The Hog Blog

The events of this past weekend got me thinking about the shot I took on that sow as she was trotting fast up the hill. What did I do right and what did I do wrong?  But I want to preface this entire post with a couple of caveats. 

First of all, running shots present one of the most difficult scenarios that might ever face a hunter… especially a hunter with a scoped rifle.  It’s what is usually referred to as a low-percentage shot, which means your odds of placing a clean hit are pretty low.  As hunters with the ethical responsibility to maximize our odds of making a clean, humane kill, that makes this kind of shot somewhat controversial.  With this in mind, running shots are not the best shot option and should probably be avoided when it’s possible. 

The second caveat is that I want to be clear that I do not condone or recommend running shots for everyone.  If you have never practiced shots at moving targets, a living animal is not the right place to start.  For bowhunters, I absolutely believe the only time you should take a shot at running or trotting game is when the animal is already wounded and you need to do whatever you can to stop it.  This basically transfers over to gun hunters as well, although I think that a gun hunter can become proficient enough to make ethical shots on running game.  And that’s the point… it takes practice and skill, but running shots can be done well.

With this conversation, I recognize there’s room for a huge ethical discussion.  Many people believe that you should never take a running shot, period.  Others (like me) think that, much like long-range shooting, it’s OK under certain conditions (a practiced marksman and a reasonable target presentation).  For now, this is about all I will dedicate to the ethical debate.  We’ll save that for the comments.

I am not an expert marksman, by any stretch of the imagination.  At the same time, I feel that I’m pretty proficient, in large part because I practically grew up with a gun in my hand.  I’ve done a lot of shooting, and a good part of that was on moving targets such as running rabbits and driven deer.  I don’t think I took a standing-still shot on a deer until I was in my mid-twenties.  For hunters with this kind of background, the moving shot is simply another opportunity.  It may not be the optimal choice, but it’s a valid one. 

“OK,” you say.  “That’s fine for you lifelong hunters.  What about the rest of us, or those who grew up in places where we couldn’t shoot whenever we felt like it? ”  Read the rest of this entry »

This post was initiated by a comment on an old thread by Rick Pasour.  Thanks, Rick, for a great question and a potentially hot topic.

Here’s what he asked:

Hi Guys- I was looking at the internal organs on a hog and looking at its bone structure with that hard fatty grisel plate over the lungs and heart. So I was wondering if you are shooting a heavy caliber rifle why not slip a bullet into the hogs brain for a humane killing shot. I know you guys and gals must be a true marksman in making such a shot.Wouldn’t this save the hams on both sides of the hog for alot more meat saved than wasted from the bullet damage?

(A lot of what I’m going to write now has been written before, both by me and by others even more skilled at explaining this.  Bear with me if you already know this, and feel free to offer your own input and opinions. )

First of all, as far as I’m concerned there are only two excuses for a meat hunter to lose quality meat, especially from the hams… inexperience and impatience.  There is no other reason to put a bullet into the hams or backstraps.  Wait for the right shot and take it.  Know what your gun and bullet will do, and put that work FOR you, rather than trying to work against it.

As far as head shots, I’ve touched on this before, but the bottom line is that the risks of such a shot far outweigh the possible benefits. 

To begin with, a hog’s brain is relatively small, especially if you’re not shooting straight down on it.  From a normal shot angle, the target area is only a few inches at most (the yellow on this photo is a fairly liberal representation of the target area for a killing, brain shot).  A small deviation in the shot placement can result in a horrible, maiming wound… either destroying the hog’s nose and nasal cavity, jaws, or eyes.  Any of these wounds will result in a long, slow death, and will make tracking and recovery almost impossible.   In short, it’s a really bad choice, despite the fact that there are many people out there who still swear by it.

The argument that a “good marksman should have no problem with that shot” is flawed, because it doesn’t take into account one critical fact.  A target at the range is stationary, while an animal is not. 

It’s not hard for a skilled marksman to put bullet after bullet into a three-inch target, even at 100 yards.  The target will always be in exactly the same spot, at the same distance, and the same angle.  Once a shooter has the mechanics of the shot down, it’s practically automatic.  Level the sights, control your breathing, manage the trigger pull, and you’ll put the bullet right where you want it every single time. 

But a living target, such as a hog, is never completely still.  Animals are in constant motion, and it’s safe to say that no part of an animal’s body moves more than its head.  What’s more, those movements will appear completely random to an observer, so timing the movements and the shot is not realistic.  A prey animal is constantly reacting to visual, olfactory, and auditory stimuli, and all of those reactions result in head movements. 

Not only does the head present a challenging, moving target, it’s also surrounded by some pretty thick bone.  The skull makes the gristle-plate (the shield) look like a sheet of paper by comparison.  There are weak spots on a hog’s skull, but they’re not large.  In addition to the sheer strength of this bone, the sloping angles of a hog’s head make for a tricky impact surface, and can deflect the energy of a bullet strike (much like a car windshield).  I know of at least two, very reliable sources who have bounced high-powered bullets off of a hog’s skull without killing the animal. 

The bottom line is, much better shot options exist.

First, the traditional “heart/lung” shot, when properly executed, is deadly and quick without extensive meat damage.  If anyone saw the video of Kat’s hog, you saw the animal drop on the spot at her shot.  That bullet cut the arteries at the top of the hog’s heart, and also smashed up the ends of the lungs.  Meat loss was limited to about three or four inches on the off-side shoulder. 

Even when the heart/lung shot doesn’t make an instant kill, it seldom requires extensive trailing.  Damage to the cardiopulmonary system cases death pretty much without exception, robbing the body of oxygenated blood and usually filling the lungs with blood.  Life systems shut down quickly after that. 

There are two key reasons why this shot is so often effective and highly recommended.  First off, the heart/lung area offers a large kill zone (about 8-inches on an average sized hog), and this is the part of the animal that offers the most stationary target.  Legs and head move constantly, but the chest area tends to be fairly immobile, or to make large steady movements so that it’s easier to hit.

The second reason is simple familiarization.  Almost every hunter has been indoctrinated with the image and idea of the heart/lung area.  The image is emblazoned onto our minds by magazine articles, hunter education materials, videos, and even hunters’ conversations.  We know where this spot is, and that knowledge allows us take aim and make a shot without the second-guessing and doubts that can cause many hunters to make a bad decision.  As I tell clients and newer hunters, “Just put it behind his shoulder, and give him hell.” 

As far as the gristle plate, if you’re using a good bullet and sufficient caliber, you’ll kill the animal.  The exception might be with a truly large, old boar.  With a hog like this, the recommendation is to think like an archer.  You want to hold your shot until the animal offers a quartering-away angle, and then you can place your bullet behind the last rib, angling forward into the vitals. 

There is another option that I really like… the neck shot. 

This one is also a bit controversial, but I think the problem is more a case of a lack of understanding of the animal’s physiology than anything else, along with some failure to understand that you have to make an educated decision when you choose your shot.  The neck shot is a great choice under the right circumstances, but not so great when things aren’t ideal.  That’s when you either choose not to shoot, or fall back on the heart/lung area. 

On a hog, the kill zone for a neck shot is almost as big as the heart/lung area.  Put a high-powered bullet in that zone, about halfway between the base of the ear and the point of the shoulder, and it will kill the animal where it stands.  You’ll sever the spinal cord, effectively shutting down the animal’s central nervous system.  Vital body functions will stop almost instantly.   

You will not have to track a neck-shot hog.  If it runs off, it’s because you missed.  There is a large margin of error on the shot.  Too high, and you’ll sever the brain stem or hit the brain.  Higher than that results in a miss.   Too low and you’ll sever the windpipe, carotid artery, or jugular vein.  Lower than that is a minor flesh wound or a clean miss. 

Meat loss with a neck shot is generally minimal.  You will probably lose some of the neck roasts, but that’s a small price to pay in exchange for a quick, clean kill. 

NOTE:  The neck shot requires a proper angle and a steady rest, however.  It’s still close to the head, so if you’re not stable enough you risk hitting the jaw or nose.  The solution is simple.  Don’t take the shot.

