While reveling in the success of outwitting a tough old state land gobbler yesterday, one that had eluded me for the better part of three mornings, I would come upon a rather unpleasant surprise. I was taken back when it came time to conclude the happy event and prepare the bird for the freezer. Setting upon the task of removing the breast and legs for a soon to be tasty meal, I was greeted with the foul stench from prior wounds. On the left side, the wing, the breast and the legs were shot with #9 pellets that I recognized as TSS shot. None of the shot penetrated the boiler room. Currently #9 shot is illegal to use on gobblers in NY.
This would be the fifth gobbler taken, and found to be uneatable in recent years, and yes, all were Pixie Swatted. One in 2016, one in 2017, and two in 2020. All late season public land birds. All but this one taken in the last days of the season. As much as I appreciate the trophy qualities of big old gobblers, the mental exercise of outwitting them, the desired purpose of hunting them is to enjoy the table fare that results from it.
In voicing this observation and learned opinion I am claimed by the peanut gallery to be biased, hateful, beneath my stature, along with the boorish and expected personalization common to the social media experience. As the heavier-than-lead proponents are hyper-sensitive to any criticism of their favored shot shells and particularly prone to assuming entire positions rather than what is actually voiced as an opinion, I’ll run thru the default clauses that I hold to be evident.
It is a clearly stated truism that TSS and similar shot composites are much denser than lead offerings, delivering the same or more energy in a smaller frontal profile that produces better penetration. The smaller shot that does not deform as it travels through the barrel results in significantly better than lead patterns when matched well with a proper choke tube. I found this to be true with Hevi-13’s once I got a good match with a choke tube. It is a godsend to use in 410’s, 20 gauges that have limited payload and performance with lead, copper/lead shotshells. At the nominal forty-yard range, the upgrade to tungsten loads in small shot sizes makes these smaller bores a pleasure to shoot and easily tuned to be on par with a 12 gauge at 40-yard ranges (I do own a Rem 870 equipped with an ATI reduction stock that would rival any 410 for felt recoil and all the benefits of a full bore 12ga.) In a 12 ga, it’s overkill at nominal ranges. The performance gain is noted for extended ranges for those that willingly accept that they cannot close the distance in our favored chess game. The risks of what can go astray at extended ranges come along with it. Are these products effective, an upgrade? Yes, when used sensibly, abet a rather expensive solution. Anytime you want to pattern a new shotgun with these products it’s a $50 proposition at a minimum. Far more if trying multiple loads and choke combinations. To be fair, at nominal ranges I appreciate the massive punch it delivers to the target.
It is an old-school mantra that requires no apology to work a gobbler on his terms, to make your hair part, and pants wave when he gobbles. It is a fool’s errand to mention that it is perfectly acceptable that a gobbler wins the day sometimes to the sniper crowd that subscribes to any means possible. In the concept of fair chase, of a gobbler outwitted by calling and woodsmanship, the insistence of acceptance of long-range shots is rejected by those that engage in a time-honored pursuit.
What I hold to be the source of my criticism of heavier-than-lead products is the marketing and promotion of extended-range, long-range shots. Equally culpable is the promotion of it among our ranks advocating 60-100 yard shots in commentary, and in videos. When it comes to misses, crippling, wounded birds, mum is the word, crickets.
Some are quick to assert it is only the hunter themselves that is responsible for it. As the last stop in the chain of decisions/actions taken, this is true; it is also a lame rebuttal that sidesteps an inconvenient truth. We are just as responsible to lead by example, to promote ethical methods, and expect the same from the hunting products industry and suppliers. We view with disdain “plausible deniability” when politicians assert this, are we to take refuge in this from ourselves, manufacturers, and suppliers?
Can one claim long shots, wounding birds were solely instigated by these products? Of course not… With the promotion of extended-range shooting by manufacturers, suppliers, among ourselves, one can reasonably call out the practice despite the assertions and snarky personal comments. Is the incidence of wounded birds on the rise? Anecdotally? Yes. As searches do not list research or peer-reviewed studies to assert wounding more birds at longer distances exacerbated by modern shotshell technology, proponents will claim no proof of it. My anecdotal yet direct experience suggests otherwise. Hence this is commentary, not a research paper. $2 and my opinion will get you a good cup of coffee at the diner. Be sure to bring $2 with you.
In any of these discussions does anyone care to mention how much the shot pattern drops over extended range? Would a foothold over a gobbler’s head at sixty yards suffice while bearing down on a bead that covers far more than the bird’s head? Do any of the advocates care to list the drop at 80? 100? It is surmised that the failure to properly compensate for the significant drop at extended ranges is a likely contributor for body shooting these birds. Add to the range estimation error that increases with distance, there is an accumulation of things that go wrong the farther one is willing to squeeze the trigger. Variance in shells is further revealed at longer distances, Having had underloaded shells in a batch from a major ammo company cost me some dandy long beards. A lesson learned the hard way.
There will be plenty that will not be feeling the love on this topic. In my perspective, it is not an issue of improving the product, but to rethink what we promote among ourselves and what we accept, reject or tolerate from suppliers of our hunting products.
I would appreciate if when you shoot a gobbler, you do so within your appreciable skills and equipment capabilities. We owe it to the quarry we pursue, and I would like to enjoy my bounty at the dinner table…
-MJ
© 2021 Mike Joyner- Joyner Outdoor Media
RSS - Posts