Thanks for the tip on P.O.F. Regarding cats,there are myriad books out there explaining this,
linked to their central nervous system. The evidence is there, not to mention as related by PHs who've witnessed many cat kills.
A Myriad..really?.....but you haven't named any at all which makes me wonder.
Are they proper scientific-anatomical based conclusive studies , or just hunting publications sprouting loose theories?
So which particular book do you recommend?
I'm more a guy that believes in experience, and not what you read from a book. To me, an employee with no college degree, that has been doing a job for 20years is worth a lot more than some college graduate fresh out of college with all the right papers but no experience.
What I'm trying to say is, listen to what has been observed through our own eyes rather than what some book says.
Again, amateur hunting videos are not scientific proof of CNS shock theory ,and neither is ordinary human observation
and conjecture.
The only way game dies from the effects of a projectile, is through physical destruction causing blood loss
or physical destruction to the CNS. Animals being shocked to death sounds very much like a wild theory that
regular people have perpetuated out of convenience. I have never seen anyone ever present on the net any
scientific -anatomical based conclusive study that supports the claim they have made about shock theory.
Its called the temporary wound channel, where the size of the temporary cavity, is affected directly by the velocity of the projectile.
"Hydrostatic shock transfer refers to the effect when shock waves travel through flesh to distant nerve centers, disrupting their ability to emit electrical impulses."
The effect of Hydrostatic shock from high velocity rounds are evident in all animals, not just cats, but saying this, the cats are certainly most affected. I have seen these affects even on Cape Buffalo. I can clearly see the difference of the effects on Cape Buffalo being shot with a 200gr projectile from a .375H&H traveling at 3200fps, as compared to a 600gr fired from a .505 Gibbs, traveling at 2250fps. Now, I'm not comparing the calibers at all,and their killing abilities, merely the visual effects I have observed between fast and slower rounds on practical examples, where I feel situations were equal. (i.e. state of the animal, shot placement etc) The faster round puts them down faster, no doubt. This is from a single shot to a relaxed animal.I'm not even referring to a few feet difference, but a on average, the bulls taken with the lighter, faster projectile traveled between 10-15yds. before collapsing, compared to 50-70yds with the bigger calibers. I would say I have had a sample size of 5 Buffalo bulls to compare results on, so by no means enough to write a dissertation, but enough proof to myself that there certainly is a difference in effects where hydrostatic shock comes into play.
Cats are notorious for having a much more sensitive nervous system as compared to a brute of a Buffalo bull.