Tag: đặt h

Conditions were perfect for a stalk. The hunters followed a little ridge for cover until they got to a rock to hide behind. There was only room for the client to crawl atop and, when he did, the bear was only 15 yards away. The first shot tore through the animal’s shoulders. The bear stood up on its hind legs and stared downstream looking for whatever had hurt him. Another shot or two and the bear was down. He wasn’t quite the biggest Baertle had taken but, he was close. The old boar measured nine and a half feet with a skull just shy of 26 inches.

A few days later, Baertle brought the bear’s skull and hide to be sealed by Fish and Game in Juneau. The biologist saw the collar scar and hole in the ear where there had once been a tag and realized it was a “research bear.” Afterward, Baertle went to FedEx and was about to ship the hide and skull to a taxidermist when Fish and Game called asking if he could come back. Baertle complied, and when he walked into the office he found brown bear expert LaVern Beier waiting for him. Beier had participated in capturing and collaring around 250 brown bears on Admiralty Island. Even though this bear was killed a little outside of Fish and Game’s roughly 140-square-mile research area, Beier knew it was one of his bears. For every bear he captured, Beier had taken meticulous notes and photos so if he encountered that bear again, he’d be able to identify it. Beier examined the hide and skull, noting the teeth were cracked but still in fairly good shape. He spent two days going through his notes. What Beier figured out surprised everyone, including himself, and made him reflect back to the beginning of his career.

Bear Man Beginnings

In 1970, when Beier came to Alaska at the age 17, he had no inkling his life would become intertwined with brown bears. He got talked into, or, as he puts it, “brainwashed” by legendary outdoorsman Bruce Johnstone into forming a trapping partnership with the old timer up the Unuk River. Wise in the way of the woods, Bruce took on Beier as his understudy. In their third season trapping together, Beier had his first life and death encounter with a brown bear while he was trapping beaver. Normally, bears are remarkably tolerant of people and go out of their way to avoid conflict, but there’s the occasional bear that is looking for a fight—or looks at humans as prey. Beier was lined up to shoot a beaver when he heard something behind him. He turned to see an adult male brown bear coming for him. He swapped his .22 for his .338 and yelled to try to stop the bear, but the bear kept coming. It took four shots before it went down.

A few months later, Beier took his first job with Alaska Fish and Game, where his job was to patrol the bays around south Admiralty Island for illegal commercial fishing. All was not well on the brown bear island wilderness. The Forest Service was on the verge of selling off the island to pulp mills to be clearcut. That summer Beier met Jack Aldrich, the creator of the Aldrich bear foot-snare, who’d just completed his third season working with biologists Harry Merriam and Bob Wood on the other side of Admiralty Island. They’d been foot-snaring brown bears to try to get some baseline data before the island was logged. Aldrich and Merriam captured around 30 bears. They had two early homemade VHF radio collars but neither worked. They’d learn the movements of their captured and tagged bears based on where hunters killed them or, if they got lucky, by spotting bears with ear tags in the spring when they were on beaches. A few years later, Aldrich taught Beier the art of foot-snaring bears. Utilizing the Aldrich foot-snare was considered the most feasible methods for capturing bears in the temperate rainforest of Southeast Alaska.

Beier worked for Fish and Game seasonally; he’d trap in the winters and guide bear hunters in the spring and fall. He worked nine years for Karl Lane, a master guide who fought tooth and nail to save Admiralty Island. Beier shares Lane’s conservation ethic and to this day is a staunch advocate for brown bears. He received criticism from some over being both a bear hunter and researcher, but the biologists he worked with supported him.

“I always viewed bear hunting as bear research. There is far more bear watching than bear killing. A lot of biologists don’t know bears being bears. They don’t know bears on the ground. They know bears from helicopters, airplanes and their data,” Beier says.

In 1980, Beier got hired to do brown bear research on Admiralty Island. President Jimmy Carter had protected a significant portion of Admiralty. However, outside the designated wilderness boundaries, the island’s resources were being exploited. The Greens Creek Mine, one of the largest silver mines in the world, was about to be built on the northern portion of Admiralty. In August 1981, Beier, biologist John Schoen and a couple of other researchers went to snare brown bears on salmon streams to get baseline data before the mine went in. It was a big learning curve, and it wasn’t long before Beier was forced to kill a bear in self-defense.

“We wondered if it was even possible to foot-snare and capture bears safely,” Beier says. “We stopped and reassessed what we were doing.”

Some bear biologists at that time doubted they’d be able to track the bears movements across Admiralty with VHF transmitters in the dense temperate rainforest. But still, the team went back to snaring and they successfully put the first VHF transmitter on a bear in Southeast Alaska. They fitted around 10 transmitters on bears that August. Through telemetry flights, they learned many bears were moving into the alpine after salmon runs petered out. Later that September, they successfully darted a brown bear from a helicopter in the alpine—a feat that until then many thought was impossible in Southeast Alaska. They learned a lot, both about brown bears habits and how to work with them. At the time, the drugs they were using to sedate the bears were dangerous for the animals as well as the people using them. It was easy to accidentally kill a bear with drugs. Or, if the bear was not properly sedated, it was easy for a person to be hurt by a bear. There were other unexpected factors to contend with. For instance, once, after Beier and John processed a female bear in the alpine, they left and a male bear came along. The female had been in estrus and when she hadn’t responded to the male’s advances, he killed and ate her.

From 1981 to 2004, Beier captured hundreds of brown bears on Admiralty Island and nearby Chichagof Island. The two islands, as well as Baranof Island, Kruzof Island and Yakobi Island, are part of the ABC Islands. All have similar ecosystems, but Admiralty and Chichagof have the densest populations of brown bears. Beier worked with deer, mountain goats, elk, wolves, as well but brown bears were his expertise. In 2001, he switched from VHF to GPS collars, which turned out to be  game changers. In a good year a researcher might get 12 data points from a bear wearing a VHF collar; with a GPS collar they found they could get 2000 data points in a couple of months. It showed them types of movement they had no idea occurred. It was during this transitional time period that Beier had one of his most unusual and unsettling scenarios snaring bears.

Rogue Bears and Close Calls on Chichagof Island

Twenty years of foot-snaring brown bears had honed Beier’s skills and knowledge. When he would consider setting a snare he’d look for signs of cubs. The worse case scenario was catching a cub, which would enrage its mother. If there was sign of cubs, Beier might not make a set. He also modified the Aldrich snare so that in theory it wouldn’t catch small bears unless the snare threw high on the animal’s leg. Beier made sure there were safe vantage points to check snares from a distance. As he approached a set, he’d sometimes spend an hour watching the bear with binoculars to confirm how well the bear is caught and its general attitude. If there were multiple bears, he needed to figure out which one was in the snare and then decide on the safest plan of action.

“We try to go above and beyond to not hurt animals,” Beier says.

In 2002, the brown bear project leader biologist Jack Whitman, agreed to help a National Geographic film crew try to fit a brown bear with the first crittercam, which would show audiences the world from the bear’s perspective. Beier was on Chichagof Island working with another biologist and they started snaring bears a few weeks before the crew showed up. They had caught and processed around 20 animals when they moved to Kennel Creek to set a few snares. There were some salmon around but the main run hadn’t arrived. The following morning, when the men returned to check their sets they saw a motionless bear caught in the first snare. It’s not unusual for bears to fall asleep in a snare, but after studying the animal with binoculars they noticed flies and then blood. They found the bear dead from bites to its head, lying on its back, its genital area torn up from another bear.

“We were stunned. This was something new. We went down the creek to check the other two snares and, fuck, there was another big dead bear. Nothing consumed. The sexual area torn up again,” Beier says.

They pulled out of Kennel Creek, hoping that when the flood of salmon came in the rogue bear would calm down and become preoccupied with catching salmon. A week later, after the salmon had arrived, Beier and Steve returned to Kennel Creek and set two snares near where the first bear had been killed. They came back the next day and in the first snare there was a dead bear lying on its back with its groin torn-up. The next snare held a big dead female bear that was buried beneath a mound of gravel. Only her front paws stuck out of the gravel bar. The men finally saw the track of the bear responsible.

“Suppose he was the biggest bear on Chichagof? He wasn’t. Maybe an 8-footer. It was not food driven. It was a power thing. I decided if I saw the Kennel Creek Killer, I was going to kill it. I didn’t give a shit if I got in trouble, this was one twisted bear,” Beier says.

The next day the National Geographic film crew arrived and promptly suggested putting a camera trap that could be viewed in real time from a distance on the buried bear. When they returned to where she’d been cached she was gone. There were no drag marks. Beier estimated she weighed between four and five hundred pounds. A bear, most likely her killer, had lifted her clear and carried her off into the forest.

The men left Kennel Creek to go work a creek three miles away, which they assumed would be safer. They made 6 sets, then came back the next day to check them. It was raining hard and the sounds of the rapidly rising creek and vegetation being splattered drowned out most other sounds. Early in the morning, at their first set, they found a bear asleep on a log jam. Once immobilized, Beier noticed she was lactating but didn’t see or hear any signs of cubs. In the early evening, after they finished checking the other snares and processing another bear, Beier began leading the crew back. They were in bear central—it’s not rare for there to be 30 or more brown bears on a mile of salmon stream on Chichagof Island. Beier made sure to give the areas where he’d left the sedated bears plenty of space. In a dense alder patch, Beier heard a bear roar and then charge. It was the first bear that they’d caught early in the day. In hindsight, Beier figured the bear had cubs and was trying to find them. The heavy rain had washed away the cubs’ scent and she was desperate and mad when the crew ran into her. In the jungle like rainforest Beier always carries a machete and he used it to try to hold her off, thinking the residual influence of the drug might make her manageable. Beier was wearing a heavy pack and became tangled up in the vegetation before the bear knocked him down and pinned him to ground. He had to hold his .338 to the side so he didn’t blow his foot off when he fired.

“I lay on that bear and cried. I apologized to her. I lay on that bear as it breathed its last breath. Saying…I was so sorry, we are here to help you not hurt you,” Beier said.

The Oldest Bear

By the time Hans Baertle the hunting guide brought in the hide and skull of the bear his client had killed in 2015, Beier had captured and handled over a thousand bears. He’d survived four brown bear attacks. Based on his involvement with DNA research work, he knew the nine distinct populations of brown bears in Southeast Alaska better than anyone. Of the thousands of brown bears Beier had encountered, Baertle’s bear was special. It was one of the first bears that he had and biologist John Schoen had darted from a helicopter in 1981. A few years later, Schoen and Beier had recaptured the bear and swapped collars. The bear had established its home range just outside of the researchers’ study area, on land owned by a Native Corporation, which explains why Beier lost track of it. The bear was 38 years old, making it potentially the oldest known wild brown bear.

“All the changes he lived through…His home range was initially old-growth forest and then it was all logged. Something like 23,000 acres clearcut. Besides his teeth, he was in great shape. He would have lived a while yet if he hadn’t died from lead poisoning,” Beier said.

Beier retired from Fish and Game in 2016. He’s still invested in bear research and conservation. Among other things, in 2018 he was part of team to that went to Mongolia to study the extremely endangered Gobi brown bear. He’s been working on two books, which many people (this writer included), are looking forward to reading.

Bjorn Dihle is a lifelong Southeast Alaskan. His most recent book is A Shape in the Dark: Living and Dying with Brown Bears.

The “brush rifle” is a commonly used term, but it’s one that’s poorly understood. A brush rifle should be defined by its handling characteristics—a short and handy lever action, pump action, straight-pull, semi-auto, or a scout-style bolt action—and how easy it is to maneuver and shoot in tight thickets at close range. However, many hunters use the term “brush rifle” synonymously with certain cartridges. Specifically, a cartridge or bullet’s perceived ability to bust through bush and briar to take game when other rounds would fail.

“They wanted .35 Remington, brush cutters,” says Hugh Schultz one night at moose camp while our dinner slowly sizzled on the small wood stove.

Schultz, who owned a small store for many years in rural Vermont was talking about the deer trackers who bought ammunition from him. After many years, his memory of local hunters’ favorite deer rifles and ammunition is as clear as the reason they chose them. The trackers often had close but fleeting shot opportunities, often in thick brush. But are some bullets really better at punching through brush? I decided to test 5 different hunting cartridges and a variety of bullet types to find out.

Perceptions About Brush Bullets

It’s common for hunters to suggest that heavy-caliber cartridges with slow, blunt projectiles are the best option for punching through the brush. This seems logical. The more mass a projectile has, the harder it will be for something to knock it off-course—at least that’s concept.

I can’t remember the specific story or issue of Outdoor Life, but Jack O’Connor wrote about the reasoning for using cartridges like the .35 Remington in the deer woods of the late 1940’s and early 1950’s. Like those Vermont deer trackers, the average deer hunter in those days was presented with fleeting shots in thick cover—largely because of how folks went about hunting deer at the time—and the best brush bullets would give you a better chance at connecting.

Studying the Best Brush Bullets

In the October 1957 issue of Outdoor Life, O’Connor wrote a story titled Rifles for the Brush, in which he wasn’t focusing on the handling characteristics of brush rifles, but the performance and deflection-resistance of various calibers and bullets. In his decades of hunting experience, O’Connor had more than a few anecdotes to share about shooting at game through brush, and usually it didn’t work out well.

O’Connor conducted his testing by placing a 100-yard smallbore target (which has an 8-inch black bullseye) behind 15 feet of brush having branches up to 1.5 inches thick. The brush was just open enough so he could see the target through the brush to aim at it and fired from 30 yards in front of the brush (35 yards from the target). He fired five-shot groups with 12-gauge slugs, a .458 Winchester, .375 H&H, .35 Remington, .30/06, .270 Winchester, and .220 Swift. Published diagrams of his results indicate only one group with each load, but O’Connor refers to “a lot of experimental shooting.”

In 2014, Editor Andrew McKean conducted another deflection test, this time shooting through brush with .308 Win. and .223 Rem. loads, and through orchard grass with a .25/06 Rem. and the .223 again. After all, what bullet wouldn’t strike home after going through a bit of grass? McKean’s tests sent bullets through 38 yards of willow brush, fired from 12 yards in front of the brush. He set a target in front of the brush to aim at, and another behind the brush to catch impacts. This way, the deflection due to brush can be measured exactly. He did the same with a patch of orchard grass.

Filling in the Blanks on Brush Bullets

Both O’Connor’s and McKean’s brush testing give us valuable information, and O’Connor concluded that “factors which contribute to bullet deflection are sharp points, fragile construction, high velocity, unstable form, high rate of spin, and light weight.” Factors which contribute to the reliability of bullets in brush are blunt or flat points, moderate velocity, strong construction, stable form, and slow spin.

Considering that the subject of brush rifles and brush bullets is one that’s discussed as fervently today as ever, I decided to conduct a test of my own. I wanted to see if I could verify what O’Connor found in his testing and collect data on the most popular “brush rifle” cartridge of today—the .45/70 Gov’t. Ironically, the .45/70 (which had been around for 84 years already) wasn’t included in O’Connor’s testing and has enjoyed a revival in the past couple of decades.

A newcomer that I also wanted to feel out was the .350 Legend. Winchester’s contemporary straight-walled deer cartridge shoots a .355-inch-diameter bullet, and its 180-grain factory loads are just slightly below the .358-inch-diameter .35 Remington’s 200-grain Core-Lokt loads. Considering the word-of-mouth reputation of the .35 Remington as a “brush cutter,” I wanted to see how the similar .350 Legend would do.

Testing Protocol

In my testing, I split the difference between the tests of McKean and O’Connor. I set up a target frame 50 yards from my firing position (target 1) to provide a consistent aiming point and measure the entrance group. I used butcher paper with stick-on targets to minimize deflection from the target itself. I placed a four-by-eight-foot cardboard wall behind 15 yards of brush (target 2). The brush was on a river sandbar and consisted of live and dead willow and alder, up to 1.5 inches thick. It was exactly the kind of stuff one might expect to see a moose in here in Alaska.

I fired two to three five-shot groups with each load from a .45/70, .375 Ruger, .338 Lapua, .338 Win. Mag., .350 Legend, and 6.5 Creedmoor. I measured groups entering the first target, and at the second target as well. Periodically, I moved the target slightly to provide the most consistent shots through un-broken brush. I noted group size as well as bullets that had tumbled and key-holed through the backing target. I considered a bullet impact “key-holed” if the hole in the target was approximately 50 percent sideways, or more. A slightly yawed bullet could still deliver decent terminal performance, but all bets are off once it really begins to turn sideways. I considered these impacts failures because their terminal performance would be unpredictable.

My first goal was to see if any of these cartridges or loads were truly viable for an ethically minded hunter to take shots through the brush. My second goal was to examine O’Connor’s theories with some contemporary bullets and cartridges. I wanted to see how the same bullet (a .338-caliber 225-grain Hornady CX in this case) would deflect at different velocities—hence the .338 Lapua vs. .338 Win. Mag. I also wanted to see if the supposition that blunt-pointed or flat-nosed bullets would deflect less easily than their streamlined counterparts.

Interpreting Brush Bullet Data

The most important thing to keep in mind when interpreting these results is that every shot taken through brush will produce unique results. Even with the 30 groups I fired through the same patch of brush, no two bullets encountered the same obstacles in the same way.

Putting a solid figure on each bullet’s effectiveness through brush would take hundreds of groups. Even then, it would come with a disclaimer. Unsurprisingly, what I found is that you should never intentionally shoot through the brush unless the animal is already hit, and you must make a follow-up shot. Any bullets can be deflected by almost any brush—some worse than others. O’Connor and McKean both came to the same conclusion, and O’Connor wrote:

“Some bullets are better in brush than others, but all will deflect—even the 300-grain bullet for the .375 Magnum (H&H).”

Brush Bullet Results

O’Connor’s conclusions about what made a bullet more or less likely to be deflected by brush included velocity, twist-rate, bullet shape, weight, and construction. To summarize his results, a round or flat-nosed bullet that’s heavy and stoutly constructed, fired at moderate velocity should produce the best results. On the other side, bullets with higher velocity, lighter weight, more aerodynamic profiles, and higher twist rates should deflect more easily.

Brush Bullet Velocity

From my testing, I concluded that higher velocity could increase deflection, but that velocity alone cannot determine if a bullet will deflect to a greater or lesser extent. Firing the same bullet with the same twist rate at different velocities showed me that the higher velocity bullet did deflect more and have a higher failure rate. To test this, I fired hand-loaded 225-grain Hornady CX bullets through my .338 Lapua at 3020 fps, as well as through my .338 Win. Mag. at 2713 fps. Both rifles have a 1:9.3-inch twist rate. The faster bullets had an average deflection of 2.303 inches and 40 percent of the bullets key-holed (which I count as failures). The slower .338 Win. Mag. load deflected by only 1.236 inches on average, with no key-holes, and only one flyer in 15 shots.

Although the same bullet at higher velocity seems to deflect more, higher velocity does not in-itself mean anything when comparing two different projectiles from the same rifle. In-fact, lighter, faster projectiles performed better for the .45/70, .375 Ruger, .338 Win mag, and 6.5 Creedmoor than the heavier, slower bullets.

The 300-grain Hornady DGX that I’ve used with great success on bears at close range in my .375 Ruger fared poorly when being slung through this patch of sandbar brush. At 2660 fps, they had an average deflection of 3.38 inches, and a failure rate of 60 percent. The lighter, faster Barnes 250-grain TTSX bullets weren’t perfect, but at 2805 fps, they showed a deflection of only 1.46 inches and an improved failure rate of 40 percent.

Shaped and built like the 220-grain .30/06 soft points that O’Connor liked, the Hornady 250-grain Interlock bullets fired at 2615 fps from my .338 Win. Mag. Ruger Guide Gun made an abysmal showing. The bullets will stop a grizzly bear that’s running at you, but not if you’ve got to shoot them through the brush first. These bullets had an average deflection of 3.76 inches and failure rate of 60 percent. As detailed above, the 225-grain CX bullets at 2713 fps did much better.

Even the 6.5 Creedmoor displayed better results with a faster, lighter bullet. Hand-loaded Hornady 143-grain ELDX bullets at 2670 fps would enter the first target in a .452-inch group but scattered to nearly 12 inches through 15 yards of brush, with an 80 percent failure rate. Federal Premium 130-grain Barnes TSX loads at 2825 fps deflected less at 5.228 inches and a slightly better 60 percent failure rate.

Brush Bullet Shape and Construction

O’Connor found through his shooting that blunt, round, or ideally, flat-nosed bullets would resist deflection better than pointed, more aerodynamic bullets. He stated that in the .30/06, the 220-grain bullet is more reliable than the 180-grain or 150-grain pointed bullets. This conclusion wasn’t the case in much of my testing, and I surmise that it has everything to do with bullet construction. O’Connor stresses the importance of sturdy bullet construction because logically, any deformation in the bullet will likely cause instability. A highly aerodynamic bullet with good sectional density might be the most stable, but deformation can ruin that instantly. On paper, the bullets with the best sectional density should be the most stable (and hardest to deflect). However, the lead-core bullets with higher sectional density still seem to deform and deflect dramatically.

In 1957, the sturdiest hunting bullets were those heavy, blunt, or flat-nosed specimens he refers to. I believe O’Connor unknowingly hinted at the reason why my results didn’t reflect his. He refers to some folks he’d known who hunted in brush with full metal jacketed bullets of various calibers. It makes sense that an aerodynamic bullet that resists deformation should do better than a soft-point of the same shape—that’s how FMJ bullets are designed. What was the difference with my testing? Modern mono-metal bullets. In every case that I tried them, monolithic copper/alloy bullets came out on top. Bullets like the Barnes TSX, TTSX, and Hornady CX, as well as the Lehigh Defense .458 Extreme Defense (Black Hills Honey Badger .45/70) all beat their lead-core counterparts in both deflection and failure rate (key-holing).

I don’t believe that the pointiness of the bullet alone is what causes some of them to be deflected or destroyed easily as O’Connor observed. Rather, the fact that spire or spitzer-pointed lead-core bullets simply deformed more easily than blunt ones—and were thus less-stable after contact with a branch or other vegetation. Modern copper bullets expand reliably, but they aren’t as malleable and prone to deform as lead-core bullets. That’s my theory anyway.

Is the .350 Legend a Brush Cutter?

Stories of the .35 Remington’s reputation as a “brush cutter” inspired me to include the .350 Legend in this test. Sure, the .35 Remington out-powers it by a bit in factory loads, but it’s close. O’Connor’s stated, “even the round-nosed, heavy, and relatively slow .35 Remington bullet will show a good deal of deflection and evidence of key-holing when shot through the brush.” Was the .35’s reputation for brush-busting simply exaggerated?

O’Connor’s diagram shows some deflection and a key-holed shot in his test group, and through an additional 12 yards of brush, the .350 Legend didn’t fare better. Both Federal Premium Power Shock 180-grain loads and Winchester Super X 180-grain loads averaged about six inches of deflection, and 60 to 70 percent of the projectiles key-holed.

The .350 Legend is a handy, accurate, and effective little deer cartridge that certainly is comparable to the old .35 Remington, but the stubby, broad bullets don’t have great sectional density and are easily turned off-course by brush. I’d bet extensive testing of the .35 Remington would show the same thing.

What’s the Best Brush Bullet and Cartridge Today? The .45/70 Gov’t

The .45/70 outperformed everything else in penetrating brush and delivering a bullet that’s still flying straight and true—something that will surely inflate the egos of its contemporary fans. I expected the .45/70 to yield the best results simply because of the mass of the bullets, but it exceeded my expectations substantially. With extensive enough testing some other big-bore cartridges might outdo the .45/70, but when it comes to common and available brush rifles today, the .45/70 wins.

The best brush bullet in my testing was the 325-grain, .458-inch Lehigh Defense Extreme Defense bullet. It was in Black Hills Ammo’s Honey Badger factory loads, traveling at 1900 fps. These are solid copper machined bullets with a nose that’s fluted and resembles a Phillips screwdriver. The bullet is designed for zero deformation, and to penetrate deeply. The fluting at the tip is designed to cause cavitation and a wound channel like expanding bullets. I’ve seen bears shot with them, and they are formidable. This load had an average deflection of only 0.63 inches, without a single key-holed bullet in 15 total shots.

