Shoot or No Shot 2016, Episode #3.

[WapitiTalk1]

The man, the myth, the legend, Swede himself (Tree Stand Hunting Rocky Mountain Elk author) has invited you to the Beaver State for your first ever tree stand hunt for wapiti! After a excellent evening campfire training session the night before, he finally sends you down a ridge trail to one of his primo stand locations to climb (safely of course), lock in, sit, and wait early the next morning. The stand location is on a nice little hidden bench that has a well used elk trail on it. It's the first day of your late August hunt in OR (Swede said you can stay at his camp five days or until he gets tired of your cooking). Bull only tag here and as you sit in your tree stand, you see this fine gentleman slowly lumbering below you to get a cool drink in the waterhole to your left at 9 o'clock. He is coming from his bedding area at your 3 o'clock (old Swede sure knows how to pick the spots). Shoot or no shot?

If you say "shoot", save the picture to your desktop and open in MS Paint, you'll be able to place a spot, X, or whatever on the critter before you save it back to a jpg and add the marked up pic with your post.

0.jpg (46.46 KiB) Viewed 4852 times

[Swede]

Very good thread RJ. I had a very similar opportunity one time. After my response on Episode #1, I probably have some people believing I will take some questionable shots. But did I pass on this one? If I took the shot how did it turn out? Hummm??? Better yet, as RJ asked, what will you do?

[ElkNut1]

I see zero shot there for me but I want a bigger bull! (grin) But I sure did appreciate swede inviting me! (grin) Thanks! Rory!

ElkNut1

[Lefty]

Currently I wouldnt know how to take that shot with a bow

[WapitiTalk1]

Anybody else have any thoughts on this scenario? He's getting away

[IdahoD]

He's plenty big for my freezer! No shot for me here, but one could very quickly materialize. Maybe he sees or "senses" you in the tree and turns around to leave and you give a few quick cow chirps to get him to stop and look back one last time. Maybe he doesn't have any idea you're there and you can whack him when he gets passed you and to the water. This one could play out favorably in less than 15 seconds and something is going to happen here one way or the other, but nothing right now. One lung shot at best and probably a lost elk if you send an arrow now.

[Fridaythe13th]

If I was at full draw there is no way I would shoot. He's going to the water hole just give time.

[Swede]

0.jpg (56.1 KiB) Viewed 4772 times

I spine shot the elk I referred to above, and would again. It was over quick. The elk fell right in the place where it had stood. A friend missed his spot and accidently hit a 6X6 in the spine. He is a lousy shot from a tree stand. Still he had the same result exactly. No tracking involved. He got out of his stand to finish his off. If I chose to shoot the elk pictured above, the arrow would go in as shown. I can't say I really like the shot, but the bull will go down in short order. I rarely expect a better shot if the one presented is acceptable. There has been too many blown opportunities. That is fine on a questionable shot, but if the shot is acceptable, I usually don't wait for a better one.

[six]

Only speaking from experience shooting lots of whitetails. I would wait until a better shot presented itself.

[jmez]

No shot for me there.

[Dr. Rx]

Wow Swede!! Never would of thought of that shot...that's impressive

Kris

[welka]

Nope. Wait until he makes his way to water hole.

[huntnfolk]

Bigger bull would be nice, but where I hunt I don't pass up a legal bull if I feel I have a good shot. On this bull I'd be waiting for a better angle to develop. I want to hit vitals rather than hope I hit the spine well enough to drop it for a follow-up shot.

[ishy]

I'm letting this guy walk away a little for a better angle, when the angle is good stop him. As a young bull he'll be pretty inquisitive and should be easy to stop right where I want him.
Any of you guys seen Randy Newberg shoot one off a cliff at about this steepness quartering away at two yards? It's great footage, see if I can find it.
https://youtu.be/LVG6Ae2jOM8

[Swede]

I have been musing over this matter of the double lung hit. I am guessing that a lot of the emphasis on double lung shooting comes from hunting forums and 3D targets. I guess it doesn't matter where it came from.
When shooting down on elk I always aim high and let the arrow travel down at a steep angle through the elk's chest. I do not ever remember one critter ever traveling far, and their chest cavity is always full of blood. Hitting one lung or two is no problem, as long as you are sending a sharp broad-head through their massive blood supply, near or in the pump. It does not make any difference which way the arrow travels (sideways or downward) if you cut a major artery. To cut an artery send your arrow into the area of the heart and lungs with good penetration. We are not letting the air out of the elk.

Here I have quoted Dr. John ??, (Deertick) a Wyoming bow hunter. I hope this helps.

"All of this illustrates a key point: it is BLEEDING that kills.

Often, I think, hunters image a tension pneumothorax killing a lung hit animal. If you are trying to cause a tension pneumothorax, then you better hope you are a great tracker.

No, we shoot lungs not due to their "balloon-like" qualities (and they aren't balloons anyway).

We shoot lungs because they are in the chest, and we shoot chests because that is where the blood is.

Sure, there's blood everywhere in a body, but it's not evenly distributed. Most is in the chest. Why? Because you have to run a lot of blood (enough for each pump of the left heart, ie 100% of the cardiac output) (or 50%, depending on how you see it) over a thin membrane to exchange gases, oxygen and carbon dioxide. That membrane IS the lungs. Lungs are vascular, and big.

Kidneys, for instance, get about 25% of the cardiac output, so hit one and it'll die faster than a femoral artery hit.

I visualize a hazy redness in the center of the animal, and in the center of that, a more intense redness. You want to hit in the center of that. That is the top of the heart, with fewer and smaller vessels the further you get away, even inside lungs.

Lungs have a great ability to heal, seal, and otherwise deal with holes, but they can't deal with massive hemorrhage.

So, my advice is to shoot for blood, not organs. Ronald Reagan got shot in the dang heart, but not with a big enough caliber to poke a hole in the chamber. He lived.

They've got to bleed to die quickly, in view (unless their movement is impaired, like a spine or brain hit). Nothing else will die quickly anytime today. Not a gut hit, not a lung hit;
not without hemorrhage."

Here is a follow-up e-mail I received from Deertick. I made a few changes for spelling to enhance clarity.

"Let's frame the question in another way: how do "one lung" hits survive?

One thing is FOR SURE: they didn't bleed enough to die, right?

Therein lies the answer.

A deer or person or whatever might or might not die of pneumothorax (usually, they live).

A deer or person or whatever might survive a ruptured diaphragm. (Usually, they do die, eventually).

A deer or person or whatever might survive a flail chest.

Deer, humans, and all of God's creatures, though, die if they bleed enough. They die quickly. Witness: the odd femoral, carotid, or kidney shot.

People don't understand how vascular lungs are and they overestimate how they are like balloons. They are not balloons! They are "internal gills". The pumping action of our chest and abdominal muscles push gas and blood over the "gills" but they don't ever "pop".

Most guys understand gills, and that fish live for a while out of water. They can't pump efficiently out here, but kind of still work, for a while. Lungs are just modified gills! Ask Darwin.

But, to make gills or lungs work, you need both gas and blood. Blood is what we are after."