The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old January 29, 2013, 10:42 AM   #26
Sure Shot Mc Gee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2012
Posts: 2,125
Quote:
cast your own. You'll never go back to condom bullets again
Now that's funny. Truly A 5 Star Grin. ~ ~ ~ ~ lol
__________________
Watch it!!! their both out to get us.
Sure Shot Mc Gee is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 11:32 AM   #27
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
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
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 11:48 AM   #28
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
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.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 12:09 PM   #29
ThundarStick
Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Posts: 16
I do have another theory about that second shot, in light of some others saying the bullet is not well constructed. You very well may have hit just above or below the joint on the shoulder leg juncture. This bone structure is very strong and can cause a bullet to frag and blow out bone with out giving the penetration nessary to make it to the boiler room and shut down the ship. I have seen this happen!

I know I have had one true fail that I know of. 100gr core loct, 243, 450 yards. The deer shot bolt up right and dropped back into the woods. I waited about 30 mins before going to check out the hit. There was a solid blood trail and I thought,"he is dead at the bottom of the hill". One step into the woods and he jumps up and takes off up the next hill. Where he was lying was a huge pool of blood and I knew all I had to do was just wait a few hours and go get him. Then just over the a shot rang out! I followed the blood to the deer where a young man from next door had taken him! He shot him from about 75 yards with a 280 and the bullet holes where with in 2 inches of each other! Nice deer for a nice young man! Next year I was using the 260!
ThundarStick is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 12:09 PM   #30
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
I don't see how it is impossible, sure Sweden isn't Alaska but we do have the northern parts which are wast areas of nothing but wilderness. but we do hunt more in groups, so you can kinda share the tracking dog. or if you go out alone and don't have a dog you call around some and check who might be on call if it happens.

it isn't a human no but WE are humans and have a morality/ethics
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 12:38 PM   #31
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
I don't see how it is impossible, sure Sweden isn't Alaska
What ABOUT Alaska? Or Colorado? Or similar states? Or Canada? Some guys are hunting several days travel into the wilderness, sometimes accessible only by air. Requiring a hunting dog for them would be near on impossible and certainly prohibitively expensive. And for what? My experience indicates about a 7% chance of wounding an animal and being unable to recover it. A good number of that 7% are wounded such that they don't die, so no recovery by dog or any other method short of shooting from a helicopter would recover them.

Yeah, we're humans, we have ethics. Those ethics extend to making a reasonable effort to make a good shot and a reasonable effort to recover wounded animals. If you do those two things, a lost animal is not a moral or ethical issue. It happens. It's life. They're animals.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 01:24 PM   #32
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
This is the internet I all sorts of BS finds it's way under the bridge but REQUIRING a trackin dog is pure silliness.

The thing that jumped out most to me in the first post was the fact he was aiming behind the shoulder. IMO that's where the problem starts. All things are fine and great IF you hit right behind it but miss a couple inches back and you'll be lucky to find the deer. If the deer is even at the slightest cant towards you then even if you hit right behind the shoulder you may be SOL. Had it happen to me this year:

50 yard shot, slightly quartering into me, off hand. Thought I hit low but had a good blood trail so I started trackin. Got over to where a friend was on stand and he opened up as I pushed some other deer outta the thicket. The deer I shot though came right back in front of me, blood all down the side RIGHT BEHIND THE SHOULDER. After some gutting of the other deer I went back to work on the blood trail which had slowed to a trickle. 1/2 mile later I jumped that doe up and off it went. No blood and no hope after that. My shooting and the fact that it was facing slightly towards me caused the lost deer (And no I didn't sit down and have a good cry over it).

Years ago I read the best place to aim on deer was the off side shoulder. Not the one you see, the one you don't. Aiming there it's about impossible to miss the vitals. It's something I always try to do yet as my story indicates isn't always accomplished.

As for the bullet failure or not....... There is not one current commercially available .30-30 round that won't drop a deer if the shooter does his part. Bullet failure my butt.
L_Killkenny is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 02:05 PM   #33
Saltydog235
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2010
Location: Pawleys Island
Posts: 1,154
We hunt as a club on leased land. If we have member that shoots a deer and it runs off in one of the bays, swamps or thick planted pines, we'll get a dog in there. Usually there is no shortages of labs or others that'll gladly join the in hunt. Requiring it though is a bit of a stretch.
Saltydog235 is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 02:35 PM   #34
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
re Brian for those animals that don't die we use people on temporary blinds/stands and/or dogs that either stand/front the animals (again I don't know the english word for this) so you get another chance, or some dogs catch or even take care of it themselves, with training the dogs only go for the intended animal.

atleast over here we hunters face great scrutiny from animalactivists and so on so we have to be very ethical about it all. tracking animals involved in traffic accidents fall on some of us hunters.

But I stand by my first statement: I wouldn't take another shot at an animal before I knew the first one was down, and I put some real effort into tracking it, if it was a hit that will kill eventually it is my obligation to put that animal down.
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 03:23 PM   #35
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
atleast over here we hunters face great scrutiny from animalactivists and so on so we have to be very ethical about it all. tracking animals involved in traffic accidents fall on some of us hunters.

But I stand by my first statement: I wouldn't take another shot at an animal before I knew the first one was down, and I put some real effort into tracking it, if it was a hit that will kill eventually it is my obligation to put that animal down.
You've let the animal rights ethics corrupt your thinking too. We ARE very "ethical" about it when we make the effort to make a good shot and a reasonable effort to recover the wounded animal.

Being shot does not, by a wide margin, guarantee death to the animal. That sounds like another fantasy created the animal rights nut jobs. I've seen quite a few animals with obvious old wounds (as in years old) that were getting along just fine.

Who says that it's unethical if the animal is never recovered? Animals die every day, no human involvement needed. They rot and/or get eaten by other animals. Same thing happens to one that's shot and never recovered. How is unethical because it's life was shortened by a human but not if it was shorten by disease?

Is the implication that it's ethical to kill the animal if you eat it but not ethical if you don't? Why does that not apply to mice? Woodchucks (Groundhogs)? Etc?

See, you're letting the anti-hunters define the parameters. They weasel their way in until you start to think like them.

It's either ethical to kill animals or it's not. If it is, human involvement extends to making a reasonable shot and reasonable effort to recover the animal. Even calling that a "moral" obligation is a stretch. As I said, if it's a moral obligation, why doesn't it extend to other relatively higher-order mammals such as mice?

It's not a tragedy if an animal is not recovered. It sucks, it's a bummer, it ruins your day, yeah, whatever, but it's not a moral issue.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 03:40 PM   #36
Sure Shot Mc Gee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2012
Posts: 2,125
Excuse please.
__________________
Watch it!!! their both out to get us.
Sure Shot Mc Gee is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 04:22 PM   #37
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
I don't let them define it, but I don't disregard their presence and the influence they might get, prepare for the worst you know.

maybe it is just semantics we argue about, reasonable effort is kinda the wording in our laws aswell, and for us having access to a tracking dog isn't a hassle. as hunters we do have a code informal if you wish to follow, and shooting at another animal before your first is down violates that IMO.

and I do very much hunt for the meat, or predator/varmint control. So I want to get my meat, heck I take care of the animals we track from accidents if it isn't too mashed up and within a couple of hours.

tell me about the groundhogs and whatnot, surely there is a purpose to it? otherwise we might aswell okey claypidgeon shooting with real pidgeons
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 04:39 PM   #38
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husqvarna
tell me about the groundhogs and whatnot, surely there is a purpose to it?
Purpose to it.... They're annoying. Does that count? We shoot them, in theory, because they ruin farmers crops and can be dangerous to livestock (stepping in holes). In reality, I shoot them because it's a challenge to hit them from a long ways away and I enjoy it. Coyotes too. Shoot them and they lay where they fall. Crows, same thing. Starlings, English Sparrows too.

It's no different to me than if I enjoyed golf or basketball. If I make a really long shot, we hoorah and High-5. It's a game.

These animals are of no use, alive or dead, at least in the numbers that they exist. I shoot them because I can and so do 10s of thousands of others.

The only reason deer are different is because a lot of people eat them. There's no ethical difference. I don't eat 95% of the deer I kill. I give them away or take them to a butcher shop to be donated.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 05:29 PM   #39
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
Quote:
We shoot them, in theory, because they ruin farmers crops and can be dangerous to livestock (stepping in holes)
well thats all fine and good, even if it is just an excuse.

but I don't know about what you wrote later.

like I said earlier would you be okey with breeding birds to be let out and shot for peoples enjoyment? that was popular back in the day but we have come a long way since back in the day. Have competitions were deer run in a trought and you shoot them?

sure hunting isn't a life or death thing in the western world anymore either but to me it is not just a sport
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 06:22 PM   #40
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husqvarna
like I said earlier would you be okey with breeding birds to be let out and shot for peoples enjoyment?
Many states do just that... except the birds are actually eaten. Our state environmental agency raises Ringneck Pheasants, native to Mongolia, and releases them in pre-scheduled places and times for the express purpose of hunters, who are waiting with loaded guns and dogs, to kill them.


Quote:
.... but we have come a long way since back in the day.
Well, we've certainly MOVED a long ways... the direction is up for debate.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 06:48 PM   #41
Husqvarna
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 7, 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 624
letting animals out to shoot them for sport isn't my cup of tea.

letting birds out and shooting them right out of the box isn't hunting IMO, and it isn't a sport for a civilized world IMO. why would it be okey with birds and not bigger animals?

realising birds to bolster or create a new population is another thing and perfectly okey, as is breeding animals on a big game farm or something
Husqvarna is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 08:20 PM   #42
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,438
Jarheadhunter, the problem is you were shooting super deer. A deer that can vertical jump 10 ft has super natural abilities and is thus bullet proof.
On a serious note, the leveroution bullets dont fail in the .30-30. It does not have the velocity to destroy them. A well placed shot would easily kill a deer even if the bullet failed to expand.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 09:57 PM   #43
reloader28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 13, 2009
Location: nw wyoming
Posts: 953
I shoot p-dogs and rock chucks because they are there and I have a gun. Its a blast blowing them apart. What can I say? I do use the excuse that I'm helping protect the ground, but basically, its fun. I must be demented.

Like Brian said, losing a deer does happen occasionally. There were hundreds and hundreds of thousands of deer shot in this country this fall and I'll bet that the ones that were lost and got away make up about 1/4 of 1 percent. With that small percentage it is completely useless to make a law requiring dogs.

Besides that, your dogs are going to run right thru where somebody is sitting and waiting for a deer. Then guess what happens?? Your dogs are going to be shot. Your going to be out a dog, you'll both end up in an expensive court and you still wont have a deer.
reloader28 is offline  
Old January 29, 2013, 10:41 PM   #44
big al hunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2011
Location: Washington state
Posts: 952
At pheasant release hunting sites the birds are released a day or two before the hunt. They don't flush like wild birds, but they are not in a box.

My personal ethics require me to search for wounded game until I find it, or determine I won't be able to. This takes hours of searching. I have spent up to 4 hours searching for an elk someone else shot poorly. We determined it survived. A month later I saw that same elk, another hunter harvested it. We each have to set our own limit for "reasonable effort".
__________________
You can't fix stupid....however ignorance can be cured through education!
big al hunter is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 01:07 AM   #45
BIG P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 8, 2010
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,613
Man I'm glad to know that BT's dont work,Ive been using them for years & my freezer is full off deer & hogs.Been using hornady SST's in 25-06 & 270 Ill tell ya Coyotes,bobcat,and alot of other critters dont like them either. Guess thats just Me.
BIG P is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 07:05 AM   #46
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 3,766
I have had excellent results,no fails,with Nosler 115 gr Ballistic Tips on antelope .I know 165 gr Ballistic Tips work just fine on elk with a 308.By Ballistic Tip,I mean Nosler.

I suspect that little chunk of riblike bone came off the top of the withers,at the peak of the shoulders,There are some rib like bones that stick up there.

I believe you may have shot high.

There is a lot more to how a bullet performs than how it looks.How thick and hard the jacket is,etc.Pretty hard to make a bullet that works in a 300 Savage,30-40 Krag,etc,yet can hold together from a 300 magnum.

The 30-30 will kill a deer stone dead with a cast leadbullet if you hit him in the heart lung area.It will do it with the original 150 and 170 gr rd nose 30-30 bullets.I know a guy eats plenty of venison and he uses the Leverlution bullets in his Marlin 336.Groups about 1 1/2 at 100 yds.If those do not work,you missed.

I have no comment on Zombie bullets.I have not encoutered Zombies.Drones,yes,Zombies,no.Are they intended for big game?If not,you failed the deer by using the wrong bullet.

Does your 30-30 have a tube magazine under the barrel?

Hornady made their points out of rubber for a reason.Pointy rubber tips won't set off the primer of the round in front in the tube during recoil.Its bad to use pointy bullets in a tubemag.Even hard plastic ones Its a roman candle thing.

For deer hunting with a 30-30I suggest you use one of the following:

Traditional 30-30 150 and 170 round nose bullets

Hornady Leverlution.

If those do not work,you missed.Practice more.The 30-30 hs been working for a really long time on millions of deer.
HiBC is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 07:57 AM   #47
dayman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: The Woods
Posts: 1,135
I've had extremely good luck with LeverEvolution in .30-30. I can't say anything about the Zombie Max, but then I've never gone Zombie hunting - because, you know, zombies are imaginary.
Even if it somehow failed to expand it's still going to be a bullet, and should still do the job if it's in the right spot, so I'm going to have to agree with the consensus that you probably missed - groups on paper are always better than you can expect in the field.
The same thing actually happened to one of my hunting buddies this year - deer jumped, blood and hair on the brush behind him, but off it ran. Only difference is, we spent the rest of the day tracking it. IMHO that's the difference between "hunting" and "shooting at animals". But, the perception's probably different hunting up north where you might only see a couple deer in a day.
__________________
si vis pacem para bellum
dayman is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 08:56 AM   #48
Rifleman1776
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 25, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,309
The problems mentioned sound like placement was bad. Your indifference in tracking wounded game leads me to belive you have other careless habits also. Did you bench and sight with those new bullets before hunting?
I use Nosler BTs in my 30-06. Their expansion and retention have been perfect at ranges from 5 yards to much longer ranges. Deer dropped where they stood and there was minimal meat loss. My experience indicates, to me, they BTs are basically Partitions with plastic tips.
Rifleman1776 is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 01:45 PM   #49
JarheadHunter
Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2012
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 24
Ok let me clear a few thign up. I didnt post to hear everyones opinions on my ethics and habitts, and blah blah blah i was asking abotu the ammo. with that I was not using the leverevolution that day. it was teh z-max(xombie max). I bench fired the rifle the day before at 100 yards. If you read through all of the post. I admit that it was partial human error. I have been hunting for 16 years now and killed many deer with a 30-30 this just happened to be a new one with a scope and not opened sights. The first shot most likely was low. After i shot it i waited in the blind 30-45 minutes then was walking back to camp to get my friend who is a 60+yr old man with hunting experience all over the Us to help me track my wounded animal. when i saw the second deer and decided that i would try my luck again, but did take my time moved down into the prone, controled my breathing, took a slow steady squeez and hit the next deer who was standing 100% broad side to me. I do not have a tracking dog and think that is one of the most rediculous things I have ever heard.

After my second shot we grabbed my truck went to the place she was standing and began tracking becasue after i walked by where the first one was there was no sign except for the hair and little bit of meat. the second was the most promising to track and recover and they actually both ran into the same area of the property so if a trail crossed then we would find one and look for the other after. I found bone with taht shot and mor hair and more meat and nto too far away we found a blood trail and followed it to the extent and continued looking for close to an hour. so you can blow that smoke some where else. Making the acusations that there was no effort when you have a fragment of a story makes you sound you come on here to make yourself sound smarter and more experienced than teh next guy. that is not what this is for. i will be taking the rifle to the range this weekend to see where i am hitting and if my shot placement was off i will gladly admit it. i am human and erorro is always possible. with taht I am an 11 yr Marine SSgt who qualifies on the rifle range yearly up to 500 yds on the range and i will not even get into weapon experience on multiple deployments. I have a lot of muscle memory from the time i put that weapon into my shoulder to pulling the trigger to follow through of my shot and keeping an eye on my target i know the sound of a round impacting target and missing target. That is why I have the most trouble with the second shot. when i sighted in the rifle i was comfortable with my group enough to take out on a hunt the next day. i woudl not have done so if i was not because i am not going out to maime or wound animals. I use as much of the animal as i can when i comes time to proccess it. I have an easy yet strict set of ethics when i hunt that i follow. I dont take rediculous shots, and If i am not comfortable with the shot i do not take it. I also make every effort to track and locate an animal that may have been wounded. I dont like well fed coyotes. I am not placing all of the blame on the rounds. So lets get that straight also. There seems to be a mixed opinion abotu them and I was just trying to see if anyone else had the same problem so i know if i should continue the use of the ammo or not. I wasnt asking for critique once again. I knwo this post is now all over the place and i am finished with my rant. so lets keep this otu of the "i know more than you so i will try an make you look lesser than me bracket". Thank you and I now look forward to what you all have to say. I appologize for the typos but i was on a roll and dont really feel liek going back and correcting them.

Last edited by JarheadHunter; January 30, 2013 at 01:53 PM.
JarheadHunter is offline  
Old January 30, 2013, 02:15 PM   #50
Dr. A
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 17, 2007
Location: Salina, KS.
Posts: 190
For those that do not know, many of the Zombie bullets are just yellow V-max. However, the 30-30 is simply leverevolution repackaged as the zombie bullets. They are identical save for the color. The FTX bullet also has construction similar to the SST in that there is a innerlocking core. This is similar to other Hornady offerings. The tip assures expansion. I've killed many deer with my 30-30 and 308 Marlin, and all have been quick, convincing deaths. The majority of these have passed through the animal.

Many folks rail against these offerings from Hornady, but the fact remains that they work well for most of us.
Dr. A is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
30/30 , ballistic tip , ballistic tip failure , no blood

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14555 seconds with 7 queries