Jump to content

Hunting, shooting and fishing poll


Anderoo

Hunting, shooting and fishing  

151 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you actively:

    • Just fish
      91
    • Fish and shoot
      24
    • Fish and hunt
      5
    • Fish, shoot and hunt
      33


Recommended Posts

I don't think my grandparents gave a hoot whether the foxes suffered or not, just as long as it was a dead fox that couldn't take any more lambs.

 

I understand that, and had I been overly concerned about the 100% quick kill then I would never have shot any. The reason I try to explain about shooting is to demonstrate to those who waffle on about how cruel the pack is, and how much better and more humane shooting is.

 

Of course shooting foxes always had it's place, being much simpler and more quickly organised, we would regulary shoot a couple a night and one evening at lambing time we took seven, thats more than the local pack took that week even after going out on call outs every day.

"Some people hear their inner voices with such clarity that they live by what they hear, such people go crazy, but they become legends"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 459
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I remember once an uncle of mine put three or four high velocity .22 rounds into a big hairy pyrenean type dog that was worrying some of his sheep. Despite hitting it three or four times the dog did not go down at all. He followed it to get a bit closer and brought it down with a head shot. The reason the other shots did not kill the dog was because the shells were spinning so fast that they were getting caught and tangled up in the dogs fur. To be honest Emma I don't think my grandparents gave a hoot whether the foxes suffered or not, just as long as it was a dead fox that couldn't take any more lambs.

 

 

What total nonesense, if he hadn't missed the dog the bullets would have gone through it like a hot knife through butter. :lol::lol: amazing, by the way the world is flat :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the effect of high veocity rounds on a body is unpredictable. by defintion they travel very quickly and so the trajectory can be straight through soft tissue and out of the other side. The injury caused may be a fatal one but as the energy passes straight through the body, it may not stop it in it's tracks, indeed it may run away to die of its wound later. Alternativley if hits something hard, the thighbone of a human for example then it mat behave erraticly, it may go into ricochet and exit through the top of the head. Low velocity ammunition is far more effective in 'dropping' the target. it hits with more 'shock' the energy following the bullet in and often staying inside as there causing massive trauma, and often without an exit hole. We need to use high velocity ammunition to get the range, its speed and shape make if far more stable in flight and therefore much more accurate than the slower typically blunter low velocity. It's true that one of the battle drills taught to soldiers is to check themselves for bullet wounds after a fire fight, this may appear crazy, as one might imagine that they would surley know if they had been shot! often they do, but not 'always' it is possible for a HV round to pass through the bodywithout hitting anything hard, and the soldier may well be so hyped up on fear, excitement and adrenalin that the pain is masked, and there is a danger for quietly bleeding to death.

 

If we transfer this sitation to the subject under discussion, shooting animals, then it explains why some foxes will be hit like that and possibly run off to die. Two shots will ensure a clean kill, head (brain) and heart and lungs. To hit the brain isnt easy, one needs to be good and have a properly zeroed weapon ans sight, it's a bit like trying to hit a golf ball (fox brain size) suspended by elastic, sometimes 200yards away one dark windy night by artificial light. The pack reduces the 'almost' variable to 'always', either the fox get away free or is killed in seconds.

 

I think you're confusing military ball rounds with hunting soft/hollow/frangible points Emma. A well designed hunting bullet used on it's target species is designed to not over penetrate. Look up varmint shooting videos, you'll see even ultra HV (over 4,000fps) bullets stopped dead dumping all their energy into the target, which literally 'explodes' from the energy transfer.

Geoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's late. I misread this.

 

 

 

MC

 

 

 

 

Well what is up with that ? It was a country tradition, friends, neighbours etc meeting for a chat etc, actually hunting the fox was just one aspect of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're confusing military ball rounds with hunting soft/hollow/frangible points Emma. A well designed hunting bullet used on it's target species is designed to not over penetrate. Look up varmint shooting videos, you'll see even ultra HV (over 4,000fps) bullets stopped dead dumping all their energy into the target, which literally 'explodes' from the energy transfer.

 

My response was prompted by your comment on miltary weaponry.

 

'I would think a .303 (or indeed any full power military cartridge) is a bit overkill on UK sized deer '

 

I do take your point (pun) about the differences in the types of ammo, however I still maintain the unpredictabilty of any HV projectile, and even hunting type has the potential to pass straight through soft tissue.

Edited by Emma two
"Some people hear their inner voices with such clarity that they live by what they hear, such people go crazy, but they become legends"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 303 for Elephants, It would be useless. Have you never seen an elephant gun ? :rolleyes:

 

A 303 isn't at all overkill for UK deer, have you ever shot a Stag ? People use 243's /30 06's etc for foxes.

 

I've shot a 4-bore, that count? I was on a Section 1 ticket until the bans, and still shoot regularly abroad. As I said the .303 has taken many elephants (hundreds?), a (famous in hunting circles) gentleman by the name of Paul Grobler hunted many elephant with a .303. Careful shot placement was of course key.

 

 

The 'elephant gun' is somewhat of a misnomer I think; it should be called the ‘short range dangerous game defence gun’. A large bore heavy hitting weapon, short barrelled for ultra quick target acquisition in life or death situations, such as a charging rhino in thick brush, wounded tiger, etc. etc.

 

 

I’m very surprised the Home Office allow the 30’06 to be used for hunting fox. And why would anyone want to? Even a little .22RF would do the job more accurately, with less recoil and noise, and for a tenth of the price.

Geoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that, and had I been overly concerned about the 100% quick kill then I would never have shot any. The reason I try to explain about shooting is to demonstrate to those who waffle on about how cruel the pack is, and how much better and more humane shooting is.

 

Of course shooting foxes always had it's place, being much simpler and more quickly organised, we would regulary shoot a couple a night and one evening at lambing time we took seven, thats more than the local pack took that week even after going out on call outs every day.

I'm not disputing the fact that the pack is humane. My beef was the claim that hunting foxes with hounds was 'efficient' and I just didn't see any evidence to support this hypothesis. I still don't. If I had a farm I wouldn't want a pack of dogs and 20 horses running all over it because I had a fox. That would probably cause more damage than the fox.

 

How many of your local farmers would have let the hunt all over their land if they were not tenants?

Edited by corydoras

The problem isn't what people don't know, it's what they know that just ain't so.
Vaut mieux ne rien dire et passer pour un con que de parler et prouver que t'en est un!
Mi, ch’fais toudis à m’mote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not disputing the fact that the pack is humane. My beef was the claim that hunting foxes with hounds was 'efficient' and I just didn't see any evidence to support this hypothesis. I still don't.

 

I agree with you, it isn't especially efficient, but it wasn't banned because of that, it was stopped because it was supposedly cruel, and they left alone the other, potentially more cruel methods of control.

"Some people hear their inner voices with such clarity that they live by what they hear, such people go crazy, but they become legends"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even a little .22RF would do the job more accurately, with less recoil and noise, and for a tenth of the price.

 

Yeah you can pop off foxes with a 22rf but they're no use at any range, if I was to use a 22 for foxes I'd use a centrefire. The 243 is far better. If your panikin about cost you just keep your cases and load them yourself.

 

 

elephant hunting

Edited by tigger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you, it isn't especially efficient, but it wasn't banned because of that, it was stopped because it was supposedly cruel, and they left alone the other, potentially more cruel methods of control.
I agree, I said as much to the one or two anti-hunting friends when the legislation was passed. Whilst they were celebrating their victory I told them that the fox had not won anything, that just as many foxes would be killed, if not more and many more would suffer slow deaths.

The problem isn't what people don't know, it's what they know that just ain't so.
Vaut mieux ne rien dire et passer pour un con que de parler et prouver que t'en est un!
Mi, ch’fais toudis à m’mote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.