davidmil - My argument is this - by your reasoning, if I have a 8 inch hole that I think I can slip an arrow into a deers liver, as he's quartering to me - if I think I can pull that shot off, you or anybody else better not second guess me or tell me I;m taking a poor shot, isn't that right ? Even if I wound 3 or 4 deer every year - if I think I can make those shots I should go ahead and do it and it shoudln't reflect on the hunting community in the least ?

I aint buying that. Theres bad shots and theres good shots. Zaft took a bad one, a quarering to shot is not bad, but difinitely iffy because of the responses of people losing deer with that shot. Broadside or quartering away is best, and of course you'll see some of those shots go bad occasionally to, but you gotta admit the percentage is low compared to other questionable shots.

pdq 5oh - Your racing impacts who ? You and who else ? Your archery shot selection impacts you, the deer you're shooting at and archery as a whole, because the anti's are constantly attacking on the one point of archery we as a whole cannot defend - that many animals are shot and lost every year do to poor shot selection. Thats the difference.

IroquoisArcher - Heres the deal on the Zaft story. You are an non-hunter, neither for or against it. You read this article - a guy whos suppose to be a really good shot, shooting at a deer thats in a very poor position to shoot at with a bow, wounds it, doesn't recover it, loses the meat and its declared a World Record (not officially). What do you think you would think ? I would think that this is normal archery hunting - taking poor shots and losing game. A LOT of people will see this as such - and it builds this image of slob hunter shooting at whatever moves, taking any shot over no shot.
Zaft did it, and might very well be rewarded with a World Record title. If he is, I will NEVER be a member of nor be a part of the P&Y Club. I will not support those who support that type of hunting. I hope P&Y sees this and recognizes the ramifications if they declare the Zaft buck a World Record.

Zaft did exactly what many would do. He took the only shot offered because he was looking at the rack and not the situation. He saw $ signs and self importance, not a living being that deserves our respect and a clean, quick killing shot.

Stealthy, My racing has nothing to do w/ bowhunting. I realize that & used it only as an example. That's all!! But if someone feels the shot they have is makeable (clean, humane kill) within their abilities, I see nothing wrong w/ them taking a shot you disagree with. People have to police themselves & not take irresponsible shots that reflect badly on bowhunting as a whole. I understand what you're saying here, but some people are at a higher level of skill than others & can make shots others can't. I hope I don't ever make a bad decision in a situation where I have a tough call to make. If something is outside of my abilities, I back off.
Given what happened to Zaft he looks bad in my opinion. I hope, as you do, that he doesn't get the reward of the world record. I wasn't there so I really can't comment on what happened at the time of the shot. He's probably not the only hunter to leave a deer until the next morning only to have it found by coyotes. The reason it is so much in everyone's mind is the fact that the deer was so incredible, a possible new record.
I hope you didn't get the impression I was attacking you. I fear what the antis can do much as anyone here!! It comes down to personal choice, can I make the shot, is it a good shot? Live w/ the consequences.


Edited by - pdq 5oh on 02/06/2002 13:36:40

Wahya - If that is true, then people in archery need to do something. Its by this very admission that anti-hunting groups will win IMO. Anyone who doesn't believe that - sit back, do and say nothing and watch your heritage go away.

pdq 5oh - You've missed my post I guess - I left a P&Y class 8 pointer in the woods in Kansas overnight because I wasn't sure he was down - and the coyotes did find him. They ate some guts - opening the body cavity up, they ate some of the hams too - I am guessing I recovered 70% of the edible meat. I was careful, and cautious, because I did not want to push a wounded buck out of the bottoms into the prarie - impossible tracking that would have been. I would make that decision again too. Which leaves me thinking how a pack only ate 30% of my deer and almost all of Zafts ?

That said, I truly think I have changed my opinion a little on quartering to shots. I think now that they can be good clean shots if given the right circumstance and if shot by the archer who can make the shot. Why the change ? Because of those of you who have made and will continue to make that shot (especially the guy on the Leatherwall, shooting a BW recurve).<font size=4> BUT </font id=size4> I highly reccommend waiting, especially for novice hunters and those who aint made a lot of kills. I still don't think its a great shot - even a good shot, but it is a makeable shot and not neccessarily a bad shot given the scenario.

I doubt I'll ever see how Zaft's buck could be considered a good shot though ...

Stealthy, I'm not sure what i missed. My comment about leaving a deer overnight was meant to say others have been forced to make that decision. I think your decision to do it was the right one. Do you know how long after the shot Zaft recovered his deer? I was of the impression it was the next day. I agree, that's allot of meat to lose in one night. If it was longer, I have a harder time w/ his getting the record. That opens the door to anyone finding a dead deer & getting in the books without even having to shoot it.
I will say again I agree w/ you on bowhunters being their own worst enemy if they take bad shots & just wound deer. But the people that have the skill to make shots others can't make, and shouldn't take, shouldn't be berated for it.

Phil.

pdq 5oh - www.zaftbuck.com - read the story for yourself and tell me what you think. He shot the deer, waited 40 minutes I believe, and searched that evening, the next morning and the next evening with nothing. He didn't mention a blood trail or anything - indicating a non-lungs hit, possibly even a non-liver hit. Only a couple of drops of blood too ...

Stealthy I agree, but how do you fight greed when hunters today are being taught that the size of the rack is all that matters. I havn't seen such obsession since the gold rush, lol. Anyway, as long as that mindset is at the forefront of the hunters reasons for killing an animal, you're gonna have people that will go to any lengths to get that big rack and it all boils down to personal glory and monetary value.

Forgot to answer your question, No, I do not think that any shot is better than no shot.

Thats not what I was taught!



>>>>--------o-->

The pig's and sheep and cow who's soul purpose is to be taken and slaughtered for there meat, do the deserve any less then these deer. The tree's that are cut, and habitat lost with millions of species all over the world, to plant soy feilds and any other crop that vegitarian's eat, does that not deserve a second look. I sit here and read the worry about anti-hunter's but they don't seem to worry how many animals they kill in the process of cultivating land for their food sources. As far as poor shot's, and being taught to only look for a rack. That isn't me, I could care less if the deer I get has antler's or not, as long as it fills my freezer and I enjoy its bounty through out the winter and spring. If I take a broadside shot, quartering away shot, who's to say whether or not something will go wrong. A 34 yard or Metre shot at a deer that is at a run or slow run, is not a shot I would take. The probablility is far gone out the window with that one. But a quartering to shot, or even a straight on chest shot with a deer that is not moving or not alert, I think those have a good probability factor, given the shot is within a persons comfortable range, and the peron has experience with live animals. As far as ethic's. It's a moot point, how can one person or a group of people, that can't even grasp what the word ethical mean's, push those of us who always have ethics in the back of our mind in the hunting community around. Why do we allow people that would sooner tear down forest's and tree's killing hundreds, even thousands of species. So they can have crop's from which to feed themselves. With human's it will always be a never ending conflict, hunter's can't win but neither can anti hunters. So lets just be ethical, because it's what we should do, for ourselves and the animals we hunt. If you or I feel comfortable taking a quartering to shot and are willing to put the time into tracking and everything else a hunter must do then do it. Just a few thought's. Good shooting.
Dylan

>>>>--------o-->

Stealthycat, thanks for the link. After reading the article, I get the impression he forgot about everything else after the deer was found. I guess the risk of such scrutiny outweighs the anticipated rewards of having a potential world record for some people. Who knows, maybe his shot wouldn't even have been fatal. It only injured the deer enough to allow the coyotes to kill it. This has been enlightening.
In answer to your question, which I see as the thread name, NO!!