Gun Choice: Sporting chances for game vs. humane kills?

Smaug

New member
As a result of my earlier thread where I was looking for someone to help me out with getting started in deer hunting, I received a PM about joining a hunting club. One comment was that I should try hard not to wound an animal, or they would throw me out.

That seems kind of harsh to me. Of course I would try not to wound game, but what if I just have a bad shot and put one in the thigh or take out a knee? Then I'm out of the club and out my $1200? Ouch. Especially in my state, where rifles aren't allowed for deer hunting, but handguns are.

What do you feel is more important, giving the game a sporting chance (some feel it is too easy with a rifle) or making sure you don't wound the animal and have to do more hunting that you'd like to?

Lastly, what is a good range to limit oneself to with a 44 Magnum 7-1/2" barrel scoped revolver? I'm thinking 100 yds, but have read of longer shots.

One example is Elmer Keith's story about the 600+ yd. kill with his 44 Special snubby, which took at least 6 shots (and 4 hits) to make the kill. Today, that would be considered inhumane and not a good idea to even attempt a shot like that, no matter how good you are with a revolver. Folks still idolize Keith today, despite that story.
 
I've never been in a hunting club so I don't know the answer to that question.

As for how far you should shoot at a deer with a handgun (or any gun) the answer is: How far can you hit an 8" circle, consistently, in front of an audience, regardless of how much sweat is in your eyes or how out of breath you are, and from the kind of position you will be shooting from in the field?

If you will be shooting from a blind with a built in rest then you will probably be able to shoot farther than if you have to shoot from braced kneeling. Find out how well you shoot from various positions and take it from there.

I don't really see the issue between "giving the game a sporting chance" and "making sure you don't wound the animal". The game gets it's chance by trying to avoid you with stealth and/or speed - if it is running to fast for you to hit then don't shoot because the animal won that round. You should always try to recover every animal you shoot.

Everyone has their own idea of how challenging hunting should be. The guy with an iron sighted rifle thinks the guy with a scope has it too easy. The guy with an iron sighted handgun thinks anyone with a rifle has it too easy. The guy with a compound bow thinks anyone with a gun has it too easy. The guy that makes his own long bow thinks the guy with a store bought compound bow has it too easy. You have to decide how much challenge you want and if you can resist the urge to try something that is beyond your ability.

When you are first starting out I would recommend a little less challenge so that you don't get frustrated. Carrier pilots don't take off and land on a carrier on their first day in an airplane. There must be some logic in that.

You should go and read the entire Elmer Keith story. The mule deer was wounded by someone with a rifle. It had a broken leg and was going to get away. He asked the other hunter if he minded trying a shot since the deer was wounded and would be lost. The other hunter agreed. Elmer was an outstanding shot at long distance with a rifle or a handgun. He had been practicing with iron sighted handguns at long range for a long time. He prevented a wounded animal from escaping, which sounds pretty ethical to me. BTW his handgun had a 4" barrel.

I have done enough shooting at 500+ yards with iron sighted handguns to believe the story. Shooting at clumps in a plowed field and measuring with a laser range finder will teach you a lot about shooting at long range.
 
Elmer's sixgun wore a 6½" barrel but you're right about it being wounded by the hunter he was guiding. In which case, you can't possibly make it any worse.


How far can you hit an 8" circle, consistently, in front of an audience, regardless of how much sweat is in your eyes or how out of breath you are, and from the kind of position you will be shooting from in the field?

This is a wise policy. Shooting a heavy sixgun from field positions at 8" targets will humble most uncommitted shooters rather quickly.
 
