
-
James Wilson
- Hero Member
- Posts: 4596
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:38 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Ek sien die manne is huiwerig om die topic weer aan te vat. Ek sal begin in die gees daarvan om n vorige topic(win270 se plasing) lewe te gee.
Ek is nuuskierig om te weet waarom die manne wat slegs loop en jag doen en dit as die enigste vorm van jag beskou, die nut daarin vind om oor n stokperdjie waaraan ander jagters baie geld en tyd en moeite spandeer afbrekende kommentaar te lewer?
Net terloops, van al die jagte wat ek in n jaar doen is langafstand jag die een wat ek die minste doen. Hoekom? Want ek is na 18 maande se oeffen eenvoudig nie goedgenoeg nie, dit vat te veels te veel moeite in die veld en is die mees uitputtendste van alle jagte.
Daar is tans plase wat cater vir langafstand jagters. Die grootste verskille is:
- dat jy moet jou jag lank voor die tyd boek, sou jy n gemsbok boek moet jy vooruit betaal. Die rede hiervoor is, dat die boere het gou gesien die LA Jagters le tot drie vier dae in opservasiepunt le sonder om te skiet. Bloot omdat hulle nie in hul self seker was dat dit n etiese eenskoot doodskoot sou wees nie( dink bietjie oor watse selbeheersing kos dit nie?). Die boer besef egter hy verloor die tyd, waar hy ander walk en stalk of bakkie of voorsit jagters kon ingekry het. Dus betaal jy reeds die bok voor die tyd. Die meeste LA Jagters sal dan bv 4 dae boek, as hy op die derde nag nog niks het nie, sal hy die vierde dag die bok walk en stalk of van die bakkie of voorsit jag.
- die plase maak ook voorsiening dat jy deur die loop van die jaar die plaas kan besoek(teen betaling) om die opset en die terein op te swot. IN die tyd mag jy ook die bokke walk en stalk om sodoende hulle gedrag te kan bepaal. Die jagonderneming maak dan ook teen betaling topografiese kaarte aan jou beskikbaar.
- n paar plase is ookal so ingerig dat hulle die dominerrende windtoestande dmv die weerburo geskiedenis aan jou kan gee.
As n mens al die aspekte, passie moeite en geld wat die manne insit in ag neem, verdien die langafstandjagter rerig om name genoem te word of deur ander jagters verkleineer te word. Ons vra bloo:t gun ons n plek. Ons respekteer jou manier, doen asb dieselfde aan ons
Ek is nuuskierig om te weet waarom die manne wat slegs loop en jag doen en dit as die enigste vorm van jag beskou, die nut daarin vind om oor n stokperdjie waaraan ander jagters baie geld en tyd en moeite spandeer afbrekende kommentaar te lewer?
Net terloops, van al die jagte wat ek in n jaar doen is langafstand jag die een wat ek die minste doen. Hoekom? Want ek is na 18 maande se oeffen eenvoudig nie goedgenoeg nie, dit vat te veels te veel moeite in die veld en is die mees uitputtendste van alle jagte.
Daar is tans plase wat cater vir langafstand jagters. Die grootste verskille is:
- dat jy moet jou jag lank voor die tyd boek, sou jy n gemsbok boek moet jy vooruit betaal. Die rede hiervoor is, dat die boere het gou gesien die LA Jagters le tot drie vier dae in opservasiepunt le sonder om te skiet. Bloot omdat hulle nie in hul self seker was dat dit n etiese eenskoot doodskoot sou wees nie( dink bietjie oor watse selbeheersing kos dit nie?). Die boer besef egter hy verloor die tyd, waar hy ander walk en stalk of bakkie of voorsit jagters kon ingekry het. Dus betaal jy reeds die bok voor die tyd. Die meeste LA Jagters sal dan bv 4 dae boek, as hy op die derde nag nog niks het nie, sal hy die vierde dag die bok walk en stalk of van die bakkie of voorsit jag.
- die plase maak ook voorsiening dat jy deur die loop van die jaar die plaas kan besoek(teen betaling) om die opset en die terein op te swot. IN die tyd mag jy ook die bokke walk en stalk om sodoende hulle gedrag te kan bepaal. Die jagonderneming maak dan ook teen betaling topografiese kaarte aan jou beskikbaar.
- n paar plase is ookal so ingerig dat hulle die dominerrende windtoestande dmv die weerburo geskiedenis aan jou kan gee.
As n mens al die aspekte, passie moeite en geld wat die manne insit in ag neem, verdien die langafstandjagter rerig om name genoem te word of deur ander jagters verkleineer te word. Ons vra bloo:t gun ons n plek. Ons respekteer jou manier, doen asb dieselfde aan ons
Ek jag miskien te veel, maar dit is nogsteeds nie genoeg nie!
-
Jassie
- Hero Member
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:17 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
James is dit nie maar omdat hulle die heel tyd en gelyktydig besig is met 'n ander speletjie ook nie. Ek noem dit "Me, myself and I", amper iets soos "1-2-3- blok myself" maar elkeen maak, uit die aard van die saak, net self sy eie spelreëls op.James Wilson wrote:Ek is nuuskierig om te weet waarom die manne wat slegs loop en jag doen en dit as die enigste vorm van jag beskou, die nut daarin vind om oor n stokperdjie waaraan ander jagters baie geld en tyd en moeite spandeer afbrekende kommentaar te lewer?
Groete
JAS
"Pas jou jakkalse mooi op om hulle later makliker van kant te kan maak" T. Mulder
-
NEGE3
- Hero Member
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:38 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Langafstand jag is 'n onderafdeling van die sport wat ons noem JAG. Om dit te wil afbreek omdat jy nie daarvan hou nie is soos om vir 'n 800 meter atleet te vertel hy hardloop oneties omdat hy nie die 100 meter in 10 sekondes kan afle nie.
