bladeracer wrote:mchughcb wrote:Them weekend warriors, shooting doe roos in the guts?
Are there any here on this forum, because plenty of the fox photos seem to have the entrails hanging out.
Where the bullet comes out may be totally irrelevant to where it went in. I've seen lots and lots of deer pics where the bullet has come out down in the intestines, I don't make an assumption that that's where they were shot though.
mchughcb wrote:Really, I've never seen the guts come out of a sambar from a chest or head shot. Come to think of it, Ive never seen it out of a fallow, red or hog deer either.
What deer do you claim this has happened to?
bigpete wrote:I have from quartering on shots on fallow deer.
animalpest wrote:I think you also missed my comment about "ethics" versus "animal welfare". Two entirely different issues
mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:I think you also missed my comment about "ethics" versus "animal welfare". Two entirely different issues
Both apply to what I said though. All the 'animal welfare' for the kangaroo....an animal you can only take with headshots to 200m. Everything else though, goats, pigs, deer, brumbies you can legally use arrows, shotguns, heart shots, ass shots, 500m shots, even stab it while two dogs chew its ears off.
Its commercial politics.
bigpete wrote:mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:I think you also missed my comment about "ethics" versus "animal welfare". Two entirely different issues
Both apply to what I said though. All the 'animal welfare' for the kangaroo....an animal you can only take with headshots to 200m. Everything else though, goats, pigs, deer, brumbies you can legally use arrows, shotguns, heart shots, ass shots, 500m shots, even stab it while two dogs chew its ears off.
Its commercial politics.
Might have something to do with them being technically a protected native species....
mickb wrote:bigpete wrote:mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:I think you also missed my comment about "ethics" versus "animal welfare". Two entirely different issues
Both apply to what I said though. All the 'animal welfare' for the kangaroo....an animal you can only take with headshots to 200m. Everything else though, goats, pigs, deer, brumbies you can legally use arrows, shotguns, heart shots, ass shots, 500m shots, even stab it while two dogs chew its ears off.
Its commercial politics.
Might have something to do with them being technically a protected native species....
Yep its why I said politics.
bigpete wrote:I have from quartering on shots on fallow deer.
mchughcb wrote:Interesting. I've used a 358 Win and never seen that before. Not high enough velocity but
bigpete wrote:I've had a 180gn speer hot cor travel the full length of the spine in one and lodge just under the skin by its rump. If the angle had have been slightly different I can quite easily see it exiting the stomach area. Plenty of velocity, I run my 180gn pills at 2600 and I'm thinking of trying a different powder to get them to 2700
animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
bigrich wrote:bigpete wrote:I've had a 180gn speer hot cor travel the full length of the spine in one and lodge just under the skin by its rump. If the angle had have been slightly different I can quite easily see it exiting the stomach area. Plenty of velocity, I run my 180gn pills at 2600 and I'm thinking of trying a different powder to get them to 2700
think i was using ar2206h with that pill in mine pete
bigrich wrote:animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
i heard they banned bow hunting in tassie cause of animals wandering around with arrows in them . only takes one or two clowns to ruin things for everybody else
bigrich wrote:i heard they banned bow hunting in tassie cause of animals wandering around with arrows in them . only takes one or two clowns to ruin things for everybody else
animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
Sticking an arrow into a horse , or bullet into its heart, or into its butt running away, all legal so I dont see any difference regards kangaroos. If there is some scientific reason the native animal cant be, I have no problem with that.
on_one_wheel wrote:
I get your point... I'd say because it's done commercially, it has attracted a national code of practice to cover things like the human consumption, avoiding lead in meat with the head shot rule as well as the instantaneous kill factor.
They're was probably also a public image issue being covered at the same time due to drunken ute loads of shooters blasting from the hip with SKK's into mobs of roos on the run, that sort of stuff generally attracts some poor publicity eventually.
As for the extreme end of poor ethics like bowing horses and shooting donkeys in the testicles, there's definitely a long and growing list of people who've been prosecuted for cruelty to animals.
mickb wrote:bigrich wrote:i heard they banned bow hunting in tassie cause of animals wandering around with arrows in them . only takes one or two clowns to ruin things for everybody else
Id say the clowns ruining things are the ones who made the law mate. Using wounded animals to ban hunting in an entire state is dangerous precedent for all hunting. id rather have beginners, s**t shots, even a couple of bad people hunting, than lose the whole sport.
mickb wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:
I get your point... I'd say because it's done commercially, it has attracted a national code of practice to cover things like the human consumption, avoiding lead in meat with the head shot rule as well as the instantaneous kill factor.
They're was probably also a public image issue being covered at the same time due to drunken ute loads of shooters blasting from the hip with SKK's into mobs of roos on the run, that sort of stuff generally attracts some poor publicity eventually.
yep mate I agree, as I said a couple posts back I said commercial /politics reasons.As for the extreme end of poor ethics like bowing horses and shooting donkeys in the testicles, there's definitely a long and growing list of people who've been prosecuted for cruelty to animals.
well I dont think big game archers would consider their sport unethical, or care what non-archers think anyway. as to shooting donkeys in the testes, where did that come from?
bigrich wrote:mickb wrote:bigrich wrote:i heard they banned bow hunting in tassie cause of animals wandering around with arrows in them . only takes one or two clowns to ruin things for everybody else
Id say the clowns ruining things are the ones who made the law mate. Using wounded animals to ban hunting in an entire state is dangerous precedent for all hunting. id rather have beginners, s**t shots, even a couple of bad people hunting, than lose the whole sport.
I agree. But publicly it’s a bad look. And in these modern times of knee jerk reactions from politicians and woke/leftist/anti hunting propaganda , banning hunting is the result. Unfortunately some hunters have little in the way of ethics when it comes to taking a poor shot. Another forum member suggested poor behaviour/ethics should be called out as being unacceptable, and I agree. The game we hunt and the ferals we cull are living creatures and I try to have empathy and take clean shots. If I’ve got doubts, I don’t take the shot. And I always use “enough gun “ for the game at hand with the right loads. Simples
mickb wrote:
I agree with ethics mate but we can be as ethical as we like but there will always be drongoes, and criminals besides. I dont take responsibilty for bad shots or unethical shots in the sport anymore than I do professional poachers or gun thieves. Its a bad position to let the government think you are responsible and if they go banning the sport its on them, not us.
mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
Sticking an arrow into a horse , or bullet into its heart, or into its butt running away, all legal so I dont see any difference regards kangaroos. If there is some scientific reason the native animal cant be, I have no problem with that.
on_one_wheel wrote:
Ok, Now I'm confused as to whether you've been ..
a; questioning the need for head shots,
b; trying to work out why head shots aren't legally enforced on all species,
c; condemning anyone who shoots animals anywhere other than heads
d; arguing that the head shot rule is ridiculous
Fionn wrote:mickb wrote:animalpest wrote:
Politics or correct decision for our native species? All animals are subjected to animal welfare laws. Stick an arrow in a dog or horse and don't kill it humanely and see what that gets you?
Sticking an arrow into a horse , or bullet into its heart, or into its butt running away, all legal so I dont see any difference regards kangaroos. If there is some scientific reason the native animal cant be, I have no problem with that.
Except for the bullet into the heart, the sticking an arrow into a horse or its butt is illegal in Victoria.
mickb wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:
Ok, Now I'm confused as to whether you've been ..
a; questioning the need for head shots,
b; trying to work out why head shots aren't legally enforced on all species,
c; condemning anyone who shoots animals anywhere other than heads
d; arguing that the head shot rule is ridiculous
Mate you made good points about the commericial/political aspects which I agreed with so not sure the confusion crept in since then.
Only difference for me , and I was open about it early on, relates to your (a) my position is non commercially taking roos or for personal consumption I cant see a reason they can be shot like anything else we take or eat. Again, just my position, not trying to lobby against some code.
B,c,d - no one on the thread said anything like that.