quartering towards you

[pdk25]

Biggie,
Maybe I shouldn't have used the word fine.  Since I have never taken one of these shots and tried to recover the animal I can't comment as to how difficult is would be.  I know in the northeast without a good bloodtrail it can be very difficult to track given the level of cover. I am, however, interested in hearing the reports from others who have taken these shots.  Most of these individuals have already expressed that they prefer not to take such a shot and only would do it under certain circumstances.  I don't know what their relative success rate is when taking such a shot, but would be interested to know it.  Finding a 200 pound plus muledeer in an open plain when you can see it run forever may put some the odds in the hunters favor, especially if they are shooting 10 yards or less.  I don't take these shots, as I said before, but essentially calling people unethical will probably influence people not to share their experiences.  I would rather hear from them to draw my own conclusions.

[blueslfb]

WOW!!! Nothing like kicking over a hornets nest. Just b/c someone thinks it's not a good shot for them does not mean its not a good shot for someone else.  If the person has the confidnece and the skill to make the shot, whatever the angle, who are we to tell that person different.  I personally won't take angling towards shots but if someone else has the ability to do it, I will not tell that person he is unethical or just getting lucky.  I feel that any succesful shot made on a wary animal has an element of luck involved.  It is tiresome reading the high and mighty attitudes displayed on this site.

[SoNevada Archer]

Just for the record. If you read my 1st post on the subject...I did it because I needed to. And for all you others who think you know best for the rest of us...I've only done it the one time.
I'm done!

[Biggie Hoffman]

SoNev, I don't think anyone is saying they know what is best for the "rest of us" just that we are concerned about what is best for the animals we hunt and the lifestyle we love.

[JEFF B]

me i would never take a shot like that. i had the chance when i was over last year but passed on it. i was sitting on the ground against a tree (big mistake CHIGGERS) with my bow on the ground and my hand in my back pack when this deer came from no where so i just waved at her and she took off in a flash, LOL!!! it aint worth it i would only shoot when it was the right time when every thing feels good.just my two cents worth.

[Reg Darling]

Yes, I've taken some shots in the heat of the moment that i would tell others not to take and 've I've blown shots that should have been a "gimmee", but a frontal quartering shot is just bad--don't do it...really, if you do, you're just courting misery.

[Wary Buck]

I thought it was interesting that a renowned modern archer, Randy Ulmer, came out in a recent issue of Peterson's Bowhunting and said this shot and the straight down shot are bad for bowhunting.  I thought that held a lot of weight coming from such an accomplished hunter/target shooter (both), and also from a magazine that has several times published views to the contrary of this from two of their staff writers.  I hope people read that.

My own two cents.  I did the front-to-stern shot once...from the ground, on a relaxed and fairly clueless Sitka buck at 15 yards.  It was straight on, and I figure my kill area was darn near the size of a volleyball.  My arrow centerpunched him and sank to the nock.  He was down and out in about 60 yards and just a few seconds.  It was pretty spectacular, the way all of our perfect shots are, but the result of unusual circumstances.  It is the only time I've tried that shot on a deer-sized or larger animal, and may well end up being the only time.

I'm pretty sure I'd never take this shot again because the chances of being that close to a clueless animal and perfect straight on and from the ground...would be fairly small.  Add in any of the following variables--treestand angle, slightly quartering, wired animal, etc.--and I think you have a bad set-up and I'd not consider it with any one of those present.  In fact, I think the quartering to shot is a recipe for trouble (same as I feel for the straight down shot).

[Kingwouldbe]

Originally posted by Biggie Hoffman:
Never. If you have to kill something that bad...get a good 30-30.
Bowhunting is all about waiting for the right shot. Some days you get the bear, some days the bear gets you.

BIGGIE, why so much anger?    :mad:    

Are you on the trad-police patrol?        

I hope you NEVER take this shot angle.        

I killed the bear head on 5 yards.    :eek:  
   

Did you get your 30-30 yet?    

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

I shot a doe one time that was quartering away from me facing right and when my arrow hit her it entered the neck on the left side and the arrow penetrated all the way to the back right ham, killed her quick but I waited till morning to look for her because she jumped the string and I was unsure where I hit her. They can move pretty fast when you surprise them!! she swapped ends to see what I was and I dont know who was more surprised! I had a similar experience with an elk. Same result. I would not take the shot intentionally but it will work.

[Biggie Hoffman]

Kingwouldbe, no anger here. Just my opinion.

The problem with the printed word is no voice inflection. If we were sitting around a campfire talking, it wouldn't have sounded angry at all....

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I don't think Biggie meant it to come out like he was angry. As most have posted, they wouldn't take that shot. Is that shot any different then a Texas Heart shot? most may feel they are both unethical shots to do, but what is ethical for one person, may not be the same for someone else.

[Don Stokes]

Re the "Texas heart shot"- ethics do seem to change with the times. In a hunting magazine years ago, an article was published along the lines of, "Would you take this shot?" Each photo of a game animal had an opinion accompanying it from a known and respected archer. Under the photo of a big buck butt-on to the camera, Fred Bear was the commentator, and he said it was a good shot- lots of big blood vessels in the ham, and deer go down quickly when shot there. I've seen several deer taken with a ham shot, including a couple of my own when something went wrong at the shot, but I don't think anyone today would advocate doing it deliberately.  Personally, I'm a heart-and-lung kind of guy.

Ethics come from within one's self, not from someone else's opinion. Fred also said, on the back of a six-pack of Bear Razorheads that I have that were packaged in the '60's, that an animal should never be shot with a two-blade head alone, that the bleeder insert should always be used for the head to be effective (my paraphrasing). By his standard at that time, many of us are unethical in our choice of broadheads.

Biggie is right, of course. We as a group, and individually as well, should never advocate attempting to take a game animal of any kind unless we are very certain of a quick and humane kill. The high-percentage shot is always the best, period.

[Flatout]

I'm learning a lot from these posts.  It sounds like 3 problems with this shot:  Small blood trails, string jumping, and hitting the onside shoulder bones.  I do think it would be great if a bunch of you heavy arrow guys would do the Dr. Ashby test on some of your deer this year.  It would be helpful to hear if you were able to get an exit hole after shooting through the onside shoulder bones - of course you would need to include arrow data.  Sounds like most of the guys who made successful "quartering to" shots avoided the bones.  However, if you knew that even if you hit the bones you would still get an exit hole, it would boost your confidence on this shot.

Kingwouldbe, I can't believe how your arrow penetrated lengthwise through that mulie.  That was an amazing photo.

[Plug]

Among all the deer I've shot I can remember shooting two in the arse.  One was a bad shot. One was an arrow deflection.

I recovered them both.  One caught the femoral artery.  The other stopped against the far side femur and when the deer ran off the sharp magnus sliced up the ham to such an extent the deer either bled out or stopped running and I found her the next morning.

So should I post the pics of those 2 deer and say, "See, arse shots are good shots, I've never lost a deer with an arse shot?"  Or should I now aim for that nice big arse because I'm 2 for 2 on arse shots?

Anatomy dictates what is a good shot, not experience.

[Gehrke145]

Kingwouldbe great pics!  You should start a thread with your kill photos!  55lbs went through lengthwise I love it!

[hunt it]

It is our responsibility to know our equipment it's limitations and our ability and our limitations. If you are shooting heavy enough equipment/setup and you know you can make the shot the you must be able to live with the results. I've never taken a frontal shot except for a few between the eyes on hogs, one worked one did not. The straight down shot which is also controversial, is my favourite shot from above. I've lost track of how many I've killed with that shot, every one has died on the spot or within 30yrds. The Texas heart shot is not for the bow in my opinion. However, I've killed many an African critter with that shot. Not much going to run away from a .375 or .458 Lott up the arse!

[BobCo 1965]

Personally, I would not take a quartering to shot.

[DELTA]

Bowhunting is full of I SHOULD OF dont let this one become that.

[Biggie Hoffman]

It's also full of "I wish I hadn't done that"

[joebuck]