I know what you're saying BobCO. I do however, think this is a viable shot. The whole point I was trying to make is the sketched bone structure isn't accurate. The structure looks alot different....that's why I posted that link. Check it out, I think you'll see what I mean.

http://www.nbef.org/pdfs/elkshotplacement.pdf

Jason N - Your link says at the end of the document ..

" Remember!
Centerfire rifle hunters can shoot animals quartering toward them or facing head-on. <u>Bow and muzzleloader hunters should never attempt
these shots.</u> Rear-end shots should be passed up by all hunters.&quot;

What was your point again ??

Took me a while but I am finally around to answering. If you can put the arrow where you want taking the liver shot or the lung theoretically shouldn't matter. Personally I choose the lung shot cause I know it works and feel more comfortable. There may be more room at the liver, but the familiarity and comfort is there for the lung shot. At least that's my feelings.

Stealthy,After reading that you posted this on the LW I went there to check out what type of reponses you were getting.I was shocked at the number of Trad hunters there that said they would take this shot.in fact 34% of the guys there said they would take it.That is about the same as the compound shooters isn't it?

How do you feel about the statements you made like this one?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>With a recurve or longbow, I don't think 1 out of 100 would - they would wait <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

and this one
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Using high tech equipment, bone busting head, high KE bows make people think they can take a marginal shot. No or yes ?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Are you a little more then surprised to find out how many trad. shooters would take a shot that many feel is marginal?

Edited by - Charlie P on 01/31/2002 14:19:04

My point was that if the anatomy is shown correctly, not as much of the vitals are covered. I would take this shot. I'm confident that I could place and arrow through at least one lung and the liver....possibly both lungs.

If it were an actual situation....I would wait for a better shot. This deer looks like it's walking or is about to move his right front leg forward. This will increase my good shot odds. He doesn't look spooked either.

In all actuallity, I'd probably fall apart and not be able to draw my bow on a deer of that caliber! That isn't exactly commonplace in PA.

I just checked out the poll that you did here it was a little tougher to get an exact number.Some guys didn't post what they shot and some shot both,but it ended up that 42% of the people here would take the shot.

[Deleted by Admins]

I took virtually this exact shot with my compound back in 1984-relatively slow bow. The arrow entered quartering in just in front of the shoulder but at time of impact did not appear to penetrate far enough for a good clean kill. When the deer was recovered the arrow was broke off but had penetrated the heart. I believe the deer pushed the arrow far enough for a leathel shot by running it into a tree as he ran off. The buck had an inside spread of 28&quot; plus. All things considered I WOULD NOT take this shot again. At the time I was brand new to archery and did not realize the risk envolved with taking this shot. I don't believe this is an ethical shot even though I was fortunate enough to recover the animal.

With a recurve or longbow, I don't think 1 out of 100 would - they would wait

I was wrong, wasn't I ? I was VERY surprised by the response on the LeatherWall. That one guys made some good arguments for taking this quartering to shot. The last reply on this thread there was &quot; The results of about 3/4 of my dozen or so experiences with that type of shot (my bloodtrails and others') made me start to pass them up. I dislike long, dwindling bloodtrails. 'Specially when I think it was a sorry excuse to shoot. &quot;

I have always understood it to be a poor shot, and personally (and I have said this) even though its a good killing shot most of the time, I think its a high percentage for lost animal shot, which is exactly what this guy is saying too.

I think this topic is VERY important. It shows that about half would absolutely NOT take this shot. The other half would but almost all agree its not a perfect shot. I'm thinking a little deeper on this as well, but still would not take this shot. Why ? I cannot make this shot with my longbow all the time. I cannot gaurantee a clean kill. We've seen the posts here on a few who have lost deer with this shot - what does that say ?

NBEF says don't take the shot too, so whos right and whos wrong ? Is the shot a good one or isn't it ? I don't see how it can really be both ways with archery equipment.

kansaswiderack, I admire you're candor and honesty.

I would not hesitate to pass on this shot. For one I think the odds of the deer jumping are very high, but most of all the angle can only be described as poor.

I wonder how many would take that same shot at a doe or a junk buck. I can't help but think that sometimes the rack on buck's head distorts the thinking in the hunter's head.