Wounding/Losing Deer and the Girlie Men

15 November 2004, 01:36

OK.. It's time I spoke out about this subject.

There seems to be a small group of Girlie Men on this forum that seem to think that if they practice enough and pass on all the "hard shots" that they will never wound and/or lose a deer.

They must have been brought up by women with no men around or got their squeemishness somewhere else. I suggest that they start gathering their meat at the grocery stores and quit agonizing over whether or not some of us are "ethical" because we don't pass up on all but the easiest of shots. eg. no running, rear, or long shots.

I have been a hunter for 46 years now and I can count on one hand the times I've wounded medium/large game that crawled off to die without being recovered, but that's not because I agonize over whether or not a shot is totally safe or whether or not I can find the game if I should happen to wound it.

$hit happens (poo poo occurs for you girlie men) and game get's wounded. Bullets fail, game moves just as you shoot, rifles malfunction, people just flat miss the vital areas, and sometimes deer just fail to cooperate when you shoot them right where you intend to. Yes!!! And sometimes even the most careful hunter fails to recover them. Get over it!!!

I will stay after most of the other hunters go home in frustration and will still try to find a wounded animal and we drag out our best tracking hounds to recover a deer any time we feel the need.

BUT!!! I don't agonize over whether or not I'll wound and lose game. I am aware that it happens many times every day in the huge national forest, (and across this great land) where I/we hunt and I don't condemn anyone that screws up. That's just part of hunting and it's gonna happen over and over and over. That's why they call it "hunting" and not "game shooting".

Many hunters just don't have the time I do to "hang out at the range" and shoot several hours a week. They don't have the time or inclination to learn to track wounded game and don't have the trail dogs to find wounded ones.

But I will defend their right to hunt right along with us that DO have the time and inclination to practice, practice, and practice some more.

Hunting is not an exact science. Game will be wounded and lost. Excercize "REASONABLE CAUTION" and then go have fun. Get over it or hang up your rifles and go to the grocery store you bunch of Girlie Men!!!

<climbing down off of soapbox>

$bob$

15 November 2004, 01:44

NitroX

I don't understand the "girlie men" comment.

Does it make you more of a real man if you are able to gutshoot or wound a deer and fail to finish it off or recover it, only to leave it die a slow, lingering and painfull death?

15 November 2004, 01:52

LDHunter

NitroX,

I didn't say that or anything even remotely resembling that and it appears that you are bent on twisting my words.

Quote what I said that made you think that and I'll respond.

$bob$

15 November 2004, 03:00

AggieDog

LD, I know what you are saying, and I tend to agree with you. My other favorite is bullet failure on deer, deer arent that hard to kill if you put any bullet where it is supposed to go. There are two schools of thought on deer bullets, I confess, I am in the premium bullet crowd, but there are others that could care less about how much weight retention a bullet has, and in fact, they prefer the bullet shed weight and cause alot of calateral damage, expend all energy within the animal. When you analize both views, to me, shot placement still comes back into play. If you are so inclined to take alot of quartering shots at deer, and perhaps at some pretty good distinces, I would argue you should be using a bullet like Barnes TSX, because you wont be satisfied with anything less. Case in point, the Accubond is much better than the ballistic tip as far as staying together, yet still not as good as something like a failsafe, or X bullet. They have their weaknesses also, nothing is perfect.

Shooting a rifle at game, on occasion, there will be a crippled animal that gets away from you. All attempts should be made to minimize a cripple, and to track and find it, but, the fact is, when it occurs, you will feel like a heal, but, ole mr coyote, or some other critter, will play their appropriate role within the food chain.

15 November 2004, 03:31

ASS_CLOWN

LDHunter,

You left off one group of deer hunters. Those that, if they wound one say "so what plenty more where that one came from". Of these group of hunters most seem to consider deer varmints. Besides that, wounded deer don't taste as good as quick kills do, at least that has been our/my experience.

Cannot wait to see you call me a troll again, or are you simply ignoring me. If so I say you are the "girlie man".

ASS_CLOWN

15 November 2004, 04:33

stubblejumper

Whenever you hunt there is the risk of losing an animal.You can reduce this risk greatly with proper preparation and by taking only high percentage shots,but the risk is always present.

15 November 2004, 05:46

Oscar Makonka

Hunting is not an exact science. Game will be wounded and lost. Excercize "REASONABLE CAUTION" and then go have fun. Get over it or hang up your rifles and go to the grocery store you bunch of Girlie Men!!!

I don't sweat the odd wounded or lost critter as long as a decent effort to make a good shot and an effort to recover it was made. Shit happens. What bothers me is the guys who are not able and practiced enough to make shots they attempt and should not be taking shots they cannot normally make. I know of one idiot who has shot and lost 4 deer in the last week with easy shots. There are some guys out there that are like a broken record, leaving the same trail of wounded critters every year. For every animal they bring home they leave 3 or 4 laying around the countryside because they are idiots and shouldn't be allowed a hunting licence. There is far too much of this going on and it bothers me that some people seem to think this is ok.

I'm one of those guys who pass on a lot of shots and generally only take ideal shots. So what if that big 6 point bull elk walks away because he didn't give me the shot I wanted. Whats it to ya? I've been hunting over 30 years and I haven't lost any animals, I may yet, but I hope not and will do my best to prevent it. It does happen but some guys seem to have it happen so often that they need their asses kicked by one of those ethical, accurate shooting, girlie men you speak of.

15 November 2004, 07:07

Wstrnhuntr

Yes mishaps do happen. Does embracing them make you a big man? Ive had mishaps before and felt like shit about it, is that supposed to be a flaw in ones manhood? For someone whos hunted for 46 years you are clearly lacking maturity.

There is a lot of people who demonstrate the same lack of consideration by leaving beer cans and garbage strewn all over the countryside and taking ATV's wherever they please. My bet is that you are one of them.

15 November 2004, 07:28

WESR

Have to agree with Wstrnhuntrï¿½s assessment.

I have lost game. It can happen even with a good hit. That said, if your not reasonably sure you can make the shot you want, and hit the vitals, then pass it up. It is the right thing to do and in what my mind separates a true sportsman from the idiots shooting rapid fire with sksï¿½s and Win. 94ï¿½s. I can buy my meat from the grocery store so I personally canï¿½t justify making a noble animal suffer anymore than it needs to. I guess youï¿½ll have to count me in as a girlie man.

Wes

15 November 2004, 07:50

beemanbeme

Let's see now, you call everybody that doesn't subscribe to your "spray and pray" mentality a "girlie man". And one of the reasons your condemn them is because they preach a ethical, careful brand of hunting that you don't agree with. You then proceed to tell them that YOUR WAY is the ONLY WAY and if they don't go along with it, they should stop hunting.
Well, sonny boy, I've been hunting for 60 years, not a mere 49, and I have lost a grand total of 1 (one) deer. I shot at a 2x2 mulie with a .243 three times as he trotted acrost the face of a hill. With my partner confirming that I was hitting the deer. The deer went over the mountain as if untouched and I spent the rest of my weeks hunt looking for the deer. I went home empty-handed and since then have never fired a .243 at game. "Oh well, the coyotes are gonna eat well" is a little too flip for me. I would imagine that I have killed well over 100 deer so far but the one I remember most is that deer. If that makes me a "girlie man" then I guess I am but remember, knowing what sort of people dislike you can make you feel really good about yourself. And I feel wonderful.

15 November 2004, 08:03

RogerK

LD, if I'm a girlyman for to minumizing the risk of wounding or losing a game animal, then you are a fitting posterboy for the anti-crowd like PETA. Blast the damned furry creatures and the hell with a clean kill or finding them after the shot.

By all means, do speak out. An idiot in the open is better then an idiot in the closet.

15 November 2004, 08:10

nelsonted

Several years ago three of us were pushing small strips of trees. Dad and Milo were in their late sixties so guess who had to do the walking? Anyway, in one of the strips I chased out a doe. It ran towards Milo and he hit her but she kept going. We followed her for and hour or so before we realized she was making a big circle back to where we started from. After discussing it we decided to put the other two in the most likely spots for a shot while I followed the deer. I spent the entire afternoon following the cripple- I could see she had a leg broken as I followed her.

As the afternoon wore on she would stay down longer each time I crept up on her. She finally buried herself in cat tails taller than my head. I followed the opening she had made sneaking ahead of me, spreading the cattails with my shotgun as I went. The last time she jumped the hair on her rump brushed my face. I couldn't do much since the muck was above my ankles and was more or less imobile. She finally walked out of the cattails and Dad shot her.

I will never forget the fear as I stood in the swamp with cattails over my head trying to find a wounded deer laying close enough I could hear her breathing but not able to get the shot. The thought of throwing my hands up and saying something like "well, she'd be in no better shape if a car hit her on the highway" and walking away never entered my head.

We have a responsibilty to the animals we hunt. It's not something to take lightly.

15 November 2004, 09:13

tasunkawitko

bee -

very well-said.

15 November 2004, 09:14

LDHunter

Well... It appears that some people here got thier bowels in a huge uproar because I mentioned girlie men. None of them were accused of being girlie men (unless they perceived an accusation due to thier own feelings) and noone seems to be interested in directly quoting something that I've said and pointing out where they disagree.

In fact what I see being protested and yelled about bears very little relation to what I actually said.

All I get is personal attacks and continuing references to the girlie men comparison.

Appears that I've struck a nerve that has nothing to do with hunting game.... Go figure....

Could it be that the shoe fits a few here and their protestations are too vociferous?...

Rolling On Floor Laughing My Southern A$$ Off!!!!

Honest guys... I wasn't insulting your manhood or lack of it... I was referring to shooting wild game!

Your knee jerk responses indicate maybe I used words that possibly made you take a deep look inside or something? Gosh... I'm sure sorry if I upset you...

This forum seems to be inhabited by those that are of a "sensitive nature" lately... Maybe I'd better pull in my horns a bit and think of a more politically correct term?

I thought I could stir a conversation that would polarize some of the underlying misconceptions (my subjective words) that seem to spark the endless blathering about what is a "properly safe" shot to take at game or not.

Instead I seemed to evoke non-adult responses that border on the "my daddy can beat up your daddy" type of exchange.

Oh well... Here we go... <sigh> <donning Nomex and digging in for an assault>

$bob$

15 November 2004, 09:34

ASS_CLOWN

LDHunter,

Quote:

Rolling On Floor Laughing My Southern A$$ Off!!!!

Are you a native born Floridian then?

As I said before, many leave badly wounded animals to die because they consider DEER vermin and by leaving the wounded they may TAG another; therefore, getting two for one.

I also personally detest the taste of highly adrenilized meat. Most refer to it as gamey. I prefer the quick clean kill and strive to achieve it. I also typically use calibers that many would call OVERKILL, this approach does mean that I must be somewhat more picky about my shots, if edible meat is the desired outcome of the hunt. I actually find this condition to provide more sport, in that the animal has a better chance of avoiding getting shot (due to orientation to me) and I typically get a quick clean one shot kill (just the way I like 'em)

For the record I have lost exactly one animal I personally shot in my 27 or so years of hunting. It was a bull elk in Colorado, shot at a range of over 600 yards with a 300 Weatherby. He was gone by the time we got to where he had been, and the blood trail quickly ceased to exist. Wait, that isn't exactly true, I just remembered a rat I shot at age 11 or so. I shot him with a pellet rifle, it was then that I learned that rats can scream like small children, and jump like 5' straight up!! The rat went back into his hole in the barn and I ran out the door!!! I think I got him though a couple weeks later (bastard was HUGE, about equal to a small cat), this time though I had enough gun, 12 ga with #4 bird shot, range about 10'. There wasn't even any "fur" needing to be picked up.

Are you ignoring me . . . GIRLIE MAN?

ASS_CLOWN

15 November 2004, 10:34

jaycocreek

LD-Isn't the internet a wounderful place where you can say "Anything" without recourse?I love the "Girlie Men" for sure.I have four boys from 37- 16(And he is 6ft 4 and 235 and a hand full) and would like to see anyone tell them that,all hunters and never lost one "Yet"..I have never lost one with a rifle but one time with the bow I did.I assumed he lived as he pulled out the arrow and went up hill for a long way.

I doubt you want everyone putting you in the Florida state of mind but your bustin everyone here unless I misread it.

Take care young pup and live and learn in person....Thats life in the real world.The strong survive reguarless how many legs they have.

Take care and learn by your mistakes

Jayco

15 November 2004, 10:52

35Whelen

Quote:

It was a bull elk in Colorado, shot at a range of over 600 yards with a 300 Weatherby. He was gone by the time we got to where he had been, and the trail quickly ceased to exist.

AC, would you mind posting the above quote in the "What's long range?" thread for LDHunter and LAWCOP to read?

'preciate it.
35W

15 November 2004, 11:00

OldFart

I agree with Wstrnhuntr and beemanbeme. I may lose a animal, but I don't have to accept it. Any time I have lost a animal, I always evaluate what happen and will always change something the next time I go out. I love the animals I hunt. I have paintings of them throughout my house. They certainly deserve my best to make a quick clean kill.
If that makes me a girly man, so be it, but I will not change. That I can accept, losing animals I can't.

15 November 2004, 11:51

stubblejumper

Quote:

For the record I have lost exactly one animal I personally shot in my 27 or so years of hunting. It was a bull elk in Colorado, shot at a range of over 600 yards with a 300 Weatherby. He was gone by the time we got to where he had been, and the blood trail quickly ceased to exist

So just how many shots did you fire practising at over 600yards with your 300wby(with your hunting load) before shooting at the elk in question?How did you estimate the range before shooting at the elk and how was the range measured after the shot?What was the difference between your range estimation before the shot and the final measured distance?Just curious since I hear of similar situations now and then and the answers are usually very similar in all of these situations.

15 November 2004, 14:24

ASS_CLOWN

stubblejumper,

Quote:

So just how many shots did you fire practising at over 600yards with your 300wby(with your hunting load) before shooting at the elk in question?How did you estimate the range before shooting at the elk and how was the range measured after the shot?What was the difference between your range estimation before the shot and the final measured distance?Just curious since I hear of similar situations now and then and the answers are usually very similar in all of these situations

Well, I had shot around 40 rounds with THAT rifle and load. With my 30-06 target rifle I had literally shot 1500 to 2000 rounds at 500 and 800 yards (mostly at 500). Ihave shot somewhere between 40 and 50 deer and dogs at ranges to 800 yards, with the -06.

The range estimation at the time of the shot was done using the rifle's scope. Later, a friend with a range finder zapped my shooting position from where we found the first blood, it was 672 yards. I most certainly hit the bull, however the trauma wasn't sufficient to bring him down quickly, nor did he bleed enough to leave a visible blood trail to follow. The other issues is that it takes time to cover 672 yards (as the bullets flies NOT as we walk) to the point of impact and begin the track. That 20 minutes or so was all he needed. Finally, I ain't no highlander anymore, I cannot jog at 10,000+ ft anymore.

Now for the truth, shooting at a known range, on a target course, if FAR easier than shooting in the mountains. The primarly reason, in my opinion, is the shifting wind conditions (and the lack of many easily visible wind direction reading devices between you and the critter, grass never seems to move when I am getting ready to shoot, damned Murphy's law!!!). Windage is 100X more difficult and complex than simple drop, but then what do I know!

The morale of the story, get in close and get good hit(s). This is something my Father taught me, but in my pride and arrogance I did not do it (didn't hurt that it would have been practically impossible to get any closer without spooking the bull). Once upon a time I was a rather descent long range shooter, those times are long ago, as is the time I lost this elk. I will endeavour not to do it again.

ASS_CLOWN

PS - Forgot your question about the range finder and my estimation. I guesstimated between 600 and 700 yards and held a bit high as I figured he was closer to 700 (as I recall, I distinctly remember thinking he was a long 600 and probably close to 700, so I held a little higher than I would have for a "650" yard shot. The scope was a Leupold VarXIII 4.5-14X40.

15 November 2004, 14:42

stubblejumper

Quote:

The morale of the story, get in close and get good hit(s).

Actually a better moral is to simply get a good hit reguardless of the range.Unless you know the precise range and have practised regularly at that range with the gun and load that you hunt with(or one with identical ballistics),your odds of a good hit are slim.This however is not just limited to long distance.Many people never practise their shooting at all.Many people sight in their guns at 25 yards or 50 yards but never shoot at targets any farther.Many of them buy whatever ammunition is on sale reguardless of whether or not it is the load that they sighted in with(if they even bothered to sight their gun in.Some take the action out of the stock to clean it and don't bother to sight in again.Some people even borrow a rifle to hunt with but don't even bother to check the point of impact.In summary all of these practises can and do cause misses and wounded animals and many of them occur at ranges that most of us would not call long distance.I have personally witnessed many misses and several animals that were not hit well at distances less than 200 yards and several much closer.If you sight your gun in properly,always use the same loads(or resight when changing loads)know the trajectory of your load,always use a solid rest,pay attention to the wind and know how it affects your load, and only shoot at distances that you have practised at on a regular basis, you greatly reduce the chance of wounding an animal.Unfortunately,if you do all of these things you will be in the minority of hunters.If however your are in this minority of hunters you probably have much less chance of wounding an animal than the average hunter even though your shooting ranges may be much farther.

15 November 2004, 14:55

olarmy

"OK.. It's time I spoke out about this subject"

You start with this statement. Why is it time?... and why should we care....

"There seems to be a small group of Girlie Men on this forum that seem to think that if they practice enough and pass on all the "hard shots" that they will never wound and/or lose a deer."

You next sentence questions the manhood of anyone who refrains from shooting until they have a high percentage shot...

My assessment is that you are either just enjoying stirring the pot, or you are someone who would not be welcome in my deer camp...

15 November 2004, 14:58

ASS_CLOWN

stubblejumper,

Not to begin another senseless thread on long range shooting, but the truth is this. On a firing range the wind conditions overwhelmingly tend to be rather consistent. When shooting across a canyon for instance, wind direction and velocity can change significantly over a distance of 600 yards. Add to that the uncertainty of what the wind is actually doing over tha 600 yards, because you have, more than likely, NO viable/reliable wind direction/speed indicators and shooting at these ranges is a real bitch.

Now if you are using a 50 BMG it is a different story. Bullets with BC in excess of 1.0 buck wind pretty darned well. Hunting bullets tend to have BC in the 0.38 to 0.6 range, with the most popular typically ranging between 0.42 and 0.56. Not the bestest in the westest wind riders.

Now I have said too much and will most likely be accused of trolling again, OH BOY!

Good night,
ASS_CLOWN

15 November 2004, 15:05

AnotherAZWriter

LD:

Ever hunt in Africa? They have a good system - shoot it and wound it, and you buy it, plus maybe lose your quota. If we had that system here, we would all be better off for it.

The only animal I have ever lost in my life was a kudu I smacked at 200 yards with a .338. He dropped like a scak of cement. As we walked up to him he took off running. Tracked him until he left the ranch. Cost me 700 bucks. Luckily, I was on a ranch in Namibia and got another chance - a huge bull running at 35 yards - a totally lucky shot, and one by all rights that should have cost me another 700 bucks.

I don't have a problem with LD shooting or hunting, as long as you have a place to practice. Frankly, they are few and far between east of the Miss. And if you do have one, it is most likely one range - where the wind blows the same, the sun angle is the same, etc.

The only issue I have with some LD hunters is their complete inability to characterize any distance as too long. I am a serious LR shooter; it is why I spent $4500 for a rangefinder that works in AZ sunlight and measures farther than any eye safe device out there. I was the Alaska Army champion all three years I competed, and finished first and second the two years I competed at I Corps (that is 40,000 men). So I think I am a pretty shot; but that is not the point. When a one mph blows your bullet 5 inches, it is absolutely too far. I have seen guys claim they can estimate a one mph wind at 1000 yards. That is complete BS.

15 November 2004, 15:22

stubblejumper

Quote:

The only animal I have ever lost in my life was a kudu I smacked at 200 yards with a .338

Further proof that incidents of lost or wounded animals do not always occur at long range.

