From: black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236))
Subject: Re: Response to Bob Black (long)
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 17:36:02 GMT

In article <RIGG.92Sep23144540@valeron.che.wisc.edu> rigg@valeron.che.wisc.edu (Tim Rigg) writes:
>In article <1992Sep22.170523.6079@clpd.kodak.com> black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236)) writes:
>
>   My point was that hunters often seem so eager to cite the relative
>   humaneness of hunting compared with more natural methods of population
>   control.  Yet hunters have at times saddled themselves - apparently for
>   flimsy reasons of sport - with unnecessary restrictions that are likely
>   to block them from applying their humane solution (in this case it was
>   the very limited range of a particular weapon).  Why?
>
>Please see my post in rec.hunting detailing my recent trip bowhunting.
>In short, the deer was alive for about 20 seconds after being hit with
>my arrow.

In your post, you say he went down after 20 seconds but that you didn't
approach for 15 minutes.  Why do you say with such certainty that he
died within 20 seconds when you were 40 yards away?  It seems like the 
most you could say is that death occurred BETWEEN 20 seconds and 15
minutes.

>  I doubt a coyote or mountain lion would be so efficient.  A
>rifle would have been similarly effective.

Are you really saying that a rifle shot would also have taken from 20
seconds to 15 minutes for death to occur?

>The point is that the weapons are equally efficient _within their
>ranges_.  It does not matter to a deer whether he is 20 yards out of
>the range of a rifle or a bow.  However, the reduced range makes it
>much more challenging for the hunter.

Of course, most of these points are all obvious.  What does matter to
the deer is the amount and duration of pain.  The range per se or the
amount of sport for the hunter are totally irrelevant to the deer.

You don't say whether the deer jumped the string.  It's sort of implied
by your statement that you didn't see the actual hit, unless by that you
simply meant that the action moved too rapidly at the instant of impact
for your eyes to follow.  If the deer did jump the string, then he could
have moved in any of a hundred ways and I'd say you were lucky that the
movement occurred in a favorable way.

As for your efficiency point - Obviously you know (and I've been told so
many times that I've lost count) that arrows and bullets kill in
different ways.  Because of the way a bullet kills, it's much more
forgiving, and because of a bullet's flat trajectory, it's much easier
to hit the intended area. 

Here are some revelant quotes from Benke (who started bowhunting in 1949):

	My early experience with 'large game' were mystifying.
	Sometimes I saw arrows effect quick kills with seemingly
	poor hits; and I saw broadheads fail to kill with good
	hits, including lung shots.  Overall I'd say I lost three
	or four animals to each one I killed.  And of all the 
	bowhunters I observed, none did any better.  [p. 8]

	Even when I equipped my arrows with the elephant- and
	rhino-killing broadheads, I failed to consistently and
	humanely dispatch mere cottontails.  [p.9]

	Now, I have no quarrel with someone who has experienced
	three or four consecutive kills with broadheads.  That
	can and does happen ... To those bowhunters, I say shoot
	a few more deer or even a few small game animals.  Then,
	when possible, observe.  Or buy an animal and shoot it
	less than perfectly and, again, observe.  What you
	observe is exactly what happens to wild animals... [p. 9]

	The gun in the hands of the average hunter is at least
	three times as deadly as the bow.  [p. 15]

	I know of many people who took to the bow for hunting but
	gave it up after crippling losses without any take.  [p. 18]

Now I don't claim any particular expertise in this because I have never
bowhunted.  I note that generally bowhunters tend to deny what Benke
says and the bowhunting establishment opposes him.  One hunter relative
of mine took up bowhunting about 5 years ago and last year had his first
shot.  He scored a non-fatal hit and the deer escaped.  This greatly
upset my relative, partly because it had never happened to him in 20
years of successful gunhunting.  He swore off bowhunting ...  for a few
days - until he allegedly spotted the same deer, alive and well.  Did he
really?  Was he really sure that this was the SAME deer he had wounded a
few days earlier?  I find myself doubting it. 

---
Robert Black 
black@serum.kodak.com  - The ONLY email address that MIGHT work.
These views are not necessarily the views of my employers.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals