Originally Posted by Husqvarna
nobody gonna comment on the second shot when the first animal wasn't tracked enough already?
you doubted your ammo and your sight-in and still took a second chance?
I know you guys are probably not high on laws/regulations (I am not either) but I fully support a law that states that you have to have access to a tracking dog when hunting.
Another tip could be to wait up to an hour or two before beginning to track, that way the animal isn't rushed out of the area and instead it seeks a shelter to lay down
There's very little reasonable in that entire post.
Why would you doubt your gun after one bad shot? It was sighted in a couple days before. The most reasonable explanation is simply a bad shot by the shooter, no reason for an experienced hunter to think he's going to do it again. Plus, he took corrective action, making the second shot prone to try to ensure a good shot.
A law requiring tracking dogs is just asinine. It would literally be impossible in a great many situations and would eliminate hunting in a good many places. These aren't people we're shooting. If one is wounded and gets away, it's not the end of the world. It's not Bambi. They're not self-aware. They're animals. It confounds me, that we will willingly poison mice, which are "intelligent" mammals every bit as much as deer, but we act like we're talking about cruel and unusual punishment of humans when it's a large animal like a deer. If we have to treat them like that, we shouldn't be shooting them in the first place. Silliness.
Waiting an hour or two after the shot is not always feasible or wise either. Sometimes, yes, but it's no generic answer.
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.