I just recieved and e-mail from Ron Oliver, who is in Zimbabwe right now and he said Pete Shepley took an Elephant Bull and Buffalo with one arrow each last week. The Elephant is estimated at 50lbs.

quote:

Originally posted by Jerry Huffaker:
I just recieved and e-mail from Ron Oliver, who is in Zimbabwe right now and he said Pete Shepley took an Elephant Bull and Buffalo with one arrow each last week. The Elephant is estimated at 50lbs.

Kids, don't try this at home!

I can't wait to hear the whole story!

Congratulations to Mr. Shepley, well done!

Gosh!

Now I will admit as a starter that I have zero exposure to bow hunting, in no way at all could I be said to be either pro or anti bow hunting (although I am very much pro hunting in the wider meaning)....so bear that in mind when I ask the following:

Are there ethical issues with using a bow on such animals.
Is there not a significantly higher risk of wounding the animal. Note I say "higher risk", clearly they can kill, so can a rifle, and either one can wound. Do bows have a significantly higher risk of wounding?
Wounding has two effects:
The animal suffers more than it needs to...we as hunters should be concerned about this.
A wounded animal is a much more dangerous animal. I'm sure a bow hunter has to be much closer to the prey, and so does his PH and maybe trackers, photographers, whoevers. A wounded animal is not only placing the hunter at more risk (a problem of his own causing, so maybe less worthy of worry?) but also all those others associated with the aftermath.
Is it ethical to risk their lives more than is "neccessary"?

I'd be very interested to hear your views.


Is there an ethical consideration

quote:

Originally posted by UKhunter:
Gosh!

Now I will admit as a starter that I have zero exposure to bow hunting, in no way at all could I be said to be either pro or anti bow hunting (although I am very much pro hunting in the wider meaning)....so bear that in mind when I ask the following:

Are there ethical issues with using a bow on such animals.
Is there not a significantly higher risk of wounding the animal. Note I say "higher risk", clearly they can kill, so can a rifle, and either one can wound. Do bows have a significantly higher risk of wounding?
Wounding has two effects:
The animal suffers more than it needs to...we as hunters should be concerned about this.
A wounded animal is a much more dangerous animal. I'm sure a bow hunter has to be much closer to the prey, and so does his PH and maybe trackers, photographers, whoevers. A wounded animal is not only placing the hunter at more risk (a problem of his own causing, so maybe less worthy of worry?) but also all those others associated with the aftermath.
Is it ethical to risk their lives more than is "neccessary"?

I'd be very interested to hear your views.


Is there an ethical consideration

Gadfry!!-----------here we go again!!!

Way to go...

A good hunter will close the distance and wait for the right shot...A heart shot in the ele and I bet it was on the ground in a 100 yds just like a rife heart shot...Same with the buf...Todays arrows have so much technology compared to ones from 25 years ago... I am not an arrow flinger...

Mike

I would dare to suggest that a properly placed modern broadhead is a quicker, cleaner, and more "humane" killer than a bullet.

(Maybe not for headshots though!!)

I was under the impression that Shepley had killed an elephant with a bow before this one??

Are any of these bow hunts for elephants recorded?

I'd be interested to see just how quickly an elephant can be brought down with a bow as opposed to a rifle...

I think it was the same guy I saw in a DVD attempting a 'one arrow' elephant. The arrow appeared well placed but they followed that ele for quite a while (not placing any follow ups) until it turned on them and was dropped by the PH's rifles....no 'one arrow'.

In my humble opinion it seemed to be a piss poor way to kill an elephant but a good way to feed a 'one arrow' ego...no better that trying any other stunt

quote:

I'd be interested to see just how quickly an elephant can be brought down with a bow as opposed to a rifle...

Tshbezi Safaris in Zim guides quite a few bowhunters. When I was there in June of last year hunting elephant, they had just finished a bow hunt where the guy had taken a 45 pounder. My ph said it went about 250 yards after the shot, which was the furthest any of the 25 or so he had guided bowhunters to went after a heart/lung shot. He said this particular shot was not perfect and he momentarily thought of putting in a 500 Jeffery as insurance, but decided not to at the last minute and the elephant ran off.

