Camouflage necessary for waterfowl?

[sjemac]

IMO waterfowling and turkey hunting are about the only two hunting sports where camo does give you a definite advantage. Aside from pink faces and flashy gun barrels, ducks are very good at picking out solid shapes and in heavier hunted areas will flare off of them or skirt them just outside of range.

So required? No.
Advantageous? Yes

 

[.17]

The best camo I have found after 40 or so years of duck hunting is white,put out some snow goose decoys and lay in them (as well as duck decoys) it works very well.

 

[archie126]

Neccesary? No.

Good to have? Yes.

Use to duck hunt with an old fella who always wore the black and RED plaid coat. Never had a problem shooting ducks.

 

[gravyboat]

A $15 mesh face mask and washing whatever you do wear in sportwash first to reduce it's UV signature will do wonders.

 

[TheCoachZed]

waterproof gear is a lot more important than camo gear when duck hunting. If you start jump shooting ducks, you don't need to worry about camo anyway.

 

[tactical870]

WalMart around here has waterproof shells with removeable liners on clearance for like $50 right now in Realtree hardwoods.

Yep. The remington camo is excellent stuff and very warm as well. You can zip out the liner for warmer weather and it's waterproof as well.

 

[mikeyb]

I can walk right up to the ducks in the field behind my house and kill them with a pocket knife if I want. I guess there's just so goddamn many of them here I hit my limit long before they realize that I'm not wearing camo. But if I had to pick something, I would look at the Remmy stuff from Wal-Mart. It's actually pretty nice fitting and decent "weight" for the weather we get during fowling season.

 

[219F]

Back in the day in the US, hunters virtually wiped out game populations through out a good part of the US. They shot everything that could be eaten. Several species of ducks were driven to almost extinction levels. All those hunters wore on their backs was either brown canvas or wool (sold and muted plaid) coats. None had camo shotguns either - all were wood and bued.

true enough but don't forget they were also using live decoys, baiting, punt cannons, catch nets and had no limits.

You can get by without camo but remember that you have to stay comfortable and a lot of the cheaper stuff out there will leave you wet from the rain or clammy from sweat that doesn't wick out of the clothes.

 

[2233]

You do need to be extremely still at the right time. i have never worn a facemask but do wear a hat 99 percent of the time. The repeated idea is that the newer hunting clothes offer great warmth / weight ratio as well as waterproofness (if that's a word). i spend alot of time in the field after birds and have found that using layouts, I will often only require a camo'd top or jacket and anything down to sweats if you wanted for the pant portion. With that being said my favourite piece of waterfowl clothing bar none is a Beretta windproff flleece in Max 4 that cost me wayyyyy too mcuh but I use it every time I go so I guess it must be worth it.

 

[catnthehatt]

WE wore canvas jakets when i was young and i still wear one for the most part - finally got myself another Jones style hat as well, but it is gortex, not flannel lined.
Waterproof is the key in bad weather, not camo.
Camoflauge, as was stated, is HIGHLY over rated when it comes to movement and glare- NOTHING will turn ducks quicker than movement and glare.
Cat

 

[rral22]

true enough but don't forget they were also using live decoys, baiting, punt cannons, catch nets and had no limits.

That is an absurd generalization. No one ever did any of that when I started hunting birds with my father and relatives in the early 50's in Sask.

 

[219F]

That is an absurd generalization. No one ever did any of that when I started hunting birds with my father and relatives in the early 50's in Sask.

I was talking about the decimation of waterfowl at the turn of last century, not whether camo is a necessity. What l was getting at was that the actions I mentioned plus the Dust Bowl knocked the pizz out out the waterfowl population.

 

[ryan32]

pretty well covered here. Its good but really not necessary ducks see movement and shapes

 

[albertaal]

true enough but don't forget they were also using live decoys, baiting, punt cannons, catch nets and had no limits.

You can get by without camo but remember that you have to stay comfortable and a lot of the cheaper stuff out there will leave you wet from the rain or clammy from sweat that doesn't wick out of the clothes.

Live decoys were used, but the majority used wood and/or cork decoys. Mason decoys being the ones most favored by my relatives in the Upper Mid-West. As a member of a prostaff, you should know that one of the "first hay-days" of duck calling was around that time. A good duck and goose call were a lot easier to keep around.

Everytime you set-up in a harvested wheat or corn field - you are effectively baiting them.

Punt guns were rarely used, but were used. Punt guns saw most usage on the East Coast, not in the Mid-West. The common shotguns used were various side x sides, M97s, M12, the Spencer, and A5s.


Catch nets were never used in the Mid-West to my knowledge. In general a hugely ineffective way to catch ducks and geese. Catch nets are good for song birds, if you like to band birds.

No limits, that be true.

And how does staying warm and dry relate to camo? The fact is they didn't wear it. I do agree that the modern coats are pretty nice. I own a few myself. The drought of the 30s did add to the decrease in waterfowl, the waterfowlers in canvas and wool coats did cause a reduction in the waterfowl population.

 

[vpsalin]

Lot's of good deals to be had this time of year. Camo is exactly what xmas gifts I'm going to recieve.

Cabela's MT060 Quiet Pack Tall Gore-Tex jacket_RealTreeAP 210$
Cabela's CAMOSKINZ II Gore-Tex 3M Insulation_RealTreeAP 20$
Wrangler_RealTreeAP Jeans 30$
Thin RealTreeAP Toque 10$
Remington MossyOak Trucker Hat 12$
Army Surplus CADPAT longsleeve shirt 12$x2
Browning Tracker XT BackPack/FoamChair_RealTreeAP 42$

 

[219F]

Live decoys were used, but the majority used wood and/or cork decoys. Mason decoys being the ones most favored by my relatives in the Upper Mid-West. As a member of a prostaff, you should know that one of the "first hay-days" of duck calling was around that time. A good duck and goose call were a lot easier to keep around.

Everytime you set-up in a harvested wheat or corn field - you are effectively baiting them.

Punt guns were rarely used, but were used. Punt guns saw most usage on the East Coast, not in the Mid-West. The common shotguns used were various side x sides, M97s, M12, the Spencer, and A5s.


Catch nets were never used in the Mid-West to my knowledge. In general a hugely ineffective way to catch ducks and geese. Catch nets are good for song birds, if you like to band birds.

No limits, that be true.

And how does staying warm and dry relate to camo? The fact is they didn't wear it. I do agree that the modern coats are pretty nice. I own a few myself. The drought of the 30s did add to the decrease in waterfowl, the waterfowlers in canvas and wool coats did cause a reduction in the waterfowl population.

true enough on the west coast but Chesapeake Bay had a HUGE market gunning industry to feed New York and Boston.

Sorry I seem to have side tracked the thread.

 

[albertaal]

true enough on the west coast but Chesapeake Bay had a HUGE market gunning industry to feed New York and Boston.

Sorry I seem to have side tracked the thread.

You are right about the Chesepeake. It had a huge market hunting industry. Canvasbacks and Redheads were favorites of the markets. It was the area that probably saw the most punt gun use. Cleaning all those birds couldn't have been a lot of fun.


Cheers,

Alan