London Jaeger
Well-Known Member
If the client cannot make an accurate heart-lung shot, surely upping the ante to a far smaller target of a neck or head shot is a recipe for (more) disaster?
You are bang on the ball dunwater.Possession and use of thermal/night vision is perfectly legal, but a night vision scope designed to fit on a firearm is itself defined as a firearm under the 1990 firearms act section 4, (g) 1.
So is a “ silencer”.
Maybe there is a similar thread on a German hunting forum telling of a trip that ended in lost deer due to no professional stalker just a blokes mate doing a favour?I’m not a paid guide, just did a favour.
If the client cannot make an accurate heart-lung shot, surely upping the ante to a far smaller target of a neck or head shot is a recipe for (more) disaster?
Maybe there is a similar thread on a German hunting forum telling of a trip that ended in lost deer due to no professional stalker just a blokes mate doing a favour?
Nobody did anything wrong as far as I could see, distances were reasonable the hits were good and the marksmanship was adequate, what we got was different results from a number of shots into the chest/shoulder area with an unusually high percentage of losses. Had they been doing something obviously wrong or shooting badly I could have dealt with it, but they weren’t.Any idea what bullets they used? I've heard so horror stories lately and they have one thing in common.
You say that but please explain how a front on shot at the chest is a “chest” shot? It’s up there with a “Texas heart shot” for simply getting a bullet into a deer, not one that anyone in their right mind would consider for anything anyone would want to gralloch or subsequently eat? Or am I missing something about your description?Nobody did anything wrong as far as I could see, distances were reasonable the hits were good and the marksmanship was adequate, what we got was different results from a number of shots into the chest/shoulder area with an unusually high percentage of losses. Had they been doing something obviously wrong or shooting badly I could have dealt with it, but they weren’t.
The bullets were 140Gr 7mm in the 7x57R and 7x65R, 140Hornady SST in the .270 and 120Gr Barnes TSX copper in the 6.5, all good reliable rounds.
I’ve had similar issues myself with chest shots in the past to the extent that I rarely do it anymore, but never before have I seen such a high percentage of runners and losses.
Maybe there is a similar thread running in a couple of EU countries, I hope it gets a bit of a debate going, because I’ve tried several times previously to get them to at least consider shooting deer somewhere else. They’re quite happy to pop boar forward of the shoulder but not deer.
Front on in the chest with very few issues….? Hmm.More deer are killed with chest shots than any otheralso shot plenty deer front on in the chest, very few issues
Yeah you are missing a lot.You say that but please explain how a front on shot at the chest is a “chest” shot? It’s up there with a “Texas heart shot” for simply getting a bullet into a deer, not one that anyone in their right mind would consider for anything anyone would want to gralloch or subsequently eat? Or am I missing something about your description?
Nobody did anything wrong as far as I could see, distances were reasonable the hits were good and the marksmanship was adequate, what we got was different results from a number of shots into the chest/shoulder area with an unusually high percentage of losses. Had they been doing something obviously wrong or shooting badly I could have dealt with it, but they weren’t.
The bullets were 140Gr 7mm in the 7x57R and 7x65R, 140Hornady SST in the .270 and 120Gr Barnes TSX copper in the 6.5, all good reliable rounds.
I’ve had similar issues myself with chest shots in the past to the extent that I rarely do it anymore, but never before have I seen such a high percentage of runners and losses.
Maybe there is a similar thread running in a couple of EU countries, I hope it gets a bit of a debate going, because I’ve tried several times previously to get them to at least consider shooting deer somewhere else. They’re quite happy to pop boar forward of the shoulder but not deer.
140gr what in the two 7mm rifles?The bullets were 140Gr 7mm in the 7x57R and 7x65R, 140Hornady SST in the .270 and 120Gr Barnes TSX copper in the 6.5, all good reliable rounds.
lesson number 1, never take a shot on an animal unless you are sure it will land where you aimed it.I suspect you shoot/guide more deer shot in a week than I do in a year so I'm genuinely trying to learn here-
Given that accuracy/shot placement was only "adequate"- and the chest shot is the biggest kill zone on a deer- what solution/alternative kill zone do you propose ?
As far as I can see- the only alternative is a neck/head shot- which along with a % of dear dropping on the floor, and some clean misses- will lead to a significant number of horrific woundings.
Very happy to be educated here![]()
Yes very few issues, no one I know wouldn't shoot a deer in the chest front on.Front on in the chest with very few issues….? Hmm.
If having othet deer about is a problem your dog is poorly trained.A dog isn’t always the answer, there are too many other deer about, but it definitely would have helped this time.
lesson number 1, never take a shot on an animal unless you are sure it will land where you aimed it.
Yes very few issues, no one I know wouldn't shoot a deer in the chest front on.
So where does the bullet end up then?Yes very few issues, no one I know wouldn't shoot a deer in the chest front on.