So you’re saying that non lethal hits never happen? The point I’m trying to make is that you can’t lump every situation into the same category.
Montana should get in line with Idaho
- Thread starter BenInMT
- Start date
Certainly they do, but more often than not the animals dies if infection at a latter date.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
So what hunting methods should be legal in your world? Close range rifles only? .30-.30 and .45-70 for everyone? Max range of 250 yards? What if I’m more accurate at 450 than you are at 250? Oh and does this apply to all big game or are wolves exempt?
A good start would be the severe restriction of bowhunting by forcing bowhunters to use the same season as rifle hunters.
I dont have an answer on how you discourage shooting animals at 1000 yards and such.
As for wolves. To me they are not a game animal and as such the same ethics we apply to game animals doesnt apply.
Last edited:
Especially when they rely on their own set of alternate facts for what a game animal is and is not.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,922
I usually don't waste my time posting. I am not going to be as subtle as everyone else has been. You have cited nothing regarding science only opinion. Only an inexperienced fool would make such statements about wounding with a bow. You obviously have had some really bad experiences with a bow or bowhunters, either way those are your own experiences and opinion. Every hunt is different and every hunter is different. The weapon really doesn't matter. If you know your limitations and stay within them, you reduce your chances of a poor hit. Anyone that is an experienced hunter knows that. I am probably way more likely to wound with a rifle than a bow...ask Timmy.
Plenty of studies out there and they all point the same way.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,922
Post them and enlighten us. Lots of studies by anti-hunting types. Location? Species? Of course statistics can be skewed. Again back to what I said, I have never seen a weapon wound an animal. There is always someone operating that weapon. Blanket statements like you have been making are hogwash and fodder. You are entitled to your opinion but not your own alternative facts. You have no credibility as far as I am concerned. Have a good one.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
To whomever posted about residents being forced to pick a region to hunt, certainly I support that. I should’ve been more
Implicit. I thought it went without saying I’d be 100% for this
Implicit. I thought it went without saying I’d be 100% for this
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
Oh and back to off topic, bow hunters wound a lot more animals per capita than do rifle hunters. Should bow hunting be banned, I don’t think so. I do think ethically it is wrong to wound an animal and continue hunting and wounding more.
T
tjones
Guest
If you really don't know you probably shouldn't ask.
For the most part I agree with you on this. I base it on whether I feel there is a decent probability the animal dies. An arrow right through the top of the withers or skimming the brisket it’s the likely to kill an animal. Anything that penetrates the abdominal cavity is a guarantee.
T
timmy
Guest
A well placed arrow is just as effective as any caliber of rifle and will kill just as quickly. As for making Montana better blaming archers is laughable. 5 weeks of high power rifles has a far greater effect on animals. Having to choose a district would be a start. Sadly Montana doesn’t have much of an appetite for making things better, just worse.
A arrow is not as lethal as a bullet, period.
5 weeks of rifle.season proceeded by months of shoulder seasons do not help things either. However bow hunting in the rut and given the wounding rate is a disaster.
Infection can kill an animal months after being sliced accross the withers and especially sonif the broadhead is burried the flesh. Of course animals can survive with a broad head, or bullet for that matter in them. I feel more often than not this isn't the case.
I would really like to hear your rationale. Seriously.
T
tjones
Guest
Plenty of studies and science out there. I don’t have it handy. I’m sure you can look it up.
I was around for the delisting in Idaho and Montana back in the day. That horse got beat to death back then and seems to keep coming back to life.
Both members of the same family. All emotions aside.
