First, I have to second the preceding comments about run of the mill rifle shooters and range estimation. I belonged to a private club and was continually appalled at people who would show up at the range the week before a hunt, throw no more than five rounds downrange and, if they could see the shots on paper, all was good. In the field, anything that is visible in the scope is a good shot. I hear eastern deer hunters saying their rifle is sighed in for 200-300 years (Really?) Shotgun in hand, the tendency is to point the thing and wait for the bird to intersect the line of sight. That's the great unwashed mass. There are also some who are very proficient, scary good, even, but they are the minority.

People that normally bird hunt, but who don't practice much, usually seem to me to do surprisingly well and I have to wonder how good they would be if they did practice. Among them I consider myself perhaps marginally more competent, but they often express amazement at my shooting. It makes me wonder what the margin is between average and good wing shooting is.