|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 13, 2013, 12:23 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
buckshot for deer, ethics.
Started this elsewhere, moved it here as a better place for this discussion:
It would seem that there are many people who consider using buckshot on deer as being an unethical practice. In that light, if you be so inclined, would you mind explaining the difference between shooting a pheasant (or a duck) with #6 - #4 bird shot and shooting a deer with #4 buck shot - 00 buck shot when buckshot is nothing more than bird shot scaled-up for the size of the game? What makes one practice ethical and the other, unethical ("...should be outlawed...")? |
October 13, 2013, 02:29 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 10,805
|
I wouldn't call buckshot unethical, just the last resort if nothing else is available. In relation to body size #6 shot on a 1 lb duck is much larger than 00 buck on a 150 lb deer. Especially when 10-15 pellets are striking the duck vs 2-3 buckshot pellets on a deer. And I'd be using something quite a bit larger than #6 on duck especially with steel shot. I typically use #2 shot.
Used within its limitations buckshot can be effective. It also has a higher percentage of wounded animals than rifle or slug loads. |
October 13, 2013, 03:31 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,342
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 03:38 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,839
|
even though I do not think buck shot is unethical, I will take this.
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. deer are a different story. a pellet in the rear, another in the leg and one through a lung won't necessarily kill it, even over a prolonged period of time. it will weaken the animal and force it to live with a handicap for the rest of it's life or it could just force the animal to die a slow death. this is why I do not hunt with buckshot. not because I think it's unethical but because I don't like the idea of having to track a wounded deer for miles because none of the shot hit a vital organ.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar. I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin |
October 13, 2013, 03:52 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,783
|
As long as it's legal, it's acceptable.
In part, you are asking for us to pass judgment on someone else's "ethical" hunting methods. I have done so in the past and now, follow the rules and laws of the state as they are in a better position to do so. ....
My last example was when I started hunting deer, in Alabama. I became aware that it was legal to use dogs to hunt deer. Being from the Midwest, I measured this as being unethical. That is until I sat in a deer stand down there. Did a complete 180 and had a better understanding and appreciation... There are thing that I would not do even if it's legal but really can't measure or fault others, for doing so. ... Now then, before most of our Iowa Pheasants moved to South Dakota, I would never consider using #4's but ethics had nothing to do it. Just not practical ... Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing. |
October 13, 2013, 04:10 PM | #6 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
October 13, 2013, 04:13 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 04:18 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 04:22 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 04:29 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
Last edited by dahermit; October 13, 2013 at 04:41 PM. |
|
October 13, 2013, 04:37 PM | #11 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
buckshot for deer, ethics.
Wound statistics on game animals come from the persons opinion on the implement. I have never seen any sort of official statistic on caliber effectiveness and I would fully expect and such number to be flawed beyond usefulness.
You don't have to hang around the forums long before you'll figure out that if every restrictive opinion were actually enforced virtually all hunting would be illegal. Somebody here thinks just about every possible weapon, cartridge, distance, method and style of hunting is unfair, cheating, unethical, unskilled, too easy, cruel, etc, etc, ad nauseum. A rifle too weak (under a certain arbitrary number created to exclude said cartridge) is unethical, one too strong (see 50BMG discussion) is stupid, unethical, etc, pick your word. Stand hunting is for sissies. Long range shots are for people who can't hunt. I was just having a discussion today about why, for example, wounding a deer and having it take 5 or 10 minutes to die is unethical but poisoning a mouse and letting it suffer for hours is perfectly fine. It all reminds me if the old saying, Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. |
October 13, 2013, 05:15 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: on a hill in West Virginia
Posts: 789
|
Just like everything else, if used correctly within it's effective range buckshot will kill a deer just as dead as a .50 BMG.
|
October 13, 2013, 05:34 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Manatee County, Florida
Posts: 1,976
|
I've taken just one deer with buckshot which certainly does not qualify me as an expert. But I'll share my experience. My folks lived near Calcutta, Ohio at the time and Dad knew a guy who let us hunt the edges of his apple orchard. The deer followed a heavily used trail to travel from a woodlot into the orchard. I hunted from a tree about 50 feet inside of the woodlot with an old single shot 16 gauge loaded with #1 buckshot. About half hour before dark, a line of deer came down the trail headed toward the orchard. I waited until a nice 6 point buck was practically beneath me. I aimed for the neck/back and cut loose with the 16. The animal fell right over and it was dead.
During skinning I was not impressed with penetration of those lead balls. The buckshot was stopped by the neckbone/backbone. Yes, the bones were broken apart but none passed through into the body cavity. Jack
__________________
Fire up the grill! Deer hunting IS NOT catch and release. Last edited by Jack O'Conner; October 13, 2013 at 05:56 PM. |
October 13, 2013, 05:45 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,968
|
its as "ethical" as a bow and arrow.... short range the buckshot will generally be more effective.
|
October 13, 2013, 05:53 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,342
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 05:55 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 13, 2013, 06:03 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 3,364
|
I go with Jack on this one. Years back I was up at my Brother-in-laws place and the neighbor stopped and said they wanted to drive the swamp as it was the last day of doe. I had a 12 Gauge in the truck and some odd shells. I grabbed some slugs and OO Buckshot. It was thick where I was standing so I loaded up with OO. A big doe came sneaking through at about 20 yards and I shot. She did not even jump. She turned her head and saw me and jumped right into the brush. The next year my Brother-in-law killed a doe there with a bow. The front half of the deer had spread out pellets in it. (Keep in mind this was in the mountains where nobody uses a shotgun). When they skinned the deer, they did not even know what the pellets were. The pellets went through the hide and stuck in the meat. The hide grew back over the pellets. Do what you want if it is legal, just be aware of the capabilities of what you are using.
|
October 13, 2013, 06:15 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 14, 2013, 02:34 AM | #19 |
Member
Join Date: November 30, 2011
Posts: 36
|
Re: buckshot for deer, ethics.
I dont consider it unethical in itself. However, one must take the situation into account.
I have taken two deer with buckshot. Both were close range, inside 30 yards. I was a last minute addition to the hunt and had only a shotgun available. I was shooting speer lawman 8 pellet OO buck. I was very familiar with this load in the shotgun I was using. I knew I could keep all 8 pellets in a 4" circle at 25 yards based on my experience. Both deer were DRT. Now, had the situation been different. Had I not been familiar with the gun, the load, and at a greater distance...now way I would have taken a shot. Too many variables to be certain of a clean, humane kill. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, just gotta be smart about it. |
October 14, 2013, 07:35 AM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Rittman, Ohio
Posts: 2,074
|
Like anything else, use it at ranges where it is likely to make a clean kill. It is illegal to use for deer in Ohio, and has been at least since the early 70's. In 1990 it was REQUIRED in a few populous areas of eastern PA. I think its more popularly used in some southern states where deer are hunted like rabbits, shot at short range, and the deer are German shepherd sized.
|
October 14, 2013, 08:42 AM | #21 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 14, 2013, 08:46 AM | #22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
|
|
October 14, 2013, 08:47 AM | #23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Rittman, Ohio
Posts: 2,074
|
Quote:
I don't know how long your deer seaon is but I would venture to guess that the number of varmint hunters in the field at any given time never comes close to the number of deer hunters out there at once, and that is the logic. |
|
October 14, 2013, 09:01 AM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 755
|
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. If someone is comfortable with it, great. Before I quit hunting I used a .270. Not only was I not as limited to shorter distance shots, it honestly helped me more(under pressure of adrenaline) become a much better shot. It has been more than 18 years since I stepped into the woods, but I say to each their own. I know a disabled vet that is wheelchair bound, he uses a shotgun with buckshot every season. He has permanent nerve damage and it is harder for him to make accurate shots without a rest. I say it is still useful. I know guys that will only hunt with bows, or long barrel pistols. I still think there is a place for it. 00 buck is now used in my HD shotgun.
__________________
" 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 |
October 14, 2013, 09:06 AM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
If you wish to use numbers to imply logic in that situation, also consider that almost all the Michigan deer hunting season shooting deaths have not come from "stray" bullets, but "mistaking" a person for a deer. In short, because the numbers indicating that a "stray bullet" is a very rare cause of death, the wisdom of the law restricting Southern Lower Peninsula seems to be based on perception vs. reality. The reality is, during deer season in rifle areas, if you are killed, it will be in a car accident not by a stray bullet. But you will find that no one seems to make much over that, but will lobby their legislators to make hunting season safer by getting rid of those dangerous "stray bullet" things. |
|
|
|