How far will a shotgun kill game.

[Smokersmith]

1 hour ago, Perazzishot said:

It's funny how when asked, no-one commenting has admitted ever being to an extreme shoot to witness 60+ birds being killed consistently.

When invited to attend I was met with no acceptance and had my character questioned.

That really does show a special level of blinkered denial!

 

Cheerio 

Not sure you’ll register this, as previous comments have been ignored.

I have been on Extreme bird shoots, and have not seen birds killed consistently. I have seen the ratio’s you’ve mentioned ..... which is not consistent.

[motty]

5 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

Not sure you’ll register this, as previous comments have been ignored.

I have been on Extreme bird shoots, and have not seen birds killed consistently. I have seen the ratio’s you’ve mentioned ..... which is not consistent.

And you, Steve, are one of the most open minded, logical thinking blokes I know. I trust your judgement on this subject.

I don't need to see a high bird shoot in action to know what a shotgun is consistently capable of (with the loads mentioned). Stratospheric birds will occasionally drop stone dead. Consistency is the key word in this whole thread.

[Diss4111]

These last two posts are the truth. Anyone can hit a bird at extreme range occasionally, but not time after time. It only leads to injured and unpicked birds that go off and die slowly somewhere and all the willy wavers just show shooters in a bad light which is the one thing we don't need.

Dave Carrie and George Digweed should wind their necks back in and stop these videos. They should be acting as ambassadors to shooting, not giving the antis a club to beat us with

[Hamster]

25 minutes ago, Diss4111 said:

These last two posts are the truth. Anyone can hit a bird at extreme range occasionally, but not time after time. It only leads to injured and unpicked birds that go off and die slowly somewhere and all the willy wavers just show shooters in a bad light which is the one thing we don't need.

Dave Carrie and George Digweed should wind their necks back in and stop these videos. They should be acting as ambassadors to shooting, not giving the antis a club to beat us with

I don't believe either have advocated routine extreme as being more than 60-70 yards. 

[Diss4111]

Just now, Hamster said:

I don't believe either have advocated routine extreme as being more than 60-70 yards. 

And even that is too far, 

 

[JDog]

Much to my surprise this thread is still running so I will add my own 'ten pennorth' for what it is worth. In doing so I will have to cast off my usual cloak of modesty.

In October I was asked to shoot grouse by my Godfather Tom de Grey also known as Lord Walsingham. When I arrived to stay overnight he told me that there were plenty of grouse and that just he and I would be shooting. The following day with a full compliment of beaters and pickers-up we headed for the moor. We were to stand two butts apart to test our skills. Those people who have shot driven grouse will know how difficult it can be to shoot grouse in front and have them fall dead in front of the butts. We were both on form and had plenty dead at least 50m in front of the butts having engaged them at 90m. Some of those that we shot behind on a good wind landed dead in Ilkley. On one drive, whilst my host was browning yet another covey in the far distance a snipe flew over his butt which I shot. His loader Baldrick told me it was the best shot he had ever seen. 'It was 90m if an inch' he said, mixing metaphors as usual. When I plucked the bird later I found that one shot had gone through it's head and five more pellets had hit the tiny bird in the body.

The last two months here on the Wolds have seen good numbers of pigeons and some really good flight lines have developed. In addition to my usual Pigeon Watch companions I have been out with Ralph Frankland - Payne - Gallwey, Isambard Kingdom Brunel and The Queen of Sheba. Whilst in their company I regularly and consistently shot pigeons stone dead at ranges up to 120m. These were no flukes. Should anyone doubt the veracity of this I will quite happily give them the email addresses of my companions so that they can check my story.

Edited November 16, 2018 by JDog

[Old farrier]

Jdog 

were you using your usual pair or did you dig out the trio of 20 bores 😉

all the best 

of 

[JDog]

6 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Jdog 

were you using your usual pair or did you dig out the trio of 20 bores 😉

all the best 

of 

On the grouse just my usual Woodwards bored true cylinder and quarter. On the pigeons my old Miroku bored quarter and three quarters. I had to sell the trio to pay a large vet bill.

[Old farrier]

1 minute ago, JDog said:

On the grouse just my usual Woodwards bored true cylinder and quarter. On the pigeons my old Miroku bored quarter and three quarters. I had to sell the trio to pay a large vet bill.

Nice choice 😄

sorry about your vet bill 

youu could of had a new hip or knee for what they charged 

 

[wymberley]

2 hours ago, Diss4111 said:

These last two posts are the truth. Anyone can hit a bird at extreme range occasionally, but not time after time. It only leads to injured and unpicked birds that go off and die slowly somewhere and all the willy wavers just show shooters in a bad light which is the one thing we don't need.

Dave Carrie and George Digweed should wind their necks back in and stop these videos. They should be acting as ambassadors to shooting, not giving the antis a club to beat us with

Yep, the LACS have been provided with a bonus on a public forum for any who do 'tune in' the form of a bean feast of information over the past few days. They now know where to go to watch and record this attempted slaughter, they's also aware that it's not just the 'toffs' who are partaking in this activity but also the working class shooters so therefore it must be rife throughout the so called sport inspite of the fact that some other shooters are not altogether happy. Unfortunately, this latter group are unable to do anything about it.As yet, it has not been ascertained which element is leading the charge. Whether it be the cartridge makers who have seen a potential market and have taken advantage of it or whether they've been lead by the number of shooters demanding the necessary equipment to partake of this activity. However, whichever it is, it is of no consequence as this "latter group" can have no effective representation - even if some think they should as they believe they're actually paying for it -  other than to say, "well, we told you so", when it all turns to  all goes wrong.

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, wymberley said:

Yep, the LACS have been provided with a bonus on a public forum for any who do 'tune in' the form of a bean feast of information over the past few days. They now know where to go to watch and record this attempted slaughter, they's also aware that it's not just the 'toffs' who are partaking in this activity but also the working class shooters so therefore it must be rife throughout the so called sport inspite of the fact that some other shooters are not altogether happy. Unfortunately, this latter group are unable to do anything about it.As yet, it has not been ascertained which element is leading the charge. Whether it be the cartridge makers who have seen a potential market and have taken advantage of it or whether they've been lead by the number of shooters demanding the necessary equipment to partake of this activity. However, whichever it is, it is of no consequence as this "latter group" can have no effective representation - even if some think they should as they believe they're actually paying for it -  other than to say, "well, we told you so", when it all turns to s all goes wrong.

I suppose thats one way of looking at it.
But no matter if EVERY cartridge or bullet fired, accounts for the instant humane death of every bird or animal its sent towards, that would still be wrong in the eyes of antis ect.
It simply isnt about humane dispatch as far as they are concerned, beside the fact that any casual hunter or pest controller who has a bean of decency, no one wants to wound or cause unnecessary suffering to quarry.
The fact that you own a gun is enough for them.

We once had some people turn up to our ground one day, I believe they were just dog walkers or ramblers that heard gunfire , rather than a proper anti gun mission.
They told us they were not happy with what we were doing, and that it was cruel.
I explained that it took great skill to hit some of our targets, and no suffering took place 😉
They were not interested, I asked them if they fancied a go (incredulous looks of horror !)
I then explained that the 'targets' were made of clay, we didnt shoot live quarry here.

They rather sheepishly departed with a parting shot of 'You shouldnt have guns anyway'

[wymberley]

With you all the way, but there's a point that you've missed.We are no different from any of the anti elements, nor they us. We - as do they - make our representations to either the general public or the powers that be. They may get away with it if they - that well known expression in HM's armed forces - the public but they won't with the powers that be. However, if they produce irrefutable evidence to both groups that we're up to no good, then that becomes a different story altogether and we won't have a leg to stand on if the authorities decide to act. It is, perhaps, fortunate that the vast majority of Joe Public are open to reason and hopefully will continue to be so provided we don't screw up.

[Rewulf]

13 minutes ago, wymberley said:

With you all the way, but there's a point that you've missed.We are no different from any of the anti elements, nor they us. We - as do they - make our representations to either the general public or the powers that be. They may get away with it if they - that well known expression in HM's armed forces - the public but they won't with the powers that be. However, if they produce irrefutable evidence to both groups that we're up to no good, then that becomes a different story altogether and we won't have a leg to stand on if the authorities decide to act. It is, perhaps, fortunate that the vast majority of Joe Public are open to reason and hopefully will continue to be so provided we don't screw up.

But if generally speaking we are obeying the conditions of our licences and the law, we shouldnt really have a problem should we ?

The fact is , there is a part of the population (I wont put  % on it ) that doesnt agree with shooting.

And thats all shooting , live or target, legal air , or sec 1 and 2 , it scares them , OR they just think that everyone who possess's a gun will at some point go on some kind of rampage, or at the very least kill next doors cat.

