absolute and utter piffle -its well documented on the other side -go read! BTWthe tone of your other posting is a trifle grandiose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
absolute and utter piffle -its well documented on the other side -go read! BTWthe tone of your other posting is a trifle grandiose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Can you honestly say that? That you are taking these measures for the game animals? for the sport? You mention decline before steel, so doesn't that tell you something?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Give it time, you will see what you are doing is short sighted.
If by the other side you mean FNH theres no documentation there. Put up a link please if you can.
Yes it does Pointer. Because of that Southland put up a proposal for a national research program around mallards. We proposed to put up $100k each year for three years if matched by some other councils. Guess what, none did. We decided we needed to do it anyway and as we speak a national program(albeit short of funds) is underway. Lead is a problem and we all know that thats why we aren't going against the research we've proposed by making this change. Hopefully the research will find out some of the other issues. We're prepared to accept whatever the findings of it are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointer
I cant believe your all arguing with another brain washed f&g muppet
I'll leave you guys to your caveman ways I think. In the meantime as I've demonstrated what we're doing, why don't you ask what your own councils are doing about the decline, you know what we're doing, its better than sitting on the fence taking licence money and watching a decline. I look forward to seeing what you come back with as far as what they're doing :)
How many years do you have left on the planet Mike H? I bet you have a few years on me. I can't help but feel, that my generation of shooters will have to come behind you and your friends adgendas and clean up this god awful circusQuote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Have you asked what shooters in my area are doing? You probably don't careQuote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Your between a rock and a hard place Mike. But good on ya for being here, weathering the storm sort of speak, seriously. You are never likely to change your mind on this issue and neither are most of us.
But you have too see that this forum and the other for that matter has only has a small % of people that are into the sport yet most of the people that have posted on the subject are upset at what is proposed by F&G ref sub-gauges.
Do you think its fair to say this small % people is a fair indication of the overall feeling towards the issue? Therefore making the claimed research of F&G southland around the issue a bit weak.
My only problem with F&G is on this issue. I know there are more serious reasons for waterfowl decline in some regions than any type of shot used.
I otherwise feel that F&G try to do whats best for the stakeholders. I have heard more about F&G West Coast in the last couple of years than I ever have since changing from the society. They are very active in our community and are even trying to get younger shooters into the sport by providing free clays, ammo and coaches at a couple gun clubs in our area. For some reason interest is low but they have to be commended for their efforts. I know one of the blokes personally and he is a keen hunter fisherman along with being a good bugger. I think he is the reason I am hearing so many good things lately about their efforts.
On the subject of steel performance compared to lead. Do you really think it is in everyones mind? Please dont dribble on about being better hunters and choosing your shots. Its old. Anyone can set up a reasonable spread and call ducks into 40 yrds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
FFS! All of a sudden too! What happened for the other 80 yrs when lead was used?
Bingo. Address these issues Mike H if you want a place in history as a guy who did the right thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
The writing style of kotuku is nothing like that of kWB or Tube. But I must say that the majority of what KWB has said is quite valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
1. You asked for submissions which by what you have posted you have ignored if they don't fit what you want.
2. The statistics that you posted show that the %of shooters using the sub gauges is really insignificant. We should now be looking at 5% of 7.5% of birds currently affected, if 12 gauge shooters are using steel and the sub gauges effect is analysed.
3. What is obvious is that you predetermined the outcome. This is not due process and quite frankly you should be ashamed of yourselves for not following due process.
4. If you want the people you are supposed to be representing to submit responses to back your view then you need to educate them and provide proof.
5. The change that you have made is against previous reassurances that have been given to hunters.
These points you have not addressed in the slightest.
No you don't get it do youQuote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Licence, desiel./petrol, shot.etc
people see steel as not as effective, have to pay more, fishing licence costs 115$ , nah fuckit.
I have several people my age , even less, that have just basically given up
they can no longer afford it.
On the subject of steel R93 I can honestly say I have no problem with it. I use a wad wizard choke which I believe helps and am a reasonable shot I feel which helps also.
What isn't known amongst the people on either forum is that like several of my fellow councillors I have access to a 20 gauge(my wife's). I took it out on the Sunday of opening weekend last year and using 3" 1 1/8 ounce of lead fives didn't find it killed ducks any better than the Remington 3" 1 1/4 ounce of steel 3s I was using the day before.
I'm not sure what people think we're trying to do here? We are hunters like you who want to do more for the sport based on the facts put in front of us. So far for the last 6 months that this debate has gone on down here the only thing people keep raising is the wounding rate of steel. It is not an issue with me, the guys I hunt with or any of the other councillors.
Some of us on the council shoot ducks in paddocks with lead. We get a similar ratio of wounded ducks with that. It is not the be all and end all magic bullet. Some people have had such a bad experience from when the first cheap shitty loads of steel came into the country that they've forgotten we wounded ducks before that with lead IMO.
And we are not arguing, we are having a free and frank discussion, sometimes.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by crzyman
We have no idea because no one counted ducks like they do now. The counts only go back 20 years sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakewire
Thats pretty sad having to give up something you enjoy because of cost. I dont see it stopping either. There will be a lot more giving up.
What are you trying to do here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Remove a scientifically proven poison from duck habitat for the benefit of the duck. That is all.
Why do you think we're doing it?
I actually don't know why you are doing it. We have shot in greater volume with lead for the last century. Something tells me the declining numbers aren't lead related...
1. None of the submissions provided any reason for adults to continue with lead. Juniors were exempted as a result of the submissions received.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetman
2. I'm a little suspect about how honest people may have been about their 20 gauge use given they knew why they were being asked. Judging by the uproar however its clear there is a significant number of people affected by this and they aren't the junior hunters who need it (if you read the submissions).
3. I have been open in all my posts prior to the decision that my mind was not made up. I went out of my way to let everyone know about the process and how to submit. Had people provided good reason to continue with lead I would have gone along with that.
4. We sent out quite a lot of information to those who signalled an interest in it. Lets be clear however, the oath of office which we sign as a councillor is not to represent hunters, it is about sports fish and gamebird management and the best things for that.
5. Southland F & G have never made any assurances about the continuation of 20 gauge use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Fuck it, I will say it, I am, when seasoned, well above reasonable with a shotgun. However since going too steel I have had too fire so many more follow up shots than I have had too, with lead. This is also evident in my birds in hand to shots fired ratio.
I fired on average another 15-20 rounds to get my limits on opening compared to years previous using lead. I always take the same amount of ammo when I go out, and for interest sake count whats left compared to whats shot. I get sick of seeing a ball of feathers and the fuckers struggling away. I have an decent clay machine and practice with steel loads. I break the same amount of targets I would expect with lead.
I do agree lead is not magic, but it is way more effective in my experience.
I must get one of these magic chokes? A restriction in the muzzle that will make my steel shot more effective as it leaves the wad? :)
Wad Wizard Choke Tubes - Shotgun Choke Tube System :)
Patterns beautifully, not sure about the whole shot stringing theory however ;)
I think you will find that a decent shot string is relied upon more than most people realise to hit flying targets. Some of the best shotgunners in the world use it to great effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
From what I have seen around here I would say they are likely fairly accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Maybe just that they have not been convinced with the information they have received? Should something like the treaty of Waitangi be considered invalid if anyone who signed it did not also write their reasons for doing so? I do see your point though, you are looking for reasoning not postal votes.Quote:
3. I have been open in all my posts prior to the decision that my mind was not made up. I went out of my way to let everyone know about the process and how to submit. Had people provided good reason to continue with lead I would have gone along with that.
But without hunters they are not game. ;) Geese are by all means game and hunted, even if they are on a different schedule now.Quote:
4. We sent out quite a lot of information to those who signalled an interest in it. Lets be clear however, the oath of office which we sign as a councillor is not to represent hunters, it is about sports fish and gamebird management and the best things for that.
But your national body has.Quote:
5. Southland F & G have never made any assurances about the continuation of 20 gauge use.
Note: I'm fairly new to game bird hunting and have not known anything other than steel. As such I am happy enough with it and know reasonably well it's and my limitations; too much Scottish blood and respect for the game for low percentage shots.
I have not seen your research but would be very interested in seeing it. Gut feeling is that if lead was responsible for low bird numbers then going by the period 12 gauge non toxic shot has been used and the life expectancy of the quarry that there should be a noticeable increase in population happening by. If this is not the case then the deaths due to lead as a toxin is likely insignificant. This would indicate that more research is needed to find out what the significant factors are.
Another point I'm interested in is the build up of shot in the environment that the ducks access. Just reasoning here, as I'm no expert, but these dabbling areas where the birds collect grit I would presume would tend to have more of a flow rather than slower/still water with a muddy bottom. The agitation provided by the flowing water I would have thought likely to cause the lead shot to drop through the stones, and the stuff that falls on a muddy bottom would tend to sink through the mud naturally anyway.
evidence thats a laugh coming from your neck of the woods mr4%Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
hardcase when feeding leads shot to ducks was exactly what the aw researcher didQuote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
but dont reality ruin your overemotive arguement:thumbsup:
but all the people supporting your position are a 100% above reproach huh:D:wtfsmilie:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
mike ,in a similar vein to when JC was presented before Herod for judgement,I sense one of the thoughts going through your head is"this aint lookin too flash bro"".
I stand corrected. I can see my good mates writing coming through. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Shooters wound ducks, not the shot itself. Shooters wounded ducks with lead also. If your wounding more now your doing something wrong. This can be changed, its up to the shooter.Quote:
Originally Posted by gsp follower
Regardless of shooter technique, lead poisons the ducks that ingest it through picking it up as grit. Shooters can't change this.
If you can put up the evidence to the contrary please do because as yet no one has put any up just as no one did this in their submissions.
How many ducks were found poisoned by lead?
Toby, I don't have the numbers but if your suggesting its a fallacy then perhaps you should write to the minister and ask for 12 gauge lead to be reintroduced?
Not one country in the world has gone back to it as it is proven. Find me one link to a single bit of published research which scientifically disproves this please. Alternatively do a google search of lead shot poisoning and let me know how many of the articles published you can disprove. Through this you'll find the mortality rates of ducks with ingested lead.
Like it or not we as Councillors cannot make regulations based on sub gauge hunter opinion, we need evidence and no one has put that up yet to support lead shot over water. The science backs it up as bad for our ducks and its there for you to see if you take the time to google.
Likewise I have not seen you post anything showing current NZ duck mortality rates due to lead poisoning. And by that I don't mean some hand waving summary. I mean a proper study with methods, analysis, results, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H
Gadgetman, there is no need to. You and others on here know this was done by F & G in the late 90's when the issue was first raised by the anti-duck hunting lobby. If you think this wasn't the case then do as I suggested to Toby and convince the minister we should be the first country in the world to bring lead back. Show the minister how our mallards are so different to every other mallard in the world.
I take it you'll be soon lobbying the CSI region with your evidence as you'll recall from the first post that they supported us when we put it out for discussion when there was no mention of an exemption for juniors?
Some on here are a bit like the smokers who fought against banning smoking in the workplace or pubs because they didn't believe it could affect non smokers.......
Has F&G done any count or research on ducks in nz found dead caused by eating lead pellets?
I recall hearing some states in the US have in fact gone back to lead.
How's this? This is from the lengthy F & G paper produced at the time of the changeover. I suggest for the full report you contact you local office and ask for it. Alternatively PM me your email address and I can email it to anyone that wants the whole thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby
http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...-poisoning.jpg
Wirehunt, in many places the ban is for all game bird hunting. One state apparently has reverted back to lead in forested areas for hunting pheasants, not waterfowl, due to the issue with steel shot in trees which are to be milled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wirehunt
No one anywhere has changed back for hunting waterfowl.
Is this scientific evidence anything like the 1080 "scientific evidence" ?
Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2