Next best was Federal Premium’s Hammerdown 300-grain load. Traveling at 1800 fps, it features a soft-point, jacketed bullet. Average deflection of this bullet was 1.43 inches, and only one bullet of 15 key-holed through the second target. They proved to be substantially more stable than the slower 405-grain LFB loads I tried, which spread to 2.32 inches with a 15 percent failure rate.

Final Thoughts on Brush Bullets

Recognizing the impossibility of absolute conclusiveness, O’Connor closed his story with the following:

“So, about all a brush hunter can do is use the most suitable bullet for his rifle, one that’s round or flat-nose, strongly constructed, and moderate in velocity. Even then he should try to pick a hole in the brush. If he can’t, he’d better mutter a small incantation to the Red Gods and hope for the best. Of all the alibis for missing game, the one that blames the brush or deflecting the bullet is still the best I know of.”

Echoing his conclusions in today’s world, I’d say that those who hunt in brushy country ought to consider copper bullets, especially in bigger rifles. Their less-deformable construction seems to give them an edge compared to even heavier, blunter lead-core bullets.

Summary of Brush Bullet Deflection

What Helps Make a Better Brush Bullet

• Monometal Construction
• .458-in. Caliber
• Moderate Velocity

What Limits a Brush Bullet

• Fragile Cup and Core Design or soft lead point
• Higher Muzzle Velocity
• Sub .458-in. Bullet Diameter

Brush Bullets in Today’s World

Unlike the mentality of the 1950’s, I’d urge you to hold yourself to a higher standard than to just shoot and hope. If you’re hunting with anything in the realm of normal deer calibers, never take your first shot through brush or grass of any kind. The chance of deflection and wounding is simply too high. Wait for a better shot, even if it might mean the animal gets away. Certainly never do it with a 6.5 Creedmoor.

If I were hunting brush thickets where fleeting and obscured shots were common at close range, I would feel relatively comfortable with the .45/70 and the right ammo based on what I’ve seen. Should I still wait for the best opportunity possible? Yes. But the .45/70 does provide a level of forgiveness if brush is encountered, and a much better chance of connecting on a follow-up shot through the wicker. Nothing else in my testing came close.

We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Learn More ›

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jordan Jonas (@hobojordo)

Cole and Jonas, both seasoned outdoorsmen with horse-packing experience and former participants on the popular survival reality show “Alone,” were on their way to meet a group of clients for a survival course at the time of the accident. (Jonas, who won Season 6 of “Alone,” hosts survival and backcountry skills courses.) The horses were loaded down with cookware, camping gear, and other equipment. The area they were riding to was so remote, the clients were flown in on a bush plane while the guides made the 32-mile trek.

The offending horse rolled to the bottom of the ravine where he landed gracefully on his hooves and started eating grass like nothing ever happened. One mare, a large bay named Annie, landed upside-down in a thicket of trees. The white mare, Pearl, wedged herself into the root ball of a dead tree with a broken saddle. During the fall, her saddle pad had scooted under her belly and ultimately protected her from a branch that would have likely “skewered” her.

“It looked really bad. My first thought was that I had a couple dead horses,” Cole told Outdoor Life. “It was tough for me because [those horses] are like family. We work together, we live together, we do everything together. So I was really stressed out. But then everyone was okay. We had an angel on our shoulder.”

Next, Cole and Jonas had to saw open the root ball to free Pearl. Once she was upright, she had to scramble up the steep, sandy hillside back onto the trail. Cole put all his force into her lead rope to keep her momentum upward. He says she let out a satisfied whinny once she was back to safety.

The aftermath of the fall is tough to watch. Cole says the video he posted is both gut-wrenching and useful for showing the less-than-glamorous side of a backcountry job to the general public.

“I’ve never filmed anything like that before, and watching back through it, I’m not sure how I felt. That’s not something I’d typically put out for people to see,” he says. “But I think it’s an interesting side to show people. That’s the reality of working in the mountains. There’s a lot of danger behind the romanticism of being out on horses. It’s a beautiful life and it’s an awesome way to make a living, and it’s really fulfilling, but there’s a downside to the good. You’re going to have accidents like that. It’s not just ‘Legends of the Fall’ or ‘Yellowstone’ where everything’s just happy-go-lucky, pretty horses in front of the mountains all the time.”

In situations like this, Cole says the most important thing to do is remain calm and keep your composure, and pay attention to your surroundings to avoid making things worse.

“At the end of the day, it’s as dangerous for you as it is for the horses,” he says. “Keep your hands clear, keep your feet clear, try to keep yourself out from in between any of the rope or horses and trees, or anything that could come down on you. But the main thing is just to take a step back and breathe.”

Read Next: Everything You Need to Know About Hunting with Horses

As for keeping the horses as safe as possible, Cole’s advice is to not act in a manner that would stress them out more, since humans only have so much control over their horses to begin with.

“If you get freaked out and panic, you’re just going to make a horse wreck into a bigger horse wreck,” he says. “It’s traumatic for the horses, too. They just need a minute to sit there and catch their breath and process what has happened. If they do freak out, you’re never going to be strong enough to grab a 1,200-pound animal and make it hold still. So just take a minute, relax, breathe, and then come up with a logical plan.”

In the video, the buck struggles to walk with the giant, fluid-filled sack impeding its front legs. The growth extends behind the buck’s forelegs, down its chest toward the ribcage, and partially up its neck. It’s hard to imagine this buck lowering its head to drink comfortably, much less feeding, breeding, or sleeping. This wasn’t DePalma’s first time seeing the buck, he tells Outdoor Life, but the growth is relatively new.

“I’m right up against the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, and that’s where I saw this guy,” DePalma, of Littleton, says. “I had seen this buck throughout the spring and summer and at least the early fall, and then he disappeared. When the rut gets going, the bigger bucks come in. He’s not a huge buck, and I hadn’t seen him from early November until Thursday of last week. And all of a sudden I got closer to him and was like, ‘wow, what in the heavens is this growth?’”

The growth is likely a massive seroma, National Deer Association director of conservation Matt Ross tells Outdoor Life. In other words, its a fluid-filled cyst (no, that’s not all pus) that likely resulted from a soft-tissue injury. Since the buck lacked the cyst before DePalma’s last sighting in early November, it’s probably the result of a rut injury.

A seroma is not caused by infection, according to the Missouri Department of Conservation, but is instead the result of blood serum leaking from ruptured blood vessels and pooling under the skin. That fluid often drains away after a period, unless it ruptures and drains externally. In that case, infection is a possibility.

Although the condition isn’t especially rare among deer, it was the first time DePalma has observed it in his decades-long photography career.

“I’ve been chasing mule deer for the last 20 years, and we see bucks bruised up after the season, with blown out knees and ankles, but never have I seen something like this.”

DePalma estimates he was about 20 yards from the buck when he recorded the footage. DePalma did not approach any closer to give the already-struggling deer his space. The buck, which had been bedded, strained to stand then began browsing slowly.

“I didn’t want to overly impede his feeding,” he says. “If he continues on, he’s going to need to feed pretty hard, [especially] if we do get some snow in this area.”

DePalma filmed the buck at about 6,000 feet of elevation. Heavy snowfall has yet to hit the foothills of the Rockies near Littleton. It’s not a matter of if the buck’s life is about to get substantially harder, but when. DePalma points out that the buck looks relatively healthy otherwise, despite his hide being rubbed down to skin in his armpits where the growth is pushing against his legs.

Read Next: Purple Buck with Bullwinkle Condition Euthanized for Severe Symptoms

One commenter on DePalma’s Instagram post said they reached out to Colorado Parks and Wildlife about the buck’s condition and that CPW was monitoring it. CPW did not immediately provide comment.

Crocodile hunting in Tanzania is legal and regulated by the Tanzania Wildlife Management Authority and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism. Crocodiles are just one big game species of many that drive ample revenue for wildlife conservation efforts in Tanzania, the Tanzania Hunting Operators Association points out in a press release.

“Tanzania wildlife Authority (TAWA) has confirmed that the Crocodile was legally hunted by the American hunter Joshua Bowmar using hunting permit MP0001792 in Lake Rukwa, in adherence to the Laws and Regulation governing Tourist hunting and outfitted by a reputable hunting company accompanied by a qualified Professional Hunter and supervision of a TAWA Wildlife Officer,” the press release reads. (Emphasis is original to the release.)

