What's the off-season without good debate ??

[Happy]

Many years ago we had this same debate on TTH forums and we gave it up when Gobblenut was trying to determine if a grenade launcher could effectively kill a gobbler without ruining the meat. I think he figured if he placed it within 30 yards the concusssion would do the job and still leave the bird intact. There were a couple other members went even further off the deep end, something about a door gunner and heat seeking rounds.....

Let me guess, he was gonna put his decoys about 20 yards from his hideout. Sounds like Gobblenut.

[Greg Massey]

 O ... NO SOMEONE BROUGHT UP DECOYS AGAIN ....

[Clif Owen]

OK guys, here's a semi-serious answer as well as another question.
I have a book here (would have to look at it to determine the author) and he talks about shooting his turkeys with a 10 gauge side-by-side with loads of #2, and 3's at ranges far beyond what we consider ethical. By this, I mean like 80 yards or so. He says those loads will break bone reliably and anchor the bird.
My question is when did we change the way we thought about it? I'm not saying his way is right but obviously, the thinking changed over the years. And wouldn't a Hevi-shot #4 do about the same as those lead 3's? I have some of those that I got by mistake. I am considering using those on coyotes. My gun sure don't pattern them good enough to use on a turkey.

[crow]

OK guys, here's a semi-serious answer as well as another question.
I have a book here (would have to look at it to determine the author) and he talks about shooting his turkeys with a 10 gauge side-by-side with loads of #2, and 3's at ranges far beyond what we consider ethical. By this, I mean like 80 yards or so. He says those loads will break bone reliably and anchor the bird.
My question is when did we change the way we thought about it? I'm not saying his way is right but obviously, the thinking changed over the years. And wouldn't a Hevi-shot #4 do about the same as those lead 3's? I have some of those that I got by mistake. I am considering using those on coyotes. My gun sure don't pattern them good enough to use on a turkey.

In his old book Capt. Bogardus a world class shotgun competitor and market/sport hunter settled on #1 lead in his sxs 10gauge to hunt turkeys with.

Charles Jordan in his even older book recommended shooting turkeys in the head/neck with #6 lead and #4 shot in the other barrel for backup shots, as Col. Tom Kelly put it "shooting turkeys in the all over" (body shots)

so it's gone both ways even that far back

[Yoder409]

OK guys, here's a semi-serious answer as well as another question.
I have a book here (would have to look at it to determine the author) and he talks about shooting his turkeys with a 10 gauge side-by-side with loads of #2, and 3's at ranges far beyond what we consider ethical. By this, I mean like 80 yards or so. He says those loads will break bone reliably and anchor the bird.
My question is when did we change the way we thought about it? I'm not saying his way is right but obviously, the thinking changed over the years. And wouldn't a Hevi-shot #4 do about the same as those lead 3's? I have some of those that I got by mistake. I am considering using those on coyotes. My gun sure don't pattern them good enough to use on a turkey.

In his old book Capt. Bogardus a world class shotgun competitor and market/sport hunter settled on #1 lead in his sxs 10gauge to hunt turkeys with.

Charles Jordan in his even older book recommended shooting turkeys in the head/neck with #6 lead and #4 shot in the other barrel for backup shots, as Col. Tom Kelly put it "shooting turkeys in the all over" (body shots)

so it's gone both ways even that far back

Not THAT far back.......

My first couple spring seasons I used #2 lead.   That's just what you used.......to break legs and wings.

It was a couple years in til I went to lead 4's.........then 6's for head/neck shots.

But, it was fact back then and it's fact to this day that a turkey can be killed farther by body shooting with lead 2's (where still legal) than head/neck shooting with lead 6's.

So, here we are.........back to "If it's legal where tou are......... "

[jhoward11]

Since it's off-season, I'm going to provide you with some argument material. First and foremost, I agree with you. Now with that being said. Your driving through one state and the speed limit is 65. Cross over to the next state and speed limit is 75. How fast before you reset speed control? Remember... going to 75 could be detrimental to you or others on the road, but it is legal. Just because it's legal should you still do it. Guessing that 99.3% on this forum would reset with-in 2 mile. There you go!

[Kygobblergetter]

Yup I'm going to 75 immediately (hypothetically) no I'm not ever (hypothetically) using a load to body shoot turkeys at 100 yards. Actually to be honest I'm never setting up any load for body shooting turkeys and I'm never intentionally body shooting a turkey. I would rather tss be illegal and be forced to use a 35 yard 20 gauge than have others capable of killing turkeys at 100 yards. Some times it's worth pointing out when others are doing things the wrong way. Not a shot at the op I understand what you're going for here. It does get on my nerves when people get offended when others point out that they might be doing something wrong or with the wrong motivation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paulmyr]

OK guys, here's a semi-serious answer as well as another question.
I have a book here (would have to look at it to determine the author) and he talks about shooting his turkeys with a 10 gauge side-by-side with loads of #2, and 3's at ranges far beyond what we consider ethical. By this, I mean like 80 yards or so. He says those loads will break bone reliably and anchor the bird.
My question is when did we change the way we thought about it? I'm not saying his way is right but obviously, the thinking changed over the years. And wouldn't a Hevi-shot #4 do about the same as those lead 3's? I have some of those that I got by mistake. I am considering using those on coyotes. My gun sure don't pattern them good enough to use on a turkey.

In his old book Capt. Bogardus a world class shotgun competitor and market/sport hunter settled on #1 lead in his sxs 10gauge to hunt turkeys with.

Charles Jordan in his even older book recommended shooting turkeys in the head/neck with #6 lead and #4 shot in the other barrel for backup shots, as Col. Tom Kelly put it "shooting turkeys in the all over" (body shots)

so it's gone both ways even that far back

The Wild Turkey and it's Hunting was written by Edward Mcllhenny from an account of Charles Jordans notes. Get it right crow!

I have doubts about about lead 2's reliably anchoring a turkeys at 80yds. Kill them at some point most likely with a solid hit. If we're talking turn of the last century and longer ago most hunting was during the fall and dogs were probably used for clean up to trail and find the wounded/dead turkeys. If not dogs the people were far better woodsman and could probably track and find it themselves.

I've shot lead 2's at flying snow geese where 50 yds was considered in range, watched them wobble from the hit and continue flying 1/4 mile or better before dropping dead. With the previously stated line of thought wings should have been broken and the bird would fall immediately.

[crow]

OK guys, here's a semi-serious answer as well as another question.
I have a book here (would have to look at it to determine the author) and he talks about shooting his turkeys with a 10 gauge side-by-side with loads of #2, and 3's at ranges far beyond what we consider ethical. By this, I mean like 80 yards or so. He says those loads will break bone reliably and anchor the bird.
My question is when did we change the way we thought about it? I'm not saying his way is right but obviously, the thinking changed over the years. And wouldn't a Hevi-shot #4 do about the same as those lead 3's? I have some of those that I got by mistake. I am considering using those on coyotes. My gun sure don't pattern them good enough to use on a turkey.

In his old book Capt. Bogardus a world class shotgun competitor and market/sport hunter settled on #1 lead in his sxs 10gauge to hunt turkeys with.

Charles Jordan in his even older book recommended shooting turkeys in the head/neck with #6 lead and #4 shot in the other barrel for backup shots, as Col. Tom Kelly put it "shooting turkeys in the all over" (body shots)

so it's gone both ways even that far back

The Wild Turkey and it's Hunting was written by Edward Mcllhenny from an account of Charles Jordans notes. Get it right crow!

I have doubts about about lead 2's reliably anchoring a turkeys at 80yds. Kill them at some point most likely with a solid hit. If we're talking turn of the last century and longer ago most hunting was during the fall and dogs were probably used for clean up to trail and find the wounded/dead turkeys. If not dogs the people were far better woodsman and could probably track and find it themselves.

I've shot lead 2's at flying snow geese where 50 yds was considered in range, watched them wobble from the hit and continue flying 1/4 mile or better before dropping dead. With the previously stated line of thought wings should have been broken and the bird would fall immediately.

I have the book and just thought it went without saying that it's Jordan's journal organized by E.M. 
The part about which shot size to use sounds to me like it's coming straight from C.J.


I hunted Canada geese pretty serious back in the good old lead days, and would have strong confidence in lead #2's to break heavy bone at 50 yards.

#2's at 80 yards breaking heavy bone sounded a little optimistic to me

[Paulmyr]

Just pulling your strings. I guess the word reliably could be a matter of perspective. For some it may mean 95% of the time, others it might mean 75%. For the weatherman it means 51% and they get awards for it.

[GobbleNut]

It is good to find things to talk about during our off-times, and especially when we have pretty much covered every turkey-hunting topic from every imaginable angle over the years.  I think the discussion about shot size and comparing turkeys and the larger waterfowl species is something we have not really talked about much...so here I go with a few random thoughts on the subject...

First of all, I find it interesting that migratory waterfowl populations, in general, are doing so well in comparison to our turkey populations.  Turkeys and waterfowl both exhibit the same reproductive strategies...that is, they rely on having large numbers of young as an evolutionary tactic that some of those young will survive to adulthood. 

I also find it a curiosity that, while waterfowl exhibit monogamous breeding behavior and turkeys have a polygamous breeding behavior (which would seem to me to be advantageous), waterfowl seem to be doing so much better than turkeys in the area of survival of their young.  That just seems counterintuitive to me, even while recognizing that waterfowl parents are much more aggressive defenders of their young.

Which brings me to the next point regarding our attitudes about shooting waterfowl as compared to turkeys...and in relation to shot sizes used and acceptance of crippling losses.  As has been pointed out, I think waterfowl hunters generally adopt the theory that shooting large shot (for the larger waterfowl species such as geese, cranes, and swans) is better, while us turkey hunters most recently have adopted the idea that shooting dense patterns of smaller shot is the way to go for cleaner, surer kills. 

Locally, we hunt sandhill cranes at times.  They winter in this area in the thousands.  They are tough, wary birds and our shots are often in the forty to fifty-yard range at flying targets.  Our strategy in shooting them has always been one of "shoot large shot and break something so they fall out of the sky".  Conversely, in turkey hunting, that concept of using large shot to "break something so they don't run off" attitude definitely has seemed to have lost favor, assuming it ever existed to begin with. 

The problem with shooting large shot is that it leaves too much to chance in where that shot hits the bird.  A pellet that hits a half-inch right or left of breaking a bone, or otherwise being an immediate mortal wound, results in a crippled bird that will likely get away only to succumb later.  On our crane hunts, there are invariably birds that we know have taken shot, but that fly off and are not recovered.  This reality bothers me...but not nearly to the extent of the thought of losing a crippled gobbler.  For some reason, in my mind, there is a difference. 

Perhaps it is just in the shear numbers of birds and, in my mind, the mental concept that losing a few cripples when there are so many of them is (reluctantly) acceptable.  On the other hand, just the nature of the type of hunting in pursuing waterfowl makes it unavoidable to some extent, it seems. Again, I don't like the thought, but I have come to accept it.  However, for some reason I accept it much less when it comes to turkeys. 

[crow]

[quote author=GobbleNut link=topic=114974.msg1151476#msg1151476 date=1689086097
Which brings me to the next point regarding our attitudes about shooting waterfowl as compared to turkeys...and in relation to shot sizes used and acceptance of crippling losses.  As has been pointed out, I think waterfowl hunters generally adopt the theory that shooting large shot (for the larger waterfowl species such as geese, cranes, and swans) is better, while us turkey hunters most recently have adopted the idea that shooting dense patterns of smaller shot is the way to go for cleaner, surer kills. 

Locally, we hunt sandhill cranes at times.  They winter in this area in the thousands.  They are tough, wary birds and our shots are often in the forty to fifty-yard range at flying targets.  Our strategy in shooting them has always been one of "shoot large shot and break something so they fall out of the sky".  Conversely, in turkey hunting, that concept of using large shot to "break something so they don't run off" attitude definitely has seemed to have lost favor, assuming it ever existed to begin with. 

The problem with shooting large shot is that it leaves too much to chance in where that shot hits the bird.  A pellet that hits a half-inch right or left of breaking a bone, or otherwise being an immediate mortal wound, results in a crippled bird that will likely get away only to succumb later.  On our crane hunts, there are invariably birds that we know have taken shot, but that fly off and are not recovered.  This reality bothers me...but not nearly to the extent of the thought of losing a crippled gobbler.  For some reason, in my mind, there is a difference. 
[/quote]
Gobblenut's quote





None of the shot size choice is limited to olden times or modern times.
Body shooting or "break something so it doesen't run off" certainly did and does still exist.
As mentioned earlier C. Jordan promoted small shot for head/neck shots as his first choice but shot turkeys with larger shot in his left (distance barrel) when it suited him.

Henry Davis was a small shot head/neck hunter but also used larger shot in his left barrel for just shooting turkey, he also didn't hesitate to shoot them with buckshot  when deer dogs ran turkeys past him

Bogardus (his book is available to watch in the archives online) was a body shooter and settled on #1 shot after trying #4 bird shot thru several buckshot sizes.

Simon Everett, pretty much the same as Jordan and Davis.

Col.Tom Kelly at different times used #2 shot for body shooting down to #7.5 lead for head/neck shots and settled on #4 lead for head shots first choice and the same #4 lead for "shooting turkeys in the all over" when appropriate.

As TSS got popular with some of the hunting shows on the outdoor channel, a lot of them are body shooting gobblers now. Our tv remote will slow it down to 1 frame at a time and pause on a frame, you can clearly see the pattern hitting the body, too regularly to be coincidental.

I'm friends with and used to hunt with an old old hunter who is no longer able to go.
He was raised in the Pa. Mt.s on a farm and was taught by older relatives to body shoot fall turkeys.
His teachers were contemporaries of Archibald Rutledge (and some of the same Pa. hunting grounds also)
From reading some of Mr. Rutledge's books he also seemed to be a first choice head/neck hunter but didn't hesitate to shoot gobblers "in the all over" as Col. Tom puts it.

I think if someone choses to hunt this way they have they same responsibilities of patterning and knowing their gun to avoid the negatives you stated.

[eggshell]

I do not like picking shot and embedded feathers from my turkey meat...."that's all I got to say about that", Forest Gump

[Prospector]

Build it, Market it. You'll make a mint from the Would Be, Wanna Be FB GOATs out there...
Seriously ...
But on a personal note, my old mentor said it best, " The downside of 40(yds) is where Turkey hunting starts; anything further is just killin."

[Paulmyr]

I do not like picking shot and embedded feathers from my turkey meat...."that's all I got to say about that", Forest Gump

If I'm gonna shoot a goose on the the ground I'm shooting for the head and neck. Those wings folded against the body with all that down underneath is like a plate of armor. Same with ducks on the water. I'm with eggshell. I don't like bb's in the meat or bloody shot up ducks for roasting, shot up ones go in the sausage pile.

I think shooting waterfowl on the wing is a different animal than turkeys on the ground. Most areas I hunt waterfowl are pretty open. There's a pretty good chance birds that aren't "anchored" immediately can still be found but I  wont go without my dog if tall weeds are nearby. A turkey, if I hit it with a good shot in the head and neck at reasonable ranges will undoubtedly be anchored.