Here's how we always did it:

.22 pistol loaded with a good hollow point. One shot in the center of the big forehead. In over 40 years it never failed to work.

Take it one further:

If a 30-06 is capable of killing a steer or a full grown domestic cow at 100 yards , shot in the boiler room which it is, then is it capable of killing a Cape buffalo ?

There is ample evidence that 30-06 is capable of killing feral cattle and not only capable of killing other bovines such as Bison but also legal, many of which incidently are larger than Cape Buffalo ?

So why the hoopla about using big bores for buffalo or are buffalo "tougher" physically than other bovines ?

Are their (buffalo ) bones stronger, is their skin tougher? or perhaps are their muscles denser?

What say ye all?

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Adrenalin and "tough meat" ! Now there is a bit of thread off a old wives yarn

Indeed. In fact, it's the lacking blood sugar burned while running which lets the meat remain "tough" even after aging.

DUK:

Low Blood Sugar ???? ! Not what adrenalin does, just the opposite ! Adrenaline by design Increases blood flow to skeletal muscle and it is diabetogenic ie it increases blood sugar through glucogenolysis so it is available for the fight or flight reaction. Both Adrenaline and noradrenlaine does this.

The way it works has no effect on the force needed to break muscle fibre apart, hence toughness or alternatly tenderness.

The other more important stress hormone is Cortisol or simply hydrocortisone , which is catabolic, meaning it leads to collagen break down, muscle weakness and osteoporosis if elevated for long periods of time.

The toughness of muscle is related to the animals age, the nutritional status specifically fat content , the amount of back ground collagen and most importantly the muscle group in the body in question. Various muscles have different back gound collagen content.

Post mortem stiffness or rigor mortis as an event relative to when the meat is proccessed and cooled down or frozen is very important and then how long the meat is hung and putrification ( aging) takes place before consumption. The principle of aging of meat is actually a state of putrification, the longer this takes place the more tender the meat.


The state of exertion of the animal just prior to slaughter and it's effect on meat tenderness and quality is not due to stress hormone effect as popularly touted but rather the metabolic status of the muscle in terms of muscle oxidative status. Past theories of lactic acidosis as a factor has been disproven in that lactate in itself is not the cause of the acidosis but rather the effects of oxigen status that is the culprit.

Lactate level affects flavour not 'toughness'
ie
it increases bitterness

If muscle usage was a factor in meat toughness the meat industry would never have cyclic electro-shocking as its "tenderising' technique, post mortem.
( the cyclic contraction produced, both reduces retained blood & uses up the energy stores in the muscle cells).

The level of muscle usage immediately pre & post mortem merely determines the period of time that muscle tissue can remain in rigor, post mortem.
It reduces the available compounds within the cell walls that are necessary for muscle contraction .
IIRC rigor is initiated by calcium leaching across the muscle cell wall post mortem, acting as a catalyst to muscle contraction.

He He........... meat tenderises post mortem initially rapidly from loss of rigor and then more slowly by breakdown of the muscle cell walls by natural body enzymes internally & oxidation externally.
or as Alf so elegantly put it .......controlled putrefaction in aging, by slowing the rate of breakdown by refrigeration.

for frozen meat , thawed product quality is best achieved by freezing while the meat is in strong rigor.
fluid expansion in freezing fractures the muscle cell walls, so a firm product on thawing is best achieved by freezing while the meat is in rigor & best able to resist fracturing as the fluids expand during freezing.
freezing post-rigor meat results in a soggy watery thawed product.
freezing aged meat results in reduced shelf life & promotes off-flavours from fat oxidation.
compared to meat frozen whilst in rigor.

Lots of really interesting information here, but one thing I have not noticed being mentioned has more to do with "Meat Toughness" ,in my opinion, than anyone has touched on. The "state" the animal is in prior to the kill, the handling/care/processing of the carcass after the kill, but in the end game, the way the meat is prepared/cooked, goes a long damn way in determining toughness.

Too many folks simply do not understand that all meat cannot be cooked like prime USDA beef. Lora and I have stopped giving deer meat made into steaks to family and friends, simply because they do not understand that taking a piece of extremely lean meat, even from a young doe, and cooking it well done is going to ruin it amd turn it basically into shoe leather. Most game meat, from my experience, if eaten as steaks needs to be rare or medium rare at most when cooked.

For the various roasts, it needs to be covered and cooked with low heat and for a longer period of time. Game meat has less moisture and fat content than prime beef and if cooked at too high of a temperature simply dries out. For consistently good quality game meat, as much thought needs to be given to the cooking end of the equation, as was given too the killing end of the equation. JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Take it one further:

If a 30-06 is capable of killing a steer or a full grown domestic cow at 100 yards , shot in the boiler room which it is, then is it capable of killing a Cape buffalo ?

There is ample evidence that 30-06 is capable of killing feral cattle and not only capable of killing other bovines such as Bison but also legal, many of which incidently are larger than Cape Buffalo ?

So why the hoopla about using big bores for buffalo or are buffalo "tougher" physically than other bovines ?

Are their (buffalo ) bones stronger, is their skin tougher? or perhaps are their muscles denser?

What say ye all?

Sure an -06 will kill a cape buffalo. Problem is trying to stop one if the first shot didn't do the trick. As you know, buff are a lot more vindictive than your average bovine.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Lots of really interesting information here, but one thing I have not noticed being mentioned has more to do with "Meat Toughness" ,in my opinion, than anyone has touched on. The "state" the animal is in prior to the kill, the handling/care/processing of the carcass after the kill, but in the end game, the way the meat is prepared/cooked, goes a long damn way in determining toughness.

Too many folks simply do not understand that all meat cannot be cooked like prime USDA beef. Lora and I have stopped giving deer meat made into steaks to family and friends, simply because they do not understand that taking a piece of extremely lean meat, even from a young doe, and cooking it well done is going to ruin it amd turn it basically into shoe leather. Most game meat, from my experience, if eaten as steaks needs to be rare or medium rare at most when cooked.

For the various roasts, it needs to be covered and cooked with low heat and for a longer period of time. Game meat has less moisture and fat content than prime beef and if cooked at too high of a temperature simply dries out. For consistently good quality game meat, as much thought needs to be given to the cooking end of the equation, as was given too the killing end of the equation. JMO.

Absolutely true
The cooking process can only start with the quality of the meat from previous processes.
Both affect the quality of the meat 'in the mouth' & on the taste buds.

Good cooking practice can improve "tenderness"
Bad cooking practice can make it a lot worse.

There's a bunch of impacts from less than desirable shooting & meat handling prior to getting it into the pan that cooking can't improve, that can only be masked by the choice of meal type it is used in & condiments
..........He He.

The biggest downside of poor freezing practice when storing meat is that the moisture in the soggy thawed meat & including that released from the fractured meat cell walls caused by the freezing evaporates very early in the cooking process & the meat goes "dry" quickly.

One aspect that improves the situation is that quickly frozen meat generates smaller ice crystals than slowly frozen meat. So its counterproductive to load meat in a pile in the middle of your freezer.
Its frozen quickest by spreading it around the walls of a chest freezer ( nearest the refrigerant coils) or spreading it nearest the refrigerant coils on the shelves in an upright freezer.
You can sort it & pack it together when its fully frozen. At that point it doesn't really matter where its kept in the freezer or how close together the packages are.
In fact its better to have product packed closely together once its frozen as its core temperature has less rise & fall in the freezer & shelf life is improved.

Vacuum packing cuts is far better than shrink wrapping in reducing oxidation & freezer burn ( a form of freeze drying) in freezer storage.

FWIW

WARNING! POSSIBLE STUPID QUESTION FROM UTTER TYRO!

Why would one not simply shoot the domestic bovine in the head instead of the "boiler room"? From my admittedly minimal knowledge I would think that a head shot with a 30-06 or .308 (you guys ARE referring to a .308 Win, aren't you?) from most any angle would drop a domestic bovine in its tracks. (I don't figure a head shot on a Cape Buffalo would do more than piss the animal off - while being almost as effective as firing my little Rem 597 22lr head on at an Abrams.)

