old vixen and cubs [ graphic PICS}

steyrman2

---

I had being watching this old vixen for a good while never got a shot under the lamp so i decided to stalk her with lots of movment in the last few weeks i decided to take her out i had seen the cubs out in the last 2 weeks plan put together. I ranged finded the ground 200 yards to the earth and the path she was travelling was 312 yards longest shot the wait began seen the cubs out playing as i had pre baited them with a few rabbits but i wanted her first around 9 pm she was up with cubs dont know how she got in as i had the binos out the whole time . She was on guard duty and as quick as she was the she was gone i waited when i saw movement just across the stream it was her again i ranged her 310 yard gave her 2.75 moa a 32 grain vmax from the .204 i could see the damage reloaded back on the cubs dialed back to 1 moa 3 shots 3 kills with the .204 damage was massive with head shots on them all but i was after her for a long time the cubs were in a maize field job done

bazza888

welldone ,great story and great pics!!

Constab2

Well done excellent shooting

cyberblade 918c

lord that is some damage at that range !!

browning 12 bore

jaysus brilliant job there lad well done we only managed two in the one field you did one better lol lol lol

ssl

Hugh damage and great shoots there pal

kildare.17hmr

I think the pics are great at showing the power and rapid expansion of the .204's light loads, it give lads a better understanding of other calibers, i also like seeing pics to go with the stories.

blackstairsboy

It is a sign of a job well done. I bet you the none of the foxes complained about it as regards them they were humanely killed, overkill some might say but you can't get deader than dead.

marlin vs

Good shooting and a job well done.

dev110

Nice shooting!
Them 32gr V-max definitely cause a lot of damage.
Have/Would you use them for chest shots or would you use the heavier rounds?

I am interested in a .204 but was wary as not many people had it and didn't want to take a risk. I hope to see more pics/stories in the future :cool:

steyrman2

dev110 wrote: »

Nice shooting!
Them 32gr V-max definitely cause a lot of damage.
Have/Would you use them for chest shots or would you use the heavier rounds?

I am interested in a .204 but was wary as not many people had it and didn't want to take a risk. I hope to see more pics/stories in the future :cool:

hi dev 110 i went for a ramble last night to a neighbours land he had shot a vixen 2 days ago it had taken a few ducks so i wanted to see if there was cubs around after 20 mins sitting and glassing the area i spotted 2 cubs out and about . I used the rangefinder and the were 245 yards dialed them in shot the first one in the shoulder and the other one sitting down square in the chest gave it 15 mins no more around went down for a look first fox pinhole in and left shoulder missing second cub the was a trickle of blood from the entry hole but the bullet traveled down and exited between the legs it cut a channel out of him no pics as i had no phone with me

dev110

Thanks. That answers my worries of the .204 not having enough penetration.

Chesapeake

Nice work Mate, nothin like a bit of skull to transfer energy
Jayus, ya wouldn't want to try to mount any of them...............LOL

Spunk84

As it was said some damage at that distance with a 32grain :O nice work mate and great shooting

deerhunter1

steyrman2 wrote: »

---

I had being watching this old vixen for a good while never got a shot under the lamp so i decided to stalk her with lots of movment in the last few weeks i decided to take her out i had seen the cubs out in the last 2 weeks plan put together. I ranged finded the ground 200 yards to the earth and the path she was travelling was 312 yards longest shot the wait began seen the cubs out playing as i had pre baited them with a few rabbits but i wanted her first around 9 pm she was up with cubs dont know how she got in as i had the binos out the whole time . She was on guard duty and as quick as she was the she was gone i waited when i saw movement just across the stream it was her again i ranged her 310 yard gave her 2.75 moa a 32 grain vmax from the .204 i could see the damage reloaded back on the cubs dialed back to 1 moa 3 shots 3 kills with the .204 damage was massive with head shots on them all but i was after her for a long time the cubs were in a maize field job done

great shooting

4200fps

I find it hard to believe all 3 foxs lost their heads completely to a .204. I'm using a 243 and it not doing that damage with v-max. The anti shooters will love these images. Looks something like a .270 or .308 done that damage in all fairness. Thats my opinion

kildare.17hmr

4200fps wrote: »

I find it hard to believe all 3 foxs lost their heads completely to a .204. I'm using a 243 and it not doing that damage with v-max. The anti shooters will love these images. Looks something like a .270 or .308 done that damage in all fairness. Thats my opinion

The difference is lad that the small 204 round dispences its energy very quickly and pretty much explodes on impact of something solid like a skull. Your 243 carries its energy alot further through so does not leave as much of a mess

4200fps

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

The difference is lad that the small 204 round dispences its energy very quickly and pretty much explodes on impact of something solid like a skull. Your 243 carries its energy alot further through so does not leave as much of a mess

58 grain v-max for the 243 is aprox 3800fps and the 50 grain for the .220 swift is nearly 4000fps and never seen this sort of damage done to a fox but i did with a 308. still dont believe it,no image of 204 beside them either. 204 carrys a low grain bullet so there be little of the round to dispurse. If i used a 95 grain superformance id have way more damage and energy and less fps

kildare.17hmr

The reason it does so much damage is exactly the reason your saying it doesnt, because its so small and travelling so fast. A lad on the other board who shoots with 243 also said the most damage he ever seen done to a fox came from a 40gr vmax 223 and that las has been shootin foxes since before you or me were born! I understand why you might not believe it but iv seen the power of the small round first hand so have no reason to doubt styerman, infact i wouldnt expect anything less from it

garv123

4200fps wrote: »

58 grain v-max for the 243 is aprox 3800fps and the 50 grain for the .220 swift is nearly 4000fps and never seen this sort of damage done to a fox but i did with a 308. still dont believe it,no image of 204 beside them either. 204 carrys a low grain bullet so there be little of the round to dispurse. If i used a 95 grain superformance id have way more damage and energy and less fps

Its cubs skull, the larger rounds would pass trough with out transferring most of their energy.

Deise Musashi

I've done similar with a .220 Swift, and years ago in UK with handloaded light foxing rounds in a .22-250.

High speed, and bullet heads designed to be very frangible, transmit huge energy on impact.

The same light round in .22-250 was accidentally used (by me) to take a head on shot on a young doe, that someone had shot the jaw off of.

The doe was facing me at about 100 yards, the round struck between and just above the eyes. I thought I had a standard round in and was going for a high neck shot, the lighter round struck a little high.
The doe dropped to the shot and once we got over to her (shot across a deep river gully) we could see the damage. A section of skull at the front had been blown out and the brain had mostly sucked out the hole, still intact and attached but laying on the muzzle of the deer.
No exit and very little in way of penetration, but a very dead deer.

The rounds for foxing were in a leather carrier, and the lad who's gun it was, hadn't realised they weren't the same round as he always used for culling Muntjac. Luckily it was enough with a head shot, but a torso hit would probably have only further wounded the same animal (young fallow doe).

I've never shot with a .204, but would be happy with that kind of performance for foxing. I'll stick with my .220Swift for now, the ammo is a killer but I don't shoot hundreds of rounds with it.

Practice with my CZ 452 is plenty cheap

4200fps

Its hard to imagine all the same for such a small round so the less grain you have and more fps you will loose an entire head down to the shoulders It maybe true but i'll have to see it done in reality before i'd believe it. But in all fairness not great images for the anti's where some find the smallest thing disturbing.

German pointer

4200fps wrote: »

I find it hard to believe all 3 foxs lost their heads completely to a .204. I'm using a 243 and it not doing that damage with v-max. The anti shooters will love these images. Looks something like a .270 or .308 done that damage in all fairness. Thats my opinion

I am not saying the other lads are wrong far from it. But the first thing I got with the .270 was a fox and he had damage just like these ones. 130gr SST at 30 yards. More then 1 round from different riflesand calibers will do damage that looks the same in photos

kildare.17hmr

4200fps wrote: »

Its hard to imagine all the same for such a small round so the less grain you have and more fps you will loose an entire head down to the shoulders It maybe true but i'll have to see it done in reality before i'd believe it. But in all fairness not great images for the anti's where some find the smallest thing disturbing.

Antis will moan at anything and have been known to cause harm and suffering to animals in order to push their agenda. Couldnt care what they think or what they say because most people know they are full if **** crazys

steyrman2

4200fps wrote: »

I find it hard to believe all 3 foxs lost their heads completely to a .204. I'm using a 243 and it not doing that damage with v-max. The anti shooters will love these images. Looks something like a .270 or .308 done that damage in all fairness. Thats my opinion

Thank you for your opinion all foxes were shot with a 32 grain vmax factory ammo doing 4200 fps from my .204 i do not have a .270 or .308 but i do have a .300 wm i have shot foxes with .308 and did a lot more damage if you look back at my post there should be a few pics of them but your more than welcome to come out with me to see it in action

steyrman2

4200fps wrote: »

Its hard to imagine all the same for such a small round so the less grain you have and more fps you will loose an entire head down to the shoulders It maybe true but i'll have to see it done in reality before i'd believe it. But in all fairness not great images for the anti's where some find the smallest thing disturbing.

hi 4200 fps i can tell you what i found out about the .204 and what made me change to it better bc in lighter bullets good fps the 32 grain vmax are like hand grenades going off tbh no one is more suprised as me . I am shooting a long time i have had the hornets, 17 centre fire , swift, .22-250 ,for foxing this year im looking forward to the .204 thats why im getting a semi custom one built
As for the anti the dont bother me i hunt shoot and fish all my life i put the pics up because the camera dont lie

4200fps

the camera might not lie but i could shoot a fox with a 243 take the picture and say i shot them with a hornet thats the point i'm making. By the way your shooting is very good and i hunt and fish alot too. I'd love to shoot a .204 to see this as my swift didn't do that damage and they are well known to do major damage but the 243 does that bit more damage!

moby30

Great shooting there steyrman. I always enjoy reading all the stories and looking at the photos it's just a pity that some lads have nothing better to do than try to contradict and and pass smart remarks about some of them. Puts others off posting their own photos and stories.

steyrman2

4200fps wrote: »

the camera might not lie but i could shoot a fox with a 243 take the picture and say i shot them with a hornet thats the point i'm making. By the way your shooting is very good and i hunt and fish alot too. I'd love to shoot a .204 to see this as my swift didn't do that damage and they are well known to do major damage but the 243 does that bit more damage!

This is possible 4200 if you had calibres i use .204 and 300 winmag i think if i shot them with the bigger gun there would be nothing left of them i have used the swift for a few years and did as much if not more damage but thats what makes forums good every one has different views

bazza888

personally i think people on here complaining about the pictures other people put up and acussing them of lying does more damage to hunters

4200fps

steyrman2 wrote: »

This is possible 4200 if you had calibres i use .204 and 300 winmag i think if i shot them with the bigger gun there would be nothing left of them i have used the swift for a few years and did as much if not more damage but thats what makes forums good every one has different views

No problem steyrman not falling out with you, i just still cant get over its damage. Its like this there is some who doesn't believe things 100% till they see it for them self's and i'm one of them. I'm mad now to try one out but i know nobody around here with one

Erk

I shot only a few foxes with my .308 only 2 being headshots and they wasn't much damage just a good size entry shot just above the nose.

4200fps

Erk wrote: »

I shot only a few foxes with my .308 only 2 being headshots and they wasn't much damage just a good size entry shot just above the nose.

What bullet type where you using?

Erk

150gr Fusion. Maybe if i shot them from side one damage would be worse?

4200fps

Them 308's do serious damage with the ballistic tips

CajunPenguin

Ouch. Why do people here hunt foxes? Just curious. I don't mind killing animals for food, but that seemed like a waste of a nice fox. Or are they eating your stuff?

Cass

While not answering in relation to the OP's specific circumstances i can answer in general terms.

Under Irish law there is no "vermin list". There are protected species with no season, and protected species with a season. Everything else has no season, and no "protection" under Irish law.

Now that's a fairly simplified view, but to get a full picture see the sticky at the top of the hunting forum for all species, and their "classification" and season (where applicable).

To answer your question foxes are not protected under Irish law. They are viewed as a pest species, and with no natural predator to control populations hunters will cull them for two primary reasons.

1. To protect livestock.
2. To control populations in a given area.

Both are necessary measures. If left unchecked the population of foxes would soon expand to such an extent you would see encroachment into the already heavily populated rural areas, but also into urban areas.

Glensman

steyrman2 wrote: »

---

I had being watching this old vixen for a good while never got a shot under the lamp so i decided to stalk her with lots of movment in the last few weeks i decided to take her out i had seen the cubs out in the last 2 weeks plan put together. I ranged finded the ground 200 yards to the earth and the path she was travelling was 312 yards longest shot the wait began seen the cubs out playing as i had pre baited them with a few rabbits but i wanted her first around 9 pm she was up with cubs dont know how she got in as i had the binos out the whole time . She was on guard duty and as quick as she was the she was gone i waited when i saw movement just across the stream it was her again i ranged her 310 yard gave her 2.75 moa a 32 grain vmax from the .204 i could see the damage reloaded back on the cubs dialed back to 1 moa 3 shots 3 kills with the .204 damage was massive with head shots on them all but i was after her for a long time the cubs were in a maize field job done

The brother shot 6 foxes this week using 39gr SBKs in his .204.
Loads of damage, not as much as this... But it is Very believable damage

gunisfun

4200fps wrote: »

I find it hard to believe all 3 foxs lost their heads completely to a .204. I'm using a 243 and it not doing that damage with v-max. The anti shooters will love these images. Looks something like a .270 or .308 done that damage in all fairness. Thats my opinion

i have seen a fox split in half with a 204 at 400 yards so i am sure it can do this

Corholio

Ezridax wrote: »

While not answering in relation to the OP's specific circumstances i can answer in general terms.

Under Irish law there is no "vermin list". There are protected species with no season, and protected species with a season. Everything else has no season, and no "protection" under Irish law.

Now that's a fairly simplified view, but to get a full picture see the sticky at the top of the hunting forum for all species, and their "classification" and season (where applicable).

To answer your question foxes are not protected under Irish law. They are viewed as a pest species, and with no natural predator to control populations hunters will cull them for two primary reasons.

1. To protect livestock.
2. To control populations in a given area.

Both are necessary measures. If left unchecked the population of foxes would soon expand to such an extent you would see encroachment into the already heavily populated rural areas, but also into urban areas.

I'd be considered an anti, but not a crazy kind. Was hard to look at those pics to be honest. Just find it a little strange hunters would boast about skull damage or amount of face left on a fox. Even though im anti-hunting, at a push I can understand people would have an interest in it, but stuff like this I can't fathom to be honest, especially defenceless cubs.

garv123

Corholio wrote: »

I'd be considered an anti, but not a crazy kind. Was hard to look at those pics to be honest. Just find it a little strange hunters would boast about skull damage or amount of face left on a fox. Even though im anti-hunting, at a push I can understand people would have an interest in it, but stuff like this I can't fathom to be honest, especially defenceless cubs.

Will you be calling them cubs defenceless next year when they are killing lambs?
preventions better than cure.

Cass

Corholio wrote: »

I'd be considered an anti, but not a crazy kind. Was hard to look at those pics to be honest. Just find it a little strange hunters would boast about skull damage or amount of face left on a fox.

To all opposed to hunting this will be the "proof" they need to convict all hunters as brutal murderers, etc, etc. From a hunter's point of view it is a display of what a certain rifle, and caliber can do. Not for the sake of bragging, but to ensure a clean, and quick kill. Now the discussion of hunting from an ethical, and moral point of view is not allowed as it always turns into a train wreck of a thread, but without breaking that rule there are two sides to every story, and hunters actively do more for the environment than people want to, care to, or will admit.

We appreciate the animals, and want any suffering to be either non existant or at a minimum. You may not like the pictures, and to some they will be a little much. However i can assure you the fox in the pictures never even heard the sound of the shot, let alone felt anything.

Even though im anti-hunting, at a push I can understand people would have an interest in it, but stuff like this I can't fathom to be honest, especially defenceless cubs.

Without being smart or nasty i dislike that term "defenceless". This is not a war. They are not children or women in some battle. They are animals. They move, live, eat, breath, and survive off instinct. Defenceless is a human emotion attached to animals by anti hunting organisations to make it easier to associate their "plight" to people that ordinarily would not care less.

The culling of all animals not just foxes is a necessity. Whether you agree with it or not is somewhat irrelevant. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but every shooter partakes in a 100% legal pursuit. Population control is vital to both control numbers, and to cull sick, weak animals which in turn eliminates or reduces the amount of diseased animals, and encourages, and supports a healthier population. To stop such culling would lead to population explosion within a short few years. Unless prey animals/ food source increased or could manage this increase you would see an increase in weaker, starving, sick animals.

While no official figures exist, that i know off, general consensus is the population of foxes within Ireland may be in the 150,000 - 170,000 mark. Of course that is only an educated guesses as a population census has either not been carried out or at least not a full/proper one.

I have had many discussions with friends and family, not all agree with hunting, that i should not be shooting foxes or from some of them animals at all. The thing is when i ask them to give another workable scenario that would effectively control a population of a certain species within an area the answers i get are completely unworkable or in some cases so expensive as to be prohibitive. So especially with today's financial situation you try and explain to people that they need to take a cut in their welfare payments, have to pay more tax, money is being cut from hospitals, healthcare, emergency services, An Garda, etc to fund such projects.

The truth is only a very, very small few people actively do anything to oppose our 100% legal pursuit. These so called "animal rights groups" have no clue as to what is they are trying to do. They act without thought of consequence or effect. The much publicised release of mink is a great example. A small "victory". At what cost. Thousands of animals released that will decimate an area of any fauna within a few short years. Added to an ever increasing population means they spread out, and continue to damage livestock, natural fauna, and forever change the natural landscape of an area.

Other species require culling. Deer being a classic example. Without continued control of the deer population the numbers would grow, areas of woodland, and arable land would be destroyed, and disease, starvation, etc would be common place. Deer are not so cute when they look like this. I know what most people think. "Well i've no problem with that as people use/eat deer". Even if they did not continued culling would still be a necessity.

Add to all this the fact that no one mentions all the breeding programmes that are run by gun clubs at their own expense. The continued programmes to eliminate non native species to protect our own. None of this is shown because it flies in the face the picture trying to be painted by those opposed to hunting. When these so called animal rights groups actually start to actively take part in animal management programmes, and consider the consequences of their actions before acting instead of throwing as much mud as they can in the hope that some sticks, well maybe then i will listen to their cries. Until they act accordingly i cannot take them seriously.


My apologies to the OP for dragging your thread somewhat (or a lot) off topic. However due to the number of responses, both visible and the insulting ones that were deleted perhaps it's best that something like this is said for all to read.

E. Fudd

4200fps wrote: »

No problem steyrman not falling out with you, i just still cant get over its damage. Its like this there is some who doesn't believe things 100% till they see it for them self's and i'm one of them. I'm mad now to try one out but i know nobody around here with one

For somebody who "doesn't believe things until they see it for themselves" you were fairly adamant about the the area around you crawling with wild boar a couple of months ago, and quite content to go prancing off convinced you were going to shoot one, of which we are yet to see any results!

I've seen a .204 in action, and I shoot a .243 myself and I can tell you here and now that the damage a .204 inflicts is something I can only describe as savage.

Give the lad a break, right, fine, you don't believe that they were shot with a
.204, thats your perogative, but stop banging on about it!