•••
• •
O N TA R G E T • •
Hunting evironments
JAN-LODEWYK SERFONTEIN
THE SUN RISING FROM
BEHIND THE ACACIA
TREES MADE ME THINK
OF THE WEEKEND'S HUNT.
IT WAS A SUCCESSFUL
WEEKEND IN ALL
RESPECTS, BUT COULD WE
PERHAPS HAVE DONE IT
BETTER?
I
will be hunting in the bush-
veld this week - we really are
so privileged to have so many
opportunities to hunt in a variety
of environments in South Africa.
We are also privileged to be able
to hunt different types and sizes
of game. What does this mean
in respect of preparation? What
should I change in order to be a
better hunter?
In the Kalahari we set our rifles
to shoot accurately at 200
metres. Long shots are not easy
and for this reason we decided
on hard point bullets for the
body shots. The bushveld would
usually present the opportunity
for shots over a short distance,
with possibly a head-shot or
two. Soft point bullets would
be ideal for head-shots. One
would obviously have to
change your settings for the
shots over a shorter distance.
A few shots on the shoot-
ing range would
help with the coming week's hunt.
Why all the changes and planning
when I merely plan to change to
another environment?
Hard point bullets for body-
shots penetrate better and limit
meat damage. They penetrate
in a straight line, even after hit-
ting bone. They don't break up
and when they enter the chest,
the damage is done to the chest
organs. However, if they are used
for a head-shot, they may pen-
etrate so well that they miss the
brain. If you use a soft point bul-
let for a head-shot, at least a few
pieces will break off and penetrate
the brain.
The disadvantages of a soft point
bullet are also a reality. Over the
past weekend one of the hunters
used a soft point bullet for a body-
shot. It passed through the body,
damaging a number of organs.
The liver and heart were hit and
blood loss resulted in a humane
way of killing the animal. When
the animal was skinned, it became
evident exactly what happens with
the soft point bullet after impact.
A huge hole could be seen where
the bullet exited, as well as five
smaller holes where the fragments
exited. In the case of a larger
animal, the pieces entering the
opposite shoulder cause excessive
bleeding. Unfortunately it also
results in a lot of damage to the
meat. A hard point bullet would
possibly have resulted in quick
death as well, with less damage to
the carcass.
We also saw the results of a hard
point bullet. A neck shot to an
ostrich hit the windpipe, without
any other damage which caused
death. It was an accurate shot,
but not fatal - a soft point bullet
would have had a better outcome
in this instance. A good head-shot
to a oryx with the same hard point
bullet would have been instanta-
neously fatal.
A number of questions regarding
the use of soft and hard point bul-
lets arise:
If soft instead of hard point
bullets, or vice versa, were used,
would the outcome have been
better? Is less damage to the meat
so important that you prefer not
to use soft point bullets for body-
shots? Would a soft point bullet
have fragmented to the extent that
it would have killed the ostrich
instantaneously? Will all the bush-
veld shots be head-shots over a
short distance? What if the animal
stands in such a way that you can
only manage a body-shot?
After all, hunting is not a situation
that can be planned perfectly.
Which bullet is best for your spe-
cific hunt? There is not one simple
answer that takes everything into
account. Plan your hunt, know
your rifle and be certain of your
trajectory. A good shot will result
in a mortal wound, whether you
use a soft or hard point bullet.
SENWES Scenario • AUG/SEP 2017
49