Shooting Birds in Flight

The chinese and koreans claim adrenaline improves the taste of the meat. That's why they scald and skin their cats, dogs, and chickens alive.

The chinese and koreans claim adrenaline improves the taste of the meat. That's why they scald and skin their cats, dogs, and chickens alive.

Click to expand...

eeeewwww!

no kidding

But its the truth.


oops, except for the chickens. Those are'nt skinned alive, they're plucked alive.

"Yes, when their adrenaline is coursing through the blood stream under duress, it does change it."

Dont know how to tell you this, but the second the bullet hits the animal they have a huge adrenaline dump. If what you say is true it is almost impossible to have good tasting meat if the animal were to have its heart beat more then about 10 times after you touched the trigger (pretty likely) you would be dealing with adrenaline in the meat and it would be no good. Furthermore i fail to see how a flushed (spooked) bird would have less adrenaline then a bird that was running. By your estimation a bird should be ruined if shot in flight, just too much adrenaline.

oneounceload- give it up! there is nothing wrong with shooting birds on the ground. if you can kill your prey quick and legal.. that's all that matters.....sorry it is what it is.. and what it is, is hunting

Click to expand...

It isn't hunting, it is shooting - if you have no more respect for the animal, that is YOUR decision - if all you are worried about it filling a limit, have at it - hunt with those who share your views - I am NOT one of them

you try to shoot an animal that is NOT running full out scared for its life.............NV pronghorn are nasty if you let them run before shooting, as are the mulies

I would like to give anybody a piece of deer that had been run by dogs and one that had it's nose down eating and dare them to tell the difference.

If it's legal to shoot a sitting bird, go for it. You might find it more satisfying to shoot them in flight, if you can.

As long as you stay within the law, do as you please. But, me, I'm out there WING shooting. As someone said, if all you want is the meat, save you coins on the hunting license, lease, whatever, and go buy some chicken....or raise chickens. Me, I have money and I hate cleaning chickens. I'll clean two limits of snow geese to get out of cleaning one chicken. When I'm bird hunting, I'll jump a dove off a limb or a duck off the water. Any idiot can hit 'em stationary. No challenge in that.

When I was young and dumb and stupid...(somewhat improved now days, not sure to what degree)....I shot geese on the wing with a .22 rifle. Lead is about the same as with a shotgun. Was illegal as heck and the game wardens on this board, the statute of limitations is long elapsed. I have reformed and am now strictly law abiding and have accepted Christ, so I've attoned for my sins...I hope.

I spend a lot of time shooting clays in the summer to be good at wing shooting. The fun is in hitting them flying. Ducks are the most fun when they decoy up and are about 2 foot off the water... deer are best when you can find one standing still at 300 yds, or walking under your stand and you can hit 'em with you revolver... but if a dove is sitting, or a duck is floating, or a buck is on a full run and I can kill 'em clean you can bet the muzzlw will sing... if I can add it to the bag it's of no concern to me...I like them all

To stay with doves for a moment: IMO, nobody in his right mind is going dove hunting as a means for obtaining meat. It's a sporting thing where the successful results happen to be edible.

"Sporting" has not always been the case. My grandfather spoke of going with a couple of older brothers who had the family shotgun. He spoke of being around five years old, so this would have been around 1890.

Because shotgun shells cost a nickel each, they would sneak around until they could have doves lined up on a branch--and then shoot.

My great-grandmother had nine kids to feed. Sport? Not for farm folks in those days.

So it seems to me that the main thing is to not fool yourself about why or how you're putting that bird in your game bag. There is sport hunting and then there is meat hunting. Okay, fine, just acknowledge the difference to yourself. As long as it's legal, it's not my problem.

As long as it's legal, it's not my problem.

Click to expand...

Sure it is , Art - just because something is legal, doesn't make it allowable or right - just like this site - allow me for a minute - politics, talking disparaging about politicians is certainly legal, but it is NOT allowed here, tolerated, appreciated, yet...................there are similar analogies in this thread that your forum's decorum won't allow me to expound on....

Just because it is right, doesn't mean it's legal

Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's right

"Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's right."

While I generally agree, the problem is that in such cases as this thread, "right" is a personal-opinion judgement call about a legal act. I figure that I'd not say anything to or about a person whose moral code was very much different from mine, but odds are that I'd not invite him to my house for supper. But shooting a sitting or running bird, to me, is situational; it seems trivial, and is not something to get all lathered up about.

But shooting a sitting or running bird, to me, is situational; it seems trivial, and is not something to get all lathered up about.

Click to expand...

this is a good way of saying what I have been trying to... this is no major issue either way..

oh and as a side not being illegal doesn't make it wrong.. sometimes it just means the government hasn't figured out how to make money off it yet..

I don't think I'd hunt with somebody again if they shot a grounded bird except a few limited instances.

HB

you try to shoot an animal that is NOT running full out scared for its life

Click to expand...

Birds also fly off when scared for their lives. Esp. when you send dogs in after them and start blasting away with the shotgun. Game bird are perpetually scared for their lives. Everything wants to eat them.

Stalking game birds in heavy cover is not "just shooting." But again this comes back to some very old class distinctions between the nobility and peasants. Apart from punt gun bans, it has nothing to do with actual sportsmanship or game management. Either method can be sporting or little more than a shooting gallery.

Furthermore, different environments call for different methods. If your "upland" birds are in the middle of vast, dense boreal jungles then there's not really much point in trying to wing shoot. You can't even see the sky, or sometimes more than a foot in front of you. Trying to get at grouse in there is not easy. Trying to get them out of the trees or in a spot where they can be shot is not easy. To apply the same standards you use in some rolling treeless scrub land to those conditions is absurd. Particularly where said rolling country is little more than a game park kept artificially stocked with plenty of birds to scare into flight for wealthy clients.

I don't think I'd hunt with somebody again if they shot a grounded bird except a few limited instances.

Click to expand...

Which is to say you would shun them as being lower on the pecking order than you. Again, it comes back to perceived social class. Those closer to the King will shoot on the wing. Those underneath will shoot grounded birds. Note that you don't say you wouldn't shoot with someone who shot a grounded bird ILLEGALLY. So this isn't about the law.

Sorry Cosmoline - it isn't about class........

I am now mostly a dove and quail hunter, but in the past have hunted chukar (runners), blue, ruffed, and sage grouse, 4 types of quail in as many states, pheasants, etc.

I don't shoot runners, because, as I mentioned previously, our hunting groups always observed the "blue sky rule - why? because someone's DOG was in the middle of it. I have seen someone accidentally shoot another's dog as the birds flushed, the hunter was caught off guard, and the dog decided to leap up to catch the birds. (the dog survived thankfully - guess the shooter took lessons from Dick Cheney).

I have been swept by loaded shotguns as birds have crossed my path, I have almost done the same - only to jerk the gun up for safety.

To ME THAT is the primary reasons I won't ground sluice a bird, but just as important were the lessons taught to this city kid by veteran hunters - it just wasn't the right thing to do - period. Any group I ever hunted with - young or old, rich or poor - you ground sluiced a bird, you could bet on never being asked back again - it wasn't a rich/poor class struggle like some here try to make it...........it was the way it was done in those parts of the country where I have been fortunate to have spent some part of my life - and when instructing MY kids on proper etiquette, the lesson is the same.

Some here seem to think hunting is nothing more than maxing out the the limit - and I'll bet they look at the max number per person, multiply by the number in the party and try to total out accordingly. Again, that is wrong - if the limit is 10 per person and you have 4 persons that does not mean 40 total with 1 person shooting 25 and the other 3 taking 5 each - although I suspect some see nothing wrong with that either. Down the road the Game Warden might not know or care, because totals equate - still doesn't make it right. If anyone here is part of that, please - stay amongst yourselves - hunters have enough issues with poachers and others to not add another group to the fray

I have to say that making this some kind of position in society thing is a little ridiculous. Where I grew up nobody had anything. But, shooting a sitting bird was looked down on. From one peasant to the other.

I think it's ironic that someone will get all worked up over this and many other huntin g practices, that they cannot give you a viable basis for. I understand if your dad or grandad thought it was more noble, sporting, or even just more fun to shoot 'em flying. People feel the same about taking a 700 yd shot at deer and the like. These are all respectable reasons to feel that way and to make that your hunting method.... but when you say that someone is immoral or unethical, I think you need a better basis for your stance. It is not taken lightly by most if you were to make the accusations to them, and I believe without the anonymity of the internet I don't think most would... so to say you wouldn't hunt with someone over a common, legal, and generally accepted hunting practice leads me to ask for a logical explanation of such an opinion.

I keep hearing people say you have to give the birds a chance...why? And are decoys, camo, auto loading,or twin barreled shotguns also unsporting.... just cause you feel strongly about it doesn't your right!

Some people still think driving over 55 is immoral, and unethical....doesn't mean they are right either.

Guess you have really missed my point - OK.whatever, this is a done thread for me - I stated my positions and why.......you do not agree? Live with it yourself.........

I also deplore those 700 yard shots at anything live - but that's just me

you actually never said why, you called names and said I was a slob, but I'm seriously curious as to why many people think taht a bird on the ground or even in a tree is bad?

I don't shoot runners, because, as I mentioned previously, our hunting groups always observed the "blue sky rule - why? because someone's DOG was in the middle of it

Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense, but it does not explain the blanket condemnation of people who don't hunt the way you do. I've tried to explain that some country is very, very different from what you may be used to. As far as exceeding bag limits, I've never even come close with stalking and ground shooting with the .22. Many times in the winter I've tracked the grouse all over, only to find them leading me in a big circle through the snow. And in the summer I can walk right by the birds and not see them at all. I'm sure I've failed to see far more than I've ever shot. Sometimes I will find a bank of river gravel and just sit and wait until there's a break in the drizzle. The fresh sun seems to draw them out, and I may get a few if I'm lucky. Hardly a punt gun, brother.

it just wasn't the right thing to do - period.

Click to expand...

There's no logic to such a blanket stance. Particularly if, as you claim, class has nothing to do with it. Whether or not ground, or wing, shooting is appropriate depends on the game laws and the circumstances you're faced with.

Here's another example--there are some ptarmigan in Alaska that are quite rare and in some GMU's and may be off the season's list. If you're blasting at anything taking wing you won't be able to tell one from the other. If you wait till you have a good bead on it with the rimfire you can tell exactly what you're shooting. You can also rule out the hens with their cute little ones in tow.

This "politically correct" ritual shunning, regardless of legality, is disturbing.

This is like a lot of the one size fits all discussions you get in to. Some of us are just hunting different birds. Until the recent reintroduction of turkeys the only birds we had to shoot were dove, duck, and quail. And, custom says you don't shoot those sitting. I have killed blue grouse in the Rockies with a stick. Don't really know what the proper method should be in another place.

Cosmoline said:

Furthermore, different environments call for different methods. If your "upland" birds are in the middle of vast, dense boreal jungles then there's not really much point in trying to wing shoot. You can't even see the sky, or sometimes more than a foot in front of you. Trying to get at grouse in there is not easy. Trying to get them out of the trees or in a spot where they can be shot is not easy. To apply the same standards you use in some rolling treeless scrub land to those conditions is absurd. Particularly where said rolling country is little more than a game park kept artificially stocked with plenty of birds to scare into flight for wealthy clients.

Click to expand...

Indeed. I went quail hunting in some pretty thick brush. It wasn't rolling scrub, more like mountainous scrub with overgrown bushes. The quail flew fast and low, and followed the ground, and dove to ground quickly where you'd lose them in the bush. Catching them on the wing was incredibly difficult because you had to spook them, and they flew up right in your face and disappeared quickly. Basically, you'd take them however you could find them. Finding them on the ground where you could see them and actually get a shot was rare.

I do it all the time - that's why my only sporting shotgun (a .410) stays home most on most occasions.

I have been considering hunting pheasants over decoys next season - just to see if it would work. My state has no regulations for equipment OR method of take.

I know pheasants group up to feed during the day, and I found a source of plastic pheasant decoys... So I'm imagining setting up a cluster of decoys along a trail or cut, and playing one of the numerous vocalizations available online, and harvesting with a .22 mag or other small caliber rifle.

like turkey hunting in miniature!

Just be aware, Mr.Trooper, that some states have restrictions on electronic game calls. Know your laws.