matthiasbadger
FNG
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 66
Long story short, I'm curious about the idea of shooting for the shoulder rather than the heart and lungs. Seems like I've seen articles on this every once in a while and there are some folks out there that advocate it. The most recent article I saw that discusses "anchoring shots" specifically advocates for shooting the scapula (shoulder blade) because not only will breaking the shoulder make the animal less mobile but the scapula is close enough to the spine that it could damage the central nervous system. There's also a good chance that the lungs will incur some damage whether from the bullet itself or bone fragments or hydrostatic shock.
Honestly I'm a bit skeptical but last week I had an episode that is making me a little more open to the idea. I shot a doe at last light, definitely hit one lung and I'm pretty sure I hit both, but the deer ran straight into some thick brush leaving a weak blood trail that stopped entirely after only 30 yards or so. Spent hours looking, never found her.
So, with that said, anyone here subscribe to the "anchoring shot" technique? Thoughts on it?
Honestly I'm a bit skeptical but last week I had an episode that is making me a little more open to the idea. I shot a doe at last light, definitely hit one lung and I'm pretty sure I hit both, but the deer ran straight into some thick brush leaving a weak blood trail that stopped entirely after only 30 yards or so. Spent hours looking, never found her.
So, with that said, anyone here subscribe to the "anchoring shot" technique? Thoughts on it?