And this is why I personally don’t agree with head shots….

[25 Sharps]

What do class as damaged? A beast that has been shot as per best practice? Any beast that has been chest or shoulder shot in my opinion should never be classed as damaged game dealers who do shame on them just pure greed and have no respect for the animal, Dirty carcass I full accept.

Would you not class this as damaged then?

 

[Marc m]

View attachment 377537

Would you not class this as damaged then?

WOW

 

[Happy stalker]

View attachment 377537

Would you not class this as damaged then?

I would asking myself why so much damage, to ask anyone if they would class this as damage is just being rude

 

[Happy stalker]

And shot you take theres potential for it to go wrong and to leave an animal to suffer period. Your bullet might pencil through on a chest shot. You might pull the shot. Your rifle might have lost zero for a thousand reasons. It's not without risk and there's certainly no guarantee that everything will be perfect 100 percent of the time. I've lost animals to chest shots where they've ran in to thick cover and I've been unable to retrieve them. They were certainly dead but that's by the by, I can't confirm it. I've not lost one to a head shot yet.

Now on to ballistic turrets - if they ensure precision what's wrong with them? It's an aid for a longer shot. You might not have the opportunity to get any closer or it might be a shot on an already injured deer. Stick with your 100 yards broadside shots but you can't sit there and judge people for shooting them at a further distance.

What you say about chest shot and things going wrong that’s a fact of life but the potential of injury in my opinion should be reduced that’s why best practice states broad side chest shots should be the first choice there is an obvious larger margin for error unlike neck or head shots.
As for ballistics and turrets to shoot, the rifle ect could have all the bells and whistles but again the weak link is the human involvement, to many people watching YouTube videos am afraid go out and learn how to get close enough to minimise injury that’s exactly what should be done

 

[Sakoodin1]

Head shooting is fine when the beast is facing away from you. These clowns that shoot them straight in the face in or side on need there dmq and ground they stalk on taken off them! It’s just not the correct shot to take and desperation to shoot at something.

 

[gelert]

The important thing is we have an obligation to make a clean kill before any thought of loss of venison revenue comes into play.
I can see and understand the comparison with regards to head shooting rabbits and foxes etc, however on a personal level deer seem to bring out a respect that other quarry don’t, that’s just me.
I can also totally understand the need for head shooting in a park environment and the pros of conducting such things in an enclosed controlled manner.

In my eyes, the thought of an injured deer succumbing to an agonizing long painful death is not on my list of priorities..
However, I have taken head shots, and I have messed up and was able to rectify the error.
There will be shooters who are very competent at what they do, and there will be others who aren't. I will not dictate what shot they should or shouldn’t be taking.
Someone very experienced once told me if you head shoot at 100yrds, practice to 200,because one day things will go tits up.

Having a well trained dog is invaluable is this instance to follow up any wounded beast.
I evaluate and take each shot as they present themselves, with the decision to pull the trigger mine, likewise the guilt is mine to bear should I injure a deer.

 

[VSS]

Head shooting is fine when the beast is facing away from you. These clowns that shoot them straight in the face in or side on need there dmq and ground they stalk on taken off them! It’s just not the correct shot to take and desperation to shoot at something.

Facing straight away or facing straight towards you are equally suitable.

 

[Happy stalker]

Head shooting deer from a deer management perspective is something that I do especially if I wish to take out as many hinds out a group as I can but only if they are laying down then hopefully I have taken a few before the others stand up then it chest shots. This is on the open hill and at around 100yrds

 

[VSS]

The important thing is we have an obligation to make a clean kill before any thought of loss of venison revenue comes into play.
I can see and understand the comparison with regards to head shooting rabbits and foxes etc, however on a personal level deer seem to bring out a respect that other quarry don’t, that’s just me.

I think producing a clean an undamaged carcass is right up there as a priority alongside a clean kill.
To me, it doesn't show much respect for your quarry to kill it in a way that results in a significant portion of it going in the bin.
So, whatever your chosen shot placement, minimising waste should be a consideration from an ethical standpoint, not just economics.

 

[Happy stalker]

So personally I’m not against head shots but only done when the conditions allow it.
Certainly not when a game dealer dictates it that is a certain recipe for disaster

 

[25 Sharps]

I would asking myself why so much damage, to ask anyone if they would class this as damage is just being rude

Why is it rude? You posed the question, not me.

It is a text book shot that has gone a little low, bullets can do a lot of damage. It has been shot as best practice and is severely damaged, this can happen easily enough if you take leg or shoulder bone through the carcass with the bullet.

So yes, best practice shots can lead to excessive damage.

 

[VSS]

It is a text book shot that has gone a little low, bullets can do a lot of damage. It has been shot as best practice and is severely damaged, this can happen easily enough if you take leg or shoulder bone through the carcass with the bullet.

So yes, best practice shots can lead to excessive damage.

Do you happen to have a photo of it still in-skin? That would be interesting to see.
Often, the extent of damage doesn't become apparent until the skin comes off, so the stalker drops off a "best practice" carcass at the game dealers, blissfully unaware of what it'll look like without its jacket on. But there's no way that carcass should be paid for at the same £/kg as one that was head shot.

 

[25 Sharps]

Do you happen to have a photo of it still in-skin? That would be interesting to see.
Often, the extent of damage doesn't become apparent until the skin comes off, so the stalker drops off a "best practice" carcass at the game dealers, blissfully unaware of what it'll look like without its jacket on. But there's no way that carcass should be paid for at the same £/kg as one that was head shot.

Yes, that’s the point, all can look well with the jacke on not sure on bullet but I had a fair few like this with nosler 120 NBTs out of the swede, fewer now I’m using copper in everything.

I’ll have a look and see if there’s one in the skin.

Edit. I’ve found a photo, remember it now, I was out with Guy Stainthorp 6.5 creedmoor 129 gr ALBR. The beast in question is the one on the right no sign of the damage with her still in the skin. Incidentally Guy head shot the one on the left with a virtus copper bullet.

 

[Happy stalker]

Why is it rude? You posed the question, not me.

It is a text book shot that has gone a little low, bullets can do a lot of damage. It has been shot as best practice and is severely damaged, this can happen easily enough if you take leg or shoulder bone through the carcass with the bullet.

So yes, best practice shots can lead to excessive damage.

I think you would need to have read the whole thread any person should know what is classed as damaged and yes chest shot beasts can suffer excessive damage due to angle of shot ect, this is not my first rodeo

 

[25 Sharps]

I think you would need to have read the whole thread any person should know what is classed as damaged and yes chest shot beasts can suffer excessive damage due to angle of shot ect, this is not my first rodeo

I have read the whole thread, you are arguing that damage is to be expected and should be accepted rather than paying a premium for head shot deer. At least that’s how it comes across, that photo, especially in conjunction with the one of the deer in the skin, says otherwise.

 

[Tim.243]

Head shooting is fine when the beast is facing away from you. These clowns that shoot them straight in the face in or side on need there dmq and ground they stalk on taken off them! It’s just not the correct shot to take and desperation to shoot at something.

I shoot foxes front on in the head as often that is the only bit poking up looking at you from the grass/tram line.

 

[VSS]

Yes, that’s the point, all can look well with the jacke on not sure on bullet but I had a fair few like this with nosler 120 NBTs out of the swede, fewer now I’m using copper in everything.

I’ll have a look and see if there’s one in the skin.

Edit. I’ve found a photo, remember it now, I was out with Guy Stainthorp 6.5 creedmoor 129 gr ALBR. The beast in question is the one on the right no sign of the damage with her still in the skin. Incidentally Guy head shot the one on the left with a virtus copper bullet.

View attachment 377552

That's interesting, thanks.
I wouldn't advise anyone to take headshots. In fact, I would caution against it. Only the individual shooter can make the decision, based on their own honest appraisal of their own capabilities. But anyone who's got the necessary skill to do so, with consistent results, and produce damage free carcasses, shouldn't ever be criticised for doing so.
And there certainly shouldn't be any grumbling about game dealers paying a premium for better carcasses. Nobody is forcing anyone to take unethical shots. If you choose to chest shoot, then you choose to accept the chest shot price, and be happy with it.

 

[patjack]

Head Shot that did not go to plan and wandered on to a our permission, was a good few days before a safe humane shot ended the suffering.

 

[Happy stalker]

I have read the whole thread, you are arguing that damage is to be expected and should be accepted rather than paying a premium for head shot deer. At least that’s how it comes across, that photo, especially in conjunction with the one of the deer in the skin, says otherwise.

I am not arguing anything what I am saying is that game dealers should not be putting money before animal welfare it’s that simple.
The photo you posted **** happens but at least the beast was down, unlike a head shot taken because a game dealer dictated it with the real potential to go horribly wrong so it’s not an argument it’s my opinion I think I have enough years behind me in this game to know what is right or wrong animal welfare should always come before money anyone who doesn’t agree with that is not worth talking to

 

[Happy stalker]

Head Shot that did not go to plan and wandered on to an our permission, was a good few days before a safe humane shot ended the suffering.

Well done for getting the beast and ending its suffering, I wonder how many are never found, if that happened to anyone on the open hill or a large forestry block it would never have been found.