Ethical hunting.

[DogNewbie]

I agree that shooting quail on the ground should be a hanging offense.

Hi Jim,

Just curious if you could elaborate on why you feel so strongly about ground shooting?

[ezzy333]

I'm sorry this talk was about hunting ethics, we have little in common with animal right advocates when it comes to ethics involving hunting. I am basing my conversation as amongst other hunters not to the animal rights crowd, to them all hunting is unethical.

I'm talking about hunting ethics as well. That was just an example of how ethics and humane treatment are intertwined in my view. As a hunter I believe my personal sportsman like practices are best for me because it helps make it more than just killing the bird. I'm I hunting to put food on the table? No, I can do that without hunting. I'm hunting for the fun of the sport and the experience gained from the harvest of the bird. I'll teach my kids to hunt because there is a huge disconnect in our society between what we put in our bodies and where it came from. But, like I said, there is a part of the hunt, a large part, that is solely sporting. That's why I like to shoot flushed birds. Yes some get away unscathed but for every unscathed birds there's a winged bird died a slow death and never found its way to the dinner table. I just find it hard to say that the sporting way is more ethical than taking a bird on the ground that you know you have a very good chance to kill quickly and not waste the birds life.

Ethical slaughtering means as humanely as possible in a completely controlled environment.

Ethical hunting is based on giving the quarry a sporting chance of survival but then performing in as humane way as possicle in an uncontrolled environment.

The gap between those two is where many have a problem connecting.

Ezzy

[jimbo&rooster]

I agree that shooting quail on the ground should be a hanging offense.

Hi Jim,

Just curious if you could elaborate on why you feel so strongly about ground shooting?

If you dont understand why folks dont shoot quail on the ground then Id say you ought to sell your dog.

I grew up in an area where seeing a quail was something you told the neighbors about. Untill about 10yrs ago they were scarce. I would compare shooting quail off of the ground to shooting deer out of the window of my truck. Like I said I feel like we have a responsibility to those who came before us to uphold the traditions that they put in place and if thats not the way you feel about it, that is fine. But your not welcome to hunt with me.
I had a buddy of mine shoot a phez off the ground at a game preserve, I picked up my dog and went home. He spent the rest of the day kicking around 60acres looking for the birds he paid for.

[DogNewbie]

I'm sorry this talk was about hunting ethics, we have little in common with animal right advocates when it comes to ethics involving hunting. I am basing my conversation as amongst other hunters not to the animal rights crowd, to them all hunting is unethical.

I'm talking about hunting ethics as well. That was just an example of how ethics and humane treatment are intertwined in my view. As a hunter I believe my personal sportsman like practices are best for me because it helps make it more than just killing the bird. I'm I hunting to put food on the table? No, I can do that without hunting. I'm hunting for the fun of the sport and the experience gained from the harvest of the bird. I'll teach my kids to hunt because there is a huge disconnect in our society between what we put in our bodies and where it came from. But, like I said, there is a part of the hunt, a large part, that is solely sporting. That's why I like to shoot flushed birds. Yes some get away unscathed but for every unscathed birds there's a winged bird died a slow death and never found its way to the dinner table. I just find it hard to say that the sporting way is more ethical than taking a bird on the ground that you know you have a very good chance to kill quickly and not waste the birds life.

Ethical slaughtering means as humanely as possible in a completely controlled environment.

Ethical hunting is based on giving the quarry a sporting chance of survival but then performing in as humane way as possicle in an uncontrolled environment.

The gap between those two is where many have a problem connecting.

Ezzy

It looks like we have differing definitions ethics. My definition is closer to your ethic slaughter definition. But I like your addition of controlled vs. uncontrolled environments. The way I see it, in an uncontrolled hunting environment, there's nothing unethical, with trying to simulate a controlled environment as close as possible i.e. shooting a bird on the ground. That would be the "as humane way as possible" part of your definition. Because of that view, I can't include the "giving the bird a sporting chance" part in my definition of ethical hunting. I have to split my hunting experience up between the raw slaughter vs. sportsmen aspect and find a balance. In the end, we both end up at the same spot with how we hunt, but I guess just view others that ground hunt a little differently.

[Redfishkilla]

"I just find it hard to say that the sporting way is more ethical than taking a bird on the ground that you know you have a very good chance to kill quickly and not waste the birds life."

Shooting a bird on the ground IS a waste of a bird’s life. Wounding game is a part of hunting and hunters should take precautions to minimize losses from wounding, like good dogs and accurate rifles and bows. But if I was so worried about wounding game to the point where I thought it better to shoot them on the ground I would find another hobby. I’d feel sick about myself if I shot quail on the ground.

If you take it further, by your standards you shouldn't even risk shooting them on the ground when you can go buy a chicken at the store. Why risk it?

This is a good debate.

[DogNewbie]

I agree that shooting quail on the ground should be a hanging offense.

