Steel shot damage?

[Bill Murphy]

A 7/8 ounce load in a 20 is not as effective as a 1 1/4 ounce load in a 12. A 1 ounce load of steel is not as effective as a 1 1/4 ounce load of lead. A 3/4 ounce load of lead in a 3" .410 or a 28 is not as effective as a 1 1/8 load of lead in a 16 gauge. It's all a matter of the conditions and the range you shoot. Any load of shot will kill game if you shoot within the limits of your skill, your gun, and your ammunition. For many years, I never shot a duck or a goose with anything other than a ten gauge AYA with 1 3/4 ounces of steel of various sizes, mostly #2, BB, and larger. Some days, I surprised myself, other days I surprised my companions. I was more than satisfied with the results of shooting with that combination.

[Steve McCarty]

Originally Posted by Elvin Ehrhardt

I know this is an old posting, but I wanted to put two cents in. I'm not a fan of steel shot and like most of us waterfowlers I think outlawing lead was a typical half-baked liberal idea that still makes zero sense. But, that being said I've been loading steel shot for a good 4 decades and I always try to collect my empties and fired wads if I can in the field. One thing I've learned over the years is that steel shot loading requires a special hard plastic shot cup wads that the shot sets in and shouldn't extend above the edge of the wad. When fired that wad carries the shot out of the barrel and generally a good 5 or 10 yards further before falling away as the shot disperses. In all these years of shooting and loading steel shot I have yet to find a expended wad that showed any sign of the steel shot penetrating the sides of the wad. Which clearly means that if loaded correctly steel shot loads should never damage a barrel by scoring it as it travels out of the barrel. That heavy steel shot wad is all that ever touches the barrel. I even have a friend that occasionally uses his Briley 20 gauge sub-gauge tubes during early duck season and he has no problems with steel shot damaging his tubes and they are made from aluminum. The evidence I've seen firsthand over the years tells me that a lot of the steel shot damage to gun barrel stories are just that, stories, without foundation or evidence. Now I would not suggest a heavy load of steel shot be fired out of a full choked barrel, because that is another matter altogether. Steel shot won't give like lead or even bismuth, so any constriction tighter than modified can risk damage to the choke.

Is there any verifiable evidence that the advent of non-toxic shot has improved the numbers of ducks/geese?

[Steve McCarty]

Originally Posted by Kevin McCormack

I'm hoping you mean "Skeet" and not "sheet" chokes! If your A-5 is a Belgian gun with after-market screw chokes, I would be very reticent to use any constriction other than IC due to the narrower mid-bore diameter of the Belgian guns vs. conventional US standards (.723 vs. .729 in 12 gauge).

If the A-5 is Japan-built and Invector or Invector Plus screw choked, Browning literature will suggest the proper size steel for use according to differing situations (ducks over decoys, pass shooting geese, etc.).

I have always been a fan of the A-5 for waterfowl hunting but only owned Belgian guns when the lead ban came into effect; I solved my dilemna by buying a used Japan A-5 3" Magnum with Inventor chokes, which has turned out to be my most dependable and effective gun for most any waterfowling setup, including ducks, geese, and brant shooting.

My typo sorry. Of course I mean "skeet". My A5 is a Belgium gun. I bought it with the screw in choke a few years ago. I'm not sure which company made the choke. It is short, and doesn't include the company name anywhere.

BTW: Does anyone know if the advent of non-toxic shot has actually had a positive effect upon waterfowl numbers? I know it is supposed to, but has it?

[Drew Hause]

It's complicated Steve. Waterfowl populations are highly dependent on drought, breeding season weather and habitat loss. There are also studies documenting little change in the amount of lead shot in sediment samples.
Here is a report from Ducks Unlimited with a population graph 1955 - 2024
https://www.ducks.org/conservation/w...4-duck-numbers