TAHOA is an industry group that represents hunting operators across the country. It was established in 1988 at the request of the Tanzanian government, the Operators and Professional Hunting Association of Africa reports. In its piece, The Citizen included a quote from a TAWA official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“We have seen the video clip. We are investigating and we will give full information to the public only when everything is completed,” the official said. He also noted frustration at Tanzanians who furthered the public upheaval by continuing to distribute the Bowmars’ videos.

It’s not clear which video clip the unidentified official is referencing, although the Bowmars are notorious for posting videos of their hunts that much of the public — including many hunters — consider to be in poor taste. But the real question is often around whether they’re following the law. Their first public controversy erupted in 2016 for attaching a GoPro camera to a large spear and using it to kill a black bear, then posting that footage to their YouTube and social media channels. Under Armour ended their sponsorship deal with Sarah Bowmar and spear hunting was banned in Alberta as a result of the incident. The Bowmars were also sentenced in early 2023 on federal charges related to the Lacey Act for their involvement in a Nebraska poaching ring from 2015 to 2017.

Footage from Bowmar’s crocodile hunt has not surfaced yet. But in captions on Instagram posts with the behemoth reptile, he writes that more content from their latest safari is coming soon and that they captured footage of the hunt.

As for whether the claim of a world record is accurate, official record data for bowhunting crocodiles in Africa is difficult to track down since so few hunters actually use archery equipment to target crocodiles, according to TAHOA. The Bowmars also claimed that Sarah Bowmar killed a world-record crocodile in 2021 and then beat her previous kill with a bigger croc in September 2023. Safari Club International, which tracks international hunting records, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Here’s a look back at some of the biggest bucks we covered this year from all regions of the country.

The Jason Thomas Buck

An Ohio whitetail made news this fall when photos of the giant deer killed by Jason Thomas hit social media. Thomas hunted the buck from the ground, according to his own account: “I made it back to the cornfield and crawled more than 200 yards toward where I thought the deer was bedded. I carried my crossbow, my pack, and the small folding stool. By 12:30 p.m., I was in position and roughly 50 yards downwind of his bed. Now all I had to do was wait and hope my plan would pay off. Two hours later, I watched the buck saunter down the middle of the washout. He was headed my way and closing fast. When the buck got to 30 yards, I eased into a half crouch and raised my crossbow to prepare for a shot, but then he turned and faced directly at me. It seemed he hadn’t busted me because he came even closer through the cornstalks.”

The Hardy Shed Buck

This buck isn’t a state record, but it is a bit of a local legend. Mike Reitz shot the deer with a 20-year-old PSE bow while hunting out of a brush blind. The buck was later rough scored by Pope and Young Ethic magazine editor and co-founder Steven Ashley. It green-scored 212 and 4/8 inches gross nontypical. Interestingly, the buck is responsible for growing the “Hardy Sheds” which, were found in 2022 about five miles from where Reitz later killed the deer in 2023. According to Reitz, that set of antlers scored 236 inches even. Without counting the spread, the sheds scored 219 7/8 inches, according to a video uploaded to Youtbue last year. The sheds are shown to have 28 scorable points, with 18 on the right side, and 10 on the left. It was quite possibly the biggest pair of shed antlers found in the state last year. Read the full story here.

Oklahoma 230

On the opening day of Oklahoma’s bow season, Ethan Kile tagged a buck that he’d chased all through the 2022 season. He shot the enormous buck on a small, 40-acre parcel of private land in Gavin County.

“Friends and I unofficially scored the buck via the Buckmasters system at 229 7/8 gross inches, with 30 antler points you could hang a ring on,” Kile tells Outdoor Life. If the official score comes anywhere close to that 230-inch mark, Kile’s buck would be among the top 10 archery bucks ever taken in Oklahoma. Read the full story here.

Maine’s Great 8

Not all record bucks have scores in the 200s. This giant, old 8-pointer taken by Maine hunter Tim Elsenheimer had a green score of 180 1/8 inches, with a net score of 176 1/8 inches. According to the Maine Skull and Antler Club, Elsenheimer’s buck should go down as the biggest 8-pointer ever taken in the state. The current state-record 8-point, taken in 1973 by Don St. Pierre, scored 168 6/8 inches. Read the full story here.

East-Texas Giant

Reili Brewer sat through a cold, rainy day while hunting this enormous buck that her dad had scouted on the Red River Army Depot. The only people allowed to hunt the army base are military personnel, veterans, base employees, policemen, teachers, and service officials. Eventually the buck came out to feed on acorns and Reili made a 40-yard shot. With a green score of around 240 inches, this 31-point buck stands to set a new state record for the highest-scoring whitetail ever killed by a youth hunter. Read the full story here.

Empire State 180

A 180-class buck in New York state is a rare occurence. So when Jeremy Williams got a crack at this buck during archery season, it’s understandable that he was a little anxious. “I was shaking so bad I missed him clean, sending my arrow three feet over his back,” he says of his first encounter with the deer. But during gun season he made the best of a second chance and killed the deer at close range. The buck has a classic, wide 12-point spread with a green gross score of 181 1/7 inches. Williams says there’s a chance it could be a new Tioga County record. Read the full story here.

South Dakota Moose

This deer might not have a record breaking score, but it does have a truly unique rack. South Dakota hunter, Shauna Woodward nicknamed the buck with palmated antlers “Moose” and eventually shot him with her bow in a cedar grove.

Woodward says Moose was looking a little ragged from the rut and only weighed an estimated 175 pounds. The buck’s unusual palmated rack was still in tremendous shape, though, with at least a dozen points. The estimated 6.5-year-old deer hasn’t been scored yet. A taxidermist who is doing a shoulder mount will eventually take the measurements, but Woodward says the numbers aren’t that important to her. Read the full story here.

Iowa’s Public Land 210

While Iowa is known as a big buck state, it’s not like there are 200-inch deer hiding on every public property, in fact there are diminishingly few. That makes JD Vandenburg’s buck all the more impressive. “It was the last Saturday of bow season and I expected the parking area to be full, but surprisingly there were no vehicles. Still, the number of empty Hot Hands wrappers strewn around was a sign that it had been hammered during the rut, and on my way in I passed a couple of tree stands, a mock scrape, then a Shoot-n-See target hung from an oak tree,” he writes for Outdoor Life.

Eventually Vandenburg shot this incredible buck, which would score more than 200 inches. “If I had to pick out one thing about him that blows my mind is the fact that he’s a main-frame seven. And none of his tines are short. I’ve shot 8-pointers with shorter tines than his last point. It’s just hard for me to believe that a deer like that exists—let alone that I’d get a chance to encounter him.” Read the full story here.

PA Record

Autumn Pierwsza and her dad Erik knew a big buck was hanging around their hunting property north of Pittsburg. Pierwsza, a 16-year-old who has taken several bucks, just needed a chance at the deer in range. She got that opportunity on October 9 and made a great shot on the deer with her crossbow. The buck will rank as Pennsylvania’s No. 1 buck taken by a woman with a crossbow, according to Buckmasters scorer Will Leonard, and number three for crossbow bucks in the state. Autumn’s buck will be mounted, and Erik is delighted that she and her two sisters are dedicated hunters. Read the full story here.

Alleged Poaching Cases

Unfortunately, not all of the noteworthy bucks taken this year have happy stories to go with them. The hunters who killed the following two deer are facing serious poaching allegations and formal investigations.

The CJ Alexander Buck

Crossbow hunter CJ Alexander says he killed this phenomenal buck on his sister’s 30-acre property in Ohio. The state’s Buckeye Big Buck Club secretary Mike Rex gave the buck a green score of 206 7 / 8 inches. If that score were to hold up to a B&C scoring panel, Alexander’s buck would become the No. 3 all-time typical whitetail ever taken in North America, and the No. 1 typical whitetail in Ohio. However, amid poaching allegations surrounding the deer, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources has confirmed that they confiscated the deer from Alexander’s possession and have launched an investigation. Read the full story here.

The Hollywood Buck

Jason Walters reportedly shot this massive nontypical buck and then sent the photos to a Virginia deer hunting Facebook page. Dozens of people identified the deer as the Hollywood buck, a well-known deer with distinctive antlers that lived in and around the Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, Virginia. The trouble? Hollywood Cemetery lies roughly 70 miles northeast of where the man, Jason Walters, claimed to have shot his buck. People began contacting the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources, accusing Walters of poaching it from Richmond city limits. Two additional bucks Walters claimed to have killed have also been identified by locals and wildlife photographers as living in the cemetery. Read the full story here.

They go by many names: coydog, yodel dog, song dog, trickster, brush wolf, tweed wolf…

Most people, including biologists, now generally refer to them as eastern coyotes (Canis latrans), but sometimes even the scientists aren’t exactly sure where this critter falls in the taxonomic spectrum. Meanwhile the human population is split. Some hunters consider them a nuisance and even a bane, others a challenge. Some suburban and even urban dwellers fear them, while others are thrilled to have them around. So what really is this large canid that now occupies nearly all of the eastern U.S. and Canada? Let’s take a look.

1. Are Coydogs Real?

Eastern coyotes were, and still are, sometimes colloquially referred to as coydogs, particularly on the leading edge of their eastward expanding range. Some of this is due to our need to ascribe names to new and different creatures.

“Our eastern coyotes are very different from western coyotes,” says Shevenell Webb, furbearer biologist with the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. “On average, they’re about 10 pounds heavier. They eat deer and they show more color variation. Some exhibit a pale gray pelage similar to western coyotes, but others are blond, red, and even black. It was once thought this variation may be derived from historical breeding with dogs.”

“While there is some possible dog ancestry in the eastern coyotes,” she says, “it is very limited and regional in places where it might occur.”

2. Is Coywolf an Appropriate Term?

Webb was clear on this point.

“The term ‘coywolf’ is very misleading to the public. Eastern coyotes are coyotes. We recognize that some hybridization occurred, but they are not wolves.”

Most samples from genetic studies in Maine were deemed to be of eastern coyote ancestry, but a small percentage had wolf ancestry.

“At some point, both species interbred and that signature is carried in genetics,” says Webb. She also noted one coyote had a wolf ancestry of 89 percent. Interestingly, it was one of the smaller animals in the study, a 27-pound female. “It didn’t look anything like a wolf,” she added.

Rutledge was more circumspect, acknowledging the term is not entirely inaccurate. “The eastern coyote is a hybrid animal that has both coyote and wolf ancestry,” she says.

Webb’s sentiment, echoed by other wildlife biologists and managers likely stems, at least in part, from the power of perception. The idea of a wolf in the neighborhood might be unpalatable to some folks. There’s also resistance to a more sinister motivation. Some claim that labeling this newcomer as a distinct species with “wolf” as part of its name could afford it more protection under the Endangered Species Act.

3. Why Have Eastern Coyotes Been So Successful?

In a word, adaptability. Some of this comes from their ancestry.

“The more genetic variation present, the more adaptable a species will be to changes in its environment,” says Rutledge. The eastern coyote’s suite of genes proved quite beneficial as they moved eastward into a new and very diverse environment.

“This species that has adapted very well to Maine conditions, and is more successful than perhaps wolves could be,” Webb noted. “They live near people [and] have a more diverse diet.”

When large prey is scarce, they’ll eat smaller prey like rabbits, hares and small mammals. When meat is scarce they subsist on a vegan diet. Household pets are on the menu in and around the trappings of man.

Eastern coyotes also have different physical and behavioral characteristics that allow them to better survive. One of those characteristics is what biologists call behavioral plasticity. Some eastern coyotes form strong pair bonds and establish packs consisting of an alpha male and female, and extended family members, much like wolves do. Others mate, raise a litter, then drive their grown offspring away each year before raising another litter the following spring. Still others—usually males—are serially nomadic, settling down perhaps just long enough to raise a litter before moving on to a new mate and territory. And some may choose one strategy for a while, then change to another.

Rutledge framed the eastern coyote as a very fascinating natural experiment.

“The role left vacant when wolves were extirpated is an important one,” she says. Deer evolved over millennia in the presence of large predators. By removing those predators we may have done them and ourselves a disservice. Clear evidence exists in the proliferation of Lyme disease, car-deer collisions, CWD, and a changing public perspective of deer from once proud woodland creature to back yard nuisance.

“On the balance, it’s better for the ecosystem and biodiversity to have [eastern coyotes] around,” continued Rutledge. Some might disagree, but it’s a fair point: Isn’t it a little selfish, not to mention a disruption of the natural order, to want fewer predators around and more deer, just so we can kill more deer?

4. Just How Bad Are These Predators?

To a great extent, that’s a matter of perspective. Physical characteristics like larger bodies, skulls, and jaw muscles make eastern coyotes better adapted to taking down larger prey, and deer are a favorite. A South Carolina study found that coyote predation accounted for between 46 and 84 percent of all deer mortality in the study area, and somewhere between 47 and 62 percent of all fawns succumbed to coyote predation, most within the first three weeks of life. Researchers also determined that most fawns were killed by different coyotes, meaning this behavior was pervasive rather than a few individuals that had learned to specialize in killing fawns.

While the researchers didn’t go so far as to say coyotes represent a threat for deer across the Southeast, they did note that the statewide deer population in South Carolina has declined approximately 30 percent since the mid 1990s—a period coinciding very nicely with an increase in coyote numbers. Other studies in Georgia and Alabama have shown coyote predation to be a leading cause of fawn mortality, and lower fall fawn-to-doe ratios since the arrival of coyotes.

Research is lacking in the northeast, but it’s reasonable to assume the impact is worse in areas where deep snows concentrate deer and limit their mobility, and coyotes prey on adult deer more frequently. We also know coyotes practice surplus or opportunity killing, taking down and killing prey not for food but merely because it’s easily available.

All this makes them very unpopular with deer hunters. Behavioral plasticity in their breeding behavior also makes them difficult to eradicate. Removing an alpha male may disrupt pack dynamics for a short while but a nomad will soon be along to take its place. Or a subordinate may take over the role. Furthermore, absence of an alpha male in a formerly well-defended territory could result in several males establishing several families. When coyote numbers are reduced, prey becomes relatively more abundant. This, and less intra-specific aggression results in higher productivity and thus, more coyotes.

5. Is the Eastern Coyote Really a Newcomer?

The recent history is fairly clear. Western coyotes began expanding their range eastward around the turn of the previous century, and somewhere along the way they met up with dwindling wolf populations.

“When a population is at a low, individuals will breed with other species if they can’t find a mate of their own [species],” says Rutledge.

The exact nature of these interactions is still unclear but the coyotes carried a diverse array of DNA as they continued east, into New York in the 1920s and Maine during the late 1960s and early 1970s. By the late 1970s, they had spread into southern New England, and subsequently continued expanding north and east into Atlantic Canada, and south throughout much of the northeast.

Meanwhile, coyotes advanced on a southern front, crossing the Mississippi River around the mid 1960s and rapidly expanding eastward from Arkansas and Louisiana. Genetic evidence suggests they eventually linked up with their northern cousins during the mid 1980s in the central Appalachian mountains of Virginia and West Virginia.

Around this same time, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began reintroducing endangered red wolves along the North Carolina coast, and subsequently in Mississippi, Florida, and interior North Carolina. Some geneticists contend that red wolves are a distinct species while others claim they may be a divergent subspecies of eastern timber wolves. Physically, they look very much like eastern coyotes. There’s also evidence that a coyote, or coyote-like canid once existed in the east, but disappeared from the fossil record about 11,000 years ago—about the same time red wolves began to appear, and humans started to inhabit North America.

The Final Analysis

What we’re left with is more questions than answers. Are eastern coyotes new, or are they returning to fill a vacated and important ecological niche as top predators? Are they a distinct species, a coyote-wolf hybrid, or a divergent western coyote with more than a trace of wolf ancestry? Perhaps a better question is: Do they belong here? They can be a nuisance to neighborhoods, a bane to deer hunters, and a challenge to both predator hunters and wildlife managers. Depending on your perspective, you can either appreciate or accept them, but they’re certainly not going away.

Ducks, geese, deer, turkeys…any critter you can call to, Abner Druckenmiller is obsessed with. But he’s particularly hooked on calling in coyotes and foxes. He works for Foxpro, one of the most creative game call and intensely-focused predator companies in the outdoors. It’s his business to know what does and does not work to lure wily furbearers into shooting range all over the country. He’s in his second decade of calling to predators in the dark.