Groete,
Koos de Beer
Koos de Beer
-
Dimitri
- Hero Member
- Posts: 1015
- Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 4:39 pm
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Happy new year to everyone. In 2014, may you and your family be blessed with good health, happiness, prosperity and more special moments shared with your loved ones than ever before.
It is very difficult to discuss this topic rationally. People are sensitive about it and tend to answer aggressively, sarcastically, emotionally and some of the analogies offered don't make sense (to me anyway).
I have had a quick look at Win270's thread and I can't really see that people are trying to ridicule or break down other people on the basis of which method they choose to kill animals. What I can see is that people define hunting in different ways. The definition of hunting varies. And the big fight starts when Person A, who considers himself a hunter, is offended by Person B who puts forward their own definition of hunting which happens to exclude Person A. It seems that there are two camps:
1. Those that believe that hunting is any method of killing animals in the field so long as the killing is done humanely (ethically)
2. Those that have a different opinion about what hunting is and, broadly speaking, feel that fair chase walk and stalk and humane kill should be an essential part of any definition of hunting as a form of recreation.
Personally, I do not define "hunting" as the ethical killing of an animal in the field. When you have sighted in on the animal and you are busy squeezing the trigger, from a humane kill point of view all that matters is that you know your equipment, it is suitable for the job and you have practised and are competent to deliver a one-shot kill at whatever the distance is.
However, it does not make sense to pretend that all the methods employed LEADING UP TO THE SHOT are similar i.to. various skills required, physical ability and equipment required. They are different. And they can be defined differently. And for some of us, some of those definitions constitute "hunting" and some constitute "shooting". That, I believe, was what Dr Lucas was saying in the article that Win270 posted. That he distinguished between a hunter and a shooter on the basis of what happened leading up to the shot.
I shoot pigeons every year. I stand at the edge of the sunflowers and I shoot them as they fly past. I employ no real hunting skill. I look for a good flight path and I hide myself a bit. And then, for the rest of the day I just stand and shoot and only leave my stand to collect downed birds. I consider that particular activity that I engage to be shooting.
When I walk and stalk I consider myself to be hunting.
Someone on Win270's post ask whether they were a hunter or a shooter based on to activities that they described. In my opinion you can be both - depending on the activity. Sometimes you may be hunting and sometimes you may be shooting.
I am a shooter myself so please understand that there is no intention to break anyone down, belittle or criticise anyone. It's just how I personally make the distinction. I respect every persons choice to kill their animal using whatever method they prefer as long as it is humane.
It is very difficult to discuss this topic rationally. People are sensitive about it and tend to answer aggressively, sarcastically, emotionally and some of the analogies offered don't make sense (to me anyway).
I have had a quick look at Win270's thread and I can't really see that people are trying to ridicule or break down other people on the basis of which method they choose to kill animals. What I can see is that people define hunting in different ways. The definition of hunting varies. And the big fight starts when Person A, who considers himself a hunter, is offended by Person B who puts forward their own definition of hunting which happens to exclude Person A. It seems that there are two camps:
1. Those that believe that hunting is any method of killing animals in the field so long as the killing is done humanely (ethically)
2. Those that have a different opinion about what hunting is and, broadly speaking, feel that fair chase walk and stalk and humane kill should be an essential part of any definition of hunting as a form of recreation.
Personally, I do not define "hunting" as the ethical killing of an animal in the field. When you have sighted in on the animal and you are busy squeezing the trigger, from a humane kill point of view all that matters is that you know your equipment, it is suitable for the job and you have practised and are competent to deliver a one-shot kill at whatever the distance is.
However, it does not make sense to pretend that all the methods employed LEADING UP TO THE SHOT are similar i.to. various skills required, physical ability and equipment required. They are different. And they can be defined differently. And for some of us, some of those definitions constitute "hunting" and some constitute "shooting". That, I believe, was what Dr Lucas was saying in the article that Win270 posted. That he distinguished between a hunter and a shooter on the basis of what happened leading up to the shot.
I shoot pigeons every year. I stand at the edge of the sunflowers and I shoot them as they fly past. I employ no real hunting skill. I look for a good flight path and I hide myself a bit. And then, for the rest of the day I just stand and shoot and only leave my stand to collect downed birds. I consider that particular activity that I engage to be shooting.
When I walk and stalk I consider myself to be hunting.
Someone on Win270's post ask whether they were a hunter or a shooter based on to activities that they described. In my opinion you can be both - depending on the activity. Sometimes you may be hunting and sometimes you may be shooting.
I am a shooter myself so please understand that there is no intention to break anyone down, belittle or criticise anyone. It's just how I personally make the distinction. I respect every persons choice to kill their animal using whatever method they prefer as long as it is humane.
-
James Wilson
- Hero Member
- Posts: 4596
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:38 am
Re: Langafstand jag en Etiek
Dimitri, eerstens n uitstekende post. Dit is wel deurdag en baie gematig. Ek het nog altyd afgelei uit jou posts oor ethics, dat jy net een stel reels het, en dat dit jou reels is, en dat geen ander persoon se sienning tel nie. Ek mag verkeerd gewees het, maar dit is hoe dit voorgekom het. Jou laaste post laat egter baie geleentheid vir n lekker debat. Dankie daarvoor.
Sal later saamgesels, net bietjie vas op die oomblik.
Sal later saamgesels, net bietjie vas op die oomblik.
Ek jag miskien te veel, maar dit is nogsteeds nie genoeg nie!
