Home Forums Birds & Dogs Waterfowl Ethical question: why not shoot ducks on the water?

I haven't hunted geese or ducks in quite a while. But back in my younger years we used to hunt them a lot. It's illegal to shoot them on the water here, but I've shot wounded birds on the water. The other issue I'd have with that is hitting the decoys. I was doing a lot of waterfowl hunting when they made lead shot illegal. I think we had a lot more wounded birds using steel. I've never used Hevi-shot.

An acquaintance use to say, he would rather have a sister that worked in a whorehouse than a brother that shot Squirrels with a shotgun...Shooting Ducks on the water is much the same....

As the Fish and Wildlife Service is silent on the matter, it is a state decision as to whether the practice of shooting waterfowl on the water is legal or not.

The early game laws, especially waterfowl, were based on rules adopted from the more prominent duck hunting clubs of that state. Some clubs condemned such practices while others were silent or it was condoned under certain conditions. This is a significant factor to the hodgepodge of legalities on the matter.

As for ethics, I am not a fan of shooting ducks and geese off the water. It has more to do with the difficulty of killing them rather than the ethics of merely shooting them while sitting. A duck or goose sitting on the water has much of its vitals covered with multiple layers of feathers and bone which makes it difficult for pellets to penetrate. Hitting the head/neck is possible but is also difficult as larger pellets often lack the pattern density to hit such a small target while smaller pellets may run out of energy to consistently complete the task at moderate to long ranges.

Ive been on both side of the issue over the years and at different times in my life. I've based the above opinion on the numerous times I have sculler for ducks and geese, a few times where I shot them sitting whether on land or water, and the times I've had to finish off a cripple. I just prefer to shoot them flying as the vitals are more exposed than when sitting on the land or water. I also tend to find waterfowl are less bunched when in the air which makes for fewer "Dutch doubles". This is especially true when sculling as the birds tend to crowd together when they become concerned by the object drifting up to them. It is a trait market Hunter's took advantage of as it maximized the number of birds bagged with one shot.

Though I have a personal ethical issue towards shooting sitting waterfowl, I don't begrudge others for doing so if it is legal and safe. For some that is the most ethical means of shooting as their wing shooting skills are rather poor. For the often limited times they get out and the even lower percentage of success, I don't see them having much of an impact.

If the hunting is slow, then i will shoot a few on the water to make sure i come back with something, as it is tradition for us to cook a duck gumbo every saturday night at the camp during the season with whatever we have killed so far. But if they are fogging in on me pretty good i shoot them on the wing.

I can't imagine there are many slow days anywhere around Houma to Morgan City. I have hunted a bit between Morgan City and Lafayette. My favorite being white Lake, I have never had a slow day on White Lake.

We shoot the hell out of mud hens always flying

There are states where it is a game law violation to shoot ducks on the water?

Hahaha. That's a good one.

Thank you all for your replies. The experience that prompted the question was one from my early teens. The first duck i ever shot. I don't come from a duck hunting family and never had access to decoys or a dog. My best bet was jump shooting off the small creeks outside town. It was basically a spot and stalk situation where I spot the ducks from the ridge and sneak down into the creek bottom.

I learned quickly that ducks are not stupid and are very difficult to sneak up on within shotgun range. After MANY unsuccessful attempts, I finally got within range of a big Drake mallard. I remember a couple of seconds of watching him on the water 20 yards away with a clear shot. I didn't shoot because I was always taught that shooting one on the water is a cardinal sin. I let him fly and my first shot knocked him down to the water, but he still had life left. He crawled into a thick mat of cattails. I searched for hours and never found him. For me, losing that bird was much less palatable than breaking some ethical taboo.

I think jump-shooting is a different game than shooting over decoys with longer shots and less reaction time.

So what you are essentially saying is you screwed up the shot on an approximately 20 yard opportunity....and therefore to make it easier you should shoot them on the water....All wrapped up in the argument of it made you feel bad....along with putting the sneak on a Duck is difficult....

Perhaps you would be better off to propose being allowed to shoot them on the water with a .22lr? M80 would work if you had a good and accurate throwing arm...

As mentioned a Duck on the water is far from a given when the majority of its vitals are underwater.

Which is why a well-trained retriever is one of the greatest conservation tools we have at our disposal.

Yep. That about sums it up. I messed up an easy shot and lost a duck. No one to blame but me.

To be clear though, I'm not condemning wingshooting, or advocating for shooting them on the water. I'm just interested in the different balance of fair chase vs clean kill for birds than big game or turkeys. Deer also have a better chance to escape if you shoot at them on the run, but it's considered unethical for obvious reasons. We prioritize clean kill and recovery over maximizing "fair chase." With birds, the hunting community begrudgingly accepts a much higher wound/loss rate in the name of fair chase (25% in that study). I know no one else here has EVER wounded or lost one, but the general public apparently isn't up to the 24hourcampfire standard.

Good points about more vitals being below that waterline, and about them bunching up on the water.

Some think it unethical to shoot them on the run...Those that grew up doing it don't....

This would be a quote from a Wayne Van Zwoll article on the campfire home page....

"With Nylon 66s, Remington salesman Tom Frye challenged Ad Topperwein’s eye-popping record on tossed 2 ¼-inch wooden blocks. During a marathon session in San Antonio in 1907, Ad had wearied several Winchester 1903s firing at 72,500 blocks. He’d drilled 71,491, including a run of 14,500 straight! Unintimidated, Frye passed the 43,725 mark with just two misses. He stopped at 100,010, having splintered all but six." Think it would be unethical for him to shoot at a running Deer?

Have we regressed as shooters while constantly being reminded of clean kill. What is a clean kill??? Instantaneous, 5 seconds, 30, a minute?

I break a win on a Grouse and the Dog brings it back....at which time I have to kill it with my hands...Could be over real quick, but it wasn't clean....

I find none of it clean....You start blowing animals apart, it is all messy....

We all shoot at enough game and we all will eventually mess up a shot...

That pretty much sums up my feelings on both issues. If one is so desperate to "get" something that they have to shoot ducks on the water or squirrels with a shotgun their life is lacking something and I don't think they'd understand. It's not my place to condemn them for it, but I do feel a little sorry for them.

Yep.

That is the trouble right there with the hunting community's idea of "WE HAVE TO GET MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED!" They go out and beg people to guns who really don't have a clue or a care about any thing about the sports. As a result you get green ass dip wads shooting turkeys off the limb, ducks in the water, sitting rabbits, fish, I'm just waiting for the "Can I shoot fish in a barrel?"

Believe it or not there has been lately...i guess it cant always be good lol. I have never hunted over that way, i have hunted in cameron once a couple years ago. We do our hunting on point au fer island south of morgan city.

Well there you go, when it comes to Turkeys I can be a dip wad...

I’ve shot them called spring and fall, when I just happened to cross paths with them, when the Dog flushed one out while Grouse hunting, on the ground and flying. With a shotgun and have tried with a .223. I’ve yet to shoot one off a limb. However, most likely I wouldn’t pass on it.

I have, and will continue to do the same. Any bird for that matter, upland or waterfowl. Count me in if it's the only opportunity I think I am to get and I don't give a damn if someone else calls it "unsporting". The OP is right that it is often more ethical to do so, from a % recovery standpoint. It is especially funny to hear people bitch about long range or running shots on big game being "bad" and unethical due to a higher chance of wounding (shooting from out of range of their senses is a different discussion), when in the same conversation they bitch about anyone not shooting birds on the wing, especially upland birds. Waterfowl do seem to soak up pellets easier when shot on the water, but I've also seen plenty take pellets in the air and keep on flying.

In my experience a lot of the stuck up, hi-falutin, proper and refined hunters are the same guys who prefer to hunt deer and elk in the rut because they're so much easier to find. I've seen a lot of those same stuck up guys go on big "hikes" when hunting because they're "proper" hunters, and those hikes end up being less than a mile or so. It's laughable, at best.

Shooting turkeys in that tiny, constantly moving head with a rifle at 200 yards, vs 20 yards with a shotgun? Call the former shooting and not hunting if it makes a guy feel better, but both have their challenges. I've even body shot turkeys with a rifle and had no regret, though I do prefer a headshot when possible for the saving meat.

I am unashamed to do what I have to do to be successful, assuming it's both legal and safe and I sure as hell won't apologize for it.

If you were to do this though, pellets only to the head and back would mean no pellets in the breast and legs, which means less trimming, ruined meat and chances of chomping down on a pellet. In some cases it could mean saving an entire side of the breast meat. I am sure we've all played that game with flying birds.


There's lots of different ways to look at ethics.

Heck Yeah! I shoot as many as I legally can every year. I have an appetizer recipe that people rave about in which I utilize coots, rails, snipe, starlings, and other so called "trash" birds. I used to use crows too but concerns with West Nile Virus by others has ended that practice.

My favorite coot spot is a 40' swath of land between two ponds. Coots trade between the two all day long and it is the only place I have seen coots truly flying of their own volition. The first time I saw them I didn't know what they were but as the sun rose I got a better look.

I jump shoot a fair number of them too, I am not picky on how I take them. The funny aspect of coots and my dogs is, as a whole, my versatile breeds have disliked retrieving them more than the setters and Pointer I've owned. One would think it being the other way around.

Again, it's not an ethical question, it's one of preference.

I still can't believe someone is convinced there are state game laws prohibiting shooting ducks on the water.