A Case of Use Enough Gun?

[HankBuck]

Bigger is always better if you shoot it well. Light calibers are fine if you are very proficienT. Most of us are not. With modern optics, there is no excuse or reason to shoot poorly. Practice practice practice

@dogcat1 - true there is more technology available today then ever to help rifle shooter be more accurate (range finders, scopes, tripod rests, muzzle breaks & recoil reducers etc…. But “modern optics” don’t reduce FLINCH and Magnum calibers are outstanding at exacerbating FLINCH. I think many on this forum have heard Guides or PH say “shoot what you are comfortable with” - some are proficient with magnums and handle the recoil and still shoot accurately but others do not and would be better served with trading off a magnum for a lighter caliber and better shot placement. I know having this conversation involves 3 types of shooters: 1). Magnum shooters that are accurate with their Magnums and may not relate to those that are not. 2). Magnum shooters that are marginal to poor with their Magnums but can’t admit it. 3). Many shooters that shoot standard to moderately powerful calibers with better accuracy then Magnums. I’ve shot both and while I think I can handle most magnums I am clearly better and more relaxed with a .30-06 and “down”.

 

[HankBuck]

There are plenty of proper deer calibers that aren't .300wm's that anyone can learn to shoot well. Plenty of tricks and well made rifles to make them more shooter friendly as well.

Hit your aim, sure. But do it with a proper deer caliber.

@CWJ: the only thing “deader” then a deer hit with a well placed .243 or .300 win mag ——- is this topic that I have enjoyed “beating to death” and hearing from other opinions and points very well written —- like yours. Thank you

 

[trperk1]

I don't think the caliber has anything to do with this. Poor shot placement is just that, regardless of the caliber used. If anything you could discuss bullet type. A ballistic tip will increase damage on marginal shot say, but that still isn't the cure for a marginal shot. Fast expanding bullets can help though

 

[Hunter-Habib]

I strongly encourage the use of the .243 Winchester for hunting muntjac deer & the smaller African antelopes (up to impala sized game). For the larger deer/antelope species, a minimum of .270 Winchester is preferable.

Of course, caliber choice means nothing if you don’t hit the vital organs.

 

[375Fox]

@375Fox - I agree that all things being equal “Bigger is always Better”…. Will ask you this: If a Hunter can’t place a .243 bullet where he needs to at 160 yrds - how can he possibly handle a .300 Win mag? This shot was off it’s mark, maybe a .300mag makes a difference if it went in exactly the same place but a poor shot is often as bad or worse with a magnum caliber (they won’t admit they can’t handle it).

When I read the story, the bad shot was made because of hunting conditions (high chest shot because surrounded by does) not flinching. The way it reads the hunter made a choice to take a marginal shot with a marginal cartridge.
For your specific question if a hunter can’t accurately shoot a 300 at the range they should step down in cartridge, but a lot of things impact shot placement while hunting. While hunting you might be excited, have a less than perfect rest, have to make a fast shot, etc. A more powerful cartridge with the proper bullet will buy you a couple inches on a marginal shot compared to a smaller cartridge.

 

[roklok]

.......






Take a good look at my previous post of the photo of my deer. That is the entrance wound of a 12 gauge slug that went clear through the deer; straight through. The exit hole is about 3/8ths of an inch larger than the entrance wound.

Guess someone should have told that deer its lungs and part of its spine were blowed out and it couldn't run up and around the hill like it did.

The only spinal damage was caused by the exiting neck shot.

Only blood in the cavity was caused during gutting when I nicked a vein/artery in the hind quarter. The lungs collapsed as I was pulling them down and out of the chest cavity.

Ridgerunner, I did take a look at the deer you posted. Thanks for making my point !! Your deer is clearly hit ABOVE the spine, not in some imaginary non vital zone between the lungs and spine. Again, this is a MYTH and does not exist. As I said, the spine is low over the shoulders, with long bones protruding to top of back. A shot through these is generally non fatal, but will often temporarily stun a deer. There was no blood in your deer's chest cavity because the slug did not go through chest cavity, it went ABOVE chest cavity AND spine. From looking at your picture it is immediately apparent that the shot was above the spine to anyone who knows big game anatomy.

 

[Rosch]

Its allways the same:
Every shot taken without the basics in line has a great potential to end up in a mess!
I think nearly every hunter came along that situation when the shot has echoed out but there is no dead game to collect. Instead of successfull hunting a wounded animal is out there suffering heavy pain if lucky dies a quick death. For me in such a moment it was psychical hell and I felt guilty to give an animal such a hard time. And, thought over later on, I had all the chances to avoid this situation!
I think the best way out of this is to learn Your lessons quick and pimp up Your own even-when-alone-out-in-the-bush-rules, what to do and what to skip. Ethics, right?
I decided long ago to go straight all the way, think before I hit the trigger, use always the bigger gun, take only the safer shot, leave out the stupid chances (You know when they come along) and make sure all the way and everytime, that the sundown beer wont have that extra bitter taste. Living game is much better than dishonored rotten meat out there because of what?

 

[HankBuck]

When I read the story, the bad shot was made because of hunting conditions (high chest shot because surrounded by does) not flinching. The way it reads the hunter made a choice to take a marginal shot with a marginal cartridge.
For your specific question if a hunter can’t accurately shoot a 300 at the range they should step down in cartridge, but a lot of things impact shot placement while hunting. While hunting you might be excited, have a less than perfect rest, have to make a fast shot, etc. A more powerful cartridge with the proper bullet will buy you a couple inches on a marginal shot compared to a smaller cartridge.

@375Fox possible, we are both “reading into it” and my “guess” was the Hunter still could see a small - but higher - vital area and missed it….but he might have selected a Non vital area (poor decision) and—-hit it—-and lost his trophy due to a picking the wrong spot on the animal to shoot…. Who knows??? Does a bigger caliber help in that same exact bullet placement scenario —-can’t hurt

 

[Ontario Hunter]

In Montana a ten point would have to have 10 on one side (Western count). Not sure what the law is on counting points there, but in some western states the point must be one inch. Sometimes counted from the main blood line to the tip of the point. In Washington it's 1" from a line drawn along the top of main beam to the tip. When I lived in California, we always figured it was a point if you could hang a ring or a watch band off of it. None of us were ever actually challenged on it there.

There is no point requirement anywhere in Montana that I know of. The only restriction this year was mule deer does/fawns could only be harvested on private land. No one knows what logic was involved in that stupid idea. One game warden I spoke to acknowledged "we're not looking into enforcing that reg very rigorously." Considering more than a third of the state is public land (Forest Service, BLM, USBR, state "school lands", Indian trust lands, USFWS waterfowl production areas, etc., etc.) often mixed in with or adjacent to private ranch property, it is pretty much unenforceable.

 

[RR 314]

When I read the story, the bad shot was made because of hunting conditions (high chest shot because surrounded by does) not flinching. The way it reads the hunter made a choice to take a marginal shot with a marginal cartridge.
For your specific question if a hunter can’t accurately shoot a 300 at the range they should step down in cartridge, but a lot of things impact shot placement while hunting. While hunting you might be excited, have a less than perfect rest, have to make a fast shot, etc. A more powerful cartridge with the proper bullet will buy you a couple inches on a marginal shot compared to a smaller cartridge.

What is also odd to contemplate is the reality that what I would consider to be marginal/poor bullets for deer (I won't list here as to derail), can actually be more effective in some circumstances on poor shots compared to Barnes, Nosler Accubond and other so called premium bonded bullets. This certainly doesn't mean they should be used, but I have actually seen them "fail" (in my opinion), and a fragment luckily causing a fatal wound numerous inches from the point of impact.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Anyone who chooses to shoot over a deer to hit another one needs a refresher course in hunters education ... and so does anyone who conjurs up excuses for him. That is just plain wrong. Reckless.

 

[roklok]

Ridgerunner, take a look at this actual x-ray of a deer compared to where your deer was shot. I think a lot of folks have no idea how low the spine is, in fact a lot of deer vital diagrams get it wrong, which perpetuates the myth of a "dead zone" or "no mans land" between the lungs and spine. NO SUCH THING !!

 

[roklok]

And here is a cross section of a deer. This shows how the lungs actually lay beside the spinal column, no space between. It also shows all the "meat" above spine and top line of back.

 

[375Fox]

Ridgerunner, take a look at this actual x-ray of a deer compared to where your deer was shot. I think a lot of folks have no idea how low the spine is, in fact a lot of deer vital diagrams get it wrong, which perpetuates the myth of a "dead zone" or "no mans land" between the lungs and spine. NO SUCH THING !!View attachment 655409

Something else about this photo and to @RR 314 point. I think this photo is used to illustrate lead fragments to individuals in certain states advocating for all copper. You can see the amount of lead fragments outside the bullet path. That’s why a heavier bullet from a more powerful cartridge can sometimes make up for a marginal shot. The lead fragments can do damage outside the bullet path.

 

[HankBuck]

Ridgerunner, take a look at this actual x-ray of a deer compared to where your deer was shot. I think a lot of folks have no idea how low the spine is, in fact a lot of deer vital diagrams get it wrong, which perpetuates the myth of a "dead zone" or "no mans land" between the lungs and spine. NO SUCH THING !!View attachment 655409

@roklok - I’d say you are 1/2 right as above the lungs/liver there is No “dead zone” but just a little back is a small area that you can thread a bullet or arrow under the spine and Not hit the guts and deer can survive this. I have only seen one “arrowed” deer survive and one antelope…both were still walking around the same general area 2 weeks later although the whitetail was in bad shape - the antelope (Wyoming near Douglas) was moving well and had a dark “stain” from the wound on both sides, the My Guide nick named him “Stain buck”.

 

[roklok]

@roklok - I’d say you are 1/2 right as above the lungs/liver there is No “dead zone” but just a little back is a small area that you can thread a bullet or arrow under the spine and Not hit the guts and deer can survive this. I have only seen one “arrowed” deer survive and one antelope…both were still walking around the same general area 2 weeks later although the whitetail was in bad shape - the antelope (Wyoming near Douglas) was moving well and had a dark “stain” from the wound on both sides, the My Guide nick named him “Stain buck”.

No, I am 100% right and proved it with x-ray image and cross section. I have been butchering deer, hogs and cattle ever since I was a kid on the farm and am well aware of the anatomy of common animals. I said there is no non-vital area between the lungs and spine as is commonly believed by so many hunters. I suspect these hunters must drop their deer off at a butcher shop and not process them themselves. Ridge Runners deer for example, if he had processed it himself he would have easily seen the slug went above the spine. I did not say it was impossible a deer could survive a hit below the spine, crazy stuff happens. No one was talking about a gutshot, most would agree that is not considered the vitals above or below the spine. Deer can be resilient and have survived wounds that are hard to imagine, at times even to the vitals. That being said I wonder if the deer that was "in bad shape" two weeks later actually survived and didn't succumb to sepsis.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

There is no point requirement anywhere in Montana that I know of. The only restriction this year was mule deer does/fawns could only be harvested on private land. No one knows what logic was involved in that stupid idea. One game warden I spoke to acknowledged "we're not looking into enforcing that reg very rigorously." Considering more than a third of the state is public land (Forest Service, BLM, USBR, state "school lands", Indian trust lands, USFWS waterfowl production areas, etc., etc.) often mixed in with or adjacent to private ranch property, it is pretty much unenforceable.

I was addressing the question of how points were counted, not whether or nor Montana had point restrictions. As with other Western states where I have hunted, a 10 point buck Eastern count would probably be a 4 or 5 point in the West. It can also depend on whether it is a whitetail or mule deer. In California which has no whitetails, eye guards are never counted. In Washington which has all three species of deer, eye guards are counted.

Having said that, and never having hunted in Montana, I looked it up. Per the Montana regulation PDF, they have had or do have occasional antler point restrictions, sometimes 2, sometimes 4 points on a side.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

When I read the story, the bad shot was made because of hunting conditions (high chest shot because surrounded by does) not flinching. The way it reads the hunter made a choice to take a marginal shot with a marginal cartridge.
For your specific question if a hunter can’t accurately shoot a 300 at the range they should step down in cartridge, but a lot of things impact shot placement while hunting. While hunting you might be excited, have a less than perfect rest, have to make a fast shot, etc. A more powerful cartridge with the proper bullet will buy you a couple inches on a marginal shot compared to a smaller cartridge.

I have hit deer higher than I intended on a few occasions. Using both a .30-06 and a 7mm RM. The result has always been the buck hitting the ground as if skilled by Thor's hammer. None has ever.moved from the spot. I can't recall actually hitting over the spine, but the shock of bigger bullets landing close to the spine seems to disrupt the system. Every time I hear about about a shot near the spine that drops the deer but then he's up and gone, it seems to be with a marginal cartridge, .243, .22-250, .223, etc.

 

[HankBuck]

No, I am 100% right and proved it with x-ray image and cross section. I have been butchering deer, hogs and cattle ever since I was a kid on the farm and am well aware of the anatomy of common animals. I said there is no non-vital area between the lungs and spine as is commonly believed by so many hunters. I suspect these hunters must drop their deer off at a butcher shop and not process them themselves. Ridge Runners deer for example, if he had processed it himself he would have easily seen the slug went above the spine. I did not say it was impossible a deer could survive a hit below the spine, crazy stuff happens. No one was talking about a gutshot, most would agree that is not considered the vitals above or below the spine. Deer can be resilient and have survived wounds that are hard to imagine, at times even to the vitals. That being said I wonder if the deer that was "in bad shape" two weeks later actually survived and didn't succumb to sepsis.

The deer in “bad shape” most certainly died, was walking with a very bad “humped back & limp” when I saw him and looked as though it would collapse any minute —likely badly infected. The Antelope in Wyoming looked great and I saw him 3 weeks after he was injured by a bow hunter, unfortunately I had taken my antelope by rifle the day before and would’ve preferred this wounded one - a much nicer trophy —- around a 70” with a large “stain” under the spine and well back of the last ribs, that antelope was walking fine and grazed in a normal manor. Those are the only two “dead zone” examples I’ve ever seen and both were shot under the spine but well back of the lung/liver area, even a “nick” to the stomach or intestines will often kill a deer in a few days from infection and one deer likely died but that antelope looked recovered. Your likely right about the area above the lungs but I believe some deer can survive a single lung puncture ——which amazes me but Outfitters have claimed bow their hunters have hit or nick a single lung and have bucks survive….I never saw that but had no reason to doubt it.

 

[roklok]

Damn straight. When I am correct I stand up for myself. If I am wrong I am humble enough to admit it. This is not one of those times. Folks should care because it is quite evident that a lot of folks don't understand basic deer anatomy and that can lead to lost and/or wounded animals and unnecessary suffering.