Novice Question- Shooting ducks on the water

Hello!
This is my first post here. I live in NW Ontario, and I'm "brand new" to waterfowl hunting, and also to this forum; in fact, despite approaching my fortieth birthday, I'm actually fairly new to hunting-in-general, and I have MANY questions, ...and the one that has come up most frequently has been---

"What's the hard scoop– (the *reasoned reason*) –on shooting/not shooting ducks on the water?"

See, as a completely uninitiated (wannabe) waterfowl hunter, I have very little of my own experience to draw on, thus my "knowledge" on the topic is mostly pedantic, and based mainly from the experience of others.

So far, my own practical experience–(grouse hunting, using .22lr and .410), –has lead me to take the safest, cleanest (head)shot I can manage– in the interest of minimizing suffering to the bird, and preserving the edible portions of the bird –and if such a shot doesn't realistically present itself, I likely wouldn't attempt *any* shot.

*But* –I recognize waterfowl hunting will be an entirely different gig, using a different firearm (12ga.) -in a different environment... so, while I may envision the safest/cleanest (head) shot is still likely going to be taken while the bird is relatively motionless on the water, I have to admit that such a notion may not actually be true in practice. ...Especially because the general wisdom (seems) to be commonly against it.

I've read MANY online articles on the topic, expressing mixed opinions...but I'm really more interested in the science...the actual *facts* of the matter.

I would (sincerely) very much appreciate your experienced opinions and advice, but most of all -- your reasoning. (Thank you!)

Just to muddy that water...What do you call "On the water"? Sleeping with it's head under it's wing? Paddling away from you but just will not fly? Running across the water trying to take off? Jumping off the water but not yet in full flight?

If you watch any hunting shows( take with a grain of salt, and some disbelief ) you will mostly see birds being shoot from a fair distance( really not that far out just the camera making it look like 60 yards), with all the birds in full afterburner mode, or the classic cupped wings landing pattern. That would be nice, but many times you don't get perfect passes, or landing approaches.

If you have decoys out and there is a bird that swims into them, that is flaring the rest what do you do? It may not fly no matter what you do. Should you sit and let it paddle around the decoys and flare off birds all day or do you smack it on the water?

Its actually quite a bit harder to kill a duck on the water. They are well protected by their wings. It may seem easy to get a head shot, but its not always the case.

A live duck in your decoys will not flare ducks, in fact, it will attract ducks.

S.

I suppose what I mean by "on the water", would be- not flying, generally still, offering a realistic opportunity to a potential headshot, within a reasonable range to pull off such a shot.

These opportunities (I suppose?) may be so rare in themselves, that THAT itself may be the rationale for shooting on the fly...(a better, more frequently available opportunity for a quick kill, as the second reply suggested.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinker

Its actually quite a bit harder to kill a duck on the water. They are well protected by their wings. It may seem easy to get a head shot, but its not always the case.

A live duck in your decoys will not flare ducks, in fact, it will attract ducks.

S.

---

A live decoy? Don't let the CO see that. As for flaring birds...All depends on how it's acting, what it is ETC. Mallards and other Puddle ducks don't like some divers and vice vesa.

There is nothing "illegal" about shooting a "sitting" duck or goose whether it be on the water or ground. Some say it's not sporting that waterfowl hunting is a wing-shooting sport. I say take the most lethal/ethical shot you can. If you've set up a decoy spread or done your scouting and found a place where ducks and geese land on the water or field and if you can get yourself hidden well enough that they will land within your gun range then you do whatever you think is best. I know what I would do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

A live decoy? Don't let the CO see that. As for flaring birds...All depends on how it's acting, what it is ETC. Mallards and other Puddle ducks don't like some divers and vice vesa.

---

Whats a CO going to do?

Bottom line is you can legally shoot a bird on the water. It up to the hunter to decide what he wants to do after its landed, or swam into range.

I've shot them on the water, but they're easier to kill in the air.

S.