Hi Jim,

Just curious if you could elaborate on why you feel so strongly about ground shooting?

If you dont understand why folks dont shoot quail on the ground then Id say you ought to sell your dog.

I grew up in an area where seeing a quail was something you told the neighbors about. Untill about 10yrs ago they were scarce. I would compare shooting quail off of the ground to shooting deer out of the window of my truck. Like I said I feel like we have a responsibility to those who came before us to uphold the traditions that they put in place and if thats not the way you feel about it, that is fine. But your not welcome to hunt with me.
I had a buddy of mine shoot a phez off the ground at a game preserve, I picked up my dog and went home. He spent the rest of the day kicking around 60acres looking for the birds he paid for.

Didn't mean to offend, Jim, just asking for clarification to see if it was an ethical or sporting issue for you. Just trying to have a friendly discussion. If you see my earlier posts, I'm not condoning ground hunting I'm just discussing the difference between killing a bird ethically and humanely on the ground vs. risking winging a bird and never finding it.

[DogNewbie]

"I just find it hard to say that the sporting way is more ethical than taking a bird on the ground that you know you have a very good chance to kill quickly and not waste the birds life."

Shooting a bird on the ground IS a waste of a bird’s life. Wounding game is a part of hunting and hunters should take precautions to minimize losses from wounding, like good dogs and accurate rifles and bows. But if I was so worried about wounding game to the point where I thought it better to shoot them on the ground I would find another hobby. I’d feel sick about myself if I shot quail on the ground.

If you take it further, by your standards you shouldn't even risk shooting them on the ground when you can go buy a chicken at the store. Why risk it?

This is a good debate.

Well that's my point exactly. By my definition, I don't hunt in the most ethical way possible. So why do I hunt? Because there is value in completely understanding and appreciating how your food gets on your table. I like to be able to look at a grouse breast and know what I'm looking at. And I like the sport. I like the challenge of shooting a bird on the wing. Do you think it's unethical to bird hunt without a dog?

[Mountaineer]

...Mountaineer, I'm asking out of a sincere ingnorance... so please no one take offense, but what is the reason for abstaining from the February season for Ruffed Grouse?.. I believe I may have recently sinned... Honestly tho, I would welcome your opinion on it... I agree completely with your other 7 points, so I'd like to understand the reason for it... 'course, it's probably so obvious I'll feel like a moron... but that's nothing new...

No problem...ruffed grouse are not under the same conditions of decline everywhere.
However, true late season is a time in much of the Apps. when food is least and of poorest quality.
Quite different than in other parts of the range blessed with aspen, swamps, etc.
As well, some parts of the range, that have/had a February season, also have conditions where every day of that long season can be hunted...snow or terrain is never a hindrance.
Late season, the killing season, saw in Ohio 40% of the total grouse harvest.
Much of Pa. for example sees a far different set of conditions for the ruffed grouse as to food, available habitat, manner of habitat, hunter access and on and on.
Ohio thankfully cut February off...too late but numbers this year aided by a couple good springs have blipped up a mite.
Aiding the springs was the shorter season, fewer hunters and some really good soft and hard mast.
Important to note that Ohio has some very fine grouse habitat existing now as a paper mill always needs fed...that cover is empty tho in many cases...I believe that there are additional components of grouse decline than either hunter additivity or habitat but...

Hunter additivity is widely pooh-poohed re ruffed grouse, I know.
Many will say no study has shown hunter additivity to be important.
True enough but the problem is, only one study ever viewed hunter additivity in late season...that was in the Pigeon river area in N. Michigan.
They did find zero additivity...course, the upper great lakes has a far different set of conditions that benefit the grouse than does much of the Apps....apples and oranges...plus, fewer turkeys.
The ACGRP study did not study late season additivity either...they did what other studies do and that is estimate additivity over an entire season.....not accurate as to late season additivity. As well, much of the ACGRP areas self-limited hunters by that, again, terrain and snow over the season.
Some also read a study, like the long grouse one in Pa., with an eye to what they want to find...intrepretation is routinely open.
Simply put, an honest read of any of the studies finds that additivity by hunters has never been addressed to properly evaluate the late season, meaning February, effect.

While I would like to see January jettisoned as well in areas like Ohio which exist well down a decline curve, the loss of January is hard to support....given lower hunter numbers and other factors.
February in the Apps is a bad time though to kill a grouse either by shooting it or by flushing it far off it's home range and so open it to avian predators, deplete energy stores pre-breeding, etc.
The ACGRP did find that grouse in the upper great lakes enter winter with less fat reserves than their counterparts in the Apps....why?....food is comparatively easy to obtain and of higher value in the UGL....and more subject to variance in the Apps.
Couple of years ago the akern crop took a pounding in WVa and parts of Pa....not good for the grouse at all.

