Jump to content

Is it illegal?


Underdog
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It doesn't make it wrong either, my view is that if I have permission to shoot waterfowl on private land or water and have satisfied the requirements of the law as far as season and permission is concerned then anything I shoot has more chance of being killed cleanly and quickly than a duck flighting in fast and high over a marsh somewhere. Any shooter could be prosecuted for cruelty whether he's using an airgun, shotgun or puntgun. If we have to worry about prosecutions for cruelty then I would rather be taking 99% certain shots at close range with an air rifle than 50/50 chance shots with a 12 bore. I've done both in the past and I know which method is more humane on a shot for shot comparison.

 

Absolutely agree Timmy :good::good:

 

I bet there isn't one prosecution for cruelty for shooting duck with shotgun, I have personally stood against two different cases with airguns being used to poach duck one when I was a river keeper, the other against some yob who thought it a good idea to shoot mallard on the canal. I admit that some seem to think that 80yds is suitable range for a 12ga, though the same can be said of airguns - it gets a bit boring listening to airgun hunters who think they can outshoot FT word champs when you hear of their exploits and claims.

 

Both those cases aren't a great example of the majority Kent :no: I have been on many pheasant shoots where they have also had duck drives. Frankly I found the level of wounding completely unacceptable. It gets rather more boring listening to the weak defence of the shotgun over the rifle. This forum has regular shot to kills ratios posted. The shotgun misses are in the 50% if your considered good to having a bad day at 80%. With that amount of lead in the air, there is again, going to be an unacceptable amount of pricking and wounding.

 

This argument will go on and on, but in my opinion, the tool that is legal to use, provides a humane kill is the right tool irrespective of your prejudices :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Turbo 33,

Now let's put the question from a slightly different perspective?

The farmer/ landowner where I shoot has 3 vermin problems. The first is pheasants(introduced foreign species)damaging crops, they need to go but because of the proximity of houses we can't use shotguns. These birds are escapees from a local shoot, 50% got away.

Because we are shooting them as vermin we are not restricted by the "sporting" ethic of only taking risky flying shots. We can go for a clean short range kill instead of employing people to deliberately scare the birds into lethargic flight so we can deliberately try to shoot them on the wing. I don't need a dog to fetch back the wounded because I rarely get wounded, I only use headshots, I nearly always hit and I've NEVER lost a bird I've hit because I don't take risky shots.

Scenario 2 is being asked to cull mallards on a private lake and grounds.

I like shooting ducks, I could go to the foreshore and take shots at wigeon and teal in halflight and maybe get 1 in 3, I wouldn't send a dog out in those conditions, far too risky.

Instead, I choose to sit in a hide and headshot the ducks from 30 or 35 yards when they're on land. Again, these birds are being dealt with as vermin but have a better chance of a clean death than any "sporting" bird.

Finally geese.

My farmer has a problem with geese on his grassland. I could go and have a shot with an air rifle but I won't.

I could have a pop with a 12g but I won't do that either.

I can't stand goose, I'd rather have chicken!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well one thing is clear...certain peoples opinions on here are making it quite obvious that in thier self rightousness that only they themselves are correct. They speak of averting further restrictions in law by wanting to encourage restrictions of thier own making or some other organisation. This is bigotry and a self rightous aproach by some that wish to prostrate themselves to the wolves but would throw thier fellow brothers freely to the wolves.

Now let me tell you why these muppets have it all wrong!

Being the OP of this thread I am authorised to point out that none of the ducks suffered on the night. Being involved on several shoots in the land one famous one at that for over twenty seasons I have forgoton how many divers have been left behind or how many birds I have seen with a leg down when duck shooting by others andby my own hands. Dogs everywheretoo and dont start me on the pheasants!

No where the fools fall over big time in this thread is the two rabbits in the photo! Regarded as fair air rifle fodder by most enyet in this case suffered more than the ducks and goose! One rabbit had to be caught and its neck broke!

That would (seeing some are so focused on belittling this form of hunting)seem to blow the two faced attitude by organisations and predjudiced people here completely out the water!

Oh I do hope big bro is listening....ban it...please ban the lot...then I no longer have to suffer these brown nosing fools that perch themselves on lofty pedestals.