When I was first starting out Duck hunting, I would shoot ducks on the water from time to time. I would suggest that you aim low on the bird (waterline) as the shot will spread. This will increase you chances of hitting the duck with a lethal amount of shot. Flying birds are better to shoot at, as it is easier to get shot at the unprotected areas of the duck/goose or to break a wing.
Good luck.

Thanks all, –for the thoughtful replies! Appreciated!

...Enormously looking forward to the autumn, but I'm gonna relish this spring & summer first.

Merci!

I find a duck much easier to kill in the air ... we are at the mercy of the pattern to kill them on the water, the kill zone becomes very small with just the head and neck, the back is very tough and hard to get pellets through to the lungs considering the angle of the shot relative to the back ... a duck in the air has a much larger kill zone, it is a matter of hitting the bird, which is harder on a moving target than a sitting one.

Geese are different for me ... the head and necks are much larger ... if I have a choice, I like to let geese land and line up the head and necks to kill as many as possible on the first shot ... one pellet in the head or neck will often kill them, but I have cleaned many many geese that have chest wounds where the pellet did not make it through all the meat, bone and organs to make it to the heart or lungs ... a goose body is tough and needs a heavy hit or close range.

If you do shoot a duck on the water (such as finishing a cripple) I find with the steel shot I finish more if I aim slightly low ... this allows the top of the pattern to be on the head/neck, but also the lower end of the pattern to "skip" off the water and also hit the head ... steel shot seems to skip more than the old lead shot did.

Welcome to the Forum!

I once watched 2 guys fire 6 shots at a bunch of ducks in their decoys - all the ducks flew off! Much better to shoot them while they're flying.

First off, if i have a duck swimming in my decoys ive always let them swim around (unless im one away from my limit). We call them " Decoy Roy". I find they DO draw in the birds. Its making ripples and splashes in the water which makes your raft of dekes look more real. As for birds not liking to land with a different species of birds, sure it happen. Some ducks can be picky. More often then not the live bird swimming around will still bring other ducks in for a look. Hopefully in range of your shot.
Second, like has been said before, a duck on the water is a harder target. Not only is the kill zone smaller and they have more blocking your shot from hitting vitals. I found the one major factor that makes it harder to hit is the waves on the water. Unless its a calm day, which can really suck for hunting waterfowl, you will have to time your shot with the waves. A wave will act like a sponge on your shot. The energy behind the pellets is lost, fast, as it trys to push through a wave. Even if it makes it to the duck it will just tickle it.
Good luck this year on the waterfowl. Its a lot of fun. An added tip, off topic, is dont sky blast. Its not worth the trouble of racing after a cripple or worst losing one completely.

If I'm going to shoot a duck on the water I'll load a 3" #3 or #4. I can honestly say I've never had a problem killing a duck quickly on the water using smaller shot with a 3" at reasonable ranges.

Water shot birds have virtually no pellets in the breast. So, in my opinion, they are better eating ! There's nothing finer than a water shot green head !! Live wild ducks left to swim around in your dekes does not constitute an offence with respect to live decoy regulations!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinker

Whats a CO going to do?

---

HUNTING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT

• 15. (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) and section 23.1, no person shall hunt a migratory bird
  
  
  • (a)
    (b) by the use or aid of live birds, including non-migratory birds;
    (c)
    
    
  • (d)
    
    
  • (e)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JayStyles

First off, if i have a duck swimming in my decoys ive always let them swim around (unless im one away from my limit). We call them " Decoy Roy".

---

You may want to think of 15(1)(b) since you are using them with intent to attract birds.
HUNTING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT

15. (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) and section 23.1, no person shall hunt a migratory bird

• (a) except with a long bow and arrow or with a shotgun not larger than number 10 gauge;
• (b) by the use or aid of live birds, including non-migratory birds;

Snowwalker

The intent of the law I think was to stop hunters from including live birds in there spreads years back when market hunting was taking place, it was common place to have birds staked to the ground. These birds were not wild, I am very confident that having a wild bird today landing in your spread while others birds continue to work your spread will not get you into any sort of trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

HUNTING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT

• 15. (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) and section 23.1, no person shall hunt a migratory bird
  
  • (a)
    (b) by the use or aid of live birds, including non-migratory birds;
    (c)
  • (d)
  • (e)

---

As already stated this is to stop using birds that are tethered for decoys the way the hunters did years ago. They would put a line on the ducks leg and put a weight on the line to keep the ducks in the area. No CO is going to charge you for a decoyed duck swimming freely in your decoys.

back to the original question, when I use to sneek boat hunt we would always try our best to get a couple birds lined up and take them before they jumped. That was with lead shot tho. As for geese I had no problem ground swatting one if it was a single that came in and stayed for abit then got weary and was ready to take flight. Usually would leave the landed birds for the last shot and start at the landing in flight birds first then by the time you fired twice the birds that were on the ground are taking flight and still in range.

My personal opinion do what you feel is best I take most of my shots with bird on the wing but I will takem on the water if the opportunity arises. As for the live decoy debate I feel that you did not put that live duck in your spread thus making it legal to leave him there to invite his friends. Very similar to not being aloud to bait migratory birds and turkeys. But you can hunt over spilt corn beans ect.

If it's meat you want, you will save a lot of time and money going to the grocery store.
The hunt is decoying them in and hitting them with a shotgun in the way a shotgun is meant to be used.
That is fun.
I don't care what anyone choses to do. Just my opinion.

I concurr with many opinions here but most of all Labber. Way cheaper to buy your food but nowhere near as much fun ! At the LPWMU (Long Point Waterfowl Mgmt. Unit) the yearly average ducks per hunter per day is 2.4 (approx.) so if you can better that by popping one on the water .... go for it ! As said ; shoot just below the bird and let some of the shot "skip" up into the head you'll end with a nice roasting bird that way. Warning ! Shooting your decoys can be counter productive.... wait for a clear shot ! LoL !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandwagon

Snowwalker

The intent of the law I think was to stop hunters from including live birds in there spreads years back when market hunting was taking place, it was common place to have birds staked to the ground. These birds were not wild, I am very confident that having a wild bird today landing in your spread while others birds continue to work your spread will not get you into any sort of trouble.

---

Ok guys I can't quote multi post right now. SO please bear with me.

I know about the market hunting thing. There is also people that will leave a cripple swimming around instead of finishing it, knowing that it will attract other birds.

Now as a CO makes his/her rounds they see a set of decoy on the pond and one or more live birds swimming around. As he watches you and your buddies hunting no one swats the bird and wonders if you may be letting a cripple suffer. The CO walks down to the blinds and asks questions. Now jf it is a diver and your decoyes are mallards I am sure you can just say you don't want divers.
On the other hand if it's all puddle ducks and the live bird would NOT put you over a limit( Black limit for example ) it would be hard to convince someone you are not leaving the bird there with the intent to use it to attract others. Which one of the posts here said that they in fact do.

Now if the CO TELLS you to swat and retrieve it, you had better hope to heck that the reason it was not flying was because it is in fact crippled.

The habit of leaving a cripple to swim was so common in one of the areas I hunted, that the DNR ran stings. I mean they had guys hunt with the people and then give evidence in court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Ok guys I can't quote multi post right now. SO please bear with me.

I know about the market hunting thing. There is also people that will leave a cripple swimming around instead of finishing it, knowing that it will attract other birds.

Now as a CO makes his/her rounds they see a set of decoy on the pond and one or more live birds swimming around. As he watches you and your buddies hunting no one swats the bird and wonders if you may be letting a cripple suffer. The CO walks down to the blinds and asks questions. Now jf it is a diver and your decoyes are mallards I am sure you can just say you don't want divers.
On the other hand if it's all puddle ducks and the live bird would NOT put you over a limit( Black limit for example ) it would be hard to convince someone you are not leaving the bird there with the intent to use it to attract others. Which one of the posts here said that they in fact do.

Now if the CO TELLS you to swat and retrieve it, you had better hope to heck that the reason it was not flying was because it is in fact crippled.

The habit of leaving a cripple to swim was so common in one of the areas I hunted, that the DNR ran stings. I mean they had guys hunt with the people and then give evidence in court.

