Global schwarming my oath. I have a view. You see, the history of the earth is littered with life changing events such as Ice Ages (more than one), volcanic dust storms, tsunamis, meteorite impacts... and what normally happens after each event is sort of cyclical. For example, carbon dating technology tells us that between Ice Ages, there are periods where dear old mother earth has got quite warm. Think far warmer than now. This has happened forever on our little planet. What we're seeing now is quite foreign to us poor humans, technically over the past 20 years, the earth has warmed by about one half of one degree on average. Let me say that again. One half of one degree over 20 years. A warming crises of biblical proportions? Not in my view. An "Inconvenient Truth" - pah!
In a similar vein...
My views on shooting lead at birds are: it is the most efficient and effective gamebird killing medium ever invented. Right price, right ballistic, right denisty... right everything. Except for one teeny weeny thing... lead is toxic. Well sure, so don't go eating the stuff in big doses! Another paradox... to keep the greenies off our back, we shoot alternative shot out of our big bore shotguns. The problem is that no matter what anyone says (inc my esteemed ammo sponsor) steel doesn't stack up at ranges beyond 40m. This actually doesn't mean that much to most pond shooters who shoot at 20m or less, so we're left with some tough choices. One of our better known waterfowling identities has all the answers - "fool ducks into getting within 20m" is his common reply. In certain areas of the country where there are vast bird numbers, lowish hunter numbers and where bag limits can be set at 50 birds a day, well I'd put it to you that anyone with a few smarts and a few good contacts could harvest huge numbers based on the fact that the birds are simply not going to be pressured as much as birds in say the Waikato region. I.e. they will be easier to decoy, easier to get into range and easier to kill with steel. So I don't fully subscribe to his views given that I think he's got it pretty easy - and don't get me wrong, good on him, that's what years of experience is all about. But to transpose a limited view based on his local area across the whole NZ shooting scene... well, that's just not right. For example, the guys I shot with on the Waikato River would open up at ducks at 60m. They'd kill them too. The ducks simply wouldn't fly closer so they did what they had to to get a bag. They hand loaded powerful lead loads based on great ballistics. I fear that with steel they just aren't going to be in the game, or will wound so many birds it would turn your stomache. To tell these guys they have to call birds in to 20m? Nah, it wont happen, it
can't happen, its just not how the ducks fly.
My view is that I'm going to continue to buy better alternatives than steel, and hopefully over time the alternatives will be more palatable from a $ perspective. I will do my utmost to have realistic decoys and appropriate settings, will continue to practice my calling and will continue to think of putting myself in places that birds go. By doing this I may have the luxury of being relaxed about killing lots of ducks with steel at 20m and then getting on a high horse and calling the sub gauge shooters "hypocrites".
(but its not likley!!)
