Extreme pheasant shooting

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Dave at kelton said:

 I thought you may be interested in some facts on range. I have looked out the OS Ranger for the highest partridge drive I know of. Guns stand in a valley and birds launch at the highest point, based on the contours, 100m above the valley floor and possibly slightly more. They fly to the opposite side landing at around 60 to 70 m above the valley floor. So the highest birds, and that is not all of them by any means, are crossing between 60 and 100 m above the guns. Few fly along the valley losing height on this drive.

The topography for the highest pheasant drive has very similar statistics except the birds fly from further back and tend to be descending.

Contrast that with a more typical drive and the highest birds are coming from 50 to 80m and either crossing to a similar height or coming down the valley and losing height so could be as low as 20m. Most guns on these drives will take the medium to high birds and the low ones are left.

I say this as it simply demonstrates as a matter of fact based on OS data what these shoots are capable of showing. There are no grounds for suggesting that ranges are over estimated. It is not rocket science. If a bird wants to fly between two given points it’s height is more or less certain. Most teams return year after year or several times a season. We all know what each is capable of and the drives will be selected accordingly.

I refrain from any comment on ethics, sportsmanship, ballistics, luck or skill. My job is to pick birds I just have the pleasant job in between of watching guns shoot one of the countries premier estates and then work my dogs to the best of my, or their, ability. My only contribution to this debate is to state what I observe on that estate throughout the season.

Very interesting post Dave from kelton.

I am that interested in this i would much appreciate it if you could post a link to the os figures /topography, site or how one might go about gathering such data. to input oneself in any model.

A in depth clear outline of what you exactly did would more than sufice here, if you could please spare the time. 

[GingerCat]

I imagine he just read an os map and saw what the elevation was of the relevant areas, in his case the height of the tops of the valley or whatever it was. 

Regardless of what an estate presents I stand firm in that 80/90 yard pheasants are too far as the pattern will have failed 20/30 metres earlier and you'll be relying on a lucky strike. Hence the 2300 shots for 300 birds as previously mentioned.  Thats about 1400-1700 too many (or there abouts) especially given the talk of the magical 70 metre cart fired through an 18.4 bore, wrapped in silk and roled on the legs of Swedish virgins  or whatever it was.  If you need that many shots then something is failing, the shots or the carts. my money is on the carts simply not having the pattern in a 12 bore at that range. 

[figgy]

Right to keep it on topic how soon before we have 31/2" chambered Wildfowling guns on high bird drives with 42g of BB steel for 60 yarders. Cue the Akar triple.

[rimmie]

5 minutes ago, figgy said:

Right to keep it on topic how soon before we have 31/2" chambered Wildfowling guns on high bird drives with 42g of BB steel for 60 yarders. Cue the Akar triple.

Why not if it kills clean ?

[Dave at kelton]

44 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Very interesting post Dave from kelton.

I am that interested in this i would much appreciate it if you could post a link to the os figures /topography, site or how one might go about gathering such data. to input oneself in any model.

A in depth clear outline of what you exactly did would more than sufice here, if you could please spare the time. 

I was working in an analogue world and just got my map, reading glasses and magnifying glass out. Not surprising when I tell you my favourite shooting is partridges over hedgerows with an 1845 16 bore percussion gun or wildfowling with my 1882 ish Tolley double 8.

[Perazzishot]

2 hours ago, Dave at kelton said:

 I thought you may be interested in some facts on range. I have looked out the OS Ranger for the highest partridge drive I know of. Guns stand in a valley and birds launch at the highest point, based on the contours, 100m above the valley floor and possibly slightly more. They fly to the opposite side landing at around 60 to 70 m above the valley floor. So the highest birds, and that is not all of them by any means, are crossing between 60 and 100 m above the guns. Few fly along the valley losing height on this drive.

The topography for the highest pheasant drive has very similar statistics except the birds fly from further back and tend to be descending.

Contrast that with a more typical drive and the highest birds are coming from 50 to 80m and either crossing to a similar height or coming down the valley and losing height so could be as low as 20m. Most guns on these drives will take the medium to high birds and the low ones are left.

I say this as it simply demonstrates as a matter of fact based on OS data what these shoots are capable of showing. There are no grounds for suggesting that ranges are over estimated. It is not rocket science. If a bird wants to fly between two given points it’s height is more or less certain. Most teams return year after year or several times a season. We all know what each is capable of and the drives will be selected accordingly.

I refrain from any comment on ethics, sportsmanship, ballistics, luck or skill. My job is to pick birds I just have the pleasant job in between of watching guns shoot one of the countries premier estates and then work my dogs to the best of my, or their, ability. My only contribution to this debate is to state what I observe on that estate throughout the season.

That's Cleugh 👌I'm back Wednesday hope you are about good to catch up!

