Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

    I don't care if they run a bit, if the heart is in two
    pieces, and the bullet has exited. They don't go far.
    
    As for three shots, what caliber and bullet were you using ?

	At close range <100 yards, I go for the head or neck.  75%
	of my elk kills have been at approx 50 yards or less.  At
	that range the impact force of a heart/lung shot sends too
	much shock into the body and causes blood to go into some
	of the best eating parts.  At ranges >100 yards, if possible
	I will still try for a head shot.  We still talking an 8"
	target and IF you know you rifle, its do able on a standing elk.
	A running target >100 yards, for me, will get a heart/lung or
	shoulder shot.  So far my only running targets have been antelope.

	As I and others have harpped on.  It's not so much the size of
	the gun, it's the person behind it that determines where to shot
	for.  I spend alot of shooting time with the same rifle and load.
	I get alot of heat for shooting a "little" gun, but I've got
	meat in the freezer.  I know guys that pack cannons, they get
	shots, crippled animals, and eat out alot.  A friend of mine
	shots a 30-06.  He can hardly hold a 12" group, I can shot his
	rifle and hold 3".  With my little .270 I can hold 1" groups.
	Shoot your rifle until you get very used to it.  Then go for the
	head shots.

	Gordon

    
    
    re. .1
    
    It was a .270 with 140 gr. bullets.  And I have no way of knowing
    if the last three shots were even necessary.  I do know that it is
    somewhat unnerving to make what seems like a killing shot and
    just watch the animal stand there.  My second and third shots
    connected (all 4 did), but I'm not sure that they did a whole
    lot of damage.  One of the shots left a baseball sized exit
    wound.  I don't know which one it was.  After the first shot,
    the elk stopped moving and never took another step.  I suspect
    that she was fatally wounded then, but have you ever stopped
    shooting at an animal that was still standing?
    
    I guess what I'm really asking is does this sound typical.  I
    have heard and read that elk are very tough to put down, and I
    feel certain that the same shot on a deer would have turned its
    lights out immediately.  Can elk really take that much more
    punishment?                                   
    
    Jerry

    If I ever had the opportunity to hunt Elk....
    
    I don't think a shoulder shot would be a wise choice, go for the
    vitals every time, your not dealing with 416 Rigbys that are using 
    500 grain fmj projectiles, or dangerouos game like a Cape Buffalo 
    or a Grizz where you want to put it down first and administer the 
    killing shot second. Your dealing with high velocity projectiles
    in the 140-180 grain class specifically designed to get through
    most mediums most of the time...  not to break shoulders...
    
    Go for the vitals, neck, head... in that order...  They may run
    but not far.   This is strictly my opinion, and how I would try
    to handle the situation (of course with my trusty .270 with me 8^)..)
    , not necessarily how everyone else should.
                                              
    Fra

     i have never hunted elk, but I have shot a few deer.  First, as
    has been previously stated, you hve to practice with whatever gun
    your going to hunt with.  Assuming you are competent with the gun,
    I believe that a Heart/lung shot gives the best percentages for
    a clean kill.  The h/l area gives you the most margin of error
    while still giving a kiling shot.  I don't like head shots.  I feel
    that head shots are more apt to lead to wounded game.  If the shot
    goes low, the animal has his jaw blown off.  This is just personal
    opinion and not meant to be a lecture.  Bottom line is practice,
    practice, practice.
    
    Jeff                          
    

>                One other thing, I have never noticed any extra tainting
>    of meat because of a heart/lung shot. Then again I've never hunted
>    elk either. Is that just with elk that this happens?
    
	No that shot "should not" cause any tainting as you have found.
	I have shot several through the heart/lung with miminal meat
	loss.  The one I got last year was at about 30 yards in the
	timber, leaving only a clear shot at that area.  It was broadside
	with the rear slightly angled to me.  The shot went in the left
	side square on the heart, but exited the other side close to the 
	shoulder yet still through the ribs.  When I cut that elk up, I
	was surprised, read pi$$ed, at the blood in that shoulder and up
	in the top of the back.  Nothing I hate worse than lossing any
	more of that good meat than necessary.

    Gordon, if you think you lost meat because of the shot placement,
    you should see the amount you lose due to bloodsoaking when hunting
    with a bow.  Unless its a clean through the ribs entry/exit the
    loss is incredible. I hit one in the front shoulder area (heart
    shot) with an exit through the back portion of the ribs and lost 20
    lbs of meat that looked and felt like jelly...
                  
    Fra
    

    I have to agree with .6 but I also have to say that I also go for
    the shoulders too, just to knock them down if they are moving. Some
    people I know out west go strictly for the shoulders on elk first.
    I would think that the shoulders might be part of the vitals since
    the heart/lung area is right behiund it. This months Field and Stream
    has an article on shot placement on Deer, Elk and Bear. In it it
    does show the vitals on an Elk is not on the shoulder. Interesting.
    But on Deer it is. 
    							Bret

    Shoot high in the forequaters.  You have heart, lungs, and backbone
    to bring him down.  The head and neck are too risky.  There is a
    lot more hair and skin there to make for a high percentage shot.
    
    Ken