And that’s the bottom line any time.  If you’re not comfortable that you can put the shot right where you want it, then don’t shoot.  It’s a discipline that any hunter should master, but far too few have bothered to do so.  As a result, you see bad shots taken in haste or out of desperation.  Something I absolutely hate to hear from any hunter is, “It was the only shot I had, so I had to take it!”

A sport hunter never has to take a shot… never!  The simple fact is that none of us is going to starve if we let the animal get away. 

We may be disappointed, or we may be harangued by our hunting buddies, guides, or other observers, but we are not going to go hungry.  Sure, we may have spent a lot of money for a hunt, only to be faced with a do-or-die shot opportunity.  It could be the trophy of a lifetime.  But it is NOT a matter of life and death to us.  It is, on the other hand, a matter of life and death to the animal. 

We are not out there because we have to be, we are out there for sport, and it is only ethical and right that we do the best we can to make the death of any game animal as clean and humane as possible.

Note:  No Hogs Were Harmed or Hunted In the Writing of This Post.

The other day over at Jesse’s Hunting and Outdoors forum, one of the members was asking for advice about buying a new, high-tech choke for his duck gun.  It immediately occurred to me to ask why he thought he needed this special choke, and what was wrong with the one he had.  Was the factory choke too tight, or too open?  Why was he interested in spending some pretty good money on something that may or may not make any difference whatsoever?  What did the shot pattern look like? 

He didn’t know.  In fact, based not only on his own responses, but those of some other members, patterning a duck gun was a relatively new concept.  Sure, lots of folks take their duck guns to shoot clays in the off season.  That’s good, for sure, and every shotgunner should spend time at trap, skeet, or sporting clays.  But I don’t think there are many waterfowlers who have ever spent any time with a patterning board, and even fewer who have spent enough time and ammo testing their shotgun’s performance on stationary targets at various ranges (turkey hunters are a whole different ball game). 

This came up again, sort of, in NorCal Cazadora’s recent comments on my recent duck hunting post (sorry to pick on you, Holly… but I mean well).  She’d shot and wounded a scaup.  She chased it down and finally had to resort to a finishing shot at very close range (about 10 yards, by her estimate).  Anyone who’s ever shot much with a scattergun knows that a load of shot at that distance can make quite a mess, and apparently this one did some real damage to the near side of her bird.  I suggested that next time she just go for the head shot, to which she replied that she would, but she wasn’t sure where to aim to get the bird’s head in the edge of the pattern without pulverizing the  body (To quote her directly and correctly, she wrote: “If I were better at this, I’d’ve tried to aim more precisely to put the duck at the edge of the pattern. But I’m not that good yet.”). 

Fair enough.  It’s also fair to mention that Holly doesn’t have two barrels on her shotgun (which is a shame, but hey… there’s no accounting for taste), so she can’t pick one choke for close shots and another for long ones. 

In my example to Holly, I mentioned using the full-choke barrel of my double.  I know that, from this gun with the loads I shoot, the pattern at 10 yards is still roughly the size of a grapefruit.  If I used the modified choke barrel, the pattern would be a little smaller than a volleyball at that distance.  I would confidently make that head shot with either barrel, because I have seen, many times, how this gun will pattern at that distance.  I also know that full choke or modified choke are fairly relative terms, and that my Mossberg 500 with modified choke barrel and using the same loads will shoot a pattern almost as large as a basketball at 10 yards, and Kat’s Remington 870 with the modified tube installed spreads the shot somewhere in between the other two.  Now, of course the difference between myself and Holly is that I’ve been doing this for most of my life, while she’s just coming to the sport. 

Point is, I had the opportunity as a youngster to spend hours in the field with my guns and little supervision, and as a result had the opportunity to “experiment” on many things.  For example, I learned by trial and error exactly how far away I could stand and still cut a three-inch diameter pine tree in half with a load of low-brass #6 shot.  I found out that, at 60 paces with that old Mossberg and a load of 00 buckshot, I could put about half of a load of 00 buckshot (2 3/4″ 00 has 9 pellets) in the door of an old Volkswagon Beetle, but at 100 yards I was lucky to land two pellets on the entire side of the car.  The outcome of these experiments is that I became very proficient and confident with my guns so that a headshot on a crippled duck (or a healthy turkey) doesn’t really even get a second thought these days. 

Now none of this is meant as a brag or anything.  Lord knows I’m no Phoebe Mozee!  What I’m getting at, though, is that the best way to become proficient with your gun is to go out and use it. 

I got my experience running the woods and shooting up trash piles, but I realize that may not be practical or practicable these days with urban sprawl and nosy neighbors.  Still, people in more urban environments can get the same experience by toting a few sheets of cardboard and a Sharpie out to the range.  Mark some circles of varying sizes, set ‘em up at different distances and have at it.  The standard patterning board is a 4×4 sheet with a 30″ circle drawn on it, and then shot from 40 yards.  My recommendation is to use that 40 yard target as a basis, but to shoot from all realistic distances… a lot.  At what distance does your shot pattern open up completely (each pellet makes a separate hole)?  Does your gun shoot to the point of aim (most shotguns don’t)?  Is it high or low, left or right?  Is it significant enough to get your gun adjusted?  Understanding your pattern at different ranges can really make you a better shot, and help you to figure out what’s going on when you miss. 

For this kind of practice, it’s best to use the ammunition you’ll be hunting with.  I know, at $2/shot for some of this stuff, who can afford it?  I’ve got to say, if you’re really making a commitment to the sport and want to maximize your (and your gun’s) potential, it’s worth it.  Once you’ve patterned your gun, you can practice with cheaper ammo. 

You can also practice, as I still do sometimes, after a hunt when there’s not much else to do but go home.  You’ve already got the gun.  You’re already out in the boonies somewhere.  Why not take a little practice session?  Didn’t bring some cardboard?  No worries.  Shoot some trash before you pick it up.  What will your gun do to a plastic soda bottle at 10 yards?  It’s about the same size as a duck’s head and neck.  Find out!  How many holes can you put in that beer can at 40 paces?  Go for it!  How many empty shotgun shells can you knock over with one shot?  Only one way to find out!  Can you stack two cans and only knock off the top one?  Give it a go from 10 steps, then back up and try again at 30! 

Most BLM and National Forest land in the west allows visitors to target shoot, as long as they’re shooting safely and cleaning up behind themselves (another topic for another post some day).  I like to do it as I’m cleaning up behind someone else.  I always pick up trash from the trailheads and campsites anyway, and it always gets me a little aggravated that some idiot left it there, so why not take out that aggression on the garbage as I go?  I don’t spend as much time testing the pattern anymore, because I’ve pretty much got it down, but the trigger time is good for me… and it will be good for you too.  (By the way, bowhunters, I do this same kind of thing when I’ve got my bow and a few judo or field points.)

Safety first, of course, and always check the regulations for the specific location in advance.  Also, for this kind of shooting you don’t have to use the high-dollar ammo.  I use whatever I’ve got in the truck… bird shot, old steel shot, etc. 

Shooting is like any other skill requiring muscle memory and hand-eye coordination.  The more you practice, the better you’ll get.  But practice with a purpose, and I think that’s particularly critical with shotguns.  Unlike a rifle with a single, realtively large projectile, you are trying to make the best of a swarm of tiny projectiles.  Sure, all you need is the “golden BB” to kill a bird, but optimizing the whole swarm to do your bidding is the real goal of shotgunning and really pays dividends when you have to make that close range killing shot, or if you have to get your retrieving dummy down out of a tree.

Most of you, like me, are just about at saturation with the Summer Olympics.  Yeah, they’re still thrilling, but there’s only so much you can watch… especially if you’re watching on network TV and listening to the banal observations of the “experts” and announcers.  The only way I can bear it, sometimes, is just to remember the announcer in Christopher Guest’s mock-umentary,  ”Best in Show“.  It reminds me to see the humor above the annoyance, and I get by… but barely.