---

Man, some of the stuff I read here blows my mind. I can't believe people who think like this actually have a hunting license. Where do you come up with this stuff???






S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinker

Man, some of the stuff I read here blows my mind. I can't believe people who think like this actually have a hunting license. Where do you come up with this stuff !






S.

---

NO kidding !!!!! Letting a wounded bird swim around without retrieving it is a totally different issue, and an offence I might add !
That section makes it an offence to pen up or stake out birds, wild or not, for the purpose of calling or attracting other fowl.......as previously posted.

Google "Call Ducks"

They were bred to be used as live decoys.

Birds landing in your decoys and staying there is not a live decoy it is a wild bird that has not taken off. If you are shooting other birds and that one is sticking around it is not your fault it is that stupid.

As to the OP, shoot when you have a save ethical shot, I shoot grouse on the ground and I would be given a lot of flak by some on here for it. When I go grouse hunting and I hike about 5 miles in a day and only see 1 or 2 grouse you better believe I will shoot them on the ground or sitting in a tree.

We usually wait for geese to land in the spread to bring in other geese before opening up, no use flaring a big flock for a pair of birds that dropped in early.

dead is dead personally I see little difference to the bird, it is destined for the pot. The way I look at it is if you can land them consistently you are on your game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

You may want to think of 15(1)(b) since you are using them with intent to attract birds.
HUNTING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT

15. (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) and section 23.1, no person shall hunt a migratory bird

• (a) except with a long bow and arrow or with a shotgun not larger than number 10 gauge;
• (b) by the use or aid of live birds, including non-migratory birds;

---

See this only applies if the bird is restrained or restricted from leaving. A wild unrestricted bird swimming in your decoys doesn't mean your hunting with it ....means you done a dam good job setting up your hide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Ok guys I can't quote multi post right now. SO please bear with me.

I know about the market hunting thing. There is also people that will leave a cripple swimming around instead of finishing it, knowing that it will attract other birds.

Now as a CO makes his/her rounds they see a set of decoy on the pond and one or more live birds swimming around. As he watches you and your buddies hunting no one swats the bird and wonders if you may be letting a cripple suffer. The CO walks down to the blinds and asks questions. Now jf it is a diver and your decoyes are mallards I am sure you can just say you don't want divers.
On the other hand if it's all puddle ducks and the live bird would NOT put you over a limit( Black limit for example ) it would be hard to convince someone you are not leaving the bird there with the intent to use it to attract others. Which one of the posts here said that they in fact do.

Now if the CO TELLS you to swat and retrieve it, you had better hope to heck that the reason it was not flying was because it is in fact crippled.

The habit of leaving a cripple to swim was so common in one of the areas I hunted, that the DNR ran stings. I mean they had guys hunt with the people and then give evidence in court.

---

The troll train is now boarding!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinker

Man, some of the stuff I read here blows my mind. I can't believe people who think like this actually have a hunting license. Where do you come up with this stuff???

S.

---

From sitting in court as a witness for the DNR. See last post about DNR running stings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

From sitting in court as a witness for the DNR. See last post about DNR running stings.

---

Thing is the charge would be failure to immediately retrieve (if they can prove you shot it) not hunting with a live decoy if the bird was not place by you. To state otherwise your story belongs at scuttlebutt lodge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

Thing is the charge would be failure to immediately retrieve (if they can prove you shot it) not hunting with a live decoy if the bird was not place by you. To state otherwise your story belongs at scuttlebutt lodge.

---

If a hunting group makes it a practice to allow cripples to swim for the expressed purpose of having them attract other birds, you would also be charge for using live decoys. The trick is to have a witness that will swear in court that it is how the group hunts.

What better witness then a licensed guide.

Yes the failure charge would also be one of the charges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

If a hunting group makes it a practice to allow cripples to swim for the expressed purpose of having them attract other birds, you would also be charge for using live decoys. The trick is to have a witness that will swear in court that it is how the group hunts.

What better witness then a licensed guide.
Yes the failure charge would also be one of the charges.

---

In court that would float like a lead balloon,as the regulations state;

Any person who kills, cripples or injures a migratory game bird shall immediately make all reasonable efforts to retrieve the bird and if it is still alive, immediately kill and include it in his daily bag limit.

I doubt very much that "a licensed guide " would want to have himself charged , wind up in court and pay a substantial fine and loose his business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

If a hunting group makes it a practice to allow cripples to swim for the expressed purpose of having them attract other birds, you would also be charge for using live decoys. The trick is to have a witness that will swear in court that it is how the group hunts.

What better witness then a licensed guide.

Yes the failure charge would also be one of the charges.

---

Not a chance !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

I doubt very much that "a licensed guide " would want to have himself charged , wind up in court and pay a substantial fine and loose his business.

---

You have it backwards......DNR asks guy to join hunting group to help convict them by providing eye witness accounts of their actions. Said informant has protection from charges. Saw it more then a few times. Deer hunters, bear hunters, waterfowl.

I think Snowwalker should of started his own thread. Your bringing this one totally off topic. It started with shooting birds on the water and now you have it about leaving cripples, to having stings setup by the law. Back to the topic asked, if you have the chance to shoot a bird on the water, in range, and want to then do it. If you dont want to then dont. If you dont want to then yell at the bird and wave your arms until it flys up then shoot it. A dead duck in your bag is always a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

In court that would float like a lead balloon,as the regulations state;

Any person who kills, cripples or injures a migratory game bird shall immediately make all reasonable efforts to retrieve the bird and if it is still alive, immediately kill and include it in his daily bag limit.

I doubt very much that "a licensed guide " would want to have himself charged , wind up in court and pay a substantial fine and loose his business.

---

Jaycee has quoted the statement that is the law.

I don't shoot birds on the water, neither does my partner. That's our choice. If they are cripples then definitely yes and as quickly as I can before I send the dog....this is completely different.

Silly argument about live/wild birds in your decoys as to be construed as hunting with live decoys and therefore an offense. Now if several teal flew in and decided to swim, we'd probably pass since we're after mallards/blacks etc. So yup they'd not be shot and are free to leave at any point, certainly not restrained as a live decoy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Ok guys I can't quote multi post right now. SO please bear with me.

I know about the market hunting thing. There is also people that will leave a cripple swimming around instead of finishing it, knowing that it will attract other birds.

Now as a CO makes his/her rounds they see a set of decoy on the pond and one or more live birds swimming around. As he watches you and your buddies hunting no one swats the bird and wonders if you may be letting a cripple suffer. The CO walks down to the blinds and asks questions. Now jf it is a diver and your decoyes are mallards I am sure you can just say you don't want divers.
On the other hand if it's all puddle ducks and the live bird would NOT put you over a limit( Black limit for example ) it would be hard to convince someone you are not leaving the bird there with the intent to use it to attract others. Which one of the posts here said that they in fact do.

Now if the CO TELLS you to swat and retrieve it, you had better hope to heck that the reason it was not flying was because it is in fact crippled.

The habit of leaving a cripple to swim was so common in one of the areas I hunted, that the DNR ran stings. I mean they had guys hunt with the people and then give evidence in court.

---

You are really overthinking things dude!

I've generally received what I was looking for through the initial question in the thread; I don't really mind if it "derails" ...such is the nature of dynamic & evolving conversation.

Thanks again for your responses folks. —Genuinely appreciated!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayardia

I've generally received what I was looking for through the initial question in the thread; I don't really mind if it "derails" ...such is the nature of dynamic & evolving conversation.

Thanks again for your responses folks. —Genuinely appreciated!

---

Well sorry to take it on a hard left anyways.
Sinker said a livs bird in the decoys was good. I asked if he was talking about a live decoy. He made the comment "What's CO going to do?" Insinuating there was no rule against it.

So there is the fork in the road. Or off the cliff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diverduck

You are really overthinking things dude!

---

Not overthinking anything. Talking from experince and court records.