It amazes me how they pigeon hole me with yobs and worthy of animal cruety charges....come on you fools....you scrutanizing coucil of crows....tell us all will you please....how many duck have you wounded with you super shotguns...come on give us a a percentage....a guess....be kind to yourself, I don't mind, why dont I mind? Because I know you have wounded duck! Call me a liar.....

 

U.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Underdog, maybe part of the problem is you haven't paid enough money for your shotgun, or maybe your jacket is the wrong tweed for the season, or God Forbid! Your hipflask may be the wrong make!

I hate to say it but eventually "sporting" shotgunning will eventually go the way of hunting with hounds as unjustifiable.

Pheasant shooting has always relied on specially bred birds being fed and released much like live pigeon trap shooting which was outlawed years ago. I don't want to see it go because I have enjoyed the odd day in the past but unfortunately the blinkered attitude of some of the participants makes it a foregone conclusion, just as some of the hunting fraternity turned a blind eye to the threat of a hunting ban until it hit them in their blue blooded ********. Then they bleated and bawled for support, forgetting that they were the very people that alienated the public with their attitudes and bad manners. My experience of that is first hand as a supporter and follower of staghunting for many years until I decided to distance myself from the ignorance and boorishness I saw so often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well one thing is clear...certain peoples opinions on here are making it quite obvious that in thier self rightousness that only they themselves are correct. They speak of averting further restrictions in law by wanting to encourage restrictions of thier own making or some other organisation. This is bigotry and a self rightous aproach by some that wish to prostrate themselves to the wolves but would throw thier fellow brothers freely to the wolves.

Now let me tell you why these muppets have it all wrong!

Being the OP of this thread I am authorised to point out that none of the ducks suffered on the night. Being involved on several shoots in the land one famous one at that for over twenty seasons I have forgoton how many divers have been left behind or how many birds I have seen with a leg down when duck shooting by others andby my own hands. Dogs everywheretoo and dont start me on the pheasants!

No where the fools fall over big time in this thread is the two rabbits in the photo! Regarded as fair air rifle fodder by most enyet in this case suffered more than the ducks and goose! One rabbit had to be caught and its neck broke!

That would (seeing some are so focused on belittling this form of hunting)seem to blow the two faced attitude by organisations and predjudiced people here completely out the water!

Oh I do hope big bro is listening....ban it...please ban the lot...then I no longer have to suffer these brown nosing fools that perch themselves on lofty pedestals.

It amazes me how they pigeon hole me with yobs and worthy of animal cruety charges....come on you fools....you scrutanizing coucil of crows....tell us all will you please....how many duck have you wounded with you super shotguns...come on give us a a percentage....a guess....be kind to yourself, I don't mind, why dont I mind? Because I know you have wounded duck! Call me a liar.....

 

U.

Still waiting you crows!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well one thing is clear...certain peoples opinions on here are making it quite obvious that in thier self rightousness that only they themselves are correct. They speak of averting further restrictions in law by wanting to encourage restrictions of thier own making or some other organisation. This is bigotry and a self rightous aproach by some that wish to prostrate themselves to the wolves but would throw thier fellow brothers freely to the wolves.

Now let me tell you why these muppets have it all wrong!

Being the OP of this thread I am authorised to point out that none of the ducks suffered on the night. Being involved on several shoots in the land one famous one at that for over twenty seasons I have forgoton how many divers have been left behind or how many birds I have seen with a leg down when duck shooting by others andby my own hands. Dogs everywheretoo and dont start me on the pheasants!

No where the fools fall over big time in this thread is the two rabbits in the photo! Regarded as fair air rifle fodder by most enyet in this case suffered more than the ducks and goose! One rabbit had to be caught and its neck broke!

That would (seeing some are so focused on belittling this form of hunting)seem to blow the two faced attitude by organisations and predjudiced people here completely out the water!

Oh I do hope big bro is listening....ban it...please ban the lot...then I no longer have to suffer these brown nosing fools that perch themselves on lofty pedestals.

It amazes me how they pigeon hole me with yobs and worthy of animal cruety charges....come on you fools....you scrutanizing coucil of crows....tell us all will you please....how many duck have you wounded with you super shotguns...come on give us a a percentage....a guess....be kind to yourself, I don't mind, why dont I mind? Because I know you have wounded duck! Call me a liar.....

 

U.

Easy my friend - Most of it is just a wind up.

Just ignore it all and make your own decisions.

Just plod along to my age and you tend to ignore 80% of all comments on anything controversial.

Keep inside the law at all times. Keep inside the natural sensibility that is built into most people.

And enjoy yourself...

As you were doing before you started this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easy my friend - Most of it is just a wind up.

Just ignore it all and make your own decisions.

Just plod along to my age and you tend to ignore 80% of all comments on anything controversial.

Keep inside the law at all times. Keep inside the natural sensibility that is built into most people.

And enjoy yourself...

As you were doing before you started this topic.

Yes...thankyou.

Funny how a confident crowing crow flies away in a flap when they are faced up to though. May of found another tree to crow from!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully accept that some shoot birds beyond their abilty or that of the guns, the same happens with rifles. Never seen the posts of 50-70 yds rabbits with 12 ft lb? Yes sure it can be done but nobody I have ever met can do it on request first shot, if they could you are looking a truly great world champ that will set a whole new president in FT standards. Its well known that some driven game shooters only get out a few times a season with the gun, watch someone who gets out a heck of a lot and only shoots at the hard ones- massive difference!

With the shotgun I feel that most failed attempts are well off target, leaving a totally untouched bird to fly on though I accept single flukey pellets and bad hits happen, though to take each shot that fails as a wounding shot is very wrong with a fast moving target. A good dog soon learns what is hit and what is not even if the shooter does not, one just to have the wit to trust it. I just don't get the wounding rate of air rifles being correct as stated a birds head is far from immobile, the brain is small. Its not like I haven't done both in my life, I suspect many are like those "missed" deer that get found a week later

 

Were pheasants truly are vermin and I accept there are occasions (though they are still game in law) I can see no issue with use of an air gun on them IF THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS SAFE / APPROPRIATE but I shouldn't choose to go for head shots on the ground, I fully accept them as no tougher than a crow (in fact they are far less hardy) Shot through the backbone would be my personal shot of choice. That said I have shot crows with hmr and got unacceptable wounding rates with good shots and have so far managed to wound two bunnies with headshots with the .22 Hornet, so why temp fate? use enough gun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Turbo 33,

Now let's put the question from a slightly different perspective?

The farmer/ landowner where I shoot has 3 vermin problems. The first is pheasants(introduced foreign species)damaging crops, they need to go but because of the proximity of houses we can't use shotguns. These birds are escapees from a local shoot, 50% got away.

Because we are shooting them as vermin we are not restricted by the "sporting" ethic of only taking risky flying shots. We can go for a clean short range kill instead of employing people to deliberately scare the birds into lethargic flight so we can deliberately try to shoot them on the wing. I don't need a dog to fetch back the wounded because I rarely get wounded, I only use headshots, I nearly always hit and I've NEVER lost a bird I've hit because I don't take risky shots.

Scenario 2 is being asked to cull mallards on a private lake and grounds.

I like shooting ducks, I could go to the foreshore and take shots at wigeon and teal in halflight and maybe get 1 in 3, I wouldn't send a dog out in those conditions, far too risky.

Instead, I choose to sit in a hide and headshot the ducks from 30 or 35 yards when they're on land. Again, these birds are being dealt with as vermin but have a better chance of a clean death than any "sporting" bird.

Finally geese.

My farmer has a problem with geese on his grassland. I could go and have a shot with an air rifle but I won't.

I could have a pop with a 12g but I won't do that either.

I can't stand goose, I'd rather have chicken!

 

To be fair those pheasants do go back to the shoot you know, once they put their feeders out. They will even fly over the motorway to get to them. The farmer where I shoot wants them gone too but realistically it's sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To be fair those pheasants do go back to the shoot you know, once they put their feeders out. They will even fly over the motorway to get to them.

 

That's not strictly true.If there are enough pickings/feed on other ground they will quite happily stick it out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the legal answers.

 

To the moral police force present here answer please;

 

How is a head shot to a goose or duck any more cruel than skirting a bird on the wing with a shotgun?

 

U.

Same as only head shooting deer with a cf rifle, there will always be a chance of breaking the jaw/bill and the animal starving to death. Does it happen to duck, yes I have seen duck with bills hanging due to an ill placed shot. A duck or goose has a longer neck than a deer and moves about more than a deer would.

No place for an air rifle in shooting ducks and geese IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...