Purcell Trench manufacturing company
home grills about order contact
Get-A-Grip page (editorial)
It is an interesting social phenomenon that as real knowledge increases, misinformation runs rampant.
INDEX
1. Hiking Poles: In the Spokane newspaper (middle of March 2006) an article entitled "Poles provide balance" suggested a set of the currently popular hiking poles increase efficiency and improve health. The author quoted outdoor equipment sales staff who sell hiking poles. Had he contacted knowledgeable research scientists they would have told a different story.
Human bipedal locomotion is very efficient. Walking is most efficient when you maintain your natural gait and cadence, which occurs when you have nothing in your hands. Walking poles not only decrease efficiency, they interfere with one's normal walking motion and may stimulate stress, discomfort and injury. If you need, or like, support or mechanical assistance to hike comfortably, then use the appropriate support; but don't use poles because it is the current fad, or because a salesman claimed they were "super efficient."
2. Point Blank Shooting: In November 2005, Outdoor Life magazine published an article entitled, "The Perfect Zero", by shooting editor Jim Carmichel. Jim Carmichel is a bona fide shooting expert, but the article is ridiculous.
Jim begins the article by noting a hunter has a lot of information to keep track of and it would make things simpler if you could just put your sights in the middle of a game animal's chest and pull the trigger, whether the animal was near or far or even if there was some wind.
The solution, according to Mr. Carmichel, is a shooting strategy called point-blank zero, or "pipe shooting." The key is to recognize game animals have a vital zone and as long as the hunter puts a bullet anywhere in the vital zone, success is assured. A table and illustration tell the story. In essence, the shooter is asked to raise rifle sights so the maximum top and bottom of the bullet arch stay within the kill zone over the maximum range. Neat trick.
For example: Jim tells us the vital zone of a large deer or elk is 12 inches. You note from looking at the table that the maximum point blank range of the trusty old 30/06 is about 350 yards. However, if you invest in a 300 Remington Ultra Magnum, maximum point blank range stretches to about 420 yards. Naturally, hunters pine for the ostentatious magnum. It is easy to make decisions from the easy chair.
The problem is with the illustration. The line of sight is shown as a straight line. The trajectory of the bullet is correctly shown as an arch, with the bullet rising to pass the line of sight and staying three to six inches above it for a long distance and then, as the bullet slows down, falling back through the line of sight and six inches below the line of sight at 420 yards. The problem is that the path of the bullet is shown as a thin line, too.
In the real world, only one hunter in a dozen can hit a flock of circus tents at 420 yards. But for the sake of argument, let us assume the hunter is a good shot (not a professional sniper or competitive long distance shooter, who can shoot game animals at long range) and has an accurate rifle, and does not suffer significantly from buck fever or flinch from the heavy recoil of the magnum rifle. The chart tells the hunter to sight the rifle so the point of bullet impact is 4.1 inches higher than the line of sight at 100 yards.
Let's assume the hunter can actually shoot a four inch group at 100 yards, in the field, shooting at a big buck deer. At 200 yards the group may be about 8 inches; 300 yards, about 12 inches and about 16 inches at 400 yards. Obviously, even this decent shot has no business shooting at game animals at 400 plus yards, but the important thing to note is the bullet trajectory in the illustration should look like a cone, rather than a line.
Get out a piece of butcher paper and draw a 12 inch circle representing the vital zone of the deer or elk. Then, using the top of that circle as the center of an eight inch circle, draw. Now go to the bottom edge of the 12 inch circle and use it as the center of a 16 inch circle. What you see is most of the shots you take at these ranges will miss or wound the game animal you are shooting at. In fact, over the vast majority of your point-blank shooting range the center of bullet trajectory is more than three inches above point of aim, meaning the top of the cone is out of the vital area most of the time.
Besides, If you are a responsible hunter, you want the bullet to dispatch game rapidly and humanely. The goal is achieved by putting the bullet in an optimal location, not five or six inches away.
The point-blank shooting strategy is unethical and a recipe for failure.
3. Predators: In the same edition of Outdoor Life magazine (November 2005), the double page indoor cover advertisement features Cabela's video game, DANGEROUS HUNTS 2. Large pictures depict a leopard and giant bear in the act of mauling hunters. In his introductory "Journal", Editor Todd Smith speaks out in support of a proposed hunt to reduce bear populations in New Jersey because, "Bears have attacked dogs, swatted toddlers and broken into homes." There is an article entitled, "Survive a Bear Attack." The monthly This Happened to Me feature is subtitled, "Alone in the wild, a trapper is attacked by a coyote."
Outdoor Life is not alone. Almost every outdoor publication I peruse has carried articles about attacks by predators over the past couple of years. Wild nature must be the most dangerous place in America.
Are wolves bloodthirsty killers with a history of gobbling children like candy? In November 2005, wolves in Saskatchewan killed a twenty-two year old geology student. There have been 27 recorded wolf attacks on humans in North America, but only one fatality.
Between 1991 and 2003 in the US and Canada, there were a total of 73 mountain lion attacks and 10 deaths, 5.6 attacks and .8 deaths a year.
In Yellowstone National Park, where hunting is not allowed and visitors may not carry a gun, and where both black and grizzly bear populations are substantial, bear attacks are rare. How rare? Between 1980 and 2002, 62 million people visited the park. Over 15.4 million camper-nights were logged in developed campgrounds and over 956,000 camper-nights use occurred in the backcountry. During those 23 years, bears injured 32 people.
By contrast, about 5 million dog bites occur in the United States every year. 800,000 require medical attention. Approximately 1,000 per day require hospital emergency room treatment. There are about 15 - 20 deaths annually. Financial cost and loss from dog bites exceed $1 billion per year and the problem is growing.
In 2004 (typical year) 42,636 people died in motor vehicle accidents in the United States - about 117 people per day.
I recently spoke to a young man who wanted to fly fish a backcountry river with trail access. He was afraid to hike in and camp because of the presence of large predators.
I frequently have customers ask me about bow hunting in northeast Washington. They want to know if I think it is safe, considering mountain lion and grizzly bear populations.
The short answer: Exercise reasonable caution, but the odds of attack by large predators is minus minimal. The worst wildlife attack I ever saw in the wild was on a solo hike in British Columbia. I met a young fellow alone on a steep trail with ugly bleeding sores on his face and arms. He thought spiders bit him during the night.
Don Tryon, March 2006