It comes down to INTENT. If the CO can prove that you do not shot cripples so that they can be used to attact more birds, well "You can tell your story to the Judge". It will not be the only charge you get but it only takes a conviction on one of the charges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Well sorry to take it on a hard left anyways.
Sinker said a livs bird in the decoys was good. I asked if he was talking about a live decoy. He made the comment "What's CO going to do?" Insinuating there was no rule against it.

So there is the fork in the road. Or off the cliff.

---

Try actually reading Sinker's post. Never does he mention anything about leaving cripples in the decoys, but live, unharmed birds that have landed.

-Nick

You are very much overthinking things...... There's no reasonable interpretation of this law to insinuate that a live bird landing in your decoys could get you a charge for using a live decoy.... Nowhere did anyone say anything about leaving a cripple.... Most cripples I encounter are either heading as fast as they can away from my decoys or diving into the water, or somehow unnaturally flipping around on the water with a broken wing or something.... Doesn't sound like good of a decoy to me

as to the op. I swat birds on the water if they land since to me you have already done the job of decoying the birds, and it's a higher percentage hit. I do like shooting them in the air when possible.
there is an advantage also with letting them land if more are coming in behind than once the second group is landing you start shooting and the original group takes off just in time for your second or third shot, and as they struggle to take off they are easier to hit.just my thoughts....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprite

Try actually reading Sinker's post. Never does he mention anything about leaving cripples in the decoys, but live, unharmed birds that have landed.

-Nick

---

I asked if he meant a live decoy and his responce was "What's a CO going to do?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinker

A live duck in your decoys will not flare ducks, in fact, it will attract ducks.

S.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

A live decoy? Don't let the CO see that. As for flaring birds...All depends on how it's acting, what it is ETC. Mallards and other Puddle ducks don't like some divers and vice vesa.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

I asked if he meant a live decoy and his responce was "What's a CO going to do?"

---

Never once did I even hint the mention of live decoys. This topic was about shooting ducks on the water. You somehow spun it all around into using live decoys, and cripples not being retrieved.

I can't count the number of times I've had live ducks pitch right in the spread, and we left them be. The may have been mergies, buffies, or goldeneyes, and we just didn't want them, so leave them be, take some photos etc. Those are NOT live decoys......or cripples for that matter.

Anyways, water swat them if you want, its legal, so its a decision only the hunter can make. I do it now and then, but prefer to put them up first, or shoot before they are pitched.

S.

I said that I have experance of people being charged for the use of live decoys because they made a practice of leaving cripples to swim around so that they would attact more birds. It was not the only charge but it was one of them. Then a couple posters started on how birds in your decoy is not illegal. It's not, but if you and everyone your hunting with has decided to leave cripples to swim and act as live decoys...well that is illegal in more then a few ways.


If a cop pulls you over for doing 50 in a 20 zone your going to get the speeding ticket, but if you happened to have done it a school zone with kids every where. Do you think he/she may tack on "reckless", "undo care", "unsafe operation of a vehicle".

They may not all stick, but just being charged will make things "fun".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

I said that I have experance of people being charged for the use of live decoys because they made a practice of leaving cripples to swim around so that they would attact more birds. It was not the only charge but it was one of them. Then a couple posters started on how birds in your decoy is not illegal. It's not, but if you and everyone your hunting with has decided to leave cripples to swim and act as live decoys...well that is illegal in more then a few ways.


If a cop pulls you over for doing 50 in a 20 zone your going to get the speeding ticket, but if you happened to have done it a school zone with kids every where. Do you think he/she may tack on "reckless", "undo care", "unsafe operation of a vehicle".

They may not all stick, but just being charged will make things "fun".

---

No, they most certainly would not !!!!

Wow I'll get the popcorn for this one as this has gone way south.

Anyways to the original poster, it boils down to what one feels is the most ethical shot and quickest kill.

Bottom line...................water swatted birds taste the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

You have it backwards......DNR asks guy to join hunting group to help convict them by providing eye witness accounts of their actions. Said informant has protection from charges. Saw it more then a few times. Deer hunters, bear hunters, waterfowl.

---

A LEO cannot ask someone to do something as an informant. Asking a person to do something makes that person an agent for the police and is a completely different ball game than being an informant.

