Acceptable Wingshooting Kill Percentage

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't care if a person takes three shots to kill a bird as long as they kill the same bird they were shooting at with the other two shots!
Shooting and missing is one clean thing, shooting , wounding and not recovering is quite another.
Either instance however, should make a person take a close personal look at what they are doing and try to improve on their shooting skills.
Either way , some clays practice and some proper instruction cannot hurt......
Cat

Totally on board with you post Cat. When you look back at some of the threads here, they're looking for the "cheapest" rifle, the "cheapest" shotgun, the "cheapest" ammo, the "cheapest" elk or bison meat, the "cheapest" optics. See where I'm going with this? Seems to me the number of those wishing to make clean, quick and ethical kills is deteriorating rapidly. Very sad indeed.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't care if a person takes three shots to kill a bird as long as they kill the same bird they were shooting at with the other two shots!
Shooting and missing is one clean thing, shooting , wounding and not recovering is quite another.
Either instance however, should make a person take a close personal look at what they are doing and try to improve on their shooting skills.
Either way , some clays practice and some proper instruction cannot hurt......
Cat

This makes the most sense. Pick a bird and take it. A little practice with clay doesn't hurt either. As a kid hunting with my dad if we didn't take 20 plus migratory birds with a box of shells you got an ear full. In our blinds if you shot before he hollered you heard about it unless a bird hit the dirt or water. That was back in the old days with lead shot.

Dad was a natural with a shot gun.When upland hunting he never shot at a sitting bird and seldom missed a bird in flight. He never took low percentage shots. I recalled in his later years he was missing on a sharp-tail hunt, when I asked what was going on he said he had a cataract in his dominant eye. I couldn't believe it but he switched hands and eyes and took his limit that afternoon.

BW

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't care if a person takes three shots to kill a bird as long as they kill the same bird they were shooting at with the other two shots!
Shooting and missing is one clean thing, shooting , wounding and not recovering is quite another.
Either instance however, should make a person take a close personal look at what they are doing and try to improve on their shooting skills.
Either way , some clays practice and some proper instruction cannot hurt......
Cat

Exactly,,,, pick a bird and stay with it until it hits the ground,,, A 2 -3 shot "thump" is far better than having a one shot "sailor"!!!

Dispatching cripples ASAP doesn't do much for your shell to birds ratio, but it is the right thing to do,,, and anyone who says they kill all their birds cleanly is probably still doing all their duck hunting in mom's basement on the old Nintendo!!!

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

Exactly,,,, pick a bird and stay with it until it hits the ground,,, A 2 -3 shot "thump" is far better than having a one shot "sailor"!!!

Dispatching cripples ASAP doesn't do much for your shell to birds ratio, but it is the right thing to do,,, and anyone who says they kill all their birds cleanly is probably still doing all their duck hunting in mom's basement on the old Nintendo!!!

And if you are not dispatching cripples ASAP because you're wedded to your 75 to 80% kill to shot ratio – – – you're a dink.

Steel shot behaves differently than denser and/or more malleable shot does when it passes through a birds body. A bird with a fatal hit with steel may still travel several hundred yards before piling up into the field or marsh. Watch every bird you shoot at for as long as possible.

[elkhunter11]

During one trip last year, when SNS2 and his son accompanied us to Buffalo Lake , Densa44's dogs and my dog found five dead but still warm, or wounded pheasants , some of which were just laying in the open. Obviously some people were not doing a very good job at recovering every bird.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

During one trip last year, when SNS2 and his son accompanied us to Buffalo Lake , Densa44's dogs and my dog found five dead but still warm, or wounded pheasants , some of which were just laying in the open. Obviously some people were not doing a very good job at recovering every bird.

The same thing happens just about every time another hunter hunts our marsh while we are there. My dogs regularly pick up cripples and lost birds from others. These guys shoot from the bushes by the road, so the dogs get their birds while we are loading up. We have gotten to the point where we kennel the dogs right away so that they can't pick up extra birds.

Birds in general are not respected by a significant number of hunters in Alberta.

That said, I once marked a bird shot across a stream. Folded dead in the air. Four wire hairs, two Labs and a Toller worked the area at various times and couldn't find the bird. Eventually crossed the stream at another point walked to the spot and picked the bird off the ground where the dogs had been literally stepping on it as they moved back-and-forth. For whatever reason, none of these dogs could smell that pheasant.

[tikka250]

Was thinking about this thread this evening when 3 of us went out for a pigeon shoot. The shell and bird count got a little muddled near the end so i cant be certian on the percentage but it was somewhere around 70-80 with roughly 30 birds dead and i was quite satisfied with my shooting. I have found that multiple days at the clays range and regular pigeon shoots have done wonders when it comes to hit percentage on waterfowl.
Fun tip for those guys using up shells on wounded birds. If you can find some steel in 7.5 or 6 it works great getting that shot in the head of the wounded teal swimming away at 40 yards.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Totally on board with you post Cat. When you look back at some of the threads here, they're looking for the "cheapest" rifle, the "cheapest" shotgun, the "cheapest" ammo, the "cheapest" elk or bison meat, the "cheapest" optics. See where I'm going with this? Seems to me the number of those wishing to make clean, quick and ethical kills is deteriorating rapidly. Very sad indeed.

Thousands of big game and birds are killed cleanly and ethically every year because of the skill of the shooter. Everyone does not believe, and for good reason that you need expensive gear to be a good shot.

[nube]

Originally Posted by MK2750

You should stick to the release sites and grain fields if that is the case. In the real world, under real field conditions, shots are missed and no where near all shots are taken with 100% assurance of a kill. Many a kill is not clean and many a time we are dependant on a good retriever to make up for a not so perfect shot.

No one should shoot at a big game animal if they are not 100% confident in a kill. Your comment, as usual, is irrelevant to discussion and simply designed to try to make yourself look better than others. Someone suggests that they hunt under challenging conditions and you suggest we are making "Hail Mary" shots at impossible targets.

You should really try to get out more. Windy day Canvasbacks and Blue Bills will adjust your attitude in no time. I took a world class trap and skeet shooter out to the marsh one fall. I loaned him an autoloader as be only had competition guns in his cabinet. After managing a tricky shot on a group of flaring Blue Bills, I asked him how he liked the shotgun. He said it was shooting 6 birds to the left.

Bingo!

[Mulehahn]

My earlier post was in jest. I am back close to Vancouver now. When it comes to waterfowl, I have a choice to make. The only fields not signed over to clubs are about 2 hours away. Or I can hunt the marsh in a 1/2 hour. The marsh is almost 100% pass shooting. Now the trick to this area is the best hunting is when the wind is howling! I mean wind advisory in affect type days. Yes, there are always fowl there, but nothing like those days where the rain is being blown upwards into your face. On those days the sky is covered in feathers, and your feet are cover in empty casings. On a calm day, if you are patient enough you should probably shoot close to 100%, but you may only get 2 or 3 ducks in range. I don't count those days as hunting, merely enjoying the scenery.

P.S.: I live about 20 blocks from the trap range, go out most Wednesdays. I am not the best shot, but am decent. When you have a 60-70km/h+ wind blowing though, all bets are off.

[The Spank]

Averages only matter in the clay sports.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by The Spank

Averages only matter in the clay sports.

On the other hand, if a person is shooting five shots per bird, they are likely missing two or three shots, and leaving one or two cripples for every bird they recover. Perhaps it's just the way I was brought up hunting, but I would not be comfortable with having so many wounded birds flying out of sight to die later. I wouldn't do it with big game, and I am not comfortable with doing it for game birds either. Of course a person will lose some birds, but the level of lost birds that is acceptable varies considerable from person to person.

[buschy03]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

On the other hand, if a person is shooting five shots per bird, they are likely missing two or three shots, and leaving one or two cripples for every bird they recover. Perhaps it's just the way I was brought up hunting, but I would not be comfortable with having so many wounded birds flying out of sight to die later. I wouldn't do it with big game, and I am not comfortable with doing it for game birds either. Of course a person will lose some birds, but the level of lost birds that is acceptable varies considerable from person to person.

Yes, everyone will lose some birds, and its totally up to them when they should call it a sh..ty day and head it home, or keep shooting and having fun, maybe even have a beer at the same time, who gives a sh.t how many rounds you shoot, why is it always a competition on these forums about the ethics of one person to another's. Drives me nuts. Go out and have fun people, its a sport and I can play it how I want.

[The Flint&Fly Guy]

well I know I'm going to have to be much more picky with my shots this year, ill be hunting with my Husqy BP shotgun and will only have about 20shells to use at a time! I think the experience will be good for me, and all those downwind!

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by buschy03

Yes, everyone will lose some birds, and its totally up to them when they should call it a sh..ty day and head it home, or keep shooting and having fun, maybe even have a beer at the same time, who gives a sh.t how many rounds you shoot, why is it always a competition on these forums about the ethics of one person to another's. Drives me nuts. Go out and have fun people, its a sport and I can play it how I want.

Pardon me,,,,,, but drinking beer while you hunt is not legal ,,,,, and will most likely contribute to an even higher shell to bird ratio.!!!!

Go ahead and call me a righteous prude,,, but please leave the beer till the end of the day when you are back at home or your camp,,, not in the field.

[MK2750]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

On the other hand, if a person is shooting five shots per bird, they are likely missing two or three shots, and leaving one or two cripples for every bird they recover. Perhaps it's just the way I was brought up hunting, but I would not be comfortable with having so many wounded birds flying out of sight to die later. I wouldn't do it with big game, and I am not comfortable with doing it for game birds either. Of course a person will lose some birds, but the level of lost birds that is acceptable varies considerable from person to person.

What is acceptable does vary from person to person and is frankly none of your concern. For every hunter you smugly turn your nose up at because they do not meet your perceived standards, there is 100 people that turn their noses up at you for hunting in the first place.

I am again baffled by the purpose of your thread. Are you concerned about the happiness of others and want to add to their enjoyment afield or do you just have a problem with people doing something different than yourself? Are you worried about the welfare and suffering of the poor birds or do you feel you are missing out on a few more birds for yourself?

Killing is a messy business and it is not ever going to be any different. The bird population is healthy in spite of more "incompetent" people afield and in fact when it comes to your beloved released pheasant, it is because of more people afield.

There has never been a person that missed a shot that didn't wish they had not. It is human nature to try to better results each time we engage in any activity as it increases enjoyment. Your pedestal preaching about how great and ethical you are compared to all others isn't going to change that. Threads about another's short comings and injuring animals is fuel for the antis, nothing more and certainly nothing helpful.

If you do ever feel like making a change for the positive in the life of other outdoorsmen, perhaps you could start a thread with some tips on wing shooting or alike. How to judge range in the field, how to lead and follow through, building a stance from the ground up automatically on a flush, shotgun types, choke selection, shot sizes,,, you know,,, like helpful stuff.

[buschy03]

Originally Posted by MK2750

What is acceptable does vary from person to person and is frankly none of your concern. For every hunter you smugly turn your nose up at because they do not meet your perceived standards, there is 100 people that turn their noses up at you for hunting in the first place.

I am again baffled by the purpose of your thread. Are you concerned about the happiness of others and want to add to their enjoyment afield or do you just have a problem with people doing something different than yourself? Are you worried about the welfare and suffering of the poor birds or do you feel you are missing out on a few more birds for yourself?

Killing is a messy business and it is not ever going to be any different. The bird population is healthy in spite of more "incompetent" people afield and in fact when it comes to your beloved released pheasant, it is because of more people afield.

There has never been a person that missed a shot that didn't wish they had not. It is human nature to try to better results each time we engage in any activity as it increases enjoyment. Your pedestal preaching about how great and ethical you are compared to all others isn't going to change that. Threads about another's short comings and injuring animals is fuel for the antis, nothing more and certainly nothing helpful.

If you do ever feel like making a change for the positive in the life of other outdoorsmen, perhaps you could start a thread with some tips on wing shooting or alike. How to judge range in the field, how to lead and follow through, building a stance from the ground up automatically on a flush, shotgun types, choke selection, shot sizes,,, you know,,, like helpful stuff.

Exactly!!!!!!!!, wicked post MK2750!!, I am with you....

[buschy03]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

Pardon me,,,,,, but drinking beer while you hunt is not legal ,,,,, and will most likely contribute to an even higher shell to bird ratio.!!!!

Go ahead and call me a righteous prude,,, but please leave the beer till the end of the day when you are back at home or your camp,,, not in the field.

No name calling here....

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by MK2750

What is acceptable does vary from person to person and is frankly none of your concern. For every hunter you smugly turn your nose up at because they do not meet your perceived standards, there is 100 people that turn their noses up at you for hunting in the first place.

I am again baffled by the purpose of your thread. Are you concerned about the happiness of others and want to add to their enjoyment afield or do you just have a problem with people doing something different than yourself? Are you worried about the welfare and suffering of the poor birds or do you feel you are missing out on a few more birds for yourself?

Killing is a messy business and it is not ever going to be any different. The bird population is healthy in spite of more "incompetent" people afield and in fact when it comes to your beloved released pheasant, it is because of more people afield.

There has never been a person that missed a shot that didn't wish they had not. It is human nature to try to better results each time we engage in any activity as it increases enjoyment. Your pedestal preaching about how great and ethical you are compared to all others isn't going to change that. Threads about another's short comings and injuring animals is fuel for the antis, nothing more and certainly nothing helpful.

If you do ever feel like making a change for the positive in the life of other outdoorsmen, perhaps you could start a thread with some tips on wing shooting or alike. How to judge range in the field, how to lead and follow through, building a stance from the ground up automatically on a flush, shotgun types, choke selection, shot sizes,,, you know,,, like helpful stuff.

If you missed it, I did post that there was still time to work on your wingshooting before the season begins, to encourage people to get out and do some shooting before the season. As for helping people with their wingshooting, I did volunteer to run an introduction to skeet for youths to help improve their shooting. I also have helped quite a few shooters , especially new shooters with their shooting both at my present club, and my previous club. I also volunteered to take both AO members, as well as members of our dog club either skeet shooting or sporting clay shooting. I have also taken out AO members to hunt birds over my dog. So it's not as if I haven't made an effort to either introduce people to wingshooting or to improve their shooting. And if someone is interested in improving their shooting, our club does allow people to shoot as guests twice to allow them to see if they want ro become members, and we are very patient with new shooters. We actually had a lady out Sunday, and she had a great time while shooting skeet for the first time. As to shot selection, choke selection etc. There are already hundreds of articles online, so I don't see the point in posting more here.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you missed it, I did post that there was still time to work on your wingshooting before the season begins, to encourage people to get out and do some shooting before the season. As for helping people with their wingshooting, I did volunteer to run an introduction to skeet for youths to help improve their shooting. I also have helped quite a few shooters , especially new shooters with their shooting both at my present club, and my previous club. I also volunteered to take both AO members, as well as members of our dog club either skeet shooting or sporting clay shooting. I have also taken out AO members to hunt birds over my dog. So it's not as if I haven't made an effort to either introduce people to wingshooting or to improve their shooting. And if someone is interested in improving their shooting, our club does allow people to shoot as guests twice to allow them to see if they want ro become members, and we are very patient with new shooters. We actually had a lady out Sunday, and she had a great time while shooting skeet for the first time. As to shot selection, choke selection etc. There are already hundreds of articles online, so I don't see the point in posting more here.

But you allude to none of that in your opening post which is why we question its purpose. The tone was quickly struck between you and fisheo that if you were not shooting 75 to 80% then you were unethical if you continue shooting. That anyone shooting less than that should go back to the range and not go back into the field until they are shooting that ratio.

The whole thing comes off as sanctimonious and condescending to those who do not hunt the way you do. Your "facts" of two wounded birds to every recovered one among those who miss more is simply conjecture. The whole opening post essentially says "this is what I believe is right and I challenge you to prove me wrong". The way you ask the questions is akin to asking " why do you beat your wife"? Supposition is made in the question itself and no one can answer it without agreeing with you or looking bad. But hey that's just me and I could be wrong.

[angery jonn]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I would like to see you go 50/50 on pointed birds, when half of them are in the timber. And that is where you will find many of the released pheasants a day or two after they are released. and they have been pushed out of the open fields. I have been in brush so thick that I couldn't swing a gun getting to my dog on point, when a bird flushed. Sharptailed grouse and Hungarian partridge on open fields often provide easier shots. Then again, the people that chase the release truck and shoot most of their birds on the ground, or sitting in trees should easily go 50/50. yet they don't for some reason.

Release sites... the struggle is real

[fish_e_o]

Originally Posted by sjemac

But you allude to none of that in your opening post which is why we question its purpose. The tone was quickly struck between you and fisheo that if you were not shooting 75 to 80% then you were unethical if you continue shooting. That anyone shooting less than that should go back to the range and not go back into the field until they are shooting that ratio.

unethical? perhaps. why should we practice getting better at anything? why don't we all go out and just be terrible shots? is poor shooting more acceptable with shotguns than it is with archery or rifle?

if i'm hunting with someone and they're shooting 10% i'm going to strongly suggest they practice a whole lot more before they come out with me again.

if someone is in the 50-60% range i would suggest they practice some more but still go hunting and hopefully it'll come to them.

[sjemac]

Originally Posted by fish_e_o

unethical? perhaps. why should we practice getting better at anything? why don't we all go out and just be terrible shots? is poor shooting more acceptable with shotguns than it is with archery or rifle?

if i'm hunting with someone and they're shooting 10% i'm going to strongly suggest they practice a whole lot more before they come out with me again.

if someone is in the 50-60% range i would suggest they practice some more but still go hunting and hopefully it'll come to them.

Why is your benchmark of 75% + ethical then? Why is that good enough but 60% not?

And obviously poor shooting with a shotgun is more acceptable. We don't shoot at running big game but we do shoot at flying birds. To truly be ethical, should we not be shooting them while they are sitting and still?

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by MK2750

What is acceptable does vary from person to person and is frankly none of your concern. For every hunter you smugly turn your nose up at because they do not meet your perceived standards, there is 100 people that turn their noses up at you for hunting in the first place.

I am again baffled by the purpose of your thread. Are you concerned about the happiness of others and want to add to their enjoyment afield or do you just have a problem with people doing something different than yourself? Are you worried about the welfare and suffering of the poor birds or do you feel you are missing out on a few more birds for yourself?

Killing is a messy business and it is not ever going to be any different. The bird population is healthy in spite of more "incompetent" people afield and in fact when it comes to your beloved released pheasant, it is because of more people afield.

There has never been a person that missed a shot that didn't wish they had not. It is human nature to try to better results each time we engage in any activity as it increases enjoyment. Your pedestal preaching about how great and ethical you are compared to all others isn't going to change that. Threads about another's short comings and injuring animals is fuel for the antis, nothing more and certainly nothing helpful.

If you do ever feel like making a change for the positive in the life of other outdoorsmen, perhaps you could start a thread with some tips on wing shooting or alike. How to judge range in the field, how to lead and follow through, building a stance from the ground up automatically on a flush, shotgun types, choke selection, shot sizes,,, you know,,, like helpful stuff.

Agreed

[fish_e_o]

Originally Posted by sjemac

Why is your benchmark of 75% + ethical then? Why is that good enough but 60% not?

And obviously poor shooting with a shotgun is more acceptable. We don't shoot at running big game but we do shoot at flying birds. To truly be ethical, should we not be shooting them while they are sitting and still?

i would say a higher percentage is safer. i don't trust that the guy shooting 10% is aiming every shot he takes. in such a case i would say a person who would pick and choose their shot and be hesitant to shoot is more aware of their surroundings and careful with their shots.

the guy who rotates 360 degrees chasing birds with shot and missing every shot is not a guy coming out in the field with me and i would say that is unethical.

feel free to hunt with whoever you want to though

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by MK2750

It is human nature to try to better results each time we engage in any activity as it increases enjoyment. .

I was with you 100% up to that point. I know people who don't follow that rule. You know them too, at least casually, if you are honest with yourself. They never go to a range, never break a single clay. I think that was the OP's original point. A challenge to improve. I didn't get that he was criticizing responsible sportsmen and women who miss sometimes (and sometimes more than "sometimes"). Heck, that's everyone.


I know I personally will never have to endure the boredom of killing everything I shoot at. And I have no idea what an acceptable percentage would be... sort of depends on the conditions. So I guess I'm with you on that one.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by sjemac

But you allude to none of that in your opening post which is why we question its purpose. The tone was quickly struck between you and fisheo that if you were not shooting 75 to 80% then you were unethical if you continue shooting. That anyone shooting less than that should go back to the range and not go back into the field until they are shooting that ratio.

