Nontoxic ammo.

[thegunnut]

The topic of lethality of non toxic loads fascinates me.
Having shot lead, and all other shot types from steel to Hevi Shot, I have come to the following conclusions.
1/ if you want definitive scientific quantification of shot "killing power" check out the Ballistics products literature for shot evaluation.
They will show fp energy of different pellet size vs material (density) at velocity. Good info and valid.
2/ Most commentary on shot performance is anecdotal, and not scientific.. Ie... I shoot geese all day with #2 steel @1400 fps and they fold stone dead out to 75 yds with a IM choke.
Or... Steel does not kill birds past 50 ft.

My personal experience... ANECDOTAL!!!!!!.....
Steel has improved since its inception. Velocity matters. Keep the shots withing effective range... No skybusting.
Hevi shot outperforms everything (ITX 13 is included as Hevi shot) and is closest to lead in my experience as far as lethality at distance. Be prepared to pay for performance.

We will never again have the opportunty to shoot lead....so embrace the options!

 

[3macs1]

I get the feeling she is an environmentalist who's science might be slightly screwed, but there is other research that also shows the advers effects of lead to scavengers and even humans. I'm not jumping on the band wagon whole heartedly, but I have no problem using steel and monolithic bullets to harvest game that my young children are going to eat. I do realize that steel shot is not as effective as lead, but if this is the deal breaker when deciding whether or not you will hunt then you are not much of a hunter. To be honest I often use 2 3/4" shells when hunting waterfowl and strangely enough I still kill birds.

Do you remember or have any idea how many waterfowl hunters we lost in 1992 when they banned lead?? The number was huge. Most of which never returned.

 

[g-manz35]

That and the gun registry that soon followed. Both are flimsy excusses in my books.

 

[3macs1]

That and the gun registry that soon followed. Both are flimsy excusses in my books.

Nope had nothing to do with the registry. If you fired steel shot that first year you would know what I am talking about so you clearly didnot. It was so bad, with so many cripples it was all over the news.
If it wasn't for me reloading bismuth the second year , then buying my 1st 10ga semi I for one would have stopped waterfowl hunting but lost a bunch of my hunting buds in those years.
Cheers

 

[Potash shooter]

I agree with the comment regarding hunters who just quit rather than switch to steel. I was one of them.
Wasn't going to bore the chokes out on my guns. So just quit, and didn't hunt migratory birds - until this year.

Retired and bought a new shotgun to celebrate .

 

[g-manz35]

I did miss the first five years of steel shot. When I first used it I realized it was not very good and I wasn't happy, but never considered quitting.

 

[3macs1]

I agree with the comment regarding hunters who just quit rather than switch to steel. I was one of them.
Wasn't going to bore the chokes out on my guns. So just quit, and didn't hunt migratory birds - until this year.

Retired and bought a new shotgun to celebrate .

Yes having to buy a new shotgun was also a big reason many switched to upland hunting or got out of waterfowl hunting. We knew nothing down this way that we could have opened the chokes and used our old guns. That came many years later
Oh yes congrats on retirement. Nothing like it. Now wonder where I had the time to work
Cheers

 

[3macs1]

I did miss the first five years of steel shot. When I first used it I realized it was not very good and I wasn't happy, but never considered quitting.

After the first five years the steel shot could kill not as good as today but at least 2x to 3x better than the initial stuff so I can see why it was not such a big issue for you. The first year all they did for factory was use pretty much lead components and the lead speeds it was a joke
There were terrible patterns and no penetration. Imagine today hunting with steel going under 1200 fps and the quality of the steel was terrible it ranged from round to square
The only alternative was bismuth with was like 3.00 each round factory when you could find it and I had to order in from the US to get bismuth for reloading since there was none in canada
Remember when this came out I thought WOW what an improvement it would not make it today however not even close. In fact I bet few even knew they made it at one time

Cheers

 

[g-manz35]

Your comment on the speed of early steel is a good one. I think a major issue today is hunters buying steel and assuming a 1 3/8 load is better than a 1 1/8 load or taking for granted that all 1 1/4 oz loads are equal. I've ran a few loads over the crony and have found some to be right on and some to be significantly slower than advertised. Speed gives you distance. Shooting anemic steel loads will leave you disappointed. I only shoot ammo that shoots a true 1550 fps for geese regardless of shot load.

 

[3macs1]

Your comment on the speed of early steel is a good one. I think a major issue today is hunters buying steel and assuming a 1 3/8 load is better than a 1 1/8 load or taking for granted that all 1 1/4 oz loads are equal. I've ran a few loads over the crony and have found some to be right on and some to be significantly slower than advertised. Speed gives you distance. Shooting anemic steel loads will leave you disappointed. I only shoot ammo that shoots a true 1550 fps for geese regardless of shot load.

Honestly to do it right and get steel to kill in your shotgun is no different that building a load for a rifle for me and how I do it. Yes they figured out that speed kills eventually but too fast can blow patterns, too much pressure destroys guns etc and different chokes from different manufacturers toss another wrench into it.Wads also have come a long way but I still use the original SAM1

When I found a RSI steel reloading manual years ago I never looked back.Think it was version 2, they are probally version 8 or better now
I would say back then I reloaded and tested every 10 and 12ga recipe they listed and ran them through, the chrono, patterned on paper and all with many many choke combinations and manufacturers
Today I am happy with my combinations and know exactly what to shoot out of my guns and what chokes.Big advantage being a reloader that is for sure but I find very few reload steel or any non tox Mind you also spent a fortune on choke tubes over the years also only to find out pound for pound one cannot beat a factory or purchased Briley
This is probally about 1/2 of what I own just in tubes
Cheers

 

[fishslinger]

Ya I remember when lead shot was banned from waterfowl hunting and the ammo manufacturers rushed to bring out an a cheap alternative. Steel shot shells, the first ones to hit the store shelves sucked big time! I remember going out with the first steel loads and seeing duck and geese getting hit out the sky only to watch them hit the water and swim away. It was sickening to see. Then people started saying use open chokes and keep shots under 30 yards. That worked ok but its still wasn't perfect. Then Kent came out with there high speed 1500 fps loads and that changed steel shot problems forever. We where able to stone ducks at further distance and soon all the other shot shells manufactures jumped on board with the speed kills. And here w are today.

 

[3macs1]

Ya I remember when lead shot was banned from waterfowl hunting and the ammo manufacturers rushed to bring out an a cheap alternative. Steel shot shells, the first ones to hit the store shelves sucked big time! I remember going out with the first steel loads and seeing duck and geese getting hit out the sky only to watch them hit the water and swim away. It was sickening to see. Then people started saying use open chokes and keep shots under 30 yards. That worked ok but its still wasn't perfect. Then Kent came out with there high speed 1500 fps loads and that changed steel shot problems forever. We where able to stone ducks at further distance and soon all the other shot shells manufactures jumped on board with the speed kills. And here w are today.

Yes sir, remember it well. Unfortunately we struggled for 5-6 years prior and many waterfowl hunters just gave up because they could not keep crippling ducks and geese. In fact Kent if I recall correctly was formed for the sole purpose of making a non tox load that worked as well as lead since things were so bad with what was available ion these early years. They bought out Activ in 97 and the rest is history.
Cheers

 

[madtrapper143]

I have found that 1 1/4 oz. of appropriately sized steel (for your quarry) @1400 FPS. Works just perfect. The only wild card is choke selection. This choice depends on distance to bird and type of bird hunted. This load is mostly in 3" 12 bore offerings. I like IMP CYL and #4. A good friend prefers a very open choke and #3. These loads with a FULL choke reach out well but I find I have better luck on medium range birds. (read 30 to 35 yards with open choke) That seems to be my shooting ability limit as I age gracefully.

Darryl

 

[canvasback]

That and the gun registry that soon followed. Both are flimsy excusses in my books.

Spoken like a man in cahoots with the anti gun and anti hunting crowd. Your personal opinions are meaningless in this context. If you want to side with the antis, go ahead. But don't blame us when the regs finally get onerous enough you give up. Government policy and regulation based on emotion and not backed up by evidence is simply poor policy. The registry was poor policy and so is the lead ban for migratory game birds. The victory of feelings.

 

[Westward1]

Spoken like a man in cahoots with the anti gun and anti hunting crowd. Your personal opinions are meaningless in this context. If you want to side with the antis, go ahead. But don't blame us when the regs finally get onerous enough you give up. Government policy and regulation based on emotion and not backed up by evidence is simply poor policy. The registry was poor policy and so is the lead ban for migratory game birds. The victory of feelings.

I don’t think he is siding with the anti’s. He is just saying that non-tox regs and the registry did not stop him from hunting. They didn’t stop me either as well as ten’s of thousands of others in Canada.

 

[g-manz35]

Spoken like a man in cahoots with the anti gun and anti hunting crowd. Your personal opinions are meaningless in this context. If you want to side with the antis, go ahead. But don't blame us when the regs finally get onerous enough you give up. Government policy and regulation based on emotion and not backed up by evidence is simply poor policy. The registry was poor policy and so is the lead ban for migratory game birds. The victory of feelings.

I'm a volunteer hunter education instructor and a firearm instructor. I think I'm doing my part to promote hunting and gun ownership.

Statistically hunters make up 15% of the population. Those who are indifferent are 75% and the Antis are 10%. We are going to win the fight by lobbying the masses (the 75%) and convincing them that we are reasonable individuals that have the same concerns that they have. Acting like a raving lunatic and telling the other 85% that they are stupid and wrong about everything will make us look like the fringe group. The nut jobs that don't accept science. The emotions and feelings of the 75% are crucial in winning this fight. To ignore that fact will be our demise.
I'm not saying that the effects of lead on waterfowl are not exaggerated, but the basis of these claims is fairly well studied and documented. Denying it opens the door for the antis to make us look like nut jobs who don't care about anything except killing birds. As our credibility dwindles so will our opportunities as hunters.
I teach this basic principle to 12 year olds in the hopes they become good advocates for the sport.

I've already accepted that this old school (I ain't gonna change) attitude is going to be the end of this sport.

 

[3macs1]

15% wow where did that come from how about 3.5% in Nova Scotia . No wonder we are the first province being pushed on the lead BS. I would love to see some information on the average age of hunters in canada. I did see a report some years ago and it was 45 then. I would bet it is 50 plus now especially in eastern canada. For sure we are not back filling as fast as we are losing these old school guys. Not to mention old school guys are the ones that historically reach into their pockets to keep our sport alive which is not something I see in a high percentage of new hunters/ shooters
Kudos for you on being an instructor I also was involved instructing the first firearm courses way back. One thing for sure the emotions and feelings of the so called 75% is not focused on our lead bullets since it is a non issue to many if we have nothing to fire them out of. Just turned on the TV looks like another mass shooting in Texas. Nice just what all gun owners need
Cheers

 

[Westward1]

15% wow where did that come from how about 3.5% in Nova Scotia . No wonder we are the first province being pushed on the lead BS. I would love to see some information on the average age of hunters in canada. I did see a report some years ago and it was 45 then. I would bet it is 50 plus now especially in eastern canada. For sure we are not back filling as fast as we are losing these old school guys. Not to mention old school guys are the ones that historically reach into their pockets to keep our sport alive which is not something I see in a high percentage of new hunters/ shooters
Kudos for you on being an instructor I also was involved instructing the first firearm courses way back. One thing for sure the emotions and feelings of the so called 75% is not focused on our lead bullets since it is a non issue to many if we have nothing to fire them out of. Just turned on the TV looks like another mass shooting in Texas. Nice just what all gun owners need
Cheers

Sorry for the derail. Had to ask.

What would give you the impression that a mass shooting in the US would have an impact on gun ownership ?

 

[g-manz35]

Sorry I didn't clarify. 15% etc is in Saskatchewan. And your right if we don't play our cards right we will be one of the last generations to enjoy hunting. I apologize for the wording in my posts. I'm fairly passionate about the subject and feel that it is this failure to change that will be our end. We are all in the same team, but seem to have very different strategies.

 

[canvasback]

I'm a volunteer hunter education instructor and a firearm instructor. I think I'm doing my part to promote hunting and gun ownership.

Statistically hunters make up 15% of the population. Those who are indifferent are 75% and the Antis are 10%. We are going to win the fight by lobbying the masses (the 75%) and convincing them that we are reasonable individuals that have the same concerns that they have. Acting like a raving lunatic and telling the other 85% that they are stupid and wrong about everything will make us look like the fringe group. The nut jobs that don't accept science. The emotions and feelings of the 75% are crucial in winning this fight. To ignore that fact will be our demise.
I'm not saying that the effects of lead on waterfowl are not exaggerated, but the basis of these claims is fairly well studied and documented. Denying it opens the door for the antis to make us look like nut jobs who don't care about anything except killing birds. As our credibility dwindles so will our opportunities as hunters.
I teach this basic principle to 12 year olds in the hopes they become good advocates for the sport.

I've already accepted that this old school (I ain't gonna change) attitude is going to be the end of this sport.

Glad to hear you are doing your part. I can only base my assumptions on the things you post.

I am far from the fringe but I am clear about one thing.....the antis won't give up. Every inch we give up to pacify or accommodate them in the name of reasonableness is simply one more step towards total firearms confiscation and the end of hunting. It may take them 50 or 100 years but that's what their goal is. It is not to arrive at a reasonable compromise. If it was, I'd be the first to sign on.

So I have difficulty accepting the idea we should be okay with regulation based on bad science. And that is what the migratory game bird no tox regs are. That's not to say I don't use no tox or have giving up hunting waterfowl. But I'm not okay with it, I don't acknowledge that it is proper or inevitable or reasonable. It's wrong and it's wrong because it's useless except to drive hunters out of the game. Which of course, is the point.

I'd also say that (and I don't mean to step on toes or insult you) as a firearms/hunter safety instructor, is it possible the many years of teaching the government mandated courses have, if not blinded you, perhaps inserted a filter in the way you look at things? Pretty hard to be a course instructor if you believe a significant part of the government mandated course is wrong and should be rescinded, is it not?

How about we work on destroying the credibility of the people who are against us?? The people who are actually wrong, who exaggerate and who twist study results to further their aims. Rather than assume that the 75% of people who are indifferent (your stats) will automatically assume the antis are right and we are the ones with no or lost credibility.