RE: So, shot placement ......................
 

With few exceptions, including flies and mosquitos, I don't kill anything I don't eat and ALWAYS eat what I kill. It's a respect thing!

Bowhunter

RE: So, shot placement ......................
 

I would shoot at a nuiscence animal if it was doing damage. Good shot or not. With a deer you want to take a good shot because you can always pass and get another shot or let someone else get a shot, plus you want it to die quick with a lot of blood so you can find it and you don't want it to hit the guts and spoil any meat. With a yote or a coon it does not matter if you find it or spoil the meat and if you let it walk then you may not see it again and it can go crab some more fawns and turkeys or give another dog rabies. A gut shot coyote is going to die. I don't care if it drops dead in its tracks or runs a mile. I would rather save some fawns and turkeys and take the shot on the yote. Keep in mind this is if the animal is doing serious damage. I would only do this if making the animal suffer a little would prevent other things from suffering a lot.

I have got a question is blasting running rabbits and flying birds with shotguns ethical. I am almost positive some of those shots are not 100percent fatal and leave a few #6s in the hind leg of the critters.

RE: So, shot placement ......................
 

I agree that we should treat all animals with respects, no matter how small. However, I also agree that man is the dominant species, and our survival is more important the kind treatment of a few nuisance species. When farmers' crops are being raided by field mice, opposums, racoons, etc., it's not about respecting the animal anymore, it's about respect our fellow humans and ourselves! If the nuisance animals destroy the farmers' crops to the point that they can't profit, there will be no more farms. If ranchers are having problems with coyotes and wolves killing their cattle or sheep, it's not about respecting the coyotes or wolves, it's about the ranchers surviving. It's the same thing with deer. If the populations get oo high they become a threat to people. Deer/car collisions aren't just deadly to the deer, they can be quite fatal to people as well. I don't want to hit a buck and have his antlers stabing me in the face along with glass shards as he plummets through my windshield! Even int he instances where they're not fatal, I don't want anything moving at 35mphs hitting me in the head, especially a deer hoof! there's a point where it's not about "sport" or "recreation," it's about surviving and taking care of our own. 'Till it reaches that point everything should deserve the best treatment we can give it, but when it crosses the line it's survival of the fittest. I ain't eatin' no coyote or wild dog either!

God bless,
Brandan

RE: So, shot placement ......................
 

I think the only animals that deserve to suffer are rapists, murderers, child molesters, and the like. They're lower than any other animal mentioned above. I can see no reason to make an animal suffer, whether through a "marginal shot" or otherwise. If it's in your control to kill cleanly and humanely, I see nothing wrong. If a shot is taken just to shoot, without regard for the consequences, I can't agree. Anyone who takes "questionable shots" at animals considered to be "annoyances", just for that reason, is being vindictive, IMO.

Phil.
"Could you guys be quiet, my dad's trying to shoot."