Maybe you are referring to something many, many years ago. But the way you are interpreting the law now is incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brent

A LEO cannot ask someone to do something as an informant. Asking a person to do something makes that person an agent for the police and is a completely different ball game than being an informant.

Maybe you are referring to something many, many years ago. But the way you are interpreting the law now is incorrect.

---

Not here or there any more. But you are correct, people doing the hunting with the group where under cover DNR agents.
Reports of the groups actions and practices came from reliable sources and DNR setup stings. Not just for leaving cripples as decoys but a whole laundry list of things. Many of the people were charged for things they did well deer hunting, as well as duck hunting, fishing ETC.

If someone wants they can go look it up.. Early 90's NB. Convictions are all public record.


When I say they where leaving cripple to act as decoys....well they were the ONLY decoys these guy had on the pond.
Five to ten birds on the water not counting what was in the game bag. They even left birds over night so they could come back in the morning and they would have decoys. Any that died over night were just thrown in the bush.

Not a normal group of hunters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Not overthinking anything. Talking from experince and court records.

It comes down to INTENT. If the CO can prove that you do not shot cripples so that they can be used to attact more birds, well "You can tell your story to the Judge". It will not be the only charge you get but it only takes a conviction on one of the charges.

---

Cool story bro.

Snowwalker you seem like the kind of guy that is someone on an automobile forum posted a question asking what the top speed of a Bugatti Veyron is you would reply by saying....What difference does it make, the max speed on any Canadian highway is 100 km/h as stated in the highway traffic act section.....blah, blah, blah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brent

A LEO cannot ask someone to do something as an informant. Asking a person to do something makes that person an agent for the police and is a completely different ball game than being an informant.

Maybe you are referring to something many, many years ago. But the way you are interpreting the law now is incorrect.

---

I had been staying out of this because I'm by no means a legal expert. But that was my thought too when I read this. A LEO cannot ask one to participate in an illegal activity and then grant immunity. Extrapolate this out to a murder and see if it still makes sense. And if the 'informant' participates in activities directed by the LEOS which are illegal is this not entrapment?

I know a guy leaving a bar after a couple to many, he was told by a cop to move his car as he could not leave it overnight where it was, as soon as he started the car to move it he was busted for impaired, he had no intention of driving it home ,or even moving it till he was told to do so, by the officer. He was convicted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

I know a guy leaving a bar after a couple to many, he was told by a cop to move his car as he could not leave it overnight where it was, as soon as he started the car to move it he was busted for impaired, he had no intention of driving it home ,or even moving it till he was told to do so, by the officer. He was convicted.

---

Were you there to witness this or is this just hearsay from am intoxicate friend?

I was not there ,I had left earlier , but another friend was there to see it all. He was the one who was going to give the ride home, and was getting his car when the drinking friend was asked by the officer to move his car. He even went to court to explain the situation but the charges stuck anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

I know a guy leaving a bar after a couple to many, he was told by a cop to move his car as he could not leave it overnight where it was, as soon as he started the car to move it he was busted for impaired, he had no intention of driving it home ,or even moving it till he was told to do so, by the officer. He was convicted.

---

I guess your buddy should have said no I can't move my car I'm drunk.

Ducks on the water I do some jump shooting and I'm not that graceful so they always pop up on me. I have never shot a duck on the water but would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LondonDave

Snowwalker you seem like the kind of guy that is someone on an automobile forum posted a question asking what the top speed of a Bugatti Veyron is you would reply by saying....What difference does it make, the max speed on any Canadian highway is 100 km/h as stated in the highway traffic act section.....blah, blah, blah.

---

Not really. But if I asked you "You didn't park in under the no parking sign did you?" and you answer "What's cop going to do." I would have in the past said "You'll get a ticket maybe even towed. I have seen it happen before." Now.......I guess I will walk away and make a call to parking enforcement.

Don't think I will be trying to help or warn anyone about anything, just keep my mouth shut and make a phone call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprite

My thoughts exactly my man!

Thread end.

---

Ditto !:goodstuff: