Shooting Woodcock & Snipe

[RoyW]

Originally Posted by muldonach

On a quick glance just about every species of wildfowl which it is legal to shoot is on that list, including mallard.

Would be interesting to understand why such apparently common species are listed.

Cheers
mac

Mallards qualify for amber listing becuase of the long term decline in wintering numbers is more than 25% over 25 years and longer (38% over the last 25 years - but only an 11% decline over the last 10 years, and breeding numbers seem to be increasing). Other species may be listed because of breeding season declines, because they are declining elsewhere in Europe, or because we have a high percentage of the European (or world) population.

I tend to think that amber list species are not meant to be the species that are thought of being in need of active conservation measures, they are species that are considered potentially at risk and in need of monitoring to see if action is required. The 'quarry' species that have shown more serious declines, and are red listed (Capercaillie, Black Grouse, and Grey Partridge) are now rarely shot, if at all.

[muldonach]

Originally Posted by Dogghound

Our local hunt shot 120 woodcock in a morning last winter, after a large influx. A lot of which were exhausted after migration. At least they gave me a ring which turned out to be from Belarus

Not good - the question I would ask is what did they then do with them? I have to say that I am surprised that the shoot manager did not call a halt well before such a figure was reached.

It is (in my expereince in SW Scotland) unusual to see woodcock reach double figures in the gamecart although I have heard of a total of 72 being reached some years ago before the shoot captain called a halt.

The challenge in shooting woodcock arises from a continuously jinking and silent flight almost impossible to predict. There is no credit in shooting exhausted birds.

Regards
mac

[Dogghound]

Originally Posted by muldonach

Not good - the question I would ask is what did they then do with them? I have to say that I am surprised that the shoot manager did not call a halt well before such a figure was reached.

Im not to sure to be fair. They shoot over a bit of land used for coservation purposes and in fairness to them they do keep fox and crow numbers down when the lapwings are breeding. As I said they informed me and gave a metal leg ring from one of the birds, plus give me the occassial pheasant. I think its a fair example of how conservation and shooting can work side by side and they tend to leave the grey partridge alone. Just issues like this can tip the balance, but what they did was within the law (as far as I am aware) and there is little that I could have done. Certainly the breeding woodcock ppulation here is very strong still.

[BugBear99]

Hi all,
Thanks for your replies, I'm glad I'm not the only one a bit shocked to hear about shooting these birds. My source is...Heard about a "friend" having gone out in West Devon on a drive, their photo shows 7 or so birds, which apparently they ate (cue some discussion about whether they are best eaten with or without innards in, and what they taste like in comparison to woodcock), not sure how many the whole group shot. Can't understand how anyone enjoys that kind of thing.

[Shrike]

ive seen woodcock eaten on river cottage with hugh whittingdle i think but theyre common in some areas and it doesnt seem to be a problem. would hate to see them shot were theyre struggling though.

[davecatt]

Originally Posted by ChrisJB

I don't shoot, but do like to eat game. Woodcock are shot for food and as much as I'd rather see a live one in the wild, rather than on my plate, they do taste very good.

Chris

Not strictly true Chris. Wood cock are shot because they are a challenging target,it's just an added bonus that they are edible. It used to be a tradition to put a feather from a woodcock in your hat band from either the left or right wing depending on the shot, it was considered to be a mark of good shot if you got two (a left and a right) at the same rise. Probably the origin of the saying "A feather in your cap" to signify an outstanding achievement.

For the record I dont approve of anyone shooting something just to prove how good a shot they are either to themselves or to others. If they want a real challenge they should get a camera and try getting a good photo undetected by the subject. The price of a gun will buy some decent camera equipment.
Dave

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by davecatt

Wood cock are shot because they are a challenging target,it's just an added bonus that they are edible. It used to be a tradition to put a feather from a woodcock in your hat band from either the left or right wing depending on the shot, it was considered to be a mark of good shot if you got two (a left and a right) at the same rise.

Yes - see my post above:

Shooting Woodcock & Snipe

Jim

[davecatt]

Sorry Jim,missed that

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by davecatt

Not strictly true Chris. Wood cock are shot because they are a challenging target,it's just an added bonus that they are edible. It used to be a tradition to put a feather from a woodcock in your hat band from either the left or right wing depending on the shot, it was considered to be a mark of good shot if you got two (a left and a right) at the same rise. Probably the origin of the saying "A feather in your cap" to signify an outstanding achievement.

For the record I dont approve of anyone shooting something just to prove how good a shot they are either to themselves or to others. If they want a real challenge they should get a camera and try getting a good photo undetected by the subject. The price of a gun will buy some decent camera equipment.
Dave

All gamebirds (and woodcock are considered game) are edible and were initially hunted for food rather than sport, I would imagine almost all woodcock shot these days end up on the table too. Woodcock are only difficult to shoot because of the habitat they are found in, a woodcock in the open is comparatively easy to hit (BTW, peregrines also find them remarkably easy to kill too if they're flushed during the day).

The term 'a feather in your cap':

It was once a common practice to award a feather to a soldier who had killed an enemy. These feathers were worn on the helmet, or other headgear and were considered symbols of social status much as modern soldiers receive and display medals.

Woodcock 'pin feathers' (from the alula or xexexexexexexe wing) are used for painting:

Woodcock pin-feather paintings: Colin Woolf

I shot for many years, I now simply watch wildlife, take a few photographs and the odd film. There's very little difference in the two, except the end result of course. It's unfair to say one is any easier than the other, if pursued in ernest and in harsh environments then both can be extremely challenging. However, I can honestly say I've never seen a photographer out on a storm-ravaged saltmarsh at dawn when wildfowling, nor one up on sodden hill ground in November when hind stalking. The vast majority of non-professional photographers are strictly fair-weather birds . . .

I don't think hunters shoot simply to 'prove how good a shot they are either to themselves or to others', do they? At least, not the one's I know. Do photographers take pictures simply to prove how good they are to themselves or others? Or because they enjoy it?

Cheers
Jonathan

[KentYeti]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

.......... However, I can honestly say I've never seen a photographer out on a storm-ravaged saltmarsh at dawn when wildfowling, nor one up on sodden hill ground in November when hind stalking. The vast majority of non-professional photographers are strictly fair-weather birds . . . ...........

Cheers
Jonathan

Does a bird photographer, (coming up to a year since I sarted that), who also still does foul weather walking with a camera count Jonathan?

I've got photos I daren't put online for fear of tempting others to do what I've done. And still do given the chance and the weather.

Like some I managed to get the day I walked the Dover Cilffs when the wind reading on the local bouy was 82 knots. That's 94.5 mph, and it was above that in the WAZ, (Wind Acceleration Zone), where I was twice blown to the ground and had to crawl for a while. In torrential rain. Or the day I ruined a digital camera shooting a VERY large breaking wave. From inside the wave! In Folkestone Warren near high tide during a Storm Force ten event. Plus some epics on Snowdon in blizzards that I admit I will not repeat. I scared myself more than just Sh...less. Hearing an avalanche just the other side of a ridge was not something I'd like to do again. Couldn't see it, I was in a true white out. And I mean white out. Not someone who comes back from the supermarket car park in snowfall talking of whiteout! I could only just see my boots and nothing else whatsoever.

I will say. DO NOT attempt such walks yourselves. I'm a big guy, it takes a lot to blow me to the ground. And on the Kent Coast I've storm walked for many years and know when it's OK, and when it's not. I study tide tables, tide heights and wave heights, wind direction etc etc before deciding to have go.

Getting back on topic, I've never seen shooters out in those conditions. Or birds for that matter. Or anyone else! LOL!

And from a personal point of view. I don't shoot or eat game birds. But, as I do with hunting and fishing, I accept shooting, and hunting and fishing as part of the way others enjoy the country, and who am I to stop them?

As long as they never harm one of my lovely owls...........

Cheers,

Bryan - Yetis do the most stupid things - B

PS. I downloaded the readouts from that bouy when gusts reached 82 knots, and made a composite piccie. At the moment I can't find where I've put it. Hope it's not blown away!