Amen. Track have you ever bow hunted? Or witnessed a bow kill? The argument in the first place was never that bows kill better than guns, it was that you compared apples to oranges when relating the energy carried by a 223 projectile and a broadhead tipped arrow. Both the deer that I shot this year with my bow expired very quickly, quicker than with most I shoot with 12g slugs. And unfortunately neither of the shots actually hit the vitals. This first shot was quartering away and the deer slightly jumped the string and twisted causing the arrow to enter right at the back of the shoulder but graze along the ribs and exit out the front of the neck. The second deer actually started to gallop away but at 12 yds I was committed and lead it to much and shot right through it's neck. Neither required much energy to impale the arrow but a 2" wound channel into any major organ or artery sure gets the blood on the ground fast.
I shake my head...
- Thread starter StevieK
- Start date
Amen. Track have you ever bow hunted? Or witnessed a bow kill? The argument in the first place was never that bows kill better than guns, it was that you compared apples to oranges when relating the energy carried by a 223 projectile and a broadhead tipped arrow. Both the deer that I shot this year with my bow expired very quickly, quicker than with most I shoot with 12g slugs. And unfortunately neither of the shots actually hit the vitals. This first shot was quartering away and the deer slightly jumped the string and twisted causing the arrow to enter right at the back of the shoulder but graze along the ribs and exit out the front of the neck. The second deer actually started to gallop away but at 12 yds I was committed and lead it to much and shot right through it's neck. Neither required much energy to impale the arrow but a 2" wound channel into any major organ or artery sure gets the blood on the ground fast.
Yep, I just shake my head as well, especially when states that an arrow is equivalent to a 300 win mag. Weather close or long range, an arrow is not in the same league as a big game rifle. Arrows don't deliver the shock or energy factor as a bullet, and doesn't knock them dead on their feet.....for the most part. Some state that a bow is just as deadly as a rifle, however give them a choice (rifle or bow) to quickly dispatch an animal out their misery, their responses are insults; at least with one individual. Arrows are out of the league of bullets and never can they be compared.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Got 2 blackies under me belt back in the day with my Cooey along with a fair number of deer. When you pick your shot right, you get meat.
Everyone's got their own opinion and I'm not gonna argue with ya on the terminal effects of one over the other more than has been already stated. The greater tragedy is that it seems you have reasoned yourself out of ever partaking in the most fun, exhilarating and challenging form of hunting.
Hunting style of the 50's, eh... "rifle cradled in your arm, on the trail of a buck."
Back in the 50's and hundreds of years before, there were hunters on the ground with "bows" cradled in their arms, on the trail of everything from small game to grizzly bears... and we still do it today... less than a third of my animals came while hunting from a treestand, less than ten percent while hunting a bait... neither is a preferred method.
I said that I had figured out your "real" objection to archery... no I am not a psychic... merely an observer (and experiencer) of the human condition. It is clear, Track, that you receive much validation, to assuage your wounded inner little Track," from your prowess as a hunter. I am not judging you for this... we all have things we turn to for solace... I have devined through your writing, that you have a wounded and assailed masculinity... hunting, particularly "successful" hunting (as you would define it), makes you feel better as a man... this is why you repeatedly interject thinly veiled (or overt and arrogant) smears at the trophies and accomplishments of fellow hunters. This is also where I believe your true distaste for bowhunting is derived... if a bowhunter with a primitive (ish) weapon can be successful and harvest significant trophies (as you would define them), and do all of this at a distance of less than 30 yards with equipment that predates your own equipment choices, then in your mind it invalidates your accomplishments and erodes away all the warm fuzzy feelings you get, the thing that makes you puff out your chest and stand a little taller... and the broken little Track inside starts hurting again.
So I will assist you... Track, you are a fine hunter. Track, you have taken many fine trophies. Track, I enjoy reading accounts of your hunts... Thank you for posting.
But, Track... this is not a competition. It is "ok" to applaud the accomplishments of other. It is not socially appropriate within a community to minimize or attempt to invalidate the choices of others (where legal and ethical)...
Bowhunting has been around a long time and has been effective for a long time, then much later, guns arrived on the scene and provided a viable alternative. I do both... but my reasons for my choices are my own, I don't expect others to make the same choices, I am just happy there are others...
You do have that gift to gab...........do you ever take a break? Now your an expert in human behavioural science. What makes you tick that you know everything in the world? Are there any threads that you don't answer? Listen, take a break from your childish humor and self-centerness.........your only a big fish in a very small pond. I applaud many or most , however not the likes of, el al.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Location
- SW Ontario
Back to the topic. If, let's say, the moose taken in the OP was shot with a .243, would it be ethical? I know that many moose have been taken with a .243, but what do all of you think. If I were on a moose hunting trip, and I had a problem with my .30-06, would I be out of line using my .243? I always thought that caliber way too light for moose. Am I wrong? Let's set aside the "proper shot placement" thing aside and base this on the capability of the firearm.
- Location
- Aaaaaadmontin AB
So I know so many of us have heard stories like this, but I just thought I'd share the latest tale I heard today.
I work in a physio clinic, a new patient comes in and is quite happy to find out that I am a fellow hunter. We start off talking about bowhunting and then the topic shifts to moose. The patient excitedly tells me that his party got the biggest moose he's ever seen in person before, by no means a record but a huge moose for an ontario hunt. He pulls his phone out and shows me the pic. Sure enough it's a very big bull moose hung up beside the woman that shot it. An extremely nice specimen of a moose. He claimed it was 1600lbs, to be honest I couldn't tell ya at all from the pic if that was an exaggeration at all as I am no judge. He tells me that this woman shots the moose at 30 yds. I ask him what she shot it with and he answers very matter of factly "Oh, 223. Good old hollow point didn't take a step" *FACEPALM* The casualty at which he said it was alarming, as if it's a common gun to take on a moose hunt.
I know everyones heard that it's possible to shoot moose etc with 223, but this was the first real encounter I've actually seen. At 30 yds broadside I don't doubt it will kill a moose, but it bewilders me that someone could take a 223 on a dedicated moose hunt. I just had to share with all of you.
Here I am wondering if I'm giving up too much taking my 270 over my 300 WM because my gun/scope combo is much nicer in the 270, makes that debate seem kinda silly
There's the flip side to that too. I have everyone and his dog looking down their nose at me because I hunt with a .308. They all have powder gobbling magnums and have memorized reams of ballistic data and can recite it on demand - but I could care less.
I keep my shots close, I am a well practiced rifleman and I can dump a moose on demand with it. No, I can't bowl them over at 400 yards...but so what? Out to 200 yards if I see a moose and have a tag - he's meat in the freezer. Use a well constructed bullet, keep your ranges short as possible, put them down with one - that is what the game is all about. Fact is, I wouldn't mind at all hunting deer with a .223 or even a handgun. Mind you, I don't mind turning my nose up at crappy shots and letting them walk away either. As a more mature hunter I have said to hell with this recoil nonsense - and shoot for fun and for meat and that's it. If some idiot wants to think his gun is better than mine and that makes him better than me - there is no harm in it I suppose. I have better things to worry about.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
There is no "setting aside proper shot placement" and timing of the shot in my book.
Check out the Gamo USA airgun site's hog hunting videos as well as the Qwackenbush airgun bison hunt vids,
and see what so called under-powered rifles can do when one picks the shot.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Gracias amigo. Unlike many others who are "ballistically challenged" or sucked in by the biggest, fastest or farthest reaching hype, you've no doubt hunted much the way I've done over the years. Good on ye mate.
Hell, there's nothing wrong with poking varmints out to 500+ yds., but for edible game I've always loaded my
rifles down to the levels that reliably get the job done at the ranges intended to avoid meat loss.
Yeah occasionally? You hear the story of LUCK where somebody manages to take out a small bear with nothing more than a 9mm. LUCK isn't my friend (usually) so I don't think I'll be traipsin' out in the olde wild with a 9mm strapped to my hip.
- Location
- SW Ontario
Whatever. I simply asked for opinions based on the ballistics of the firearms, not the skill set of the user.
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
My father in law was an experienced woodsman, hunter and forester. He was one of the original guys that charted the logging roads around the Harrison River in BC. I'm sure luck had nothing to do with his shooting skills. Me, on the other hand, would never be caught with anything smaller than a .30 cal when I'm traipsing in the " olde wild"!!
My usual hiking rifle is a 94 in .44 mag.