But what I’m not getting enough of in the televised coverage… actually, what I’m not getting ANY of on network TV… is the shooting sports.  Archery, pistol, rifle, and shotgun events have been part of the games for ages, but in recent years televised coverage has dropped to nil.  Some folks believe there’s an anti-gun/anti-shooting sports reason for this lack of television exposure.  I’m not sure I completely buy that.  The more logical argument put forth by the networks is that these aren’t really crowd-pleasers and they don’t generate enough attention to merit coverage… which amounts to the fact that if they don’t generate enough advertising they don’t rate air-time.  I guess that’s valid enough, since TV is all business.  But it still grates on me. 

Another reason you won’t see a lot of the shooting sports on US network TV is that the US has generally been fairly tepid in the Olympic shooting sports.  Our shooters put up a great effort with an occasional stellar performance, especially in the shotgun sports, but we’re often outgunned by other marksmen (and women)…particularly the northern european countries.  That makes it tough for some of the flag-waving crowd to get behind, but dammit, these shooters are all the BEST IN THE WORLD!  That’s how they got to be at the Olympics in the first place!  They ALL deserve recognition and coverage.  I believe that’s sort of the point of the Games.

Anyway, since you won’t hear a lot about this in the mainstream, I just thought I’d let ya’ll know that so far the U.S. shooters have taken three medals.  There are still some events left, including a couple where our team should make a good showing, but for now we have the following:

Women’s Skeet – Kim Rhode won the silver following a three-way tie and shoot-off for the gold. 

If I remember correctly, this is Kim’s third or fourth Olympic medal, going back to the 1996 games where she won gold as a 17 year-old competitor in Women’s Double-Trap!

Women’s Trap – newcomer Corey Codgell took the bronze medal. 

As the press-releases tell, Corey wasn’t even expected to make the team this year, much less medal in the events.  As a brand-new face at the Olympic Shooting Camp, she was just there to learn more and train fo the 2012 games in London. 

Following a pretty awesome performance in the qualifications, and in other key shoots, she suddenly found a spot on the team and with this bronze medal win, made her own mark in the annals of Olympic history.

Men’s Double Trap - Glenn Eller took the gold, and set a new world record in the process… 190 out of 200 targets! 

This is Eller’s third Olympics, and his first time on the Podium.  As of right now, he shows promise to be there again in London, four years from now. 

You can learn a lot more about the US Shooting Team by going to the USA Shooting website.  Read up on the program, and the participants, then find out what you can do to help this great organization continue to bring us even more world-champions. 

There’s a lot of great stuff going on in Archery too, and as that competition begins to gel, I’ll bring you a salute to some of America’s (and the World’s) best archers! 

In the meantime, I just want to recognize the intense drive, determination, and dedication these shooters and archers have demonstrated in order to get where they are.  This isn’t the kind of thing you just learn to do overnight. 

Something gelled for me the other day.  I’ve been pondering for a while, and when I shot that buck a couple weeks ago it came together.  This past weekend, when I checked the zero on my .325wsm, I decided it was true…

I believe that my bowhunting and practice has actually improved my skills with the rifle.  Here’s the deal.

I’ve been shooting guns for as long as I could hold one up.  For a long period of my life, I was able to grab a gun and go out behind the house to shoot to my heart’s content.  As a result, I became a pretty good marksman.  Like many country kids, my friends and I would have “shoot-outs” and pick apart the tiniest targets we could come up with.  One of my favorites was to cut kite string. 

Since moving to the city life, I’ve often bemoaned the fact that I don’t get those shooting opportunities anymore.  The closest place to shoot is a public range about 45 minutes from my house.  It costs about $15 to shoot there, and while it is a nice facility, it’s very strictly run and managed.  You can shoot from the benches, or you can shoot from hunting positions… but to do so you are working on a concrete platform with other shooters on benches on either side of you.  It’s not real comfortable.

Anyway, I’ve been concerned that my shooting skills were suffering. 

A few years ago, I started shooting a recurve bow.  I practiced a ton with it, right in my backyard (although that’s technically illegal in city limits, no one has complained).  I work hard on form, on visualization, and on repetition.  I am no Robin Hood by any means, but I’m comfortable enough to hunt with it and can consistently put my arrows into a “kill zone” on the target.