The whole thing comes off as sanctimonious and condescending to those who do not hunt the way you do. Your "facts" of two wounded birds to every recovered one among those who miss more is simply conjecture. The whole opening post essentially says "this is what I believe is right and I challenge you to prove me wrong". The way you ask the questions is akin to asking " why do you beat your wife"? Supposition is made in the question itself and no one can answer it without agreeing with you or looking bad. But hey that's just me and I could be wrong.

If you shoot fifty shots and drop ten birds, is it logical to assume that the other forty shots were clean misses? Or is it more likely that some of those forty shots wounded birds that you did not recover? As to whether it is five or ten or fifteen wounded birds, a person can't prove one way or another, but from many years of shooting thousands of shotshells per year, I have seen that most misses are the result of not enough lead. That being the case, I am inclined to believe that for every kill, and every miss, there will be a shot that is just behind enough to put pellets in the rear half of the bird, which often results in the bird flying away , and not dropping close by. And when people start shooting clays and they realize why they are missing, they usually are able to improve their shooting quite quickly with some practise. It's not like everyone improves at the same rate, or that they reach the same level of proficiency, but with practise, most people do improve. Even losing every fourth bird is a huge improvement over losing every second bird. The point is that some people realize that they can improve and they take action to make it happen, while other people just carry more ammunition, so that they don't run out. We took one person out a couple of times, because he was always pestering us to take him, but after the second time, he shot so poorly that we gave him the option of coming out to shoot clays, or he wouldn't be hunting with us again. He always had excuses, and finally when we were about to head out for the first time that season, he declared that shooting clays was a waste of his time, and he wasn't going to waste his time. The result was that he didn't hunt with us again. Yet another couple of people that went out with were so frustrated with missing birds, that they made the time to come out on a regular basis to shoot clays. The end result was that they missed far fewer birds, and they enjoyed the hunts much more.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you shoot fifty shots and drop ten birds, is it logical to assume that the other forty shots were clean misses? Or is it more likely that some of those forty shots wounded birds that you did not recover? As to whether it is five or ten or fifteen wounded birds, a person can't prove one way or another, but from many years of shooting thousands of shotshells per year, I have seen that most misses are the result of not enough lead. That being the case, I am inclined to believe that for every kill, and every miss, there will be a shot that is just behind enough to put pellets in the rear half of the bird, which often results in the bird flying away , and not dropping close by. And when people start shooting clays and they realize why they are missing, they usually are able to improve their shooting quite quickly with some practise. It's not like everyone improves at the same rate, or that they reach the same level of proficiency, but with practise, most people do improve. Even losing every fourth bird is a huge improvement over losing every second bird. The point is that some people realize that they can improve and they take action to make it happen, while other people just carry more ammunition, so that they don't run out. We took one person out a couple of times, because he was always pestering us to take him, but after the second time, he shot so poorly that we gave him the option of coming out to shoot clays, or he wouldn't be hunting with us again. He always had excuses, and finally when we were about to head out for the first time that season, he declared that shooting clays was a waste of his time, and he wasn't going to waste his time. The result was that he didn't hunt with us again. Yet another couple of people that went out with were so frustrated with missing birds, that they made the time to come out on a regular basis to shoot clays. The end result was that they missed far fewer birds, and they enjoyed the hunts much more.

What would be a decent average shooting Sporting Clays ?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Salavee

What would be a decent average shooting Sporting Clays ?

That depends on the course, but any remotely decent wingshooter should make 60%. It takes a good shooter to make 80%. In skeet a half decent shooter will break 70%, and a good shooter will shoot 90% plus with most gauges. The scores for trap will be similar to skeet, but in trap all targets are going away from the shooter, so it is the least like actual bird hunting. Sporting clays most closely replicates shooting actual birds, as the shot angles, and the speed of the clays change gesture with every station. As well, the people looking after the field make regular changes to the course, so when you think that you have figured out a target, it is often not the same when you shoot it again.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by fish_e_o

i don't trust that the guy shooting 10% is aiming every shot he takes

I hate to go a different direction but aiming every shot may be a clue to why he is only 10%.