Tag: đặt h

During the interview, Mahato mentioned that he’d heard from several American and Japanese hunters who’d offered millions of dollars to hunt a Nepali tiger. He suggested a month-long hunting season every four or five years and didn’t mention bag limits or quotas (as far as we can tell, since the interview was in Nepali), but according to Mongabay’s reporting, it sounds like the opportunity for hunters to kill multiple tigers over the course of the hunt was on the table.

Critics point out that killing the apex predators can have a cascade of unintended consequences, some of which might actually endanger livestock and humans (as well as the globally endangered tigers themselves) even more. Tigers are also considered sacred to Indigenous peoples in the region, some of whom relocated their lives and communities to create more space for Nepal’s ambitious tiger conservation goals.

Too Many Tigers?

Nepal finds itself in the unique position of having what some consider too many tigers. In 2010, the 13 nations around the world with resident tiger populations committed to doubling their populations by 2022. Not only was Nepal the only country to actually make good on its promise, but it went above and beyond. The country’s tiger population tripled, going from 121 to 355 in just 12 years, Mongabay reports.

Last year, in just one small area of Chitwan National Park in the south-central part of the country, tigers killed 12 people in 11 months. Meanwhile, in western Nepal, the tigers in and around Bardiya National Park don’t have any large wild prey to hunt, so they’ve been targeting livestock and humans instead. The estimated 125 tigers that call the park home have killed over two dozen people in the last five years. The rural and Indigenous communities that made space for the tigers in the first place fall victim the most.

With these numbers in mind, some wonder if Nepali tigers have reached their biological carrying capacity and if some level of predator management is warranted.

“Indigenous people and the communities living close to tiger habitats are paying the price of conservation [success] with their lives,” Tharu Cultural Museum and Research Center director Birendra Mahato (not to be confused with the Minister of Forests and Environment with the same name) told Mongabay. “Government studies on carrying capacity don’t take this into account … Personally, looking at the social and environmental situation in Chitwan, I believe that we already hit carrying capacity back in 2018.”

To Hunt or Not To Hunt?

This might sound familiar to rural residents in the Upper Midwest and Mountain West. If grizzlies or wolves killed that many humans in the U.S., the national conversation would probably redirect from experimental populations and reintroductions to lethal control and season-setting. But if you ask wildlife biologists, the feasibility of killing a specific number of predators to manage their population remains questionable, especially when it comes to tigers.

One study found that when dominant males die, competing males will likely kill all their offspring. Likewise, when females die, cubs struggle and infant mortality skyrockets. In other words, one dead tiger doesn’t always equate to just one dead tiger, and every mortality counts against an endangered global population.

The rising number of human deaths seems to be of more immediate concern to Minister Mahato, but whether the hunt will become a reality remains to be seen. A host of other issues that compound Nepal’s tiger problems require a hard look before any hunting should be considered, former chief warden of Chitwan National Park Maheshwor Dhakal told Mongabay.

Read Next: Hunting the Nile Crocodile, the Very Picture of Death

“The first thing that needs to be addressed is the quality of habitat,” Dhakal said. “Then, we need to urgently address the issues of human-wildlife conflict, poaching and illegal trade, threat of invasive alien plant species, climate-induced disaster, management of prey base, development of infrastructure, employment of local people in tourism, and mobilization of security forces.”

The people most impacted by these decisions have largely been left out of the tiger management conversation, according to Shristi Singh Shrestha of the Jane Goodall Institute Nepal.

“Officials who blindly advocated to increase the population of tigers without considering its impacts on local communities need to be held accountable for their actions,” Shrestha told Mongabay. “How can a group of leaders meeting in a big country decide how many tigers people in Chitwan or Bardiya will have to live with?”

Mohr made the discovery during Saturday’s weigh-in. When he cut open the fish that were submitted, it appeared that one competitor, Pete Smith, had stuffed two of his walleyes with smaller fish to increase their weight. He found a 12-inch walleye with its tail cut off inside one of Smith’s fish. The other had an intact white perch stuffed inside it.

“They both had holes in their lips, and they were both stuffed inside bigger walleyes,” Mohr tells Outdoor Life. “The 12-inch walleye, it looked to me like they tried to stuff it and it wouldn’t go down, so they cut the last three inches off. It was suspicious because the fish was still really bright, and then I picked it up and could see a hook mark in its lip.”

Mohr explains that cutting open fish is standard practice at the Bart’s Cove tournament—and has been since long before the cheating scandal that took place on Lake Erie last fall. His rules explicitly state that if a fish is being entered in a payout structure, it will be cut open and inspected. (He doesn’t believe in using lie detectors and thinks they do more harm than good in tournament settings.)

“It’s always been that way since before Ohio. But after what happened there, I absolutely insisted that every single one of these fish be cut open—not just Pete’s,” Mohr says. “It’s just stupid what he did, especially after last year. I still can’t believe it.”

Read Next: Walleye Anglers Taken into Custody for Jail Time After Fishing Tournament Cheating Scandal

Mohr also wanted to be 100 percent certain that Smith had cheated, and Smith insisted that he was innocent. So, instead of publicly disqualifying Smith at the event, Mohr contacted officials with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, who confiscated the two fish on July 30. The agency confirmed in an email to Outdoor Life that their investigation is ongoing.

As for Smith’s claims of innocence, however, Mohr now has even more reason to believe that he knowingly cheated on Saturday. What’s even worse, Mohr adds, is that Smith didn’t have to break the rules to have a shot at winning the tournament.

“I got a phone call from Pete’s wife. She let me know that one of the individuals in Pete’s boat admitted to her that they did cheat, and that he was afraid to come to the weigh-in on Saturday,” Mohr says. “But the thing about it is that Pete didn’t have to stuff them. He only gained maybe 10-12 ounces, less than a pound. But he had a 22-something-pound bag, and the next closest was 19 pounds.”

Mohr says that it’s up to the DEC to file criminal charges against Smith. Either way, he joins a list of seven individuals who’ve been banned from the Bart’s Cove tournament for life. And if nothing else, he hopes that Saturday’s incident will get more tournament organizers around the country to tighten up their rules.

“Everybody needs to know about this, and hopefully it makes other tournaments have more integrity,” Mohr says. “I don’t care if you’re stuffing lead in Ohio or stuffing fish in Dunkirk, or if you’re water-bathing fish or fishing Canadian waters when you’re supposed to be fishing New York waters. There’s always something going on. And until these tournament directors step up to the plate, it’s going to continue.”

The growing frustration over the state of these fisheries was compounded by the fact that the region lacked a fisheries manager for two years, not to mention a full understanding of what’s driving the declines.

Finally, Gov. Gianforte held a meeting on Friday at a packed community center in Wise River. He tried to assure the crowd that Montana Fish, Wildlife, & Parks had formed an adequate response to trout declines in the Basin. This news was welcomed by the locals. It was also long overdue, which only underscores the fact that it could be some time until we fully understand the crisis at hand.

The Lowest Fish Counts on Record

The most recent fish counts on the Jerry Creek Section of the Big Hole show fewer than 1,000 brown and rainbow trout per mile. That’s compared to roughly 1,750 trout per mile in 2017, and it’s a third (at best) of the 3,000 to 3,500 trout per mile that were counted along the same section in 2000.

“We’re talking about the lowest fish counts on record in the Big Hole, Ruby, and lower Beaverhead. It’s bigger than a singular river,” says Brian Wheeler, a fly-fishing guide at Big Hole Lodge and the executive director of the Big Hole River Foundation. “This is a basin-wide crash at the headwaters of the Missouri River, and we’re right in the middle of it.”

Trout populations in the Basin have trended downward over the past 11 years, and scientists will point out that other streams in southwest Montana have seen their trout populations dip recently during low water years. But they also agree that something more troubling seems to be taking place on the Big Hole.

“We’ve seen declines—[but] nothing on that magnitude,” MFWP fisheries biologist Jim Olsen told the Montana Standard last month. “In the past, they’ve really followed water. And so, during drought times, populations [on the Big Hole] would decline. But we’re talking a 20 to 25 percent decline.”

What makes these low numbers even more concerning is that no one knows exactly what’s causing them. As Olsen and others have pointed out, low, warm water has been linked to trout declines in rivers across the Intermountain West. But brown trout are usually more tolerant of warm water than rainbow trout and native cutthroat throat—which also inhabit the Big Hole—and the browns seem to be faring the worst out of the three.

“It’s the browns that seem to be the ones getting this disease—this fungus—whatever it is,” Wheeler says. “Another odd aspect is that the rainbows aren’t increasing to fill the voids the browns are leaving. And then you have cutthroat, which seem to be doing great. These are some things that don’t quite make sense and lead us to think there is an additional factor at play that’s probably disease.”

Olsen and other biologists found several of these dead, fungus-covered browns in the Big Hole last fall. They say the only way to positively identify the mystery disease is to bring a live tissue sample from a living fish to a histopathologist in a lab. But the agency has so far been unable to pull this off.

This spurred Big Hole Lodge owners Craig and Wade Fellin to launch the Save Wild Trout campaign in the spring. The group partnered with Yeti to acquire some coolers that were retro-fitted with aerators. These serve as temporary fish tanks, and they could be essential in helping the guides achieve their number-one goal: getting a live-but-dying brown trout into MFWP’s hands.

“We’re just trying to get this done as quickly as possible, and the best-case scenario is providing an answer so the state can chart a path forward,” Wheeler says. “We’ve had a few situations where a guide caught a sick fish, rowed down and wasted their day to get to the boat ramp—but didn’t care because this is as close as anybody has gotten to getting a sick fish to a biologist. Then they got to the takeout where they had service, but the fish didn’t quite make it because there was nobody available to come meet us at the boat ramp.”

The Mysterious Fish Fungus

Mike Duncan, who was hired as the Region 3 Fisheries Manager just three weeks ago, says he understands the frustrations voiced by the outfitting community.

“I get it. I get that folks worry that we’re not being proactive or responsive enough, but we’re working on it best we can.”

A former fisheries biologist on the Madison River, Duncan points to the agency’s recently announced four-pronged response to trout declines. This includes three key studies into fish mortality, recruitment, and any potential diseases that could be impacting populations. The three studies are slated to begin sometime in 2024. This feels like an eternity for the guides and private anglers, who are now trying to work in tandem with the state to speed the process up. In the meantime, Duncan is working to better understand what’s killing the trout.

“The fungus on their sides, that’s saprolegnia. We know what that is,” Duncan tells Outdoor Life. “But these other lesions we’re seeing on the top of their heads, tails, and bellies. We don’t know what exactly is causing that, and saprolegnia could be a secondary effect from that.”

Duncan points to the new online portal that FWP launched in July, which allows the public to report sick or dead fish to the agency. (This represents the fourth “prong” in MFWP’s ongoing response.) And he says that as much as he’d like to see a sick brown trout tested in a lab, it’s not always that easy. There aren’t many histopathologists who can run this specific live-tissue test, he explains, and the agency’s staff is already spread thin across a large geographic area.

“I think we need to have realistic expectations on how we can respond to these calls,” Duncan says. “The one that came through the other week … I was finishing up a meeting and hit the road to head over there, and then the fish died before we got there.”

Duncan adds that while the moribund browns are a real concern, it’s not like every brown trout in the Big Hole is sick or dying. He and other biologists have spent days on the river looking for sick trout without finding one.

“I get that when you see a dead or dying fish, it’s concerning … especially when you have a population that is at or near historic lows,” Duncan says. “And when the biologists can’t tell you exactly what it is—I understand why the public wants answers. And we’re gearing up to get them those [answers].”

Declining Water and Quality Concerns

The myriad problems plaguing the Big Hole might not be fully understood just yet, but two things are certain. They aren’t unique to southwest Montana, and they all tie back to a shortage of cold, clean water.

Below-average snowpack, weakened runoff, higher water temps, lower soil moisture levels, and longer fire seasons. As the effects of climate change bear down on watersheds across the West, many of the people whose livelihoods are tied to these rivers start blaming one another. And on the Big Hole, this conflict is too often portrayed as the fishing community versus the ranchers.

Beaverhead County is home to more cows than any other county in Montana, and cattle operations have long been linked to poor water quality. Wheeler runs a water-quality-monitoring program at various points along the river, and he’s seen nutrient-loading issues with some stretches containing high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. He also says that since some irrigators don’t measure how much water they use, it’s hard to determine the amount of water being taken out of the system at any given time.

“We know we have nutrient problems, but I want to say explicitly that this is not a ranchers versus fishermen debate,” Wheeler says. “The whole ‘cows not condos’ thing is a real mentality out here and we hope that ag stays on the landscape. These problems are not unique to here. They’re also not unfixable.”

This is where the Big Hole Watershed Committee is trying to make a difference. Executive director Pedro Marques explains that the group was formed to get ranchers engaged in voluntary conservation, and so far, they’ve been successful. Marques and Wheeler both point to the Arctic Grayling Recovery Program, which is run by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and supported by MFWP. The program relies on dozens of ranchers along the river who’ve either cut down on their water use, engaged in restoration work, or both—all with the common goal of preserving one of the last viable grayling populations in the Lower 48.

“These ranchers are doing the best they can,” Marques says. “We know there are improvements to be made, like installing water measurement devices at diversion points and making headgates more efficient to operate. And if we can find some spots where we can help ranchers move their production and concentration of cows further from the river—those are relatively easy projects once we identify them.

“But based on our drought management plan that we’ve had for 20-something years, ranchers have been giving back water, and they’re all trying to share in that sacrifice for the river’s sake,” he continues. “The hard truth of the matter is that these landowners could dry up the river tomorrow and not break a single law.”

Duncan agrees.

“We’re confident that it’s the amount of water in the river that continues to drive the bus,” he says. “And we can work with water users to be as efficient as possible … But we can’t make snow. Ranchers are already taking voluntary cuts on the Big Hole, Beaverhead, and Ruby Rivers, and every one of those rivers could be dried up multiple times if it weren’t for their efforts.”

Marques adds that it’s important to look beyond the barbed wire fences to the roughly 2,800 square miles of mountainous country the Big Hole drains. He brings up the loss of beaver in the region, which has significantly reduced the landscape’s ability to hold water, along with the roughly 42 percent of rangeland that’s been lost to conifer encroachment over the last 30 years.

“If you ask the ranchers ‘where’s the water?’ they look up at the mountains,” Marques says. “These forests are overstocked. And every tree uses water: roughly eight to thirty-five gallons per lodgepole pine per day.”

Are Anglers Contributing to Trout Declines?

Marques also brings up a hard question that some anglers might not want to answer: Is there a chance that we’re part of the problem?

The ranchers in the Big Hole Valley have dealt with water shortages before. Both Marques and Duncan point to the drought of 1988, when the river went totally dry near Wisdom. Trout populations dipped as a result, but they say the ’88 crash still wasn’t as substantial as the one we’re seeing today.

“One thing to keep in mind is that agricultural practices in this valley—and the amount of water they use—haven’t changed substantially in 100-plus years,” Marques says.

One thing that has changed substantially is the amount of fishing pressure the Big Hole receives every summer. MFWP keeps track of this pressure by gauging the number of “angler days” in a year. (One “angler day” equals one angler fishing one body of water for any amount of time on a given day.) Past surveys by the agency showed 71,553 angler days on the Big Hole in 2011. That number jumped to 95,233 in 2017 and then to 118,140 in 2020, which equals a 65-percent increase over a nine-year period.

The question, then, is whether all this increased angling pressure is having a real impact on the fishery itself. Duncan can’t be certain it isn’t. Catch-and-release anglers have long seen themselves as having minimal to no impacts on wild fish populations. But the jury’s still out as to what percentage of trout survive, die, or get sick after they’re caught, handled, and released.

“We’ve seen a lot of increased pressure in recent years, just a lot more folks fishing on these rivers,” Duncan says. “And I think one of the reasons we’re interested in the impacts of catch-and-release angling is because it’s the one thing we have the most control over.”

These impacts can also vary depending on the waterway. It’s possible that some rivers in the West can handle more catch-and-release because there’s enough clean, cold water to keep fish populations healthy and strong in the first place. As an example, Marques points to the Madison River tailwater, which sees roughly three times the angling pressure at Big Hole.

Read Next: How a Dam Malfunction on the Madison River Nearly Wrecked a Blue-Ribbon Fishery

“People point to that river and say, ‘See, you can still hammer these fish as long as you release them—they’ll be fine.’ But that’s because the Madison has a dam that provides abundant cold water. I don’t think you can hammer these fish under certain situations. I think it adds a significant stressor to a fishery that’s already struggling.”

The most obvious stressor is the direct handling of fish, which can remove the protective slime that serves as a trout’s immune system. Playing fish for too long can also wear them down and make them more susceptible to predation or disease.

But there are secondary effects of angler pressure—more cars driving through the valley, more feet walking along the riverbed, and all the bug spray and sunscreen from 120,000 angler days—that could be impacting the river’s overall health and its bug populations. And fewer bugs means less food for trout.

Emergency Regs and Fishing Closures

While the state looks for answers, MFWP has enacted emergency fishing regulations on the Big Hole, Beaverhead, and Ruby Rivers. Catch and release is now mandatory throughout most of the Big Hole, as is fishing with single barbless hooks. The agency also plans to shut down fishing during the brown trout spawning season, which takes place in the fall. Duncan explains that browns are “extremely vulnerable” when they’re on their spawning redds—especially after dealing with low water conditions all summer.

These emergency regs are separate from the state-mandated Hoot Owl restrictions that are already in place on the Big Hole, Beaverhead, and Ruby Rivers. The restrictions close certain stretches to fishing after 2 p.m. and they’re triggered when water temps exceed 73 degrees for three days in a row. (You can find a list of the current closures and angling restrictions here.)

Other Things Anglers Can Do

“Right now, all the changes regulation-wise are being implemented on the fishing side of things,” Wheeler says. “And we have absorbed that happily because until we know, the outfitting community is willing to take these hits. We know we have to be extra cautious until we figure this out.”

For Wheeler and the other guides at Big Hole Lodge, this means carrying a thermometer and reeling up when water temps reach 68 degrees, which is even stricter than the state’s Hoot Owl rules. (Trout start to get stressed when water temps exceed 65, and they’re already struggling to survive by the time temps reach the mid-70s, according to Trout Unlimited.) It means keeping fish wet and handling them as gently as possible. It means staying off closed sections and not ripping browns off their spawning redds in the fall.

“These fish can be resilient when we figure out what’s happening and manage accordingly. But job number one is to define the problem,” Wheeler says. “That’s why I carry one of those coolers and aerators in my truck. And anytime I have a single fishing client, we’re bringing that in the boat with us and—I never thought I’d say this before—hoping to catch a sick fish.”

“It wasn’t about the money when we decided to fish this weekend, but this needed to be done,” Donnie told the Vicksburg Post on Saturday. “This $50,000 payout sets a new standard for the catfish world.”

Fishing from a 24-foot Mossy Cat complete with electronics and a 300-horse outboard, the Fountain brothers went up against a field of 60 other teams. They caught all their fish from one half-mile stretch of river that was roughly 75 feet deep.

The strategy turned out to be a good one, and they found big cats on both days of the two-day tournament. They used cut skipjack herring baited on 12/0 circle hooks, and added eight ounces of weight to keep their baits on the river bottom. Their reels were spooled with 80-pound braid tipped with 80-pound monofilament leaders.

“We had three cats on Saturday weighing 179.95-pounds, including a 65-pounder,” Donnie says.

This put them among the four teams that competed for the top spot on Sunday.

“We pulled it out thanks to my brother,” Donnie continues. “He caught a heavy 58.3-pound fish just four minutes before we had to run in to weigh our fish.”

Read Next: Another Walleye-Stuffing Cheater Caught at a Fishing Tournament in New York

The second-place team’s bag weighed 140 pounds, or roughly six pounds lighter than the Fountain brothers’ winning bag. That team took home $20,000 in winnings, while the third-place team earned a respectable $15,000. When asked what they’ll do with their winnings, Donnie didn’t hesitate.

“We split the money 50-50. And all of it is going back into our fishing—paying for tackle, gear, and other tournament expenses.”

Of all the rifles I get to test, I usually find myself rooting for the affordable ones. Evaluating them has opened my eyes to the realistic capabilities of these rifles, and created an appreciation for the ones that reliably print tight groups. Conversely, it’s annoying to shoot rifles that don’t meet expectations. I simply don’t have time to waste on guns that don’t shoot well. Considering that, my heart bubbles over when a rifle outperforms its price tag.

I’m a budget rifle guy from way back. The first rifle I saved up to buy was a Remington Model 710. I killed sheep, moose, bears, and caribou with it, and it will always have a spot in my safe. I’ve used a number of Winchester XPRs, and I have one in 6.5 Creedmoor that has killed more sheep than most Super Slammers, a baker’s dozen of caribou, and, most recently, a big grizzly bear. I was intrigued when I saw the new Stevens 334 Walnut announced at SHOT show this January. It’s a Turkish-built budget gun, imported under Savage. I saw an affordable, pretty good-looking rifle that gave a nod to hunters who appreciate a traditional-looking, wood-stocked hunting rifle. I immediately requested one chambered in .308 for myself.

We secured a Stevens 334 Walnut chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor for the Outdoor Life gun test, and I quietly hoped that it would make a strong showing. Now, the original Stevens Arms manufactured over 700,000 contract Mosin Nagant rifles for the Ruskies back in 1916 and 1917, and it seemed like that trigger technology was something that’s endured to present day. Our sample had a simply awful trigger but, in spite of that, it knocked our socks off. With lots of concentration, we managed to print excellent groups with that rifle, and we liked it even better in practical handling and shooting. As I awaited my sample, I had to wonder, was it a fluke? Had we simply gotten one of a small batch of 334’s that had been carefully anointed at the Church of Constantinople or hexed with a Bedouin’s spell before its voyage overseas?

Stevens 334 Walnut Specs

• Cartridge: .308 Win.
• Capacity: 3+1, detachable box magazine
• Weight: 7 pounds, 12 ounces (measured)
• Receiver: Carbon steel
• Receiver Finish: Matte black
• Action: Bolt action
• Barrel: 20-inch, carbon steel, 1:10 twist
• Optics Mounting: One-piece Picatinny rail atop receiver
• Stock: Turkish Walnut
• Overall Length: 41.25 inches (measured)
• Trigger: Curved shoe, two-stage, 5 pounds, 12 ounces (measured)
• Price: $430

Anatomy of the Stevens 334 Walnut

After waiting for several months, I finally received my Stevens 334, chambered in .308. Now that these rifles are readily available, I was eager to tear it apart and see if this rifle would shoot to the same standard as the one that excelled for us back in April.

Initial Impressions of the Savage 334 Walnut

Upon examining the rifle, I noted a few minor differences from the earlier sample we’d gotten—all of them positive. First, the Turkish walnut stock seemed to be a richer, darker color than the one we’d already tested, and the finish looks better. Time and weather will tell how it holds up, but for the price, it’s an excellent-looking stock.

Second, I noticed that the finish of the bolt on my new sample is a matte stainless, while the bolt on our early sample was polished. It’s not specified whether the bolt is stainless steel or simply coated, but it appears to be a bead-blasted finish, not a coating. Also, the engraving of “STEVENS 334” on the receiver is sharpened up and enlarged a bit, with an added TM following the 334. The Stevens “S” logo is now behind the gas vent hole.

Finally, the trigger on my sample seems to break more cleanly—but not much more. It still cracks over at 5 pounds, 12 ounces, and I’d think that even the ruins of the Ottoman Empire could build a better trigger than that. The boys that were defending Stalingrad with their Stevens-made Mosins didn’t have it so bad. At best, it’s manageable. The pull is a bit smoother than the early model in that after taking up the first stage, it only creeps slightly before breaking. I’m being brutally honest because I think that at gun store counters, that trigger might be the one thing that turns some folks away from an otherwise dandy rifle.

Stevens 334 Walnut: The Stock

Not too many new hunting rifles are launched in wooden-stock configuration these days, and that’s what first caught my eye. The Stevens 334’s Walnut’s stock is in a basic sporter style with checkering and a slight palmswell on the grip, and checkering along the sides of the fore-end. It’s got a basic look, but some nice features. The bottom of the fore-end is flat, which allows it to mate nicely with a bipod, ride on a bag, or rest on the shooting rail of your deer stand. The stock is capped at the butt with a clean-fitting rubber recoil pad. The heel has a horseshoe-shaped hard plastic piece that allows the stock to glide gracefully over clothing as you bring it to bear—soft rubber pads often grip and pull at a shirt or jacket while you slide the stock up into your shoulder. This plastic piece does scuff a bit if you stand the rifle on its butt on the ground or concrete.

The stock might have the look of a basic wood stock from a previous generation, but under the hood, it’s modern. The fore-end has milled-out pockets to remove weight while maintaining structural integrity. Under the forward part of the receiver, the stock has an aluminum bedding block into which the hefty recoil lug is secured. Inletting around the barrel is pretty even, and the barrel is completely free-floated. The bottom hardware is plastic, but is thick, durable, and fits tightly into the stock. It’s similar to the bottom plastic and trigger guards on the wood-stocked Tikka T3x rifles. The overall fit of parts into the stock is superb for a sub-$500 rifle, and elements like a smooth thumb channel around the three-position safety show thoughtful attention to detail.

Stevens 334 Action

The action of the Stevens 334 Walnut is a 3-lug, box-magazine-fed design that’s robust and milled from carbon steel. The finish appears to be good, but it’ll need to be maintained to avoid corrosion. The bottom of the action is flat except for the protruding recoil lug, and it’s secured to the stock with two action screws torqued to 60 inch-pounds, and steel sleeves that act as bedding pillars. It’s a stable connection.

The three-lug bolt is similar to that on rifles like the Ruger American and Winchester XPR in that its bolt lugs are the same diameter as the bolt body itself. Because of this, the receiver requires no channels, only a smoothbore inner surface for the bolt to travel in. A 60-degree throw locks the lugs into place, and facilitates quick, smooth cycling. It’s removed by depressing a button on the left side of the receiver—no trigger pull is necessary.

The low-profile box magazine is single stack, and holds three rounds of ammunition for all three offerings (.308 Win., 6.5 Creedmoor, and .243 Win.). It protrudes slightly from the bottom of the stock, but doesn’t interfere with one-handed carry. It also is much like that of the wood-stocked Tikka T3x.

The solid receiver has a right-handed ejection port and is topped with a one-piece steel Picatinny rail for easy optic mounting. It’s drilled and tapped to match the Savage Model 110, so it’s compatible with any bases for that rifle.

Threaded into the front of the receiver is a 20-inch carbon steel barrel that’s tipped with an 11-degree crown. It’s got 1:10 RH-twist rifling, and a nice, slightly heavier profile than many standard-weight hunting rifles of today.

Weight and Balance

The Stevens 334 Walnut makes no attempt to be an ultralight mountain rifle. Instead it firmly embraces the role of a regular classic-style deer hunting rifle. With a scope, it’ll weigh around 8.5 pounds, and it balances well in the hand and at the shoulder. Most hunters will likely find the extra mass to be beneficial to accurate shooting in the field. Our sample at the gun test really shined during positional and practical shooting exercises. It’s a wonderfully handling rifle compared to its peer group.

How Does the Stevens 334 Walnut Shoot?

My hope for the Stevens 334 was that it would shoot well at the gun test. It did, and I nervously hoped for the same results from my sample. Taken from the batch of production guns that have finally started shipping, I prayed it wouldn’t be a dud. I applied the same testing protocol that we use at our gun test, shooting 5-shot groups from 100 yards. I noted the overall accuracy average, and the average of the top 10 groups—which is a good representation of what the rifle is capable of.

The Stevens 334 Walnut in 6.5 Creedmoor at the 2023 Gun Test was tested with 6 different types of hunting and target ammunition with the following results:

• Overall average 5-shot group size (24 groups total): 1.105 inches
• Average of 10 best 5-shot groups: .724 inches

The Stevens 334 Walnut in .308 that I tested with 9 types of ammunition printed these results:

• Overall average 5-shot group size (37 groups total): 1.233 inches
• Average of 10 best 5-shot groups: .782 inches

Accuracy was very consistent between the two rifles, even in different calibers. I attribute that to some of the design features which secure a rigid connection between action and stock, and the floated barrel. Accuracy would likely be improved further with a good trigger.

For perspective on this rifle’s accuracy, it’s better than any of the other budget hunting rifles I’ve tested. It even out-performs the Tikka T3X Lite in .308 that I tested last year. That one averaged 1.956-inch overall groups and 1.33-inch groups (best 10).

My sample punched its best groups with Federal Premium Gold Medal 168-grain Center Strike OTM ammunition (.912-inch groups), and averaged 1.4-inch groups across all hunting ammunition tested. Many hunters will choose basic whitetail loads like Federal’s 150-grain Non-Typical, which averaged 1.767-inch groups.

Read Next: M1 Garand: The Greatest Generation’s Service Rifle

What the Stevens 334 Walnut Does Well

The Stevens 334 Walnut brings a great balance of quality and performance that out-matches many of its budget-rifle peers

Where the Stevens 334 Walnut Could Be Better

The Stevens 334 Walnut deserves a better trigger, that’s my only complaint.

Final Thoughts

As much as I’ve come to appreciate high-end rifles that are reliable tack drivers, it warms my heart to see a quality, well-executed budget rifle. It’s no classic custom Model 70, but it’s not meant to be. It is, however, a very affordable rifle that punches way above its weight class and shoots better than many more expensive guns.

“Caught my first ever orange smallmouth. I am not making this up,” he says in a Facebook video. “This thing isn’t like kind of orange. It’s like neon, goldfish orange.”

The fish is so wildly orange that the distinctive vertical bars common to smallmouth are indiscernible.

Read Next: 12-Year-Old Girl Catches Pending World-Record Blue Marlin Off West African Coast

Chrenko says he may have a replica mount made of his bright orange smallmouth to remember the catch of a lifetime.

“Being neon orange would make for a tough life as a small freshwater fish where pretty much everything is earth tones,” Chrenko said on Facebook. “For someone who lives and breathes fishing for smallmouth, this is one I’ll remember my entire life.”

Other Examples of Brightly Colored Fish

In the last year, at least two other xanthic fish have shown up on social media. One was a golden-hued bluegill caught by Terry Nelson while ice fishing on Lindstrom Lake in Minnesota. Remarkably, ice angler Rick Konakowitz caught a similarly colored golden crappie on Clear Lake, Minnesota in February 2022.

Also, during the spring of 2021, Josh Rogers caught a golden largemouth bass while fishing Beaver Lake in Arkansas.

Cold weather is a good news/bad news situation for hunters. Depending on what, where, when, and how you shoot, you might need to worry about cold — or forget about it. Let’s tackle the bad news first.

Bottom line: cold slows down your bullets. It increases bullet drop. It increases wind deflection. It reduces energy delivered on target. Heck, cold temperatures can even prevent guns from firing.

Consider this scenario: you are dressed head-to-toe in your best snow camo. You have your .22-250 Rem. coyote rifle taped white and stuffed to the gills with the hot 55-grain poly-tipped boattail spire point handloads you concocted last summer. Your carefully chronographed measurements showed average muzzle velocity (MV) as 3,700 fps. You’ve got your drop and drift chart memorized and know just which sub-reticle to hold for 300, 350, 400, and 450 yards.

So let the hunt begin. You sit against a fence post in a miserable, 10 mph left-right crosswind at 0-degrees F, thankful that you’ve worn four layers of hydrophobic fleece, Merino wool, and the finest goose down plus a wind blocking layer of Gore-Tex. You blow your open reed call eagerly for 30 seconds, wait three minutes and repeat. After 15 minutes, your first customer appears. Instead of charging in, the big dog stops facing you at a laser ranged 400 yards. OK. That’s a pretty narrow target. But you have a steady bipod rest and you know your drop and drift numbers. You’re a precision shooter. You steady your 400-yard reticle and kiss the 2# Timney trigger. Click. Failure to launch. Stay calm. Bolt in another round and worry about the mis-fire later. Shot number two ignites and the 55-grain projectile is away. In less than a half second it lands. Just right of the coyote and slightly low!

But Why Did You Miss?

The miss happened because you chronographed the load in August at 90-degrees F. But you’ve just launched it in January at 0-degrees F. Just as cold slows syrup and motor oil, it slows bullets. Cold makes air more dense. It’s hard for us to appreciate this because we’re immersed in air all our lives, but it actually has a measurable weight. A cubic foot of atmosphere at standard temperature (59-degrees F.) and pressure (29.92 hg) weighs 0.0807 pounds. And every fraction of an ounce of that creates drag on projectiles, slowing them down. How much? Well, that depends…

Obviously, we’ve just seen that drag increases with air density. You can offset this with an efficient bullet shape, but that is a given in the loads you’re shooting. In other words, your 55-grain bullet doesn’t change shape with cold. Only air density changes. So it doesn’t matter what bullet you’re shooting or what your trajectory curve looks like — it’s going to suffer from colder temperatures. (All the more reason to load the highest B.C. bullets you can.)

The big question, of course, is how much does this cold induced air density hurt you? Well, a quick ballistic trajectory calculation will show us that. Let’s study two tables, both shooting the same load with the same zero and same muzzle velocity (MV). The only difference will be atmospheric temperatures, 90-degrees F. vs. 0-degrees F.

Here’s our first bit of good news. Look at the elevation column in inches. At 200 yards our cold-induced drop increases just 0.12 inches. Not enough to worry our pretty little heads over. At 300 yards — a pretty good poke for most of us — our frozen bullet drops just 0.28” more than our hot one.

Still nothing to worry about. But at 400 yards our additional icy drag results in 1.5 inches more drop. Still not drastic, but combine that with the inevitable poorer precision of a 400-yard shot and you’re liable to miss. Our good news would appear to be over. And there’s more bad news on the way… Greater wind deflection.

Everyone Knows It’s Windy

Wind effects on bullet flight are always more problematic than drop since wind isn’t constant. Add in the longer flight time that results from denser air and your bullet’s deflection increases. Check the Windage columns fourth right from the Range column. These numbers are bullet deflection in inches. At 0-degrees F. our little bullet suffers nearly 4 more inches of wind deflection than it does at 90-degrees F. Ouch!

There is no escaping the increased drag from colder air. The only reasonable way to minimize it is to load the highest ballistic coefficient (B.C.) bullets you can at the highest velocities. But there’s a problem with highest velocities, too. Cold can decrease them. Here’s how…

Baby Come and Light My Fire

You would think that the incredible heat generated by a given quantity of gunpowder would produce a given gas pressure to shove a given bullet from a given length of barrel at a given MV. But, despite all those givens, that’s not a given! Gunpowder, like paper, wood, and hair ignites at a given initial temperature. Paper’s ignition temperature is 451-degrees F. Smokeless gunpowder ignites at about 320-degrees F. But…

Believe it or not, cold makes gun powder harder to ignite. And once it does flame, it doesn’t burn as hot nor produce as much pressure as it does at a higher ambient temperature. For every 1-degree F. drop in temperature we can expect about a 1- to 1.5-fps drop in velocity due to lower propellant temperature. Our 3,700 fps load above would drop to about 3,572 fps at 0-degrees F. Combine that lower MV with the denser air at 0-degrees and trajectory really starts to suffer, as this final table shows.

Now we’re really feeling the effects of the cold. At 400 yards our drop increases by 2.5 inches compared to our 90-degree trajectory. Worse yet, wind deflection widens by almost 5”. Of course, as range increases, both of these increase, too. Fortunately, we have more good news to offset this!

Curing the Cold Weather Blues

Not all gun powders suffer from the cold. Many modern powders have been engineered to minimize temperature sensitivity. So-called temperature insensitive powders such as Varget, Hodgdon H-1000 and the rest of Hodgdon’s Extreme line of powders minimize MV changes across a wide temperature range. IMR Enduron powders are similarly designed to minimize temperature sensitivity. Serious precision shooters and handloaders can and should research temperature insensitive powders to select the best and most consistent for their particular rifles, cartridges, bullets, and style of hunting.

Hunters who shoot factory ammunition should conduct similar research. Not all or even many ammo makers advertise the powders they use, but some are beginning to least least specify “less temperature sensitive” powders in some of their loads. Regardless, a wise shooter will verify this by chronographing or drop testing loads in wildly different temperatures. To drop test, merely measure bullet drop below your point-of-aim at varying distance, i.e. 300 yards and 400 yards — farther if you anticipate engaging targets at longer ranges. If your bullets drop significantly more in extreme cold than they do in summer heat, they’re likely propelled by a temperature sensitive powder. But that doesn’t mean they’re no good…

Read Next: Top 10 Big-Game Bullets

To use any temperature sensitive load effectively in extreme cold without a chronograph measurement of MV, merely determine drops at those temperatures and use this trajectory information when compensating for distant shots. An on-line ballistic calculator or phone app like Ballistic can spit out drop and drift charts for you quickly.

Best News

Perhaps the best news of all is that you rarely need to shoot beyond 300 yards when winter predator hunting. Coyotes, foxes, and bobcats responding to predator calls usually approach within at least 200 yards and, as experienced callers will attest, often inside spitting distance. Then cold induced trajectory differences mean nothing!

Conclusion

Before you worry too much about cold temperatures screwing up your shooting, make an accurate assessment of how often you actually hunt in serious cold. Many of us imagine we’re Numb Butt of the North when we’re really freaking out over a reasonable winter day in the teens. You have to hunt places like South Dakota and Montana north into Canada and Alaska to really enjoy some serious cold.

Second, determine how often you shoot late winter game beyond 200 or 300 yards. Don’t get your Long Johns in a wad until shots extend past 300 yards.

Read Next: How a Ballistician Determines and Applies BCs for Bullets

Third, shoot a high velocity, high B.C. bullet to begin with. This always minimizes drop and drift at all temperatures.

Fourth, test your loads for drops and drifts at anticipated hunting temperatures. If you can’t replicate them, freeze your ammo overnight, keep them in a cooler with ice until you reach the range, and shoot quickly after chambering. That won’t show the effects of thicker, cold air, but will at least show the differences in powder burning effects.

Finally, memorize your drops and drifts based either on a good ballistic calculator or actual field testing under true hunting conditions.

Only two of those fish were big enough to be weighed, however, and Ols’ marlin was the only one that met the minimum length and weight requirements in order to qualify. (The tournament minimums for blue and white marlin are 114 inches and 70 pounds, respectively.) His roughly 640-pound fish took first place in both the white and blue marlin divisions—along with all the prize money that came with it.

“The blue marlin from the Floor Real left no doubt when it was measured at 118 [inches] in the boat before electrifying the crowd while tipping the scales at 640.5 pounds,” officials explained in a news release. “It proved to be the only qualifying billfish and wins most of the money for both white and blue marlin.”

Read Next: Massive Blue Marlin Caught Off Alabama Coast Breaks 27-Year Record

The $6.2-million purse replaces the previous world record for the biggest payout in fishing tournament history, which was set during last year’s White Marlin Open. The record-breaking $4.45 million in winnings went to Capt. Jeremy Duffie, who took first place in 2022 with a 77.5-pound white marlin. Duffie’s boat, the Billfisher, is also based in Ocean City.

The following piece, titled Is Recoil Ruining Us?, was written by Jim Carmichel, Outdoor Life‘s former shooting editor and successor to Jack O’Connor. Carmichel published this piece in 2005, and in it he brings up the popularity of magnum cartridges and the valid issue of how recoil will degrade marksmanship. And, importantly, that recoil affects everyone. He makes an argument that power cannot make up for shooter error, and recoil-induced error is totally preventable.

It seemed that when he wrote these words, hunters were trending toward magnum cartridges. However, I don’t know that it was a recent trend; it’s been an issue since the days of O’Connor. In recent years, a clear split has developed between hunters with seemingly irreconcilable mindsets. Bigger and faster cartridges are being developed all the time—just look at Nosler and Weatherby’s impressive lineups. Hell, I just bought a .338 Lapua Magnum myself. On the other side, the 6.5 Creedmoor became popular for a reason—and it wasn’t just because writers were shoving it down the throats of shooters like a spoonful of Robitussin. The 6.5 Creedmoor is inherently accurate, performs well on most game, and it’s very soft on the shoulder.

In a way, the popularity of muzzle brakes since 2005 is a nod to Carmichel’s opinion. Contemporary factory rifles regularly include them—even on mildly-chambered rifles. They certainly make shooting heavy magnum calibers easier on the shoulder—even if they are hell on your ears (and on bystanders).  But these rifles are still more difficult to shoot with absolute consistency than lighter-recoiling rounds with less-violent muzzle blast. O’Connor himself referenced recoil-induced flinching numerous times and was a fan of medium-bore cartridges because their reduced recoil made them easier to shoot well. In a piece titled On Getting Kicked, in the April, 1972 issue of Outdoor Life, O’Connor said the following:

“A man can resign himself to heavy recoil. Under the excitement of shooting at heavy and dangerous game he may not notice it much, but I think anyone who says he is oblivious to it is talking through his hat…Most of us are somewhat more sensitive to recoil than we care to admit, and mild recoil is as much of a virtue in a cartridge as high velocity and flat trajectory.”

Certainly, none could argue that O’Connor was afraid to shoot a big rifle.

I don’t think Carmichel—or O’Connor for that matter—argued that big magnum cartridges were bad. I certainly don’t think they are. It’s just that those guys appreciated them for what they were, but recognized that it’s easy for people to get sucked into the idea that more is better without realizing the issues that a harder-kicking cartridge can create for the average shooter. The same goes for the “needmoor” super cartridges (as some might satirically characterize them). In the right context, they’re perfectly capable, but they aren’t magic. In either case, there’s no substitute for being able to place a bullet where it needs to go.

Is Recoil Ruining Us?

By Jim Carmichel

A wise proverb warns: “Be careful what you wish for–you might get it.” Sometimes the object of our dearest wishes yields only disappointment and regret. That certainly holds true for what seems to be a widespread notion that bigger, faster, more powerful cartridges will enable us to smite deer and elk at yardages measured in the hundreds. But have we overgunned ourselves to the point where the advantages of ballistic horsepower are outweighed by the disadvantages?

Why Bigger Isn’t Better

Obviously, “overgunned” is a relative term. When relating size and energy to specific game, for instance, are we overgunned if we use a .300 Magnum for whitetails when a smaller, less powerful caliber such as a .250 Savage will do just as well? “No way,” the Use Enough Gun Brotherhood may cry. “A bullet can never hit an animal too hard.” And they put forth some convincing arguments.

But theirs is a rather one-sided discussion because no one is seriously debating the effectiveness of powerful magnum-sized cartridges. After all, we can accept as gospel that a fast-stepping bullet from, say, a .300 Winchester Magnum hits hard, and that its flatter trajectory makes it easier to hit distant targets. The flaw in the argument, however, is the assumption that hunters will fire hard-kicking magnums as accurately as they will lighter calibers. Ah, there’s the rub, because when the recoil factor kicks in, marksmanship can drop faster than a non-magnum bullet at 250 yards. Consider these facts:

1. Game is always killed cleanly and efficiently by proper bullet placement.
2. Proper bullet placement is a result of good marksmanship.
3. When we use equipment that degrades our marksmanship, there is a corresponding loss in our ability to kill game efficiently.

There appears to be a chronic misunderstanding, or underestimation, of this third fact. There is a mistaken, but apparently widespread, notion that poor marksmanship can be compensated for by more powerful cartridges. I call this the “hit ’em harder and they’ll die anyway” rationale.

Such reasoning would have us believe that a hunter is more liable to put his tag on a deer gut-shot with a 270-grain bullet from a .375 H&H Magnum than one similarly hit with a 130-grain bullet from a .270. We might technically suppose that the deer or elk gut-shot with the .375 will succumb to the wound somewhat sooner because of greater shock and tissue damage. But how much sooner? And where?

To wish for a ballistic behemoth that renders instant lights-out for any game animal regardless of bullet placement, we need to think in terms of a 105mm howitzer firing a hollowpoint bullet that explodes a deer like a prairie dog being disassembled by a .220 Swift. Since howitzers and bazookas are pretty much out of the question, we must circle back to good bullet placement in our quest for the quick kill. Read Fact No. 2 again.

I’ve been hanging out with hunters, shooters and wastrels of similar stripe most of my life and have known men of Napoleonic size who seemed to enjoy being kicked silly by big-caliber guns. Conversely, I’ve known hairy-chested hunks who shuddered at the mere thought of a gnat landing on their shooting shoulder.

On average, though, few hunters can take much recoil without having to pay for it sooner or later. And we pay for it in ways that we sometimes don’t even suspect–most commonly in loss of personal marksmanship.

But how did we become so magnumized in the first place? Shooting magazines and gun writers have no doubt encouraged their readers to “think big,” and I can certainly claim my share of the blame. Consider just the literary attention that has been paid to short magnums in recent years.

More troublesome, at least to me, is the increasing notion that game animals are somehow getting harder to kill, as if they are more bulletproof than their daddies and granddads.

In just the past two weeks I’ve read articles by three writers freshly returned from South African farm hunts who used phrases like “tough to kill” in describing rather ordinary species that were successfully done asunder by their big booming magnums. Never mind that for the past century or so the ground has been flying up and hitting these same species when they’ve been struck by bullets from 7×57 Mausers, 6.5 Mannlichers and even gentler calibers. Hunters reading these hair-raising accounts will be inclined to go for more power than they can use.

In his book A Country Boy in Africa, George Hoffman, a professional hunter and safari guide who had seen hundreds of animals shot with all sorts of calibers, stated that while the .338 Win. Mag. was one of his favorite calibers, it was too much for plains game, and that “smaller calibers serve the purpose much better.” Many of his clients couldn’t handle the recoil and shoot accurately with even the relatively mild-kicking (by African rifle standards) .338 Mag.

Shorter Isn’t Less

The new short magnums are marvels of internal ballistics and have already established design trends that will be with us for generations to come. But let’s not confuse short with little, or kid ourselves about the potency, fore and aft, of this new breed of cartridge.

Though they may appear cute and cuddly, the .300 Remington and Winchester Short Magnums equal the velocity of a .300 Win. Mag. with 180-grain bullets, and are definitely hard-kicking magnums any way you look at them. Blast this energy out the muzzle of a rifle weighing scarcely more than 7 pounds (Remington’s M-7SS) and you get the dubious thrill of about 25 pounds of recoil.

Being “overgunned” is most obvious when a hunter jerks the trigger and hunches his shoulder in anticipation of recoil and squinches his eyes so tight he has only the vaguest idea which way the bullet is heading. But being overgunned can have more subtle effects, too.

I talk to lots of hunters, many of whom tell me they handle powerful magnums without a problem. This always leads me to ask how much they practice with their hard-kicking rifles. The answer is usually something like, “Well, I shoot it a few rounds when I check the scope before I go hunting.”

In other words, these hunters aren’t getting in the practice they need to be truly competent marksmen. Magnum-class ammo costs more than ordinary calibers, of course, which in some cases may be a reason for scant or nonexistent practice, but the fact of the matter is that there simply aren’t many shooters who truly enjoy practicing with hard-kicking rifles. (This also applies to hard-punching shotguns and handguns.) After a few punishing rounds from a sighting-in rest and a few more from hunting positions, we tend to get out of the mood for more practice and our marksmanship suffers.

Das Flinch

A while back, when I was hunting in Scotland for the petite roe deer, our party was joined by a German who presented himself in traditional hunting lederhosen, a Tyrolean hat and a rifle covered with engraving, carvings, and other such frills.

The expensive scope was as big as the stovepipe in a lumber camp cook house and the caliber was 8x68mm, which is popular in Europe and would be a good choice for North American moose and big bears.

Read Next: 10 Classic Hunting Rifles Every Hunter Should Own

The morning we went out to check our sights it became quickly apparent this fellow was virtually terrorized by the recoil of his rifle. Not only was he overgunned for the 90-pound roe, but he was clearly overgunned for himself. When he fired at a foot-wide target at 60 yards he flinched so badly it was impossible to know for sure whether the rifle was sighted in or not.

For two days he blasted away at deer near and nearer without touching a hair, so on the third and final day I offered him the use of the little .222 rifle with which I’d cleanly dropped two nice bucks. At first he seemed a bit insulted, as if my simple little rifle was in no way up to his standards, but at the gamekeeper’s urging he finally accepted the offer.

That night he was all smiles, songs and toasts because he’d finally connected on the trophy he’d come all the way to Scotland for, thanks to a shooter-friendly rifle and a caliber that didn’t punch his lights out every time he pulled the trigger. Mostly, though, he was happy that he had learned a lesson lots of other overgunned hunters can benefit from.

At first, Meyers said he shot the deer three times with his crossbow from roughly 25 yards away, according to court documents published by WXOW. But Meyers eventually revealed that he used a rifle instead of a crossbow to kill the trophy buck behind his garage. He then stabbed the dead buck with a broadhead arrow in the bullet wound to make it look like the animal had been taken legally with a bow.

Meyers pled guilty to all charges according to La Crosse County Circuit Court records, in exchange for a plea agreement stipulating a three-year suspension of his Wisconsin hunting and fishing privileges. Officials also notified the organizers of the local hunting contests that Meyers’ buck had been illegally taken, and his contest entries were removed.

Read Next: Vermont Poaching Bust Exposes Father, Son, and Grandfather

“We appreciate the teamwork from citizens who care about the state’s resources and want them protected,” DNR lieutenant warden Tyler Strelow said. “It is important to take action against individuals who are stealing from those who hunt the Wisconsin way—legally, safely and ethically.”