Argentina

[grrclark]

My attitude shouldn't baffle you. I come from the angle that shooting live quarry should never have a competitive element to it. Creatures should be treated with more respect than simply being a number.

 

JD, not being argumentative for the sake of confrontation, but a genuine interest in respect to the nature of the discussion.

 

If creatures should not be treated as a number should we celebrate posts where people talk of killing x amounts of pigeons then neatly arranging them in rows for a photo for voyeuristic pleasure?

 

For what it is worth I find it really hard to reconcile within myself my own sense of hypocrisy, I look at things like big game trophy hunting with a huge element of disdain, but will equally talk about with like minded friends how I had a spectacular kill on a super fast high bird running on a tail wind (admittedly that conversation doesn't happen very often, more often the talk is of how good a kill it may have been if only.......). Is my kill any less of a trophy that theirs?

 

I also recall a post you made a couple of years ago about you turning down a job in America where they were effectively pushing pheasants off a ramp in order to provide sport to the guns (if I remember accurately), I was in total agreement with your point of view on that, I thought it disrespectful in the extreme to the birds. But is there a difference in driving a bird from a cover crop versus driving them off a ramp when the ultimate aim is to provide sporting enjoyment to the gun, the bird is the rather unfortunate commodity in both experiences.

 

I think that what we do and enjoy is defined by a million shades of grey, for some it is perhaps the primeval instinct of being a hunter gatherer, for others it is the skill and the ability to find the quarry and to administer a swift despatch and for other it is simply efficient in the role and it is the latter who aspire to bagging the big numbers.

 

Ultimately though, and this is the point I think often talked about by Scully, we each kill because it brings us pleasure. From wherever we derive that pleasure will differ, but if there were no pleasure none of us would shoulder a gun to a beast, at least in our very cosseted western society where our essential needs are catered for through retail outlet.

[Hamster]

If I were offered a free days dove shooting I'd take it in a heart beat, if I were offered the chance to try and beat a record I'd turn it down. I know there is a difference.

[grrclark]

The ten shooters would have experienced an near once in a life time event and may well remember at least some individual shots. They will be tired but not exhausted unlike the guy who shoots ten times as many in a day. He would have engaged in target shooting with a deliberate purpose of achieving numbers to brag about. There is a difference.

I agree that there is a difference, but how do we define that difference?

 

That seems to be the gist of our discussion, the guy that shoots 7000 birds may be fit and very well equipped to shoot that number, maybe that is his near once in a lifetime experience so why is he someone to be pilloried, but the guy shooting less isn't?

 

I know there isn't a binary answer to the question because there can't be, some will say 1 bird is too many and some will say 100 or maybe even 1000 and the odd few will say there is no limit.

 

Is acceptability defined by the depths of ones pocket (something that is very much the case on some PW debates), or is it determined by ones physical capacity to shoot a quantity of shells in one day or is it defined by something else that is much more intangible? Is it our own limits on our ability to reconcile within ourselves how much killing is acceptable?

[Scully]

 

The chase in pigeon shooting terms is the reconnaissance, the effort to find the right fields to begin with and work out where best to set up, the wind, the skill in setting up not just the hide but also the decoys, knowing when and where or IF one needs a whirly, when to bring it in, being able to live with close birds when circumstances force you to as well as knowing how to kill more distant ones. Rabbit shooting with a rifle has its own set of demands and skills hence hunter V hunted. Being driven to a set stand from which you're absolutely guaranteed volume shooting is chalk and cheese.

 

I absolutely have stopped shooting when birds have decoyed too easily, it doesn't happen too often as we all know but I have never shot pigeon because I'm worried about a farmers crops, that is a side issue. I shoot pigeon because of the love of the countryside, wildlife, solitude, etc, and I like a few for the table, I don't need 200 for the freezer.

 

 

 

The chase in pigeon shooting terms is the reconnaissance, the effort to find the right fields to begin with and work out where best to set up, the wind, the skill in setting up not just the hide but also the decoys, knowing when and where or IF one needs a whirly, when to bring it in, being able to live with close birds when circumstances force you to as well as knowing how to kill more distant ones. Rabbit shooting with a rifle has its own set of demands and skills hence hunter V hunted. Being driven to a set stand from which you're absolutely guaranteed volume shooting is chalk and cheese.

 

I absolutely have stopped shooting when birds have decoyed too easily, it doesn't happen too often as we all know but I have never shot pigeon because I'm worried about a farmers crops, that is a side issue. I shoot pigeon because of the love of the countryside, wildlife, solitude, etc, and I like a few for the table, I don't need 200 for the freezer.

But again, in your initial paragraph, you are seeking, through the act of reconnaissance, the best place to set up etc etc, the best method of increasing your chances of killing birds. That is what field craft is all about; increasing ones chances of killing quarry. If you're not bothered about numbers why not just sit in a hedge and take whatever comes your way? Do you see the point I'm trying to make?

Your second paragraph describes someone who is shooting for solely pleasure and not pest control. If our landowners found out we quitted because the birds were decoying too easily we would lose that land to someone else. I don't need 20 for the freezer, never mind 200; it's pest control. That's all it is.

I also love the solitude of the countryside and its wildlife, but don't feel it necessary to shoot to do so. I shoot pigeons through a love of shooting.

[Hamster]

I agree that there is a difference, but how do we define that difference?

 

That seems to be the gist of our discussion, the guy that shoots 7000 birds may be fit and very well equipped to shoot that number, maybe that is his near once in a lifetime experience so why is he someone to be pilloried, but the guy shooting less isn't?

 

I know there isn't a binary answer to the question because there can't be, some will say 1 bird is too many and some will say 100 or maybe even 1000 and the odd few will say there is no limit.

 

Is acceptability defined by the depths of ones pocket (something that is very much the case on some PW debates), or is it determined by ones physical capacity to shoot a quantity of shells in one day or is it defined by something else that is much more intangible? Is it our own limits on our ability to reconcile within ourselves how much killing is acceptable?

 

Perhaps once you start having to get a team of people involved in loading your 5+ semi automatics we can safely say we've passed the point of decency.

[Hamster]

 

 

But again, in your initial paragraph, you are seeking, through the act of reconnaissance, the best place to set up etc etc, the best method of increasing your chances of killing birds. That is what field craft is all about; increasing ones chances of killing quarry. If you're not bothered about numbers why not just sit in a hedge and take whatever comes your way? Do you see the point I'm trying to make?

Your second paragraph describes someone who is shooting for solely pleasure and not pest control. If our landowners found out we quitted because the birds were decoying too easily we would lose that land to someone else. I don't need 20 for the freezer, never mind 200; it's pest control. That's all it is.

I also love the solitude of the countryside and its wildlife, but don't feel it necessary to shoot to do so. I shoot pigeons through a love of shooting.

 

We are not blessed (plagued) by a trillion woodies hence why we have to carry out reconnaissance. I want to give myself a fair chance of some action, say upwards of 20 shots at least, I also enjoy the process of setting the hide up etc, I just wouldn't want to kill 7000.

[Scully]

If I were offered a free days dove shooting I'd take it in a heart beat, if I were offered the chance to try and beat a record I'd turn it down. I know there is a difference.

What if during your free days dove shooting the record for that location was 500 and you just happened to break it? After all, it wouldn't be you ding the counting; you'd be too busy shooting. Would you stop when they made you aware 'just another 10 Signor, and you've broken the record !' Sorry.

 

Perhaps once you start having to get a team of people involved in loading your 5+ semi automatics we can safely say we've passed the point of decency.

You're killing for fun......at what point does decency come into it?

[grrclark]

Perhaps once you start having to get a team of people involved in loading your 5+ semi automatics we can safely say we've passed the point of decency.

 

So six men involved in killing 7000 birds, does it matter if 6 guns and 6 shooters or 6 guns and one shooter? Outcome is still 7000 dead birds. From your previous replies I would say that you would have no issue with 6 guns and 6 shooters as it is after all a once in a near lifetime experience. I'm honestly not being flippant.

 

I do fully understand where you are coming from in your argument, likewise with JDog, I also totally respect that point of view and if i'm honest I also subscribe to it. I am just really exploring the philosophical elements of the conversation.

 

The essence of this goes back to the exact same argument that the anti's will make to us, it is simply their thresholds of tolerance are much lower. They would suggest that you could enjoy all the same elements of pleasure of the countryside, solitude, setting up a hide, reconnaissance, etc if you were shooting with a camera and not a gun.

[Mungler]

Did I say I was aiming to shoot 7000?

 

If you look back you'll see my shoulder won't take 500 shots.

 

I'm going to have a great time and I'll make sure I'll take lots of photos.

 

I am also aiming to eat lots of steak and drink a lot of wine - no doubt the vegans and the t-totallers will have something to say about that too.

.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Mungler

[grrclark]

Did I say I was aiming to shoot 7000?

 

If you look back you'll see my shoulder won't take 500 shots.

 

I'm going to have a great time and I'll make sure I'll take lots of photos.

 

I am also aiming to eat lots of steak and drink a lot of wine - no doubt the vegans and the t-totallers will have something to say about that too.

.

I'm envious

[Hamster]

 

So six men involved in killing 7000 birds, does it matter if 6 guns and 6 shooters or 6 guns and one shooter? Outcome is still 7000 dead birds. From your previous replies I would say that you would have no issue with 6 guns and 6 shooters as it is after all a once in a near lifetime experience. I'm honestly not being flippant.

 

I do fully understand where you are coming from in your argument, likewise with JDog, I also totally respect that point of view and if i'm honest I also subscribe to it. I am just really exploring the philosophical elements of the conversation.

 

The essence of this goes back to the exact same argument that the anti's will make to us, it is simply their thresholds of tolerance are much lower. They would suggest that you could enjoy all the same elements of pleasure of the countryside, solitude, setting up a hide, reconnaissance, etc if you were shooting with a camera and not a gun.

 

If we as shooters refuse to admit there must be an element of respect and even self restraint in the days proceedings then they'll have a much easier job of getting everyone to think that we shoot only to kill.

 

If the idea is simply pest control and numbers then why not go one step forward and use one of those chain shot guns that can fire thousands of rounds, why not just use flare guns that shoot flames 100 yards up into the air and burn whole flocks in one go. If dead is dead then why not.

[grrclark]

 

If we as shooters refuse to admit there must be an element of respect and even self restraint in the days proceedings then they'll have a much easier job of getting everyone to think that we shoot only to kill.

 

If the idea is simply pest control and numbers then why not go one step forward and use one of those chain shot guns that can fire thousands of rounds, why not just use flare guns that shoot flames 100 yards up into the air and burn whole flocks in one go. If dead is dead then why not.

I don't disagree, but what number objectively quantifies one over the other?

 

What is the threshold when sport stops and indiscriminate slaughter begins?

[Scully]

 

If we as shooters refuse to admit there must be an element of respect and even self restraint in the days proceedings then they'll have a much easier job of getting everyone to think that we shoot only to kill.

 

If the idea is simply pest control and numbers then why not go one step forward and use one of those chain shot guns that can fire thousands of rounds, why not just use flare guns that shoot flames 100 yards up into the air and burn whole flocks in one go. If dead is dead then why not.

 

We do only shoot to kill. You can include conservation; preservation of flora and fauna or anything else you care to mention, but you can also do that without shooting. The entire purpose of shooting is to kill. It may be unpalatable to some, but whether it's 1 for the pot or 100 for the game dealer, that's why we do it.

I'm pretty sure if those in Argentina couldn't attract shooters over there to pay large amounts of money to shoot the doves, then other, possibly more drastic measures would be sought.

[Hamster]

I don't disagree, but what number objectively quantifies one over the other?

 

What is the threshold when sport stops and indiscriminate slaughter begins?

 

As I've said before I think loading ones own semi is enough, I presume a spare gun is carried to account for malfunctions. I have spoken to guys who've done these trips and 2000 shots in a day is not uncommon and unsurprisingly despite using 24g through semi automatics the fatigue and tiredness is self evident at the end of each day.

 

I could honestly say that I could enjoy myself hugely if I fired 500-1000 shots in a day, it's a subjective opinion but I believe the threshold is the intent at the outset, the point at which you need several hands to load, a clicker guy to count and the point of the day has morphed from dove shooting to setting records is the point at which I personally see it as indecent.

[grrclark]

The thought of 1000 cart's in a day fills me with woe, let alone more than that. Even using a pogo stick I think it would stop being pleasurable in just bringing the gun to the shoulder.

 

It is an interesting conversation to which I think there is no wrong ir right, it is acceptability by degree.

 

Back to the OP, I hope that you have a fantastic time in what is a fascinating country.

[islandgun]

interesting debate

 

Upon his death a man was rewarded with unlimited dove shooting where he was able to shoot his best shots all day every day, the man was in heaven until it wore off,

 

not for me, but I would love to go to Argentina and catch a few fish and shoot a few doves

 

have a great trip OP

[Dunkield]

I am also aiming to eat lots of steak and drink a lot of wine - no doubt the vegans and the t-totallers will have something to say about that too.

 

I have to say, roll that in + some sea trout fishing and you are talking a trip of a lifetime

Having watched the John Torode program I would fly down there just for the steak and wine

[FalconFN]

interesting debate

 

Upon his death a man was rewarded with unlimited dove shooting where he was able to shoot his best shots all day every day, the man was in heaven until it wore off,

 

not for me, but I would love to go to Argentina and catch a few fish and shoot a few doves

 

have a great trip OP

+1