Duck Hunting Forum banner

Shooting Ducks/Geese on the water

23K views 115 replies 44 participants last post by  Feather Seeker 
#1 ·
I have always been taught to not shoot waterfowl on the water, if something swam into the deeks I would always scare it up and shoot it, or try to shoot it. I have started hunting with these guys and the other day we had some geese swim in to the deeks and I asked if we gonna scare em up, and I was met with a resounding "**** no" and we ended up shooting them on the water. I was wondering other peoples opinion on this matter.
 
#2 ·
I always shot ducks on the water....till i turned 14. There should be a stiff fine for people who do that. You dont throw a clay pigeon out on the ground and shoot it do you? Do they also shoot deer on a wheat field from their trucks? Or pop a dove thats chillin on a fence from a truck? If your water poppin i wouldnt tell anybody. Yea we all love duck hunting and bottom line is we are out to kill them but damn man...they deserve a little more respect than that.
 
#3 ·
Where do you think the term "siting duck" came from? I agree with sooner, they deserve better.

Frank
 
#4 ·
I think it all depends on the reason you are hunting.
If you are hunting for sport then by all means jump them up then shoot. Missing the duck only means you eat a hamburger instead.
If you are hunting for the meat and to feed your family then I really don't care if you shoot them on the water.
I know people here in AK who lived off of the game they shot at one point in their lives, If they didn't shoot anything they didn't eat anything. Or at least not any meat. They lived where there were no grocery stores let alone roads so it isn't all that easy to get food where they lived. I have no doubt they groundsluiced a few birds in that time and in my mind rightfully and legally so.
If the law said we could not shoot them on the water or on the ground then I would say we shouldn't do it.
It is legal by law where I shoot so there are times when I will do it.
I hunt first because I want to eat what I shoot and so does my family.
Secondary to me is the enjoyment I get from hunting. Yes I make enough money to buy the food we eat. Store bought processed food just isn't the same as the wild game I shoot and process myself.
I believe shooting a sitting duck within range of your gun is much more respectfull than skybusting and letting them fly off wounded. Or more so than those who do not serioulsy track down a crippled bird.
Are there actually places where shooting a sitting duck is against the law?
Either way the result is the same a dead duck right?
 
#5 ·
i see nothing wrong with it a duck is a duck its food the way i look at it yeah its not as fun but most of the time in the morning is the only time you have them there so shoot them and its no different then shooting a deer of of bait, your bait it duck hunting is your decoys. so i say shoot them wherever air or water.
 
#8 ·
How bout yall dont worry about what I do, within the law, while I'm hunting and I wont worry about what you do either....

Seriously, if someone shoots a duck legally then whether or not it's in good "sportsmanship" is just an opinion of another hunter who isn't minding their own business.
 
#9 ·
Kasilofchrisn said:
I also wonder do you yell at your deer so they take off running before you shoot at them?
That's the least they deserve! Give the deer some respect and a fighting chance!
Same thing with rabbits,squirrels,elk,mule deer,turkey etc.etc.
Not really a valid comparison. First off, most deer hunting (be patient, I'll get to buckshot in a minute), is done with weapons shooting a single projectile that must be placed within a specific area of the animal to ensure a clean kill. Shotguns are designed to throw a cloud of shot which will greatly increase the chance of a pellet striking a vital area and that cloud, or pattern, is larger than the target animal as a whole. Even buckshot is designed to act more like multiple rifle projectiles than it is a true shotgun pattern.

Just for the record, I don't shoot sitting ducks. Just my choice. I have no objection if anyone else does so, but I will not hunt with anyone who does. Call me holier than thou, or whatever you like, but not only is it more sporting to shoot them in the air, it is actually more effective, mostly. When a duck is sitting on the water, the majority of its critical zine is below the surface and protected by its folded wings. About the only vital area that's exposed is the neck and head, what amounts to about a pecan sitting on a pencil stub. Not a very big target. And one that can easily slip through a pattern that is generally designed for a much larger target area. I carry swatter loads for crippled birds on the water. Generally 1 1/4oz #4s. Seem to work pretty well and getting the head and neck, though I've read where an ounce of #6s might be a better choice. A noral load of #2 steel is as likely to cripple a sitting duck as it is to kill it. And, if you're shooting divers, this can be a real issue.

This is why I believe that the birds deserve better.

Frank
 
#11 ·
OK Frank what about Turkeys then. Often hunted with shotguns with birdshot.
We don't have them where I hunt but when I watch them on the outdoor channel they never jump up and try to get the turkey to fly off before shooting.
My point is other than waterfowl and gouse people do not seem to care either way.
A running squirrell sure is more sporting but they are often shot while standing still as well.
I get your point about the kill zone being under water or covered better when they are sitting. Still if you wait until they swim close enough they are still dead as ever. Or you shoot a second time to finnish them off.
My opinion is each hunter and his hunting partners should decide for themselves before the hunt what their plan is. Whether to shoot only on the fly or on the water as well.
Both are 100% legal. Both put meat on the table.
Like I said before I much prefer people shoot them on the water when they are within range than skybusting and wounding them.
 
#12 ·
I've shot a lot of birds on the water, some due to being crippled others due to being 10 yards away... The best is when they jump just as you raise the gun to swat them.

I have no objections to either opinion on this issue as I've hunted with people from both sides.

I prefer putting food on the table, but there is a point to be made here... If you're going to water swat make sure they are darn close because if you cripple a sitting bird and lose it, it's simply wasteful.

I guess it goes with everything in hunting, use your judgement to do what will not result in waste.
 
#13 ·
Kasilofchrisn said:
OK Frank what about Turkeys then. Often hunted with shotguns with birdshot.
We don't have them where I hunt but when I watch them on the outdoor channel they never jump up and try to get the turkey to fly off before shooting.
Again, not a valid comparison, in my opinion. With turkeys, you are typically shooting a very tight pattern and trying to place that lattern similar to a rifle shot.

Kasilofchrisn said:
My point is other than waterfowl and gouse people do not seem to care either way.
To this I'd add all upland birds, but I'm sure you'd agree. That's why it's called wingshooting.

Kasilofchrisn said:
A running squirrell sure is more sporting but they are often shot while standing still as well.
With squirrells, at least with me, it's about stalking and positioning. Again, a bit of a difference in method

Kasilofchrisn said:
I get your point about the kill zone being under water or covered better when they are sitting. Still if you wait until they swim close enough they are still dead as ever. Or you shoot a second time to finnish them off.
Too close and you've got duckburger. And while second shots are sometimes necessary, in my experience, the necessity for a second shot under these circumstances is too great.

Kasilofchrisn said:
My opinion is each hunter and his hunting partners should decide for themselves before the hunt what their plan is. Whether to shoot only on the fly or on the water as well.
Both are 100% legal. Both put meat on the table.
I agree. Like I said, if you want to shoot them on the water, have at it. I won't and I won't hunt with anyone who does. Just my choice.

Kasilofchrisn said:
Like I said before I much prefer people shoot them on the water when they are within range than skybusting and wounding them.
There are extremes on both sides of the coin. Neither is acceptabe, in my opinion.

Frank
 
#14 ·
Perchjerk said:
How bout yall dont worry about what I do, within the law, while I'm hunting and I wont worry about what you do either....

Seriously, if someone shoots a duck legally then whether or not it's in good "sportsmanship" is just an opinion of another hunter who isn't minding their own business.
Id agree other than the fact the freakin thread was started by a guy ASKING the question and us giving our opinion. If your hunting for your families survival then i have no problem taking game by any means necessary. If not then why dont we try bettering our calling and decoy set up to get a flying kill! I know the chad belding targeted followers are the ones most likely to water pop. Dress up in your affliction, slam your protein shake and pre-game to Roadhouse. I will completely agree id rather water pop than skybust though.
 
#15 ·
I'm well aware of what the op asked and my comment wasn't directed at him. Its directed at the junior wardens who pass judgement on people that hunt differently than they do especially when no law has been broken. If u don't like to shoot ducks on the water cool but don't put down someone else if they choose too ( not implying you sooner, just in general). All I'm saying.
 
#16 ·
Perchjerk said:
I'm well aware of what the op asked and my comment wasn't directed at him. Its directed at the junior wardens who pass judgement on people that hunt differently than they do especially when no law has been broken. If u don't like to shoot ducks on the water cool but don't put down someone else if they choose too ( not implying you sooner, just in general). All I'm saying.
Apologies. See where your going with the junior wardens. They get out of hand around the waurika area from time to time. I prefer people dont but if you do i can't judge bc it's not illegal. Just an opinion and that n $5 will get ya a ****ty cup at Starbucks!
 
#17 ·
sooner737 said:
If your hunting for your families survival then i have no problem taking game by any means necessary.
i think this is part of the issue. If one is truly subsistance hunting, then yes, by all means, shoot them however you please. But, I have a very difficult time believing that anyone has to subsistance hunt in this day and age, even with the present economy. If you sit down and add up all the costs to go hunting, it's really a lot less expensive to visit the local supermarket. Plus, if you have to subsistance hunt, the implication is that you're in very dire financial straits, so what are you doing on the internet? How do you afford a computer or ISP fees?

People like to hid behind this mantra and use this as an excuse (where none should be required.) Sorry, I'm just not buying the subsistance angle.

Frank
 
#18 ·
Different strokes for different folks. I don't care to do it. There are also reasons other than sportsmanship, not to. On small water holes it can be a safety issue particularly if other hunters are around. Pellets like bullets will skip on the water. There is always a risk but a little elevation reduces it some. Effectiveness is another issue. I don't know about anyone else but I have one heck of a time killing cripples on the water. I maybe get 1 in 10 with just one shot. They are a more compact target on the water, part of the body is sub surface and the heavier wing feathers guard much of the body. Unless you can consistently head shoot them they make for a tough target.
 
#19 ·
Frank Lopez said:
sooner737 said:
If your hunting for your families survival then i have no problem taking game by any means necessary.
i think this is part of the issue. If one is truly subsistance hunting, then yes, by all means, shoot them however you please. But, I have a very difficult time believing that anyone has to subsistance hunt in this day and age, even with the present economy. If you sit down and add up all the costs to go hunting, it's really a lot less expensive to visit the local supermarket. Plus, if you have to subsistance hunt, the implication is that you're in very dire financial straits, so what are you doing on the internet? How do you afford a computer or ISP fees?

People like to hid behind this mantra and use this as an excuse (where none should be required.) Sorry, I'm just not buying the subsistance angle.

Frank
Perhaps the same way you see Cadillac escalades at the welfare office!
 
#20 ·
Here in Alaska subsistence is alive and well in many areas.
I am talking people who live in the bush where there are no roads no stores etc. Most Alaskans do not live this way but there are quite a few who do.
Many of these people do not have any internet or phone services.
Their income is low so the state does not require they get a state duck stamp and their license is $5 and that includes hunting,fishing,and trapping. The federal government also give them subsistence hunting and fishing rights with larger bag limits and gear types other americans are not allowed. This is due to the fact they belong to a qualifying Alaska native tribe or live in an area considered by the feds to be "Rural" and not have easy (as in road) access to stores etc.
They only jump shoot or use 2 liter soda or bleach jugs with a bit of black/white paint for decoys when duck hunting.
They truly live off of the land as much as possible. Selling furs and hand made crafts on the once or twice yearly trek to town.
Point being their are people in this day and age living a true subsistence lifestyle here in Alaska.
 
#21 ·
I have to agree 100% with Perchjerk.
To each his own and mind your own business as long as we are all legal.
If it was truely something that should be illegal then why don't you petition the federal/your state government to make it a law?
A law stating all waterfowl as well as upland game should be shot in the air. With the exception of finnishing off a cripple no person would be able to shoot the listed species on the water or on the ground.
The federal government as well as local and state governments currently allow it. Until that changes I will at times take them any legal way I can.
Some choose a bow -some choose a gun.
Some use decoys and calls -others jump or pass shoot.
Some sit in a deerstand -some hike for miles.
Some ride a horse -some ride a 4 wheeler into the woods -many use neither.
Some plant food plots or use bait(where legal)- others do not.
some buy their food- some hunt/grow their food.
Some think hunting is vulgar and barbaric-others believe it is humane and ethical.
As I said to each their own.

Even if a person is not living a true subsistence lifestyle some people are still forced to deal with tight budgets and justifying their hunting time and expenses to their wives and families. Jump shooting a few ducks whether they be sitting or flying allows them to justify the expense by offsetting the cost of a meal somewhat. Besides the fact that meal is healthy wild game not processed store bought stuff.
So they can spend $50 on chicken at the store or $50 to jump shoot a few ducks. They might choose to hunt ducks instead.
Maybe they use a borrowed or inherited gun or buy one cheap via garage sale etc. Once they have the gun A license with stamps and the cheapest $12 a box shells are all they need for some jump shooting in the marsh.

Also I have several low income friends. They afford to duck hunt by using my shells and hunting over my decoys. Some of these people are disabled and cannot work. They recieve a disability check each month that provides the bulk of their meager income.
They have a used shotgun and a license is $5 + a $15 federal duck stamp.No state stamp required for them due to their dissability and low income. Without my help they could not hunt ducks. They are good friends of mine and I don't mind helping them out.
Especially when it means helping their kids get into hunting.
It is not their fault they were in a couple of serious car wrecks or were born with problems that led to their dissability.
I don't blame them for taking game by any legal methods and/or means at their disposal.
 
#22 ·
My own feeling is if geese are on the water, and you stand up to flush them you will be getting nothing but butt shots most of the time. Swat one on the water and the rest will jump and be beating wings by the time you get to them. I'd rather see a head shot dead on the water than an butt shot cripple that gets away. Some hunters can finish birds and set them in the decoys. If they want to water swat them, it is legal.
 
#23 ·
I've shot ducks on the water in my day. I avoid doing it but sometimes when the opportunity arises I still do it. I'm out to get ducks. I will do it any way I can within the law. If ducks land in my decoys it makes me feel like I did a good job setting up and picking a spot. I never judge someone who is hunting within the law. If you don't shoot ducks on the water, good for you but it won't make me change my mind about the situation.
 
#25 ·
My decoys spread is designed to accommodate kids shooting birds on the water without also popping decoys, and it doesn't bother me when an adult takes that advantage. But I was brought up by men who wouldn't shoot a stationary bird other than turkey and never felt I needed a bird badly enough to break that tradition.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top