What would you do?

S

Swampghost

New member
I am privileged to hunt on a section of a well managed private ranch. Some moron (not on our section) decided to hunt with a .22 Hornet. Management found the dead deer and now .243 is the minimum that is allowed and they are really pressing for the larger cals. even up to 30-06.

Our deer run pretty small and the ranges are, for the most part, short. I can't imagine the damage done to a 130# deer that has been shot @ 30 yds. with a 30-06! Or even a .243.

Doe's have to be over 100#s which is a very close call and bucks now have to be sporting 6 pts. I know that you Northern guys are snickering but this is what WE have to play with.

I'm considering hooking up with an old buddy that hunts the WMA's to put meat on the table, times are tough.

I think that I just answered my own question.
 
A well placed shot with a 30-06 is not going to do horrible things to even a small deer. Ok, well, it WILL do horrible things but if the shot is well placed then it WON'T ruin much, if any, meat.

I wouldn't worry about it one bit but if you do worry then just choose a bullet that is not going to be expanding explosively. There are plenty of good bullet choices.
 
Hunt by the rules that the landowner has or don't hunt. If you don't have the minimum caliber to hunt with see if your buddies will loan you one. I understand your dilema, but the landowner can set his own rules or deny you access.
 
G'day. In Australia the Kangaroo shooters have to head shoot to be able to sell the game. A Kangaroo head is about the size of a 3/4 grown Rabbit. They are often taken out to 250m.
 
peet, detonating animals is my primary concern. A .30 anything will ruin a large portion of meat given the short ranges that we mostly hunt it. 50 yds is a long shot if your not over the pastures.

Taylor, I have always followed the rules/laws wherever I have hunted. The ONE exception was some time spent down in Big Cypress, I did what I had to do to survive. It was after MY war and I needed some breathing room.
 
I dunno, Swamp. I've shot does about that size with a .30-06 and a .308, and no "detonation" ever occurred. It'll pass through and through just fine, never had excessive meat loss even at very short distances.
 
Back in my school days when I would only have 2 or 3 days a season to hunt I ended up shooting a few small bucks because they were all that I could get sights on in that short of a time period. The smallest was 140-150 and I was using standard federal powershok ammo...the cheap stuff. I always have and always will use 180s in my 30.06 most likely. I like the big round for its impact on the potentially 300lbs bucks that I prefer to chase ;-)
Anyway one of those deer was well under 75 yards and even there the shot did very minimal damage. Just catch the deer in a good spot and you are fine, I like the classic broad side, behind the shoulder shot. The entrance and exit holes were both quarter sized, the deer went down fast, and I lost no more than a rib or two worth of meet with no excessive wounding or bloody pulverized meat to cleam up.
 
Sorry, Swamp, I gotta totally disagree with you. I've killed a fair number of deer with my '06, and messing up meat just flat-out didn't happen. At close range, neck shots are seriously easy. If the deer is broadside and you don't think you can hit the neck, the heart/lung shot is clean.

My handloads were running right at 3,100 ft/sec for 150-grain bullets. 26" barrel; 52.5 grains of 4064. I started using that load in 1950.
 
A .243 would be a great choice and if you really are worried about ruining meat you can buy factory ammo in 55 to 58 grain offerings. If you don't load your own the factory ammo in that range can be more expensive, but even the cheap corelokt 100 grain shouldn't do alot of damage. I've shot a dozen deer with my .243 and the corelokt 100's and have never had any abnormal meat damage.
 
A .243 would be a great choice and if you really are worried about ruining meat you can buy factory ammo in 55 to 58 grain offerings.
Click to expand...

Bad advice here, 55 and 58 grains are varmint bullets and they will explode violently at nearly 4000 fps.

Unless you are using a solid copper bullet such as Barnes or Nosler E-tip and even these companies don't offer a bullet that light in a solid copper. To avoid a blow up on deer, use heavy bullets at moderate speeds. Use 85-100 grain bullets for the .243 Win and 165-180 grain for .30-06 and you can basically eat right up the hole.
 
Swampghost said:
A .30 anything will ruin a large portion of meat given the short ranges that we mostly hunt it.
Click to expand...

I don't think that it will. I hunt deer exclusively with a 12ga which generates over 3000ft/lbs of energy. These days we use ballistic-tip bullets too. So, I've essentially got a high powered, 58 caliber rifle and the VAST majority of shots are at under 50 yards.... I'd say that the average is 30 or less. A well placed shot ruins nothing but rib meat, which we don't use anyway. Worst case is one shoulder gets hit but it that happens it won't matter if it's a 22-250 or a 30-06, you're going to ruin meat and there's not going to be much difference.

By comparison, a 30-06 generates between 200 and 800ft/lbs less energy, roughly, and creates a hole with nearly 4 times less area. We would consider 30-06 to be a LOW risk of damaged meat.
 
Last edited:
I've predominately used a 270 Win here in the Texas Hill Country where the deer aren't much bigger than a dog with long legs, and have plugged the vitals without too much devistation at less than 100 yds, though I like the neck shots (they don't move other than the summersault on the way down;)). Used Winchester Ballistic Tips (130 grn).
 
Swampghost, you have never shot a deer with a 30-06.
I have killed 90 Georgia whitetails, and I killed 60 of them with my 30-06.
These were small deer like you are talking about, 130 pounds on the hoof was not unusual, some were 150 pounds, a really big one was 200 pounds on the hoof.
Thick Georgia woods, average range, 40 yards.
I was using the Winchester Silvertip, and the Remington CoreLokt, both in 180 grains.
On a lung shot, .30 entrance wound, .50 exit.
Zero damage to good meat, just a little bruising on the ribs, they are garbage anyway.
On the neck shot, no big deal, wasted a pound or two of neck meat, but the deer was anchored, didn't run.

