Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
04-03-2003, 10:46 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere ND USA
Posts: 92
Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
Last year i had about a 15yd shot at this nice 3x3 it was the first buck i had seen all season because it just started and i was going to take the shot but there was a problem. The deer was looking right at me I already had my bow drawn on him ready to send him to a better place(my freezer) but i had a shot right into his brisket. my bow at the time was set at 51lbs and i was my arrow with a 100gr broadhead weighed 405grs. This is one of the toughest shots to take so i passed it up not wanting a wounded deer. Now here is the deal, the next month the deer gets hit by a car. I know it was the same buck because there isn' t very many bucks in my area. How about this for luck!!
04-03-2003, 10:49 AM
#2
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
No good looking back on a shot opportunity and second guessing yourself. Hunting is about right now, not months later. The shot didn' t feel right to you and you passed it up. That' s all that needs to be said.
04-03-2003, 10:56 AM
#3
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
I do not know. I tend to agree with Arthur' s approach to the issue but until I am actually placed in it myself I honestly do not know what I would do. Going by the book I do not think I would have taken the shot but, again, until it actually occurs.....
04-03-2003, 12:11 PM
#4
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blossvale, New York
Posts: 21,199
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
It' s a tough shot. It' s impossible to get both lungs. It' s possible to get the heart..... BUT.. it doesn' t take much for it to go all wrong. On top of that your equipment is marginal if it hits any heavy bone. I' d say you shouldn' t for sure. Everyone has to make his own choices.... but it' s tough no matter who you are. I' d wait for him to turn and hope he didn' t bolt.
04-03-2003, 12:18 PM
#5
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern NY
Posts: 148
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
I' d have to agree with the others. You have to see what feels right when you' re there.
I think I' d probably have passed it up as well. I' ve passed up larger bucks that offered a good shot during rifle season just because I knew I still had the whole season ahead of me. (It usually ends up haunting me later
)
I think I' d probably have passed it up as well. I' ve passed up larger bucks that offered a good shot during rifle season just because I knew I still had the whole season ahead of me. (It usually ends up haunting me later
)
04-03-2003, 01:49 PM
#7
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: AR USA
Posts: 889
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
I would have taken the shot. I' m already drawn and ready to release the arrow.
If I' m confident I can put the arrow where it should be, thwack.
but, you decided not to, and ultimately it' s got to be the hunters choice. so your deceison is all that matters.
If I' m confident I can put the arrow where it should be, thwack.
but, you decided not to, and ultimately it' s got to be the hunters choice. so your deceison is all that matters.
04-03-2003, 03:44 PM
#9
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,862
RE: Would You Have Taken This Shot? Ethical or Not???
bogobble
Well said, in a nutshell!
The term " ethical" is too often and too loosely used when deciding whether a shot should have been taken, especially by " Monday morning quarterbacks."
Some shooters use the term because he or she passed up a shot because he or she do/did not have the skill, the right gear, or the confidence -or all, to take any shot other than the commonly standard shot that is universally known. Therefore, if someone does take a shot outside the so-called norm, a shot that another would or could not take, the shooter is often found guilty of having taken an unethical shot, and, therefore, is an unethical hunter.
Last season, I took a buck under conditions near to what " The Shooter" has just described.
I was in one of my ground-blinds, 36" off the ground. Of three fire zones I had, one zone was a crossing that was 8 yards in front of me. I was in a treeline. Outside the treeline was a harvested bean field. Any deer using the crossing would be coming in, dead at me..
I had determined that there were two types of shots I would restrict myself to, and would definitely take if a deer came into the zone. 1) The standard shot, if the deer stayed in the field and passed broadside, and 2) in the front pocket between a front leg and the deer' s chest if the deer presented the necessary angle and front leg position.
I had a buck come across the bean field, headed for the opening. At 21 yards out, he stopped and was facing towards me. While stopped, he looked toward his left to a section of timber that six does had just went into minutes before his arrival. Eventually, he shifted his body to his left and his right front leg was back. I saw the pocket and took the shot.
The buck reeled backwards so hard, he fell. He fought violently to regain his footing and broke a leg as he stumbled again. He made 200 yards of open bean field, running erratically the entire way. He crossed a dirt road, went 40 yards and crashed in a heap. The arrow had taken both lungs, the heart, glanced off his left rib cage, and the shaft embedded the entire length, just beneath his skin.
Some would say that the shot was chancy and unethical. I would say to those who were not there and not in my head: I knew I had the gear, the skill, and, most of all, total confidence to put the arrow in the " pocket," I knew the hit would take at least one lung and his heart. I also knew that if he did not go down immediately, the hit would be fatal and he would eventually go down. I also knew where the areas were that the buck would go to lie down.
A shot is always the individual' s call. However, the shot is more righteous if he or she knows he or she has everything it takes to make the shot and the conditions are right. If I had been 18 feet up a tree, I would not have taken the shot.
It is uncontestable that there are shooters whose gear, shooting and tracking skills, and confidence is so inadequate, any shot they take is an unethical shot.
Well said, in a nutshell!
The term " ethical" is too often and too loosely used when deciding whether a shot should have been taken, especially by " Monday morning quarterbacks."
Some shooters use the term because he or she passed up a shot because he or she do/did not have the skill, the right gear, or the confidence -or all, to take any shot other than the commonly standard shot that is universally known. Therefore, if someone does take a shot outside the so-called norm, a shot that another would or could not take, the shooter is often found guilty of having taken an unethical shot, and, therefore, is an unethical hunter.
Last season, I took a buck under conditions near to what " The Shooter" has just described.
I was in one of my ground-blinds, 36" off the ground. Of three fire zones I had, one zone was a crossing that was 8 yards in front of me. I was in a treeline. Outside the treeline was a harvested bean field. Any deer using the crossing would be coming in, dead at me..
I had determined that there were two types of shots I would restrict myself to, and would definitely take if a deer came into the zone. 1) The standard shot, if the deer stayed in the field and passed broadside, and 2) in the front pocket between a front leg and the deer' s chest if the deer presented the necessary angle and front leg position.
I had a buck come across the bean field, headed for the opening. At 21 yards out, he stopped and was facing towards me. While stopped, he looked toward his left to a section of timber that six does had just went into minutes before his arrival. Eventually, he shifted his body to his left and his right front leg was back. I saw the pocket and took the shot.
The buck reeled backwards so hard, he fell. He fought violently to regain his footing and broke a leg as he stumbled again. He made 200 yards of open bean field, running erratically the entire way. He crossed a dirt road, went 40 yards and crashed in a heap. The arrow had taken both lungs, the heart, glanced off his left rib cage, and the shaft embedded the entire length, just beneath his skin.
Some would say that the shot was chancy and unethical. I would say to those who were not there and not in my head: I knew I had the gear, the skill, and, most of all, total confidence to put the arrow in the " pocket," I knew the hit would take at least one lung and his heart. I also knew that if he did not go down immediately, the hit would be fatal and he would eventually go down. I also knew where the areas were that the buck would go to lie down.
A shot is always the individual' s call. However, the shot is more righteous if he or she knows he or she has everything it takes to make the shot and the conditions are right. If I had been 18 feet up a tree, I would not have taken the shot.
It is uncontestable that there are shooters whose gear, shooting and tracking skills, and confidence is so inadequate, any shot they take is an unethical shot.
