Ethical?I think NOT!!!!!!!!

[mightyfofaad]

ORIGINAL: MI Hunter

ORIGINAL: Cut N Run

A .270 might work, but my opinion is that anything under a .30 caliber bullet and you are pi$$ing in the wind. 100% agree that .308 is the minimum for black bears. .30-06 is better.  It doesn't make sense to be undergunned for something that could possibly take you out if the initial shot was not as good as it needed to be.

Jim

Might? A 270's more than adequate and is far from pi$$ing in the wind.   BB's aren't all that hard to kill as long as you choose the right bullet and place it where it needs to go.

Whoa ... I don't think Jim was trying to belittle your .270 which is a very hot sub .30 cal. cartridge. This thread was about whether a .243 was an unethical cartridge to use because, in an average shot placement, it might be somewhat less humane.

Everyone talks about "as long as you place the shot in the right place" ... as if you're going to find that bear standing still (profile) out in the open ... as if you're at the shooting range.

I come across many BB's, both bear hunting & not, & have never seen one presenting itself "that way." They are almost always moving or partially behind a tree or thru 30 to 70 yards of brush.

Hence, we take the best shot we can, if at all. Thus, most of us feel taking that shot with a lite bullet not much bigger than a .22, is probably somewhat unethical.

Look, in WWII we found .50 bullets did a nice job shooting down enemy planes. But a 20mm or 30mm nose cannon did it better, taking fewer shots because it made bigger holes.

Your .270 is good, a bronze tip 30-06 is probably better ... but the point here was ... a .243 is definitely on the lite side to be used as a bear cartridge.[sm=rolleyes.gif]

[MI Hunter]

ORIGINAL: mightyfofaad

[color="#003399"][size="3"]Whoa ... I don't think Jim was trying to belittle your .270 which is a very hot sub .30 cal. cartridge. This thread was about whether a .243 was an unethical cartridge to use because, in an average shot placement, it might be somewhat less humane.
[/size][/color]

No, he simply made a blanket statement that using anything below 30 caliber for black bear is pi$$ing in the wind and that's simply not true at all.  There are many sub 30 caliber cartridges that are perfectly adequate for black bear, I could name 10 off the top of my head.  Black bears aren't that hard to kill.  We are blessed with a lot of good bullets nowdays, some which make cartridges even better.  I agree a 243 is on the light side, but I also know some who've been very successful.  I bet an 85 grn TSX or 100 grn Partition would do ok, and who's to say it's less humane or unethical if someone makes a clean kill? 
 

[color="#003399"][size="3"]
Everyone talks about "as long as you place the shot in the right place" ... as if you're going to find that bear standing still (profile) out in the open ... as if you're at the shooting range.

I come across many BB's, both bear hunting & not, & have never seen one presenting itself "that way." They are almost always moving or partially behind a tree or thru 30 to 70 yards of brush.

Hence, we take the best shot we can, if at all. Thus, most of us feel taking that shot with a lite bullet not much bigger than a .22, is probably somewhat unethical.
[/size][/color]

You know what was meant, you're twisting it around to something entirely different. To clarify, when you are presented with an adequate shot presentation within limitations of you and your equipment, put the bullet where it needs to go and a majority of the time you will be successful.  If you are not given an adequate shot presentation, then you need to pass up the shot.  Forcing it is asking for a wounded animal and L've seen more wounded animals that are a result of that vs one of inadequate cartridge.  I don't know your bear regs but here you can hunt them over bait or with dogs. Either way you get some good shot presentations.  I know some running dogs who use handguns as well. 

[color="#003399"][size="3"]Look, in WWII we found .50 bullets did a nice job shooting down enemy planes. But a 20mm or 30mm nose cannon did it better, taking fewer shots because it made bigger holes.

Your .270 is good, a bronze tip 30-06 is probably better ... but the point here was ... a .243 is definitely on the lite side to be used as a bear cartridge.[/size][/color][sm=rolleyes.gif]

I'm not exactly sure what 50 cals vs 20 or 30 mm's has to do with hunting, you're comparing shooting down machines with hunting animals... [sm=rolleyes.gif]  Either will take down a plane, hit one with either enough and it comes down, there's no different degrees of taking down a plane.  I do agree a 243 is on the light side just like I think a 223 is light for deer.  But there are those who use them with great success, esp using TSX's, Partitions and the like.  Who am I to judge them and tell them they're unethical because mine or your opinion may differ?  And I doubt you'd see much difference on a black bear using a 270, 7 x 57, 7 mm RM or '06 [;)]

[mightyfofaad]

ORIGINAL: MI Hunter

I know some running dogs who use handguns as well.

Oh ... now I see why you're so upset ... I'm sorry, I didn't understand, because here in NYS running dogs aren't allowed to carry handguns ... thank God. [8D]

[MI Hunter]

Hardly upset...[:)]  I take it you're not a fan of handguns for BB's?  I do recall a guy a year or two ago shooting one with a 357 mag (IIRC) and the bear mauled him.  Even a non resident can come here and use one, but they do need a CPL from their home state.  Check out the UP here if you're ever interested in it, non resident fees are pretty reasonable and easy to get.  Not my thing personally though.

[northwood]

I hunted bear in Minnesota for 15 years.  A bear is not built anything like a deer.  The hide is much tougher.  They frequently have a few inches of fat underneath the hide.   The bones are heavier.  The muscle groups are wrapped in dense sinew.  The result of these factors is that, in my opinion, a .243 is not a good choice for bear.  Will it kill a bear?  Yes.  This is not a discussion about will the caliber work or won't it work it is about what are the better choices.
 
I have seen the results of many bear kills.  A light bullet travelling at high velocity will often mushroom and expend much of it's energy outside of the rib cage due to the heavy hide and thick bones of the leg and shoulder.  Most of the hunting in Minnesota is done at relatively close range over bait.  A good choice in firearms here is a 12 guage shotgun and slugs or a large caliber high power rifle with a heavy bonded bullet.  A .270 or many of the 30 caliber high power rifles with a core lokt or similar bullet would be a good choice.  Magnum rifles are not necessary but neither are they overkill. 
 
Nothing is better than a well placed shot by a competent hunter but a bear can be hard to put down.  In Minnesota most bear are hunted from a tree stand.  Accordingly most entrance wounds are high on the bear.  Often I have found no exit wounds on bear.  The off side hide can trap the bullet without creating an exit wound.  A bear generally has a healthy layer of fat.  Once the bullet passes though the hide, fat muscle and rib cage the layers of tissue no longer line up, effectively sealing the wound channel.  Without an exit wound low in the kill zone it can be very difficult to track a wounded bear.  Many wounded bear are not recovered due to this.   

[Everyday Hunter]

I've tried to read this entire thread, and unless I missed it no one made the comment I will make.

One of the issues we must consider when shooting a bear is the fact that they are fat, and sometimes very fat. Although a .243 will kill a bear with a hit to the vital organs, a marginal hit will result in a lost bear.

What you want when you shoot a bear is a big hole. The bigger the hole, the less it's likely to plug up with fat and stem the tide of blood. My calculations say a .30 caliber bullet has a 25% bigger cross section, and is 41% bigger in area than a .243. When it expands there will be an even bigger difference in area. I'd choose a .30 caliber bullet over a .243 anytime, not because the .243 doesn't have sufficient energy, but because the .30 caliber punches a much bigger hole.

Even a .30-30 will be better, especially at close range as in a baiting situation. Over the years, the .30-30 has killed lots of bears. I'm thinking of using one on a hunt I have planned for spring in New Brunswick.

Some bullets smaller than the .30 caliber will kill bears reliably. I'd also trust the 7mms with good deep-penetrating bullets.

Steve

[Everyday Hunter]

Northwood --
You did say what I said, and you said it much better than I did. Somehow I missed your last paragraph.

And, welcome to the D&DH forums. Great first post.

Steve

[mightyfofaad]

Once again folks, the purpose of this thread was to discuss whether certain methods of taking game are humane or not, not which guns are better for this & that. The ethics of taking game humanely; & that's all.
 
Frinstance ... the Shaman has developed a new hunting method where he places a cookie directly outside of his blind ... when a deer or bear bends down to eat the cookie, he hits it over the head with a large rubber mallet.
 
I personally do not feel this is a humane method, feeling that a 32 oz. short handled sledge would be more effective & thus, more humane.
 
What do you think? Let the Shaman know how you feel about this.

[northwood]

Steve,
 
Thanks for the kind comment.  You certainly have the right idea.  The problem is, How do you deliver a punch that will create a large hole.
 
A couple of points.  My experience is that it is tough to get a large entrance wound in a bear due to the soft tissue (fat) under a tough hide.  A bullet entering a bear will usually punch a small hole.  If it hits bone it has already travelled through fat and that fat keeps the shock from creating a large entrance hole in the hide.  The trick is to deliver a high energy retention bullet to the vitals and hopefully have enough energy to punch a large exit wound. 
 
In a 30 caliber bullet I would avoid soft points in favor of a full metal jacket or other premium bullet designed to deliver and retain energy in a heavy bodied animal.  As an example a hollow point would be a very poor choice, in my opinion, since they rapidly expand resulting in delivery of the majority of the energy outside the chest cavity.  Think in terms of a well built heavy bullet which is not prone to fast expansion.
 
If you reload that is not a problem as there are many good choices of 30 caliber bullets which are readily available.  However in my area it would be tough to find comercially available 30-30 cartridges that I would recommend for bear hunting as they are primarily designed for deer hunters.  i.e. Soft point.   
 
Having said that many spring bear have very little body fat and therefore much of this conversation may not apply to your plans.
 
Good luck.  I look forward to hearing about your success!
 
 

[dmcianfa]

I agree with Dan Salmon.  It's all about shot placement.  I wouldn't hesitate to hunt black bear with a .243 calibur.  Provider there was a nozler partition head on it to control expansion.  It's got enough muzzle velocity to rip through a black bear's hyde and punch through the rib cage as long as you hit your mark.  Now, if we want to talk about getting buck fever and not being able to hit a pie plate at 100 yds, then by all means if you think you can't group well and be accurate or precise you shouldn't be using it.  But, it can take a bear down if you aim and hit your spot.  Not the skull, either, as a bear's skull is thick and long, so ricochet can happen too easily, unless you plan on going through an eye socket shot, which is what most .22 calibur deer hunters do and quite effictively I might add as some folks are dead eye dicks.  Most black bear are taken within 20-100 yds and I would personally have no problem using this weapon with the correct load.  If it's the only rifle you got, I say go for it if you are a good enough shot.  If your like most hunters and have heavier caliburs, why use the .243 then.  I would pick up my 300 WSM because I have one.