Woman Kills Elephant with a Bow!

[61chalk]

If the death of the prey is the end of the hunt.....then gutting must be the beginning of dinner!!!!

 

[natman]

You can not approach dangerous game with a bow after it has been wounded, even if it's mortally wounded and might already be dead. That is a sure way to end up dead yourself. It might have died in 30 seconds or it might have died later. No one knows. An arrow into the heart of an animal is an ethical way to dispatch it. If you don't agree, you probably disagree with hunting altogether. They only leave the elephant as a precaution. I don't know about you guys but I'm not walking up on a wounded elephant with a bow. If you think anything is wrong with that situation you might as well be against bowhunting period.

You're right. All of this is an excellent argument against hunting dangerous game with a bow.

A rifle isn't exactly a laser beam of instant death by the way. Many animals who are hit with bullets do not expire instantly. Some of them are also dangerous game that have attacked and killed hunters after being shot even more than once. A bow that can shoot a heavy enough arrow at an fast enough speed is capable of humanely harvesting an elephant (as long as shot placement is correct).

I believe bowhunting is just as humane as hunting with firearms. If the hunter is taking a risk, it is a calculated/educated risk and that is a decision for the hunter to make, not you.

It amazes me to see people on a hunting forum who are only ok with harvesting one or two types of animals with one particular type of weapon. Anything else in their mind isn't acceptable. These are the same hunters that get our hunting rights thrown out the window when it comes time to vote. First it's banning bowhunting, then it's banning crossbows, then it's only one type of rifle...and pretty soon you've voted your way out of the sport entirely.

I think some people should just be honest and admit that their real issue is that they don't believe in hunting elephants at all. If this article was about a hunter who shot a rabid coyote with a bow instead of an elephant, I highly doubt there would be an argument.

Go back and read all three statements in context. If you do that you will see the following:

In the first quote the author says that it is too dangerous to administer a coup de grace with a bow. Let's assume that's true.

To my mind that's an excellent reason not to hunt DANGEROUS GAME with a bow, not an excuse for leaving a fallen animal to die slowly. If you drop the animal, you should be able to finish it off. If you can't, then you shouldn't be hunting it with that weapon in the first place. I highlighted the words DANGEROUS GAME in the hope that it would emphasize the point, but apparently to no avail.

No, a rifle does not always drop game instantly, but it's a far better tool to finish off fallen game than a bow.

All the rest is unsupported projection on your part. I've never said that there is only one good way to hunt or anything that can be responsibly extrapolated to support that I want to get our hunting rights thrown out or that I have anything against responsible bowhunting, elephant hunting in general or any of the other nonsense you've conjured up out of nothing. Your entire third paragraph is way out of line.

And yes, if this were about a coyote, I wouldn't have a problem with it. A coyote is a reasonable target with a bow. An elephant is not.

 

[atomd]

To my mind that's an excellent reason not to hunt DANGEROUS GAME with a bow, not an excuse for leaving a fallen animal to die slowly. If you drop the animal, you should be able to finish it off. If you can't, then you shouldn't be hunting it with that weapon in the first place. I highlighted the words DANGEROUS GAME in the hope that it would emphasize the point, but apparently to no avail.

Who said it died slowly? It didn't drop dead right there on the spot...obviously. Most animals shot with a bow travel some distance before expiring. How is an arrow through the heart of one animal any different than an arrow through the heart of another animal? Please explain why the coyote would be different. If you hit it in the heart (which the bowhunter in question DID), then what is the problem here? A bow that powerful is easily capable of penetrating an elephant's heart.

No, a rifle does not always drop game instantly, but it's a far better tool to finish off fallen game than a bow.

Who said anything needs "finishing off" anyways? One shot through the heart with any weapon should be fast enough and ethical enough for anyone.

All the rest is unsupported projection on your part. I've never said that there is only one good way to hunt or anything that can be responsibly extrapolated to support that I want to get our hunting rights thrown out or that I have anything against responsible bowhunting, elephant hunting in general or any of the other nonsense you've conjured up out of nothing. Your entire third paragraph is way out of line.

