From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Bowhunting wound rates
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:14:42 GMT
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center

In article <1992Oct5.172447.22649@clpd.kodak.com> black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236)) writes:
>In article <viking.718076141@vincent2.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>>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. 
>

There's the answer. "At the sound of the shot." Benke needs to quiet his bow.
This is possible. A couple years ago I shot a young buck at less than 10 yards.
He flinched and looked around, but didn't run. Apparently he had no idea where
the arrow came from. On Friday, I shot at a deer 20 yards away and the arrow 
hit a twig. Incredible how fast that deer turned and bolted. The arrow caromed
off into the trees and never came close, but passed above him before he could
turn around. Not a scientific test of deer reflexes for sure, but had the 
arrow flown straight, he'd have been one dead deer. The twig was about midway
between us, so I'm guessing that at 10 yards, at least, a deer won't be quick
enough to jump the string. And if he doesn't hear or see it (never shoot at a
deer who's aware of your presence- too risky) he won't try.
   Basically, Robert, I don't so much disagree with much of what you say. We
differ in our solutions. If any deer are wounded only to die and go to waste,
it's too many. But your solution appears to be a ban on bowhunting, whereas
mine is to become a better bowhunter and try to convince others to do likewise.


>   "When an animal jumps the string, it is virtually impossible for anyone
>   to place his shot.  Therefore, all the current talk about knowing the
>   limitations of one's shooting ability and the limitations of his
>   equipment is nonsense.  These limitations are established by animals'
>   ability to hear the release of the arrow and move a minimum of six
>   inches before it reaches them.
>

If you are shooting at an unalarmed deer, at a reasonable range, with a 
properly set up bow (quiet), string jumping will not occur. Failing to 
meet the above conditions, an ethical hunter does not take the shot.

>>	I suggest the latter.  I don't hunt with a bow because there is
>>simply not enough time for me to become proficient with it to the extent
>>that I am proficient with a rifle.  Both have inherent weaknesses that
>>only practice will overcome.  As we learned in the Indian wars, arrows
>>are just as deadly as bullets, 
>
>Did we really learn this?  It seems like many Indians were inordinately
>anxious to convert over to guns when given the opportunity.
>

Dead is dead, whether by arrow or bullet. The increased range and (later)
more rapid fire were probably more influential than relative killing
efficiency.


Jeff Achenbach
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals