# GROUND SLEWING



## #1DEER 1-I

DO YOU THINK IT IS ETHICAL TO GROUND SLEW GAME BIRDS?
__________________________________________________________________
IN MY OPINION ONLY IF IT FLYS, IT DIES.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3

I don't even know what a ground slew is, but thanks for asking. :?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

I once got in big trouble for ground slewing a girl in highschool. I still get an itch every now and again.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

MABY I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT USES THAT TERM BUT IT MEANS YOU SHOOT A THE BIRD (CHUKAR, DUCK, PHEASANT, ETC.) BEFORE IT FLYS.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

I'm ok with it. Sometimes it's for sport and sometimes I just want a smoked grouse, and in that case, why would I give it a chance to get away? :shock: :wink:


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

I CAN UNDERSTAND THERE IS A CHANCE IT CAN GET AWAY AND I WON'T DENY SHOOTING BIRDS ON THE GROUND. I THINK IT IS FUNNER TO SHOOT EM' IN THE AIR THOUGH JUST SEEMS BETTER. BUT IF I SEE AN OLD ROOSTER RUNNING DOWN A DITCH BANK HE'S NOT GETTING AWAY.


----------



## callofthewild

hows that itch treating ya tree. i hope it was worth it.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

It was. :wink: My memory sucks, but the pictures I took will last forever. They make a hell of a screen saver.


----------



## Wdycle

I say give'm a chance to fly. It's more sporting in my opinion.


----------



## Riverrat77

Wdycle, I agree..... let em fly and shoot em out of the air. Have I groundpounded birds?? Heck yeah I have.... sometimes you just about have to pick a grouse up and punt it to get it in the air.... :lol:.... but I've shot my share on the ground. Ducks... well, I've pounded my fair share on the water. When I started out, I thought thats how you were supposed to hunt because I didn't know any better... I can't use the I was a kid excuse either. I was 23 years old when I started hunting, but I didn't have decoys, had no adult to show me the right way or anything. I generally would prefer to shoot a bird out of the air, but wouldn't think less of somebody that did it another way. 8)


----------



## duck jerky

I'll admit i do on accasion. don't have a problem with other pepole doing it.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3

I think it's easier hitting them in the air than running, those flapping wings make a bigger target. 8)


----------



## chuckmiester

for quail the ground is a heck of a lot easier and perfectly acceptable, but for birds such as pheasant, honkers, and such let em fly. otherwise where's the fun? isn't that why we all hunt, because of the challenge and enjoyment of it?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

Don't let Knowlton see this post.


----------



## reb8600

I have seen grouse in timber so thick you couldnt get your gun up to get a shot. If they fly I will take them in the air. But if they chose to stay on the ground then I will shoot them there. I want to eat them and there is not difference in the taste based upon how you shot them. I am out there to get some for dinner, not try to make them fly. Besides I am not as good with shotgun as most. I am more apt to wound them on the fly. Which is more ethical, to wound them or a clean kill??


----------



## Riverrat77

Good point Reb. 8)


----------



## bow hunter

I think most people have done it, I think it's more enjoyable if they fly, but hey it happens.


----------



## ram2h2o

Never heard of "ground slewing", but have heard it called a "skillet shot" in West Texas!


----------



## Donttreadonme

I'm a walking contradiction on this. Waterfowl, Phez, and Chuckars all need to be in the air before I shoot. Generaly speaking where I hunt them it's plenty open so I can get a good shot at them as they fly. Grouse are "take 'em where they sit" for me. I have tried to be sporting and flush them before I shoot but those suckers are fast and fly throught the thickest stuff they can find. If they are in the open I'll flush and shoot but if I'm in thick timber I'll ground pound them or pop them in the trees.


----------



## Greenhead 2

I was taught that shooting a bird on the water or ground was the same as hitting a woman. How sporting is it to take a bird like that???? The phrase "sitting duck" means easy to take. No I don't think it is any different for kids or first time hunters. Running birds like phez and chukar, IMO should also only be shot when flushed. You could get your limit of chukar with one shot plus a few extras. Do the ethical and sporting thing,makem fly!


----------



## proutdoors

Greenhead 2 said:


> I was taught that shooting a bird on the water or ground was the same as hitting a woman. How sporting is it to take a bird like that???? The phrase "sitting duck" means easy to take. No I don't think it is any different for kids or first time hunters. Running birds like phez and chukar, IMO should also only be shot when flushed. You could get your limit of chukar with one shot plus a few extras. Do the ethical and sporting thing,makem fly!


+1

PRO


----------



## sagebrush

shooting them on the ground or in a tree gives you a better shot at the head. so do you what you have to do, to make yourself feel better about it. just get it done.


----------



## JAT83

I'll have to remember all this when I start hunting :lol:


----------



## LOAH

For safety's sake, I say shoot them on the ground. I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers, but it seems irresponsible to shoot a firearm into the air. Who knows who could be on the other end of that field, behind some tall grass waiting for the same thing you are? Maybe even someone's dog.

Some of you might say that checking the hunting grounds first would be the answer to that. Yeah right. You're not about to spook your game so you can make sure nobody else it around. Others might say the landowner is responsible for making sure nobody else is around. Fine.

Personally, I believe the bird will taste the same no matter where you shoot it from. Anything else is purely something to make you feel cooler. Granted, it's better target practice, but it seems risky to me.

I guess it's just been programmed into people since they started hunting, though.


----------



## snobiller22

Certainly not unethical. But, more sporting I agree 100%. If anything it's more ethical because you are more likely to harvest the bird rather than hit the tail end of it and watch it fly. I don't have that problem though, cuz i don't miss. 8) :mrgreen: <<--O/


----------



## campfire

Just to add a bit of irony......how many hunters let a turkey fly before they shoot?


----------



## Trooper

> For safety's sake, I say shoot them on the ground.


LOAH, 
I think you need to conduct a little experiment with the ballistics of #6 or #7 1/2 shot. You couldn't injure anyone past about a hundred yards even if you wanted to (yeah, it'd sting pretty good at 100 and add another hundred for the eyes). Anyway, in grouse country the vast majority of the pellets are going to be stopped by vegetation within half of that distance. Chukar hunting, you're going to know who's within a half-mile or more of you pretty much every time. Duck hunting you have to angle yourself safely in relation to the shoreline. Scattergunning is much safer than rifle hunting, because those little pellets just don't hold thier oopmph for very long. (Of course, it's much more dangerous than a rifle within 15 yards or so). Anyway my point is, ground-pounding a grouse in the name of safety is a pretty lame attempt to justify something that's morally questionable.

Full disclosure, I had one grouse in the bag on Sunday and the dog found one in a tree about 50 yds from the truck, it was really thick, and I "needed" that second grouse for lunch... Everyone does it sometimes, it just shouldn't become a regular practice. It was a very nice lunch that otherwise would have been a turkey sandwhich.


----------



## LOAH

Maybe I'm missing something. You're intent is to kill a bird that spends most of its time on the ground. What's morally wrong about shooting it on the ground?

I really don't understand why it would be unethical to shoot it right there. Maybe it kills the sport of it, but it gets the job done, right?


----------



## LOAH

This is exactly why I posted what I did:

http://www.kutv.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=e3f0c6bf-dac8-40cd-a97d-5a600fdecec0

You never know who's out there with you. Be safe, guys.


----------



## Trooper

> I really don't understand why it would be unethical to shoot it right there. Maybe it kills the sport of it, but it gets the job done, right?


That right there is where we would have to part ways on this subject. It's not about "body count" or "getting the job done". To me the difference between good dog work followed by a flush and "in the air" shot and shooting a bird on the ground is night and day. It's the difference between fishing with a harpoon and fishing with a rod and pole. Just because you can limit out on grouse by driving around on an ATV at dusk, doesn't mean you should.

As for saftey, make all the excuses you want, but shooting birds on the ground is immoral. As for this story, although frightening, something doesn't add up.


> http://www.kutv.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=e3f0c6bf-dac8-40cd-a97d-5a600fdecec0


There's something fishy about that story, the guy was 40 yds away and had his eye shot out and the shooter didn't even know he hit someone? Something is rotten in Denmark, err Tooele.


----------



## LOAH

I understand that it kills the sport for you. I hope I didn't offend anyone.

I guess that's why I stick to fishing instead of hunting. The odds of me killing someone while I'm tossing a spinner are pretty much nil compared to shooting a shotgun into the sky. 

I still hope none of you folks get hit with someone's shot. Being responsible can only account for what YOU do and not the other guy stalking the same game.

Honestly, I don't mean to stir it up. I'm not a hunter, so I should leave hunting topics alone.


----------



## threshershark

I've always felt this is an issue of fair chase. Hunting is something that sportsmen do on the animal's terms, when the strengths of that species are at the fullest point. In my mind this has always been a big part of how each animal is given proper respect. Big game animals have superior senses of smell, hearing, etc. and the challenge is to meet the animal on its terms when its natural abilities and faculties are all present. The same is true of game birds, they are at their best when on the wing such that they can leverage the fullness of their abilities to evade the hunter. In each case you want to take your best shot and do everything possible to ensure a clean, responsible kill -- however affording each animal the right to use its natural defenses is the sportsman's way.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

> make all the excuses you want, but shooting birds on the ground is immoral.


 -BaHa!-

Yes, I can see the similarities between shooting a pheasant on the ground and banging your neighbors wife. It's all become clear.


----------



## Greenhead 2

The difference to me is, the wife would be more of a challenge, more fun and better not just sit there. Pounding a bird on the ground is for those who can't and only imatate hunting. Those same people should also stick to fishing.


----------



## LOAH

Yep! You got me pinned there. :roll: 

Never tried. Probably won't.


----------



## Greenhead 2

Actually you should give it a try, you just might like it. You also might change your way of thinking on shooting sitting ducks????


----------



## jahan

I think it depends on what the purpose of hunting birds is for. If you go just for the meat; who cares if you shoot it while on the water. Now if you are more about the challenge, then shoot them after they are in flight. I personally have never hunted birds of any sort, but it seems more ethical to kill them while they are still. JMO We don't sneak up on a deer and goose it so we can get a shot off at it while it is running. 8)


----------



## Trooper

> We don't sneak up on a deer and goose it so we can get a shot off at it while it is running


Of course you don't ususally shoot big-game at 15 yds, with an ounce and an 1/8th of number 7 1/2 shot out of a double barrel choked Skeet and IC either. If you did, you'ld probably let them run a bit first.

Bird hunting is not supposed to be easy. It's not like you could shoot enough grouse (or god forbid chukar) to yield positive calories. (Presuming you hunt on foot.)

LOAH, when you fish do you always use bait on treble hooks? Do you snag fish? Do you shoot the fish? That's the equivalent of ground slewing a grouse. Just as I'm sure you have snagged a fish, I've swatted a grouse out of a tree. That doesn't make it right.


----------



## LOAH

Trooper said:


> LOAH, when you fish do you always use bait on treble hooks? Do you snag fish? Do you shoot the fish? That's the equivalent of ground slewing a grouse. Just as I'm sure you have snagged a fish, I've swatted a grouse out of a tree. That doesn't make it right.


No, I don't always use bait on treble hooks. I love using minnows on a tiny treble, but I never get a snag that way. Usually, I use hardware of some sort. Sometimes I snag a fish or two, but that's doesn't seem like the equivalent to shooting a bird on the ground or shooting a fish, either. When I get a snag, it's usually because I got a bite and set the hook poorly.

As far as trying out bird hunting, highly dubious. I don't really have a lot of interest in it. If I ever did, I'd probably be considered unethical for not shooting into the sky, but it's not like I would do it for the "pure sport" of it. Probably because I wanted to know what fresh pheasant or duck tasted like.


----------



## duck jerky

campfire said:


> Just to add a bit of irony......how many hunters let a turkey fly before they shoot?


you make a good point. how many of you that say it is immoral to shoot a bird on the ground or in the water would have no problem shooting a turkey on the ground :?: when i go out hunting i'm not looking to shoot them on the water or ground but if the chance occurse i will shoot. and let's be honesty someone stated about giving the animal a fair chance well then why don't you leave your gun at home and try to kill it with a spear. i like bird meat so i don't care how i get it as long as it's legal. so to each their own.


----------



## jahan

I agree LOAH. Each their own, but to say it is wrong to shot a bird on the water seems far fetched. Honest question, what is the kill rate of ground slewing? Do most birds die that are shot on the water?


----------



## Trooper

You guys are driving me nuts with all this comparing apples to oranges- OK, I didn’t help with the fishing example… but… Anyway… Greenhead2, help me out here… 

1.	You shoot Turkeys on the ground b/c the odds of killing them in the air are truly horrible. They would be easy to hit, but a bird that big and tough pretty much has to be shot in the head or it won’t die in a reasonable amount of time. Body shooting a turkey is just cruel. It’ll probably die, but nowhere near where you shot it. They don’t decoy in flight like a goose, so you’d have to shoot through maybe a foot or 18 inches of body to get to the vitals on a “going away in the air” turkey shot- that ain’t going to happen. (Yes, my old man took a turkey on the wing with a 20g loaded with 6’s during a fall phez hunt (in Wisconsin where it’s legal) but he came right at him, it was a once in a lifetime kind of thing. )

2.	The kill rate of ground slewing better be pretty near 100% or you would be better off using that boom-stick as a club. Same goes for the water… that’s what makes it immoral. Have you heard the phrase- “a sitting duck”? As in “we better find some cover, we’re sitting ducks out here!” Where do you think that comes from? 

3.	No true hunter should ever use the phrase- “I don’t care how I get it as long as its legal…” You better be 13, grow up. 

4.	LOAH- your not shooting into the sky thing is just perplexing to me. You’re not a shot-gunner, so I’ll give you a pass, but don’t make up your mind about things you don’t understand. You don’t have to believe me, but I hope someday someone will show you that waiting for ducks to land or spying grouse on the ground before you shoot is IMMORAL. (Ok sure-- glass house, first stone, not saying I’m perfect). I make it a practice to not tell others how to live, but to intentionally choose to avoid shooting birds on the wing, and wait for an opportunity to shoot them on the ground/water is unconscionable. Like fishing with dynamite. The only reason its legal is because there is no way to police it.


----------



## LOAH

I guess I'm just a perplexing kind of guy. :lol: 

Look, the bottom line of what I've said is:

Even though I feel pretty good about my skill with a shotgun, I would be arrogant to think that every bb is going into what I'm shooting at. That being the case, I (personally) would feel that I was being irresponsible to shoot into the air if there was any chance at all that someone else could be nearby. 

Now about 2 or 3 days after I posted my initial statement on this thread, the exact problem I spoke of actually happened and got press. Those involved were pheasant hunters. I can only speculate as to whether or not they were experienced hunters, but they were hunters. The police statement was that there appeared to be no evidence of any wrong doing. You may say the whole thing stinks, but all I can do is accept the facts about the situation: People were hunting in the same area. Somebody shot into the air. Someone else got shot. Those are the facts and, IMO, my initial point is proven and my feelings on the matter are only reinforced.

Valuing others' lives should never be thought of as immoral. I couldn't possibly trust my "hunch" that nobody else could be in my line of fire while shooting into the sky. Even if the energy of the load was too low to cause any injuries or damage,..How would you react if you got pelted with stray bb's from someone's shotgun? I imagine you'd be pretty angry and you'd feel that the other person was acting irresponsibly by firing when they did, correct? (No need to answer, rhetorical.) 

I really didn't expect people to make such a big deal about what I said. I'm not even a hunter, so you have no reason to worry about me pounding all of your game birds while they're sitting. 

You insinuate that it's unsportsmanlike to kill them where they lay. That's your own opinion and you're free to have it. Your purpose of hunting is probably different than what mine would be.

I'll admit, I've been turned on by the sporting side of fishing. But I still cling firmly to my overall reason to be there with rod in hand: To maintain my connection with nature and the predator/prey relationship...Yes, food. I manage to have a lot of fun doing this and the technology is such that I can actually release a fish that I would rather not eat, most of the time.

So that's where I stand on this topic. I answered the original post honestly. I've since been called to defend that position and I have. A recent event even strengthened my POV. I doubt my mind will change any time soon in regards to shooting birds on the ground. I respect the people who have different views about it, but those views are not based on conclusions that I've made, so they're not mine and won't be. I'm sorry if you can't see why I feel the way I do about it. I've explained it pretty well, so you should at least be capable of understanding "why" I feel the way I do. I don't ask that you adopt my views on the issue.

To each their own. Just remember this discussion next time you hear about someone getting shot while hunting birds...I certainly hope it's none of you.


----------



## jahan

Trooper, I am sorry to say, but I don't see it as Apples to Oranges, I see it as ethical vs. ethical.



> 1. You shoot Turkeys on the ground b/c the odds of killing them in the air are truly horrible. They would be easy to hit, but a bird that big and tough pretty much has to be shot in the head or it won't die in a reasonable amount of time. Body shooting a turkey is just cruel. It'll probably die, but nowhere near where you shot it. They don't decoy in flight like a goose, so you'd have to shoot through maybe a foot or 18 inches of body to get to the vitals on a "going away in the air" turkey shot- that ain't going to happen. (Yes, my old man took a turkey on the wing with a 20g loaded with 6's during a fall phez hunt (in Wisconsin where it's legal) but he came right at him, it was a once in a lifetime kind of thing. )


*I agree completely with this statement, once again comes down to what is ethical*



> 2. The kill rate of ground slewing better be pretty near 100% or you would be better off using that boom-stick as a club. Same goes for the water&#8230; that's what makes it immoral. Have you heard the phrase- "a sitting duck"? As in "we better find some cover, we're sitting ducks out here!" Where do you think that comes from?


*Saying a 100% kill rate and saying that it is immoral is very confusing to me. How could it be immoral? It is immoral and unethical to try and be the hot shot and wound any animal. It is going to happen and I am fine with that, but a shot should be taken that will kill the animal. If you want sport go out to the clay range, but don't let the ego get in the way of ethically killing an animal*



> 3. No true hunter should ever use the phrase- "I don't care how I get it as long as its legal&#8230;" You better be 13, grow up.


*I see your point in this statement. I would phrase it as "I won't take the shot unless I feel it will be lethal and ethical!"*



> 4. LOAH- your not shooting into the sky thing is just perplexing to me. You're not a shot-gunner, so I'll give you a pass, but don't make up your mind about things you don't understand. You don't have to believe me, but I hope someday someone will show you that waiting for ducks to land or spying grouse on the ground before you shoot is IMMORAL. (Ok sure-- glass house, first stone, not saying I'm perfect). I make it a practice to not tell others how to live, but to intentionally choose to avoid shooting birds on the wing, and wait for an opportunity to shoot them on the ground/water is unconscionable. Like fishing with dynamite. The only reason its legal is because there is no way to police it.


*If the bird is flying I absolutely agree if you are capable of making the shot, take it. On the other hand, you come up to a bird on the ground and you know you have a "100%" chance of killing, why wouldn't you? I don't think you should have to wait for the bird to land, I am just saying that if it is there, it is NOT immoral to shot it, period. By the way LOAH, I have never met you, but I really have a lot of respect for you, especially always sticking to what you believe.*


----------



## Trooper

> Saying a 100% kill rate and saying that it is immoral is very confusing to me.


Ah-ha! I get where you are coming from. What you are getting at is that in your view the most "moral" form of harvest is the one that most quickly and efficiently dispatches the animal. I understand how you might come to that conclusion, but IMHO you are way off base. If that were true all hunting and fishing would be "immoral" because ducks and fish etc can be raised in a farm setting and dispatched by professionals at a slaughterhouse.

To understand the immorality of ground-slewing birds you have to go deeper. In and of themselves birds are not particularly difficult to kill. With a few bags of corn and half-dozen live decoys I could murder all the ducks you care to eat, everyday. If I shoot them on the water very few will live long enough to hear the gun go off. That would be a crime because there would be no sport in it.

The problem of course, is that there are only so many ducks to go around. Thus, we have intentionally chosen to make modern hunting harder. Hence all the rules. The rules are designed to shelter the resource and to add "sport" to an otherwise utilitarian exercise. Now, I'll be the first to admit that shooting flying birds is going to result in cripples, lost birds and lingering death. That's a fact. But, I'm (morally) OK with that because I make every reasonable effort to kill and retrieve what I shoot at; and because choosing to confront the birds in a "sporting" manner means that most of them will get away to circle someone else's decoys or torture someone else's pointer or to provide a more pleasing day at the park for someone else. Killing stationary birds is immoral precisely because it is too effective. Doing so damages the resource and allows you to take more than your fair share. Just as some trout streams are artificial lures only, and fishing with bait in those waters would be immoral because it is too easy&#8230;

Ground pounding birds is the equivalent of stealing from someone who has taken the trouble to do it right. It's a sloppy short cut that only undermines the pleasure you would otherwise get from a job well done. Now you might say that anything less than the most efficient kill possible is morally wrong. But let me direct you to nature. The life and death reality faced by wild animals is not cruel nor un-cruel, it just is. Playing a part in that struggle is necessary for humans, because it teaches us that our own actions (in every part of life) have very real consequences.

So no, obtaining a sure kill is not the most moral thing to do, giving the animal a fair chance is.


----------



## jahan

I can see where you are coming from now, and thanks for the explanation. I still disagree with you about it being "immoral" to shot a bird on the ground, but I can see your point of a someone limited resource. I also agree it is more "sport" giving a bird more of a chance, but all I am saying is it is more ethical to do the for sure kill, IMO. I can tell by reading many of your posts, Trooper, you are a very ethical hunter and I was just giving my point of view and by no means was trying to offend you so I hope non was taken. I guess what I am saying is I will agree to disagree.


----------



## proutdoors

> Probably because I wanted to know what fresh pheasant or *duck tasted like*.


MUD!!!

PRO


----------



## Greenhead 2

Trooper summed it up pretty well. Shooting them on the ground absolutely doesn't guarantee there will be no other birds crippled or killed. This is just what I know about this year from guys that call themselves hunters/sportsman. Guy on Redmond kills 14 geese with one shot, cripples are also seen flying away. He is 11 over his limit. Guy shoots 9 chukar near delta. He is 4 over his limit. Virgil posted on another forum that out of bordem he shot into a group of coots, killing 9 of them. A guy shot a rooster near richfield opening day. When he shot a rooster flew up and then dropped about 50yds away, they lost that bird. Later I heard that when this guy picked up the first rooster, a hen was running but bleeding badly, she ran into a wood pile and couldn't be found.I have seen many cripples get away while jump shooting, that is the reason I don't do it anymore. I have seen many times guys take over their limits on hens water pounding. On top of everything else its just a cheap wrong way to kill a bird. These are just birds from this year!!!!!!


----------



## jahan

Greenhead 2 said:


> Trooper summed it up pretty well. Shooting them on the ground absolutely doesn't guarantee there will be no other birds crippled or killed. This is just what I know about this year from guys that call themselves hunters/sportsman. Guy on Redmond kills 14 geese with one shot, cripples are also seen flying away. He is 11 over his limit. Guy shoots 9 chukar near delta. He is 4 over his limit. Virgil posted on another forum that out of bordem he shot into a group of coots, killing 9 of them. A guy shot a rooster near richfield opening day. When he shot a rooster flew up and then dropped about 50yds away, they lost that bird. Later I heard that when this guy picked up the first rooster, a hen was running but bleeding badly, she ran into a wood pile and couldn't be found.I have seen many cripples get away while jump shooting, that is the reason I don't do it anymore. I have seen many times guys take over their limits on hens water pounding. *On top of everything else its just a cheap wrong way to kill a bird.* These are just birds from this year!!!!!!


Sorry I am having a hard time following this post.  Are these all examples of people "Ground Pounding" birds? Or are these examples of just sloppy hunters in the field? "On top of everything else its just a cheap wrong way to kill a bird!" That is a nice opinion, but it is merely that an opinion and we all know about opinions. :wink: 8) In my opinion it is not a "cheap wrong way to kill a bird." but once again that is JMO. It is unfortunate to hear about all of the cases, just this year, that is assuming they are true and not just internet rumors. :twisted: :wink:


----------



## Trooper

Just a quick note this time (for once). Good discussion everyone, hope I don't seem accusatory and I thank you all for a very interesting conversation. I apologize if I overheat from time to time. I just can't get this image of a father and son watching a flight of mallards come into their dekes and the father says, "wait until they land and then we'll shoot a limit." It makes me ill. Same goes for Phez, grouse and chukar.


----------



## duck jerky

Greenhead 2 said:


> Trooper summed it up pretty well. Shooting them on the ground absolutely doesn't guarantee there will be no other birds crippled or killed. This is just what I know about this year from guys that call themselves hunters/sportsman. Guy on Redmond kills 14 geese with one shot, cripples are also seen flying away. He is 11 over his limit. Guy shoots 9 chukar near delta. He is 4 over his limit. Virgil posted on another forum that out of bordem he shot into a group of coots, killing 9 of them. A guy shot a rooster near richfield opening day. When he shot a rooster flew up and then dropped about 50yds away, they lost that bird. Later I heard that when this guy picked up the first rooster, a hen was running but bleeding badly, she ran into a wood pile and couldn't be found.I have seen many cripples get away while jump shooting, that is the reason I don't do it anymore. I have seen many times guys take over their limits on hens water pounding. On top of everything else its just a cheap wrong way to kill a bird. These are just birds from this year!!!!!!


the exsamples you gave is what i would call flock shooting.


----------



## Greenhead 2

Yes, all these birds were killed/wounded with one shot. Obviously I was not there or these things would nit have happened. But I trust everyone that has told me them. Its not just my opinion, I think most hunters feel this way. Why would you call it flock shooting??? They shot intending on killing a bird, They killed several birds over there limits. When yiu shoot thos pellets don't stop at the bird.They bounce and skip along ways. The guy that shot the pheasent, he didn't know the other two birds were there, how is that flock shooting. Flock shooting is just pulling up and not picking a bird and fireing a shot. 1hy would you do that with sitting ducks??? ya got all day to aim at them!!!!! Flock shooting usually is a result of inexperienced hunters getting excited when birds are coming on to a set, They tend to just point and shoot, duck fever. Flock shooting usually ends up with a miss or the tail bird folding, Not a dozen birds hitting the water.


----------



## InvaderZim

News to me...I thought ground pounding was something completely different! :wink:


----------



## duck jerky

so on the geese did he sneak up on them and shoot them on the ground or let them land in his deke's then shoot them on the ground? and did he only shoot once? and i thought groung slewing you only was shooting at one bird not the whole flock. so if someone shoot's a bird on the ground or water he shoot's over his limit. but if he let's them fly he doesn't shoot over his limit? :wink: i'll admit i've shot a few ducks on the water i've never shot a pheasant on the ground other then the ones i've hit in the wing and is running(no dog at the time).


----------



## Riverrat77

I saw this post on the fuge and it pretty much sums up what I think about ground sluicing.... at least with regard to ducks.

"I have no problem whatsoever with a water swat. The way I see it, if I am good enough to fool a ducks eyes and ears, to the point where they feel safe enough to set down, I win. As a Natural Selection Enforcement agent, it is my duty to cull these birds that are obviously not the smartest. "

I'd love to get a badge that labels me a Natural Selection Enforcement agent. :lol:


----------



## jahan

Greenhead 2 said:


> Yes, all these birds were killed/wounded with one shot. Obviously I was not there or these things would nit have happened. But I trust everyone that has told me them. Its not just my opinion, I think most hunters feel this way. Why would you call it flock shooting??? They shot intending on killing a bird, They killed several birds over there limits. When yiu shoot thos pellets don't stop at the bird.They bounce and skip along ways. The guy that shot the pheasent, he didn't know the other two birds were there, how is that flock shooting. Flock shooting is just pulling up and not picking a bird and fireing a shot. 1hy would you do that with sitting ducks??? ya got all day to aim at them!!!!! Flock shooting usually is a result of inexperienced hunters getting excited when birds are coming on to a set, They tend to just point and shoot, duck fever. Flock shooting usually ends up with a miss or the tail bird folding, Not a dozen birds hitting the water.


I guess I agree with you.  I thought we were talking about ground slewing?


----------



## RipNLips

Trooper said:


> LOAH, when you fish do you always use bait on treble hooks? Do you snag fish? Do you shoot the fish? That's the equivalent of ground slewing a grouse. Just as I'm sure you have snagged a fish, I've swatted a grouse out of a tree. That doesn't make it right.


Those are not quite equivalent to ground slewing. Snagging fish is illegal and shooting fish with a gun is illegal. I personally never shoot a bird unless it's in flight, however, I've got no problem with a guy pond slamming a duck as long as he retrieves it and takes it home wth him.

#1DEER 1-I - I too learned the phrase "ground slew" many years ago as in "I ground slew it" meaning "I slayed it while it was on the ground".


----------



## Riverrat77

RipNLips said:


> I personally never shoot a bird unless it's in flight, however, *I've got no problem with a guy pond slamming a duck as long as he retrieves it and takes it home wth him*.


Thats pretty much the point of all this. Its folks with one ethic saying the other is wrong because its personally distasteful to them, not because its actually against the law. Who cares how or why you shoot your birds as long as you are within the law and take them home and use them? I would rather have some ground pounder take the birds home and eat them than have some loser shoot a limit of birds in the air and stomp the ones he doesn't like into the mud. How you kill em is up to you (within reason of course). LOAH, I'd love to take you out shooting sometime, just to get you a taste of the bird. If you wanted, we could even waterswat a limit one at a time if that floats your boat. Its not wrong to waterswat, regardless of what anyone will tell you.... but its supposedly not as "fun", "challenging", "sporting" or whatever other handle people want to give for why they shoot them in the air. Either way, the bird dies.... and we here at the top of the food chain get some more good eating. 8)


----------



## duck jerky

Riverrat77 said:


> RipNLips said:
> 
> 
> 
> I personally never shoot a bird unless it's in flight, however, *I've got no problem with a guy pond slamming a duck as long as he retrieves it and takes it home wth him*.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats pretty much the point of all this. Its folks with one ethic saying the other is wrong because its personally distasteful to them, not because its actually against the law. Who cares how or why you shoot your birds as long as you are within the law and take them home and use them? I would rather have some ground pounder take the birds home and eat them than have some loser shoot a limit of birds in the air and stomp the ones he doesn't like into the mud. How you kill em is up to you (within reason of course). LOAH, I'd love to take you out shooting sometime, just to get you a taste of the bird. If you wanted, we could even waterswat a limit one at a time if that floats your boat. Its not wrong to waterswat, regardless of what anyone will tell you.... but its supposedly not as "fun", "challenging", "sporting" or whatever other handle people want to give for why they shoot them in the air. Either way, the bird dies.... and we here at the top of the food chain get some more good eating. 8)
Click to expand...

+1


----------



## Leaky

Well, let's see. What's the best way to explain??? Most of us would much prefer to shoot em in the air. More sporting and more bragging rights, right? Another thing that not everyone knows when shooting ducks on the water, it ain't that sure or easy. Remember a good portion is under water and you have a much smaller target.
Ok, for me, somewhere between 40-60% of my being out there is to be with my buddy (Sparky) and watch his exuberance and never tireing go, go, go. Each time I go I feel an obligation to reward him with a retrieve. Now comes the kicker. I make sure he has a retreive. :wink: Most times if I have an opportunity to get my first bird (whatever it is) on the ground, I take it. After that, only flyers.  I've been on many trips and walked all day without a bird and I could really see the dissapointment in my buddy's looks. Thus, my first shot on the ground if necessary. Now, If I know I'm going to get some shoots then that's a different story. I don't miss much. Right Riley? :lol: :lol: :lol:  

Leaky


----------



## Trooper

Yeah, I only shoot ‘em on the ground for my “buddy”, and I only steal a little from the boss for my family, and I do a little dope as a “pick-me-up” and leave my trash in the field because its "so heavy", and I drive over the speed limit because "time is short", and I cheat a little on my taxes because the government "takes enough of my money", and I stiff the waitress because the "food’s expensive enough", and so on and on and on. 

Excuses are like @-holes... everybody's got one.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

:shock: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: 

I refuse to shoot birds when they are flying. It's much more sporting to sneak up to them and shoot them. They usually fly when they are scared and the rush of adrenaline and acids when they are scared makes them less than desirable tabe fare.

I think the DWR should ban shooting birds in the air.


----------



## Riverrat77

Trooper said:


> Excuses are like @-holes... everybody's got one.


So do the forums apparently. :roll: Leaky... I totally get why you shoot a bird on the ground for Sparky. I'd do the same thing and not bat an eye for Buddy. To compare it to stealing, speeding or anything else thats actually *against the law* is ridiculous. There's not anything even remotely close between those examples. One is what one person considers unethical and wants a pat on the back for thinking so. The others will get you fines, possible incarceration, and other severe consequences. I don't EVER feel like I'm stealing when I hunt... whether its shooting a grazing deer, elk, or a sitting duck. I suppose I could shoot a runner occasionally... but why, when I can get close enough to reach out and touch em?? Same with ducks.... they come close, they go in the bag and I could care less if they swim in, or if they backpedal and plop into my dekes. It sure doesn't change the taste in my opinion and the meat of a swimmer looks the same as one in the air... maybe minus a few holes. :lol: Its the whole "my way is better" or "my way is the only true way" BS all over again and its best disregarded by people who are a little bit realistic about why we're out with guns and steel shot in the first place. For the record, *NO LEAKY, YOU DON'T MISS MUCH!!*


----------



## jahan

Trooper said:


> Yeah, I only shoot 'em on the ground for my "buddy", and I only steal a little from the boss for my family, and I do a little dope as a "pick-me-up" and leave my trash in the field because its "so heavy", and I drive over the speed limit because "time is short", and I cheat a little on my taxes because the government "takes enough of my money", and I stiff the waitress because the "food's expensive enough", and so on and on and on.
> 
> Excuses are like @-holes... everybody's got one.


Trooper I think this is probably the worst response I have seen on these new forums. Congrats on such a great achievement. That takes a lot of work. 8) :roll: Apples to oranges. There is nothing ILLEGAL about shooting a bird on the ground, NOTHING. It is simply your opinion and using your analogy "opinion are like a**holes...everybody's got one." There is nothing wrong with shooting a bird on the ground, plain and simple.


----------



## Trooper

If you feel a twinge of remorse after you pull the trigger on a sitting bird - don’t worry that’s just pride leaving your body. I’m sure you’ll get that pride back when you impress your buddies with all the birds you got. Some people are into numbers and whatnot and if you need to pad your stats… go for it. Just call it what it is, you don’t think you can limit-out without a crutch and are too embarrassed to come home empty-handed. That’s cool. 

If you actually feel good about yourself after you ground-pound a bird, then I feel sad for you. Personally, I’m not OK with it-- it’s a sloppy, childish, selfish way to hunt. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve done it before and I’ll probably do it again someday, but that doesn’t make it right. As you get to be a better hunter I hope you’ll eventually start to pass on that “sitting duck”- but no one is going to make you. 

I also hope you reconsider basing your personal “ethic” on what’s “legal.” Do you let the government dictate every facet of your life? 

Let’s go shoot some skeet sometime, moving targets are fun! That's just my @-hole opinon though, I'm sure stationary targets are quite challenging for you.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr

> That's just my @-hole opinon though,


I can agree with that.


----------



## duck jerky

do you think the bird gives a dam if your shooting at it in the air or on the ground. i know many pepole have differentt reasons why there out hunting but the goal is the same in the end is to kill something if it's not then why take your gun our buy a liecence. and to compare that stealing or cheating or speeding is equal to ground slewing is one of most stupidies things i've ever heard.because in the animal rights activest eye's we're all murders it don't matter if it was flying or sitting. because you an't no better hunter then anyone else that chooses to shoot their birds on the ground. sorry for the rambling.


----------



## Trooper

> you an't no better hunter then anyone else that chooses to shoot their birds on the ground.


Disagree. With the exception of Treehugginhunter who sneaks up on his birds and covers their mouths and noses with a hanky soaked in ether so they gently fall asleep before he snaps their little necks, and Leaky who thinks that a sitting duck is somehow more challenging because ducks are apparently built like ice-bergs, the whole reason why shooting birds on the ground is immoral is because it is so EASY. If you EVER miss a sitting bird there are only two possible reasons why: 1) You are too far away or 2) You suck (and see reason 1).

I'm sorry that a number of you seem to believe that only things which are illegal can be immoral. There's no counter-point if that's the kindergarten philosophy you want to espouse.

I'm not sorry if I'm forcing some of you to look at yourselves in the mirror, and judging from the hostility out there-- there's a bunch of ground-pounding going on in Utah. Stop embarrassing yourselves.


----------



## Firstarrow

*IMO*
What it all comes down to is where you are in your hunting career. 
There are things all of us may have seen as acceptable as a youth or beginning hunter, that after time becomes unacceptable. Some would call it progress, others maturity. I believe that I can share my methods and reasoning with others, and they may gain some insite from it. I also know that I can learn from my fellow hunters.

In the beginning, we "all" (for the most part) try to hunt with in the limits of the law, after time / experiences we may begin to mature, and set higher standards or in other words "limits" for our selves, be it in measuring in inches of horn, bands, or the equipment we choose to get it done. I might wonder why anyone would take a smoke pole after turkeys, they might question my use of a long bow, others raise an eye brow at the fly rod, or the hook with a worm.

Shoving "ethics" or anything for that matter down someones throat usually don't sit well and results in the other spewing it back at you. If you want to "help" others see things the way you see it, take them along with you, share with them why you set those self imposed limits, and let them see for them selves that there may be a better way.


----------



## Riverrat77

Whats hilarious about this is that most of us will shoot birds in the air, but aren't going to throw stones at others for their "ethics" just because we believe its not right. I'm not quite sure how somebody else shooting a bird on the water ruins your hunt, but at this point, I'd really care less if it did. If Leaky hunts for the dogs sake (which may also be why he doesn't feel the need to take a limit every time out) then who cares if he takes a duck off the water. At least he eats em all.... To me, thats TONS better than the guys who load up their freezer all year long with bags and bags (way over their possession limit) of bird breasts and then wind up having to hurry and process them all or even throw them away to make room for the casualties of the next season. Thats crap and lots worse (again with the illegal issue) than what a few folks choose to do to obtain some good eating wild game. The guys I know that do that are awfully proud of their shooting ability.... does that make them ethical just because they shot them in the air?? I highly doubt it. I'm not all about numbers, but I'm certainly not so full of myself that I feel like I can tell a duckhunter whats right or wrong... people want to waterswat em?? Great, have at it... I'd have a good time hunting with them regardless of how they kill their birds. Wait... Leaky and I DO have a great time when we go out hunting... for the record, the last time out, he shot three birds... all on the fly. Swat away boys...swat away.... it means nothing at all when you get home and clean em and they eat just as well. I think there may be a "S.W.A.T. team" video in the works at this point. :lol:


----------



## jahan

Trooper said:


> If you feel a twinge of remorse after you pull the trigger on a sitting bird - don't worry that's just pride leaving your body. I'm sure you'll get that pride back when you impress your buddies with all the birds you got. Some people are into numbers and whatnot and if you need to pad your stats&#8230; go for it. Just call it what it is, you don't think you can limit-out without a crutch and are too embarrassed to come home empty-handed. That's cool.
> 
> If you actually feel good about yourself after you ground-pound a bird, then I feel sad for you. Personally, I'm not OK with it-- it's a sloppy, childish, selfish way to hunt. Don't get me wrong, I've done it before and I'll probably do it again someday, but that doesn't make it right. As you get to be a better hunter I hope you'll eventually start to pass on that "sitting duck"- but no one is going to make you.
> 
> I also hope you reconsider basing your personal "ethic" on what's "legal." Do you let the government dictate every facet of your life?
> 
> *Let's go shoot some skeet sometime, moving targets are fun! That's just my @-hole opinon though, I'm sure stationary targets are quite challenging for you.*


I suck at shooting skeet you would kick my arse,  but it is fun.  Sorry to get all wound up, I just hate when people are so one sided and don't seem to try and see the other side. I don't base ethics off of what is legal, but generally they tend to coincide. Usually the ethical thing to do is follow the law. JMO. I guess each their own as long as it is legal.


----------



## Trooper

First off- I hope nobody takes any of this too personally, I'm just busting some chops both because its fun and because this is a very irritating issue to me. I think everyone who has written on this topic has made some valid points and I'd hunt with any of you. That said...

No one’s disputing that shooting more birds than you can use, or wasting birds or going over the possession limit is wrong. I also don’t think this thread is about the many things which are “more” wrong than “checking your pattern” on a swimming duck. 

The point is, shooting birds off the water, or on the ground, is lazy, selfish hunting. Why am I so adamant about this? Because I have observed a general decline in the level of expertise displayed in hunting-- and it seems worst in duck and pheasant hunting. It seems like a lot of people today feel like they “deserve” a limit. So they buy enormous shotgun shells and fire them through guns equipped with five different recoil-dampening systems, and super-tight “extended range” chokes. These people then wonder why they can’t hit a 25-yard mallard, but are pretty good at 60-yard sky shots and 70-yard water shots? I’ve seen people who seem to believe that no duck is ever too high and no swimming duck is ever too far from shore. What’s the fun in that? Shooting is great- that’s what sporting clays is for… but (as a group) we hunters need to focus more on hunting SKILLS and less on shooting EQUIPMENT. When someone sees a guy shoot a swimming duck (and you'ld be surprised who sees what inthe marsh) he thinks, well I'd better do the same-- and that's what you call a viscious circle.


----------



## Riverrat77

Trooper said:


> *I have observed a general decline in the level of expertise displayed in hunting-- and it seems worst in duck and pheasant hunting. It seems like a lot of people today feel like they "deserve" a limit. So they buy enormous shotgun shells and fire them through guns equipped with five different recoil-dampening systems, and super-tight "extended range" chokes. These people then wonder why they can't hit a 25-yard mallard, but are pretty good at 60-yard sky shots and 70-yard water shots?* I've seen people who seem to believe that no duck is ever too high and no swimming duck is ever too far from shore. What's the fun in that? Shooting is great- that's what sporting clays is for&#8230; but (as a group) *we hunters need to focus more on hunting SKILLS and less on shooting EQUIPMENT.* When someone sees a guy shoot a swimming duck (and you'ld be surprised who sees what inthe marsh) he thinks, well I'd better do the same-- and that's what you call a viscious circle.


That bold part, I totally agree on. The tactics used to close the distance on wild game of any sort are falling by the wayside in favor of floating, mechanical and electronic crutches that folks can't get by without and they HAVE to kill a limit or its just not a good hunt. That part of it is very sad.... and shoot em on the water or not, there are tons of hunters who wouldn't know what to do without a boat, a Mojo, or the latest greatest loads and choke tubes. Sneaky is a learned tactic... not a bought one. Good point there Trooper.... hope I got your point right.


----------



## Leaky

Trooper,
Just got back from a trip. I guess I got flamed, huh? That's tooooooo funny. :lol: :lol: :lol: Oh well, --------. I think I may live through it. :roll: 
Riley - thanks for the defense but I've tried to educate ya - not worth the effort. :wink: 
Leaky


----------



## Riverrat77

Leaky said:


> Riley - thanks for the defense but I've tried to educate ya - not worth the effort. :wink:
> Leaky


Thankfully, along with my ability to pick and choose my hunting partners, I also have the right to stick up for my friends, especially when the flaming is unjustified (at least in your case my friend). Take that Leaky....

Hope that doesn't keep us from going on Friday.


----------



## Leaky

Now I'm embarassed.  I know some folks won't beleive that, but I am. Thanks Bud. Now I have to measure up. You do keep me going.  Man, it's tough gettun old. Sparky (and me) are really looking forward to tommorow!!! :!: I'll give ya the first shot, but that's al-llllllllllllllllll.  
Leaky


----------



## wyogoob

If it's legal what's the big deal? I will take a duck off the water, but most times I pass. I think sneaking up on a flock of geese and getting that first shot at one on the ground is quite a challenge.

I prefer my forest grouse shot off the ground with an arrow or .22. I think it beats losing wounded birds in the dark timber or picking BBs out of the meat at the dinner table.

Ptarmigan....At my age they're gonna get shot off a boulder, sorry, hate me, but I'm not going to all that work (without dogs) and let them little guys get away. As a matter of fact one of the best ptarmigan hunts I had was with a .22 revolver!

On the other hand, I just can't shoot a quail or pheasant with a shotgun off the ground. I just have to kick them up into the air. Funny.....

I think sneaking up on a crane and shooting it off the ground is tougher to pull off than shooting them over decoys.

Blah, blah, blah, *one thing I have learned on outdoor forums: I am gonna rot in hell for using bait and driving a Ford so I guess shootin' a duck off the water won't matter much.*


----------



## wyogoob

No, I'm keeping the Ford, goin' to hell anyway.



InvaderZim said:


> News to me...I thought ground pounding was something completely different! :wink:















































This is the coolest post since the one a year ago about the cigarette butts on the ice at Scofield!


----------



## Riverrat77

wyogoob said:


> This is the coolest post since the one a year ago about the cigarette *butts on the ice at Scofield!*


Is that why people refer to it as freezing a$$ cold up there?? because of all the butts on the ice? :lol:

Ok, maybe I'm the only one laughing. Leaky... I was serious about a waterswat video.... birds at least, if not limits, on the water for our next hunt. Sound like a plan?? I know a place where we can make it happen.... :wink:


----------



## huntingbuddy

The way you hunt pheasants its more dangerous to shoot the bird on the ground when its running than when its in the air.


----------

