Being discrete in nature - colour Vs cammo?

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
Ever tried punt guns? Are they legal anywhere these days? One well timed shot and you have a boat full!
They aren’t legal here. Not for at least a century. That said, even with them you have to be discreet enough to get within range, still limited to about 40 yards—-60 max when old fashioned lead shot was legal over waterways. Much less with legal steel shot
 

Paul_B

Bushcrafter through and through
Jul 14, 2008
6,154
1,546
Cumbria
I guess it's a method suited for certain types of areas where a few hours floating in the tide gets you discretely into shot. I don't know much only a Sunday times article where the journalist was taken out on one to learn how it was done. I don't believe he shot anything but he got in range according to the expert in the technique he went with.

According to Wikipedia, so might not be true, it's not illegal to own and use punt guns in USA just not legal on migratory wildfowl. In the UK 1995 survey had 50 operating punt guns. 1981 wildlife and countryside act limits punt guns in England and Wales. In Scotland there's a bore limit. Sounds still legal. If not then perhaps someone could update Wikipedia with citations.
 

Robson Valley

Full Member
Nov 24, 2014
9,959
2,664
McBride, BC
I don't know if punt guns, the market gunners, are legal any more.
My dog was originally bred to work those downed birds. (Chesapeake Bay Retrievers).
Refrigeration kind of put an end to daily meat shopping.

Some places, the Snow Geese do so much crop and field damage that there's no bag limits.
If you can whack 50/day, more power to you.

Wildlife commerce here is illegal. I face a sporting bag limit of 5 Canada geese per day.
Hell, the whole shoot can be over in 10 minutes. Lesser Canadas, a big one might go 15lbs live weight.

My cut-leaf camo or the broad break-up painted camo coat were all I ever needed plus a head hood.

Canadas circle the decoy spread before they will land at the tail sides. Maybe 50kph to have a look-see.
Set up 40 yards off to one side and sit still in your camo. The geese come around,
looking at the dekes. You can stand up from your folding chair and take 3 steps, they don't see you.
Then you let the air out of a few. If that doesn't work, the hard landing will kill them for sure.
Benelli Nova 12 ga pump, 3 goose loads of BBB in 3.5" shells. The recoil is impressive.
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
Sorry Paul, my comment was a bit unclear. You’re correct: it’s not the gun itself that’s illegal, it’s hunting with it that’s illegal.

RV, it wasn’t just refrigeration that’s ended market hunting. It was also growing conservation laws and daily bag limits. And those laws in turn can be attributed to species being hunted to extinction (I.e. the passenger pigeon)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robson Valley

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
And, you're lying down in a punt in the freezing cold trying to paddle without your hands getting wet in the freezing water etc. etc.... :)
I was luckier than that. I always hunted waterfowl from the shore rather than in a boat, and like RV, the dog did the fetching So I never really got wet.
 

Paul_B

Bushcrafter through and through
Jul 14, 2008
6,154
1,546
Cumbria
It seems Wikipedia has it wrong then, it says only illegal for migratory wildfowl. Not sure what that leaves as I don't hunt. In England and Wales it doesn't seem to say it's illegal, Scotland not illegal if bore is less than a certain figure. I don't know enough about the relevant legislation to amend Wikipedia entry on this.

The Wikipedia pictures show the person in the boat but the ones I've heard about were kind of floats the person basically swims behind or half on.

RV would block colours not work with c geese then? If you're in plain, block green with hood and gloves would that spook them more than camo that you use?
 

Robson Valley

Full Member
Nov 24, 2014
9,959
2,664
McBride, BC
No water here but the big wide Fraser river.
Best chance is pass shooting as the birds move from one foraging area to another.
Regular as clockwork. Low and slow.

I think the dogs liked running around in the fields without the ice and water.

Might be a wheat field or a pea field with no snow. Just the soil and the crumpled veg.
The hunters dress totally in white and sit among the decoys on upturned 5 gal white plastic buckets.
As long as they sit still, the geese don't see them for what they are. Big white blobs.
100 white nappies dropped in a flock fools them as well.
 

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
It seems Wikipedia has it wrong then, it says only illegal for migratory wildfowl. Not sure what that leaves as I don't hunt. In England and Wales it doesn't seem to say it's illegal, Scotland not illegal if bore is less than a certain figure. I don't know enough about the relevant legislation to amend Wikipedia entry on this.

The Wikipedia pictures show the person in the boat but the ones I've heard about were kind of floats the person basically swims behind or half on.

RV would block colours not work with c geese then? If you're in plain, block green with hood and gloves would that spook them more than camo that you use?
I suppose Wiki might be referring to federal law? Diffierent states have different hunting laws but to the best of my knowledge the federal laws are relatively limited: if it’s not a migratory animal (such as waterfowl or doves) or an endangered species there generally isn’t much, if any federal regulation.
 

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,937
4,570
S. Lanarkshire
I thought punt guns were for mostly still-ish water, among the reed filled edges, etc., the Broads, lochs, lakes, those kind of places. I didn't know they could be used offshore.
There you go, learn something new every day :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: santaman2000

Paul_B

Bushcrafter through and through
Jul 14, 2008
6,154
1,546
Cumbria
My understanding is you go out away from the hunting spot where the birds go then use the tide to drift you to where the birds are. That way you're not really noticed by them being so low to the water. Broads is probably the main area for it in the UK.

It's not my thing shooting in any form for hunting. Nothing against it but it's not a cheap sport and I kind of only agree with hunting for food. If it was possible I'd be up for shooting to fill the family table. I don't think punt guns are for individuals but more for commercial hunting. If you're really only going to get one shot out make it a big one makes sense.
 

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,937
4,570
S. Lanarkshire
I know that the old time punters were shooting for the pot and the local 'butcher'. I think the Broads sent stuff down to London though.
I remember reading an account of an old man taking a younger one out to show him how it was done. Lying low in the punt, just moving like everything else; gentle, gentle, and that the old fellow was canny with his shot, because they weren't cheap. So one bird from one shot wasn't the idea. He said that the punt could be used to nudge birds into trapping areas too though.
That's where the comment about getting too close with too big a charge came from, and the mess of just bird soup.

I suspect it's down to skill, knowing your water and a heck of a lot of patience.

You can imagine Ancient Briton doing it in a coracle though :) or a log boat, with a net or sling shot, even just stones or a throwing stick. Saw a lad take down a goose one day just with a stone. He was a crack shot with a stone though. He just had that spot on hand/eye co-ordination.

I think we're inclined to forget that hunting in these isles is a lot longer than gunpowder times, it's not all bow and arrow, and that done since childhood the skills and knowledge build up. Not all meat is 'big', and we know that the mesolithic hunters did very well on the water edges.

M
 
  • Like
Reactions: santaman2000

Robson Valley

Full Member
Nov 24, 2014
9,959
2,664
McBride, BC
It's quite probable that every useful beach along the British Columbia coast has been culturally modified
for the mariculture of clams, oysters and mussels over the past 14,000+ years.
The depth and area of the shell middens is surprising. One is estimated to contain 27,000 m^3 shell.
Added to that, bones of any kind are uncommon in the middens. The dietary composition wasn't all meat and fur.
Chances are that the bones were used in tool making, as well.

Well into the interior of BC, the middens contain enormous heaps of salmon and trout bones.

I expect that the shorelines of the UK were managed in the very same way. Find the shell middens.

In Africa, the Leakeys taught their children how to catch and kill waterfowl bare handed.
Camo of veg on your head. Glide out slowly into the flock. Grab their feet and pull the birds under.
National Geographic documented the scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toddy

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
Generally for waterfowl (over the last century anyway) you don’t deliberately move. Whether you’re in a boat or in a shore blind you try to get to the chosen spot quietly before dawn (or an hour or two before dusk) and then wait for the migrating flights. That spot is usually chosen with care from past experience and you’d put decoys out to attract passing flights.

probably a bit different back during the market hunting days though.
 

Tengu

Full Member
Jan 10, 2006
12,777
1,512
51
Wiltshire
Wasnt a lot of the Fenland hunting done by decoy ponds?

An infinite bag of birds.

But, when the Fens were drained suddenly the birds went away....
 

Mowmow

Forager
Jul 6, 2016
237
130
Nottinghamshire
Hunting camo patterns come in a few different forms.
High contrast big pattern camos designed to break up the human outline. The colours are usually subdued but the main focus isnt on colour matching or blending in really. As most game animals like deer or rabbit dont have particularly good colour eyesight so just breaking up the outline so you dont look like anything is the main idea.

Other patterns try and mimic certain backgrounds, a popular type of camo is the 2d patterns printed to look 3d.
They often come in designs for a specific environment, tree bark, crop stubble, grassland, deciduous woodland, etc. They work great in their intended background and have colours and patterns to match that specific area. The idea here is blending in. These are great for people who shoot birds like pigeon or waterfowl as they have some of the best eyesight in the animal kingdom.

Hunters will use camouflage to try anything to tip the odds in their favour. Especially with bow hunters or airgun hunters who have to stalk within 30 yards or less of their quarry.
In the UK there is a stigma on camouflage as it says something about the individual, i.e military, hunter, survivalist, etc. So most hunters in the UK prefer solid subdued colours. They are often performing work for someone else or on someone elses land, around members of the public also. So there is something to be said for looking like a country man rather than a member of a paramilitary.

