Handgun Hunting story.

howell_jd

Adventurer
It's getting off topic again to compare a contemporary hunter (not necessarily outfitted with modern weapons) with a historic hunter. The latter was providing sustenance where few alternatives were available while the former (a solo hunter no less), who may very well be consuming the quarry afterwards but has abundant alternatives, carries implements in today's hunts valued sufficiently capable of providing more than just meat for a family for one month or more. Also the number of hunters involved when equipped with primitive weapons such as sticks, stones, longbow and flint tipped arrows were a work force not a hunt party...their success meant eating, low-percentage shots to demonstrate skill follow from sufficient supply.

There are enough skilled hunters, and novice hunters to be clear, who use blackpowder rifles, and pistols with ethical hunting practices. I would expect regardless of the method employed that a hunter has a responsibility to the environment and even the quarry - again not unlike "Tread Lightly."

Survival situations change everything I agree. No argument here. Animals first...I'll eat my vegetables later.

Jonathan
 

jh504

Explorer
I would like to see the ballistic numbers of an actual arrow fired from say a 60lb bow. I doubt you have any "cavitating" energy transfer from the arrow so you are relying solely on the actual hole to make the kill. If you could compare the same to a firearm round, I wonder what it would be closest to? Maybe someone with more "ballistic expertise" could comment on that one, I definitely dont know where to categorize that.

howell_jd, I grew up in Lauderdale County, MS, and still hunt there every season. Maybe we have crossed the same hunting paths?
 

Mr. Leary

Glamping Excursionaire
That's why you make another "fatal" shot at close range to make sure that it's dead. This is what I would do if I was hunting with a smaller round than needed to make a clean kill. Imagine your surprise if it jumped up and starting kicking you when you made you initial cut with your knife. I imagine that it was dead or you would have noticed that it was still breathing when you skinned it.
This practice will keep you safe and ease the concerns that you are making the animal suffer. Back in my days of doing brain research, we did many experiments relating to head trauma. There is a very small likelyhood of the animal feeling any pain in the minutes after the trauma. However, it is possible that in the following time period the animal will regain some basic brain function (it happened in some of the rats we put on dialysis). From this point, pain can re-enter the scenario, which is why it is important and morally praiseworthy to finish the animal off quickly.

The bigger issue is hunter safety.

From personal experience, I have never felt pain while unconscious... always hits me like a freight train when I come to!

Are there laws in Montana against carrying some slugs along with small game loads for your shotty? This situation could present itself again...

The deer couldn't have felt any less pain, there is no sense of pain when you're knocked out.
Not neccessarily, see above... yes and no.

"You have the right to be grilled. You have the right to be tasty next to the corn and potatoes on the plate."
My favorite post in this thread. :sombrero:
 
Last edited:

007

Explorer
It's getting off topic again to compare a contemporary hunter (not necessarily outfitted with modern weapons) with a historic hunter.

Jonathan
I know a few people that still do the primitive hunting thing (make their own weapons). Like you say, its not out of necessity, they are doing it for other reasons. I have a load of respect for these people and I also aspire to acquire this same skill set one day. I believe its akin to keeping our heritage, and staying connected to our roots. On another level, (and this may not be a bit practical), I like the idea of a few of us knowing how to survive without a drop of technology.

I'm not trying to justify a poor harvest by a modern day hunter with all of this caveman talk, I'm just delving into that gray area to add some perspective on the matter.
 

Bogo

Adventurer
Not to get off topic, but its widely agreed that slaughtering an animal the kosher or halaal way is the most ethical manner and the most hygienic method. Both methods involve draining the blood from the animal. Both methods do not allow for the animal to suffer any pain during the process or to allow the animal to see others of its own kind killed.
SNORT!!!! I wouldn't exactly think having your throat slit is painless. A stun bolt or bullet to the head that takes out the brain is much more humane and also not kosher.

Anyways, a modern well designed slaughter plant is much kinder than kosher rules allow for. Why, because the kosher rules haven't kept up with modern science. Why do the operators exceed kosher rules, because they understand money. Stressing the animal just before slaughter destroys meat quality which reduces profits per animal. A slaughter plant can only process so many animals a day and margins are very thin. Each one needs to generate as much profit as possible. Adrenalin makes meat tougher and darker, and that heightened state also burns off sugars that are present in the muscle. Both diminish the meat quality. Bruising from hitting equipment, etc. also causes meat quality loss. Bad enough and it will no longer be human grade. There is a major meat value hit when that happens.

Yeah you got to see an old slaughter plant. They go up for sale because the modern plants get higher value per animal so they are more profitable and take business away from the older plants. Eventually the full industry will wake up and abandon the old plants, but some still feel they can cut corners, but they eventually will pay for that. Meat buyers know what sells well and take their business to the modern plants first, then fill in the cheap orders from the old plants.

BTW, I am in the meat industry. I breed Black Angus for meat and carcass quality, and the family has been doing it for generations.
 

howell_jd

Adventurer
Army brat here

I grew up in Lauderdale County, MS, and still hunt there every season. Maybe we have crossed the same hunting paths?
While my family is originally from Mississippi, until this most recent assignment with ERDC in Vicksburg, MS I had never lived in Mississippi. We were able to get to Mississippi about every other year alternating with Tennessee. As a result my hunting paths are short in Mississippi primarily on the west side of the state...I do need to get out more often!

Jonathan
 

jh504

Explorer
While my family is originally from Mississippi, until this most recent assignment with ERDC in Vicksburg, MS I had never lived in Mississippi. We were able to get to Mississippi about every other year alternating with Tennessee. As a result my hunting paths are short in Mississippi primarily on the west side of the state...I do need to get out more often!

Jonathan
There are some decent sized deer over there in the delta. I killed my biggest 9 point in Chunky near I-20. To keep it ballistic related, he was shot at 50 yards with a 30-06. That round put him straight on his back and he never moved from that spot. The result was massive cavitation from the high energy round.
 

96discoXD

Adventurer
There are some decent sized deer over there in the delta. I killed my biggest 9 point in Chunky near I-20. To keep it ballistic related, he was shot at 50 yards with a 30-06. That round put him straight on his back and he never moved from that spot. The result was massive cavitation from the high energy round.
I use a 30-06 and have had similar experiences. I even dropped a doe where she stood at 165-170 yards with my muzzleloader. My brother in law ridicules the 30-06 and uses a 7mm rem mag. I tell him that additional kinetic energy can often be a substitute for superior marksmanship! With regard to the OP and subsequent responses I too believe that ethics have to be an integral part of hunting, but I will say in the defense of the OP that he seems to be an ethical hunter. Now, back to talk of tasty venison!:drool:
 

jh504

Explorer
I use a 30-06 and have had similar experiences. I even dropped a doe where she stood at 165-170 yards with my muzzleloader. My brother in law ridicules the 30-06 and uses a 7mm rem mag. I tell him that additional kinetic energy can often be a substitute for superior marksmanship! With regard to the OP and subsequent responses I too believe that ethics have to be an integral part of hunting, but I will say in the defense of the OP that he seems to be an ethical hunter. Now, back to talk of tasty venison!:drool:
I am currently hunting with a Remington 700 in 7mm mag when I need a scoped gun. It too, drops them dead in their tracks. I dont know what all of this talk about blood trails and trying to find kills is all about??:elkgrin:.
Seriously though I really like the 7 mag with my 700 because it is just SUCH a flat shooter. I am hunting with a short barrel open site .30-30 for thick stuff and I love that gun too. I hear a lot of folks talking about the 7mm mag and saying that there isn't really an advantage in using it over a .270. I think the numbers speak for themselves though. 3,003 ft/lb is some serious power.

.30-30-------------150 gr 2,390 ft/s 1,903 ft·lb
7mm Mag-----------150 gr 3,003 ft/s 3,003 ft·lb
.30-06-------------150 gr 2,910 ft/s 2,820 ft·lb
.270---------------150 gr 2,850 ft/s 2,706 ft·lb
 

coreys88burban

Adventurer
This is the type of post that gives hunters a bad reputation. Taking big-game with a small caliber pistol, let alone an underpowered small caliber pistol is unethical. I abhor such a posting as this. I would normally not make such a showing of distaste on the ExPo but this is beyond cruelty and reeks of sensationalism as well.

The author would have us to believe that he "skinned...and cut all the muscles from the the bone" of a still living animal - a MULE DEER BUCK at that (about 200lbs on average I would imagine - no small task...skinning requires rolling an animal of this size without the use of a gambrel). While I have indeed seen an animal skinned alive on the internet thanks to GreenPeace and PETA (although such eco-terrorist organizations have sufficient ill-repute to lead any to question their altruism), most hunters would in fact field-dress a deer to properly cool the meat and gain access to the most desirable cuts - namely the backstrap. Field dressing removes all the vital organs - but more importantly - the entrails to prevent tainting the meat. Removal of the organs is certain to render an animal dead and any uncertainty would be exposed by the visible pumping blood, functioning respiration, and (not quite a small spasm) muscle twitching.

I've seen my share of hit deer that kept going. I suspect that there are even cases of a stunned deer from a handgun shot but this just doesn't sound legitimate to me. Hollow point usage in hunting - for self defense perhaps but against the two-legged variety of predator not game. A hollow point is designed to do just what the author describes rapid expansion and massive transfer of energy in a short space. Spitzer rounds penetrate and normally an ethical shot is to double lung, liver, heart (if you are extremely accurate and LUCKY or fully equipped with optics and known ranges). An ethical pistol range is equivalent to bow-hunting range...like 35 yards or less.

I question the full truthfulness of the posting - perhaps there are elements of truth - I am not however impugning character here...plenty of folks exaggerate and I hope that is a case of sensationalism at worst.

I think the posting should be removed. What are the hunting requirements in Montana (if this is where the hunt occured)? I've hunted LOTS of places and in addition to a license I had to have a big game tag for the game animal I was hunting. Hunter safety courses abound in scope and professionalism but I would hazard a guess that .40cal ammunition (and HOLLOW POINT?) is NEVER recommended for large game ETHICALLY and/or perhaps LEGALLY.

I request that the moderators take the post down before this causes problems for our community.

I am a hunter. I would NEVER do this. I would never hunt with someone who would do this. I don't condone the actions of someone who would do this.

Bad, bad, bad.

Jonathan
i agree completely. next time use a bigger stick.
 

Klierslc

Explorer
I am currently hunting with a Remington 700 in 7mm mag when I need a scoped gun. It too, drops them dead in their tracks. I dont know what all of this talk about blood trails and trying to find kills is all about??:elkgrin:.
Seriously though I really like the 7 mag with my 700 because it is just SUCH a flat shooter. I am hunting with a short barrel open site .30-30 for thick stuff and I love that gun too. I hear a lot of folks talking about the 7mm mag and saying that there isn't really an advantage in using it over a .270. I think the numbers speak for themselves though. 3,003 ft/lb is some serious power.

.30-30-------------150 gr 2,390 ft/s 1,903 ft·lb
7mm Mag-----------150 gr 3,003 ft/s 3,003 ft·lb
.30-06-------------150 gr 2,910 ft/s 2,820 ft·lb
.270---------------150 gr 2,850 ft/s 2,706 ft·lb

IMO, 10% is not worth the extra cost of the rifle nor the extra cost of the ammo....
 

jh504

Explorer
IMO, 10% is not worth the extra cost of the rifle nor the extra cost of the ammo....
I hear what your saying, you could also throw in the extra bruising on your shoulder from the 7 mag. I actually paid much less for my 7 mag than I would have for the .270, which is why I bought it. It was the year prior's model and had been discontinued. 10% is still 10%, and I would feel confidant shooting almost anything with this rifle.
I am thinking of switching from a synthetic stock to a heavier wood stock and throwing on a muzzle break to take down the recoil a few notches though.

Some trajectory charts. Again the 7mm mag doesnt blow the .270 away, but does do a little better.

.270 150g--------------3"@138yd MPBR 287 yds

7mm RM 150g.-----------3"@150yd MPBR 305 yds
 
Last edited:
Top