Elmer's sixgun wore a 6½" barrel

I don't have my copy of "Hell, I was There" in front of me, but I was able to google this up. It doesn't say in this excerpt what the barrel length was:

Paul Kriley and I hunted up Clear Creek on the right side where it is partly open bunch grass meadows and partly patches of timber. We hunted all day, and although we saw several does at 80-90 yards, one at 60, that I could have killed. We passed them up, as I wanted a buck. Toward evening we topped out on a ridge. There was a swale between us and another small ridge on the side of the mountain slope about 300-400 yards away. Beyond that, out on the open sidehill, no doubt on account of the cougar, were about 20 mule deer, feeding. Two big bucks were in the band, and some lesser ones, the rest were does and long fawns. As it was getting late and the last day of the season, I wanted one of those bucks for meat. Being a half-mile away, I told Paul, “Take the .300 Magnum and duck back through this swale to that next ridge and that should put you within about 500 yards of them. I’ll stay here (the deer had seen us), let them watch me for a decoy.” Paul said, “You take the rifle.” “I said, how is it sighted?” He said, “one inch high at a hundred yards.” I told him to go ahead because I wouldn’t know where to hold it. I always sighted a .300 Magnum 3 inches high at a hundred and I wouldn’t know where to hold it at 500.

I said, “You go ahead and kill the biggest buck in the bunch for me.” Paul took off, went across the swale and climbed the ridge, laid down and crawled up to the top. He shot. The lower of the two bucks, which he later said was the biggest one, dropped and rolled down the mountain. I then took off across the swale to join him. Just before I climbed up the ridge to where he was lying, he started shooting again.

When I came up on top, the band of deer was pretty well long gone. They’d gone out to the next ridge top, turned up it slightly and went over. But the old buck was up following their trail, one front leg a-swinging. Paul had hit it. I asked Paul, “Is there any harm in me getting into this show?” He said, “No, go ahead.”

I had to lay down prone, because if I crawled over the hill to assume my old backside positioning, then the blast of his gun would be right in my ear. Shooting prone with a .44 Magnum is something I don’t like at all. The concussion is terrific. It will just about bust your ear drums every time. At any rate Paul shot and missed. I held all of the front sight up, or practically all of it, and perched the running deer on top of the front sight and squeezed one off. Paul said, “I saw it through my scope. It hit in the mud and snow right below him.” There was possibly six inches of wet snow, with muddy ground underneath. I told him “I won’t be low the next shot.” Paul shot again and missed with his .300 Magnum. The next time I held all of the front sight up and a bit of the ramp, just perched the deer on top. After the shot the gun came down out of recoil and the bullet had evidently landed. The buck made a high buck-jump, swapped ends, and came back toward us, shaking his head. I told Paul I must have hit a horn. I asked him to let the buck come back until he was right on us if he would, let him come as close as he would and I’d jump up and kill him. When he came back to where Paul had first rolled him, out about 500 yards, Paul said, “I could hit him now, I think.”

“Well,” I said, “I don’t like to see a deer run on three legs. Go ahead.” He shot again and missed. The buck swapped ends and turned around and went back right over the same trail. Paul said, “I’m out of ammunition. Empty.” I told him to reload, duck back out of sight, go on around the hill and head the old buck off, and I’d chase him on around. Paul took off on a run to go around this bunch-grass hill and get up above the buck and on top. He was young, husky, and could run like a deer himself. I got on the old buck again with all of the front sight and a trifle of the ramp up. Just as I was going to squeeze it off when he got to the ridge, he turned up it just as the band of deer had done. So I moved the sight picture in front of him and shot. After an interval he went down and out of sight. I didn’t think anything of it, thought he had just tipped over the ridge. It took me about half an hour to get across. When I got over there to the ridge, I saw where he’d rolled down the hill about fifty yards, bleeding badly, and then he’d gotten up and walked from the tracks to the ridge in front of us. There were a few pine trees down below, so I cut across to intercept his tracks. I could see he was bleeding out both sides.

Just before I got to the top of the ridge, I heard a shot up above me and then another shot, and I yelled and asked if it was Paul. He answered. I asked, “Did you get him?” He said, “Yes, he’s down there by that big pine tree below you. Climb a little higher and you can see him.” Paul came down and we went down to the buck. Paul said the buck was walking along all humped up very slowly. He held back of the shoulders as he was quartering away. The first shot went between his forelegs and threw up snow. Then he said the buck turned a little more away from him and he held higher and dropped him. Finally we parted the hair in the right flank and found where the 180-grain needle-pointed Remington spitzer had gone in. Later I determined it blew up and lodged in the left shoulder. At any rate I looked his horns over, trying to see where I’d hit a horn. No sign of it. Finally I found a bullet hole back of the right jaw and it came out of the top of his nose. That was the shot I’d hit him with out at 600 yards. Then Paul said, “Who shot him through the lungs broadside? I didn’t, never had that kind of shot at all.” There was an entrance hole fairly high on the right side of the rib cage just under the spine and an exit just about three or four inches lower on the other side. The deer had been approximately the same elevation as I was when I fired that last shot at him. We dressed him, drug him down the trail on Clear Creek, hung him up, and went on down to the ranch. The next day a man named Posy and I came back with a pack horse, loaded him and took him in. I took a few pictures of him hanging in the woodshed along with the Smith & Wesson .44 Mag.

I took him home and hung him up in the garage. About ten days later my son Ted came home from college and I told him, “Ted, go out and skin that big buck and get us some chops. They should be well-ripened and about right for dinner tonight.” After awhile Ted came in and he laid the part jacket of a Remington bullet on the table beside me and he said, “Dad, I found this right beside the exit hole on the left side of that buck’s ribs.” Then I knew that I had hit him at that long range two out of four times. I believe I missed the first shot, we didn’t see it at all, and it was on the second that Paul said he saw snow and mud fly up at his heels. I wrote it up and I’ve been called a liar ever since, but Paul Kriley is still alive and able to vouch for the facts.

Elmer Keith
 
I limit my shots to 80 yards and in, with my Ruger Super Red Hawk .44 Magnum. I shoot 240 grain Hornady XTP Hollow points. I load my own ammunition and hit a 5" circle consistently. This is strictly a pistol set up for hunting only, and has a red dot scope mounted on top.

I could probably hit game further than 80 yards with it, but I am not confident enough to find out, as I have not practiced any further than 80 yards. I think a 8" circle is realistic, but only the shooter knows what his limit must be.

I will say that if you haven't practiced at longer ranges, that you are being a bit optimistic, if you take longer shots. A .44 Mag is a hoss at any range, and the further you shoot, the bigger it gets.

Don't know much about "Hunting Clubs" as most of the guys I know that belong to them are more interested in card playing, and whiskey drinking, than they are about hunting.

Just throwing this in- A 180 grain bullet with a BC of 1.6, Sighted in at 30 yards, is approximately 152.8" low at 600 yards. Thats over 12 feet low. No wonder people have trouble believing a shot like that. Witness or not.:D
 
Clubs have some long standing rules to follow. Here are a few I have seen over the years.
Miss a shot and your shirt tail is property of the club and will be cut off and hung up in the lodge. New shirt or old it will be cut.

Take a shot and not retrieve the empty shell or case and you will be ribbed for littering. Some clubs charge a fine if you do not bring the empty shell or case back with the meat.

Took lunch or snack with you for your day in the woods? Better bring that candy /sandwich wrapper out with you.

Take more than one shot on a deer and you pay a dollar, third shot will cost you five bucks.
 
I know that popular myth was that it was a four incher but John Taffin put it to rest in one of his articles.
 
A 180 grain bullet with a BC of 1.6, Sighted in at 30 yards, is approximately 152.8" low at 600 yards. Thats over 12 feet low. No wonder people have trouble believing a shot like that. Witness or not.

