It's not my poll, but I don't see why you shouldn't offer your opinion; I do all the time. Tell us that you would or would not take the shot, and please tell us why you would or wouldn't take the shot.
Just don't tell us we are un-ethical or bad hunters, or trash, or idiots or any of the other things some choose to call someone who doesn't meet their personal ethical standards.
There have been a number of threads on the ethical/unethical shot. I for one would not take some of the shots discussed but it is because of my skill and confidence level with a bow and that is all. I know my current limits and would not begin to try to tell a more seasoned archer which shot he should or should not take. I have been hunting with a firearm for 42 years and nobody will tell me how to hunt that way or what shots I should and shouldn't take since I've taken may over that time.
Well said brother Javi...if you chose not to take a certain shot....thats fine...even great....tell us you wouldn't ....that is fine...that is your right...just please don't dictate what another hunter should or should not do! I don't like liver but if you do thats great but I'm still not gonna eat it!!!
I will try to specifically address some of the questions.
Although kildog did not answer mine.
I would not take a neck shot, never have. I have seen quite a few very deadly neck shots. I have also seen a few that were not.
I have seen one heck of a lot of double lung shots, EVERY SINGLE ONE WAS SUCCESSFUL.
Until roughly midway through the now infamous neck shot poll, I never used, or implied the words ethical, or unethical.
I believe lower percentage was the term I used to describe neck shots.
I have made light of my shooting, montanans shooting, and even texans shooting. It was done in jest, and was received that way.
In all honesty, I can confidently say that I can stand toe to toe with anybody here, at any distance they desire. And I have harvested roughly 100 big game animals with a bow.
The ONLY reason I mention these last two points are to clarify that I PERSONALLY choose not to take these shots, but it has nothing to do with my shooting ability, or my nerves during the moment of truth.
I prefer a higher percentage shot that the double lung offers.
Can a deer, or other big game animal be harvested with a neck shot, or a hard quartering to shot? Or a butt shot?
Only a fool would answer no to these questions. It has been done many, many times.
Double lung shots are time in, time out, a killing shot. Even you guys know that. I am pretty sure that you were never argueing that point, but were argueing the point of any hunter telling another what shot to take.
DT explained to me his scenario with the antelope. I still am not in agreement that the shot was the best move, but his explanation sure made a huge difference in my opinion of it. What he described made perfect sense. Again, I would not have done it, but his words tell me that he had his thinking cap on the whole time!
Gotta run for a minute, if I overlooked something, let me know.
My apologies BC! Lets break that question down....sharing ones thoughts? That can interpreted several ways....If you are saying you would not take that shot and that it is a low percentage shot then the answer is NO... Now if your thoughts on that shot are that people who take that shot are moronic or idiots or wear wife beaters t-shirts then the answer is Yes.....Unless you know a paritcular hunter's situation or the where or whys then who are we to judge especially if it was a kill shot.....I hope that my answer did not offend you but I really don't care what shot you chose to take....you are the one who lives with the reward or the consequences...I can only decide for myself which shots I can effectively take or not....Just don't want someone telling me what shot is right or wrong for my situatuion...know what I mean BC.
Not true BC....I learn from other peoples opinions.....I like to hear what you would or would not do.....if you don't jive with me thats fine....I respect your right to differ....just please respect my rights to differ.....how did you interpret that from my last post?
Just as some guys came across sounding like if you took a low percentage shot you were a moron, there were guys who sounded like taking a low percentage shot was ok, for any archer at all times.
I'm not into taking low percentage shots because too much can go wrong, its just the way I feel. Although I may not agree for me personally, I can understand the reasons for a few lower percentage shots being taking by experienced guys, with excellent shooting skills and who know how to track. There's a big difference between an experienced guy taking a lower shot, who KNOWS he can make it, and a new guy taking a low shot, THINKING he knows he can make it.
Can you guys agree that a lower percentage shot is more acceptable by an archer who is well experienced and more than capable with his equipement, as compared to a "green" archer, or one who has a tough time even making the high percentage shots.
If a guy makes a bad shot I will, and have helped track all day. In the case of some of my very capable hunting buds, if I see a pattern of greedy low percentage shots, and lost game, they know not to expect me to piss away my day helping. IMHO the animal deserves better. Sorry kildog but this is a stupid poll.
I huess that if a hunter thinks the neck shot is the only way to go, that would not make him unethical. I do not agree with it,
but that is my opinion. I disagree that the neck shot is a high
percentage shot, or even one that shoudl be taken, bu I will not call you unethical if you did take one. I may tell you that it was a risky shot in my opinion, but would not hold it against you. The
marsmanship of one compared to another may also be different,
and one may make that shot every time with 100% success, I still would not agree that it was the shot to take. And for those that could not hit a 55 gallon drum at 100 yards, I would call them
silly for taking such a shot
heavy arrow...I agree sir!!! Fxxx....your catchin on...it is about as intelligent as some of the last few that have been on here....Thank you Mel..........Ditto Javi....its a shame more can't see it for what it is!
A good friend of mine killed a 14 point buck Monday. He was using a 60# longbow, cedar arrows, and Wensel broadheads. He took an almost straight down shot from a tree stand shot and spined it with the first arrow, then took 2 more arrows to end it's struggles. He felt the shot was a very good percentage shot. I would have passed the shot and waited for a better shot, or another day.
Ethics? He felt he could kill the deer, and did! Hard to argue with, but it could have turned into a single lung hit and a lost deer very easily. If you think an intentional spine shot is good, go for it. I wish you the best of luck, for the deer's sake.
A forum community dedicated to bow and crossbow owners and archery enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, performance, troubleshooting, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!