My shooting/hunting perceptions and skills have changed dramatically over the years. When I started hunting at age 12 and up to about age 35 (It's embarrassing to write this), I was mostly an unsuccessful sky blaster for waterfowl and a 3 shot no matter what for upland game. Friends an mentors took me under their wings and changed my whole hunting/shooting perspective. One guy took me skeet shooting and after a while had me shooting low gun to simulate hunting conditions. Another friend taught me to call ducks and geese to within easy shooting range and as as result of what those two guy taught me I became a successful hunter and not just a bad shot and bird crippler. They also taught me that 1 1/4 oz. of lead, when lead was legal is more than enough for both ducks and geese. I shoot pheasant, Huns, sharp tail and blue and ruff grouse with 3/4 oz. loads. I spend a lot of time on my pattern board when I'm attempting to evaluate a new load or perfecting an old one. A person can use as much shot and gun that they feel is necessary, but crippling birds at extreme ranges makes no sense to me and in the case of waterfowl, when you learn to call close shots are the norm.
Does crippling birds at
CLOSE range make more sense?
Crippling ducks, or any other gamebird that may be occasionally shot at a longer distance, is not exclusive of short range shooting.
SRH
