The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 14, 2013, 09:14 AM   #26
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
I used buckshot when I was young and hunting(12-13). I took my first buck with it. I decided that it really did a lot more damage to the meat than I wanted.
I have found that due to the relatively low velocity of buckshot, skeletal meat damage is all but non-existent. I have eaten a shoulder blade roast and have discovered a clean buckshot hole though the shoulder blade what had not given any indication of being there before it was prepared. I have observed a noticeable lack of all secondary projectiles (bone fragments) and blood-shot bruised meat that is typically found in deer killed by rifle bullets. In short, I have never thrown away any meat from a buckshot kill. I cannot say the same for the rifle kills I have made, and seen.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 10:54 AM   #27
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 2,072
Quote:
Originally posted by dahermit:

In short, I have never thrown away any meat from a buckshot kill.
Over 48 years of bow hunting I have eaten too many deer to remember that I killed with an arrow. An arrow does not produce shock trauma and velocities are much slower than buckshot. Still, in every instance there was meat in the area of the wound due to blood saturation that I did not wish to eat and the hole made definitely gave a indication of being there. In short, I have never eaten any deer, shot even with a arrow, "hole" and all. Unless the deer was already dead, it would be hard for me to imagine a wound made by any projectile, whether it contributed to the death of a deer or not, that didn't have some meat damage due to blood and trauma.

No one in this thread has said the use of buckshot is unethical, nor do they recommend folks not use it. You asked for opinions and folks gave them. When their opinions are not what you want to hear you criticize them for being poor shots. In several posts you claim that one needs to wait for a BEHIND THE SHOULDER SHOT and then brag about eating a shoulder roast with buckshot holes in it. Again, no one is criticizing you for using buckshot if you wish, why are you so critical of those that do not wish to use it?
buck460XVR is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 11:15 AM   #28
Gunplummer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 1,450
How many people are into buckshot enough buy a special shotgun and then test different ammo until they have the perfect setup? Apparently only certain people are capable of using buckshot correctly. When I tell someone I got a spread of shot across the whole front half of a deer, where do you think I was aiming? You want to use it, fine, but don't try and tell me it is not underpowered for deer. I walk around in shotgun areas and have never seen an empty buckshot shell larger than 2 3/4. I used to do logging and land clearing in shotgun areas after deer season and the loss rate of slug shot deer is really bad. I can't even imagine what it would be like if buckshot became popular.
Gunplummer is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 11:35 AM   #29
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,540
Seems to me that it's all about choke, shot pattern, range and skill.

And judgement.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 11:49 AM   #30
CharlieDeltaJuliet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 750
Art pretty much summed it up. I did a lot of damage to the one and only buck I shot but I was using 00Buck XX magnum. I was expecting a 30-40 yard shot but had the buck walk within 15 yards of me. It tore the shoulder up pretty bad, but still left a lot of meat for the table. I decided to try honing my rifle skills. (12-13 years old at the time).
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to
keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in Government.
..." - Thomas Jefferson
CharlieDeltaJuliet is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 12:04 PM   #31
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
No one in this thread has said the use of buckshot is unethical, nor do they recommend folks not use it.
Not in this thread, but it is a common theme on this forum when buckshot for deer is discussed to the point where some have said that buckshot should be illeagle for hunting deer (excessive wounding, etc.). That is the purpose of the OP.

Quote:
You asked for opinions and folks gave them. When their opinions are not what you want to hear you criticize them for being poor shots.
Read what they have posted...they describe a very poor choice of conditions/where they shot the deer. I still wait for a person who shot a deer at reasonable range, behind the shoulder, to tell about the negative results (deer ran-off, to die from being gut shot, etc.).


Quote:
In several posts you claim that one needs to wait for a BEHIND THE SHOULDER SHOT and then brag about eating a shoulder roast with buckshot holes in it.
"brag"?? It would seem that you are implying an undue emotional term to what should be a logical discussion. I told about an observation. Is it surprising that inasmuch as I did not press the muzzle against the deer's rib cage, that I would find a piece of buckshot in the shoulder? It does after all, begin to spread as soon as it leaves the muzzle...some will hit the heart/lungs, some in front of that, some behind...just like a pheasant or a duck.

Quote:
Again, no one is criticizing you for using buckshot if you wish, why are you so critical of those that do not wish to use it?
And again, there are those who have frequently criticized the use of buckshot. I am critical of assumption, blaming the use of buckshot for their own poor choices and techniques, knee-jerk sans sufficient experience and evidence, opinions not backed by logic (just gut feelings). I am in favor of using what ever makes a person happy and I have used buckshot, rifle, and handgun to take deer. What prompted this post is the frequent nearly hysterical response to people using buckshot based on erroneous assumptions.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?

Last edited by dahermit; October 14, 2013 at 12:31 PM.
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 12:09 PM   #32
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
How many people are into buckshot enough buy a special shotgun and then test different ammo until they have the perfect setup?
How many rifle hunters buy a rifle, scope, cartridges, and sight it it? How is that different from taking any shot gun to the range and looking at the patterns at various distances? "Perfect", is somewhat overdone.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 12:14 PM   #33
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Art pretty much summed it up. I did a lot of damage to the one and only buck I shot but I was using 00Buck XX magnum. I was expecting a 30-40 yard shot but had the buck walk within 15 yards of me. It tore the shoulder up pretty bad, but still left a lot of meat for the table. I decided to try honing my rifle skills. (12-13 years old at the time).
"...15 yards of me. It tore the shoulder up pretty bad..." Would the out-come (less damage to the shoulder), been any different if you had just shot it behind the shoulder? What would have happened to that shoulder if you had shot it with a 30-06 and an 180 grain bullet?
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?

Last edited by dahermit; October 14, 2013 at 12:29 PM.
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 12:49 PM   #34
Bezoar
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 19, 2004
Location: michigan
Posts: 578
do you equate that little 3-5 pellet buckshot load made for self defense with a .410 shotgun as a deer cartridge? because if you say that buckshot is good, ethical, moral to use for deer hunting, then that guy who gets a box of pdx shotgun shells and takes a 70 yard shot on a deer like the gun counter guy says, your advocating something less then smart.

each pellet is never going to do what you want, they haveno real mass so they do what the old lrn widow maker 38 special load did, follow the pass of least resistance in the target.
not good when you want to eat what you hit. not smell it 3 weeks later because you had no way to find it.
Bezoar is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 01:20 PM   #35
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
do you equate that little 3-5 pellet buckshot load made for self defense with a .410 shotgun as a deer cartridge? because if you say that buckshot is good, ethical, moral to use for deer hunting, then that guy who gets a box of pdx shotgun shells and takes a 70 yard shot on a deer like the gun counter guy says, your advocating something less then smart.

each pellet is never going to do what you want, they haveno real mass so they do what the old lrn widow maker 38 special load did, follow the pass of least resistance in the target.
not good when you want to eat what you hit. not smell it 3 weeks later because you had no way to find it.
This deer and buckshot thread was meant only to relate to 12 gauge loads.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 01:45 PM   #36
CharlieDeltaJuliet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 750
Dahermit, you are exactly right. I just had a larger entrance wound cavity. The buckshot did it's job. The buck dropped in it's tracks actually tumbled a bit. But suffered none if I were guessing. Don't get me wrong I have no problem with people using buckshot, and I would use it again if I were hunting in the area I used to hunt and needed to put food on the table. There were a lot of briar thickets in the area. I did do about the same damage with a lever action 35 Remington (Marlin lever action), on a doe at 25 yards using a 200 gr.. It was my brush gun after the shotgun and was devastating when it hit.
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to
keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in Government.
..." - Thomas Jefferson
CharlieDeltaJuliet is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 02:01 PM   #37
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,266
I dont have an opinion on how ethical buckshot is. Its historical performance on deer makes it very low on my choice of preferred things to shoot deer with.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 03:54 PM   #38
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
I dont have an opinion on how ethical buckshot is. Its historical performance on deer makes it very low on my choice of preferred things to shoot deer with.
My heart would have soared like a hawk and my feet would have danced for joy if only, only, only, you had included some of that, "...Its historical performance on deer...", (I assume negative), data. I was hoping for something more scholarly. I would even be interested in hearing your first hand experiences/results using buckshot.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 04:15 PM   #39
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Don't get me wrong I have no problem with people using buckshot, and I would use it again if I were hunting in the area I used to hunt and needed to put food on the table.
I was told about using buckshot (# 4 buckshot) , from some admitted poachers I worked for that grew up in the Upper Peninsula. They explained to me that it was the most effective deer-taker they had found. When I mentioned double-ought, they pointed out how few pellets were in a double-ought and "...just like a duck or pheasant...", you had to put enough shot into them to do the job and double-ought is short on pellet count compared to #4 Buck (27 in a 2-3/4 shell...before the 3" with 41 pellets each). I followed their suggestion and found that a charge of #4 buckshot was a very effective means of taking deer. After shooting several, I came to the conclusion, that if one was strictly after meat (not antler/sport hunting), it was a better method than trying to put a single shot into a deer under less than ideal field conditions. After taking several with buckshot, all very good kills, inasmuch as I considered myself a gun enthusiast first, and a hunter second, I opted to switch back to using a rifle just for the sport of it. Nevertheless, I of the last three deer I have taken I used my buckshot on two of them inasmuch as I was hunting for meat. The third, I shot with a .41 Magnum using my cast bullets, because I wanted to take a deer double-action. In short, if I was subsistence/meat hunting/had to feed myself, I would use a 12 gauge, 3 inch magnum with .41 pellets (.24 caliber). I understand that there are sophistocated modern buckshot loads that pattern well at longer distances now, but I have not tried them.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 14, 2013, 06:55 PM   #40
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,266
Dahermit, I have never shot a deer with buckshot. I have looked for plenty of them that others shot, with my tracking dogs. Found very small percentage of them. Buckshot per-se, is not the problem. Hunters trying to extend it past its practical limits is the problem.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old October 15, 2013, 03:58 AM   #41
Todd1700
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2008
Posts: 187
Quote:
Seems to me that it's all about choke, shot pattern, range and skill.

And judgement.
That's it in a nut shell.

We killed a lot of deer with buckshot when I was a younger man and when virtually everyone in our region of Alabama were running deer with dogs. Buckshot's reputation for wounding deer can be divided into 3 categories in my opinion. None really the fault of the buckshot.

1. People not patterning their shotguns to see what kind of patterns they are getting with a particular choke and shell. Lot of people back in the day were flying blind so to speak with no real clue what kind of patterns they were flinging.

2. The fact that we were shooting at running deer with a pack of hounds hot on their butt. Not taking a swipe at dog hunting here but it's just common sense that shooting at moving animals is going to result in more bad hits than shooting at stationary ones.

3. People not respecting the limited range of buckshot. It's hard to believe that something which can be so lethal at 30 yards can become pretty ineffective by the time it reaches 50 yards. I always kept my shots 40 yards and under. Also few people had the will power to let a really good buck pass by just out of buckshot's effective range without lobbing a few spray and pray shots.

I don't use buckshot anymore. We no longer run deer with dogs and if I'm going to limit myself to 40 yards and in I will typically have a bow in my hands these days. But if I needed or had to use it, I would pattern my gun; respect it's range; and kill deer just fine with it.
Todd1700 is offline  
Old October 15, 2013, 05:19 AM   #42
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Buckshot per-se, is not the problem. Hunters trying to extend it past its practical limits is the problem.
I agree with that. In general, it seems that passing up a shot is not possible for many of them. Although I have only taken one deer with bow and arrow, I believe that most gun hunters would be better/more successful deer hunters, if they had to do several seasons of bow hunting before they could gun hunt. Perhaps some sense of patience and marksmanship would be instilled.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old October 15, 2013, 08:48 AM   #43
CharlieDeltaJuliet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 750
Thanks for the info Dahermit. I hope it never comes down to it but if I do hunt again I will try the No.4. I guess right now besides if my family were going hungry the only reason I would hunt again would be if my daughter ever wants me to teach her. I almost burned myself out on it, and the last time I went with a couple buddies one of them had a ND when placing his rifle in the back of the vehicle. It went into the seat adjuster on the drivers side and came out the rocker panel. I was in the seat at the time. I removed a small piece of lead that barely stuck in my left kidney area. I swore never again, or at least with others, even friends.

Seems the fellow decided to lighten his trigger on his Winchester 30-06, well it was a bubba job or he pulled the trigger by accident from what happened. I chewed him for having a loaded rifle in my vehicle and us on the way to the field, etc... But ultimately cut ties with him after seeing his other safety violations and ethics. He was actually a friend of a friend....so no harm no foul, just don't want to hunt near him...
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to
keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in Government.
..." - Thomas Jefferson
CharlieDeltaJuliet is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 07:27 AM   #44
Countertop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2004
Location: At the diner
Posts: 125
buckshot for deer, ethics.

Every deer I've ever shot with buckshot died a whole lot faster and dropped a whole lot faster than with any other methods.

I think it's entirely ethical. And folks who post these anti-hunting threads tend to be the usual internet idiot who can't see the world beyond their own nose let alone state.
Countertop is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 07:32 AM   #45
Countertop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2004
Location: At the diner
Posts: 125
buckshot for deer, ethics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dahermit View Post
I agree with that. In general, it seems that passing up a shot is not possible for many of them. Although I have only taken one deer with bow and arrow, I believe that most gun hunters would be better/more successful deer hunters, if they had to do several seasons of bow hunting before they could gun hunt. Perhaps some sense of patience and marksmanship would be instilled.
I became an excellent hunter when I started now hunting. The number if animals I see far exceeds what non bow hunters see because it forces me to be aware of everything that matters, movement, scent and noise.
Countertop is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 12:48 PM   #46
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 2,072
Quote:
Originally posted by Countertop:

And folks who post these anti-hunting threads tend to be the usual internet idiot who can't see the world beyond their own nose let alone state.
"These anti-hunting threads"? Really...... have you read this thread? Maybe you can show me anywhere in this thread, any statement claiming hunting is bad or unethical. Show me anywhere in this thread where anyone has said hunting with buckshot is unethical. All I have seen is a reference by the OP about folks in some other thread somewhere claiming buckshot is unethical. Folks in this thread, have for the most part kept it to a civil conversation about their experiences with buckshot and why or why not they choose to use it. The OP, an avid buckshot user admits to it's limitations and most folks list those same limitations as the reason they don't choose to use it. So who then, if I may ask, are these "internet idiots who can't see the world beyond their own nose let alone state" you speak of? Folks that don't hunt the exact way you choose to? Is that what makes them "idiots"? Sorry, but when someone feels the need to call folks names just cause they do not agree with them, has already lost the argument and does not display any superior level of intelligence or credibility. I have bow hunted since the mid-sixties and took my first buck with a recurve bow when I was 14. I still can't claim to see more animals than EVERY non-archery hunter in the woods. Many of those deer hunters a generation ahead of me, never picked up a bow and have more knowledge and have seen more game that I could ever hope to. But then I ain't you.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 01:28 PM   #47
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,781
Quote:
birds a very frail creatures. they have very light bone and muscular structures to allow for flight, even birds like turkeys with limited flight capability. all it really takes is one or two pellets to hit a bird to kill it and if the pellet doesn't the hard fall will.
You don't have a lot of experience hunting turkeys, do you?

Unless you hit them in the head or neck with those one or two pellets, forget about it. I've seen turkeys rolled multiple times, knocked out of the air and get up and still keep going- those feathers shed birdshot like rain...... fall turkey is more like "Magnum pheasant" than ambushing lovesick toms in the spring .... I rolled a tom one time with a single #2 pellet to the back of the head- he keeled over and his feet stuck up toward the sky and twitched .... I dropped the shotgun, ran out and hoisted the bird up in triumph ..... at which point the bird came out of his daze and came to life and commenced to beatin' on me, slashing me with his free spur ....
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 01:38 PM   #48
Gunplummer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 1,450
Only one deer with a bow? Just like the previous poster, all I ever used were recurve and long bows. I do remember way back when someone was selling a device to shoot two arrows simultaneously from a bow. There may well be potential there for "Traditional" buckshot if you can add more arrows.
Gunplummer is offline  
Old October 19, 2013, 07:13 PM   #49
03Shadowbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 176
We dog hunt with 00buck and have killed numerous 8-11 point big boys. I have also taken quite a few from our shotgun stands which are about 40 yards max. It kills just fine if you do your part within short yardage.
03Shadowbob is offline  
Old October 19, 2013, 08:23 PM   #50
jersurf101
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2013
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 265
I was forced to use 12ga 00 buck for some of my deer hunting. The first 3 deer I killed with 00 buck and a Winchester 1400. I would not use it past 20-25 yards on the outside. It is not the best tool for the job but will work just fine. I actually found it better to aim at the base of the skull/upper neck area with 00 buck. These were smaller southern deer. Seemed as ethical as any other kind of hunting. This is just my experience in the Southern Virginia swamps. YMMV.
jersurf101 is offline  
Reply

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 06:31 AM.


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 0.12972 seconds with 7 queries