Its down to ignorance mostly, or some idea that people who shoot are not quite right in the head, have vast country estates they dont deserve, or like blowing small animals apart.
I have a really good friend who is an avid twitcher, he flatly refuses to come to my clay ground.
He doesnt 'agree' with it, its not his 'thing' Ive given up asking him now, yet hes quite happy to play violent military x box games with his 12 year old son ?

10 years ago I believed that sec 1 and 2 firearms were beyond my pocket, and due to my misspent youth, beyond my police record to own.
I have always been interested in shooting, and was quite involved with air rifle FT for many years, but just thought the big stuff was out of my reach.
Then I was invited to a masonic charity clay shoot, and since then have realised that was completely untrue.
These days Im heavily involved in 2 sec 1 target clubs, have a 1000 acres of farmland permissions, and run a busy clay club.
What I aim to do is educate as many people as I can, that shooting disciplines ARE accessible , largely inexpensive, and are populated and serviced by some of the most law abiding , level headed people in society.
If I can get one more person shooting, its one more voice of reason in a country of general pessimists to the sport.

[Ultrastu]

We are lucky that some of the most influential and powerful people in the country  shoot. 

[wymberley]

"But if generally speaking we are obeying the conditions of our licences and the law, we shouldnt really have a problem should we ?"

Oops, that's down to me, apologies. Having some bother engaging my brain at the moment and my fingers have a mind of their own which is not helping Yes we are and no we shouldn't. I meant for my words that you highlighted to relate to our sportsmanlike conduct and not that which would relate to the law. What I was getting at is as far as I'm aware there's no legislation regarding minimum velocities/energy/range. Consequently should someone be able to prove that we are not acting in a sportsmanlike fashion and consequently inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering and this point is well circulated in the media, then it will do us far more harm than a story about Joe Bloggs getting fined because he had an unlicenced firearm simply because he'd inadvertently failed to renew his certifucate.

[bornfree]

Someone once said they could break clays at 130 yards. So I set up a 8x4 sheet of cardboard at 130 yards and shot at it with a 32g 5 shot cartridge. The result was 14 bits of shot hit the cardboard with full choke. And they only dented the cardboard 

[Scully]

Shooting extreme birds doesn't really appeal to me; if I can't bring them down consistently with run of the mill cartridges then I wouldn't bother to raise my gun to them, and I certainly couldn't be bothered to seek out specialised loads, but it's not illegal so each to their own. 

However, I was talking to a chef this weekend and he said he wasn't keen on birds shot at extreme heights as he blamed the impact of them landing, whether dead or alive, on the amount of unusable meat he sometimes gets. He understands some of the heavy bruising could be from hard mouthed dogs, but says he can often tell where his birds have come from by the amounts he can't use. I don't know if there's any truth in it as I have seen bruising from even our rough shoot, but he says there are some shoots he prefers to others. Just a thought. 

[islandgun]

On 16/11/2018 at 13:23, Rewulf said:

But if generally speaking we are obeying the conditions of our licences and the law, we shouldnt really have a problem should we ?

The fact is , there is a part of the population (I wont put  % on it ) that doesnt agree with shooting.

And thats all shooting , live or target, legal air , or sec 1 and 2 , it scares them , OR they just think that everyone who possess's a gun will at some point go on some kind of rampage, or at the very least kill next doors cat.

Its down to ignorance mostly, or some idea that people who shoot are not quite right in the head, have vast country estates they dont deserve, or like blowing small animals apart.
I have a really good friend who is an avid twitcher, he flatly refuses to come to my clay ground.
He doesnt 'agree' with it, its not his 'thing' Ive given up asking him now, yet hes quite happy to play violent military x box games with his 12 year old son ?

10 years ago I believed that sec 1 and 2 firearms were beyond my pocket, and due to my misspent youth, beyond my police record to own.
I have always been interested in shooting, and was quite involved with air rifle FT for many years, but just thought the big stuff was out of my reach.
Then I was invited to a masonic charity clay shoot, and since then have realised that was completely untrue.
These days Im heavily involved in 2 sec 1 target clubs, have a 1000 acres of farmland permissions, and run a busy clay club.
What I aim to do is educate as many people as I can, that shooting disciplines ARE accessible , largely inexpensive, and are populated and serviced by some of the most law abiding , level headed people in society.
If I can get one more person shooting, its one more voice of reason in a country of general pessimists to the sport.

Agree with all you have said, made me smile at the clay shoot...I do wonder is your twitcher friend a vegan, or does he like odd KFC