Keith was using a 240gr. Remington factory load I believe. Much better BC. More important is that you shouldn't think of it as aiming 12 feet (or whatever) above the deer. You adjust your sight picture as Keith described i.e. raise the post up out of the notch. He had a special front sight made for his long range handguns. It had two horizontal gold lines across the rear of a vertical post. He used them as elevation reference marks for shooting at long range. I don't know what the numbers were but just for example if the target was 300 yards away you would put the upper line even with the top of the rear sight and if the target was 500 yards away you would put the lower line even with the top of the rear sight. Another thing is that I typically sight a .44 mag or similar gun in about 1" high at 25 yard with iron sights. That makes it point blank to beyond 100 yards which is farther than I will shoot at a deer, but not farther than I will shoot at a coyote or pig. That extra height makes a difference.

The best thing to do is try it. A plowed field works well so you can see where you are hitting.
 
Enough about Elmer Keith...

Smaug, most states that are shotgun/pistol, only, do that because of the perceived danger from the distance a rilfle bullet can travel.

IMO, the only place any "sporting chance" comes into hunting has to do with the finding. There are gaziillions of opinions about "fair chase"; I won't get into that.

I've been a bit tighter in my thinking about one's personal limit on taking a shot. For me, it's how far off I can reliably hit something about the size of the end of a soda can. But, I wouldn't get all excited against a four-inch circle being okay...

As far as your hunt club "no wounds" policy, the first question that pops into my mind is, what about a deer that is "dead but doesn't yet know it" and gets onto neighboring property before dying? Me, I'd want to see the written rules before putting up any money. Misinformed hearsay is a bummer.

The .44 Maggie oughta be reliable to a hundred yards. The main thing is to practice enough to get all married up to the sights and trigger. Little stuff like what effect a rest has on the point of impact, etc.

Nuff fer now...
 
Smaug,
Each weapon has its' limits and challenges and if you hunt within those parimeters you'll do fine. :)

I don't join hunting clubs for THEIR types of pressure and/or ethics that they employ upon their members. I have my own hunting standards, adhere to them and don't feel the need for someone else's. Fact of the matter is, if you hunt deer long enough, you're going to lose one. :rolleyes: Nobody likes that idea, we all strive to keep it from happening, but it's reality.

$1200 of club dues would make anyone pass on a questionable shot, but so should your own hunting ethics. ;) Be honest with yourself, be discriminating within yourself, keep a clear mind about what you're about to do and all will be well....with or without a club membership. :)

Smaug said:
:confused: What's a hoss?
hoss = horse, hog leg, heavy or long and heavy handgun.
Colt Walker's are often refered to as a "horse pistol" or "hog leg", due to their size.

Good hunting, Bowhunter57
 
If you hit a deer in the thigh or 'take out a knee' then you made an extremely poor choice in pulling the trigger. As a sportsman, you must strive to make a clean shot each and every time. If you aren't 100% sure, don't take the shot. "I think I can" is for practice sessions, not hunting.

I've cleanly missed deer and I've hit higher than I would have liked but every deer I've ever taken has expired within 50 yds of where the shot was taken.

The "sporting chance" part comes in the hunt, not the shot. Deer have vastly superior senses and they spend every day in the woods. They know every rock, tree and trail. When they sense that something is out of place, they usually don't hang around to find out what it is. If you only hunt during legal hours with legal methods during the legal season, they have more than a sporting chance. If you limit yourself to shots that you KNOW you can make and only take game you can use, then you're on your way to becoming an ethical, responsible hunter.

As mentioned above, rifles are not permitted in certain areas due to safety concerns, not ethical ones. Anyone who says that rifles aren't 'sporting' probably doesn't know much about hunting or has a messed up value system. Don't get me wrong, if someone wants to take on the challenge of hunting with a handgun, and they can limit themselves to ethical shots, then they should go ahead and do it. To prescribe it for others is wrong.

My vote is that you use a shotgun with rifled slug barrel and scope. If you practice and buy good equipment and ammo, you should be able to consistently hit an 8" pie plate at 150 yds or better. The rest it up to you.
 
Colt Walker's are often refered to as a "horse pistol" or "hog leg", due to their size.

That and they were carried in a pommel holster, looped over the saddle horn. So the weight was carried by the horse, rather than the Texas Ranger set upon him.
 
My bet is that the hunting club is just telling you to take ethical shots within your area of skill---that's all.
I'm sure they don't want a bunch of people coming in and taking 400 yard shots when they are not skilled enough to make them.

What do you feel is more important, giving the game a sporting chance (some feel it is too easy with a rifle) or making sure you don't wound the animal and have to do more hunting that you'd like to?

I'm not sure how to answer this---I don't know what "doing more hunting than you like to" means.
Are you doing it for sport or are you doing it just to kill something or for meat??
I never did more hunting than I like to---just the opposite.:)

IMO, the only place any "sporting chance" comes into hunting has to do with the finding

+1


Lastly, what is a good range to limit oneself to with a 44 Magnum 7-1/2" barrel scoped revolver? I'm thinking 100 yds, but have read of longer shots.

Sounds good but of course, there are other factors to consider besides range--cover, how good you are at 100 yards, do you have a rest, out of breath etc.
Pratice, then you'll know your limits---reading of longer shots may not apply --what YOU can do does.

Dipper
 
+1 Bitmap

nobody can define your limits, your skill level with a given weapon will tell you that. Get out there & find out (through practice). Also, hunting clubs have a ring of eletism to me.
 
Last edited:
dipper said:
I'm not sure how to answer this---I don't know what "doing more hunting than you like to" means.
Are you doing it for sport or are you doing it just to kill something or for meat??
I never did more hunting than I like to---just the opposite.

In that case, I meant wounding the deer and then STILL having to hunt for it, because it ran off wounded.
 
If you have to ask these questions, then I suggest that you spend the next year at the range boosting your confidence in the ability to use your gun. Then you can join the "club" knowing you can hit and kill what you aim at.
 
Colt Walker's are often refered to as a "horse pistol"

Walker Colts were called horse pistols because they were carried by mounted soldiers in holsters attached to their saddles.
 
I'm confused. It seems that you think it is OK to would a critter if it's the only shot you have ("what if I just have a bad shot and put one in the thigh or take out a knee?"). What the heck kinda thought it that? Any hunter that says he hasn't made a bad shot and wounded game is lying. But any hunter that tells you that he "intentionally" wounded game because that's the only shot he had needs to have ALL hunting and firearm privileges REMOVED.

Sounds to me like you need to do LOTS of reading and research before even attempting to start hunting. Then start with small game like squirrel and rabbit to become more "woods wise". I applaud you trying to get the info you need but as of right now, you have no business hunting deer. If you were near me I'd be happy to show you some ropes. And finding an experienced hunting partner is going to be your best bet.

LK
 
:confused:

L_Killkenny - who said anything about intentionally wounding an animal? Not me! There is no need to talk down to me, whether you are confused or not.

I was presenting a scenario like you just mentioned. A hunter accidentally wounding an animal, and getting thrown out of a hunting club for it.

My whole point was that at a given range, let's say 50 yards, if I have equal mastery of a scoped hunting revolver and scoped hunting rifle, I will be more likely to place the shot in the right spot with the rifle. It would actually be hard to miss with the rifle, but still challenging with a revolver.

In other words, the animal has better sporting chances if I have a revolver, as I'm more likely to miss altogether, (even if I'm within my limits!) giving him a chance to run away.

It is also possible that I could also superficially wound an animal, (by accident of course) let's say a nick an ear, or take the tip off an antler.

Now in a worse case, even if I'm within my limits, I'm more likely to wound an animal, let's say gutshot, with a handgun than with a rifle. When we look at it this way, rifles are simply more humane than handguns, because they are inherently more accurate in human hands.

I hope that is more clear now.
 
Back
Top