From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Bowhunting wound rates
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:06:46 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.164239.14987@clpd.kodak.com> black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236)) writes:
>In article <RIGG.92Oct5151040@osnome.che.wisc.edu> rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Tim Rigg) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct5.172447.22649@clpd.kodak.com> black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236)) writes:
>>
>>   Okay, let me quote Benke directly, rather than rely on my less-than-perfect 
>>   memory and imprecise terminology:
>>
>>      "While collecting deer in my research, I tied baiting and had an unusual
>>      experience - twice.  On two occasions spiked buck came in to my shelled
>>      corn at a distance of 15 yards.  In both instances I shot while the deer
>>      were broadside, with their heads lowered.  Both times the abdomen was my
>>      intended target, but that wasn't where I hit them.  At the sound of the
>>      shot, these deer turned 180 degrees and were struck in the back leg that
>>      had been opposite me. 
>>
>>If his arrow passed through the animal (which is very likely), he has
>>no way of knowing which was the entrance wound and which was the exit
>>wound.  Perhaps the arrow hit the inside of the far thigh.
>
>Interesting point.  So according to that theory, the 180 degree turn
>occurred after the hit?  Nothing in Benke's literal words rule this
>out, yet I don't think that's what he meant.  His style is generally
>too direct, clear, no-nonsense, and to the point.
>
>Also I find myself questioning the statement about the difficulty of
>distinguishing between entrance and exit wounds.  Assuming one can get a
>close look, is it always impossible to tell? My guess would be that
>sometimes yes, sometimes no - for the hunter in the field.  A vet or
>medical examiner would have a better chance.  There should be clues,
>like angle of the wound channel, direction of skin displacement at both
>ends of the wound channel, etc. 
>

With a bullet, it is generally quite easy due to expansion of the slug while
traveling through the body. The exit hole, if there is one, is generally 
much larger than the entrance. With an arrow, it would be extremely difficult
if not impossible, unless one were on an elevated stand shooting at a sharp
downward angle.
   If Benke was shooting at short range (say 20 yards) it would be quite 
difficult to follow the arrow in flight and determine exactly which came 
first, the hit or the turn. Even my relatively slow recurve (slow compared
to compounds) seems to reach a 15 yard target almost instantaneously. A deer
can swap ends fast enough to make the action difficult to follow. Overall, I
would guess that we are all guessing, including Benke. The difference, judging
from the quoted text, is that Benke won't admit it.
   Someone else (I forget who) brought it up, but it's still not clear to me.
Was Benke intentionally trying to gutshoot these deer? I find the thought 
sickening myself.


>Finally for those who question how far a deer can move in a split second,
>Benke, in his paragraph immediately preceding the above quote, writes:
>
>	"According to the experts, animals can completely evade an
>	arrow at distances of 15 to 'less than 20 yards.' (95,147)
>	This is undoubtedly true, which means they can also PARTIALLY
>	[emphasis mine] evade the arrow and become wounded.
>


I don't doubt this is true of an alert deer aware of your presence. But you
have no business shooting under such conditions.


Jeff Achenbach
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals