50-90 scores another buffalo

[ironramrod]

Josh,

Wowwee, now you're starting to ask the hard kind of questions. Your questions are excellent, but I'm not sure there is a solid definitive answer. However, I'll take a whack at them knowing full well that there are a multitude of answers, and likely all of them are right in 1 form or another.

First, in the book of Genesis we find that God created all the animals on the earth, and of course He created man. Additionally, we find that He breathed His spirit into man, but He did not do that to any of the animals. Thus, we know that man has a spirit, but based on scripture we don't know that the other animals do. In fact, it can easily be debated that based on the scriptures in Genesis the animals do not have a spirit. They certainly do have a mind, emotions, and will as well as the obvious body. Thus, scripturally, once the animal dies intuitively there is no spirit to go anyplace. There will be lots of other thoughts on this, but that is basically what the scriptures tell us.

The definition of humane is in a general fashion describing events in human terms. Death is not easily described nicely especially into human terms. I have seen deer and antelope die in the winters in this country, and they are almost sedated from being so stiff, frozen legs and ears and starving; they simply can't move. I question how much they could even feel in wind chills from -40 to -70 deg; they were still alive, but a very ugly scene. Walking around among them and putting a bullet in each head is not a fun job either, but letting them freeze solid (suffer more?) was out of the question. Is death in that form humane? Probably not, but I really don't know. Not easy to know what the deer are thinking or feeling, but I have to believe they weren't thinking about what is humane. The deer, the rancher, the hunter and the receptionist will all have different answers, but who is right?

Also, I have seen coyotes we had radio collars on pull down a deer fawn or catch a rabbit. It is absolutely brutal in human terms what 3 coyotes do to a deer fawn at least from a humane perspective. From the coyotes perspective this is how they prepare a meal; au jus in every bite. From the fawns perspective my guess they know they are dying and it is very painful, but again they aren't likely thinking about what is humane. Is death in this fashion right or wrong? Probably depends on who you ask; the hunter, the grocery store clerk, the coyotes and the deer will probably all have different answers, but again who is right?

My guess is that I have thoroughly clouded the questions, but at least I took a whack at them. Now, I have a question to help cloud it up even more. If as hunters we decide that certain forms of death are inhumane, are we forced to say by default then that the births that brought those animals into the earth to die in this certain manner was also inhumane?

Better quit; I think I'm giving myself a headache. There will be lots of other input.

Regards

[Texas Shooter]

Josh:

Maybe instead of trying to be a, "Humane Kill", it should be a, "Respectful Kill". All of the regular posters here seem to be people who love the outdoors, love our own history and how it relates to the outdoors, and like to treat it with respect and preservation, so that the next generation can enjoy and "touch" the past like we have been able to.

Life and Death is the way of Nature, and it's a nice thing to be able to participate in it directly. For me, it reminds me of my own mortality, and my own good fortune to be able to enjoy it that day. I tend to enjoy all the little things in life more.

Or in simpler words.

We are proud of our shared heritage, and want to be a good steward of it so our kids, and their kids, can enjoy it into the future.

Is this close? No one want's to waste a great buck by wounding and not finding it, or dump a bunch of garbage in it for the hell of it.

At least that's the way things seem to me.

If this sounds to, Touchy Feely", give me your opinions. Being outdoors is a refreshing experience.

Texas Shooter

[Buckskinner]

Texas Shooter

Being out in the great outdoors is what it's all about for me. I hunt all the time even on a trip across the country. I just take photo's instead of pulling a trigger. Getting in close to see and not be seen and I do like the wild meat. Then there are the memories, I remember the first Deer I killed, I was 11 yrs. old and my Dad helping me to field dress the animal. I will never forget that! I think the bottom line is to pass it on, if we don't pass this great land on to our young we have accomplished nothing!

Gary

[Josh A.]

Iron, we're close to the concept I am after. I believe that we should keep any discussion of humane kill firmly rooted to the norm in nature. In other words I don't want our kills distinguished from nature, I want us thought of as part of the natural killers.

In other, other words we have already lost the war of ideas if we let anyone frame the humanity argument in the human context. As in cruel and unusual capital punishment. In human terms we are trying to decide if putting someone to sleep before we kill them is humane, I don't want hunting kills judged by that standard because we lose in those terms. We win when we are viewed as just another natural killer.

By the way, I have always had a fear of dying so fast that I don't know I'm dead. I suppose if it is the last thing I am going to do on earth, I want to see it coming and know what is happening.

Take care,

Josh

[ironramrod]

Josh,

I can tell you have done a lot of thinking on this kind of thing. But I really wonder if as hunters we can win very many if any debates on justifying the act of killing an animal as humane. A more accurate definition of humane according to Webster is having the best chars. of mankind (e.g. tenderness, compassionate, merciful,etc.). The very act of death itself is more often none of these, and in hunting it is most likely none of these. I completely agree with you that allowing a debate on hunting to be framed in the context of humane may very hard to win.

However, as Texas shooter points out it may be much easier and possibly much more accurate to frame a debate on hunting as "respectful" in which it is much easier to outline the hunters respect for the animal even though the very act of killing may have been a little less than stellar. I really like Texas shooter's idea of respectful; a concept I had never thought of and I never heard it mentioned in the 40 years I was in the professional wildlife management field. As Gunny would likely say, "that is a damn good idea"; at least it sounds good initially. With such a concept it could be easy to debate that hunters are performing a valuable service in wildlife management by assisting in population management, and they are willing to pay their own way to do it. It isn't necessarily humane, but it is respectful. Additionally, they are willing to accept restrictions so that they don't cause excess mortality in the population, etc. All of this would be much easier to debate and defend under the context of respectful than it would be under the concept of humane.

Additonally, the whole concept of wildlife damage management could be easier to debate under the a concept of "respectful" than under a concept of "humane." However, I am more than willing that I may be wrong.

Your thoughts?

Regards

[mrrangerman]

Hi all.

Well I guess I'll put my 2cents worth in. The right to kill an animal is a God given right. The Bible says in Genesis 9:3 "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." In fact the first animal to be killed by anyone was killed by God, Genesis 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them." Now for the coats of skin to be made an animal had to die. The death of those animals was a picture of what Christ would some 4000 yrs latter do on the cross.

Now the issue is on humanly killing an animal, I would say it should be done in such a way to limit the animal suffering an undue length of time. Not like the bunny huggers idea of animal control. I was hiking in Northern California and came across an area that had signs to keep your pet on a leash, they had put poison out to help control the varmit population. I thought "now there is a bright idea", I wonder how many other animals died as a result of the poisoning. That would be a slow and painful way to go. The bunny huggers can argue all they want about taking the life of an animal yet if you were to pole the lot of them, I'll bet they have know problem with killing the unborn child. They have no concept of the value of life, do they even consider how many creatures lost there lives and homes the minute they built there big fancy houses?

Just some of my thoughts on this subject.

Good Shootin
Dan

[Omak Cowboy]

Killing and the qualities of death

Interesting line of thought and an interesting thread.

My few thoughts. First I'm sure many here have heard of the "seven-second" rule that states most wounded animals can run full speed for seven seconds even with a mortal wound. The reason for this is that even with no heart and no lungs the autonomic nervous system pumps blood by muscle contraction and hence supplies the brain with blood and oxygen for at minimum seven seconds. Good thing to remember is that if you are within that seven-second travel radius the animal can reach you...unless your shot is so devastating to the skeletal structure further movement is impossible.

Now on the qualities of death. I read some years back that the human survivors of lion attack report feeling absolutely nothing after the instant of the initial attack. It seems the brain goes into a deep shock state where there is little feeling and the consciousness is one of been removed from the moment.

I can report, from personal experience, that it's a sort of disembodied moment to moment consciousness wherein one is aware of sight, some of sound but little to no emotion nor physical feeling, nor is there any intellectual evaluation of one's surroundings.

I suspect animals have much the same lack of sensations.[/b]

[Texas Shooter]

Omak:

Interesting idea. I recently was involved in a automobile accident. At the exact moment I was hit, and for a couple of minutes afterwards, I could see and hear but don't remember feeling anything. Only afterwards, did realization and pain enter into my mind. It was like I was disconnected mentally from my body during that time. <------ Me and Shirly McClain Right??

I wonder if it is a similar experiance.

Texas Shooter

[Omak Cowboy]

Tex Your experiences in the auto crash were exactly the same as what happened to me. Funny, as I was reading your note I recalled a conversation I had with an EMT two days ago. He said that in some crashes the forces could be so severe that the aorta would be ripped and the person would bleed out right in front of you...but that they never knew what was happening and would be talking to you in a normal voice and then just collapse. Lights on......lights off!

I've also had circumstances, when I had my business in Pioneer Square in Seattle when the bums and drug dealers became a problem I had to deal with face to face. Now there are 108 separate points on the body where one can hit to produce various results. I've used these points and I have hit people with enough force that they remain standing but just like in the auto accident there is not much going on upstairs.
Omak

[Leatherstocking]

I guess it can't be over emphasised. Shot placement! I have taken 9 with Shiloh 45/70. All were one shot kills, but I followed up on two bull elk with addional rounds because they hadn't dropped yet. First rounds were killing shots, heart and lung, but my personal philosophy with elk is to keep putting lead in them till they stop breathing! Deer, antelope and bear all dropped where they stood. Shots out to 300 yards. Some with jacketed, flat soft head and some cast w/alloy! I believe pure cast propbably best on deer size game, not unlike round ball.

[canuck4570]

I also cast pure lead for hunting. WW for all target shooting. Have a couple bullets in my desk I keep to show the guys. Pure lead shot into a sand bank at 100yds., 500gr. round nose, one expanded to 1.010 and the other at 1.020!

what was your velocity... I am interested because I shoot a saeco 500 gr RN original and I shoot it around 1100 fps.... thank your

[Old Doe Shooter]

Bison hunts or a shoot can be a lot of fun, 45/70 or 270. One thing we should remember as was noted above in the 'humane kill' discussion is that the old timers placed ONE good shot and let the animal keel over and die is his own good time. Powder and lead were precious and it's hard to lose a bison if you just look a bit. Then again if there were millions who's looking very hard anyway.
I have shot two of the critters and seen a few more taken and talked to some guides who do it 20-30 times a year. Bison do not like anything in their lungs so powerful arms are NOT required BUT patience is. Since we ( hunters of the 21st century ) can usually see the bison we have a tendency to pour in more lead thinking a 'clean kill' means "bang.. whapp, on the ground". A deer or elk that takes off and runs 30 yards can be out of sight in a second and lasts no longer than a bison but looking at him dying somehow is supposed to offend even the hunter so we think more holes will hasten the process. Something that often does not happen with a bison. He's dead, he knows it, he's just not about to admit it until absolutely mandatory and he falls over. If you know you made a good shot, just relax, he's going down.
Actually, I'm told that too big caliber in a modern arm can be a bad a thing. Some of the premium bullets dont' open properly on a lung shot bison as they are constructed for penetrating lots of bone and muscle, like a shoulder shot on a Cape buffalo or a moose.
One GOOD lung shot is all that's required. Running up and poking him in the eye is not recommended protocol until a little time passes. Any fairly adequate BPCR with a good lead bullet will do the job nicely in that 100-150 yard range or even more. Few people eat lungs anyway so no wasted meat too.
A nice cow or younger bull makes a great robe as a trophy and a freezer full of good meat. Big bulls are for head hunters. Like antlers, horns make thin soup.
Shoot more critters have more fun. There is room for all God's creatures, right next to the mashed potatoes... (or potatos).
ODS

[Brent]

ODS - most accounts I have seen of buffalo hunters suggest that they shot 3-5 times per kill. I believe Sellers will bear that out and will others.


That said, I am in agreement about patience. If the shot is good, patience is in order. I've not shot bison but antelope and elk seem to adhere to this rule well. Antelope are about as tough as anything to kill in my experience. Deer seem to go down right fast however.

In a sense, hunting with a bpcr is something like hunting with a bow and arrows. Make a good shot, and then let it do its work. This does not sit well with a lot of modern rifle hunters but it does work for me.

Brent

[Old Doe Shooter]

Brent,

I've taken 17 'goats' and can't say any of them, except for one I botched, went much more than 10 feet. I've even flagged in for a fairly close shot. As long as you don't run a pronghorn or shoot at them running they seem to me to be one of the easiest kills. Calm animals of any species go down far faster than ones with their adrenaline up. I shot one at 12 yards
and I shot one 'way out yonder', most in between at modest range.
The close one walked towards me while I stalked towards him. I came over one edge of a draw as he came over the other edge. His last mistake. The far one I figured was at the edge of my ability but he was headed for a line fence opening and when he stopped to check on his lady friends. he managed to catch my bullet right where I figured I could take him. Sometimes you make you own luck. It was a shot I should be able to make and have the good sense not to take. Nice 14 incher too.
Mule deer go down pretty easy too, easier than a whitetail but few animals can go far with a 1/3" hole in their chest, let alone a 3/4" hole from an expanded 45 cal slug.

Bison and moose are not hard to kill. Caribou go down real easy. Elk die harder for sure as do bears. One bison stood there a while, thought over his life and laid down to cash out. The other ran 30 yards and when his nose started running his buddies took off for the high country without him.
Neither were really farm hunts, big plains, nice hunts. SD & WY.

Of course, there are still some guys, bp or wp, who just have to try the longest shot possible and IF or WHEN they hit something they don't let go for decades. They never mention the misses or wounded game.
But hit one and you never hear the end of it...... Like that 3/4" group I shot off-hand... ONCE UPON A TIME.

Get close. Shoot straight. Kill clean. I don't 'harvest' game. I harvest
oats. I kill game.

I dont have a clue how many big game animals I have taken. If I figured it our and write down here PETA might put out a contract on me.
I've been very fortunate to have hunted all over the world. I'm also an opinionated SOB to go with my experience. I read about it for sure, then I go do it and add my own experience, mostly modern arms admittedly but that probably holds true for most here too.

This coming year will be my first exclusively with my 1874 45/70. Ask me how it went come Christmas time.

Dave

[Old Doe Shooter]

Brent,

I've taken 17 'goats' and can't say any of them, except for one I botched, went much more than 10 feet. I've even flagged in for a fairly close shot. As long as you don't run a pronghorn or shoot at them running they seem to me to be one of the easiest kills. Calm animals of any species go down far faster than ones with their adrenaline up. I shot one at 12 yards
and I shot one 'way out yonder', most in between at modest range.
The close one walked towards me while I stalked towards him. I came over one edge of a draw as he came over the other edge. His last mistake. The far one I figured was at the edge of my ability but he was headed for a line fence opening and when he stopped to check on his lady friends. he managed to catch my bullet right where I figured I could take him. Sometimes you make you own luck. It was a shot I should be able to make and have the good sense not to take. Nice 14 incher too.
Mule deer go down pretty easy too, easier than a whitetail but few animals can go far with a 1/3" hole in their chest, let alone a 3/4" hole from an expanded 45 cal slug.

Bison and moose are not hard to kill. Caribou go down real easy. Elk die harder for sure as do bears. One bison stood there a while, thought over his life and laid down to cash out. The other ran 30 yards and when his nose started running his buddies took off for the high country without him.
Neither were really farm hunts, big plains, nice hunts. SD & WY.

Of course, there are still some guys, bp or wp, who just have to try the longest shot possible and IF or WHEN they hit something they don't let go for decades. They never mention the misses or wounded game.
But hit one and you never hear the end of it...... Like that 3/4" group I shot off-hand... ONCE UPON A TIME.

Get close. Shoot straight. Kill clean. I don't 'harvest' game. I harvest
oats. I kill game.

I dont have a clue how many big game animals I have taken. If I figured it our and write down here PETA might put out a contract on me.
I've been very fortunate to have hunted all over the world. I'm also an opinionated SOB to go with my experience. I read about it for sure, then I go do it and add my own experience, mostly modern arms admittedly but that probably holds true for most here too.

This coming year will be my first exclusively with my 1874 45/70. Ask me how it went come Christmas time.

Dave