PeterHenry

👍

Yes, perhaps - and @Konorhas my unreserved apologies if he chooses to accept them. No good is achived by falling out with people on the Internet. Lots of heat, and very little to show for it.

Despite our similarities, we obviously inhabit different parts of this debate. I want to see more game on shop shelves, not less - although I would like to see better prices for it, which would necessitate less of it being shot. As i've said, that is no bad thing in itself - but I have no desire to see the end of driven shooting, as I enjoy it every bit as much as rough shooting or wildfowling. Your right, excess is a bad look. But theres a whole world between excess and hair shirts. Insofar as the defensibility of shooting - what some of us tend to veiw as defensible as a comunity has equal capacity to look bad in the eyes of the public. Just look at the comments section of any online newspaper artical on wildfowling. Regardless of your veiw, laws, especially in our democracy, are ultimately underpinned by the consent of the public. As the population grows increasingly divorced from the realites and traditions of the countryside, shooting has a growing number of PR problems. But people are in no danger of forgetting the need to eat. Game shooting ultimately has to be about food. That doesn't stop it from being about other things as well - and those other things are important. But if the buck stops anywhere - it stops at food. That is something non shooting pepole can be involved in. If we are going to survive as a sport - that is a major way our social licence, and therefor our legal rights are maintained - because it has the capacity to broaden our base vastly beyond what we could achive otherwise. If we need to get rid of lead to achive that - so be it. As far as I can see, your view boils down to the fact you would rather others sport was curtailed more severely, so that you are not inconvenienced yourself. And having said that, i'm out.

Again, I agree with a lot of that - which is why - unless I have missed or misread something - I'm still confused as to your opposition to BASC and others doing something about the massive PR issue (amongst other things) that is lead shot? Even if we got the roll back of bag sizes we would ideally like - with game shooting being what it is - there would still be surplus game (albeit more saleable and hopefully at a price befitting its true value). But it would still contain something commonly held by most pepole to be toxic. That's a big PR issue - and it's a PR issue that confronts anyone who wants to, or even considers eating game - which is a big step closer to the consumer / public, than anything to do with bag sizes. I get how irritating it is not to be able to use some of the beautiful old English and Scottish guns so readily. I've got a Scottish side by side that when I bought it was all I was ever going to need. To this day its still my favourite gun - but I'd rarther relegate it to the safe and increaseingly use a modern over and under with non toxic shot - because - as we both agree - public consent govens our ability to continue our sport - and if someone looks at a pheseant or partridge and it comes with a health warning on it, it's very difficult to see how that consent can be maintained.

Its strange, because the bags and type of shooting you favour are exactly the sort I favour. The bag on my little syndicate goes perhaps above 20 on a good day. There are certainly a lot of days where its less than that. But is it not to be presumed that if you were in a possition of any influence, you would inforce your ideal? Or would it be voluntary? And if it was inforced, how so? Bag limits? (US) Licencing for releasing birds? (Wales) licencing shoots themselves? (Scotland). All of those things are far more damaging to the fabric of game shooting than the use of steel shot. I share your concern about bags - but the way things are going, if left alone, those will come down anyway. Prices are rising, pockets are shrinking - and luxuries are the first things to be scaled back. It happened before - and I suspect it will happen again. Regardless, Its very easy to make shooting look bad on YouTube as far as the average person goes - it doesn't take Dave Carrie. It could just as easily be you or me with our handful of ducks. I also suspect you will ultimately get your wish in the form of some kind of regulation - because that also seems to be the way things are going at the moment. But it certiantly won't shore up our shared pastime, and unlike BASC and the other orgs attempt with lead shot to divert the flow of things to shootings benefit, it'll be an actual, objective milestone towards the end of game shooting in Britain - and something to be resisted at every opportunity.

Exactly

Controversial? How on earth would you go about it? It sounds awfully similar to something the Welsh Government is trying to achieve at the moment. You can't go off on one at John Swift, et al. for damaging shooting and then - as I read it - state in an ideal world you would stop shoots over a certain size. Pot calling kettle black springs to mind... I would take steel shot over your sugestion any day of the week - and that's coming from somone who has no intrest in big bags whatsoever.

That's great thanks - much appreciated 👍

No problem at all 👍

👍 Very wise. I only ask because some say BioAmmo Blue behaves better with certian choke constrictions than others. For the record, I found it worked well with 1/4 and 1/2 last season.

@B686 excellent bag - do you mind me asking what choke you used?

No problem - I've cut open a new cartridge and borrowed a pair of scales. The shot from the 27g cartridge comes in at 27g for 218 pellets

I don't have any scales, but if you PM me your address, I'll send you the contents of one thats been cut open.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/section/4/enacted?view=plain The above link is to section 4 of the Firearms Act 1968, and is the same as the below text - (1) Subject to this section, it is an offence to shorten the barrel of a shot gun to a length less than 24 inches. (2) It is not an offence under subsection (1) above for a registered firearms dealer to shorten the barrel of a shot gun for the sole purpose of replacing a defective part of the barrel so as to produce a barrel not less than 24 inches in length. (3) It is an offence for a person other than a registered firearms dealer to convert into a firearm anything which, though having the appearance of being a firearm, is so constructed as to be incapable of discharging any missile through its barrel. (4) A person who commits an offence under section 1 of this Act by having in his possession, or purchasing or acquiring, a shotgun which has been shortened contrary to subsection (1) above or a firearm which has been converted contrary to subsection (3) above (whether by a registered firearms dealer or not), without holding a firearm certificate authorising him to have it in his possession, or to purchase or acquire it, shall be treated for the purposes of provisions of this Act relating to the punishment of offences as committing that offence in an aggravated form. ------ If you go to schedule 6, it talks about sentencing / fines in respect of s4 of the act - which range from 6 months and/or £400 fine, to 7 years. It's a really stupid idea - especially as the thing has to go to a proof house afterwards, and no RFD worth his salt is going to submit it under his own name for you. I would imagine it would more than likely come out at some point, and firearms offences don't look good for certificate holders. Strongly advise against

Off the top of my head, don't you need to be a RFD to possess a gun that's (albeit temporarily) been cut down below the otherwise legal minimum length?

It not that I necessarily disagree with all of that - it just makes me wince when that particular argument is rolled out, because it tends to be presented as a very simple and obvious truth, when in fact its not.

So does Arsenic.... Obviously they aren't direct comparisons - but it's a daft argument that just because somethings natural, it's not in need of some form of regulation.

👍 I think they might have been

I've seen it in Waitrose and Iceland

👍 👍 Thanks - that's very reassuring. It often amazes me the amount of specialist knowledge on this forum. That's a fine collection Very helpful - and much appreciated

Hi All, This is an appeal to the collective knowledge of Pigeon Watch. I bought the book in the photos recently, and it was mentioned it had some staining to the spine - but the photos weren't particularly good. It arrived this morning and my first thoughts were mould. But, there is no mould in the book itself, or on the inside of the spine. There is some foxing and also a musty smell, but no powdery substance or black marks anywhere. My theory's are - Water or some other liquid damage to the spine / cover, that has resulted in staining but no mould. Fungal damage that's been treated by something like bleach? Any views greatly appreciated, Peter

I have a pair of them - they are good guns and rarther quick. In one sense they are quite unforgiving because if you try and (incorrectly) hold the fore-end instead of the barrels, you struggle to point them with any degree of accuracy. But yes, I like them - they are good, practical, traditional game guns and not expensive. Good for walked up shooting or traditional driven birds. I even used one last season to flight duck below the high tide mark.

Yes, that is a problem. I have tried various places around the garden - flowerpots, compost heaps, etc, with no luck. I spoke to the importer and he said they require bacteria to break down, so last season I threw a bunch in the most stagnant, muddy'ist flightpond known to man, and a few weeks ago went to find them. I can only assume they also need oxygen, because they came out of the mud / water like they were new - not even the metal on them had rusted.... Not being an expert, but also being vaguely optimistic, I'm presuming that when they down break down (even if it takes some time) they break down into something less harmful than regular plastic.

It does work, and in my experience kills better than steel. 2 1/2" through to 3" is available, and you can use it through any choke. It's also a fair amount cheaper than Bismuth.

There's Bio Ammo Blue