Oh boy, here we go again. I knew I was going to open up a can of worms when I brought up the head/neck shot business. I will speak one more time and then no more. Our conversation has gotten a little off track because we are talking arrows, 30-30's etc.
Stumpkiller is absolutely right about any sort of risky shot when using a round ball. Since this is traditional muzzleloading that probably should have settled the question. I should not have brought up the issue.
But let us say you are in South Georgia or Florida. You are watching a little clearing near a creek. The palmetto flats are so thick you CANNOT SEE YOUR FEET let alone snakes, etc. Off to the other side is a cypress head with knee deep water. Now if you shoot a deer or hog with a typical lung shot and off he goes for 100 yards, GOOD LUCK.
Now I was talking about CLOSE range, fiften yards or so, that's about half way from third base to home plate. You could hit a deer or hog in the head with a baseball at that range. I have had spikes and does come in about fifteen feet or closer. I have also shot deer (30-30) where the bullet burned off the top half of their heart and they still ran 40 yards. I have shot deer, aiming about 1/3 down from the neck (again 30-30) and they just drop. The damage isn't really that bad and the ribs were protected- okay, I think the ribs are the best tasting part of the critter and I don't want any blood stained meat. Again, with a PRB I wouldn't do this, but the conversation had gone to other areas.
So what's the point? If we hunters take a sporting lung shot and lose the animal that's okay because everyone loses one once in a while, BUT if we take a neck/head shot and then lose an animal the world has come to an end. We started out this conversation with a twentyfive yard shot. With a smoothbore a lung shot was probably the only alternative but if a neck or head shot had been taken and the same deer was lost then everyone would be complaining that the problem was taking the wrong kind of shot. Think about it, the animal was still lost. Makes no sense to me. As far as a trophy, etc, a head shot is out of the question, no argument. If you shoot a black bear in the head I believe it is automatically disqualified from being entered in any record books(I may be wrong). What I was trying to point out is suppose you are in an environment where tracking is all but impossible. All of us, myself included, are so used to the lung shot that we automatically take that shot. Every time I have shot an animal in the head or neck I admit I automatically started aiming for the lungs and because I wasn't rushed I realized that given the tracking conditions, the close range of the animal, and the perfect shooting conditions, that in that particular situation a head/neck shot was a viable alternative. In such a situation, on the average, it probably guarantees a recovered animal versus just feeding the buzzards and yotes.
This obviously is a sensitive issue. I consider myself a wilderness only hunter. Some folks hunt the beanfields or use hounds. The issue of a head shot destroying a beautiful, wild creature is valid and I must admit I am mostly a meat hunter, I only have two wall mounts. I will have to think over that aspect. I guess each of us must settle on what ever ethics we feel are proper. :relax: