Long-range shooting is one of the hottest trends among today's riflemen. In some ways this is really good because it has driven the manufacturers to create a bow wave of excellent new products. We have a whole bunch of fast new cartridges, so many that it's downright confusing, but they're all wonderful. Some of them, at least theoretically, offer more accuracy than the previous generation of belted magnums, and a few offer genuine increases in trajectory-flattening velocity.

We also have a lot of rifles that, right out of the box, offer significant improvements in accuracy. To me this is even better to play with than new cartridges. Hunting scopes and this new breed of "tactical scope" are more rugged than ever, plus--a big plus--they have genuinely repeatable adjustments and a variety of reticles to help judge range and allow a more precise hold at extended ranges.

This is all good, and the best part of it all is that it has given guys like me lots of things to write about. So we've written about long-range shooting, and many of you have done it. With or without the new equipment, you've honed your skills and increased your capabilities until you are genuinely dangerous at much farther ranges than you once thought possible. This is also good; riflery is about getting better, not standing still.

I do have a rub with this thirst to extend the range envelope, however, and that's when it is taken hunting. Don't get me wrong. There are circumstances where long shots are appropriate, and the very word "long" is very subjective. A great many hunters, perhaps the majority, have no business shooting at game much beyond 200 yards. There are others, a minority, who are perfectly competent out to 400 yards and beyond when the conditions are right. There are a very few who, on a calm day, in good light, with plenty of time to set up and think it through, can shoot considerably farther with confidence and reliability.

It is not my place to tell anyone how far he should or should not attempt to shoot at game, so I'm not going to put a figure on how far is too far. It depends a whole lot on the circumstances and the conditions at a given moment, as well as an individual's skill. I can say that, with all the new equipment, I occasionally hear people telling about shooting game at 700, 800 or even 1,000 yards. This is sort of like pornography: It's very difficult to define, but you know it when you see it. I can't precisely define a range limit; it varies with every person, and no two situations are alike. But I can say that I am totally opposed to shooting at game at the ranges mentioned above.

Here's a perfect setup for a long-range shot. The light is good, the game is undisturbed, and a steady rest can be obtained. If the wind is calm, and if you have the equipment and know how to use it, maybe you should take it--if you can't get closer.

Note that I am not suggesting that shooting at such ranges is impractical. Long-range shooting is fun, and long-range competitive shooting is fascinating. Thousand-yard shooters continue to raise the bar, now shooting groups that many of us would have trouble matching at 200 yards. And the stories are just now starting to trickle in about the shooting feats of some of our snipers in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. This is all great stuff, but to my mind it has nothing to do with hunting.

THIS ISN'T COMBAT
The variables that make long-range shooting difficult are the same whether we're talking target shooting, hunting or tactical shooting (which I take to be a euphemism for police and military sniping or preparation for same). The list is long, but it includes knowledge of distance and knowledge of trajectory for the proper hold; adjusting the hold for wind; sheer accuracy, which includes the inherent accuracy of the rifle and load, the shooter's skill and the degree of steadiness and stability that the current circumstances allow; and, finally, pesky little things like shooting angle, light and temperature. Long-range target shooting is a wonderful sport and the best way in the world to learn about these variables. One of the lessons to be learned is what you can do and what you cannot do.

"Long range" is a very subjective judgement. I took this New Mexico elk at about 410 yards. These days some argue that this isn't long range at all. I think it is, especially on a big, strong animal like an elk, requiring near-perfect shot placement.

Tactical shooting for real is the ultimate test. I have never been to sniper school, but I have commanded Marine scout/snipers on numerous occasions. The training is wonderful but no less wonderful than the great shooting these folks have done. Snipers have played an important role in American military tactics since our Revolution, although it has only been in recent years that we have had formal schooling and an official "Military Occupational Specialty" (MOS) for the trade. Some have passed into legend: Timothy Murphy, whose felling of a British general during the battle of Saratoga may well have changed the course of the American Revolution; Alvin York, not a designated sniper but one helluva rifleman; Carlos Hathcock, Marine Distinguished Marksman, whose incredible exploits in Vietnam led to several books.

As riflemen, we admire their skill, but I consider it an exceptionally bad idea to try to replicate their feats in game country. Hunting is not combat. The stakes are immeasurably higher in the latter, at least to the shooter and his teammates, but the two situations couldn't be more different. As hunters, we have an obligation to take our game cleanly, efficiently and humanely. It is preferable to do this with one well-placed shot, but we all know sometimes this isn't possible, so we are prepared to follow up with additional shots until the game is brought to bag. This is not the preferred situation, but it's acceptable. What is not acceptable to any hunter worthy of the name is wounding and losing game.

In combat, the situation is much different. While the military sniper always seeks the best shot he can get, the real goal is almost always to take the target out of the fight. A nonfatal hit is perfectly acceptable under most conditions because most hits will take most men out of the fight, and near-misses will cause a lot of men to rethink their next move. Perhaps more important, in most armies a wounded soldier must be recovered and cared for, which expends resources, takes other enemy soldiers out of the fight and just may expose other targets during the recovery process.

Folks, this has nothing to do with hunting, where the only goal is to take your game cleanly so you can recover it. Let's review some of the challenges in long-range shooting as they apply to hunting situations.