He had also killed a nice 45 pound bull that had charged them during a bowhunt. In that situation, obviously, the bowhunter is at a decided disadvantage.

Pete has bowhunted elephant before but the one I know about required a rifle shot. If you can get an arrow between the ribs, it will kill very cleanly.

Who was the ph?

I don't understand the ethics question on hunting with a bow! It is either asked to stir the pot or out of ignorance.

Archery requires more discipline in taking only good shots and knowing the limits of your equipment. I can't tell you how many animals I have passed on because of poor presentation of the vitals. But that is bow hunting.
Properly placed arrows are as deadly if not more so than bullets. Many times the animals are not as spooked after the shot. They run a little stop look around and fall over. I have no experience with elephant but the dynamics of a center punched hart can't be that different.

The cutting, penetrating and hemorrhaging effect of a sharp broad head is amazing. In fibrous material i.e. muscle tissue and organs, an arrow will often out penetrate a bullet. Arrows with broad heads go right through bullet proof vests!

Safe hunting

Will

Don't worry about bowhunting prejudices. Each forum has its own quirks...love/hate for Remington/Ruger/Winchester, premium bullets, archery, leverguns, etc. etc. (anything and everything).

Those who bowhunt (myself included) know the tremendous capabilities of archery tackle and cutting broadheads. I don't spend much time trying to convince those who don't like something.

I agree that a properly placed arrow will kill very quickly, but just about everybody I know of that bow hunts elk have wounded elk and that's way too much in my opinion. If the client is under strict orders to only shoot when the shot is perfect then I don't have a problem with it.
Too many people with their modern fancy bows don't practice enough and shoot when it's too dark and everything else.
I think all bow hunters should only limit themselves to very close and perfectly broadside shots.

Of course, practice is important. I know many bowhunters who are much more successful (and better) hunters than the average rifle hunter.

I could also say that "too many hunters with their modern fancy firearms have wounded whatever...." It's not the weapon choice...it's the person using it.

I personally wouldn't hunt elephant with a bow (Buzz tried to get me to bring mine for elephant but I didn't want to) but a few have done it. I would shoot one with my .500 Linebaugh pistol though and get full penetration.

If I remember correctly in order to hunt Dangerous Game in africa you have to be pulling a certain bow weight, arrow weight, cut on contact broadhead, and I think there is a big bow assoc. that does a class as well that is either required or just helpful and detailed about it.

In one of Tom Miranda's hunting videos he talks about it before taking his Cape Buff

For bowhunting Class A game (elephant, buff, hippo) in Zim, you have to get a special bowhunting permit and it is only available from the PWLMA director general. The operator arranges to receive it on behalf of their client.

The regs for bowhunting other big game are different and more specific.

This recurring stuff about "Ethics" is doing more harm to hunting than anything HSUS or PETA ever can do.

If the man is an experienced archer and the PH was alright with the situation, everyone else's opinion on the subject is

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
This recurring stuff about "Ethics" is doing more harm to hunting than anything HSUS or PETA ever can do.

If the man is an experienced archer and the PH was alright with the situation, everyone else's opinion on the subject is

Absolutely! As long as it is legal, and done accroding to the game laws!

Hey now, hold on a minute.

I'll plead ignorance when it comes to bowhunting Jumbo, so I have no idea if it's ethical or not.

But....

Ethics should always have a place in hunting.

Every one's set of ethics will vary from others, but they should always carry them along when they are in the field.

I think it was O'Conner that said something to effect of,

Ethics is what you do when there's no one else around to see if you have them.

To say that discussing ethics on this forum does more harm than what HSUS or PETA is just bloody adsurd!



Regards

Elmo

quote:

In fibrous material i.e. muscle tissue and organs, an arrow will often out penetrate a bullet.

REALLY?

A hunter shot an 80lb elephant bull in our hunting area - Coutada 10 - last year. It was a stone's throw from the camp and the complete hunt is on video. Quite remarkable. The bull has only one tusk. The other tusk root had an old bullet in the new growths - we guess a poacher bullet from yesteryear. That means that there's a clarge chunk of ivory lying in the wilderness somewhere ...

An arrow travels at less than 300 fps and, without hitting large bones like a shoulder joint, will easily exit on broadside shots. I have had exits on hogs that broke the back leg bone quartering through, breaking and exiting the opposite front shoulder. Most bullets won't do that. Consider that arrows are up to 36" long and are usually much heavier than the largest bullets used in hunting.

The point is that arrows with cutting broadheads are very efficient and provide very little resistance when encountering hide and flesh. That's one of the reasons why surgeons use scapels instead of golf balls to make cuts.

Just want to be clear here---

So a 500 grain arrow going 300 fps will often out penetrate a 500 grain bullet traveling at 2200 fps?

I'm talking about efficiency...but yes, it's possible for the 300 fps arrow to outpenetrate the bullet if the bullet turns, tumbles or comes apart...or if it's a soft. Arrows don't tumble or turn or come apart and they need about 10-15% of the bullet's speed to achieve the same penetration as long as heavy bones are not encountered.

But Jim you should already know of all of this...and I think you do.

quote:

Originally posted by elmo:
Hey now, hold on a minute.

To say that discussing ethics on this forum does more harm than what HSUS or PETA is just bloody adsurd!
Regards

Elmo

What he is saying, by that statement is, putting down a hunter who is using a legal method to hunt, with the consent of the Wildlife people, is what is unethical!

To the PeTA heads, and the HSUS idiots, when you put anyone down for legally hunting an animal, you are saying that all hunting by that method is unethical!

My question to you is, what is unethical about bow hunting, or hunting by any legal method? Because that is what you are saying to the Animal rights fools, that bow hunting is unethical!

It is quite evident, the hunter did it right, because he has the ele on the ground, with no help from any other form of weapon being used, and with all the pertinent permits, and the blessing of the game department!

Engage brain, before placing foot in mouth! I firmly believe we are our own worse enemies, at times, and do far more harm to ourselves, than PeTA heads do!

Actually I admire bow hunters and I don't begrudge them taking any type of animal with a bow but...

If they're going to bow hunt, let them only bow hunt. When they've wounded their animal, let them go after it with their bow. If they want to follow up their animal with a rifle, then their bow hunting was just a stunt.

Why is everyone jumping on the ethical question? The guy is from England dammit! They don't bowhunt there! He was asking a legitimate question. He admitted he knew nothing about bowhunting. You folks are just paranoid. Don't you get tired just looking over your shoulder all the time? And, yes, I have bowhunted.
Peter

I've had lots of experience bowhunting in North America, but only one bow safari and none for DG.

One "good" thing about hunting with a bow is that you can pretty darn well see exactly where the shot goes and how far it penetrates. If the PH knows the animal's anatomy he can immediately tell if the shot is fatal and make a shoot/no shoot decision. A big, razor-sharp Magnus or Grizzly broadhead tipped arrow buried to the fletching and hard against the lower shoulder will almost surely put an elephant down within 200 yards.

Folks here who bow hunt have seen animals so shot run 40 or so yards and even return to feeding before just wobbling some and falling over like they never knew they were hit.

Jim:
The folks I know who hunt DG with bows use very heavy arrows. One guy shoots fish arrows of 1200 grains. The trajectory is like a rainbow, but my friend never shoots further than 20 yards. Perhaps as important to his success is that his long bow makes NO noise, so animals don't "jump the string".

Not my cup of tea what Shipley did, particularly since it was a compound, but with equipment tough enough to stay together, more power to him.

I have a question for those who might know.
Does anyone remember a problem Pete Shipley
had in Zim, in the mid 80's, shooting buff
with light arrows and an overdraw bow?

/

Happy days Pete had back luck on an ele two years ago that got twitchy when the arrow hit and charged, and the PH shot it.

Since this hunt occured in a parks area, it might stop some of the BS from parks on bowhunting!

RM007

In the late 80's there was alot of debate on bow design and arrow types. Fast and Light vs Slow and Heavy.

We shot a couple of dozzen buff selting this argument and Pete, being one of the top bow makers was asked to come and demonstrate different options.

Light & fast was not what the doctor ordered - but it was what Pete was aked to use.

Hey MacD

Read my post again.

I'm not making any comments about what is, or isn't ethical. I'm not condemning Shipley or any other bowhunter. I think bowhunting is great because the challenge of getting into bow range is greater than that of rifle hunting. I've seen the results and the lethality of a broad head is mighty impressive.

I'm just saying that discussions about ethics DO have a place on this forum.

I also would like to point out the fact that just because something is legal doesn't mean that it's ethical. Look at the lawsuits against gunmakers in this country, if you need an example.

Franky I don't give a damn about what PETA wackballs think. They hate us and nothing is gonna change that.

What does piss me off is when some jackass shoots a Robo-Deer out of the window of his pick-up truck at night. Then the media picks it up and splashes it all over the front page. It was a lack of ethics that pulled that trigger.

It's the un-ethical slob hunter that gives hunting a black eye. Far worse than whatever PETA can deliver.

I'll say it again,

This forum is exactly the right place for discussions of hunting ethics.

Elmo

quote:

Originally posted by elmo:
Hey MacD

Read my post again.

I'm not making any comments about what is, or isn't ethical. I'm not condemning Shipley or any other bowhunter. I think bowhunting is great because the challenge of getting into bow range is greater than that of rifle hunting. I've seen the results and the lethality of a broad head is mighty impressive.

I'm just saying that discussions about ethics DO have a place on this forum.

I also would like to point out the fact that just because something is legal doesn't mean that it's ethical. Look at the lawsuits against gunmakers in this country, if you need an example.

Franky I don't give a damn about what PETA wackballs think. They hate us and nothing is gonna change that.

What does piss me off is when some jackass shoots a Robo-Deer out of the window of his pick-up truck at night. Then the media picks it up and splashes it all over the front page. It was a lack of ethics that pulled that trigger.

It's the un-ethical slob hunter that gives hunting a black eye. Far worse than whatever PETA can deliver.

I'll say it again,

This forum is exactly the right place for discussions of hunting ethics.

Elmo

You are absolutely correct, as long as you stick to ethics, and do not put down someone who "IS" abiding by the law, and following the rules, laid out by the game departments! It means little that you don't agree with some form of hunting, and if you don't like that method, and consider it unethical, don't do it, but that doesn't make it unethical,it just means you don't like it! If it bothers you that much, work to change the law!

As long as it is within the law, I have no reason to put down those who utilize that method, though I wouldn't do it myself. ETHICS, sir is what you do that doesn't bother your sleep, even if no one knows about it. You are right, there are many things that are legal that I don't agree with, and the slob hunter you just described did nothing within the law, and for your information, game laws are set by the ethics of hunting in the region where the hunting takes place, and though it may seem unethical to you, and would be in your region, it is quite ethical there! This is because ETHICS is a cultural thing, and this forum covers the world over, encompassing many cultures, that do not agree with your ETHICS, but you have the same right to disagree, personally. However, if the method is legal where it takes place then don't go there, and do it that way, but the ethics of it are not lacking because of your opinion.

Where the problem lies, is the animal rights take things out of context, and simply apply thier ethics (read OPINIONS)of the subject to all. Much the same as what you just posted, and both of you are wrong, in thinking your ethics should be the rule of law!

To one person shooting an animal that is asleep, is unethical, that is OPINION, not ethics! IMO, shooting a sleeping animal, you have successfully stalked close to, is very ethical, because accroding to MY ethics, giveing an animal the quickest, most painless, death I can is what a hunter should do. A sleeping animal never knows fear of the hunter who has just killed him!

Your line highlighted in RED above is an example of what I'm talking about! You use the word HUNTER to describe a law-breaking poacher! That is a tactic taken right out of the PeTA head's play book! To them, if you kill an animal, you are a HUNTER! That, my fine friend, is what I call UNETHICAL! Again, think, before placing your foot in your mouth! You have my opinion, and that is my last word on this matter, because strings like this one do far more harm, than good!

I don't know Mr. Shelpey, but I'm sure that he is a smart person. I'm also sure that his PH backed him up with a big bore rifle, and most likely there were one or two other big bores along with the party. So, the danger factor was no different then if he took the elephant with a big bore, himself. In 1988 I hunted Kodiak Bear with the late Frenchy Lamoureux. He had one of the first guide licenses in the State, and was involved in harvesting many Kodiak Bear during his life time. He told me that he had never had a hunter harvest a kodiak bear with a bow without him or one of his guides stopping the animal with a rifle. Interestingly, he also stated that this applied with muzzle loaders also. If a man wants to hunt with a bow, or muzzle loader for that matter I have no problem with that. But, we must remember what Clint Eastwood said in the old Dirty Harry movies " A good man must know his limitations".

Bo Rich - Your comments about Pete don't come across well. Pete is a hard hunter and a first rate ambassador for bow hunting. He has been out, and worked with Zim Parks board since the late 1980's finding out what did - and didn't work.

He has now taken ele, buff lion and leopard with a bow- and no bullets fired to back up or assist in taking the animal down.

No- a bow will not stop a charge - nor will a .45-70 (unless it is over loaded and you are lucky and shooting at a smallish cow). I have guided clients who have used both bows and .45-70's to sucessfully take ele and buff- which is more than I can say about any either client I have guided who carried a .378 Weatherby.

For a client- what you choose to carry is not hugely important to me as the PH. How good and hard a hunter YOU are, how much preperation and practice YOU have put into the pre-hunt will make a big difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Ganyana:
Bo Rich - Your comments about Pete don't come across well. Pete is a hard hunter and a first rate ambassador for bow hunting. He has been out, and worked with Zim Parks board since the late 1980's finding out what did - and didn't work.

He has now taken ele, buff lion and leopard with a bow- and no bullets fired to back up or assist in taking the animal down.

No- a bow will not stop a charge - nor will a .45-70 (unless it is over loaded and you are lucky and shooting at a smallish cow). I have guided clients who have used both bows and .45-70's to sucessfully take ele and buff- which is more than I can say about any either client I have guided who carried a .378 Weatherby.

For a client- what you choose to carry is not hugely important to me as the PH. How good and hard a hunter YOU are, how much preperation and practice YOU have put into the pre-hunt will make a big difference.

WELL SAID!! Thanks Ganyana.

I'm sure Mr. Shepley is a fine hunter, and a good man. This was mot in question. My point is that I don't think there is any more risk involved hunting with a bow, or a rifle when you are backed up by a PH with a big bore rifle. This is just my honest opinion. I thought that Accurate Reloading Forum folks would find old time Alaskan Guide Frenchy Lamoureux observation interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by Bo Rich:
I'm sure Mr. Shepley is a fine hunter, and a good man. This was mot in question. My point is that I don't think there is any more risk involved hunting with a bow, or a rifle when you are backed up by a PH with a big bore rifle. This is just my honest opinion. I thought that Accurate Reloading Forum folks would find old time Alaskan Guide Frenchy Lamoureux observation interesting.

I believe it is a given that a bow hunter is safer with a back-up by the PH with a big bore rifle, than with his bow only! However he is in more peril with a bow, and the PH's rifle than he would be with both him, and the PH shooting proper rifles. I think that is also a given!

The hunting of elephant is damn dangerous when hunting at bow ranges, even with a good rifle. but that is not the issue here, that rules in or out hunting ele with a bow! It is evident that this man qualified himself to get the permit to hunt the elephant in the first place, and it is evident, as well, that he did what he wanted to do, without any help, eventhough it was available to him if needed.