GBE recognized hunter additivity decades ago in his area....few considered the possibity then than do now...that was a shame.
He was ahead of his time re ruffed grouse and the problems they face in a more populated world and one where early successional finds few champions.
Frank Jezioro, WV DNR Comish, finally posted many of the same thoughts as I in the PDJ a while back....simply hoping, I believe, that more hunters consider that they do have an affect....at times and in some areas.
That is all many of us would like to see...consideration well past a hunter's own front sight.
But too may hunters want to hunt so badly that they refuse to see what is before them untill it is too late.
Some even will say "shoot 'em while we got 'em and blame everything on Habitat.
Habitat, as I have said many times, while #1 in importance, begins to lose it's percentage of the blame in the decline, as bird popualtions fall, to all the lessor factors of the decline.
Hunter additivity being but one factor.

Hunter additivity is not the same for all gamebirds or for any one gamebird at any one time or at any one time of the season...some bird populations simply are able to traditionally absorb and blunt hunter additivity.
Some birds like the pheasant have a different breeding dynamic as well.
Hunters pretty much stomp and fume whenever hunter additivity and ruffed grouse is mentioned as a possibility....another shame.
We grousehunters should be more open...for the sake of the bird we love and respect...for the wildness and the memories they deliver.

More power to those who legally hunt in February, and certainly January....just consider and be mindfull that you may have an affect beyond what you hit and harvest...or what happens after you miss and leave the woods.

Long-winded..sorry.
Not a short answer subject.
I shot my first grouse in 1964...tough to witness so strong a decline from up so close.

[markj]

jimbo&rooster wrote:

I agree that shooting quail on the ground should be a hanging offense.



Hi Jim,

Just curious if you could elaborate on why you feel so strongly about ground shooting

I also feel this way, having had to put anothers dog down in the field was the last straw for me. Never went out with that guy again. Shooting ground is a good way to get a richochet and someone or a dog will get hurt. Sure it is cool to see them quail walking in a line one behind the other but give them a chance in flight and dont shoot low flyers, it is how folks get hurt there once again. Many places it is against the law, ground shooting that is.

Ethical hunting is using common sense mostly, dont shoot at deer running away from you, that kind of thing. Always makesure you are not gonna shoot someone over there, that kind of thing. Being safe in the field is key, hence the hunter safety classes needed to hunt now. Follow all the laws to the letter is also key. Yearsago Iwas dunb, was hunting, got to thetruck, removed the shell was in the chamber left the magazine full, guess what? The game warden hada nice camera showed me my actions, I did put the gun in the back of the truck but it was legally loaded, so I gota huge fine which I paid. Was over 20 years ago and I have yet to not follow the exact letter of the law.

Was huntingin Nebraska, Burt county, was in a large field, saw a deer walk/stumbling thru the field, saw it leave the field and go into tall corn. Saw the blood track it left was a lot of blood. Saw hunters stop their truck and ask if we saw a deer etc, told him yep, showed him the blood track told him I was from out of state and wasnt going to track it without a permit sooo I watched them get into thetruck and drive off...... Later that day saw em in town, no deer in the truck, they left it there to die, too lazy to get out of the truck and track the blood trail.

Another time, found a deer was hit in the back wit han arrow, he run himself to death with the arrow slapping him on the back like that, lung was hanging out his mouth. Now that makes every hunter look bad, since they cut his antlers off left the rest there. Stuff like this pisses me off to no end. Dont shoot to wound, make sure you can kill it and am not in the wrong.

[Redfishkilla]

"Do you think it's unethical to bird hunt without a dog?"

Not if you find every bird you shoot at, but generally? Yes. And who would want to go hunting without a dog?

"So why do I hunt? Because there is value in completely understanding and appreciating how your food gets on your table."

You hunt for the wrong reasons. You don't have to hunt to get to your stated goal. Go buy a live chicken or cow and go through the process of taking it from pasture to table. We hunt for fun, for sport therefore we don't shoot them off the ground. Your goal is an added bonus not the purpose.

[dreamerofdreams]

jimbo&rooster wrote:

I agree that shooting quail on the ground should be a hanging offense.



Hi Jim,

Just curious if you could elaborate on why you feel so strongly about ground shooting

I also feel this way, having had to put anothers dog down in the field was the last straw for me. Never went out with that guy again. Shooting ground is a good way to get a richochet and someone or a dog will get hurt. Sure it is cool to see them quail walking in a line one behind the other but give them a chance in flight and dont shoot low flyers, it is how folks get hurt there once again. Many places it is against the law, ground shooting that is.

See, that's the sort of explanation that really helps someone like me. Thanks for that.

[DogNewbie]

"Do you think it's unethical to bird hunt without a dog?"

Not if you find every bird you shoot at, but generally? Yes. And who would want to go hunting without a dog?

"So why do I hunt? Because there is value in completely understanding and appreciating how your food gets on your table."

You hunt for the wrong reasons. You don't have to hunt to get to your stated goal. Go buy a live chicken or cow and go through the process of taking it from pasture to table. We hunt for fun, for sport therefore we don't shoot them off the ground. Your goal is an added bonus not the purpose.

I think that's interesting that you find, in general, hunting without a dog to be unethical. I grew up pheasant hunting with no dogs and I can't think of a single time my father didn't do it ethically. I remember the first time he took me duck hunting I shot my first teal and put it right into the reeds. We were in there for over an hour looking for that bird. Would a dog have found it? Maybe, but the respect for the animal my father had was clear every hunt.

I completely agree that we hunt for the fun first and foremost. That's part of the reason I believe that it's not always the most humane way to kill the bird. It's the most sporting way to kill the bird while trying to be as humane as possible. I accept that and appreciate each bird more because of it.

[Sharon]

The thing with ethics is that it is "to each his own". 60 years ago there was a standard based on the Bible , but that is long gone for most. Each person has to decide on their own set of values whether it be for hunting or living.

When Dad had to feed 7 kids, shooting a bird on the ground was reasonable and understandable .

Now in Northern Ontario it is common practice to shoot Spruce Grouse on the ground. They hang around on lumbering roads and on low trees. Always bothers me when one of those hunters says, "I had a great day Grouse hunting.( no dog needed). " Not my definition of a great day but it's legal and it's his choice.

Having worked in the jail I can tell you that MANY people simply live within/without the "confines" of the law and know nothing of ethics.

We have a Frebruary cotton tail season here. I don't hunt rabbit in February as many /most of the does are pregnant due to our warmer winters,

however , I don't judge the guy who does.

PS The only thing that really bothers me is to see a pickup truck full of coyotes or geese. It shouldn't bother me , it is perfectly legal but..............................

[jimbo&rooster]

Dognewbie,

you didnt offend me in the least and in the sport of friendly discussion you got more than a 2 word answer. (which wouldn't have been nice)

When you asked me why I feel so strongly about shooting birds off the ground I really didn't have an answer to your question.... In my mind there is nothing worse than cheapening a day in the field with my dogs by taking shortcuts to achieve a desired end.

I dont think Ethics is something you can write down. You either have them or you don't. I gather from some of your posts that you are probly fairly educated, if not to a fault. By playing the devils advocate it is my experience that a person is either trying to stir the pot for their own entertainment or they are trying to prove who swings the bigger bat so to speak.

Jim

[nikegundog]

Follow all the laws to the letter is also key. Yearsago Iwas dunb, was hunting, got to thetruck, removed the shell was in the chamber left the magazine full, guess what? The game warden hada nice camera showed me my actions, I did put the gun in the back of the truck but it was legally loaded, so I gota huge fine which I paid. Was over 20 years ago and I have yet to not follow the exact letter of the law.

To me what you did would not be considered unethical unless you were doing it to gain advantage over game, illegal yes, unethical no.

[DogNewbie]

Dognewbie,

you didnt offend me in the least and in the sport of friendly discussion you got more than a 2 word answer. (which wouldn't have been nice)

When you asked me why I feel so strongly about shooting birds off the ground I really didn't have an answer to your question.... In my mind there is nothing worse than cheapening a day in the field with my dogs by taking shortcuts to achieve a desired end.

I dont think Ethics is something you can write down. You either have them or you don't. I gather from some of your posts that you are probly fairly educated, if not to a fault. By playing the devils advocate it is my experience that a person is either trying to stir the pot for their own entertainment or they are trying to prove who swings the bigger bat so to speak.

Jim

Good, I'm glad I didn't offend. I guess I misread your passionate response. I completely agree that there isn't a set definition of ethics and there never will be. That's why I think it's fun to debate.

[DogNewbie]

Follow all the laws to the letter is also key. Yearsago Iwas dunb, was hunting, got to thetruck, removed the shell was in the chamber left the magazine full, guess what? The game warden hada nice camera showed me my actions, I did put the gun in the back of the truck but it was legally loaded, so I gota huge fine which I paid. Was over 20 years ago and I have yet to not follow the exact letter of the law.

To me what you did would not be considered unethical unless you were doing it to gain advantage over game, illegal yes, unethical no.

Agreed. Intentions are everything.

[Max&rick]

WOW lots of great points lots of different views,I love the birds the chase and especially the dogs.I always make sure when my head hits the pillow I can sleep good knowing I have done the right thing!!!!

[markj]

Ethics are different to people, what one will do and is OK wit hit another will cringe/

I was up hunting, hadmy dog. Saw a truck pull up on a thicket, 2 guys jump out and shoot the roosters on the ground. One took to the air wounded, they followed it and head shot it on the ground. Pulled his cell phone out called another number said we will be right there, went off. I bet to do this again at another "locals" place. It was OK for him, but I sure did cringe over that.

Its all in what you are raised up in.

I was hunting with some guys, came up on a thicket, birds started running eveywhere, a guy shot at one, pellets hit the ground and richochetted into the guy across from him. Coulda went bad right there.


Loaded gun isagainst the law, in Iowa it must also be in a case, not to be loaded until you are off the road. Never know when the game warden is watching from a mile away.

[northern cajun]

Everybody's standards are different.

I am amazed at the amount of judging of other's ethics.

Did those guys that shot birds on the ground or water break any laws.

What about wild turkeys should we put them to wing before we shoot them in the spring? Why not tradition?

It is simple if people are hunting by the regulations and not breaking laws who is anyone to impart a higher standard than is already called for, based upon your own experiences vs the "unethical" hunter if you do not like the method they use simply do not hunt with them. No more no less. The in fighting amongst hunters will be our doing.

If ethics were the main goal. Then trying your best to harvest the bird with the least possibility of wounding and not recovering it then everyone should hunt with a 12 gauge not them bean shooting 28 gauges or does that make it sporting.

Just putting it out there. I see a lot of "ethical hunters" hunting with weapons in which they are not skilled enough to competently harvest game with some degree of efficacy. Is that ethical I find that more appalling than the person who shoots a bird on the ground, the "ethical hunter" will waste more game over the course of his life shooting a challenging weapon than the man shooting birds on the ground and which will have a larger population impact long term.


I am curious as to the responses I will get to this don't worry I have thick skin.

[northern cajun]

Oh and I don't want theories or a persons perspective give me cold hard data from a peer reviewed journal on late season hunting etc. Not some article in PDJ.

I am not picking a fight but science isn't speculation. Now I will grant over a person life they can in fact have some strong correlations they a have seen over time.
Correlations does not prove causation.

[northern cajun]

Dognewbie,

you didnt offend me in the least and in the sport of friendly discussion you got more than a 2 word answer. (which wouldn't have been nice)

When you asked me why I feel so strongly about shooting birds off the ground I really didn't have an answer to your question.... In my mind there is nothing worse than cheapening a day in the field with my dogs by taking shortcuts to achieve a desired end.

I dont think Ethics is something you can write down. You either have them or you don't. I gather from some of your posts that you are probly fairly educated, if not to a fault. By playing the devils advocate it is my experience that a person is either trying to stir the pot for their own entertainment or they are trying to prove who swings the bigger bat so to speak.

Jim

I disagree with the statement you either have ethics or you don't. I person can have a good work ethic or a bad one they still both have ethics just not to the same ethical standards. Ethics is like beauty it is very subjective and very personal and anything that is subjective,Ethics will never be agreed upon by all parties due to its subjective nature.

[Mountaineer]

... The in fighting amongst hunters will be our doing. ...

Perhaps, but another factor in the "undoing" may be the quiet acceptance of the less than admirable actions of hunters amongst us.
Hunters are a very small group and there are always those watching for slips to try and limit what we all enjoy.
It may be a good idea to consider raising the bar rather than lowering it to some least common denominator based upon either a group affiliation or a legality of action.
That does not require that we imply that we trump another hunter or another manner of hunting but all hunter decisions should be up for scrutiny because they have the potential to affect us all.

Shooting a ruffed grouse on the roadside with the truck engine running and shooting a turkey coming into a call are two very different hunting situations....different and uncomparable.
Whenever these ethics discussions arise they quickly evolve into the error of flock shooting but then just as quickly dissolve into the different and uncomparable.

If we all were open to that scrunity of actions, if we all simply acted like we had some sense afield and if we worried less about what we wanted to do, what we were legally permitted to do or, what we traditionally have done then, I believe, we would all profit to the greatest extent.
But, the least often raise the largest noise....so, who knows what will happen in the future.

*As far as what you want northern cajun....you may not always receive it.
If you read what I said then you would see that any info on late season additivity in the Apps. does not exist...either way.
Which leads me to believe you may read too quickly or incompletely as my point was that the science is sorely lacking re studied late season additivity in the Apps.
One is then left with anecdotal evidence that certainly is not an end all as that evidence varies across the appalatchians but neither can it be ignored....unless one wishes to blindly not consider.
Too much of that going around which is one reason the ruffed grouse are holding their breath today in many areas.
I attended the ACGRP presentaion...attend a few of those, read reams of grosue studies and you will easily see that there is disagreement amongst researchers....let alone grousehunters.
Again, I only hope hunters consider what their ruffed grouse coverts can handle rather than what their grousehunting wishes require.

[northern cajun]

... The in fighting amongst hunters will be our doing. ...

Perhaps, but another factor in the "undoing" may be the quiet acceptance of the less than admirable actions of hunters amongst us.
Hunters are a very small group and there are always those watching for slips to try and limit what we all enjoy.
It may be a good idea to consider raising the bar rather than lowering it to some least common denominator based upon either a group affiliation or a legality of action.
That does not require that we imply that we trump another hunter or another manner of hunting but all hunter decisions should be up for scrutiny because they have the potential to affect us all.

Shooting a ruffed grouse on the roadside with the truck engine running and shooting a turkey coming into a call are two very different hunting situations....different and uncomparable.
Whenever these ethics discussions arise they quickly evolve into the error of flock shooting but then just as quickly dissolve into the different and uncomparable.

If we all were open to that scrunity of actions, if we all simply acted like we had some sense afield and if we worried less about what we wanted to do, what we were legally permitted to do or, what we traditionally have done then, I believe, we would all profit to the greatest extent.
But, the least often raise the largest noise....so, who knows what will happen in the future.


*As far as what you want northerncajun....you may not always receive it.

Well I agree with you last statement I would caulk that up to a basic fact.

I stand by ethics are subjective and therefore very difficult to discuss, much less come to a consensus. I am not arguing one way or the other. I just find it strange when people try to force feed moral values upon others that they really do not know and I am not talking about me. Just the discussion in general.

Oh but Mountaineer lets discuss the gun issue I raised please.

[carlrh42]

If I had to make a choice in upland hunting: Leave the gun home or leave the dog I would leave the gun every time. Just the way I feel about it.
CRH

[Mountaineer]

...Oh but Mountaineer lets discuss the gun issue I raised please.

Think you can find some better or more fertile ground for yourself there, eh?

If you mean the ...paraphrased, "use a 12 and not a 28" then I would say neither gives as much advantage over the other as some believe.
I used to use a 28, started with a 12 & 20 and now go with a couple of 16s or a 12.
A decison of which is most about my preference on the day....not about which is most deadly, as I find little to choose on a practical level from any gauge, save the 410 which does bring many burdens of it's own.
Any other particular bird, of course, can bring a change.
Efficiency in "wounding and harvesting" is more about shooting well and making decisions regarding weight, choke, cartouche, flight, distance, conditions and more rather than gauge. Gauge is never the only consideration. Barrel length, for another example...is it ethical to use a 34" XF Knick for woodcock?
I say no, imho...but legal it is.
We should all make a personal choice of scattergun and operate within our own limits with it....that is the ethical choice, totally unrelated to the gauge of the scattergun. :roll:

NC, the "oh" and "please" words indicate that you may to get more out of the fun and challenge of a discussion rather than any considering of another view.
Fine enough I reckon but I leave the swingset to you now.
This is a serious subject for many and too much back and forth serves no one well.
I've stated my thoughts to the best of my ability...if insufficent for you then I accept that one will have that in Life.

[northern cajun]

...Oh but Mountaineer lets discuss the gun issue I raised please.

Think you can find some better or more fertile ground for yourself there, eh?

If you mean the ...paraphrased, "use a 12 and not a 28" then I would say neither gives as much advantage over the other as some believe.
I used to use a 28, started with a 12 & 20 and now go with a couple of 16s or a 12.
A decison of which is most about my preference on the day....not about which is most deadly, as I find little to choose on a practical level from any gauge, save the 410 which does bring many burdens of it's own.
Efficiency in "wounding and harvesting" is more about shooting well and making decisions regarding weight, choke, cartouche, flight, distance, conditions and more rather than gauge. Gauge is never the only consideration. Barrel length, for another example...is it ethical to use a 34" XF Knick for woodcock?
I say no, imho...but legal it is.
We should all make a personal choice of scattergun and operate within our own limits with it....that is the ethical choice, totally unrelated to the gauge of the scattergun. :roll:

I beg to differ, the problem is people are often not good judges of their shooting abilities period and hence need all the help they can get :roll: :roll: :roll: and yes guns with the same chokes do pattern roughly the same however pellet density is dramatically different and over the long haul in the same hands the twelve will out perform the lesser guns IMHO, especially in water fowling.

The average hunter is not a good shot. :roll: :roll:

[northern cajun]

http://www.huntfairchase.com/docs/7aa88a58.pdf

Like I said its subjective.

[twofeathers]

Ethics are different to people, what one will do and is OK wit hit another will cringe/



Loaded gun isagainst the law, in Iowa it must also be in a case, not to be loaded until you are off the road. Never know when the game warden is watching from a mile away.

I work with a guy (never hunted with him) that was bragging about driving around with his shotgun loaded in the vehicle he shot his limit of birds a couple of times last season cruising gravel roads. I tried telling him it was not legal, let alone unethical, he told me he has a concealed carry permit so he could have a loaded weapon in his vehicle. I read DNR rules to try and disprove him but they do not go to any detail about permits to carry so I couldn't.

He doesn't own dogs and in his mind what he was doing was perfectly legal and ethical -heck it was even worth bragging about. =====sickening.

[Redfishkilla]

"and over the long haul in the same hands the twelve will out perform the lesser guns IMHO, especially in water fowling."

By this reasoning shouldn't you always use a 10 gauge with 3.5 inch shells?

[Mountaineer]

.... over the long haul in the same hands the twelve will out perform the lesser guns IMHO, especially in water fowling. ...

Good thing you added the waterfowling ....a 28 with a small load of steel would indeed be far from a wise or, I would say ethical, choice for pass-shooting geese, but I addressed that with "any other particular bird".
I was speaking of ruffed grouse and with Ol' Bonasa U as a bird of the day, I could not disagree more with your 12 gauge statement of superiority. Over any haul length, effectiveness of the 12 versus the 28 to16 is no different in my experience. Far too many additional variables of the shot itself when Ol' Bonasa U takes wing....however, your generalized assumption of the available data would fit fine in an intrepretation of a ruffed grouse Study.
I reckon tho that for those sturdy mountain folks in Pennsylvania who use the first shot at spooky grouse to clear a path thru the densest laurel and the second to connect may differ...but one will also have that.

As far as disparaging hunter shooting, I expect that may be so, more and more.
Less opportunity in many cases and less interest as a whole.....less developed ability over that "long haul" perhaps.
Simply illustrates that more of those who take afield for gamebirds should work to improve their scattergunning...a fine and ethical decision when impacting a gamebird.

Someone mentioned hunting w/o a dog as unethical, if I understood correctly.
Afraid I can't buy that idea.
I don't see anything unethical in that practice.
I do see an unethical decision can be made when any flushed bird flies...whether a pointer or flusher pup is present or not.
Lost birds are far from a given sans dog...as with all examples, the particulars make the argument.
Many of us were not blessed to begin wingshooting with a dog....just would not want to hang a tag of unethical on a kid in the back forty beginning a journey....without witnessing how that kid conducts himself, then and long into Life.
JMHOT

[rschmeider]

.... over the long haul in the same hands the twelve will out perform the lesser guns IMHO, especially in water fowling. ...

Good thing you added the waterfowling ....a 28 with a small load of steel would indeed be far from a wise or, I would say ethical, choice for pass-shooting geese, but I addressed that with "any other particular bird".
I was speaking of ruffed grouse and with Ol' Bonasa U as a bird of the day, I could not disagree more with your 12 gauge statement of superiority. Over any haul length, effectiveness of the 12 versus the 28 to16 is no different in my experience. Far too many additional variables of the shot itself when Ol' Bonasa U takes wing....however, your generalized assumption of the available data would fit fine in an intrepretation of a ruffed grouse Study.
I reckon tho that for those sturdy mountain folks in Pennsylvania who use the first shot at spooky grouse to clear a path thru the densest laurel and the second to connect may differ...but one will also have that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5AsZyyw ... re=related This is how we Pa sturdy mountain folk Hunt
I train my dogs and hunt in Feb to. ..I never harvest grouse out of my covets past Jan..Been huntin the same spots over and over 20 some years. :roll:

[markj]

Did those guys that shot birds on the ground or water break any laws.

heck yes, it is against the law in Nebraska and Iowa to shoot a rooster, we call it arkansasing. Dont do it, you may get a ticket. or worse. Do it on the res up north and you is in a heap of trouble, they will confiscate the car or truck the guns ammo and maybe the dogs too. What can you do about it? nothing at all.

The average hunter is not a good shot

You must not hunt much around here we practise. Dad and Grandpa never missed a shot, why you may ask? Well they were selective about what they shot at. I suggest everyone do so. long shots wound and cripple. I have a lot of pics I used to send to my cousin in Mich of the hunting I did, limited every time out. Sometimes before 10:30 am. Shot 5 quail in flight out of a covey one time, Dad was very impressed I was taking after him. 5 shots 5 quail, dog fetched every one to my hand. I was younger man then but with my new eyes I will be back out next season.

I use a 12ga.

[BrassVols]

Dont hunt coveys late in the day, dont shoot birds out of a small covey. Limit your chasing or taking of birds out of even a large covey especially in in climate weather. If you can tell the difference at flush only shoot the male quail (some of us can tell when they Flush believe it or not) and dont train dogs in the spring during nesting season. Only shoot at a bird when you have a clear shot and BELIEVE you can get a clean kill, try not to wound.

X2
Very well said.

[SHORTFAT]

This is how we Pa sturdy mountain folk Hunt

rschmeider... that video ended before I could see if the dog stayed steady to wing and shot!!!

[nikegundog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5AsZyyw ... re=related This is how we Pa sturdy mountain folk Hunt
I train my dogs and hunt in Feb to. ..I never harvest grouse out of my covets past Jan..Been huntin the same spots over and over 20 some years. :roll:

That's awesome two Governors in one 30 second clip.

[Mountaineer]

...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5AsZyyw ... re=related This is how we Pa sturdy mountain folk Hunt
I train my dogs and hunt in Feb to. ..I never harvest grouse out of my covets past Jan..Been huntin the same spots over and over 20 some years. :roll:

Pennsylvania is blessed with many solid ruffed grouse conditions...you are extremely lucky in that state and wise in when you hunt.
Lucky moreso now with the influx of marcellus payments.

Re the comment on "sturdy" and "laurel"...I was thinking of one particular traditional mountain gentleman.
Not much chance he will ever be elected Governor...fingers crossed.

[nikegundog]

I was speaking of ruffed grouse and with Ol' Bonasa U as a bird of the day, I could not disagree more with your 12 gauge statement of superiority. Over any haul length, effectiveness of the 12 versus the 28 to16 is no different in my experience. Far too many additional variables of the shot itself when Ol' Bonasa U takes wing....however, your generalized assumption of the available data would fit fine in an intrepretation of a ruffed grouse Study.

What number shot are you using for grouse?

[Mountaineer]

...What number shot are you using for grouse?

Depends...#s 6, 7 and 7 1/2 mostly.
Have used 8s and 9s over the years, but not my favorites.
About like most folks I reckon.

[rschmeider]

...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5AsZyyw ... re=related This is how we Pa sturdy mountain folk Hunt
I train my dogs and hunt in Feb to. ..I never harvest grouse out of my covets past Jan..Been hunting the same spots over and over 20 some years. :roll:

Pennsylvania is blessed with many solid ruffed grouse conditions...you are extremely lucky in that state and wise in when you hunt.
Lucky moreso now with the influx of marcellus payments.

Re the comment on "sturdy" and "laurel"...I was thinking of one particular traditional mountain gentleman.
Not much chance he will ever be elected Governor...fingers crossed.

just having a little poke off fun. I realy appreciate your passion for the OL'Bonasa U...Keep posting i like your read.
I am a life time member of the RGS
If your ever in WPa..PM me..I like to guide you on a Ethical hunt.

[nldd]

...What number shot are you using for grouse?

Depends...#s 6, 7 and 7 1/2 mostly.
Have used 8s and 9s over the years, but not my favorites.
About like most folks I reckon.

Mountainer ,what company makes # 7 shot ? all i see in store bought ammo in canada is #7 1/2,,,,are those reloads?

[Mountaineer]

Lawrence did, reckon they still sell bagged hard 7s.
Hate to see the price of lead tho.

I've loaded 7s back when that seemed cool but I'd as soon buy them....RSTs, B&Ps, some English as well I think.
A slight difference in size 7s from different sources tho....true 7s run about 300 to the ounce as I recall...been awhile since I looked at that.
W/O looking it up I believe English 6s are about American 7s....a nice load.
Truth is, correctly pointed, not much won't work, unless at some extreme.
I just bought some B&P 16s with 1 1/16 of 7s...should be a nice load but I never shot them before.

* Just looked for you...RST sells 7s in 12, 16, 20 and 28.
They put out good shells.
http://www.rstshells.com
No reason to miss now.

[asc]

I shoot at running deer in front of dogs(sometimes with a shotgun, sometimes with a rifle). I don't shoot birds on the ground unless it's a pen raised bird and I get tired of throwing my hat at it. I don't waterswat ducks and rarely pass shoot. I consider myself an ethical hunter. Some of y'all seem a little full of yourself, JMO

[Sharon]

Here are a couple other personal ethical rules that I follow that haven't been previously mentioned:
1) When I'm driving to a hunting spot and birds cross the road in front of me I don't consider stopping and going for it, because that's not "Hunting". To me it's like taking advantage, there's no skill in that. For me It's purely the act of obtaining of food.
2) I consider crippled birds not retreived as a part of my bag limit.
3) Generally, shoot only one bird on a covey rise, and retreive that bird before looking for another. I loose to many birds/cripples when I take my eye's off the spot of where the bird fell.

I don't like calls that call in coyote ( injured rabbit call), turkey or even ducks. To me it seems like cheating - not fair to the animals.
I know most everyone uses calls . It just doesn't feel right to me.

[jimbo&rooster]

Here are a couple other personal ethical rules that I follow that haven't been previously mentioned:
1) When I'm driving to a hunting spot and birds cross the road in front of me I don't consider stopping and going for it, because that's not "Hunting". To me it's like taking advantage, there's no skill in that. For me It's purely the act of obtaining of food.
2) I consider crippled birds not retreived as a part of my bag limit.
3) Generally, shoot only one bird on a covey rise, and retreive that bird before looking for another. I loose to many birds/cripples when I take my eye's off the spot of where the bird fell.

I don't like calls that call in coyote ( injured rabbit call), turkey or even ducks. To me it seems like cheating - not fair to the animals.
I know most everyone uses calls . It just doesn't feel right to me.

with out calls there wouldnt be alot of coyotes or turkeys killed.... However it wouldnt bother me if most hunters left their duck calls at home...

Jim

[deke]

If more duck hunters left their calls at home they might actually shoot more ducks.

[asc]

If more duck hunters left their calls at home they might actually shoot more ducks.

X2