In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Edgar" wrote in message
...
Not even that long ago in UK. I once knew an old guy who used to use one
in
the 1920's and early 1930's. I saw his gun when I was young but cannot
remember the bore but it was at least 2" and carried a heavy charge of
shot. It was mounted more or less horizontally along the foredeck of a
low
lying wooden canoe type boat known as a 'duck punt', always painted grey
to
be less visible at night.. You loaded up and, lying flat in the punt, you
stealthily paddled yourself with your hands up to the mudflats where the
ducks were sleeping on the water. You aimed the punt, not the gun, and
like
you said you only got one chance because there was no way of reloading.
Not
sure of this, but I think you held your fire until they heard you and were
just lifting off.
If you made a noise you might get nothing but if all went according to
plan
50/100 bag would not be unusual. Gun was fixed to the punt and the recoil
sent the whole lot backward. Not very sporting, but mighty effective.

Your assessment is right on. When the gendarmes began to confiscate the big
guns, some of the hunters would rather die than surrender them. They fought
to keep them, and some did go to jail. Oddly enough, no one seemed to care
if fish were netted by the hundreds, but to shoot waterfowl in that quantity
was a crime.

Nobody cared *then*. Dunno how easy/difficult it is to legally fish
with a gill net in the USA without a licence, but it's hard to
impossible here in the populated states. All a matter of dwindling fish
stocks and increased exploitation.

Of course the decline is usually due to habitat destruction but that's
too hard, too much money in filling 'useless' mangroves and wetlands.

PDW