Where do you aim

[jungleboy]

I am not good enough to risk a head/neck shot I go for the the heart lung area and it seems to work fairly well. I have laid a good number of deer down over the years and I have had to finish a few deer where guys try to get fancy. We push bush for the most part and it is a rare occasion that i get an opportunity at a standing deer. so a head shot is not an option even if I was that good.
You shoot the shot you are presented with .If you cant hit consistently at 200 yrds at the range from a bench then you might think twice about a 200 yd shot in the field no matter what part of the deer you want to shoot at.

[stuckon308]

Originally Posted by sjemac

No. But I've tracked or found more than a few shot by some "jerk" who shot too far back and gut shot an animal. Not fun, easy, or quick.

A face shot animal may LOOK more horrific than a gut shot animal but the actual death is just as gruesome in both cases. Make the shots you know you are capable of.

Bad shots are bad shots. I once (after seeing him take 10 shots at a fawn that wouldn't leave) counseled a guy with a Lee-Enfield that was held together with duct tape to shoot at a deer's front hoof. After two more shots, he took my advice and hit it in the neck just in front of the shoulder.

Shoot where you know you can make the shot. The "jerks" will shoot regardless.

Originally Posted by catnthehat

A bad shot is just that, a bad shot, and head shots for the most part are a lower percentage shot than a lung shot.
I have shot deer in the head but much prefer a heart/lung shot for several reasons....
Cat

Cat knows where it's at.

I don't disagree that hitting a deer in the head will normally have him drop right where he was hit. But a head provides a smaller target than the heart/lungs/shoulder/spine. A deers head also moves quickly without a lot of notice.

Not advocating gut shots but a gut shot deer also can heal. I have seen a deer starve to death because the jaw stopped bleeding but without it's use, eating was impossible. My thoughts are that that death would be worse than a couple of hours of gut shot death.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by stuckon308

Cat knows where it's at.

I don't disagree that hitting a deer in the head will normally have him drop right where he was hit. But a head provides a smaller target than the heart/lungs/shoulder/spine. A deers head also moves quickly without a lot of notice.

Not advocating gut shots but a gut shot deer also can heal. I have seen a deer starve to death because the jaw stopped bleeding but without it's use, eating was impossible. My thoughts are that that death would be worse than a couple of hours of gut shot death.

Gut shot deer rarely heal. If you blow a hole through an animal's stomach and/or intestines it is 100% fatal and will often take many days to kill the animal as its own enzymes and digestive juices eat it from the inside out and the bacteria spilled into the abdominal cavity induce infection.

Again, it comes down to appearances. Guys can feel "better" about a gut shot deer because it doesn't LOOK as bad as a bad head shot. Same as how the anti's like to portray bloody seals on white ice -- the imagery is more vivid and hence the mind makes it seem "worse" than other killing.

A bad shot is a bad shot and I will guarantee you that there are at least 20 times more gut shot deer dying long lingering deaths every year than there are the rare deer that has a jaw blown off and is not recovered. I will also guarantee you that there are a lot of deer that are "missed' on the heart/lung shot that wander off to die a few yards into the bush -- I come across about a dozen or so in 318 every year. I've NEVER come across a deer with a jaw or face blown off -- not once.

At 200 yds, I'm taking a chest shot. At 50 yds and with a bipod rest on a stationary deer that I am not trying to save the horns on and I'm taking out the melon as it is ultimately the MOST humane shot to take.

I think a lot of what is being said here is simple projection. Some people don't feel comfortable taking a head shot and thus don't think anyone should ever take one. If you as a hunter (and I speak generally here -- not singling you out Stuckon) do not feel confident taking a head shot and have not practiced extensively in shooting under the conditions required to successfully make that shot reliably -- then don't. But stop waving the ethics finger in the face of those of us who do confidently and reliably make the shot.

[stuckon308]

To me it's not about ethics. It's about kill percentage.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by stuckon308

To me it's not about ethics. It's about kill percentage.

X2

I have made head shots and know I can make them, I just choose the higher percentage chest shot if it presents itself. I don't eat the rib meat anyways.

LC

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by stuckon308

To me it's not about ethics. It's about kill percentage.

Same here.

[aulrich]

It's alot harder to miss on a standing animal, both the heat lungs or even a solid liver shot is pretty deadly.

Now running shots have been known to make missing alot easier but that is another flame feast.

For me the bottom line is from the lowlyest gopher on up when you drop the hammer on an animal you have done everything to ensure there is no undo suffering, you owe them a clean death.

So head shots, long shots, running shots does not matter if you can make that shot most everytime then I am cool with it. But let me be clear that most everytime looks alot like everytime but with the reality that no one is perfect.

[Wisebuck]

I can't believe what I see here is the chest thumping of those that believe the higher percentage shot at the heart lungs is for those that, in the opinion of the "crack" shooters, can't shoot as accurately?

Lack of respect for the animal entices some to "flex their muscles" and shoot at a smaller target cause they can! Better hope you never have to eat your words!

The words coming from some of the "shooting experts" here disgusts me.

I would never take a lower percentage shot unless it is at an already wounded animal, and I am trying to finish an already botched job.

Sniper qualified and still shoot at the largest target I can to keep the odds in my favor!!!!! Animals move at the quickest speeds and I respect that.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Wisebuck

Sniper qualified and still shoot at the largest target I can to keep the odds in my favor!!!!! Animals move at the quickest speeds and I respect that.

Always the best bet IMO.
One examle of not taking a lung shot that I use is when a moose is near water - I try to anchor the shoulder then ( hope everyone knew the rabid gopher comment was a joke!!)
They typically try to get to water if wounded form y experience, and after field dressing few in the river and sloughs, I always advise the shoulder shot to try and drop them .
otherwise, heart/lung .....
Cat

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by Wisebuck

I can't believe what I see here is the chest thumping of those that believe the higher percentage shot at the heart lungs is for those that, in the opinion of the "crack" shooters, can't shoot as accurately?

Lack of respect for the animal entices some to "flex their muscles" and shoot at a smaller target cause they can! Better hope you never have to eat your words!

The words coming from some of the "shooting experts" here disgusts me.

I would never take a lower percentage shot unless it is at an already wounded animal, and I am trying to finish an already botched job.

Sniper qualified and still shoot at the largest target I can to keep the odds in my favor!!!!! Animals move at the quickest speeds and I respect that.

Do you shoot at flying birds? If so, why? A sitting bird is a much higher percentage target.

[Wisebuck]

Originally Posted by sjemac

Do you shoot at flying birds? If so, why? A sitting bird is a much higher percentage target.

Apples and oranges........don't confuse the issue......bird hunting is with a SHOTGUN not a rifle.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by Wisebuck

Apples and oranges........don't confuse the issue......bird hunting is with a SHOTGUN not a rifle.

How is it different? A shotgun fired at a stationary target is a higher percentage shot yet most of us are exhilarated when we take a fast moving bird on the wing. Those who skillet shoot the birds on the ground or water are generally looked down on.

Yet if someone takes a lower percentage but perfectly makeable shot on big game the frowning is reversed and folks climb up on their high horses and start yapping about "respect for the animal", ethics, and being disgusted about other hunters legal actions.

"But it is not sporting to shoot birds on the water" one might say.

If you want to get into the issues of whether something is "sporting" or not then my head shots are more sporting than most guy's center of mass shots because I must get closer, get a rest and wait until the animal is perfectly still before shooting. I pass up a lot of makeable chest shots in order to make the shots I prefer to make and that requires some very specific conditions.

Now last year when I shot my whitetail buck in 102 and only had one day to hunt I shot it at around 375 or so yards. That was a heart-lung shot. The buck fawn I shot out of my back field at 25 yds was a head shot.

I believe that I owe the animal the quickest death that I can give it under the circumstances. A properly placed CNS shot does that every time.

[Wisebuck]

Originally Posted by sjemac

How is it different? A shotgun fired at a stationary target is a higher percentage shot yet most of us are exhilarated when we take a fast moving bird on the wing. Those who skillet shoot the birds on the ground or water are generally looked down on.

Yet if someone takes a lower percentage but perfectly makeable shot on big game the frowning is reversed and folks climb up on their high horses and start yapping about "respect for the animal", ethics, and being disgusted about other hunters legal actions.

"But it is not sporting to shoot birds on the water" one might say.

If you want to get into the issues of whether something is "sporting" or not then my head shots are more sporting than most guy's center of mass shots because I must get closer, get a rest and wait until the animal is perfectly still before shooting. I pass up a lot of makeable chest shots in order to make the shots I prefer to make and that requires some very specific conditions.

Now last year when I shot my whitetail buck in 102 and only had one day to hunt I shot it at around 375 or so yards. That was a heart-lung shot. The buck fawn I shot out of my back field at 25 yds was a head shot.

I believe that I owe the animal the quickest death that I can give it under the circumstances. A properly placed CNS shot does that every time.

Look....a shotgun fires a load of pellets.... a rifle fires a single bullet.........hate to be the guy to break this news to you.........

they are different........see my point/

Oh by the way, I don't migratory hunt and I ground sluse all my grouse. If they fly, I chase them down if I can and try to sluse them. Higher percentage shot every time.!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mike_W]

Shoulder shots cause exsessive meat damage....I hate nothing more than cutting out blood shot meat and throwing it away. Admitidly the one animal I have shot in the head only was a moose and it was nothing gross and a 70-80 yards shot with the only thing open was the head. Field dressing and butching was great it was a nice clean animal no messy blood clots.

I still prefer shooting at a larger kill zone ...right behind the shoulder.

[elkhunter11]

Oh by the way, I don't migratory hunt and I ground sluse all my grouse. If they fly, I chase them down if I can and try to sluse them. Higher percentage shot every time.!!!!!!!!!!!

A good shot with a shotgun, can maintain a very high percentage shooting upland birds on the wing.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by Wisebuck

Look....a shotgun fires a load of pellets.... a rifle fires a single bullet.........hate to be the guy to break this news to you.........

they are different........see my point/

Oh by the way, I don't migratory hunt and I ground sluse all my grouse. If they fly, I chase them down if I can and try to sluse them. Higher percentage shot every time.!!!!!!!!!!!

A lower percentage shot is a lower percentage shot regardless of the tool used. According to your logic we should only be shooting at birds that are sitting since it maximizes the percentages of a clean kill.

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

A good shot with a shotgun, can maintain a very high percentage shooting upland birds on the wing.

Agreed. But not as high as they would if they shot them all off of the water or out of trees. Therefore, according to some here, they are unethical and showing a lack of respect for the game.

[Wisebuck]

Originally Posted by Matthew1996

Another thread got me thinking. Where do you aim on an animal rifle or archery?
I usually aim for the neck (rifle) and any deer I've ever hit in the neck has droped in its tracks.

I have IMHO portrayed the ethics that I hold for Archery and Rifle hunting animals. The op was not asking about shotgunning......... I won't comment any further on either as ethics is as disverse as a subect as any. I have stated mine, and the reasons why.

I guess to each their own and we can agree that we both see our techniques achieving what we believe to be fair to the game we chase.

[elkhunter11]

Agreed. But not as high as they would if they shot them all off of the water or out of trees.

I have seen patterns strike all around geese sitting on the water, and in several cases,the geese were only wounded. A goose with it's wings folded over it's body, can be much tougher to kill, than an upland bird with it wings spread in flight, especially considering that lead shot can still be used on upland birds. Having it's wings spread also increases the target area.

[Slash8]

Anyone ever go for a head shot on a goose in flight.........

[bb356]

Originally Posted by Slash8

Anyone ever go for a head shot on a goose in flight.........

I usually aim for the eye and get em in the neck !!!

[aulrich]

With the crappy penetration of steel shot, why yes I do try

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Slash8

Anyone ever go for a head shot on a goose in flight.........

if you don't then you are aiming a the wrong end!!
Cat

[Speckle55]

Heart and lungs for me and i will wait till i have that shot.

[Rather Be Hunting]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Always the best bet IMO.
One examle of not taking a lung shot that I use is when a moose is near water - I try to anchor the shoulder then ( hope everyone knew the rabid gopher comment was a joke!!)
They typically try to get to water if wounded form y experience, and after field dressing few in the river and sloughs, I always advise the shoulder shot to try and drop them .
otherwise, heart/lung .....
Cat

Very true.
RBH

[thefloormat]

heart and lungs, will wait and if that doesnt show, i don't shoot.

I dont want to put an animal through anymore suffering than it needs to, and I'm not going to say this for sure, but Imo I think there are plenty less things to go wrong with a heart lunch shot than a head or neck shot.

Provided your steady and can shoot, the only thing, aside from the animal taking a final step and getting gut shot, that usualy goes wrong is incorrect yardage. So your bullet or arrow should hit high or low, heart lung area is big so your covered if your off by a little bit, or you will miss altogether more than likely.

a quick google search led me to this article, first one I clicked on. He pretty much tells you all you need to know in the first couple paragraphs. He doesnt even say taking a head or neck shot is wrong or bad, bit must be executed perfectly.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/where_to_shoot.htm

I know this thread will get shut down, beause I know how a lot of people on this forum are, and how they react to being told no, or that they may be wrong/taken a risk/done something unethicle/ etc.

I hope that by having this thread, at least one new hunter will see how things should be done for the sake of the animal, and maybe tell another person who was misinformed or flat out didnt know.

There is a hunter education course for a reason, dont be embarrassed, if you feel you don't know everything, wether your old or young, go take the course. Hell take it with a nephew or someone and say your there for support if you feel like a tool going. If someone wants to take the course and know another adult will be there, I'll gladly sign myself up.

We owe it to the wildlife and each other to know what the f we are doing out there.

[thefloormat]

another article, second link brought up by google.

http://www.whitetaileddeer.ca/how-to...-best-shot.htm

Again, not saying the neck or head shots are wrong, so dont s**t on me for this, but not the best. And we should be doing the absolute most/best we can out there.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by thefloormat;1122817[URL="http://www.chuckhawks.com/where_to_shoot.htm"

http://www.chuckhawks.com/where_to_shoot.htm[/URL]

Excellent article..........very informative.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Bigger target = better statistical chance of hitting the target

Easier to hit the broad side of the barn than the magpie on top.

LC