Anyway, at the range a while back I was a little surprised at how tight my shooting was, even though I hadn’t fired the rifle in months.  When I shot my deer in August, and then this last one, I was very confident in the shot, and it went exactly where I pictured it. 

That’s where it all came together.  I was applying my archery skills to the rifle, and it makes perfect sense.  Archery is all rooted in consistency and focus.  Every movement must be measured and careful.  The release is nothing more than an extremely calculated form of trigger control.  Picking a spot (“aim small, miss small”) is emphasized in archery, especially traditional archery, far more than it is in rifle marksmanship, but when you apply that level of focus through a telescopic sight…  it pays off, big. 

So I’m wondering if any of you other bowhunters have experienced the same transfer of skills to your firearm shooting. 

Wow, this last poll has been great!  50 responses, and a pretty wide gamut of favorite calibers for hog hunting.

There were some interesting choices (and a couple of jokers) in the mix, which is part of the reason I asked the question.  Even discounting the .22short and the .416 Rigby (and probably the .17hmr, although I know there must be somebody out there…), the choices were fairly illuminating.  By the way, if the person who voted for the 22-250 is reading this, can you just let me know (by comment or email) if you’re in Texas?  That seems to be a real popular round there. 

As I mentioned before, I was a little surprised to see how close the .270 came to the 30-06, while the .300win mag seemed to trail more than I’d expect. 

Anyway, the responses seem to be slowing down a bit, so I figure maybe it’s time for a new one.  Check it out on the right, and let’s see where this one goes.

What is the “perfect” hog rifle?  Is there such a thing?

It’s just like me, I suppose, to ask a question that I really can’t answer…at least I can’t answer definitively.  I do, however, have some ideas and opinions. 

The first prerequisite is a rifle that shoots accurately.  If you can’t hit a hog cleanly, in the vitals, then nothing else is really very important.    The only variable in the rifle’s accuracy should be the shooter (YOU). 

Unfortunately, this doesn’t narrow the field very much.  There are a LOT of accurate rifles on the market today.   You don’t have to pay a fortune for a good centerfire that will consistently shoot MOA groups with the right ammo.

But accuracy isn’t much good if the gun doesn’t have enough power to cleanly kill the animal.  Hogs are tough, and I’ve seen some hogs absorb hits from a 30-06 without so much as a flinch.  I also know of (but have never witnessed) a lot of guys who claim instant, clean kills with much lighter calibers than I would ever dream of… stuff like the .243, .22-250, or even the .223 (5.56). 

There can be a lot of factors, but I believe that if you must err, err on the side of caution.  I prefer not only the possibility of a clean, quick kill, but also something that’s going to create a significant blood trail, in the event that the shot doesn’t go quite right and I have to follow the animal.  I also want something that will penetrate the thick bones and shoulder plate of a big boar. 

With that in mind, I generally recommend the more powerful .30 caliber rifles.  The .308, 30-06, and .300 Winchester Magnum are well represented in recent “Favorite Hog Caliber” poll for good reason… they’re effective under almost all conditions, and from big boars to “meat hogs”.  Of the three mentioned, the 30-06 is well known as one of the most versatile hunting cartridges of all time, and if someone asked me what rifle to get for hunting everything from coyotes to moose, that would be the one I’d choose. 

The .270 got a lot of votes on that poll too, by the way… and it’s a great caliber… ideal for deer and antelope, good for hogs, and acceptable in a pinch for elk.  I wouldn’t advise anyone against the .270 if they asked, but it wouldn’t be my own first choice.  There are several other sub-30 caliber rounds that would also be acceptable or even perfect, but the simple fact that they don’t spring instantly to mind tells you where I place them on my personal list. 

So with accuracy and power, what else is there?  What about long-range shooting?

Well, I’m not a fan of shooting long distances.  Most hunters have no business shooting more than 200 yards, even with modern rifles and optics.  They don’t practice those shots enough, and for the most part, they can’t tell the difference between 150 yards and 300 yards.  Almost any of the calibers I’ve mentioned so far would be fine at those ranges.

Hog hunting and hog habitat vary pretty widely across the country… even across the state of CA where I do most of my own hunting.  I’ve shot or shot at hogs at distances ranging from about 10 yards to over 225.  For that kind of wide variety, I like a quick-handling rifle that’s chambered in something that will stretch out, but won’t just punch through or blow-up on the close-range shots.  (Actually, those surprise close-ups are the reason I carry the .44mag revolver…)

If I were hunting a place with more close shots, such as the Hawaiian jungles, then an open-sighted, close-range levergun, like the Model 94 Winchester, in .30-30 would be an excellent option.  A semi-automatic carbine chambered in something like .308 or 30-06 would also be good, although I feel that semi-autos tend to encourage spray-and-pray shooting… especially in less experienced hunters. 

Speaking of action types, which one is “best”?

That’s partly a personal choice and partly a question of hunting style and habitat.  Back east, I was a really big fan of lever-actions.  My little 30-30 was perfect for the swamps and pocosin, where I often had to shoot fast, and have a quick back-up.  Some folks say a levergun isn’t as accurate as some other action types, but I have a .243 BLR (Browning Lever Action) that would put a quick stop to that kind of talk. 

As I mentioned, I’m not a fan of the semi-autos, although they are pretty popular in some parts of the country.  Pump-action rifles are pretty cool and useful in the same applications as lever guns.  Unfortunately, this configuration never seemed to catch on in big-game rifles, and I believe the Remington 7600 and variants is about the only option available there. 

Since moving to the West a little over a decade ago, I’ve become a big fan of bolt action rifles.  While there can still be a lot of quick action in tight quarters, we also have a fair amount of longer range shots.  Quick follow-up doesn’t seem to be as important here.  Bolt actions are also generally the most reliable and accurate under a wide variety conditions, and they’re available in a huge array of calibers and configurations.  

There are a few other choices, of course.  Single-shot rifles like the Ruger #1 and the NEF Handi-Rifle occasionally show up in the field.  However, even a well-hit hog sometimes needs more than one bullet, which puts the single-shot at a little too much of a disadvantage for my tastes.   Double rifles are pretty cool, and I’d love to have one.  However, the price and selection is a big limiting factor there.

So, with all that said, where does that leave us?  Well, in my own opinion, “perfect” is way too much of a limitation.  Perfect in the chemise or a deep, southern swamp may not be the same as perfect on a high, western ridgetop.  Even so, if I were pressed to make a choice knowing that someone might take my choice as advice, I’d go with a bolt-action rifle, chambered in 30-06. 

Since I already have one of those, though, my most recent acquisition is a Browning A-bolt, chambered in .325wsm.  That’s a lot of gun, but it will serve dual-purposes as a primary elk and hog hunting rifle. 

Here’s my newest hog-slayer, a Browning A-bolt stainless stalker. It’s a bit of overkill for hogs, chambered in .325wsm, but it shoots and handles like a dream. It’s light as a feather which will be great for trekking across the ridges and canyons, and has plenty of “oomph” when the time comes to make the shot…whether at 30 yards or 300.

What else goes into making a “Hog Rifle”?   What are YOUR prerequisites?

Not a lot going on this week since I’ve been pretty focused on my “real job”.  As a result, I’ve been kind of struggling to come up with titillating tales of tall trees, tough targets, and other alliterative miscellania. 

Anyway, I did find a cool new blog to visit the other day.  Jon Bryan sent me a note to mention how he enjoyed reading some of my stuff, along with an invite to come see his blog, Outdoor Odyssey.  I did, and I really found some great writing.  Check it out if you get a chance. 

Also got a kick out of Rex’s latest tall-tales over at the Deer Camp Blog.  I love his writing and his sense of humor, but I really would’ve thought he’d have killed one of those Mississippi long-beards by now.  Heck, his pops can do it!  All of his readers can do it!  But why can’t Rex kill a turkey?  And don’t buy his excuse of having to go help Othmar move right at the peak of the season! 

Hope I can offer a little more substance with my next post, but in the meantime…  hey, you got what you paid for. 