But night ops take a little more skill—or at the very least, a different approach—than daytime hunts. For hunters, seeing their intended quarry is paramount. You won’t always have that luxury when chasing fox and coyotes under the moonlight. Spotting and shooting predators in the dark are difficult tasks, especially for newbies, though you shouldn’t let that deter you. Varmints are very susceptible to being killed at night because they are more active, so ostensibly there will be more opportunities if you target the right areas. The darkness gives you the advantage; it’s just a matter of setting up properly and knowing the habits of night-walking critters.

Here are some of Druckenmiller’s key tactics to putting more pelts on the fur sled.

Outdoor Life: What’s your gun and cartridge of choice for hunting coyotes and foxes at night?

Abner Druckenmiller: My setup and strategy don’t change a ton whether I’m hunting out West or here in Pennsylvania, during the day or at night. I pretty much use the same rifle and cartridge for red fox, grey fox, coyotes, raccoons, and bobcats, which is a Ruger .204 rifle with a 45-grain soft-tip Hornady bullet (that offering has been discontinued, but factory loads are available in 40-grain). If a coyote hangs up at 200 yards, I feel a lot more confident with that load than a .17 HMR. I mean you can kill a coyote at that yardage with a .17, but it takes careful shot placement.

I always take a shotgun with me, too. Packing it in sucks sometimes, but if you don’t, odds are that’s when a coyote is going to come in too close for the rifle and you’ll need to make a quick shot. Even if it’s a big, wide-open field, where you would never expect a coyote to work in tight—take it with you.

AD: I stick with the same calls I typically use from my Foxpro, but I also bring along a hand call. Sometimes the cadence from a hand call can make all the difference in terms of getting a response from a predator. The biggest rule to follow is if they respond to a certain call, keep rolling with it until they stop responding. It’s just like trout fishing. If I catch one on a pheasant tail, I’m going to keep fishing that same fly until it stops working.

OL: What’s the proper way to use a rifle-mounted light when you’re hunting at night?

AD: The first question I always get asked ism “What color light do you use? White, green, or red?” I like red because it’s softer (so it’s less apt to spook a coyote), and I don’t get blinded when I’m using my Foxpro remote. A white light can be so harsh, so if you do use it, I would dim it down. I feel like I can keep that red light dimmer and see farther with it. If you hit a coyote with a white light at 60 yards, it’s going to bug out of there, but it’s good to have one for finding coyotes, so you should buy a light that has all three colors. Test all the colors out and see what works best for you.

And this may seem odd to someone who has never done it, but you always keep that light on no matter what, and scan the field or woods with it quickly. I turn my light on at the truck and don’t turn it off until I get back. You never know if there is a predator lurking around. I’ve caught eyes walking back to the truck and also turning the light onto the spot where I just made my stand before moving onto the next location. If you’re hunting with that light off, you’re not going to kill anything.

OL: You can use a light in combination with a thermal, right?

AB: Yeah, so what I like to do sometimes is scan with the light, and then once I see the eyes of a predator light up, I’ll turn it off. Then I go to the thermal and call that coyote or fox in tight to take the shot. It makes them less skittish, as long as they don’t smell you.

OL: Shooting at night is much different than during the day. It’s harder to see the target through your riflescope. How can hunters better prepare for shots in the dark?

AD: One thing I highly suggest doing is to buy Bright Eyes, which are those reflectors that illuminate when a light shines on them, and stick them on a paper target at the rifle range. This will mimic the eyes of a predator lighting up in the night when you shine your light on them. You also need to practice target acquisition. It’s harder to find an animal in your scope at night, so you need to go out in the dark and get behind your optic and practice on an object that’s the size a coyote or fox.

Predators are small targets. They may look big because of all that fur, but you only have a 4- to 5-inch area to hit in order to kill them. I like to hold my crosshairs in the center of the animal near the top of the shoulder if they are standing broadside. A lot of times predators will walk straight at you coming into the call, but it’s the same concept there. Hold center mass and it will penetrate deep as long as you have the right cartridge.

Read Next: Q&A With an Expert Farm-Country Coyote Hunter

OL: Do you ever have trouble locating a fox or coyote after you shoot one in the dark?

AD: One of the most difficult things about night hunting is finding your kill after the shot. I set up my rifle on a tripod, and after I shoot, I leave the gun positioned directly where I shot because the light I have mounted to it will be shining right where I shot. Then I get up with my shotgun and use an additional scanning light to locate the coyote or fox in the field.

OL: What are some important things to consider if this is my first time hunting at night?

AD: If you don’t have much experience with night hunting, you should know that it’s possible to call all kinds of animals into your stand. I’ve called domestic dogs into my stand, and let me tell you, a German shepherd looks a lot like a coyote in the dark. Just because you see a set of eyes light up doesn’t mean it’s a legal animal to kill. I can tell the difference between a fox and coyote at night, but that’s after 16 years of hunting predators. I suggest hunting at night when both coyote and fox seasons are in. That will lower the chances that you shoot an animal that you shouldn’t have. And honestly, I like to wait till fox and coyote seasons overlap because I’m an opportunistic hunter and want to shoot any legal animal that comes in. If a fox comes in out of season, that’s kind of a waste. Wait a few more weeks for fox season, and you can kill both.

OL: Is there a difference in the locations you choose at night versus the day?

AD: You can get away with a little bit more at night, but I still use something to breakup my outline—a fencerow, hay bales, etc. One thing I do at night that you could not get away with during the day is to sit in the middle of a field, so I can hunt 360 degrees. But I’ll find some kind of cover, even if it’s just a small bush in a pasture. You still need to have the wind in your face [so predators can’t sniff you out], and get elevated. You don’t need to be in a treestand, but find a hillside instead of sitting in a bottom. Sit in a chair or even stand up. It will allow you to see further, and you won’t miss out on as many coyotes.

If I’m hunting in the woods, I look for openings where I think a coyote or fox might come into and set up. A lot of times these are old logging roads where I can see out to 200 yards. We have also killed many coyotes by hunting in groups. Sometimes I’ll take two or three gunners and spread them out in the woods. Here in Pennsylvania one hunter might only be able to see 100 to 150 yards if we’re in the mountains or timber. A coyote might hang up just outside that range and you will never see him. You increase that to two or three hunters and now you can see 600 to 700 yards. We’ve been really successful this way, typically hunting just before sunrise and as the sun sets.

OL: What’s been your experience in terms of getting access and how should we plan a hunt?

AD: The No. 1 rule to predator hunting is having multiple places to hunt. If you want to be consistently successful, you need to cover a lot of ground and make as many stands as you can. I’ve seen it all. I’ve had some farmers that don’t want coyotes killed because they kill the deer, and they want to control whitetail numbers. But I’ve also had farmers that hate coyotes and foxes and want every single one of them gone. If a farmer grants you access, make sure you are responsive if he or she calls you. That always goes a long way. Also, you can be really successful on public land. What I do is look for public spots and then use onX Hunt to find the best private options around it. That way you hit both and it increases the ground you can hunt.

Also, try and find chicken, turkey, or pig farms. Predators are almost always hanging around these places and most of those farmers have had an issue with a coyote getting into the chicken coop and killing a few birds. It’s a great opportunity to get on a good hunt.

Coyotes, foxes, and bobcats are all cautious critters, and that caution only increases when they are hunted hard (if you have ever pursued any of these predators when they have been pressured, you know how difficult it can be). But predators have this stigma for being ultra-tough to kill, and that’s often not the case…if you understand how to hunt them. It’s critical you know the right places to hunt, how to approach a stand, what time of day to hunt them, calling strategies, and how to setup the e-caller so you can take an optimal shot. Put all these elements together and you’re bound to pile more pelts on the sled. You just have to remember to stick to a few simple tactics, and avoid costly mistakes. Employ these strategies, and your success rate will skyrocket.

1. Scouting For Stands

Having multiple places to call predators is the main ingredient for better hunting, so you have to scout and secure places to make more stands. I’ll hunt public land but like to focus on private tracts, if possible, because the pressure on coyotes is usually lower there. OnX Maps is a great tool for e-scouting. Look for timber-lined areas around agriculture fields, chicken and turkey farms, or if you are out West, focus on large parcels of land that may have cattle feed yards and/or pastures. These are all places where I’ve killed a lot of coyotes. Also, gather as much intel from landowners as you can. Ask them where they have seen coyotes. It will give you the best chance to call in a predator.

2. Where You Sit Matters

3. Make It Easy on Your Quarry

Place the e-caller in an area that offers the approaching predator the quickest and easiest path to the call. Like a turkey, they have an innate ability to hone in on the source of the call/sound and will come right to it if it’s easy to find. It’s in a coyote’s DNA to circle downwind of its intended prey, but if the call is in their direct line of sight, it’s likely they will come right in and give you an easier shot.

4. Command the Call Sequence

One of the biggest mistakes I see folks make while calling coyotes is only playing rabbit distress or bird distress sounds. I’ve found that offering a variety of sounds on a stand is key. I use a FOXPRO X2S and have over 800 different sounds that are at my disposal. Why so many? The same reason you have a tackle box full of different fishing lures. Variety (i.e. something different) tends to peak a critter’s interest, whether that’s a big bass or coyote. I am able to offer different cadences, frequencies, and volumes to trigger a response. Don’t be afraid to play sounds a predator has never heard before either. A coyote has no idea that we do not have jackrabbits here in Pennsylvania, but that doesn’t stop me from playing a jackrabbit distress call (it’s worked for me a ton).

If you have a successful stand, continue to mimic that calling sequence until it stops working for you. One of my go-tos is a “Coyote Pair” call at full volume for about 35 seconds to try to get an answer from a nearby coyote. I will wait in silence for about 60 to 90 seconds for a response. If I get one, I wait until they stop howling. This is important, because after they stop howling you tend to have their undivided attention. That’s when I will play “Lil’s Cottontail” on the FOXPRO and ramp the volume up and down for about two to three minutes. If I still do not get a coyote to come, I will play “Nutty Nuthatch” for two or three minutes and then switch to “Smacked Rat” for another two to three minutes.

I typically never stop or mute the call after getting that first response because an approaching coyote may stop and use the terrain to its advantage and wind me. If after 10 minutes on the stand, I still have not called in a coyote I’ll play “Yipping Coyotes” at full volume for about 45 seconds, then immediately switch to “Coyote Pup Distress” for an additional 3 to 5 minutes. This puts you on stand for roughly 15 minutes (most of the coyotes I call in show up in the first four minutes).

5. When to Take the Shot

A fox or coyote is a small target (there’s only a 3- to 5-inch margin for error) that require precise shots. I use a Ruger RPR chambered in 6mm or .223 with Hornady ammunition. It works best for me, but it might not for you. Pick a rifle/load combo you’re comfortable with and stick to it. A coyote or fox often faces you straight on coming to the call. I hold center mass on their chest in this scenario, or if they turn broadside, my point of aim is the top of the shoulder. Both of these shot placements offer a quick and ethical dispatch of a predator.

One mistake I notice some hunters make on a stand is not facing the rifle or gun in the correct direction before they start to call. I will always have my rifle pointed in the direction of the e-caller. This helps to minimize movement on your stand when a predator approaches. If you’re in a less than ideal position when a coyote is close, the best time for you to move is when the coyote moves.

6. The Best Time to Hunt

When other animals of prey—owls, hawks, eagles and even house cats—are hunting you can bet coyotes are on the move too. A cold front—any weather front for that matter—makes predators active as well. During day hunts, I focus on the twilight hours. Right at daylight and just before dark are naturally great transitional times to kill predators. During a full moon I hunt during the day because I have found that prey animals seem to be more active during the day time hours. Prey animals typically refrain from excessive activity at night when it is very bright. Basically the darker it is at night, the better. During a waxing moon I focus on hunting after midnight when the night seems to be the darkest. The waxing moon will rise earlier and sets just before midnight, giving me the darkest part of the night to hunt in those earlier morning hours. During a waning moon I will hunt right at dark up until the moon rises around midnight and becomes the brightest during the early morning hours. Other factors, like cloud cover, cold weather, or a major weather fronts also determine when I hunt.

In the East, I have always been more successful hunting at night. Out West, daytime calling is best. Also, the higher the density of predators, the more competitive they are with one another for food, which can result in some very lucrative stands.

7. Use Lights and Thermals at Night

Night hunting has always been one of my favorite ways to call coyotes and fox. The basics are very similar to day hunts. I look for elevated vantage points and keep the wind direction in my favor. The only real difference is spotting them with a light or utilizing thermal or night vision devices. The biggest mistakes many people make when running a light or scanning with a thermal is they stop to take a break, or turn the light off (you can’t shoot what you can’t see).

Predators will come to the call quickly, so it is imperative to constantly be searching, scanning, and looking for incoming targets. When I am using a light, I use the FOXPRO Gunfire. I will cover an area, searching for eyes to reflect back at me. Once I get a set of eyes, I will keep the light on them or just above them as they approach the stand. Once they are in range and I am ready to make the shot, a quick lip squeak or bark will make them hit the brakes and offer a good shot opportunity.

As soon as I am out of the truck, walking to a stand I turn on the light or thermal scanner and search for the eyes of predators. My light or thermal scanner never gets shut off until I get back into my truck to head to another stand. And just a disclaimer: you can call in several different types of animals to a stand at night, so be sure to positively identify your target (domestic animals or a wild critter that is out of season may come in).

A generation ago, the gateway to the West for a big-game hunter ran through pronghorn country. Doe/fawn tags were abundant as antelope herds flourished on public land, and it was a good bet that everybody in a hunting party would at least get a shot and would probably make meat.

But over the last decade, pronghorn tags have been harder to draw as populations have declined in most states. The new gateway hunt? Elk. Specifically cows.

Across the West, elk herds are booming, and the best tool wildlife managers have to keep wapiti in check with habitat is cow tags. There have never been as many antlerless elk permits available as states will issue this year. Access is generally better for cow hunters than it is for bull hunters, and harvest rates for cows in many Western—and even some Midwestern—states are double that for bull elk.

Idaho and Washington both offer over-the-counter cow tags. Most of Wyoming’s antlerless units have 100 percent drawing success, and the $288 nonresident cow tag is less than half the price of an either-sex tag. In Montana, the already liberal general rifle season has been extended in many districts through mid-January for cow-elk hunters, who can hunt private land that may not have been open for bulls earlier in the fall.

“Cow elk build a hunter’s skill set,” says Dan Harrison, longtime backcountry elk guide and owner of Harrison’s Hunting in Grand Junction, Colorado. “The smartest animal in these hills is a lead cow, and if you can figure out how to fool her, you’ve done something. The meat is phenomenal, and there’s a lot of it. And if you can learn the country and the critter by hunting cows, then you will have an advantage if you ever draw a bull tag.”

A growing number of nonresident hunters has figured out that the Meat Highway leads to places like Riggins, Idaho; Craig, Colorado; Dillon, Montana; and Rawlins, Wyoming. These hunters are gathering buddies and traveling west with generators powering portable freezers. They’re filling cows tags on public-land hunts, butchering the meat in camp, and driving home with those freezers full.
Harrison says that hunting access for cow-elk hunters is generally good, even on private land, in areas with elk herds that have exceeded population objectives. But he warns that cow hunting isn’t a slam-dunk.

Read Next: The Top 10 DIY Western Hunts

Top States for Cow Elk

Montana

Nonresidents must first enter a drawing for a deer and elk combination license, which is $1,045 and allows you to hunt general entry units. Once you draw that, you can then research and apply for cow tags in limited-entry units.

Utah

Draw success for limited-­entry bulls is notoriously difficult in the Beehive State; the odds are 1-in-60 for nonresidents. Antlerless tags are a different story. The odds are 1-in-2.9 for nonresidents applying for cow tags.

Colorado

Colorado doesn’t issue quite as many antlerless elk tags as it once did, but it’s still a bargain. Nonresident youth cow tags are sold for $100, and in many units, bull hunters are allowed to pick up a second tag for cows.

Idaho

The Gem State offers over-the-counter cow tags for archery, muzzleloader, and rifle seasons—plus millions of acres of public land open to elk hunting. The cost is $582, and the success rate on antlerless elk is very good.