Many times, on many boards, there will be a thread (or twenty - depending on how far back you go in the archives) about HOW MUCH AMMO TO STORE FOR THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT.
That's not the purpose of this post. Don't really care how much.
One guy's list, that I was reading t'other day, had shotshells. First, it was for 12 gauge (because more different types of shells are made for 12 than for any other type, and anything you can do with a 20 or 410 you can do with a 12) but he said to stock X amount of buckshot and the same X amount of slugs, and a whole bunch more birdshot - like maybe 3 or 4X amount.
It just got me to thinking. Why in the hell would anyone want birdshot in an end-of-the-world situation?
You have two types of hunting. You have "sport hunting", which is what we do now. "Fair chase", and "unsportsman-like", and things like that. Then you have "I need to kill that animal". That would be "damn I'm hungry", or maybe "keep the ***** out of the corn".
Now, in "sport hunting", I will hide in the cornfield, until the flock of doves comes in, and then rise up and shoot them on the wing. Doves are small and fast, and can maneuver quickly. GOOD sport. I know people that count it a GOOD DAY if they average one dove per box of shells.
But in "I need to kill that animal" because "damn I'm hungry", I'll shoot that same dove off a tree branch, with a 22 rifle.
As an actual "game getting device", a shotgun is terribly inefficient. They are quiet heavy, the ammunition is extremely bulky, and the "component per ounce of meat" ratio is awful. Even if you got one with every shot, you know how much edible meat is on your average dove or quail? A 12-gauge shell takes, maybe, 25 grains of powder and an ounce of lead. A 22 take, maybe, 1.5 grains of powder and 1/11 of an ounce of lead.
I know that, during the Depression, my uncles helped feed my mother's family with an Iver Johnson Champion 410 shotgun. I'm pretty sure they were not shooting those pheasants on the wing, though. Not enough gun for a rising cock pheasant, at fifty feet. Plenty for a sitting one, at twenty feet, though.
That's not the purpose of this post. Don't really care how much.
One guy's list, that I was reading t'other day, had shotshells. First, it was for 12 gauge (because more different types of shells are made for 12 than for any other type, and anything you can do with a 20 or 410 you can do with a 12) but he said to stock X amount of buckshot and the same X amount of slugs, and a whole bunch more birdshot - like maybe 3 or 4X amount.
It just got me to thinking. Why in the hell would anyone want birdshot in an end-of-the-world situation?
You have two types of hunting. You have "sport hunting", which is what we do now. "Fair chase", and "unsportsman-like", and things like that. Then you have "I need to kill that animal". That would be "damn I'm hungry", or maybe "keep the ***** out of the corn".
Now, in "sport hunting", I will hide in the cornfield, until the flock of doves comes in, and then rise up and shoot them on the wing. Doves are small and fast, and can maneuver quickly. GOOD sport. I know people that count it a GOOD DAY if they average one dove per box of shells.
But in "I need to kill that animal" because "damn I'm hungry", I'll shoot that same dove off a tree branch, with a 22 rifle.
As an actual "game getting device", a shotgun is terribly inefficient. They are quiet heavy, the ammunition is extremely bulky, and the "component per ounce of meat" ratio is awful. Even if you got one with every shot, you know how much edible meat is on your average dove or quail? A 12-gauge shell takes, maybe, 25 grains of powder and an ounce of lead. A 22 take, maybe, 1.5 grains of powder and 1/11 of an ounce of lead.
I know that, during the Depression, my uncles helped feed my mother's family with an Iver Johnson Champion 410 shotgun. I'm pretty sure they were not shooting those pheasants on the wing, though. Not enough gun for a rising cock pheasant, at fifty feet. Plenty for a sitting one, at twenty feet, though.