The reason shotguns are required for turkeys in many jurisdictions has nothing to do with it being required to kill a turkey and everything to do with safety. Turkey hunting is done while wearing full camo which makes other hunters hard to see. Shotguns limit the range of the shot thereby reducing the risk.
Where is your proof for that statement? Full camo is not a prerequisite or requirement for turkey hunting.
I never said that camo was
required to be sucessful; it just improves the odds.
Regardless there is a very good chance that there will be hunters wearing full camo in the woods during turkey season, hence the safety regs.
Natman,
My comment addressed the camo, because full camo is not required by law to wear it to hunt turkey. Therefore, it is not a reason to consider. What I should have said is I disagree with the assumption that shotguns somehow make it safer to engage in the activity. I am not trying to denigrate your position, but I feel strongly that there is no merit in your argument. I know what I say is not going to change your mind, and what you say won't change my mind, but I must continue. I have always had the choice to choose a rifle or shotgun for turkey and I don't want that to change.
So, I disagree with the statement that shotguns are safer than a rifle to hunt turkey. For example, shotguns are required in some counties in Virginia for deer hunting where the terrain is very flat. The concern is the bullet may travel too great a distance. Some of those counties allow use of a rifle for deer hunting if you are in a tree stand of a certain height. I will agree the effective killing range of a rifle is greater than that of a shotgun, but it does not make it safer to use when hunting. A rifleman needs to be concerned with his backstop since many bullets pass through a prey animal i.e. squirrel, rabbit, deer even if a lethal hit is made. My questions to you is, "Can you account for every pellet which leaves the muzzle of your shotgun on their way to their intended target?" Misuse of either can injure or kill someone.
I work for the Commonwealth of Virginia and I have a job where I do enforce regulations although not for VGIF. The one thing I have learned is such a law is usually in place for some other reason. Like another poster said previously the National Wild Turkey Federation has a foothold in some of these decisions in other locales and I agree that special interest groups like the NWTF sway politicians. I doubt it's really for safety although that may be what they publicly say. My guess is there is a monetary benefit to it in regards to equipment, access, memberships, limiting certain groups, etc.
I hope you don't feel like I am personally attacking you because I am not intending to do so. This argument comes up locally from those of us who hunt turkey. There are many people who hold your position and many who hold the position like mine. I guess I am throwing this out there for those who may not have formed an opinion yet or made up their mind and would like to see both sides. I guess the most important thing is we are both allowed to hunt turkey and enjoy doing so. Fall turkey starts here soon, so I wish you luck on your hunting adventures this fall.
