Birding for Hunters

OK, I know what you’re thinking; this guy has been out in the sun too long if he thinks I’m going to become a bird-watcher, me being a big rugged hunter and all. Well, stereotypes aside, the truth is that hunters are normal everyday people just like anyone else, and most often have other interests aside from hunting. What if you were able to combine that other interest with your hunting; you’d have twice the enjoyment and twice the motivation for a hunting trip. Think of it as an adjunct to you skills as a hunter and a way to enrich the enjoyment of your time spent in the field. Actually, it’s a case of adding to your hunting experience rather than taking over from it. Birding can be like one of those things that you discover has been right under your nose all along, but never realized it until it’s pointed out, then all of a sudden every time your outdoors becomes an excuse to do some birding. I don’t expect everyone to become a fanatical birder, but you may find you enjoy it more than you imagined.


I think there are a couple of reasons that birding, bird-watching, twitching, whatever you want to call it, fits so well with hunters. Firstly and fore mostly is that fact that hunters for the most part are nature lovers whether they are really conscious of it or not. They love being outdoors in the bush, the sights, the smells, the freedom to wander and soak up the atmosphere that is nature. Birds are a big part of that ‘atmosphere’. In fact what bush scene would be complete without the accompanying shrill notes of a passing squadron of parrots, the melodic song of a butcher bird or the busy twitter of a wren? Birds are an inescapable part of the Australian bush and inextricably linked to our experience of it.

The other reason is the simple fact that hanging around the neck of most avid hunters is the birder’s number one tool; a pair of binoculars. So you’re already set up with nearly everything you need, no additional outlay required other than maybe a bird field guide to aid you in identifying what species you’re looking at. And another benefit for hunters: if you happen to wear camouflage clothing when you hunt it certainly won’t hinder your chances when it comes to birding.

One thing that I realized early on is that the Australian bush is not a very color filled environment. The majority of our country is generally an arid landscape and in places where there is forest, it’s predominantly dry eucalypt woodland. It’s a landscape of dull shades of brown, green, grey and yellow and you have to look pretty closely to find the odd colorful flower or insect buried in the undergrowth. Most of our larger animals like the marsupials are generally nocturnal and are inactive or hidden during the daylight hours, so there’s not a lot activity to be seen. Birds provide the color and movement that’s otherwise missing in our forests, like a polished red ruby emerging from a bucket of gravel; they stand out as an exclamation mark of vibrant color and interest. Even when there’s almost no other activity happening in the bush, the birds will still be present, so if you’re a birder your very rarely let down.

Another great thing about birding is that it’s an activity you can enjoy when you’re not hunting. For example, trips with the family like bushwalking, camping or even fishing, in fact all or any occasion where birds are present. But before we go any further, let me take this opportunity to debunk a common misconception; bird-watching is not just for geeks or little old ladies, in fact most birders I’ve met don’t fit either of those descriptions. Stereotypes of birders are just as inaccurate as stereotypes are of hunters and almost always wrong; everyone is a unique individual. Birding is for anyone who loves to see wild animals in the wild, and in the case of most birds, magnificently colored, interesting wild animals.




When I go bushwalking I can’t help but feel sorry for the other parties we pass along the track who are not birders. In my view they are missing 50% of the picture. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the tall trees and the views from the lookout as much as anyone but you can only stand so much of trees and shrubbery. Having an interest in the birdlife is like having front row seats to the theater of nature; it’s where all the action is happening, the rest are all just stage props. Your binoculars are just means of drawing it closer so you can soak up all the color and detail and make the impression all that more striking.



In a many ways birding is similar to hunting and incorporates several elements of the hunter’s art. For instance; when you set out it’s the uncertainty of the day’s forthcoming events that creates the adventure because you never know what you’re going to flush out. You have a hope for something in particular but it’s the mystery of discovery and what may be around the next bend that keeps you going. Then, as with hunting, when it comes to the actual appearance of your quarry, it’s all about your reaction, which may require lightning fast reflexes to draw a bead or a slow deliberate stalk to get within range. Making a good stalk and taking the successful shot would be the equivalent of getting a good hard look at your bird and making a successful identification, in other words nailing it down so to speak.

Some of you may be starting to sense that there could be a conflict of interest being a birder and at the same time a wingshooter or waterfowler. Well, perhaps not. Since time in memorial hunters have traditionally had great respect for their prey and appreciated its beauty; this intimate connection with nature one could argue, gives the hunter a truer sense of its beauty and value. Hunters instinctively recognize the concept that they themselves are part of nature’s cycle of life. Though some would like to overlook the fact, there is no denying that our position in the food chain is that of a predator. The human is one animal that has developed the ability to understand aesthetic and abstract concepts such as beauty; at the same time he is also an apex predator in the food chain. Can it not follow that whilst he can appreciate the beauty of birds for example it would also be perfectly natural for him or her to bag a brace of quail or a couple of pacific blacks for the evening’s dinner table. I see no logical reason why the love of nature and the taking from it can’t exist side by side; native cultures have been practicing these very same traditions for thousands of years. The only proviso is that above all other factors it must be sustainable; after all what would be the use of enjoying your sport if future generations are deprived of the same enjoyment because of one generation’s shortsightedness and mismanagement. Hunters have always been natural conservationists; after all it’s in their own interests to do so.

Let me deflate another myth; bird-watching is not about sitting there all day watching one little bird jump around, I would consider that fairly boring myself. It’s actually more about the challenge of identification; getting a good enough look to positively identify your bird and then moving on to the next challenge. Over time you may develop a deeper appreciation of your particular favorites and enjoy just watching their behavior for short periods, but for most beginners that’s not usually the case. For most birders the ultimate thrill is the excitement of seeing a bird they’ve never seen before and the challenge of working out just what this new bird might be. It’s not as easy as you think, hence the challenging part.
It can become quite competitive when you get a group of birders together to see who can be the first to identify the fleeting glimpse of a tiny bird at what can seem like a mile up in the treetops. An expert birders speed of identification is quite amazing to behold. We all know if something is too easy it’s won’t hold our interest for very long, well with birding there’s no shortage of challenge to be found. At around 800 Australian bird species it would take a lifetime to run out of ‘new’ birds to discover, but beware, you may find yourself having to travel further to sometimes remote places to spot that elusive once in a lifetime bird. What better excuse to go on a trip, as if any of us need much of an excuse.

Throughout this whole article I’ve so far failed to mention the single greatest reason of all to be a bird aficionado; it’s a fantastic motivation to shoot foxes and feral cats, just in case you needed one! But seriously, foxes and feral cats are a primary factor (aside from land clearing and over-grazing) in the decline of our woodland bird species Australia wide. Particularly vulnerable are any ground foraging or ground nesting species such as quails, ducks, parrots, babblers and many shorebirds. We don’t even have to mention the damage they are doing to our native frogs, lizards, bilbies, bandicoots, and the list goes on. Every time you shoot one of these nasty introduced predators you are doing our native birds and animals a favor and at the same time a good deed for Australia’s biodiversity. Anyone who eradicates one of these destructive environmental vandals or indeed any introduced pest species could rightly be regarded as an ‘Eco-warrior’ in a very practical sense. For the wingshooting fraternity we have a job also; the targeting of indian mynahs and starlings. These aggressive introduced birds out-compete many of our native birds, particularly parrots, for their all important nesting hollows. For those shotgunners in certain states mourning the temporary loss of their duck and quail seasons, pick yourselves up and turn your attentions to a new challenge, the targeting of introduced bird species: indian mynahs, starlings, spotted turtle-doves, pigeons etc. there is no shortage of these pest species. I’d even go as far as to encourage shotgun clubs to liaise with land holders and organize drives to clean out heavily infested areas of pest birds and to encourage competition between participants with prizes for the day’s highest bag. These are the sort of measures that need to be taken in some areas. So whether you’re a rifleman or a shotgunner, there are plenty of positive things that can be done.



Just a word on equipment before I finish; invariably there is always debate about the best size of binoculars for birding or hunting. If you want the short answer; a pair of high quality 8x42 roof prism binoculars are the ultimate choice and will suit both pursuits equally well. Overall, pair of 8x42’s are the best compromise between size, weight and light transmission. This has been the widely accepted standard by experts for many years. Almost no one carries 10x50’s these days for any distance unless they have a masochistic streak and there’s really no need. With recent advances in optics there is a trend towards smaller binoculars with a 32mm objective lens . These days a good quality pair of 8x32’s can have nearly as much light transmission and resolution as the 10x50’s of yesteryear. For the weight conscious hunter who might be hiking all day, already burdened with pack and rifle the 8x32’s are probably the best choice. Having said that, I have gotten by for many years with a set of Nikon 8x25’s without much problem, except in lower-light situations such as heavy forest or dawn and dusk. For bird field guides it depends on whether you want to carry it with you or not. The most popular small ‘carry’ size guide book is undoubtedly the ‘Slater Field Guide to Australian Birds’. For a larger guide that you may want to leave in camp, my personal favorite is the ‘Michael Morcombe Field Guide to Australian Birds’. Other good long standing choices are the ‘Simpson and Day’ and the ‘Pizzey and Knight’ field guides. These are all good reference works so it just comes down to personal preference which one you buy. If your an incurable birder you will probably own all of them because some artists depiction of certain birds can be better than another's and this can be just the clue that is needed to make a difficult identification.

So the next time you’re out hunting and not much is happening, throw up the binos and take a look at a few of the birds around the area, you might start to wonder what bird your looking at. If that curiosity starts to bite, you’ve already become a birder. With some appreciation of our native birds you may find yourself becoming more interested in what’s increasingly becoming known as ‘conservation hunting’ because you’re more acutely aware of what you’re fighting for. You can then rest assured you are helping to return the enchanting color and sound of our native birds to our forests and farmlands, all the while giving a boost to the eco-system and hopefully enjoying even more, your time spent hunting.

Elmer on Big Game

Most shooters will need no introduction to the name Elmer Keith, for those that do I can tell you that he was arguably the most prolific and well known gun writer of the last 50 years. He quite deservedly became known as “The Dean of American Firearm Writers”. Between Elmer Keith and Jack O’Conner they pretty well covered every topic of interest to keen shooters and hunters in their many years of writing regular columns for the leading US gun magazines Guns and Ammo and Outdoor Life. O’Conner was a great supporter of the 270 Winchester and its ability on large game. On this point he and Elmer disagreed intensely, Elmer being a promoter of the big and slow bullet over the small and fast bullet preference of his rival. This disagreement became the subject of a famous long running feud that played itself out over decades in the regular magazine columns they wrote for competing shooting publications. But Elmer was perhaps best known for his bigbore handgun shooting and was instrumental in the development of the 44 Magnum cartridge. He wrote many columns and books about “sixgunning” but he was definitely no slouch when it came to rifles and rifle hunting either.
During the 1920’s and 1930’s, Elmer was a rancher and big game guide in Oregon and Idaho with his first articles starting to appear at this time. His first published work was in the American Rifleman in 1924, and 60 years later, his works were still being published in Guns and Ammo. In World War II, he served as an inspector at the Ogden Arsenal (as did P.O. Ackley) and went full time as a writer in the ‘50’s. During his career, he served on the staff of The Outdoorsman, The American Rifleman, Western Sportsman, Guns, and Guns and Ammo. It wasn’t long before he was receiving hundreds of letters a year asking advice on rifle and caliber recommendations for big game hunting. To help reduce the incoming mail burden he decided it might be more expedient to write a book that would outline all his recommendations in one fell swoop. Thus in 1936 “Big Game Rifles and Cartridges by Elmer Keith” was born.


One thing to note is that when Elmer says big game he is referring to American big game such as Deer, Elk, Moose, Grizzly etc and not African big game. Though they can be dangerous at times, they are not quite as guaranteed lethal as the big five of African game. Elmer admits that Africa’s dangerous game require a whole different approach when it comes to rifles and calibers.

Elmer was famous for his saying “use enough gun” in effect meaning to choose a caliber that has more power than you need rather than trying to get away with one that is barely adequate for the job. The whole book is basically centered on this premise. His only condition was that you must be able to shoot that big caliber well otherwise your wasting your time, and that means familiarisation and practice with your chosen caliber/rifle combination. Elmer found that in most hunting situations the game rarely presented the perfect shot and quite often you needed a bullet that would give adequate penetration on less than ideal angles such as rear raking shots. So therefore you needed a bullet with strong construction, adequate sectional density and energy to reach those vital areas even in the worst of situations.

He was of the school who believed in complete penetration, meaning that the bullet should pass completely through the game. This he reasoned caused greater blood loss and accordingly a larger blood trail. Therefore if the game animal was wounded it was consequently easier to track. Also he stated that you can’t have a bullet that stops in the animal on broadside shots and at the same time have enough penetration to get into the engine room on a rear raking shots. That’s hard logic to argue with unless you’re only going to take text book broadside shots and forego any other angle. Even so, the debate still rages to this day as to whether the bullet should stay in the animal or pass through. With today’s modern controlled expansion bullets the consensus seems to be in favor of the bullet staying in the animal thus expending all its energy and doing the most damage. Even so, there are still many on both sides of the debate that vehemently defend their side of the argument.

That being said, Elmer did not like wounding game and was a strong advocate of humane killing, saying that no man can call himself a true sportsman if he doesn’t do his utmost to ensure a clean quick kill. In fact, it’s this belief in humane killing that is the whole reason for the term “use enough gun” and the purpose of trying to educate hunters to use larger calibers.
Many at the time were experimenting with the new high velocity 22 centerfires on large game and Elmer was aghast at such a thing taking place, and I quote:

“Many hunters today are apparently small bore crazy, seemingly wanting to kill as large a game as lives with as light and small a bore of rifle as possible, throwing the lightest bullet obtainable; even to hunting big game with a 22 Hornet. Such men need their heads examined. Certainly it is not sportsmanship they display.”

At the time the book was published there was a lot of experimentation and wildcatting being done. Pioneers such as Parker Ackley (P.O.Ackley), John Dubiel and Charles Askins were contemporaries of Elmer’s and were no doubt influential in forming some of his opinions about rifles and cartridges. One of Elmer’s favorite rifles was a Magnum Mauser in 280 Dubiel Magnum which pushed a 150gn bullet at around 3200-3300fps. Quite remarkable ballistics for the 1930’s. The 280 Dubiel Magnum is one of many cartridges that have fallen into obscurity over the years but it’s not for reasons of poor performance. Elmer certainly loved it.

As far a calibers and cartridges went Elmer had plenty of advice to give, which normally leaned towards the larger side of things as you would expect. For starters he was not a fan of the 30-30 Winchester, the 303 British, or the 7mm Mauser as he had seen too many animals lost by other hunters to these calibers. Elmer relates the story of his friend Bill Bell to illustrate this point:

......Bill used a .30-30 for a good many years until he had trouble bringing down a big Idaho grizzly. The grizzly didn't take too kindly to being stung by such an inadequate caliber and became quite agitated to say the least. Bill was perched up high above the grizzly in a jumble of rocks and the bear never did locate him, or the results may have ended in favour of the bear......


Even the popular 30-06 was quite often not enough according to Elmer. He advised the 30-06 could be used by the experienced woodsman with careful selection of bullet construction and weight, usually the of the heavier 220gn variety. For use in timber country he came to the conclusion he would use nothing less than a 35 caliber rifle firing a bullet not less than 250gn at no less than 2000fps. Consequently his favorites for all large species was the 35 Whelan, 400 Whelan and the 375 H&H Magnum.

One surprising thing is Elmers’s love of the double rifle especially in heavily timbered or brush type hunting where most shooting is at ranges under 100 yards and more often at less than 50yards. Elmer says:

“I firmly believe the double barrel rifle to be the most reliable of all types from the standpoint of safety to the hunter, when facing wounded or dangerous game.”

This fact has been well demonstrated by generations of African professional hunters and is hard to argue with. The smooth breech of the double rifle is not apt to catch on branches or undergrowth and is better sealed against the entry of sand and water than the bolt or lever rifle. Also the fit and balance of the double is more like that of a fine shotgun and so enables the rifle to come to the shoulder more naturally for faster snap shots to be taken. The most obvious advantage is of course the ability of the double for a quick second shot. This may make the difference between loosing your once in a lifetime trophy or spending three grueling days tracking a wounded beast only to loose the trail and possibly still come up empty handed. There is much to be said for the double rifle but there are two major disadvantages, the first one being the need for regulation. For those unfamiliar with the peculiarities of double rifles, regulation is where each barrel is adjusted so that both barrels shoot to the same approximate point. Thus the rifle is tuned or ‘regulated’ to this particular bullet weight and velocity combination. This has the result of limiting the choices of loads one can use in the rifle. Regulation also reduces the effective accuracy at long distance but this is no problem when used in close quarter shooting. The other drawback is the sheer cost of a fine grade double from a reputable gun maker, but for those not financially challenged they certainly are an excellent choice for close contact big game hunting.

Elmer’s attitude to scopes is interesting as it shows that even in the pre-war years scopes were a popular and much welcome addition to any hunting rifle, if you could afford one. He was of the opinion that low magnification scopes in the 1.5-2.5x range were the best choice for general hunting and the 4 power was advised for long range work. His observation showed that when offhand shooting, the high magnification scope only served to magnify the shooters natural shake and create a psychological barrier to pulling the trigger, thus causing the shooter to hesitate and most often ruin the shot. This is still sage advice to consider when choosing a hunting scope even to this day. For low light situations the scope he said was always superior to any iron sight. The only time he conceded anything to iron sights was when extolling the virtues of the deep-V express sight for close range dangerous game work.
It was around this time that scope makers were discovering the benefits of internal reticle adjustment and the Noske was one of the first to begin offering this feature. The best at the time and Elmer’s favorites were the German made Zeiss, the Hendsolt, and the American made Noske. It’s interesting to note that all these years later Zeiss are still market leaders in the optics game and still a popular choice for the discerning buyer provided money is no obstacle. In that era Bill Weaver was the first to break the price barrier and start producing a decent quality scope that the average man could afford, and so started the gradual rise in popularity of the scope to the level we know today.


Although it’s been 80 odd years since Elmer put his thoughts in print it’s apparent that very little has changed from the standpoint of rifles, cartridges and hunting. It may be surprising to learn that parallax error, sectional density and bonded bullet construction were not subjects foreign to the hunter of that bygone era. So it seems that almost all we know today about these subjects was known about by the 1930’s. Somehow I think it’s comforting to know that very little has changed, and to know we are continuing the traditions of generations past in much the same way as they did it back then.
But whatever you do, don’t forget to “use enough gun!” and make Elmer proud.