Rough shooting/ walk up & high viz

[Davyo]

Just a thought, but what's the PM opinion on high viz ( Orange ) like the Americans wear? Especially on walk up rough shoots.

[muffin]

Why

[BrowningB525]

I personally think that safe shooting practices are better. E.g. only shooting birds in the air.

[Scully]

Haven't given it much thought to be honest.

In countries of thick covered terrain I suppose it has its uses; a hunter in N. Zealand was recently shot and killed by another hunter who mistook him for quarry

Edited September 5, 2015 by Scully

[Danger-Mouse]

The American situation is very different. They have vast spaces where anyone with a rifle can roam around looking for quarry. As such they have no idea if that movement they spotted is a deer or another hunter. Here where space and hunting rights are far more limited it doesn`t really seem necessary. As BrowningB525 said, as long as safe shooting practice is followed then I don`t see any reason to adopt it.

[scotslad]

Its the same in NZ, my mates awear by there blaze orange cammo and say deer don't seem to notice, But say it's great if ur stalking with someone else throu thick cover as can see each other.

 

A lot of countries with open public acess/hunting do have a habit of firing towards either movement or sound in bushes. Fortunately not the case here, really no need if safe/common sense applied

[LeadWasp]

please NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

 

Unlike some countries we don't believe in taking 'sound' shots (I heard a sound so I shot at it).

[Alex C]

I recently bought my son a Sealand Keeper suit which comes with an orange bib in an inside pocket. He wears it every time we go beating. I also bought a hat which turns inside out to show an orange side, I wear it orange side out in the beating line. I started taking my daughter out last year and she sports a pink Hi Viz.

 

I see what you are all saying about safe shots but I just see it as an extra precaution. I like the idea of being very visible, I adopt the same principle while i'm out on my bike.

[welshwarrior]

For most shooting don't see the need have worn in Canada NZ States and will in Oz but in the UK only time I do is on pushed deer

[Scully]

I recently bought my son a Sealand Keeper suit which comes with an orange bib in an inside pocket. He wears it every time we go beating. I also bought a hat which turns inside out to show an orange side, I wear it orange side out in the beating line. I started taking my daughter out last year and she sports a pink Hi Viz.

 

I see what you are all saying about safe shots but I just see it as an extra precaution. I like the idea of being very visible, I adopt the same principle while i'm out on my bike.

Rough neighbourhood eh?

[matone]

You must be shooting with some dodgy beggars if you`re thinking along these lines........or you`re a Health & Beauty at Work man.

[CharlieT]

The day British shooting degenerates into a dangerous free for all that requires participants, for their own safety, to wear high vis is the day I give up.

 

Next some will be suggesting we wear orange tweed and wear orange boots.

[Savhmr]

Best left to Americans I think. I can just see "Elf & Safety" getting hold of this and passing some daft regulation to make it mandatory!

 

The one and only time I would have benefited with hi-viz was when invited on a shoot with others I didn't know only to almost have my head blown off by a shooter taking a bird which was flying low towards a group of us. Moral was for me, "don't ever go shooting with people you don't know or trust" and then you'll probably stay safe.

[LeadWasp]

After years in oil, mining and subsea it has reinforced a long held belief that safety is primarily an attitude of mind - not generally speaking an item of equipment or a piece of paper. Someone has to give a stuff about that risk assessment in the first place In the case of hi-vis for shooting, the person whom it alerts is already carrying out an unsafe practice.

[Savhmr]

After years in oil, mining and subsea it has reinforced a long held belief that safety is primarily an attitude of mind - not generally speaking an item of equipment or a piece of paper. Someone has to give a stuff about that risk assessment in the first place In the case of hi-vis for shooting, the person whom it alerts is already carrying out an unsafe practice.

 

 

Unsafe for whom? The fox or rabbit certainly, but if someone with a rifle is deemed to be "unsafe" or the practice is deemed "unsafe" then something, somewhere, is wrong. Shooting in whatever discipline is as safe as the person behind the trigger or controls imposed and enforced by the range or shoot. There is no reason for a potentially unsafe practice to become in reality an unsafe practice. If a shot is clear and safe, and there's a backstop, what is unsafe about it? The mere act of carrying a firearm isn't unsafe and good shooting discipline including safety kept on except when taking the shot, or chamber not loaded until the shot is taken is not intrinsically unsafe. I think that it's a dangerous road to go down making general statements about shooting in general being unsafe, unless of course that is not what you meant? There will always remain an element of risk where firearms are concerned, however well controlled, but that is a little different to branding all firearms use as intrinsically unsafe.

[LeadWasp]

I think you misunderstand me - if it takes an orange vest to stop someone swinging through the beating line.................................

 

Where have I said half the stuff you've imagined I have?

Edited September 6, 2015 by LeadWasp

[mossy835]

leave to the yanks, they need to look out for each other,trigger happy .lot

[Savhmr]

I've misunderstood your last sentence " In the case of hi-vis for shooting, the person whom it alerts is already carrying out an unsafe practice" which in that context is easy to misinterpret. I haven't imagined anything at all let alone accused you of anything plus, haven't quoted you at all, save the above . Same hymn sheet.

[Alex C]

Are you telling me, hand on heart, that you have never been rough shooting and all of a sudden through the mist or sideways rain you have spotted a beater and thought 'By eck, they are closer than I thought ' You have heard every whistle for the No more Forward shots on every drive of every shoot you have ever been on ? You have never been on a shoot where one of the old boys maybe doesn't have the best eye sight ?

 

I know I have, and for that reason if my kids are out with me I will make sure they are 100% as visible as possible. As for me, I don't do the full hi viz bit, but a flash of orange on my hat just lets the guns know where I am. Cant see a problem with that, just common sense to me ?

[LeadWasp]

I've misunderstood your last sentence " In the case of hi-vis for shooting, the person whom it alerts is already carrying out an unsafe practice" which in that context is easy to misinterpret. I haven't imagined anything at all let alone accused you of anything plus, haven't quoted you at all, save the above . Same hymn sheet.

Hi Sav - yes I meant that if it takes seeing orange to make you go "ooeerr didn't think they might be there" etc. etc.

As you say, same hymn sheet

Edited September 6, 2015 by LeadWasp

[LeadWasp]

Are you telling me, hand on heart, that you have never been rough shooting and all of a sudden through the mist or sideways rain you have spotted a beater and thought 'By eck, they are closer than I thought ' You have heard every whistle for the No more Forward shots on every drive of every shoot you have ever been on ? You have never been on a shoot where one of the old boys maybe doesn't have the best eye sight ?

 

I know I have, and for that reason if my kids are out with me I will make sure they are 100% as visible as possible. As for me, I don't do the full hi viz bit, but a flash of orange on my hat just lets the guns know where I am. Cant see a problem with that, just common sense to me ?

I've certainly thought "By 'eck" but that doesn't mean that I would have ever raised a gun in that direction. The same goes for old boys with dodgy eyesight - don't shoot where you can't see. The same goes for a deer stood in front of a hedge or a rabbit running along a hedgeline. You have no idea what is behind the hedge, or out in the mist. The same goes for hilly ground or flat, unless you can see that there is absolutely no-one there why would you raise a gun to it? Basic firearms safety. Every shot is a dynamic risk assessment. Every time you point your gun you have to prove to yourself that it is safe to do so, even in the heat of the moment. This is why this country has such an excellent shooting safety record compared with others. We do not rely on a flash of orange to tell us it is unsafe. Orange is a false positive and lulls you into a false sense of security.

Edited September 6, 2015 by LeadWasp

[Alex C]

I agree with you to an extent, however you are assuming that everyone has exactly the same level of awareness and are as disciplined as you. I wouldn't make that assumption and for the sake of a bit of orange cloth, i'll make sure I am visible.

 

I'm not advocating all wandering around looking like road workers in full hi viz but an orange hat is hardly going to bring and end to the traditional English shoot day.

[Savhmr]

There's another debate waiting to be opened here I think, regarding taking children on a driven shoot or rough shoot involving multiple guns some of whom you may or may not have any experience of. I agree with Leadwasp though and that is, it is every shooter's responsibility to ensure that EVERY shot taken is safe. It is for shoot managers (if used on formal shoots) to throw anyone off not behaving with total regard for everyone around them. I, for one, wont go on any shoot where I don't know and trust the others with me, simple as that. As for bringing my children along, nope, that wouldn't happen at all unless I was just with one or two other guns known to me and then, I'd make damn sure we all knew where each other was 100% of the time and the kids would always be with me. That's common sense. My experience is that having witnessed witnessed people escaping by the narrowest of margins where they were in full view of the idiot taking unsafe shots, wearing dayglo wouldn't have made a jot of difference to the idiot behind the gun. No need for orange blaze at all. Someone swinging round on a bird in the heat of the moment may continue to swing and even pull the trigger, red blaze or not. It is no guarantee of safety. Clothing has little to do with common sense, as that would have gone out the window the second any gun becomes unaware of where others are located, or where the shot becomes the more important thing for the berk behind the gun, and berks do exist who shouldn't be behind guns.

[Alex C]

Absolutely agree, I will only take my kids out on days where I know who is going to be there, but still like them to be very visible regardless.

 

However I disagree with you that we shouldn't take kids out. Mine are 7 & 9 and have both been coming with me for a year or so now. They stick close to me and they know that they do exactly what they are told or else. I will only take them on the days where we are shooting one of the more open farms and there are no blind spots or really heavy cover. They absolutely love it, and I think that by getting them involved in the shoot days and the day to day running of a shoot will better understand our sport and the countryside than any or their peers.

 

Not to be too cheesy but they are the future of the sport, shooting is a lifestyle and I like to involve my whole family. (Plus i'm tight and it save me having to take them to the cinema on a Weekend.)