That wasn't 100% in reference to your post. It was a combination of your posts and many other ridiciulous posts prior to yours. I thought you might be able to figure that out by how it was a different paragraph that started with "It amazes me to see people on a hunting forum". See the word "people"? There was nothing "out of line" about that at all and I never directly accused you personally of anything so quit being so sensitive.

And yes, if this were about a coyote, I wouldn't have a problem with it. A coyote is a reasonable target with a bow. An elephant is not.
Last edited by natman; Today at 02:59 PM.

Ok...there's a reason why I would like to know how an arrow through the coyote's heart is any different than the arrow through the elephant's heart. I'm very curious about that part so be sure to include that in your response. We're not talking about going around making poor unethical shots on animals. That's a different subject matter altogether. She didn't shoot it with a .22. She shot it in the heart with a weapon easily capable of penetrating that animal's heart. She even trained for a year to make sure she could make the correct shot with the correct equipment. Why is that wrong? Since you are obviously an elephant hunting expert that would know why an elephant is not a reasonable target with a bow....you can explain that also. I'll bet that many professional hunters might disagree with you though.

 

[61chalk]

atomd...its ok to shoot coyotes because they haven't been on a Walt Disney movie,..like Dumbo. I saw a guy fill a 5 gallon bucket with sand, then shoot it with a 30/06, the bullet didn't come out the other side...he then shot it with a arrow an it had total penetration....so much for an arrow not having any penetration. I've shot deer with archery that ran a few feet, stopped an bled out an died in seconds, an have heart shot deer with a .12 gauge slug that ran 200 yds. before dropping an kicking around. So I suppose someone will tell me a .12 ga. with slugs should only be used on squirrels......

 

[kyle1974]

It's just like my grandfather used to say when those damn dolphins would screw us up once we got on the trout....


"no one gave a damn about those ******** dolphins until that "flipper" TV show came out

LMAO... God rest his soul.... He hated those dolphins

 

[natman]

Quote:
No, a rifle does not always drop game instantly, but it's a far better tool to finish off fallen game than a bow.

Who said anything needs "finishing off" anyways? One shot through the heart with any weapon should be fast enough and ethical enough for anyone.


Quote:
All the rest is unsupported projection on your part. I've never said that there is only one good way to hunt or anything that can be responsibly extrapolated to support that I want to get our hunting rights thrown out or that I have anything against responsible bowhunting, elephant hunting in general or any of the other nonsense you've conjured up out of nothing. Your entire third paragraph is way out of line.

That wasn't 100% in reference to your post. It was a combination of your posts and many other ridiciulous posts prior to yours. I thought you might be able to figure that out by how it was a different paragraph that started with "It amazes me to see people on a hunting forum". See the word "people"? There was nothing "out of line" about that at all and I never directly accused you personally of anything so quit being so sensitive.


Quote:
And yes, if this were about a coyote, I wouldn't have a problem with it. A coyote is a reasonable target with a bow. An elephant is not.
Last edited by natman; Today at 02:59 PM.

Ok...there's a reason why I would like to know how an arrow through the coyote's heart is any different than the arrow through the elephant's heart. I'm very curious about that part so be sure to include that in your response. We're not talking about going around making poor unethical shots on animals. That's a different subject matter altogether. She didn't shoot it with a .22. She shot it in the heart with a weapon easily capable of penetrating that animal's heart. She even trained for a year to make sure she could make the correct shot with the correct equipment. Why is that wrong? Since you are obviously an elephant hunting expert that would know why an elephant is not a reasonable target with a bow....you can explain that also. I'll bet that many professional hunters might disagree with you though

Please read the following carefully.

You can not approach dangerous game with a bow after it has been wounded, even if it's mortally wounded and might already be dead.

This is what the first poster said. Assuming it's true, then a bow is not a suitable weapon for DANGEROUS GAME, because even if it's POSSIBLE to make a clean kill with a bow, it is not GUARANTEED that you will, and you need to be able to administer a followup shot if needed.

I don't care if you can shoot a bow through a Sherman tank, in the real world not every shot goes perfectly and YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FINISH THE JOB.

If you start off a post with a quote from someone, then launch into a rant about what "people" do, it is not clear who you are talking about. It may have been clear to YOU that you were talking in general terms, but the secret to effective communication is not what is clear to you, but what you make clear to everyone.