For the record I practise regularly out to 500 yards at my local range.The longest shot that I have ever attempted on a game animal was a pronghorn at 480 yards.That pronghorn dropped dead at the shot.My second longest attempted shot at game was on a whitetail at 434 yards.The result was the same as the pronghorn.In both cases I used a leica 1200 yard rangefinder so I knew the exact range.In both cases I shot from the prone position with a solid rest and the wind was light and in my face.In both cases I was shooting a rifle that I consistantly shoot 3" to 4" groups with at 500 yards on the range.I do not practise farther than 500 yards so my maximum shot distance on game is 500 yards and then only under ideal conditions.

My point is that I do as much as possible to reduce the chance of wounding an animal.And with the preparations that I(and many other serious hunters)make,the chances of me wounding an animal at 400 or even 500 yards is less than many other hunters at 200 yards.Therefore just because a hunter may shoot at longer distances than average,it doesn't mean that he will wound more animals than the average hunter.

15 November 2004, 15:56

NitroX

In some European countries it takes a lot of effort to get a hunting licence. If you shoot the 'wrong' deer let alone gutshoot one and let it escape, you could well get a black mark on your licence, and two black marks could mean loss of the licence for life.

I guess they just have different standards from LDShooter.

"Girlie Men" to mean sounds like something a baggart would use. I haven't heard terms like this since about kindergarten.

And using it for hunters that care to try not to wound game unnecessarily really is silly.

Quote:

I am aware that it happens many times every day in the huge national forest, (and across this great land) where I/we hunt and I don't condemn anyone that screws up. That's just part of hunting and it's gonna happen over and over and over. That's why they call it "hunting" and not "game shooting".

No I call these kind of people 'shooters'. Those without the necessary skills that they should be allowed to hunt. You talk about huntng for meat. Is it so hard to harvest a meat animal? I have never found it so. Taking a trophy is much harder as it is often 1 in 500, but a meat animal! When hunting for meat I am extra careful and try to spine/neck shoot or brain shoot the deer, let alone gut shooting one.

Quote:

Many hunters just don't have the time I do to "hang out at the range" ...... They don't have the time or inclination to learn to track wounded game and don't have the trail dogs to find wounded ones.

If they aren't prepared to do the right thing, learn how to shoot properly, and too lazy to do their best to find wounded game, they are lazy slobs who have no part in hunting game ethically.

Quote:

But I will defend their right to hunt right along with us that DO have the time and inclination to practice, practice, and practice some more.

I read this as "But I will defend their right to wound and cripple game. What a statement!

LDHunter,

I believe you try to do the right thing and have not wounded a lot of game and when you have have tried to a reasonable extent to finish it. At least I hope you are.

I too have wounded game and since an early age have managed to find and kill every beast even if it took two or three days. As a teenager I "shot animals" with a bunch of blokes with under-powered calibres who when an animal was wounded let it go if it was going to be too hard to follow. Or even said it wasn't worth the ammo. Since then I traded up and in calibres and hunt with a different class of hunter.

But your attitudes show a HUGE lack of respect for the game you hunt. At least condoning it in others who seem to have no respect for the game they shoot, wound, cripple.

15 November 2004, 16:01

35Whelen

Quote:

On a firing range the wind conditions overwhelmingly tend to be rather consistent. When shooting across a canyon for instance, wind direction and velocity can change significantly over a distance of 600 yards. Add to that the uncertainty of what the wind is actually doing over tha 600 yards, because you have, more than likely, NO viable/reliable wind direction/speed indicators and shooting at these ranges is a real bitch.

VERY well said,AC. While hunting in New Mexico last month, I was reminded of how erratic the wind velocity and direction were, especially at higher elevation (10,000 ft. +/-). It was at times, maddening. There I'd sit, in the perfect position, waiting for elk to come out of the timber, wind in my face, and an instant later, it was at my back, or on my cheek.

I wonder how the your factor that into a 450-500 yd. shot?

35W

15 November 2004, 16:05

35Whelen

Quote:

Further proof that incidents of lost or wounded animals do not always occur at long range.

Stub, I've yet to hear anyone argue the quoted point. But, I think it's unargueable that if wounding an animal at 200 yards is possible then as distance increases, the likelyhood of a shot going awry, and game being wounded, increases too. Wouldn't you agree?
35W

15 November 2004, 17:16

stubblejumper

Would you not agree that an experienced shooter with very good equipment( very accurate rifle with properly developed handloads and a laser rangefinder),that puts in a lot of practise time at the range, at various distances up to and including 400 yards,would wound no more animals at 400 yards than the average shooter(very little practise if any,usually not a precise sight in and shooting factory loads in a factory rifle)would wound at 200 yards?

The likelyhood of wounding a game animal depends just as much on the person doing the shooting and the equipment that he is using than the shooting distance.

Actually if you were really serious about reducing the number of animals that are wounded by hunters each year ,you should lobby the game departments to institute a testing system like the one used in Finland.Before being granted a license,the prospective hunter must pass a shooting test to prove his shooting ability and the test is difficult enough that over half of the people taking it fail.In that way the poor shooters would have to either improve their shooting or quit hunting.Either way less animals would be wounded.Just how bad do you want to reduce the number of wounded animals?

15 November 2004, 18:13

35Whelen

Quote:

Would you not agree that an experienced shooter with very good equipment( very accurate rifle with properly developed handloads and a laser rangefinder),that puts in a lot of practise time at the range, at various distances up to and including 400 yards,would wound no more animals at 400 yards than the average shooter(very little practise if any,usually not a precise sight in and shooting factory loads in a factory rifle)would wound at 200 yards?

The likelyhood of wounding a game animal depends just as much on the person doing the shooting and the equipment that he is using than the shooting distance.

You're missing the entire point, Stub. I agree with what you said in the above quote. But ability and all the fancy equipment in the world cannot overcome that which occurs from the time the brain says "Now." to manipulating the trigger, until the bullet reaches the target.

We're not talking about a piece of paper, or a water filled milk jug or a steel disc; these are targets that NEVER, EVER move and that are shot at under ideal, almost controlled conditions. We're talking about a living animal that in the course of time I mention above is likely to raise or lower his head,take a step, whirl and run, etc. Not to mention wind that varies in speed and direction.

For the sake of arguement, let's take a .338" 250 gr. Nosler Partition @ 2900 fps. That's ROUGHLY 340 Weatherby ballistics. Let's say you have an opportunity to take a shot at an animal at 500 yds. At 500 yds. here's some interesting facts:

At 5000' above sea level, it takes the bullet 0.604015419 seconds to get from the muzzle to a 500 yd. target. ADD to that the time it takes the image of proper crosshair placement to travel through your eye and to your brain, your brain to tell your finger to squeeze the trigger, the time it takes the sear to break, the firing pin to drop, the primer ignite the powder, etc., etc., and we're probably talking about a full second here. We all know what an animal can do in one seconds time.
Now,let's assume you're supernatural and you can judge wind speeds at over 1/4 mile distance with uncanny accuracy (that said with tongue in cheek). You decide there's a 10 mph breeze blowing 90ï¿½ to the path of your bullet where the animal is standing, so you allow for a 15" drift. You carefully take aim behind the shoulder of the _______, (fill in the blank), squeeze the trigger but DRATS!!, the wind at the target gusted to 15 mph. Oh-ho! Your bullets already on the way but it's going strike 8" from where you intended (now 23" from the point of aim)!! To complicate matters, the animal took a step into the wind to snatch a morsel of grass he sees. Bummer, now, despite knowing the exact range and executing the shot perfectly, you just gut shot a________ .
And by the way, had you misjudged the wind speed by 10 mph OR if the wind gusted or died by 10 mph at that range, the bullet drift just changed by 15" from your original estimate.