[Dave at kelton]

3 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

That's Cleugh 👌I'm back Wednesday hope you are about good to catch up!

Yes and no. I am out Tuesday and Friday next week. More business trips to London etc I am afraid. Let me know any other dates and I will see if I can arrange my diary for picking up when you are around. That’s the trouble with working. It might pay the bills but doesn’t half *****r up enjoying yourself 😁

[Perazzishot]

I've got another 4 days to look at from MH, with him on Tuesday to add to diary so will let you know.

[gotgcoalman]

To help estimate range.

This is 8m.

multiply if necessary.

 

 

 

 

[Perazzishot]

what a strange name for a dog 🙈😂 how much are the pups once they have multiplied?

[gotgcoalman]

actually the pup is called perazzi.

I'm thinking of having him neutered .

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Dave at kelton said:

I was working in an analogue world and just got my map, reading glasses and magnifying glass out. Not surprising when I tell you my favourite shooting is partridges over hedgerows with an 1845 16 bore percussion gun or wildfowling with my 1882 ish Tolley double 8.

Oh ok thanks.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, GingerCat said:

I imagine he just read an os map and saw what the elevation was of the relevant areas, in his case the height of the tops of the valley or whatever it was. 

Regardless of what an estate presents I stand firm in that 80/90 yard pheasants are too far as the pattern will have failed 20/30 metres earlier and you'll be relying on a lucky strike. Hence the 2300 shots for 300 birds as previously mentioned.  Thats about 1400-1700 too many (or there abouts) especially given the talk of the magical 70 metre cart fired through an 18.4 bore, wrapped in silk and roled on the legs of Swedish virgins  or whatever it was.  If you need that many shots then something is failing, the shots or the carts. my money is on the carts simply not having the pattern in a 12 bore at that range. 

Absolutely  agree with what you say, i was just interested its not an aspect of cartography i have ever paid much attention too that’s all.

I do not want to cloud the waters too much yet with shot per kill ratios for this or actually hiring something flying at the claimed 80 yards, we need to see some evidence its feasible at this stage. So far the HIGH BIRDERS have input ZERO evidence, just guess work tail Fanning and some strutting and posturing but no patterns at this 80 yard range.

  We are dealing with  a couple of possibilities here, severe overestimation of range or pure flukes random to a huge number of misses  there is no science not even basic science to suggest these sad achievements are anything other than the latter of these two scenarios with a bit of the first one now and again on the lower birds.

 We got very little to go on really.  We got a pile of birds a way bigger pile of spent cartridges , a potential that 80 yard birds fly over the ground as Dave suggests, but other than that NADA zilch, the bird pile could all have been shot at 60 yards for all we know, and realistically they probably were.

 Going back a page or two Parazi states patterns mean nothing.

 So clearly the whole world has it wrong completely wrong.

I think massive oversetimation of range coupled with a few 60 yard kills lots of shots and a over inflated eggo or three thrown in to the mix, gives us what we are left with here.

 Can not draw another conclusion, with no patterns to go on how can we come up with anything else. I ask you.?

 

 

[lancer425]

2 hours ago, rimmie said:

Why not if it kills clean ?

Thats the thing and 3.5 inch has the payload that coupled with other things might get the job done, but as it is with these High birders we got none of these changes and still no patterns.

How on earth do you fathom what’s going to work without patterning.

And lead too i mean even high antimony hard nickel its still lead and you got flyers, at these ranges and 12s these payloads . No we need to see some patterns.

[Perazzishot]

On 15/11/2019 at 20:05, Perazzishot said:

Video from today.

Clean kill at over 80 yards, it is pheasant.

 

Lancer watch!!!

I spoke to the team who went to the same place as figures quoted earlier which were 2000/300 in real terms, it was an inexperienced team on extreme birds 2800/175. Where equipment and skill arrive at the same ground and achieve such a different result does it not tell you that if luck was the key to this then surely by throwing more lead in the air they would have shot more?

[grrclark]

10 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Thats the thing and 3.5 inch has the payload that coupled with other things might get the job done, but as it is with these High birders we got none of these changes and still no patterns.

How on earth do you fathom what’s going to work without patterning.

And lead too i mean even high antimony hard nickel its still lead and you got flyers, at these ranges and 12s these payloads . No we need to see some patterns.

I do understand where you are coming from, but not quite sure of the obsession with patterns.  It won’t change the argument any.

The pattern at 80yds is blown in the 30” given circle, that’s all a pattern board would show, but there are still a load of pellets that retain sufficient energy to bring down a bird.  The evidence for that is that birds are brought down at that height.  It might be a broken wing, the bird being stunned or an outright kill but they are dropped at height, there is lots of demonstrable evidence of that by a lot of shooters.

I agree that luck in having one, or maybe more, of those pellets hit the bird is the biggest single factor when the reliable density of pellets has failed.  Skill plays some part in that the cloud of pellets are in the vicinity of the bird, but the majority factor is luck.

The fact is the more times you shoot at that sort of target then the luckier you will be, it’s a volume play with a bit of skill or learned judgement.

[lancer425]

6 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

Lancer watch!!!

I spoke to the team who went to the same place as figures quoted earlier which were 2000/300 in real terms, it was an inexperienced team on extreme birds 2800/175. Where equipment and skill arrive at the same ground and achieve such a different result does it not tell you that if luck was the key to this then surely by throwing more lead in the air they would have shot more?

Pellets kill birds even those at your claimed 80 yards.   Pellets fly in patterns if we got no pattern we got no pellets no pellets no bird.  We need to get those pellets enough of them to CONSISTENTLY .... KILL.... BIRDS.

 No pattern no bird its not complicated. got to see some patterns.

 I know whats needed for clean kills at long range even 80 yards . you need to show us what you got or fluke it is.

 

 

[Perazzishot]

3 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Pellets kill birds even those at your claimed 80 yards.   Pellets fly in patterns if we got no pattern we got no pellets no pellets no bird.  We need to get those pellets enough of them to CONSISTENTLY .... KILL.... BIRDS.

 No pattern no bird its not complicated. got to see some patterns.

 I know whats needed for clean kills at long range even 80 yards . you need to show us what you got or fluke it is.

 

 

On that basis alone Lancer I'm happy to accept we shoot in a team of the flukiest males and females in the country, if that suits your agenda then I'll grant you that victory. Maybe with that much luck over judgement we should all win the lottery every other week too. But guess what we don't we are all hard working business folk who worked up the ladder until we faced a challenge. As we moved on the environmental constraints increased we adapted, we asked for pairs of 18.4 barrels to allow us to shoot fibre effectively on the governance of Nigel Teague, cartridge manufacturers started working on their fibre loads jostling with each other to find the best loads. We spent £000's in the field achieving results on targets which cannot and will not ever be achieved on any tower.

Teams practice for a high bird on a clay ground on a target which is slowing down from the moment it leaves the trap the live game accelerates and is never slowing all the practice in the world on clays does not carry over for that reason. 

  

[lancer425]

7 minutes ago, grrclark said:

I do understand where you are coming from, but not quite sure of the obsession with patterns.  It won’t change the argument any.

The pattern at 80yds is blown in the 30” given circle, that’s all a pattern board would show, but there are still a load of pellets that retain sufficient energy to bring down a bird.  The evidence for that is that birds are brought down at that height.  It might be a broken wing, the bird being stunned or an outright kill but they are dropped at height, there is lots of demonstrable evidence of that by a lot of shooters.

I agree that luck in having one, or maybe more, of those pellets hit the bird is the biggest single factor when the reliable density of pellets has failed.  Skill plays some part in that the cloud of pellets are in the vicinity of the bird, but the majority factor is luck.

The fact is the more times you shoot at that sort of target then the luckier you will be, it’s a volume play with a bit of skill or learned judgement.

with a pattern you get to see what works and what wont work, itsnot to say some dangerous pellets could not be out there doing their thing, But with the best will in the world that FLUKE.

Its like hitting a high goose stunning it the fall on to frozen ground kils it, bust a wing off its calling as it spirals its running dog on it . But hey we got a result.

No! thats not how its done, We got to get real dont stretch barrels keep ranges sane tight pattern place it right Front end head over back balled up thump down on that green shore.  that is how its done Clean consistent kills .

 to get good you got to PATTERN, i hate patterning it takes time and money off me, I would much rather spend on other sports i do in the summer months, but No i HAVE to pattern.

 I have some developed Gun set ups with loads that i have no intention of ever changing, but any new gun or new powder or component, its back to the grind to get it ON!

 If its not patterning its not going to get used by me i respect what i hunt way too much to ever go out with anything less than ammo that is GOOD enough.

 I do not know any other way but the right way. What they are using at80 yards needs seeing to evaluate or its fluke this is just how it is.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Perazzishot said:

On that basis alone Lancer I'm happy to accept we shoot in a team of the flukiest males and females in the country, if that suits your agenda then I'll grant you that victory. Maybe with that much luck over judgement we should all win the lottery every other week too. But guess what we don't we are all hard working business folk who worked up the ladder until we faced a challenge. As we moved on the environmental constraints increased we adapted, we asked for pairs of 18.4 barrels to allow us to shoot fibre effectively on the governance of Nigel Teague, cartridge manufacturers started working on their fibre loads jostling with each other to find the best loads. We spent £000's in the field achieving results on targets which cannot and will not ever be achieved on any tower.

Teams practice for a high bird on a clay ground on a target which is slowing down from the moment it leaves the trap the live game accelerates and is never slowing all the practice in the world on clays does not carry over for that reason. 

  

I do not want a Victory as you put it, my only interest in this is seeing things done right. 80 yards is a long way to consistently kill with a shotgun, but flukes happen at that range, but please dont try and dress it up as Sportsmanlike.

Long range shotgunning is a thing an ethical thing, but we need to see what your using to draw any accurate conclusions. Pattern its what the whole world does why are you chaps unique in not needing this basic aspect.?

This chap patterns all the time he thinks it matters obviously.

And i share his sentiments voiced at 12.17 on  in this video.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by lancer425

[GingerCat]

2 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

Lancer watch!!!

I spoke to the team who went to the same place as figures quoted earlier which were 2000/300 in real terms, it was an inexperienced team on extreme birds 2800/175. Where equipment and skill arrive at the same ground and achieve such a different result does it not tell you that if luck was the key to this then surely by throwing more lead in the air they would have shot more?

Post that video as much as you like but that bird is not 80 yards up. 

60 yes. 80 not a chance. Can you kill at 60 with a heavy load and tight choke from a 12b? Certainly. Its the limit though. Anything past that and lady luck come into play regardless of how many £000s you've spent in "the field". And that's the point we are getting at. Yes you may well hit 80 yard birds. Especially with the half ton if lead you sling up there (2300 for 300). If you didn't hit something i would be more surprised. But it's not ethical and is detrimental to the sport.

1 video of wounded "extreme" birds from packham and you can bet your shoot breakfast that it will go viral and there will be calls and petitions to ban it. Probably within hours.

This is election time in an anti field sports country. What do you think will happen? Boris won't bat an eyelid to win another 500000 votes at the drop of a hat and neither will any of the rest. 

Even digweed the 26+ times worlds champ and impressive game shot says 60 is the limit. If it was 80 he would say it's 80 and demonstrate it no doubt. He doesn't as he knows that although the pellets may have the power they don't have the pattern.  If he can't do it reliably and then pretty much no one can. 

About 18 months maybe 2 years ago I shot at a pigeon at about 35 yards, it was a low jinking bird powering past the hide left to right , I had no chance looking back and probably was 3 feet behind easily if not more. What was extraordinary was a pigeon (in a flock of about 20) some 50 or maybe 60 yards behind that I hadn't seen fell stone dead. My friend thought I had gone for that one and was congratulating me on such a shot, I was annoyed I hadn't seen them behind or I wouldn't have fired. So yes I accept the shot posses the power to kill and a good shot may get some of it on the bird however there is so little of it that a lot of hit birds will simply fly on and die elsewhere. My garden is a good example as I often find 1 or 2 sulking about the place after a shoot day having been pricked some 300 yards over the fields. Those birds aren't 80 yards up either.

[JDog]

8 hours ago, gotgcoalman said:

actually the pup is called perazzi.

I'm thinking of having him neutered .

Yes, please have Perazzi neutered then we won’t hear any more stories about 80 yard pheasants once the hormones have dissipated.

[motty]

12 hours ago, figgy said:

Right to keep it on topic how soon before we have 31/2" chambered Wildfowling guns on high bird drives with 42g of BB steel for 60 yarders. Cue the Akar triple.

To be honest, the pattern for pheasants at that range would be unlikely to cut it.

Interestingly, a mate of mine has loaded on shoots where one gun uses a 10 bore with 2 1/4 oz turkey loads - a more suitable combination for these higher bird shoots.

[figgy]

Your right Mitty, in the video the Welsh fella was killing 45 yard pheasants. Soon as Eley sort out the wads a bit more and make them HP carts, 60 yards will be the norm. Might need 1 shot for the more range.

Edited November 17, 2019 by figgy

[JJsDad]

9 hours ago, GingerCat said:

Even digweed the 26+ times worlds champ and impressive game shot says 60 is the limit. If it was 80 he would say it's 80 and demonstrate it no doubt. He doesn't as he knows that although the pellets may have the power they don't have the pattern.  If he can't do it reliably and then pretty much no one can. 

Just about sums up the majority view on this discussion. Forget all the videos, its virtually impossible to judge the height of a `high` bird against a clear sky background using a camera. We seem to have no evidence to support these inflated claims for the magical properties of these batches of cartridges. If they were giving good and consistent results at 70 or even 80 yards the manufacturers would be using this in their advertising blurb in an attempt to increase their sales. They are not, which must suggest something.

I will stick with George Digweeds view. Even then, 60 yards is a real long shot for Mr Average, particularly on a bird descending slightly on fixed wings and sliding slightly in the wind. No doubt the `extreme bird boys` will let these sail by as being to easy !