Military camos use colour and contrast to blend in, in usually a wider range of environments and at close and long distances, using the general colour scheme of a specific area of operations. Woodland dpm for example is for blending in in dark, wet, european woodlands. The English countryside for example is mostly lush green and dark browns. So it works fairly well all round. One thing people have realised now though is at long distances dark colours and small patterns tend to blob into one solid dark colour. In the case of woodland dpm, it looks black because it is too dark.
In the mtp uniforms they use macro (big) and micro (small) patterns together within the camouflage pattern. The macro patterns provide high contrast and big blobs to break up the outline at distance, but these alone stand out up close where you can see more detail. So they use smaller micro patterns within to break up these blobs up close and keep the pattern effective at various distances.
The colour scheme, using lighter colours such as tan and cream/white provides contrast but also reflects surrounding light and colours so it takes on the hue and colour of the surroundings. Almost like adaptive camouflage.
Lighter colours also do better at toning the colour up or down depending on the available background shadow or sunlight. As it is shade that makes things look black or dark (you need light to see colour), the new thought is now that black in canouflage patterns is completely unnecessary as it is very rarely found in nature and the argument for it mimicing shadows is irrelevant as it is shadows and therefore the lack of colour that makes things in shadow look black.
And at night time even black tends to be darker than the surroundings and so silhouttes just as much as in day time.

Military camos do not try and mimic a specific environment exactly as a oak leaf pattern like you find in hunting clothing, despite possibly having similar colours, the pattern would look out of place in a pine forest or grassy field. And the hunting patterms tend to have things in the wrong scale such as oak leaves 3 times the size of a leaf in real life.
The idea of military camo is colour matching and breaking up the human silhoutte, it does not mimic the idea is to make the shape indiscernible and so it does not look like anything recognisable.
Most snipers for example tend to get spotted by people spotting their boots or the tell tale shape of the end of a barrel or optics.

Camo is very effective in their intended environments and especially static positions. IIRC the germans found that camouflage reduced casualties by 35% over their standard feldgrau uniforms.
But the US army found that camouflage uniforms made it easier to see troops pn the move, so they stuck with their olive drab single colour uniforms as troops on the move were harder to see in the jungle.

Camo is more effective at concealment, especially for big manmade structures like tents or vehicles as their straight lines and blocky shapes benefit massively from big contrasting colours and shapes to make them hard to discern what they are at distance. Which i think is one small reason why the German army only originally offered camouflage shelter halves as camouflage gear initially to the heer.

You could write a book on all the aspects of camouflage but that was just a bit of info on how some camo patterns work.

I disagree that camouflage is a military thing as it has been used since the dawn of man for hunting mostly.
And now practically is used for photography, hunting but has also become a huge thing in fashion and image. Some people sport it for patriotism or respect for the military for example.

Camouflage is great for deceiving humans and animals alike. But as is the same with drab colours, it is only effective when used in conjunction with stealth and fieldcraft. Using proper camouflage and concealment techniques. You can not just put on a camouflage jacket and expect to be invisible.

If you are going to camouflage yourself it is a go all out or do not bother at all affair.
If you want to disappear you need to cover all of your skin, get rid of any shine and aim to break up your shape. Then use fieldcraft to disappear into the landscape.
BUT if you just want to be a bit more subtle and not stand out in the woodland some subdued coloured clothing like olive greens or coyote browns are great, you will not be a homing beacon for eyes miles away to focus on and if you just sit still watching the wildlife you will probably pass unnoticed by anyone not actively looking for you.

Personally i love camouflage but its really a personal thing. Subdued, drab colours like browns, greens, greys, tans are extremely effective and have their own benefits such as your friendlier appearances in public, can be a blank canvas for diy camo.

Here ive just covered a bit on 2d camouflage clothing.
3d camouflage, supplementing existing camouflage using foliage and fieldcraft and stealth is all a different ballgame all together.

To be honest unless something is neon pink and out in the open it will probably go past unnoticed to the majority of people in the countryside. You could hide a neon pink backpack in some brambles and nobody would see it even if they were stood on it.

Edit: got carried away forgot to add something.

Most surplus clothing is very good value for money, hard wearing, comfortable, practical. So people who may not exactly.need the camouflage could be wearing it because it's utilitarian, durable, for work clothes or just practicality. Or for fashion, etc. It also makes very good outdoor clothing.
I'm wearing some british army pcs trousers right now in the garden because its red hot and theyre super light and airy and comfortable, keep the bugs off and stop my legs getting burnt. While i sit here and sip a beer.

Its all just personal choice really, there practical aspects it in regards to work or a hobby like hunting or hiding from the germans.
And then theres just that its good kit.
It could be a lifestyle thing, a fashion thing or a practical thing or a budget thing.

I personally love surplus kit n i cut grass for a living

N no i dont walk around head to toe in camouflage in my day to day life haha its a practicality thing.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

santaman2000

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jan 15, 2011
16,909
1,114
67
Florida
Mow mow I agree with most of what you posted. The biggest exceptions would be the reason the US Army held out so long before switching to camo. The reason was cost. The Marines did much better and switched sooner IIRC.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE