[SpeedAKL]

What do you consider as overkill on an animal, and do you care? I was having a discussion with some friends who shy away from higher-powered rifles for deer hunting not because of recoil or their ability to shoot them well but because they think that a .270, .30-06, .308, 7mm-08, etc etc, or even a 7.62x39 or .25-06 takes too much meat and is inhumane and excessive (they have a "take-only-what-you-really-need" philosophy, and they hunt for meat, not sport). They won't let me go out with a .30-06 or 7.62x54R for this reason. I don't particularly have a problem with hitting a deer with a strong all-round caliber like a .30-06 or 54R so long as the hunter can accurately place an effective shot.

Your thoughts?

Edit: I guess the better overall question is, do you lean more towards the "use only what is really necessary" or "it's OK to use what you want so long as you can handle the recoil/blast/etc and still make a humane kill?"

[Kimber1911_06238]

your friends won't let you deer hunt with an '06 or 7.62X54R? Get new friends

[Deer Hunter]

Use what kills them. If your "freinds" wont let you hunt with YOUR rifle, then tell them to hit the road. Find a new place to hunt. Personally, I don't think you can ever have "too much" gun when hunting. It's the Indian, and not the Arrow.

[MCgunner]

What do they hunt with, .22s???? Sheesh, I sorta think of 7 or 300 mag when I think "too much" and "meat damage", but hey, so long as the deer is down ASAP, and GOD KNOWS the 7 will put it down ASAP, so what? Eat what you don't screw up and shoot 'em in the ribs behind the shoulder to minimize damage. They'll go down and who cares about a little rib meat?

I don't get that much meat damage from my .308 load, Nosler 150 BTs and it kills 'em dead. I've killed a lot of deer with the .257 Roberts, same deal. I don't need no belted magnum, but hey, I want more than a .22 mag. :rolleyes:

[eliphalet]

None of the calibers listed will cause meat loss if the deer is shot correctly. I deer hunt with a 30-06 and I am a meat hunter. If my shot is placed right it will not ruin a pound of meat. I see nothing wrong with as fast a kill as possible and no reason to destroy meat in the process.
I would advise better informed hunting friends.

A deer shot with a 223 with the wrong bullet in the wrong area will cause much more meat damage than shot with a 375 H&H hit right.

[R.W.Dale]

In my mind if someone mentions Ethics and Hunting in the same post what they really mean is "Everybody should be required to hunt as I do"


BTW You hunt with a bunch of weird-o's

[.41 magnum man]

Would I be correct in guessing your philosophical friends are teenagers?

Humane killing and meat loss isn't even in the same category. Dead is dead. Making them dead with the least amount of suffereing is humane. Obliterating them with something like a bazooka, grenade or land mine comes under the category of "Waste." Don't pay those guys any attention, they don't understand what they are talking about. I classify people like that under "Mind over Matter." I don't mind what they say, cause it don't matter! :D

[Pigspitter]

your friends won't let you deer hunt with an '06 or 7.62X54R? Get new friendsI would be a little suspicious that your friends aren't Germans who are still a little bitter about getting whupped on by those calibers back in WWI and WWII

[SpeedAKL]

41 magnum: they're college students, so close enough

[Art Eatman]

Assuming Bang, Whop, DRT, there's no such thing as overkill or underkill. Dead is dead.

The only way to ruin meat is to shoot meat instead of the proper kill zone. Hams, shoulders, backstraps and tenders ain't proper kill zone hits.

SFAIK, some folks get all excited and forget what they're supposed to do, which is aim at a specific point on Bambi. They just sorta point at the middle of the brown, yank the trigger, and hope something good happens.

If you ruin Bambi's neck, it doesn't matter if you use a minimum cartridge or a .300 RUM or equivalent. If you center punch the heart/lungs, it doesn't matter if it's a little cartridge or a big cartridge, low velocity or high velocity.

And if you hit a deer or elk in a ham, most any cartridge of whatever size is gonna ruin meat. God didn't put a butt on a buck for an idjit to shoot at.

[birdbustr]

Tell your friends that the most humane way would be to jump out of trees with Bowie knives. See if they would do that.

What are these guys "ethical ways"? Are they using spears or something to give the deer more of a chance?

It sounds like these guys watch too much Tred Barta. At least he doesn't try to push his crazy ways on everyone else. Tred Barta even admits that his ways aren't the best ways to do things.

[86thecat]

Hunt with a medium bore Weatherby, put the shot behind the shoulder and ask them to show you all of the ruined meat. You may need some new hunting buddies.

[stan in sc]

Hunt with a 45/70.It kills and does not blood shoot a lot of meat.Like it is said about 45/70,you can eat right up to the hjole.

[qajaq59]

What you have there are acquaintances, NOT friends. Friends don't tell you that you must do it their way or take the highway. Go find someone else to hunt with.

[Kingcreek]

Overkill is when the animal is shot dead AND reincarnated before it hits the ground.
Art is right, dead is dead.

[mbt2001]

These "friends" sound like ignorant judgmental elitists...

Also, I hate the word "humane" when it comes to hunting. People are always throwing it around. Let me say this, the word HUMANE cannot be used in any conjunction with game animals or animals. Example, my Dog eats more regularly, eats better and gets better healthcare than 1/3 of the world. That is a sad fact. The word HUMANE is crap. We treat each other like sh$t. If we treated animals "HUMANELY" we would bomb them, throw them in prision and search their pockets.... I hope I am never treated humanely, which is to say horribly.

Stepping off soapbox now...

[cracked butt]

Shot placement matters much more than the cartridge if you don't want to ruin meat. A well paced heart shot behind the front shoulder with a .50 bmg will waste far less meat than a .243 through the front shoulder.

[retrieverman]

This is the silliest thing that I have heard in a while.

SpeedAKL, you haven't mentioned what calibers your so-called friends are using that is so much more "humane" than your '06. Like others have said, I would find somewhere else to hunt and some new friends.

[ArmedBear]

Inhumane and unethical?

I think that using a cheap scope that won't hold zero, a junk rifle that doesn't shoot accurately at the range in question, or an insufficient cartridge for the game, can certainly be considered inhumane and unethical.

Sometimes, that can sound "elitist", but I couldn't care less. I think you owe the animal equipment that is up to the task. It needn't be fancy or expensive, but "all I have is a .223" is no excuse for hunting elk with it, and if you know a gun is good for 6 MOA from the bench on a good day, it's unethical to use it on deer at 200 yards offhand.

But a .30-06? What's unethical about that? It's an accurate cartridge, shoots pretty flat, and makes for a clean kill.

[renriq02]

it can go the other way....

shoot the deer with a smaller caliber..and the deer will probably live for another few hours before it drops dead.

THAT'S INHUMANE! :barf:

imagine running around like a chicken that got his head cut off.
bleeding to death......and running around waiting to die. :eek:

[SpeedAKL]

The calibers they are using are .243 and shotguns

[ArmedBear]

Well, deer size/weight and hunting ranges vary from place to place, so it's hard to really generalize about calibers, except to say that the rounds you listed are probably the most common deer calibers in North America, and have been for many years.

Some experienced hunters consider the .243 to be borderline (i.e. inhumane/unethical) for deer, at least good-sized ones. That comes from their experience with light bullets. Having to shoot the deer several times despite acceptable shot placement is hardly humane.

Buckshot or slugs? It's hard to see how buckshot would ruin less meat than an effective one-shot kill with a 7mm-08, .30-06, etc. And slugs are big. Big means a big shockwave from the entry hole, i.e. bloodshot meat around it. And range is limited due to limited accuracy.

It's really hard to see where these guys get their opinions, and why these opinions are so strongly held, but I'd guess that the answer to both questions contains a 7-letter slang word for "rectal orifice."

Ditch these idiots, IMO.

[41magsnub]

It's not humane unless the critter explodes in a fine red mist upon impact of the round. That way you know they didn't feel anything. As a bonus you don't have to dress an animal!:evil:

Seriously though, humane in my mind is doing whatever it is you need to do to make it a quick and as painless as possible kill. Usually that is a mix of shot placement (meaning knowing how to shoot and the limitations of you and your rifle/ammo) as well as proper caliber.

Also, part of humane is using enough gun so that if you flinch, get a bad gust of wind, slip, or whatever and the round is not perfectly placed it still should kill the animal. That said, a truly horrible shot say in the gut will end badly no matter how much gun was used. Example, somebody might consider it ethical to hunt deer with a .22 because they are a great shot, but what if they miss slightly such as not getting a perfect head shot but instead hit low and punch a hole it it's neck and it runs off? Similar to the guy who only takes 1 round hunting because he never misses. Then at a 300 yard shot he slips and tags a critter in a front leg. Doh.. no second shot and a critter can go for a long ways and time with a leg shot. There needs to be a margin for error.

Agree with the .30-06, that will kill pretty much anything if using the proper load and placed correctly. That can be said about any round.

As far as overkill? There is a point at which the gun used would be ridiculous such as hunting a squirrel with .338. But, even if there is too much gun if the shot is placed right and the proper load is used the wasted meat would be acceptable. but, I would rather waste meat than wound a deer and have it run off and die in a ditch somewhere just to rot after days or weeks of suffering due to it's injuries.

[ArmedBear]

Note also that the .30-06 is probably the cartridge with the widest variety of available factory loads, and the widest variety of proven handload formulas.

In .30-06 brass, you can put a slow or fast, light or heavy load. ".30-06" by itself means almost nothing, when bullet weights range from 110 grains to 220 grains, and velocities from 2000 fps to over 3000.

A 520 grain .45-70 works quite well on jackrabbit. Getting the elevation just right is a challenge, though.:)

[springmom]

Did I read that right? They won't "let you" hunt with a .30-06??????

Now mind you, I hunt deer with a .243 (guess that would be an approved cartridge for your friends :neener:) but I do it because I am not terribly fond of recoil on my weenie little shoulders AND, more importantly, because it's an extremely accurate gun with good ammo.

But so is my husband's .30-06. I don't understand their objection, honestly. If you blow the lungs and heart to bits, you haven't messed up anything that you can easily eat anyway. A good lung shot will even allow you to keep the liver (assuming you have ice upon which to store it). What's the problem?

Springmom

[Loyalist Dave]

SpeedAKL

BOL@#*KS!
Tell them if it ain't a .54 patched round ball from a flintlock it ain't "ethical" as it's too much of an "advantage" to take game with fixed ammo from a breech loader. :what: :D

Seriously, The previous folks are correct. As long as you're accurate and hit the heart/lungs as Springmom wrote, or hit the spine via the throat or hit the brain, that's humane. The ethics comes in as long as you're a safe shooter, don't illegally take game, or leave the meat behind to rot. Damage the meat with a .30-06? Again as she and others wrote, a properly placed shot (be it .223 or .458 or in between) doesn't destroy what you're going to harvest and eat.

What your college friends have is a problem with aesthetics NOT ethics. As long as you're a safe hunter by identifying your target, the animal is harvested by legal means, and the harvest isn't wasted..., the rest is what they feel is the better way.

I prefer to use a flintlock as I find it more rewarding, but you'd be welcome with your bolt-gun with me during regular deer season. I hunted down in Woodstock VA a few weeks ago and was successful. My personal experience is that a scoped, rifle (mine is a .308) is too "easy" where I currently hunt but that's just me. Were I to hunt where the deer scarse and in wide open spaces, you bet I'd go back to my bolt-gun.

IF they won't "let you" use whatever, then it sounds like you're depending on them to take you hunting. I will paraphrase one of the first replies..., get new deer hunting buddies.

LD

[Deanimator]

Personally, I don't think you can ever have "too much" gun when hunting.
+10,000

No animal ever was lost because you shot it with a firearm that was TOO powerful.

I've never heard anyone before claim that WOUNDING an animal was "sporting". Sounds like an anti-gunner complaining that a .45acp doesn't give a home invader a "fair" chance.

[skinewmexico]

No animal ever was lost because you shot it with a firearm that was TOO powerful.

Sure it has. I've seen several people shooting something way too powerful wound animals that ran away, never to be seen again. Any rifle will kill an animal if you hit it where you should. Lots of people shoot too powerful rifles badly because they're afraid of them.

[jmorris]

The calibers they are using are .243 and shotguns Next your going to say they use buckshot....Looks like another example that crack doesn't smoke itself.

[Deanimator]

No animal ever was lost because you shot it with a firearm that was TOO powerful.

Sure it has. I've seen several people shooting something way too powerful wound animals that ran away, never to be seen again. Any rifle will kill an animal if you hit it where you should. Lots of people shoot too powerful rifles badly because they're afraid of them.
Please explain the causal mechanism in play that doesn't apply to any firearm.

Please also define "too powerful". The original subject was deer hunting. I doubt there are many people hunting whitetails with a .700 Nitro Express.

Hunting isn't like shooting an across the course match. Of course plenty of people have and continue to shoot across the course with .30-06 rifles. That's not exactly a 13mm Mauser.

I don't demand that people shoot .30-06s for deer hunting, much less a .50-110 Sharps. However, to portray the .30-06 as some kind of brutal mankiller on the shooter end is kind of foolish.

My first hunting trip that didn't involve North Koreans in the DMZ took place a couple of weeks or so ago. Instead, I've shot a lot of 600 yard NRA long range with a .30-06 loaded with 200gr. Sierras over a stiff charge IMR-4350. I'm a short, stocky guy who's never been mistaken for Sonny Barger. If I can take 20-100 of those at a time, I think the average person (including women) can take 5-10 150-165gr. .30-06s a YEAR.

[rc109a]

If their ethics prohibit them from shooting a round that the hunter is comfortable with then there are other problems that are not being talked about. If they are so worried about hurting an animal, then they should become vegitarians. I hope they don't eat beef or pork. They would be shocked to know how some ranchers kill them (I know growing in a family that owned a large ranch full of hogs and cows). Maybe they can just sweet talk them wild animals into giving up, and kill them with carbon monoxide (or talk them to death). Sorry I have to agree with 99% of the people here who say dead is dead. Yes, don't wound the animal, but kill it clean. I hate to see one of those guys break down in tears if they accidentally mess up the first shot and have to take a second one. Will they be able to see through the sights with all those tears in their eyes? Sorry about the rant...

[Joe Gunns]

PC by any other name still stinks. Their "ethics" sound posed. If your relationship with these boys is important enough to you that you are willing to buy a new gun just so you can maintain it, go for it. There is nothing inherently "wrong" with using your available calibers for deer.

[ArmedBear]

Please also define "too powerful". The original subject was deer hunting. I doubt there are many people hunting whitetails with a .700 Nitro Express.


I hit a jackrabbit with a 520 grain .45-70. I can say with good confidence that it was a clean kill. Nothing unethical about it.

[Shadow Shock]

I define "Overkill" as squirrel hunting with an RPG. .30-06 is fine, dead is dead. I'd feel infinatley more comforatable with my .223, but mainly because I know the rifle in and out. I know what it can do and am still looking for something it can't. I've dropped a buck in his tracks with my .223 at 300yd. I've seen deer shot within 50yd with a .30-06 run and never be found. Does it have to do with the round? No, it's mostly shot placement. The average hunter won't or shouldn't take shots past 300yd, and many need to be closer. I can tell you from experience that a well placed 55gr soft point will kill a whitetail at that range, so a .223 is all you NEED. Most people will feel much more comfortable with a bigger bullet though. I'll be the first to admit the .223 isn't the ideal deer hunting round for everyone. It is for me, but if .30-06 or 7.62x54R is the ideal round for you, then don't let anyone stop you from using it.

[alsaqr]

"The only way to ruin meat is to shoot meat instead of the proper kill zone. Hams, shoulders, backstraps and tenders ain't proper kill zone hits."

Good post.

i sometimes hunt in WV. When my deer is taken to the butcher, i like to look at the deer carcasses lying outside. It is not unususal to find a deer that has been shot three or four times with a high power rifle. Some look like they were shot with 75mm pack howitzers.

The owner of the shop says that a lot of out of state hunters bring in shot to pieces deer and then whine that he stole their meat.

These are the same "hunters" who are always looking for that magic bullet that will turn their gut shot deer into a bang flop every time.

[Pigspitter]

I don't believe in overkill, but the "I got me more gun than you' hunter peeves me bad. I have a friend that I won't let hunt with me because he insists on using a 7mmMag that he can barely keep on the target board and rarely puts it on the paper at 100yrds. I wouldn't mind it if he could shoot the gun, but I'm not cleaning a gut shot pig for him.

[alsaqr]

"I wouldn't mind it if he could shoot the gun, but I'm not cleaning a gut shot pig for him."

+1

My first cousin married a guy just like the one you describe. Only difference is that he hunts with an 8mm Remington Magnum. Every deer he ever got was gutshot. Most get away because he won't track them: He writes it off as a "clean miss" and won't even go to the place where the deer was shot.

[SD800]

My buddies in Nebraska use to hunt deer with 22-250 and .243's until we started hunting with them, hitten'em at 400 yards and putting them down one shot with our 300 mags and 30-378 weatherby's, a little over kill but no chasing them around. They have all changed to 7 mm or 300 mags.

[unreal45]

I think that using a cheap scope that won't hold zero, a junk rifle that doesn't shoot accurately at the range in question, or an insufficient cartridge for the game, can certainly be considered inhumane and unethical.

Sometimes, that can sound "elitist", but I couldn't care less. I think you owe the animal equipment that is up to the task. It needn't be fancy or expensive, but "all I have is a .223" is no excuse for hunting elk with it, and if you know a gun is good for 6 MOA from the bench on a good day, it's unethical to use it on deer at 200 yards offhand.AMEN best post I have read in a while.

[mikewalker]

You need new "friends" Your first responsibility is to a quick, humane kill.

What do your friends hunt with? Spears?

There is a reason F&W agencies have minimum power/caliber rules.

It's so an animal wont disapear with a minor wound and die a slow, painful scary death.

[bfhcards]

When I first looked into hunting 90% of those I asked pushed me in the 30.06 direction. I dont understand your friends sounds like you dont either. Good Luck

[CajunBass]

So I guess they knaw the bones, and tan the hides and don't waste a scrap of the animal, right?

I've been faced with the question a little differently lately and that involves killing more than I need. I love to hunt squirrels, but we've got plenty in the freezer right now. So I still hunt, but I don't shoot. I'll put the crosshairs on them, and think to myself "KRACK." (Haven't missed one that way yet. :D ) To me to keep killing them when I don't really need them would be "unethical." YMMV.

Some folks may think that's funny. "Why carry a gun then?" Well, I don't think it's a "hunt" unless you have the opportunity to make a kill. I recall a line from a Gene Hill story a long time ago that went something like "Sometimes the greatest pleasure in owning a gun, comes when you don't use it."

Maybe slightly off topic, but it's what I thought of when I saw the word "overkill."

Hunt with what you want to.

[alsaqr]

"So I still hunt, but I don't shoot. I'll put the crosshairs on them, and think to myself "KRACK." (Haven't missed one that way yet. ) To me to keep killing them when I don't really need them would be "unethical." YMMV."

i do the same. It is very good practice.

[AntiqueCollector]

I'd rather have more gun than needed to ensure it will kill the animal as quick as possible than to try a weak caliber and for whatever reason miss the right spot but still hit it and it takes a while to kill it. Not to mention I like to have a powerful enough gun for bigger animals (or the two-legged kind) in case defense is necessary (against a bear, for example, as unlikely as it may be, I prefer being prepared for any such situation).

[BsChoy]

I have never overkilled anything....once I killed it it was hard as heck to kill it further...the 30-06 is a great round and will do anything reasonably asked of it with destruction.