|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 3, 2004 16:45:44 GMT -5
This is the 1st deer I shot 42 years ago. My dad took me out. Didn't have a licence but he said that if we saw a deer he'd let me shoot. Was the last day of the season and never saw anything. We were heading for home and driving down a trail back to the road. This deer along with about 5 others were standing in the open about 40 yds from the bush. They were about 350 yds away. My dad stopped and before he could grab the rifle I was out behind the car, blazing away. Back then my dad shot a Lee Enfield 303 British with a 10 shot mag. The deer just stood there and had no idea where all the noise was coming from. After about 8 shots they decided to head for the bush and on the 9th shot this guy dropped. It was pure luck, not skill. Hit him in the middle of the back and broke the spinal column. He just sat there pawing with his front legs. My dad took the rifle and calmly finished him off. He had it mounted for me and it now proudly hangs of the wall of my cottage at the lake. Scored about 150. Taxidermy has come along way since that mount done.  |
|
|
|
Post by scott41069 on Nov 4, 2004 16:12:06 GMT -5
Thats a shooter for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russell on Nov 8, 2004 16:54:18 GMT -5
Nice deer. But let me think a minute: no license, shooting from the road, a youngster shooting a rifle at 350 yds, at the upper limit of the firearm, takes 8 shots, then finally wounds a deer (lucky shot)that has to be "humanely" finished off, wait a minute, does something seem wrong here or am I off a little. Guess the decline in ethics isn't something that has just been happening lately. Guess I am wrong but does the end justify the means. Just my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by duncan on Nov 9, 2004 13:14:49 GMT -5
just read the response by Russell and to me he seems a little too critical. Yup he was youngster and I gathered shooting at his first deer. Dad let him shoot with his rifle and his tag. Also critical of shooting from road. I read the post and he said they were on a trail leading to the road. Don't see anything wrong there. Says shooting at the limits of the rifle. I,m sure that rifle is deadly at longer ranges than 300 yds. Sounds like our shooter had a bad case of "Buck fever" which is understandable and which would explain all the shooting and missing. When the deer was hit it went down and was "finished off" by the father who was likely a more experienced hunter and shooter. Deer likey didn't suffer any more that one shot through the lungs and runs off a 100 yds before bleeding out. Sounds to me like the writer became an avid hunter since then and probably gained some experience. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by mamaflinter on Nov 9, 2004 18:38:22 GMT -5
Russell lighten up a little. I agree with Duncan in that you are being a little bit critical here.
I can say that although I wasn't there, he probably did have a case of buck fever. I only say that since I can remember seeing the first legal deer and my reaction when I saw it and how the events played out.
In my case, it was a clear miss and I shot right over his back. But the event didn't fail to get that adrenaline pumping and it was only a 3 point buck. Had I seen this deer, I doubt I'd have been able to stand for quite some time afterwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russell on Nov 10, 2004 9:25:57 GMT -5
LIghten up a little, I did, you should have read my first post that I deleted. Seems like no one cares about ethical hunting any longer, guess it is because we were all raised to do what ever it takes to harvest an animal. My dad would have blistered my backside if I had done what he did. I am sorry that no one seems to understand the unethical behavior here. Sorry for all of you that feel it was an not unethical nor illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by ABinMD on Nov 17, 2004 2:54:49 GMT -5
RAF,
42 years ago or not Congrats!
Al
|
|
