When the deer season's over, Joe's gun gets a good cleaning, and back in the rack it goes until next season. Again, though, this is a guy who loves to hunt--so much so, that gun season isn't enough for him--so chances are he takes advantage of the bow or muzzleloading seasons to extend his days afield.

While providing a very steady front rest, a makeshift tripod is only effective for the average rifleman out to about 200 yards when accelerated breathing and pulse rate enter the picture.

Given the above two examples--which, I grant you, are at the very extreme ends of the spectrum--can we say that the first guy is primarily a shooter, while the other is more a hunter? Based strictly on the tactics and methods employed, sure we can, but it would be a gross oversimplification. For one thing, Joe hunts in the east and doesn't have a lot of options as to where he can hunt. Whether by choice or not, he finds himself hunting areas that are heavily wooded, where ranges are short and where his .30-30, 4X scope and factory ammo work just fine.

Whether or not you've ever given it much thought, if the foregoing scenarios were accurately articulated, I'd bet most people would say that at some point hunting ceases to be hunting and becomes a clinical exercise in shooting. Where we draw the line is something each must answer for himself, but wherever that line is, it is determined primarily by distance. Most of us envision hunting as a contest between instinct and intelligence, but to actually be hunting it must be done at relatively close distances, where the hunter must employ skill and stealth to be successful. He must be aware of wind direction and that movement or noise at the wrong time can bring an abrupt end to the hunt. But when the quarry is so far away that scent, movement and noise (within reason, of course) are no longer factors, it then becomes purely a test of one's shooting skill and equipment. That's not an indictment, mind you, simply a statement of fact.

Where am I on this issue? Somewhere between the middle and the tech side, and I'd venture a guess that the majority of RifleShooter readers feel the same way. I mean, the very title of this magazine suggests that to those who read it, the rifle, caliber, the specific load, along with all the other ancillary equipment used on a hunt can be as important as the hunt itself. In fact, I'll bet there are quite a few readers out there to whom hunting just happens to be the best means of trying out new equipment--a new rifle, cartridge or handload.

Laser rangefinding capability built into a binocular and wind meters are invaluable aids to extreme-range shooting. The trajectory chart taped to the stock shows points of impact out to 500 yards.

Can a tech weenie love to hunt just as much as the guy who looks at a rifle merely as a tool? Of course. It's just that, in addition to the enjoyment derived from hunting, the techie is committed both emotionally and financially to the equipment to the extent that it

provides a year-round interest. Acquiring a new rifle, whether it's chambered for an old classic or the latest cartridge, then finding the most accurate handload for it are ends in themselves. It's what drives the firearms industry, and thank goodness, too, because if we were all like Joe, who's content using his dad's hand-me-down rifle and buying one box of ammo every few years, we'd be able to see every exhibit at the SHOT Show in 20 minutes. It is us--you and I--who are the reason we see the cornucopia of new products that is introduced every year, new rifles, cartridges, optics and all the other related products that keep pushing the envelope and make us more effective hunters.