It’s not something you can just scratch and make it go away.  You can’t spray Bactine on it, or take some antihistamines to clear it up.  It’s worse than mosquito bites on top of poison oak, and it never goes away.

I’m sitting here this morning, eaten up with it.  I know I need to get to work, but all I can think of is hog hunting. 

My thoughts drift from actually chasing the hogs, to all the preparation I could be doing right now. 

My “new” hunting vehicle needs some work, since the brake lights and turn signals appear to have come unwired.  I also want to look into replacing the springs on it, so it doesn’t rattle my teeth quite so bad on the slightest pothole.  And, as much as I’d like to delay it, I need to go see if it will pass the CA Smog test, so I can complete the registration process.  I also want to look into getting a vanity plate for her.  Her name is Petunia.

There’s a big part of me as well that just needs to get out of the bloody office and into the field.  I know that envy is one of those seven deadlies, but I can’t help being a little jealous of the folks who make their living in the outdoors.  Game wardens, biologists, full-time hunting guides and outdoors writers.  Here’s what I really wish my office looked like:

Anyway, I guess I’m not feeling too bad about it.  At my weekly chiropractor visit yesterday, I got to talking to the Doc.  I’ve convinced him to join me at Tejon over the Memorial Day weekend.  This’ll be his first hog hunt, and he’s gone all in about it.  Every time we get together now, a good part of the visit is spent discussing gear, hunting strategy, ammo, and anything else related to hunting. 

The itch is contagious, and now that I know I’ve passed it along, it makes my own case much more bearable. 

When I was a kid, growing up in the semi-rural south, I was seldom in the woods without my BB gun, and later my .22 rifle.  I shot a lot, at all kinds of crazy targets, and almost always from offhand positions.  My buddies and I would often gather at some of the many trash dumps in the local woods, and compete against one another.  One of the contests I remember most vividly was to hang something from a piece of kite string, and try to cut it down.  You might be surprised at how often we could clip that string on the first shot. 

As a result of shooting like that, my friends and I became a pretty danged good marksmen.  We honed those skills picking off bushytails from the tops of the oaks and hickories in the swamps and bottoms, and found it easy to transfer that ability when it came time to pick up the deer rifle.  The deer rifle kicked harder, and cost more to shoot, but barring the occasional flinch from trying to use too much gun, we were just as deadly with the centerfires as we were with the .22s. 

Where’s this all going?

So I haven’t been keeping up with Dave Petzal’s blog lately, but since I have a down day today (raining and slow at work), I had a chance to catch up.  He had this great post about improving your marksmanship a couple days back, and it’s worth a read.  I couldn’t agree with anyone more…not that someone of Dave Petzal’s stature really needs validation from someone like me. 

My standing advice to anyone who wants to become a better marksman with their big game rifle is exactly the same as Petzal’s … Get a  little gun.  A .22 LR is easy on the budget, and easy to find.  Just use one that offers some pretty reliable accuracy.  Most of the .22 bolt actions are good, and it may be worth it to spend a bit more to get something like the CZ American or something of that class.  I recently bought one of the .17 HMR rifles from Savage (I’m a big fan of Savage rifles), and I’ve never had so much fun with a rimfire.  A benefit of the .17 is that you can practice accurately out to 100 yards, as opposed to the more limited accurate range of the .22 LR. 

Whichever way you choose to go, get the rifle and scope it.  Use a quality hunting scope if you can afford it.  If it’s the same scope as your hunting rifle, that’s a bonus.  Otherwise, get the best you can afford.  This is serious practice for big game hunting, not simple plinking.  You’ll benefit from better glass.

So anyway, once you’ve got a good rimfire and have it shooting well, then start shooting the heck out of it.  Practice field shooting, from all the positions you would expect to use.  Plan to burn up a brick or two of ammo every month.  It’s not that hard to do, since most shooters can’t seem to stop blasting away with the little guns.  It’s cheap, it’s fun, and it’s painless.   And when the time comes to place your crosshairs on that trophy deer, elk, or whatever you’re shooting… taking the shot will be like second nature.