Help me out here. I've hunted my whole life, and have never been on a trip with anyone who took the Texas heart route. Now, I've heard of people shooting animals in the butt, only we are usually laughing about this. This shot only has anecdotal value in my hunting camps. In fact, I didn't know this was ever actually an option (nor one with a name) until AR opened my ignorant eyes. My question is: how many people really consider this as a viable option in the field? Do you see a big bull slipping away (or screaming away, as is more common) and blast them in the ass? Am I the only one here who looks onto this practice with bewilderment? Can those who've taken this shot (or consider it as a usable option) explain this? Is this a kill-at-any-cost method, or is there more to it?

I've taken a couple of people hunting for the first time, and when I'm covering the where-to-aim part, the ass never comes up. I emphatically teach that the idea is not to kill an animal at any cost, but rather to take an animal when the opportunity at a proper shot at head/neck/vitals presents itself.

Now, I'm not trying to make a judgement here--this is just new to me. And every shot I've taken has not been perfect (esp at a wounded animal). In fact, the little buck I shot at the end of the year was facing away at just under 100yrd, but I took him in the back of the head. I've also shot running animals. Yet I can't imagine laying my crosshairs right on the ass of an animal and letting fly. Maybe the reason this idea is so foreign to me is that I hunt for meat as well as sport, and an ass shot doesn't seem like it would make for good eating.

Please weigh in and let me know how other hunters see this. I'd love to hear thoughts on both sides of the fence.

Cross posted from another thread:

When I was first introduced to hunting, I read about the "Texas heart shot", sounded pretty good. Dumb as I was, I tried it once. Result: wounded and unrecovered animal. Older and a tad wiser now, I'll not use this shot on any animal (let alone a bear), unless the animal is wounded.

I'm not saying it can not work, but it is an EXTREMELY chancy shot, and you should respect your animal enough to make sure of a clean kill.

FWIW, my $.02 - mike

With a proper calibre and proper bullet construction there is, in my opinion, no reason to not take this shot. I believe the "Texas Heart Shot" got a bad name in an era during which bullet construction was not of a sufficient quality to ensure proper lengthwise penetration through even deer or elk sized game. It seems clear to me that if the projectile will penetrate to the vitals and kill cleanly then the shot is an ethical one. I have taken this shot on two continents and it has not failed me when using my .416 Rem Mag.

In "The Perfect Shot", Kevin Robertson tells the story of a client who passed on a VERY large Bushbuck because the only shot presented was a "Texas Heart Shot". The client thought the shot to be "undignified". NOTHING will frustrate a PH faster than a client passing on top-ten record book game for such reasons.

Regards,

JohnTheGreek

I'm with mikea on this one. Never used the shot and don't plan to (plans do change though).

quote:

---

NOTHING will frustrate a PH faster than a client passing on top-ten record book game for such reasons.

---

When a PH pays for my hunt I'll shoot the animal anywehere he says. Until then, it's my choice.

John,

I shoot a 300rum now and have little doubt that I can push a partition through the length of most the animals I take. But, is this shot better in your thinking than a head shot from behind? Is the "kill zone" bigger? I've always liked head/neck shots when and animal is in close b/c of the very quick kills I'm rewarded with. If an animal is around the 100yrd range, that's where I've shot the last couple of years. Have the shots you've taken only serve to anchor an animal until you can get more lead in them, or is a quick kill? Would you broad-side an animal in the butt if that is the only shot you were going to get? Would size of trophy matter in this instance?

Do you eat what you shoot? How does this affect the meat? Do you lose the hind region, loins, backstraps, etc? Does this matter in your hunting? This will always be a factor to me, as I like venison and love chowing down on elk.

I've passed on alot of butt shots (not to say the animal doesn't turn and end up in my freezer). It sounds like some might think this is naive. This is the sort of thing I was wondering about.

Thanks for your responses. Keep them coming!

Definetely not the preferred shot, but it can be done with the proper tools. It is a personal decision. Really, it's the same as shooting an animal facing straight at you. You can ruin alot of meat, and for that reason I would only use it on non edible game like coyotes and bears.

Only way I would (and have) used this shot, is to drop an already hit animal. It can be done. The one time I used it, was to drop an 100lb Doe that had been wounded by one of our party. The shot hit almost perfectly between the hams, and exited the chest at the base of the neck. Bullet was cast wheelweight metal 170grain, gun was a '94 Winchester 30-30, range about 20 yards.
It made a hell of a mess of the insides, green goo from one end to the other.
I would NOT use it as a regular shot on any animal there is too much that can go wrong in the entire body length of an animal.

I've taken the shot several times. I have taken these shots using premium bullets with rifles up to 416 Rem. Every one went straight down. Most of these were followups on game that was running away after what should have been kill shots in the head/neck or heart/lung area. I would have no qualms about using this on any animal if the rifle/bullet are capable. I've shot lenghtwise on elk more than once with a 35 Whelen and lengthwise on an Eland with 416 Rem. Very little meat was destroyed in any of these shots.

Hi Todd I have used it once on a crippled critter by another guy and my dad used it once. It is not a pretty sight when you clean one. Mine with a 8mm mag and my dads with a 300 h+h 150 grain bullet,both deer. The 300 knocked him down but he got up and it took us 3/4 mile to finnish him. Mine a 220 grain and in my openion the lightest bullet for the cartridge.It went clear through. My insight all is far on wounded game and in that instance I certainly woud use it. Yes with enough washing and triming you can eat it but what a mess. If shooting an animal that absolutely must be killed use it but make sure you have a heavey for caliber bullet it has to go thru alot of crap to get the job done

Dennis,

I agree that it is certainly not the choice of a PH whether or not to take a shot. BUT imagine, in a North American context, a 375"+ bull elk offering only a Texas heart shot before strolling into the woods. Now imagine being the guide that has brought the hunter to this opportunity and watched him refuse the shot.

Mikea,

I think the Texas heart shot is, with proper bullets and calibre, a MUCH better shot than the rear head/neck shot. I cannot imagine it being otherwise. If one can be assured of proper penetration through the length of the torso, you have so many potential targets . . . the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys etc. All vital organs that when hit, will bring down game in short order. Much less room for error as well. I have shot impala in the neck from behind and it is a risky proposition. It is very easy to miss just a bit left or right. I happened to miss just a little low of my inteded target and hit the ram lower in the spine. Thinking the animal was finished we approached. The ram was playing possum. He waited for us to get within range and the animal bucked his head and caught my PH in the hand. OUCH! The Texas heart shot would have been a higher percentage shot and simultaneously, while considered by some to be not so sporting, saved my PH and the animal a bit of suffering. Yes there is a clean up job to be done after such a shot but this is not too bad when presented with the option of a trophy buck or bull walking into the brush or, outside the realm of trophy hunting, watching a freezer full of meat simply stroll away.

No offense to you and your 300 RUM but I also think todays ultra high velocity calibres can be a bad thing when faced with the possibility of a shot on game from behind. There will definitely be more meat damage and striking all that bone in the hind quarter might do stranger things to bullet performance at higher velocities rather than low/intermediate ones.

To continue, I have taken this shot on whitetail while culling does in Texas and on a monster Bushbuck in Zimbabwe. I took my limit of 4 whitetails in 4 days along with a wild hog. I was not hunting from a stand most of the time and put what I must admit was a hell of a stalk on this one particular doe. When she jumped up, I instinctively placed my crosshairs on her hip and fired my .416 angling toward the vitals (a lot o fgun for deer I know but I was practicing for an upcoming hunt that required the large calibre). There was VERY little meat damage. Just a .416 diameter hole and a small area about the size of a silver dollar that was inedible in the roast. I cut around it when butchering and it worked out great. My Bushbuck incident simply required the texas heart shot. He was, quite frankly, HUGE and was walking toward the trees. I took the shot and we ate his tenderloins for dinner that night. Would I do it again? HELL YES! Both of the described incidents resulted in the animal simply falling STRAIGHT down with not so much as a twitch of an ear or kick of a leg to follow. I would call that a quick and humane kill.

Would I broadside an animal in the butt? As a secondary shot to anchor wounded game I would. As a primary shot not a chance. Now if I had intimate knowledge of the location of certain internal organs such as the liver I would shoot for those and under some circumstances this might be perceived as a less than ideal broadside shot.

I absolutely eat what I shoot and, when I can, I distribute venison to my non-hunting friends. This is the best way, I think to make people who might be neutral on the issue of hunting into pro-hunting folks. I butchered those four whitetails and that one hog in my snowy back yard (looked a bit like a crime scene afterwards ) and we had one hell of a BBQ at my buddy's house a few weeks later.

I have a question for those who look down on the texas heart shot. Would you take a frontal chest shot?

Looking forward to your responses.

Regards,

JohnTheGreek

I will only use in in an pinch, but not for normal hunting

Facts are, if you can hit a spot the size of a silver dollar 100 percent of the time, there will always be an argument for any angle/type of shot. Animals can/have been killed in every way possible. Choice is of course, can you live with the shots your taking? That question is different for everyone.
In my teenage years I shot a doe in the back of the head at around 85 yards, at the time I did not even think to shoot her "texas heart" style. About 2 years later I was in camp(differnt times) when different "texas heart" shots arrived. Both deer were killed cleanly and I thought to myself "If I can take the shot at the back of the head, why not the rear?" I have never taken that shot to date, but I wonder if I would now. I hope not, but as I think about it, I have heard alot more stories of "wounded" or "lost" deer on broadside shots than I ever head otherwise. Of course, not everyone gonna tell you they aimed for the arse.

GTR

I don't know much about the big game thing, but you know the most explosive shot placement on a prairie dog i've ever seen is right up the heart of Texas, maybe because that's where they're the most solid?

Not much help here for the big game boys but just thought i'd stick that one in (pun intended).

1. Who gives a flying flip what the guide thinks??? His paycheck is stil the same. And, if he were to complain about the shot not being taken, his tip would have just suffered some major shrinkage, to put it mildly. The customer is ALWAYS right, folks...even if he's unpleasant, out-of-shape, or otherwise unprepared.

2. As for the shot itself, while undesirable, perhaps, it is effective and, even, ethical. Those who wring their hands in disgust are operating from the same position of "enlightened" arrogance of which we accuse the anti-gun/hunter crowd. And we know how FOS they are!

Read some old stuff by the likes of Teddy Roosevelt and his contemporaries: angle be damned, they worked with what they had if they really wanted an animal. And if it took five shots...oh, well.

3. For the last time, it's a MEXICAN HEAD SHOT. Those references to Texas hurt our little feelings down here.

Carry on,
RSY

If you got an ass shot usually the back of the head is open. Fuzz

I think how willing a hunter is to take this shot depends on the purpose of the hunt. I am normally slow to take this shot, as almost all of my hunts have been "meat" hunts. On a trophy hunt, where meat may be secondary, no problem. As most of the comments indicate, bullet selection will have a big bearing on results, both in downing the animal and edible meat retention. I have taken this shot on one moose, while hunting south of Slave Lake. I was using Nosler Partitions, in my 7MM RM. Very effective at downing the bull, very little meat damage, very little contamination of the carcass. BTW, this bull was dead but didn't know it, and I didn't want to spend the night sectioning and packing him out of the miserable scrubby "brush" that grows so thickly up there, or possibly lose him in that brush. As a norm, I'm slow to take this shot. With the right bullets, I think it can be effective.

Of course, this opinion and $1.50 will get you a cup of coffee most anywhere.

The Rear-Shot, when applied with a quality bullet (Partition, Failsafe, etc) can work very well, pure and simple. There's a lot of bone that can be broken down as well as the femoral artery... not to mention with today's great bullets the vitals can often be reached from the rear... by best bull to date offered nothing but his ass at fifty yards in the thick stuff... Partioned in the rear ham, the femoral artery was obliterated and bone broken... he was down and unable to get up within sixty yards for the finisher.

BA

I totally agree with JohnTheGreek. The key is that you have to make this part of your hunting philosophy and arm yourself accordingly. I take a lot of kidding because my normal deer and antelope rifle is a .338. However, it is always loaded with premium bullets at a moderate velocity. In general, I always hunt with a rifle I am absolutely sure will penetrate completely through any animal I am hunting from any direction. This doesn't mean that it is my preferred shot. You also don't aim at a ham on purpose. The central spine region is a much better target. However, if faced with the choice of ruining part of a ham and going home without a great trophy after paying for the hunt, I will ruin the ham.

On the subject of meat damage, the only instances I have ever seen where significant amounts of meat were ruined was with high velocity smallbores and violently expanding bullets such as the Nosler ballistic tip. This includes spreading the "green stuff" around on a rear lung shot. Fragments from these go everywhere, even with a chest shot. With a controlled expansion bullet at moderate velocity, you can generally eat "right up to the bullet hole" as they say.

Wow!

I didn't realize there were so many taking these shots. I've heard some pretty decent arguments for the plausibility of rear-ending animals. However, to say that the THS is equal to hitting an animal straight on is actually off base. If I shoot an animal straight on, I am assured of where my bullet will strike the vitals. If I take one from the rear there is alot of tissue, bone, and cartilage between poi and vitals. The similarity comes from the fact that the guts and yes, maybe even the ass, will also be involved. And I have certainly shot animals through the vitals only to have the bullet end up in the guts. My biggest concern from behind (aside from the mess that must ensue) is the pelvis/femur problem. It seems to me that the area to cleanly pass a bullet through w/o hitting these major bones is not much bigger than the head of an animal.

And John, I'm surprised to hear your impala story. One reason that I favor a head shot is that even if something goes wrong and I miss, it would usually result in a clean miss and a lost animal, rather than a wounded one (as could easily result from a fouled THS). I like this as the animals I've taken in the head/neck have all been dead immediately (or would have lived had I missed). I guess anything can happen. And, no offense taken. Neither my 300 rum nor me is overly sensitive. And you're right, it is difficult to get bullets to stay together at the rate this gun will push them. But I think I have a winning combo worked out.

I guess it comes down to how badly you want the animal in question. I took a shot on a really nice buck before that I usually would never take, b/c I really wanted that rack (running flat out at 100 yrds in the woods). I got lucky, and wouldn't recommend this shot. Certainly not a shot I would risk on a doe. And I guess I can't say that I would pass up a trophy bull if all I had was a clean THS (though I’d be willing to bet I’d try a head shot first). But I would never risk one on most animals. I realize this is hypocritical, but I think it is actually the sentiments of most here that favor this shot. That said, I will never endorse the kill-at-any-cost method of trying to simply anchor an animal so that I might get more lead into it. If I don’t think that I can take an animal in the first shot, you can bet I won’t pull the trigger. Also, I’ve never paid for a hunt in my life, so luckily for the animals $$ doesn’t enter into the picture (I would hope it wouldn’t even if I did pay).

With a good bullet and a powerful rifle I would take this shot with no hesitation at all. A .416 Rigby loaded with 410 gr woodleigh's will definitely penetrate anything in the country I hunt in.

Ive noticed that most guys advocating this shot are using them in context with the likes of 416 rigbys and 416 rem mags. For most hunting in NA that is completly unnessesary. Ive never used it and dont intend too, I aim for the base of the neck on such occasions.

I just read something yesterday from Jack Oconnor called the indestructible Wapiti. In this he mentions that he heard great things of this approach and decided to give it a go, he placed several (I think it was 4) .375 300 grn loads up the poop shoot of an eland and it kept going. His guide had a better shot and placed one in the lungs and dropped it with a .243. Thats quite a contrasting difference and speaks well for bullet placement and waiting and working for a good shot.

If your shooting a large heavy animal in the ass then there is a awfull lot of penetrating that needs to be done to reach the vitals. An antelope or whitetail would require much less gun to succesfully use this shot. I think that is important to consider if you are going to use the THS.

One of my dads favorite hunting stories is one about a Texas heart shot, his buddy did one so good that there was no entrance hole sept the one already there..

I have absolutely no hesitation taking this shot on a cape buffalo or a whitetail wounded or not. If you shoot a caliber and bullet appropriate for the game you are hunting the only trick is to make sure that you are aiming at the part of the rear that will put the bullets path between the front legs. This type of shot will often break the pelvis, tear up the liver and destroy heart and lungs.

If you pass on this shot just because it seems in appropriate you've probably lost a bunch of venison and/or some great trophies.

I see nothing wrong with a Texas Heart shot, I have used many times..Where I hunt elk you only get that shot, in the dark timber going away. Where I hunt deer in the Texas Bush by sneaking through the thick stuff as opposed to sitting in a stand and bushwacking them you only get going away shots..

I use enough gun to drive the bullet into the vitals and out the front, and I'll be damned if I can figure where this silliness of not taking such a shot came from, like it makes a big difference which direction you drive a bullet into the heart lung area, It is a quick killing shot because you destroy everything inside the animal and its no big deal to keep the shot out of the hams if you aim, someone has been reading fantasy land comic books or hasn't hunted a hell of a lot...or perhaps I havn't been privy to nice tame animals that present the hunter with picture book broadside shots. The best trophy class animals I have shot have mostly been escaping.