Rather than excessive damage, my problem was inadequate damage. On the lung shot those little Georgia deer would run 100 yards at least. I had them run 120 yards sometimes. I got good at tracking a blood trail.

I wanted something to do more damage to anchor those deer.
Now I shoot 'em with the .50 Savage muzzleloader, two inch exit wound on a lung shot, Bambi won't get far.
 
simonkenton said:
I wanted something to do more damage to anchor those deer.
Click to expand...
I don't really understand the fascination with anchoring a deer. Nearly every deer I've ever shot has run somewhere between 30 and 150 yards. I've never had a problem finding one. A hole through both lungs, especially one that hits a major artery, can leave blood trails literally 5 feet wide and 3 feet up the side of trees and brush. I might walk 5 miles in a day of hunting, 150 yards more is not terribly bothersome.

simonkenton said:
Now I shoot 'em with the .50 Savage muzzleloader, two inch exit wound on a lung shot, Bambi won't get far.
Click to expand...

"Bambi" could still go 150 yards or more. Like I said above, I hunt with a 12ga generating over 3000ft/lbs of energy. Nearly every deer that I and everyone in my hunting group has ever shot has run between 30 and 150 yards. Last year I shot a buck at about 40 yards with a Remington Core-Lokt Ultra. It was walking at the time. At the shot it jumped and jogged about 40-50 yards before falling. I blew it's heart to shreds and hit both lungs. 3000ft/lbs from what is essentially a 50 caliber rifle bullet and the deer didn't "anchor".
 
Last edited:
i have used both .308 and .06... both with 150gr fmj bullets... and I ALWAYS shoot in the head.... sure dont have to track em far, and no meat damage.
 
Swampghost said:

peet, detonating animals is my primary concern. A .30 anything will ruin a large portion of meat given the short ranges that we mostly hunt it.
Click to expand...

Methinks you don't fully understand terminal ballistics of very many types of bullets?

If you use a fragile bullet, then what you said is generally true. With a better constructed bullet, it's not.

I've gotten horrendous meat damage from a .243 bullet that was fragile, yet only lost about 4 ounces from each of two different antelope shot with a 7mm mag using a better (not premium) bullet.

I also stopped using the fragile bullets in the .243, and the ones I use now don't damage a lot of meat.

Our little whitetails (coues deer) top out at around 120 lbs. They average about 80 lbs. I've shot some within 10 or 15 yards with a 7mm mag that resulted in minimal meat damage.

Pick a good bullet (but not TOO well constructed or it won't expand at all), place it well, and you won't have to worry.

Daryl
 
The Hornet is just a poor choice.Not enough bullet weight and light bullet construction.
At the ranges one might try to use a Hornet,a good old 30-30 will get the job done.So will a .250Savage or a .44 mag.A 7.62x39,a 35 Rem,or many rifles downloaded a bit ,even with a cast bullet.Along with hitting a good spot,you have to get penetration.Varmint bullets are poor.

The last deer I shot was a nice 4 point.(western count).Ot collapsed in its tracks from a lung shot.Exit wound was half dollar size.None of the jello-bloodshot hivel explosive damage.

I hit it with a 200 grain .30 cal Accubond launched at 2900 fps from a 30-338.

By using a heavy,tough bullet,meat damage is light
 
i have used both .308 and .06... both with 150gr fmj bullets... and I ALWAYS shoot in the head.... sure dont have to track em far, and no meat damage.
Click to expand...

The use of FMJ bullets may not be illegal in WV however most States say that the bullet must be an expanding type. Make sure you check your hunting regulations before you start using FMJ ammunition.
 
Peetzakiller...do you typically take lower vital area shots?

I find if you look in a lot of hunting magazines or watch a lot of hunting shows the "recommended" ideal broadside shot is a bit low for my taste...it seems to involve aiming AT the heart. Myself and most other in my camp, we shoot a little higher..typically our bullets miss the heart entirely but catch major blood vessel/arteries instead and the lungs still get punctured. I like this approach because One: it saves the heart and that's good eating! and Two: it does seem to anchor deer (most of us use 180gr federal powershot ammo from 308s or 30.06s) Sometimes a deer will make it 50 yards, but often they just drop right in place or take one single jump and fall. My own personally theory is that the impact of the bullet is imparting a serious shock to the spinal colum (as the bullet passes fairly close, but under it) and on more than a few deer it appears to be slightly bruised. ... nothing like a good shock to the spin to stop something in its tracks.

As for the issue of tracking a fatally wounded deer...its usually not too hard, but there are a lot of areas around here where 150 yards can and does seem like an eternity of gnarls, tangles, and annoying frost reddened leaves that make red drops of blood blend in and desappear to anything but the sharpest eyes.
 
300magman said:
Peetzakiller...do you typically take lower vital area shots?
Click to expand...

No, in fact my advice is to avoid the heart when possible. Both to save the shoulders and the heart from bullet damage but also because a low shot will hit nothing but leg. Generally, I aim several inches roughly 45 degrees up and behind the heart. This location is nearly fool proof as it insures a vital zone hit in all but the most extreme eventualities.

I don't mind a DRT shot, I just don't understand why it's the criteria for choosing a gun. I shoot deer with a bow too so I see what 40 or 50 ft/lbs does and how easy a heart and/or lung shot deer is to track.

Yeah, sometimes tracking can get nasty in brush but it's just not a real concern for me. A deer hit in the lungs will be bleeding in a way that makes trails easy to follow.

It's funny that you mention the low shot being idealized by the tv shows. I've always thought that they seem to glamorize the DRT shots and often shoot dangerously close to the "no mans land" in the deers high forward chest area.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top