Is bow hunting and small cal. bullets Humane?

[1eyed]

I have hunted with both. All but 2 of the animals that I have shot with a bow have dropped within 25 to 50 yards of where I shot them. I think that if you practice (and practice a lot) and know what you are doing either method is fine.

I think the biggest problem is people not waiting for a clean shot. If you can't wait for a clean shot and know for sure that your going to put the animal down, then you shouldn't take the shot.

Oh I'd better quit, don't get me started.

[outdoor.spec.ops]

Mega,
What is your opinion on animals lost when shot with the "big magnum" rifles? I have only shot one critter with my bow, and the elk went a shorter distance than the elk I have shot with a high power magnums. Im not sure if limiting the calibers of the gun is the right way to go, nor the idea of only hunting the rut. Loosing animals is going to happen regardless of what rules are set, just like the fair catch in football--they somehow drop the fair catch, even though the rule is there to ensure they get the catch.
Just my opinions,
Aaron

[Tilla]

Don't some bullets expand improperly at too close a range?
Bowhunters use due diligence in dispatching animals. No one wants to see an animal suffer on purpose.
I don't think all animals fall right away from rifle shots, except the ones I shoot when I use a rifle.

I like bowhunting because it's difficult, intense and I don't worry about getting shot. Plus it's not so cold in the mornings.
. I did notice one interesting thing, in the few instances where I picked up my rifle after bowhunting for several years, I felt I had to stalk (even on my belly) within 100 yds or less before I was comfortable taking the shot.

It's OK to have an opinion. That's what this is all about.
Of course rifle hunters would do better if they would pull over, turn off their engines and get out of their rigs once in a while. :grin:

[TheRogue]

Seems like a big problem nowadays is the huge influx of bow (and muzzleloader) hunters because of limited entry, and in some cases, the ability to hunt during the rut(s). I can guarantee a bunch of the "new" hunters that always used to just pick up the rifle the week before season and run a few rounds through it are doing the EXACT SAME THING with the bow as well!!

I myself would bowhunt at least the deer season except I know for a fact that I would not get out and get the practice that I need to be effective on a regular basis. I don't shoot my rifles enough anymore, and I'm pretty sure it cost me an animal this year. I wouldn't dream of chancing it with a bow.....but I'm sure there's oodles of others out there who do.

Kudos to those who put the time in, and do it right!!

TR

[BlindSquirrel]

WOW!

As was stated on the previous threads you mention -- lethality has more to do with shot placement, and much less to do with weapon of choice. Whatever weapon you use -- you've got to know your limitations -- and have the ethics to live by them. Shot placement and the decision to take the shot is not just affected by distance -- it's affected by so many other factors -- angles, lighting, your heart rate, time of day, scope condition (if used - fogged up, water drops), animal foreground and background, adjacent animals, adjacent hunters, location from roads, size and condition of animal, size of rack, shooting position (free hand vs. resting against tree vs kneeling, etc)
and on and on.

Most of the animals that drop on the spot from a rifle shot are hit in the spine. Animals hit in the heart and/or lungs often go at least 50 yards -- especially elk, even when hit with the magnums.

The other thing I'll comment on is hunting during the rut -- which I think is a bad idea for general over the counter unlimited tag rifle hunts. The success rates would be much higher for harvest -- for a few years -- until nearly all the mature breeding bucks/bulls were killed. I even think that bow hunting bulls during the rut is not such a great idea either -- but luckily it takes more effort/skill/luck to get within lethal range with a bow -- so things kind of even out a bit. I don't think hunting during the rut with rifles will cause fewer bad shots.

Just my humble opinions...
Blind Squirrel

[bigshark]

Well lets see here..........everyone on this board takes extra careful bullet and arrow placement so I couldn't get flamed if I were
to suggest a checkout system for the deer and elk. You know, like the NW Goose thing. You shoot your deer and get it checked out at rrhe local checkstation. They check to see where your bullet or arrow hit. Not in a good place......you loose your tag next season. Now that would make a few think first before the 600 yd running shot with his heat seeking mega-mag. What about the arrow up the butt?
Yep, throw the bum's name in the no tag pile.

I'm pulling everyones leg of course......this is what some dummy may come up with in the future however. It really all comes back to hunters acting as responsible as we can. How does that little ditty go?........be careful of what you say and do....the future of hunting depends on you ! Straight shots guys

[MetalHead]

Mega, I'm going to take a shot at this one. First question "Is bow hunting and small cal. bullets humane?" My answer YES if the hunter is proficent and ethical. The sad part is that in at least 50% of the cases in either Oregon or Washington that is not the case. The Rogue hit it on the head when he spoke about the hunter (I use that term loosely) that picks up the rifle, bow or muzzle loader a week before the season and puts a couple of holes in paper and says "hey close enough, lets go hunting".

I have hunted big game for 35 years the last 11 bowhunting exclusively and I can tell you I have had a 5 point bull Elk hit in the boiler room (Heart Lungs) at 200 yards with a 300 Win Mag, 185 gr Nossler Partition go 80 yards before he dropped. I have also hit them high and had them go down like a rock with a spine shot. On the other hand every Elk I have shot with my bow has gone down withing 50 yards most of this I attribute to the fact that I am closer, quieter, and can call to them after the shot to settle them down. My partner shot a Cow Elk this year that went 12 feet and hit the ground dead (right in the pump, bottom of both lungs at 27 yards) it was the most impressive thing I have ever seen.

I find it incredable that ODFW and WDFW allow any yahoo to walk up the counter and buy a liecense to bow hunt without any formal training. And hunter education training does little but give young hunters a basic foundation in safety and ethics (what they see the adults they hunt with does much more) My parteners and I may be the exception but we practice year round with my bow and limit ourselves on the shots we will take. I have yet to lose and animal I have tracked one for 9 hours (hit with a rifle too far back) before I got it.

Rifle, Bow or Muzzle Loader. Know your weapon. Know your limitations, Know your weapons limitations. Be ethical (would the boy you were be proud of the man you are). One shot - One kill

MetalHead

Blind Squirel your a dead on the money with not hunting the rut in rifle season, here in Washington we might get to hunt the first few days of the rut in archery season if the weather is right and the muzzle loaders just get the tail end. With the number of rifle hunters out there the Elk herds would be decimated in 2 or 3 years if they were hunting the rut.

[Megabites]

Great replies everyone. Sounds like if ODFW were to enact a law to make it mandatory to go to a hunters training class it would go over well. I myself would feel much safer in the woods. If you think about it police officers, military and it used to be that hand gun permits all have to go through a trainig corse to carry a gun. So why not hunters. In fact we have to take a test to drive a car why not to hunt. Let the class cover wepon training, ethics and while we are at it hunting methods. I bet if there were these kinds of tests that there would be fewer hunting accidents, fewer wounded animals and fewer wana-be hunters.

I myself spend a great deal of time at the shooting range honing my skills and perfecting my loads. I also do just a ton of research on hunting in general. I know get a life - but I take it very serious. Unfortunatly not everone does. Here is a great story that happened about a week ago. I was in the woods about 50 yards up a hill from a road when 3 shoots went off on the road. now I wasn't too woried about getting shoot but I did not move until the firing stopped. I went down to find two hunters in the road looking down the canyon on the other side of the road. Being relieved that they were not shooting towords me I went to find out what they were shooting at sense I had obviously spooked it out. The guy proceeded to tell me how he can't believe he missed with his 300WM and rattled off his scope placements at different yardages. I again asked what he was shooting at and he replied "I think it was a buck" boy did that **** me off. After the lecture on knowing what you are shooting at and that I should report him he left and I did not see them again. This guy has obviously not hunted much and could use some training.

What do you think about manditory hunters training? Maybe I should put this in a new thread.

[6wapiti6]

I admire where this discusion has gone. When I read the first post, I thought it would be all out war. Congrats to those who have posted. As far as the ethical/humane issue. It is my opion that small cal. bullets and bows/muzzleloaders are just that. Ethical and humane. I had a female relative on the east coast where it was shotgun only kill more deer with a .410 gauge slug than most guys with thier 10 & 12 gauges. If the law didn't allow her to shoot the small caliber she would have not hunted, as she said she couldn't control the bigger guns. How's that for ethical. Know your weapon of choice, know your quarry, and most of all know your limitations in the field. Even though we are out there taking a life, we must do everything we can to respect it.

[montster303]

I used to wonder about the ethical and humane side of hunting with a bow. Then i was watching some hunting videos about it. They were showing deer shot (well placed shots by well practiced hunters) and after being shot, the deer jumped a time or two then stood still and went back to grazing...all the time it was bleeding out. That alone changed my opinion. Sure, it doesn't always happen that way, but as with anything else, you have to pick your shot and be well practiced. m2cw

[ 11-12-2002, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: montster303 ]

[fishlis 1]

let me start by saying that i bow hunt for elk and rifle hunt for deer. i have never had an elk go more than 30 yards before dropping. Also i use a .243 rifle for deer and have never had to trail a deer more than 20 feet. it all has to do with being patient and getting a well placed shot. my muzzy 125 grain broad head well placed does just as much damage as a high cal. bullet. people just need to know their limit and this knowledge comes with practice. my comfortable bow range is 45 yards and in. my rifle range is 300 yards and in if i am out of my range i get closer if i can't then the animal lives to see another day. so in response to small calibers and bows being inhumane i totally diagree. it all has to do with shot placement.

[tailchaser]

Great, another one of these friggn' threads. How many times do we have to go into this. A properly placed arrow will kill an animal just as quick as a rifle a lot of times. I've shot elk and they never took a step after that. It went clean through and he never knew what hit him. Probably 15 seconds later he was stone cold on the ground. Granted this doesn't always happen but neither does a bullet. No matter what bullet or ballistics you use it's all out the window if you don't hit where you need to. It's all about placement and the hunter who's doing the shooting. It has absolutely nothing to do with the method. SO LEAVE IT ALONE!!!!! I'm sick of people bashing one over the other when they don't know what it takes on either account. I've heard this crying for months now. I've found bullets in elk and have yet to find an old arrow. You don't see me sqwaking about it, it happens everyone should get used to that fact. Honest hunters don't try to wound animals but animals flinch and bullets/arrows get deflected.

As of the hunt during the rut, you should do some research on the units that other states do that in. The larger bulls that used to be there won't be now. The hunts are too popular and a lot of times much easier. The mortality on big bulls is outrageous and small bulls are left to breed. Thus creating a bad gene pool. I'd rather chase a few monsters around from year to year than slaughtering them in a couple. Think about it.

This kind of fight has been going on forever and needs to be squashed. It doesn't help anyone. If anyone wants to keep this from happening more preach to the hunter and educate them in taking shots and placement, but leave the methods alone. It's not the bow or rifles fault.

tc

[ 11-12-2002, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: tailchaser ]

[bigfishon]

It is MUCH easyer to become good with a rifle than with a bow.Bow hunting gets loads of wounded animals left on the run. Problem is that most bow hunters are not very good with a bow or with their hunting skills. As for small rifle loads I don't think they are near as much of a problem, in this part of the state it is so brushy that I have rarly ever made a 100 yard shot on a deer. I don't hunt clear cuts oftem mainly cause they are genraly straight down into a hole and if you shoot something if is a real pain to get out. Anouther thing I would be willing to bet is that poachers have probably taken more deer with .22 rimfire rifles than all other calibers combined (this alone would be proof that small caliber guns are deadly to big game). I think if I were hunting eastern Oregon I would want some bigger firepower, but here I for one don't think it is nessasary. Bow hunting on the other hand is a terrible waste of animals & meat, and yes I do think bow hunting is cruel and inhumane, I have shot deer myself that had arrow shafts in them and the animal all full of infection and gangreen (made me sick just walking up to it, man did it stink). But all in all the more power you use to put an animal down the better in my opinion.

[ 11-12-2002, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: bigfishon ]

[Wak]

I have put an arrow right through a bull that picked his head up and went right back to eating. 30 seconds later he laid down and died without ever knowing I was there or hearing a loud gun shot to scare him. This is not always the case but I know other bowhunters who have similar stories. As everyone else says, it is all in placement, but I would say it is more humane that that bull never knew what happened rather than hear a loud noise and run off in distress.

[Megabites]

I just read a thread about bullets and broadheads being found in animals. I have allways thought that using a bow or (let me get this out as well) using too small a bullet is not humane. I have never seen an animal drop in its tracks using a bow. However I have not ever shoot an animal with a rifle that did not drop right where it was standing. Not that hunting is humane but if you are going to take an animals life shouldn't it be as quick as possible. The other thing that bothers me is that rifle shoots are all to often out of the effective range of the gun and or bullet. I have done serious research on the range and knock down power of my rifles to make sure I am in range. Also I use only bullets that expand properly on impact and the range for that to happen. What bothers me most about rifle hunting is that (here in Oregon) we do not get to hunt the rut which starts about Nov. 15th. If we could overlap this to get the hunters closer to the animals I think we would have alot less wounded animals and hunting accidents as well. If needed make it a draw hunt to limit the bucks that get taken. Boy am I going to get it for that comment.

[Yoter]

Well, since the importance of shot placement and good hunting ethics has been THOROUGHLY covered, I guess I'll just tell what has happened to me. I have killed 1 deer with both my bow, 4 deer with my 30-30 , and three with my 12 gauge using buckshot.
The deer shot with a rifle all died what I would consider a humane death. My first deer took two shots because I hit it a little far back(Iwas only 13 ), but thankfully i had an opportunity for a good second shot. The other 3 deer were one shot kills, only one actually dropped in its tracks. None of these deer were more than 100 yards away.
The deer I have killed with my 12 gauge didn't have a prayer. All were 40-60 yards away and none went more than 20 feet. I shoot 31/2 inch 00buck and it hits them like a ton of bricks.
Last year I decided to finally try archery hunting(I practiced with my bow for three years before) and killed a forky. It was an 18 yard shot with the deer quartering away from me. I hit the deer between the third and forth ribs(from the back) with a 125gr broadhead followed by a 2315 easton gamegetterII. The arrow went throught the lungs and heart and opposite side shoulder blade and about 5 inches into the shoulder. The thirty-two inch arrow was buried clear to the nock, and the buck ran 80 yards before it piled up.
I consider all of these kills humane and ethical. It is just a matter of not pushing the limitations of the weapon you choose to use.


Yoter

[Bounty Hunter]

Hey Yoter (or anyone else that knows),

I'm not experienced hunting deer with buckshot. I was just curious where you aim when you shoot one with a shotgun. (not that I will probably try it soon, but I was curious). Do you shoot them in the head? Is that one of those master-hunter things? I always thought they were using slugs.

[Megabites]

My comment on the 7mm Ultra Mag was just for the ultra mag. The 7mm Rem Mag is a fine load. However the only reason to go to an ultramag ins to increase velocify and in this case the velocify is to great for the bullet cal. The bullets will just poke a hole through with no expansion and little exension of energy. On the point Knock Down power is the expense of energy on the target. I did the math for a 550gr. broadhead traviling at 270 fps and the energy at release is 89fpe. Compare this to a modist load of 125gr .308 bullet at 2350fpe which has an energy release at 100 yrds of 1292fpe. Now a .308 bullet that expands properly will have a slightly lower surface area that an arrow but not enough to make up the difference in kenetic energy. Hence more energy is expelled on the target giving more Knock Down power.

The point is that an arrow or a bullet that does not expend its energy on the animal and passes through the target is not as effective as one that expends its energy on the target.

Don't believe me then drop a baseball on your foot from 4 feet in the air then have someone hit you with a fastball. Hurts a lot more doesn't it.

[outdoor.spec.ops]

Maybe you should quit hunting Mega, so you dont have to worry about an in-humane experience. You may wish to quit fishing as well, since you drag them in with a line, before bashing them in the head or cutting their gills to "bleed" them out.

[Jim]

An extensive study was done on this exact question in the early '80's and I believe it was published in Outdoor Life. It was done on a variety of African big game. I can tell you only the final conclusion: a humane kill can only be achieved by proper placement of chosen weapon, both were considered equal.

Now the kicker, animals wounded by an arrow were recovered far more often than an animal wounded by a rifle.

The most interesting thing to me was, as an archery hunter, the most lethal broadhead was the classic two bladed one piece broadhead...it out killed the fancy ones. I switched from Satellites to Bears that season, that has been a lot of animals ago now.

Thats my .02

Jim

[Fish_N_Russ]

Hmmmmmm, its amazing what a little 'Ballistics 101' will do to peoples opinions on this :smile: I wont start any rants so ill stop now lol

Russ

[tailchaser]

Might as well cause you're not going to win. A chart doesn't matter a darn bit when something's moving in the woods. Might look good on paper but that's it. Some things just aren't as simple as the equation spits out.

Now if that ballistics 101 had examples where bullets hit diameter of braches or brush in every possible environment I might listen. See where I'm getting at here. Relying on those things don't make a good hunter. It's good to know those things for what the weapons effective range is for yourself but that's about it.

I guess the next time I see an elk run off from a .300 mag I'm going to start yelling "THE CHART SAYS YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!" :grin:
tc

[ 11-13-2002, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: tailchaser ]

[outdoor.spec.ops]

I wonder if Daniel ran his rocks through a calibration test before striking the GIANT?

[Megabites]

Jim thanks for the relevant reply. That is what I was looking for is an informed opinion. As far as my hunting experience goes I have hunted for 20 years seriously for the past 10 and have killed at least 15 deer and 8 Elk. All of these animals died within ten feet of where they were shot but one which was when I was new to hunting. I started me to wonder why this deer ran so far after being shot. That is why I do the research I do and practice shooting as much as I can. I have found it to make a difference so it is worth it to me. I do prefer a head or neck shot for deer (don't waste meat that way). I shoot enough to feel comforable with this shot. Tailchaser I hope to god I never see an elk that takes six shots to bring down. My Elk party routinly takes 4 or more bulls each year and I have yet to see one with more than one hole in it. Now you see I am getting personal - this was sapposed to be about the question I asked not about how I or you hunt or fish.

Outdoor.spec.ops I would quit both if I thought I was not doing everything I could do to make a clean kill. Do you have any relevant information to offer?

[outdoor.spec.ops]

I do have relevant information to offer, as I have taken animals from both sides of the field. I just do not appriciate the scowering that is thrown on bow hunters, by hunters who do not respect our choice of weapons.

[Megabites]

This thread was started intesionally with the small cal. in the comment to overt a bow hunters bashing. A poorly placed bullet or too small a riffle may kill an animal but how long does it take? So we can stop all the junk and get back to an intelegent conversation. Maybe I should ask it this way. If you had to die how would you like to be killed? Arrow to the chest, 22 cal to the chest or 44 Mag to the chest?

[lightline]

mega what do you consider a slow bleed out? I have shot elk with about everthing 340,338,300 win,7mag 270,300 sav,but my favorite is the 257wby mag. Most of my shots are in the lungs and the the biggest mess I see is with a broadhead. The first elk I killed with a bow was shot through both lungs and when I opened it up I was shocked at the amount of damage there was. The arrow went all the way through but that doesn't matter because once the arrow goes through its done its job. I geuss what I'm saying is you take all that fire power that I used to use it takes about the same amount of time on a double lung shot as it soes with a bow.

[lightline]

mega it doesn't matter. If all the shot are placed equally as well its a done deal and doesn't matter. Now if you are talking about ill placed shots thats different. I mentioned in my former post that my favorite elk rifle is a 257 wby. Iv'e taken several bulls with it, but it isn't a cal. that I would feel comfortabe for my wife to use. (sorry hon) Its like they say you gotta know your limits.

[Megabites]

I do have a question for bow Elk hunters. What happens when an arrow hits a rib? will it break through or deflect and then penitrate? How common is it to hit a rib? I have no first hand knowlege of this and would like to know if it skrews up the effectivness of the shot. Not to get back onto the bow vs. rifle thing. I just really want to know.

I consider a slow bleed out to be any shot that allows an animal to move more than 10 yards. I have only had that experience once with a .243 riffle and never sence I went to .308 and heavier bullets. It really hit me when I was working in Texas this year and the only decent TV was an outdoor channel. I watched hours of videos of hunts and it seemed that the animals shot with bow allways ran off. Where the riffle kills the animals either dropped in its tracks or took two steps and dropped. Not to get back to the bow hunting thing as I feel that poor riffle shots or small cal. give the same results.

[TheRogue]

If you had to die how would you like to be killed? Arrow to the chest, 22 cal to the chest or 44 Mag to the chest?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Sorry, but we are talking about animals. Your line of questioning assigns a human quality to a non-human thing. PETA just loves this crap. This stuff just plays into their hands. Dead is dead, whether it's a .338 that breaks the shoulder, a .22 through the eyeball into the brain, or a broadhead through the lungs. Ethical discussions are ALWAYS a losing proposition.

My .02

TR

[lightline]

mega: you shoot through the rib. The broad head is wider the the rib spaceing so you have to cut some rib if you are using a three bladed broadhead. I would assume most guys are like myself and the broadhead is razor sharp. I personally have never seen a rib deflect an arrow enough to cause a problem, im sure that it has happened before. I think the thing you have to consider is if the bull doesn't know that you are there and you nail him you can most generly call him back and that does not spell out pain to me. Iv'e heard stories about humans being shot with an arrow and they never felt it, its the same as the fellow that was stabbed in back with an eight inch knife and didn't know it. That was in the papers several years ago. I trully believe that a well placed arrow is as humane as you can get. I shot one bull at thiryfive yards in both lungs and had him circle around and almost dropped at my feet, it took all of ten seconds, when he dropped he was still looking for the cow, so that doesn't spell pain to me. you have a great evening.

[tag-a-long]

Originally posted by megabites:
I did the math for a 550gr. broadhead traviling at 270 fps and the energy at release is 89fpe. Compare this to a modist load of 125gr .308 bullet at 2350fpe which has an energy release at 100 yrds of 1292fpe.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I never did bow hunt much, do they really make a 550 grain broadhead?? That has to be a monster!!!!!!! :shocked: :shocked:

[lightline]

tag-a-long that total arrow weight the broadhead itself usually is between 100 and 160grns. There are places in africa and on certain anamals that you have to shoot at least 1000 grains and pull at least 100 pounds.

[tag-a-long]

Originally posted by megabites:
I consider a slow bleed out to be any shot that allows an animal to move more than 10 yards

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">!0 yards? I have to get in here... A deer hit anywhere can cover 10 yards in one jump... I shot a young buck with 180 gr. nosler partition at 70 yds. The heart was torn apart. That deer ran, and I repeat, ran over 40 yards. 120 feet. All on what was left of brain function. I am no slouch when it comes to shooting. If you have never had but one run farther than 10 yds. keep doing what you are doing.

[Norm]

Originally posted by megabites:
I do have a question for bow Elk hunters. What happens when an arrow hits a rib? will it break through or deflect and then penitrate? How common is it to hit a rib? I have no first hand knowlege of this and would like to know if it skrews up the effectivness of the shot. Not to get back onto the bow vs. rifle thing. I just really want to know.

I consider a slow bleed out to be any shot that allows an animal to move more than 10 yards. I have only had that experience once with a .243 riffle and never sence I went to .308 and heavier bullets. It really hit me when I was working in Texas this year and the only decent TV was an outdoor channel. I watched hours of videos of hunts and it seemed that the animals shot with bow allways ran off. Where the riffle kills the animals either dropped in its tracks or took two steps and dropped. Not to get back to the bow hunting thing as I feel that poor riffle shots or small cal. give the same results.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I first started bowhunting with a 55LB whitetail, which is close to the minimum weight for elk. It penatrated through one rib and almost through another on the way out. A good lung or heart shot will take them out within 50 yards or so every time. I think the reason you hear so many stories about broadheads being found in healed wounds is most animals wounded with broadheads survive. Bullet wounds are not as clean and much less likley to heal. I've found plenty of rifle season wound/losses during late seasons. Like everything else, 99% of us are ethical in our shot placement, but people usually notice the other 1%. Either a bow or a small caliber rifle will do the job if used properly.

Member of PETA, (People for Eating Tasty Animals)

[bigshark]

Mega

I don't think anyone is trying to argue with you and your last question assures me that you have a limited knowledge of bowhunting. Please do not be angry that I say that, it is this type of disscussion that can inform you and give you enough data to start to make judgements of your own liking. The question about ribs and arrows is an exellent one. Let me give you my answer. Like bullets, some arrows are better suited for elk than others.
The key is penetration. Hence weight and velocity are important. Another factor is blade design. The two large and long fixed blades with a small bleeder blade on each side are my choice. These bleeder blades are really not designed to make the wound bleed more, although it is a secondary benefit, but to reduce "shaft pinch". Simply stated the hide does not slow the shaft down as "flaps" are made to keep the arrow driving through the animal. Only once have I shot a bull that the arrow did not pass completely through it. That was a two bladed head without bleeder blade called a Butterfield Brut if any out there are that old to remember the hype that came with this head in the 70s. So, back to the question, a heavy arrow driven at high velocity and a well designed broadhead are the ticket in my book. That broadhead design, two bladed with two small bleeders, should have the point rounded. This will always, I repeat always, take an elk rib out like a 300 mag takes a match stick out. The next thing you should know is that it makes a difference whether the animals lungs are full of air or empty when its hit. Thus, an elk piles up in 10 yards or 40.
We can go on and on about so many factors but it really is just so much chatter unless you really want to study it. In another 30 years on top of the ten you have, who knows, you may remember back about a time some old fart tried to tell you something, he just didn't tell it the right way for you to understand.

[ 11-13-2002, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: bigshark ]

[Megabites]

Great information - thank you. Bigshark that was the best explanation of arrows I have yet to here you have done your homework.

TheRouge did bring up a good point the word humane in based on the word human. We are after all kill these animals one way or another so I guess there is not much humanity in that. The whole subject is a bit contradictive. I guess if you can sleep ok who cares, right?

[TheRogue]

Yes, Megabites....but you're oversimplifying by not factoring in the cutting/bleeding power of a good razor-sharp broadhead!! These stories of the animal never moving and dieing in place are likely caused by that "slow" moving broadhead barely being felt as it went through, yet it slices a very nasty path on it's way, MORE than a bullet would do.

A hit through the lungs, not touching any bones, with a bullet that retains most of it's weight and the classic mushroom, and exits out the other side, will cause LESS damage than a razor broadhead in the same circumstances, because of the total "cutting" area. Especially in the case of a deer, where the hide is thin and will not absorb much shock (unlike an elk).

More of the force from the bullet would be transferred to an elk because of the dense, thick skin. And then, if you talk about hitting bones, there's no comparison. But there has to be something "solid" for the projectile to hit before you can use the ft-lbs arguement.

A fastball in the chest may feel like it hurts you much more than a broadhead, but I can guarantee the broadhead will be worse in the long run!!

TR

[bigshark]

megabites

Bullets and arrows work on two different principles. A sporting bullet is meant to expand and kill by shock. A bullet used in war is a full jacket and is hoped not to expand and hence the man hit is out of action but has a chance to live. Expanding bullets are designed for maximum shock.
Arrows are designed to deliver a slicing or cutting for hemorraging. Maximum blood letting
is the key here. If it were not we would use field or target points, not mutiple cutting edges. For this reason an arrows placement is all the more important. As a general rule does an arrow kill as quickly as timed by say seconds? No ! Is that less efficent ? A hundrenth of a second or 3 to 10 seconds?
Under this measure, sure the bullet wins. However.......the damage caused by an honest mistakenly placed bullet is a cruel and certain death. An honest mistakenly placed arrow doesn't always mean the same as the finding of broadheads in animals shows. Either way we the shooter are on the hook. Only we can make the difference, and the unfortunate truth is, some do not hone their skills by practicing as they should. I start the waterfowl season every year with more poorly hit birds than I like and therefore am the last to point my finger and judge another. I can only ask that we all try a little harder to be the best we can.

[ 11-13-2002, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: bigshark ]

[Megabites]

The last two relies are what I was getting at in the beginning of this thread. Is the slow blead out of an animal less humane than a shocking down out. Personally I would rather be hit by a train then have my wrist cut and slowly bleed to death.

[tailchaser]

Are you seriously telling me that no animals run off when shot by a gun??? If that's your statement then you haven't hunted much, or for that matter shot many animals of this caliber. I've seen a bull elk take five shots from a .300 mag in the chest and still make it 300 yards before the last bullet finished him an hour later. Explain the difference please.

tc

[ 11-13-2002, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: tailchaser ]

[Yoter]

I aim high on the neck with buckshot. The 31/2" 00B loads have 18 pellets and with a full choke I find 5-6 pellets that found their mark. A buddy shot a doe with 00B behind the shoulder and we found pellets all the way up in the tender loins so I"ll stick with the neck shots. Anybody else out there shoot buckshot? My Mossberg 835 won't take slugs.
Sharp broadheads are important. I used the three blade type on my buck last year and it did just fine with the ribs and the shoulder blade on the other side. I will try those double sided broadheads though cause I have heard they work really well.
Yoter

[GutshotApe]

Yoter - I now use 1 oz. slugs shot thru a rifled slub bbl. with iron sights but I once shot a little buck with 2 3/4" 12 ga. OO buckshot (9 pellets I think) thru a regular full choke bbl. and was not that impressed. The shot was close - maybe 20 yds - aimed for the neck/shoulder and hit with 4 pellets. The pellets penetrated only an inch or so under the hide. The deer didn't go down but it was definitely hurt - it leaned up on a tree trunk and I finished it off with another OOB load to the head from 5 yds.

I would not recommend using buckshot on deer if slugs are an option.

[outdoor.spec.ops]

I haven't had a problem with an arrow penetrating while hitting a rib on an elk. The arrows do deflect some, as they pass through. The only solid rib shot I had on an elk broke 2 ribs on the way in, and 2 on the way out.

[Big Willie]

Hmmm...a little late to chime in but here goes. Wow mega you sure did get the can of worms open on this one. I will be honest in saying that your opening comments were a little offending, but that's ok, we all have our opinions.
First, I am a bowhunter for elk and a rifle hunter...most of the time for a doe tag. My one and only elk kill was a small bull two years ago and it didn't go far and dropped. It was a good shot that was well placed at 18 yards...and broke the leading rib and just about went through the other side. A well placed shot with a .243 will kill an elk, as will a 30.06 or a 30-378. It's ALL about shot placement.
It looks as though you spend quite a bit of time at the rifle range in order to be a responsible hunter, well I do to...but at the archery range. This has nothing to do with hunter education rather morals and common sense.
The problem, as stated in the other thread, is this. I think too many hunters who don't draw a controlled rifle tag (deer or elk) blow the dust of the old bow and go bowhunting. GENERALLY speaking, they are out of practice or go buy a bow 2 weeks before the season starts and expect to harvest an animal?
I would like to see the ODFW make a hunter decide what they are going to hunt with BEFORE you apply for a tag in May. In other words, with the intent to draw a rifle tag, deer or elk, deprives you from purchasing a bow tag. I think you would see far fewer errant broadheads in animals.
Gary

[ 11-14-2002, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Big Willie ]

[tailchaser]

Honestly this arguement needs to be squashed. It's not benefitting either side and isn't something that should be taken any farther. The next time someone brings up an arguement they should know the pro's and con's of both aspects so they don't get slammed for opening up a can of worms. So for everyone who ever claims one is worse than the other it's basically everyone who's at fault and don't look past yourself. Anyone who carries a gun or bow is a problem if you don't take the time to practice. This thread has probably peeved every bowhunter who spends their time shooting and at bow shoots to hone thier skills to keep from wounding an animal. I could care less if you put joe shmo next door in that classification if he doesn't practice. He deserves the scorn just like the rifle hunters that don't shoot but once a year.

A lot of opinions on this thread I would call BS on but I'll keep from going there when it comes to the stories they are telling. I've killed a lot of animals and I know a lot of people out there are saying the same thing that have experience shooting elk. I've probably seen 50 hit the skids and I'm still learning something new every year, so killing a couple doesn't make an expert out of anyone. Hopefully people will think a little before it gets real ugly.

tc

[Big Willie]

Very well put TC.

Bottom line is...think before you post and practice at the range with whatever weapon you decide to take to the field.