Is Dave on vacation? Reruns from the rag are appearing on my computer, must be a glitch. Either that or he was taken out by a drone... hmmmm the 380 yard miss is starting to make more sense.

I knew he was getting too political for the current state of our union. I guess an IRS audit just wasn't enough to intimidate the nasty old ba$tard.

Probably the most physically demanding North American game animal would have to be just about any of the wild sheep (native species). I always wanted to shoot one. Now that I have the time and money I no longer have the need for the meat. And I don't hold with shooting something just to shoot it. Damned shame I'm so principled. Always wanted to go to Africa too. Sigh!

I don't know where hizzoner DEP chases antelope, but I've never had to shoot any further than about 150 yards.

John Barsness always liked to write about the longest shot he ever made at antelope; with his grandmother's plain vanilla Remington Model 722 in .257 Roberts. 427 yards I think. It's 400+ definitely, with a 7 at the end.

And John's .257 Roberts always shot varmint weight bullets at 3,500 fps and deer hunting bullets at 3,000 fps. And if your .257 isn't making the same velocities, JB would like to see your rifles!

Ontario Honker and principled hunters everywhere - something to think about...

1) When you keep game meat for human consumption, the valuable nutrients from the carcass end up in your septic tank and drain field, never to be seen or used again.

2) When a trophy consists of horns and skull or hide and the carcass is left in the field, the nutrients are spread over the land by nature's clean-up crews to fertilize the land for future generations.

3) Which is the better outcome? Which is the greater waste?

kudukid: "Nutrients" don't just disappear in the septic tank. Most are leached into the soil in the same manner that they are if a carcass is left in the field or when my dog craps on the back yard. The septic system just ensures that nutrients are dispersed safely with harmful bacteria regulated in a controlled environment, something that doesn't always happen with a carcass left in the field.

Ontario Hunter:

Nutrients "leached into the soil" are leached 2 feet under. Guts and bones left in the field are utilized as nutrients in a very short time...not so the meat consumed by us, which is buried forever in our drain fields.

When your dog craps in the fields, that is immediately available to the surroundings.

Hopefully, treated sewage ends up as fertilizer somewhere, but that is not nearly as efficient as being re-used at the point of origin.

Gtbigsky:
Is it really ridiculous or just something you never thought of before? I'm well aware of the universally accepted idea that if a food source of game isn't consumed by people, it is considered a terrible waste. Couldn't it also be a waste if not returned where it came from. Generally the nutrients contained in our sewers is not a good thing when it reaches the outside environment.

Dave,
I've used Walker Game Ears for about 15 years. They've sense changed hands and parts are becoming hard to get. Like you, I won't hunt without the best hearing protection for what little hearing I have left. Thank you for mentioning Magnum Ear. I never heard of them, but I plan on getting a set.
The Game Ears are mainly behind the ear. I'm thinking more about in the ear. Are you wearing in the ear, or behind the ear. I'm curious what style you're using, and why you picked that one.
Thanks,
mikeb

Regarding the question about a proper anniversary gift for the wife - Good God man, guns and cedar chests are great, but give her some fine jewelry; or take her on a trip. She might actually believe you still think she is special.

$1,000 for hearing aid....or $250.00 for Game ear..Hmmmm
New Gun or loss of hearing..Hmmm, I vote for a New Gun, may be the new Rem 1911R1 Carry...Hmmmmm.

Catfish,
Post your question under the 'answers' tab on the main page and you will get a lot more response.

Does anyone know why David P. prefers the heavier for caliber 150 grain bullet for the .280 instead of the more popular 140 grain? I'm sure he has a reason but I have not heard him mention it. I get great accuracy with 140 grain bullets and wonder what the 150 does better that offsets the loss of velocity, even though it is not a lot. I don't see David making the same statement about a 140 grain for the .270. Would like to know what his thinking is.