Why - if a trophy is not an issue (Can't you just see some guy pointing to a polled hereford steer head on his wall and saying "He was a wily beast, he was. Tracked him through 3 meadows afore I got close enough to plug him."??) - would one not simply shoot the animal in the head and drop them instantly?

Be kind. I am not trying to upset anyone, merely asking a question. I am not a hunter but expect to have to be ere long.

Alf

I haven't had a lot of technical training, but a lot of the practical sort. Stressing an animal prior to butcher leads to what is known as a 'dark cutter'. You can tell when you butcher it, the meat will be about the color of walnut, rather than dark bloody red. I don't think the issue is tenderness however, but taste. It is definitely an undesirable. By the way, I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express, but spent a good portion of my life working cattle with my parents, and grandparents.

I also have shot a few cows that were so wild you couldn't take a couple of kids with horses and ropes and catch. We let them rest and settle down, then shot them with whatever deer caliber we had available at the time, some were wild enough you couldn't get a 100-yard shot. Shoot them, grind the whole damn thing into burger.

jstevens:

I too grew up with a lot of passed on convention in matters hunting, slaughter and the raising and keeping animals for purposes of consumption.

Some so sacred if you dared not execute all the steps to the letter it would certainly evoke the wrath of the gods themselves.

The choice of and the slaughter of an animal was a excrcise not taken lightly and rightly so.

The reality though is that many of these conventions were passed down as folklore and the reason given were/ are unfounded.


Whilst it is true that the meat of a properly selected, slaughtered and then rendered animal tastes and is "better" in terms of tenderness the reasons cited by those who are supposed to have all the wisdom their reasoning why is most times plain wrong...... not that I would ever dare call them on it, lest risk bannishment from house and home.

Whilst taste is subjective, meat toughness testing using a mechanical tester is not and fact is that one cannot objectively show from a toughness test what animal was stressed just prior to slaughter or not. The animals meat is either tough or it is not.

There are many such conventions in hunting folklore...... you do not eat the meat of carnivores, you cannot eat the meat of a waterbuck, zebra are wild horses and you do not eat horse meat......you have to cut off the testicles of a male animal lest it contamintes the meat with what?????

When it came to the handling and finally the actual preparation and cooking of game the elder women had the last say and if you think the old guys were tough on convention the womenfolk were more so..... and so we can go on.

As to the "hunting" of domestic cattle, there are places where this becomes necessary in cases where these have become feral.

During the Rhodesian war I had the privilege of "hunting" Brahaman Cattle that had gone feral because the owner of the farm could not access the property due to landmines.

Alf,
part of hunting folklore is that African wild cattle would be tougher[ to kill, not eat]..than any other form of wild cattle in the world, correct?....

yes a 30-06 will kill a full grown cow. for the hit it in the head with a hammer or 22 between the eyes crowd, day worked cattle when I was younger, been around cattle you couldn't get that close to without a hell of fast horse and some darn good catch dogs. had some days I would have loved to have an '06 handy.

Whenever someone adds "Just Curious", I become suspicious. This usually implies a hidden motive.
Whose cow? If it's yours? why would you have to shoot it at 100 yards with a hunting rifle?
Are you at war with a neighbor or are you a meat rustler? If it's your cow, you should be able to capture it and slaughter it properly. Why would anyone think that a cow would survive a well placed 180 gr bullet from a 30-06 at 100 yards, who has any familiarity at all with weapons of this class? Something doesn't seem right here. I'm not accusing you of anything illegal, I'm "just curious' why anyone would ask such a question.

As i posted earlier, the following explains why I asked.

quote:

Originally posted by delloro:

...I was thinking of one of the many stories of novice hunters shooting cattle, having mistaken them for deer. recalling the puny ribs on the whitetails I have cleaned, and the much bigger beef ribs I see in the meat case, the question came to mind.

I have read the many discussions of the '06 being barely enough for moose, and I did not think moose were as large as cattle (never seen a moose up close).

no more, no less, nothing nefarious. I just wondered if the ol' '06 was up to a boiler room shot on a relatively massive animal....

I almost forgot to add: thanks for the excellent responses, and I am not surprised to know somebody here has been there, done that.

quote:

Originally posted by leon phelps:
Whenever someone adds "Just Curious", I become suspicious. This usually implies a hidden motive.

prepare for disappontment.

quote:

Whose cow?

some apocryphal farmer's.

quote:

If it's yours?

it's not.

quote:

why would you have to shoot it at 100 yards with a hunting rifle?

that's what deer hunters use.

quote:

Are you at war with a neighbor or are you a meat rustler?

no, I like my neighbors, and I live in the 'burbs.

quote:

If it's your cow,

it's not.

quote:

you should be able to capture it and slaughter it properly.

thanks for your vote of confidence.

quote:

Why would anyone think that a cow would survive a well placed 180 gr bullet from a 30-06 at 100 yards, who has any familiarity at all with weapons of this class?

what about somebody without any familiarity with cows? like me?

quote:

Something doesn't seem right here. I'm not accusing you of anything illegal, I'm "just curious' why anyone would ask such a question.

I don't know what doesn't seem right, except maybe your misplaced concern. As I posted earlier, the following explains why I asked.

quote:

Originally posted by delloro:

...I was thinking of one of the many stories of novice hunters shooting cattle, having mistaken them for deer. recalling the puny ribs on the whitetails I have cleaned, and the much bigger beef ribs I see in the meat case, the question came to mind.

I have read the many discussions of the '06 being barely enough for moose, and I did not think moose were as large as cattle (never seen a moose up close).

no more, no less, nothing nefarious. I just wondered if the ol' '06 was up to a boiler room shot on a relatively massive animal....

I almost forgot to add: thanks for the excellent responses, and I am not surprised to know somebody here has been there, done that.

quote:

Originally posted by leon phelps:
Whenever someone adds "Just Curious", I become suspicious. This usually implies a hidden motive.

prepare for disappontment.

quote:

Whose cow?

some apocryphal farmer's.

quote:

If it's yours?

it's not.

quote:

why would you have to shoot it at 100 yards with a hunting rifle?

that's what deer hunters use.

quote:

Are you at war with a neighbor or are you a meat rustler?

no, I like my neighbors, and I live in the 'burbs.

quote:

If it's your cow,

it's not.

quote:

you should be able to capture it and slaughter it properly.

thanks for your vote of confidence.

quote:

Why would anyone think that a cow would survive a well placed 180 gr bullet from a 30-06 at 100 yards, who has any familiarity at all with weapons of this class?

what about somebody without any familiarity with cows? like me? nobody said the cow wouldn't die. the question was humanely.

quote:

Something doesn't seem right here. I'm not accusing you of anything illegal, I'm "just curious' why anyone would ask such a question.

I don't know what doesn't seem right, except maybe your misplaced concern. As I posted earlier, the following explains why I asked.

quote:

Originally posted by delloro:

...I was thinking of one of the many stories of novice hunters shooting cattle, having mistaken them for deer. recalling the puny ribs on the whitetails I have cleaned, and the much bigger beef ribs I see in the meat case, the question came to mind.

I have read the many discussions of the '06 being barely enough for moose, and I did not think moose were as large as cattle (never seen a moose up close).

no more, no less, nothing nefarious. I just wondered if the ol' '06 was up to a boiler room shot on a relatively massive animal....

I almost forgot to add: thanks for the excellent responses, and I am not surprised to know somebody here has been there, done that.

quote:

Whenever someone adds "Just Curious", I become suspicious. This usually implies a hidden motive.

You need to get involved with the site more.

Curiosity is the sign of a healthy/open mind, something way too many people this day and time do not have.

quote:

will a 30-06 kill a full-grown cow?

Naaah; it may momentarily stun one occasionally but kill? Even if one did eventually die you'd probably have to track the thing for miles.

I dont have anything of real importance to add, just wanted to say..."Interesting reading thread".

I personally would vote for the shot in the head, and if at 100yds, more gun than a 22mag.

Makes me wonder what a 6mm, 75gr V-max would to to a cow head...

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
This place is amazing!!!!!!!

Delloro asks a simple question, in which at NO POINT did he mention ANYTHING about eating the beast in question, and folks have become experts in the processing of beef carcasses.

Good Grief

X2!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Maybe the Sumbich wrote a bad check???????? The possibilities are endless.

That was my thinking too!