My point in this dissertation is this:
Despite the best equipment and ability, assuming you can hit a a snuff can at 500 yds., there will ALWAYS be variables over which you have no control and cannot overcome. These variable are magnified with each yard added to the distance of the target. Granted, they may not always present, but someday, they'll bite you.
THAT, my friend, has been the point I've been trying to make all along.
Regards,
35W

15 November 2004, 19:33

cobrad

I have a fool-proof method of dealing with the wind on those long shots at big-game. If it is not still, don't shoot. It's not that hard to tell what the wind is doing between me and the animal if there is no wind. It is also helpful to check through the scope to see if any grass or branches are swaying to be sure it is as still as it appears. This takes too long? If there is not time to assess conditions, then set up and execute the shot, then there is no shot.

15 November 2004, 20:26

35Whelen

Ahhh....wisdom. Good post, cobrad.
35W

16 November 2004, 02:06

LDHunter

Quote:

LD-Isn't the internet a wounderful place where you can say "Anything" without recourse?I love the "Girlie Men" for sure.I have four boys from 37- 16(And he is 6ft 4 and 235 and a hand full) and would like to see anyone tell them that,all hunters and never lost one "Yet"..I have never lost one with a rifle but one time with the bow I did.I assumed he lived as he pulled out the arrow and went up hill for a long way.

I doubt you want everyone putting you in the Florida state of mind but your bustin everyone here unless I misread it.

Take care young pup and live and learn in person....Thats life in the real world.The strong survive reguarless how many legs they have.

Take care and learn by your mistakes

Jayco

Now that's my favorite of all the immature responses I got yet... My name's Bob Monahan and I'm in Cape Coral Florida and I'm in the phone book. I'm not hiding from you or anyone else.

By The Way... I've also lived and hunted in 11 states and am originally from Southern Illinois.

I bet I would have had a largely ignored thread if I hadn't referred to "Girlie Men"... Seems like Arnie knows how to root out the sissies and I just copied his success... <LOL>

$bob$

16 November 2004, 02:13

stubblejumper

Quote:

You decide there's a 10 mph breeze blowing 90ï¿½ to the path of your bullet where the animal is standing,

You seem to have missed(or conveniently ignored) my previous post where I stated

Quote:

my maximum shot distance on game is 500 yards and then only under ideal conditions.

To me a 10mph wind at 90 degrees in not ideal conditions for a 500 yard shot.I would not shoot in this situation.You overlooked or more likely ignored the statement in my previous post about the conditions necessary for me to take a 500 yard shot and instead assumed incorrectly that I would shoot 500 yards under any conditions.I assess each situation and then decide whether or not to shoot.

16 November 2004, 02:38

SteveM70

I'm not going to argue my man hood or preach my ethics to a complete stranger who certainly doesn't see things the way I do but I can tell you that my kids will not share your views when they reach adulthood.

16 November 2004, 03:02

LDHunter

OK... Exactly what views to you disagree with? Please quote what I've said and tell me exactly why you don't like my view and how yours differs.

$bob$

16 November 2004, 05:59

SteveM70

Quote:

I suggest that they start gathering their meat at the grocery stores and quit agonizing over whether or not some of us are "ethical" because we don't pass up on all but the easiest of shots. eg. no running, rear, or long shots.

but that's not because I agonize over whether or not a shot is totally safe or whether or not I can find the game if I should happen to wound it.

BUT!!! I don't agonize over whether or not I'll wound and lose game.

These are the parts I take issue with. I can agree with you that one shouldn't "agonize" over whether or not they loose game and I doubt that anyone here spends there hunting time doing so. Do you know of anyone who is in agony over the prospect of loosing the next animal they shoot at? I sure don't but I can tell you that after reading your post you are not coming across as someone who doesn't agonize over whether you wound or loose game, but more like someone who just doesn't give a damn.

16 November 2004, 06:23

GeorgeS

As LDHunter stated, shit happens. At some point, someone is going to lose an animal. LDHunter's point is, while none of us wants this to happen, it will (someday), and there is no reason to beat yourself (or others) over the head with it.

As long as it doesn't happen due to carelessness, lack of preparation, or using the (obviously) wrong equipment, just try to learn from it and move on.

George

16 November 2004, 06:35

Kev

HI,

What George said,Kev

16 November 2004, 07:06

GeorgeS

Kev,

How is Alaska treating you, Kev?

George