I think the gun involved has alot to do with the sucess rate of this shot. Iowa is predominately a shotgun slug state. Most of the deer I hear of shot in the ass here get away. Not enough penetration. In Wyoming I shot an antelope straight on in the chest with an x bullet from my .264 that exited his backside. I have no doubt if he had been facing the other other way it would have preformed exactly the same. To date I've never been faced with a no choice but THS situation so I don't know for sure what I would do. I hope I'll always have another option.

Brian

I would not hesitate to use this shot on an escaping animal. Where I do most of my hunting its hard to get that picture perfect broad side shot. First I go for a neck shot but if thats not an option then the Texas Heart shot is taken.

Back in my younger days I was with a buddy who used a Texas heart shot on buck just as it was cresting a hill about 75yds away. If remember correctly he was using an old Mauser in 8x57 stoked with FMJ's. We both heard the hit, so it was just a matter of finding the buck. When we got to the top of the hill we saw the buck dead in the brush just over the crest. He was missing his scullcap and horns which we found a short distance away. That FMJ followed the spine from the end to the beginning. I'm NOT making this up.

I see nothing wrong with a Texas heart shot.
I had my post all thought up and then I read Johnthegreek's. He pretty much said what I think.
I was also thinking that alot of the time game is heading in a direction away from you(example,whitetail-muledeer driven) escaping. I don't know too many guys that will turn down a shot on a wall hanger buck cause he won't give him a broadside. Ray has covered this.
I also think that a guy that turns down a good trophy on an expensive hunt because the animal never gave him a broad side has a fuck of alot more money than I do. I wonder how many guys against T.heart shots would have a change of heart on the last day of a long expensive hunt if that was the only shot they were going to get?

I don't agree with head shots though. They are much riskier than the T.H.S. Face on, usually it is lights out. Headshots from the side are where the problems are. I've seen small deer drop like a sack of shit, then jump up and take off with a bottom jaw hanging. Shot through the beak does no good either. The head is a small target. The bullet has to hit the brain or very close to it.
If I think there is a chance that I or a client will get a broadside, then I will wait for it. There are alot of variables. There are times I will and there are times I won't.
There are times that I have even waited for the ass end shot. Hunting for trophy whitetails, in some situations, it is easier to wait and hit'm running straight away than running broad side.
If I were hunting purely for meat and there was lots of oppertunity, I would pass on the Texas heart shot.

Daryl

I finished a Zebra this way after a frontal side shot was deflected by brush. (I know -an excuse) The point is the bullet entered at the base of the spine and was found in the chest-somewhat worse for wear. I also have taken Kudu this way. In both cases the bones of the pelvis worked the bullet over but the good construction was up to the challenge.
I saw a lot of game taken with this shot on my trips to Africa and never had a PH say "Don't take it". It was "There he is. A good Texas heart shot."
Ray is right :Use enough gun and good ammo.
I'm reminded of a friend who hunting for lion for the first time, was faced with this shot. He was hunting a man-eater in Niger with Native guides (muzzle loading shotgun and poisoned spear for backup). The lion came out of the thorn bushs and the guide identified the lion and said "Shoot him" My friend said "But he's going away'. The answer briefly was "You came here to kill a lion who has been killing women and children and you argue about sportsmanship? Shoot him in the rear and he will turn and charge. Then you can feel sporting". He did what he was told and sure enough the lion turned and charged. He hit him in the chest and knocked him down only to get up and charge again. His Win pre64 jammed and the lion was finished with 6 frontal chest shots from a Colt Python.
The post mortem showed the first shot would have killed him shortly and the second shot went end to end also. The problem was an inexperieced hunter with a 300 winmag and Win silvertips. I have it written down as it was relayed 35years ago and it hasn't grown in the telling.
Afterward he had three comments: "Do you know how fast a wounded lion can cover 100 yds?" "I saw dust fly from him chest with every shot from that Colt." "The lion charged. I looked to the side and I was alone".
"When we're young and full of life we do strange things".

[ 03-05-2003, 18:39: Message edited by: Dr. Duc ]

Jack O'Conners experience primarilay illustrates the different state of bullet design now vs 40 years ago. I watched a fellow hunter in Montana almost lose a spike elk shot cleanly in the ribs broadside at 75 yds by a 300 Win Mag with Winchester factory loads. Post mortem showed he got inadequate penetration. Old writers often disguised their actions by creative writing. Elmer Keith speaks several times of taking the "spine shot" at retreating animals. Yeah, right!

The story of the spine shot deer I believe. This happened with a large moose killed years ago by my local gunsmith. He took a THS with a 35 Whelen and the moose went down like poleaxed. The bullet literally destroyed the bulls entire nervous system.

A 260 gr, 375 H&H Nosler and most premiums of 270 gr. and up, will reach the vitals on an Eland with a going away shot, as will a 338...

Actually I recovered a 243 100 gr. corelokt from the neck of an Eland that PH Phillip Price put through him at 200 yards, going away, He had been shot several times.The corelokt was perfectly expanded..I don't recall but I doubt it hit any big bone...I was a little amazed.

Thanks to all who've replied (and had something to bring to the discussion). I must say I'm surprised at the overwhelming majority who seem to keep this shot in their repertoire. In fact, though I set out only to satisfy my curiosity, I have actually been swayed in my thinking. The number of first hand reports as to the effectiveness of the THS has made me take it seriously. To clarify: I’ve never cared which way my bullet went into vitals, just that it did. I simply have never been confident enough that I could shoot an animal in the ass and kill it with one shot. Of course, we all dread cleaning an animal that has been gut-shot, but a proper trophy would assuage such pain.

If advocates don’t mind, what is the minimum cal in your mind for this shot on deer? Elk? Also, do you really try for the corn hole, or wouldn’t it make more sense (at least if on the same level or lower) to shoot below the pelvis into the belly and towards the vitals? I might attempt such a shot if an animal of proper proportions was slipping away and I felt I could make a one-shot kill. Most animals I take are not of significant proportion to risk this shot in my eyes (honestly, unless you’ve scared the shit out of an animal you can often stop/turn him with a sharp whistle—except elk, who just tear away).

Any hunter taking a shot at an unwounded game animals ass needs to re-think his priorities. I would have no interest hunting with anyone who told me that was a desireable option.

A world record head means virtually nothing to me. Sporting achievements in life mean very little yet grownups sometimes act like it is a life or death issue; that they have to be perceived as "winners". All this trying to "win" make people do unethical things.

Someone made a comment about a PH getting frustrated if a client passes on a top-ten head. That PH is my employee. He works for me. If he wants to vent a little frustration, we'll have a little nose-to-nose discussion. My employees learn pretty quickly that pouting or throwing a tantrum isn't an option for them. Personally, I've yet to hire a PH or an outfitter that wasn't anything but courteous and professional.

I've certainly heard of outfitters who goaded hunters into taking low percentage shots to up their trophy fees, but luckily I've never accidentally hired such an idiot.

I killed this buck with a THS X 2 (semi-auto shotgun). Two slugs under his tail from about 15 yards away, he died before he was 20 yards away. I jumped him out of his bed while still-hunting a cedar thicket and he wasn't going to give me a better shot. One slug never touched a hair, and split his pelvis with very little damage to the hindquarters. The other slug was a little higher and followed the underside of the spine into the chest cavity, the tenderloins were destroyed. The intestines were intact and since the pelvis was broken it was very easy to field dress.

I wouldn't hesitate to take this shot again under similar conditions, but I would limit the range to 50 yards or less with a slug gun.

I mentioned O Connors story to illustrate a point, I never said that I believed it. Im sure that his idea was to illustrate the same point.

I have no experience with this shot nor do I have any desire too gain any for basically two reasons;

1- Succesfull use of the THS requires much more gun than other shots, having enough gun is one thing but enough to penetrate from end to end, especially on things bigger than deer, is not a habit I care to endulge.

2- Even a well placed THS wastes meat. Anyone who has had the pleasure of cleaning an animal with its intestines blown to bits knows this, besides it makes cleaning a PITA. Ripping up the fine eating rump roasts in the process is just more wasted meat.

Those who do like it, more power to you (pun intended) I believe there are better alternatives.

[ 03-06-2003, 06:50: Message edited by: Wstrnhuntr ]

I hunt moose for meat, so I won't take a Texas heart shot. As some of you may know, moose are very large animals that have lots of meat. One of the things to keep in mind when hunting moose is that stomach contents on the meat will introduce bacteria and may even spoil the meat.

If any stomach contents gets on the meat, you will need lots of clean water and a rag to scrub and rinse it. A little skinning job could turn into a huge one if one has to clean the meat.