Elk Behavior Round Robin "Concur or Bullshrimp"

[WapitiTalk1]

In my neverending quest to find ways for us to talk about these big galoots, I've came up with an elk "round robin". It goes like this, someone throws out a fact or behavior trait about elk and folks will respond in their follow on posts with either "concur" if they agree or "bullshrimp" if they don't. You may certainly add comments to your concur/bullshrimp response if you wish.

Example: RJ posts "Elk ivories are the two teeth located directly behind the top two canines". WW posts "bullshrimp.. they actually are the elk's top two canines".

Should be fun..... I'll get the first one going.

[WapitiTalk1]

You can oftentimes tell a bull from a cow by just looking at their tracks.

[Swede]

I think that is generally bull. I get an idea a lone large track is from a bull, but I rarely would be dogmatic about it. Other things will contribute to help determine if it is a bull or cow.

This should be a fun thread RJ. Good idea.

[Lsb]

There is a "no man's" zone above the lungs and below the spine in which you can hit and not kill it. Or other species too I suppose. Not sure where I stand, science say no but I know people that I trust that swear to it.

[Swede]

I believe it is bull Lsb. What happens is the animal does not bleed as much when hit in that area and it is mostly internal. Likely you will not find your critter if you hit it there, but it will die. Is there some small area that a bullet or broadhead could pass through and still not kill the animal. I doubt it.

[Cram369]

I concur on whitetail. Experienced it on first buck I shot.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Cram369]

Guess I better give the rest of the story. Game warden finished him off and brought him to me 8 days later. Said he was in pretty bad shape. Broadhead stuck in far side shoulder and had to cut it out. He wouldn't have survived with that arrow sticking out.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Indian Summer]

Similar scenario.... I believe you can take a frontal shot on an elk, with bow or high powered a rifle and not kill it because the bullet went inside the shoulder but outside the rib cage neither breaking the shoulder or damaging any lungs or organs.

[Lsb]

Similar scenario.... I believe you can take a frontal shot on an elk, with bow or high powered a rifle and not kill it because the bullet went inside the shoulder but outside the rib cage neither breaking the shoulder or damaging any lungs or organs.

That has happened to me. I believe it

[Tigger]

Elk always bed on a north facing slope on warm days.

[Swede]

I have experienced giving elk only a flesh wound by shooting down at a steep angle, and not getting penetration into the chest cavity. I hit a rib and the arrow stayed on the outside of that.

[Indian Summer]

Elk always bed on a north facing slope on warm days.

Bullshrimp the word always can never be used!

[>>>---WW---->]

When in thick brush and all you can see is the body from the shoulder area down you can always tell a bull from a cow.

[WapitiTalk1]

Hmm, I’d lean towards bullshrimp without seeing the head. But I’ve been wrong before.

[Swede]

I had a situation very much like what WW describes. The elk had its head in the brush. It was very big and muscular and at the tail end of a herd. It was rifle season in a bull only hunt. I would not shoot. I felt 95% sure it was a big bull, but that is not enough for me to pull the trigger. The elk kept walking forward and I never saw the head. What do you do, and what would you say with a big dead cow down in front of you? I just could not take that chance.
I have to say bull.

[>>>---WW---->]

Never said would you shoot, only can you tell a cow from a bull if you actually can't see the head. The correct answer should be (concur) if you know what to look for. Cows are tan in color to their legs and under belly. Bulls are always much darker, more like a dark chocolate.

[WapitiTalk1]

Good stuff WW, makes sense now that I think about it and look at some pics.

[Swede]

For me the operative word was always. If I was positive, I would shoot. I saw the rear three quarters of the elk. I guess that doubt caused me to let one go.

[WapitiTalk1]

Elk antlers can weigh in at over 35 pounds.

[Tigger]

Never said would you shoot, only can you tell a cow from a bull if you actually can't see the head. The correct answer should be (concur) if you know what to look for. Cows are tan in color to their legs and under belly. Bulls are always much darker, more like a dark chocolate.

I would not say that bulls are darker on their sides. I feel they are light on their sides and darker in the neck area. At least in the areas I have hunted in MT and WY.

[Swede]

Elk antlers can weigh in at over 35 pounds.

That is true unless you are talking about the ones I get.

[>>>---WW---->]

Not their sides Tigger. Their under sides, (aka) belly and lower legs.

[Tigger]

in the areas I hunt, it is their sides too. You can tell them a long ways away based on color (lightness for bulls). I wouldn't doubt this varies by location however.

[Swede]

Bears and cougars kill more elk than wolves. Concur?

[WapitiTalk1]

I'd have to say an extra large bullshrimp with a side of mustard on that Swede. I am not quoting/referring to any published statistics, but, I remember distinctly prior to the wolf introduction(s) (yes, it was/is an introduction not a re-introduction as the introduced Canadian Greys are vastly different than the Timber wolves) that the existing predators back in the day (cats/bears) were not knocking down the elk and deer herds significantly like those grey bass-terds are now.

[Tigger]

Woofs. man, we could have pages on woofs. I really wish those judges would get their head out of their rear and use science instead of foolishness in these lawsuits. We have so many woofs in MN it is crazy, yet we cant hunt them because they are not common in IL and IA. Huh??

And I would like to kick then next person in the nards who says that wolves only kill what they can eat. Completely untrue. They kill to kill and many times do not eat it.

Having said all that, the compounding effect is what is really hard on our elk numbers. Bear-caused mortality? Elk can overcome it. Bear and lion-caused mortality? Elk can overcome it. Bear, lion, wolf-caused mortality? not a chance to overcome it.

[Swede]

According to what I have read the director of science and planning for the RMEF Tom Toman, the #1 predator is the cougar. The #2 predator is the bear. Wolf predation varies by area. In your area wolf predation could be the biggest problem.

[WapitiTalk1]

According to what I have read the director of science and planning for the RMEF Tom Toman, the #1 predator is the cougar. The #2 predator is the bear. Wolf predation varies by area. In your area wolf predation could be the biggest problem.

Kind of a trick question you sly dog . Ya, in the grand scheme of things (not area dependent and just considering overall kill numbers in the lower 48), I imagine big cats are the number one killer. That said, if your question would have been wolf area specific, there would be no contest..... wolves are the #1 killer by far. They don't just kill for food, they kill to kill and are exceptional at it.

[Swede]

You folks are just too smart. I had to resort to a trick question.

[Jhg]

Elk will follow your tracks in the snow a short distance.

[Swede]

I have had elk follow down the same trail I just walked on when there is no snow, so I can't see why they would not if there was snow.