Big Game

Latest Articles

Big Game
Page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot

Author

Message

cab

Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 12:53 pm Post subject:

Andy B wrote:

How important is shooting for the pot for the downsizer? I would have thought it was someway down the list.

That all depends on the downsizer.

Some people eat very little meat, and what they do eat is wild caught. For such people, knowing how to get hold of such meat (be it hunted personally, bartered or bought) is very important.

Andy B

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 3920
Location: Brum

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 12:59 pm Post subject:

cab wrote:

Andy B wrote:

How important is shooting for the pot for the downsizer? I would have thought it was someway down the list.

I know it will vary from person to person, i was generalising.

Gervase

Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 8655

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 1:31 pm Post subject:

Andy B wrote:

How important is shooting for the pot for the downsizer? I would have thought it was someway down the list.

Maybe as a primary food source, but with rabbits and pigeons you're doing two jobs - getting rid of thieving little b*astards and filling your larder.
As for foxes, I don't eat them but I do shoot them. I find lamping most effective, with a .243. Trouble is, most foxes I've shot have been when I've least expected them. The last one was messy - two loads of No4 shot and then finished off with a spade. Not done by the book, I know, but how often does one tote a rifle around when walking up the coverts and checking pens?
Deer are another matter, and I'd echo Cab's advice - take a course with BASC or the BDS and go out with an experienced stalker.

Lloyd

Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 2699

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 2:01 pm Post subject:

Andy B wrote:

How important is shooting for the pot for the downsizer? I would have thought it was someway down the list.

i agree it's far from the top of my list, however, there are few things as satisfying as when the great hunter returns home heavy laden with fresh meat. On a few very rare occasions, I sold bunnies, hare, etc by the dozen to local butchers having filled my freezers first. It feels a bit like when you harvest your veg patch, except natures larder is not depleted by your efforts, when the veg patch will be.

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 2:16 pm Post subject:

If you're talking shotguns or air rifles then I think it fits in quite nicely with the downsizer/smallholder approach. Having a hour here or there to walk up some rabbits of pigeons is great.

Plus there is a seasonal aspect of it, my shooting will tail off until the pigeons start coming in over laid or stubble, and my sea fishing will go up a huge amount as the mackeral come in.

Conversely, I think that rifle shooting is a more specialist sport, the opportunities to indulge in it are far less, the costs are certainly higher and the quarry is in far less numbers.

Andy B

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 3920
Location: Brum

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 2:49 pm Post subject:
I was just looking at it from the vast majority point of view. Most people live in towns and cities, but that shouldnt put them off the downsizer idea as far as growing veg and having a few chickens. But when you start talking big animals and shooting, and i dont mean drive byes, it gets more difficult. Almost more eletist, and that might put some people off.

Bugs

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 10744

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 2:52 pm Post subject:
That is a good point Andy. I think it was part of the idea of separating out the "Wild Food" sections, because a lot of people might fancy picking fruit or the odd mushroom but never dream of catching a rabbit or even shellfish from the beach.

cab

Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 3:17 pm Post subject:
There are also very different styles and skills involved in picking, hunting, gathering, fishing, etc. There are overlaps (getting winkles from pools, for example, is more like foraging than fishing!) but I think it's handy to have the areas covered seperately.

deerstalker

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 589

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 6:42 pm Post subject:
That's why I set up the topics that way (and also to try to leave the fox hunting debate behind).

deerstalker

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 589

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 6:50 pm Post subject:

jonnyboy wrote:

I think that rifle shooting is a more specialist sport, the opportunities to indulge in it are far less, the costs are certainly higher and the quarry is in far less numbers.

A high powered small bore rifle (eg .17 HMR or .22 WMR) is without doubt the most effective method of shooting rabbits I've ever come across.

It is certainly a good deal cheaper than using a shotgun, all cost considered.

Lloyd

Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 2699

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 9:55 pm Post subject:

Well, that wraps several issues together. A 12 bore is god only at close range. A luvly big blunderbuss. The .22LR is a nice varminter but suffers from excess drop due to low power. The plus point is low noise, (a major plus), but the down side is the arc of the bulet and rapid drop. You can zero for a given range, but the rifle will not hold true to that impact point if you add or subtract even 30 yards. The .17HMR is a phenomenal weapon on small mammals. Very small and light. This works for it and against. Extreme accuracy at amazing ranges, 250 yds +, ....*in ideal conditions*. On a windy day, I leave it at home and take the .22. The damage a .17HMR does is remarkable too. The bullet has a polymer tip, so fragments on impact. What the sky marshalls in the USA use. It stays in the target, so no ricochets, no risk to others. Miss the target and the round turns to dust when it hits the next nearest object. Shoot a rabbit on an ideal day at 250 yards, and the entry point is invisible, but the other half of the head is missing. So choices!.....

Lloyd

Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 2699

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 9:57 pm Post subject:
I think that with my shotty, I miss more, but then I'm not good with it, always been a rifle shooter. So the 12 guage costs more. The .22 and .17HMR always kill first time, so overall costs are lower.

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 10:55 pm Post subject:

Madman wrote:

I think that with my shotty, I miss more, but then I'm not good with it, always been a rifle shooter. So the 12 guage costs more. The .22 and .17HMR always kill first time, so overall costs are lower.

Fair enough, but my success rate with a shotgun is pretty high, then again the actual amount I bag may be lower in total because I will never shoot at extreme range.

But I still consider the shotgun a more practical weapon, You can shoot moving quarry for a start!

On top of that what about the legal issues and the practicality of rifle ownership?

Plus the risks are higher - You have to be far more careful about how and where you shoot. Over here a five year old was shot in the head in a school playground. Police are blaming a stray .22 round that may have been fired from a mile away. Now I know that this is an isolated incident but it's worth considering.

Lloyd

Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 2699

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 11:05 pm Post subject:
JB, taking just your final comment, a .22 rifle fired from a mile away....Was the guy pointing vertically into the sky in order to get the incredibly unlucky headshot?.....Sherlock Holmes would say that te most obvious thing is the most likely thing. I couldn't head shot a kid at 300 yards with my .22 accurately, so I can't really contribute to your thread.

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Wed May 25, 05 11:11 pm Post subject:

Madman wrote:

JB, taking just your final comment, a .22 rifle fired from a mile away....Was the guy pointing vertically into the sky in order to get the incredibly unlucky headshot?.....Sherlock Holmes would say that te most obvious thing is the most likely thing. I couldn't head shot a kid at 300 yards with my .22 accurately, so I can't really contribute to your thread.

I'm not saying it was deliberate, but a .22 does have a very high MV and can be fatal over a suprisingly long range. I'm just trying to make a point over the potential risk involved. (Actually I have a feeling of deja vu here)

This is the news report. https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4478143.stm

Edit: that's a report from the time of the incident, thankfully the boy has recovered from two operations and has been moved to a normal ward, although it will be a while before he leaves hospital.

	Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot	All times are GMT Page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

View Latest Posts