[fabsroman]

"cost of ammo is one of the smallest expenses in waterfowling"

I don't know about that. Once the blinds, decoys, camo, and guns are bought, about the only consumable is the ammo. If you shoot 100 shells a year, that comes to $300 a year if you use the good stuff, and I have killed more geese than that in a single year. So, ammo can get up there. Heck, I have probably shot more money out of my barrel than my gun, decoys, and camo clothing cost over the past 8 years.

That aside, I still agree that the more expensive stuff is well worth the expense. Better to shoot one expensive shell at a bird than two moderately expensive shells at a bird.

If we all cared for the resource, we wouldn't be longing for the good old days of lead shot, because that lead shot poisoned a lot of waterfowl over the years. Now, do I think the laws should be a little better written (i.e., no hunting with lead shot within 500 yards of any body of water). Yeah.

I know guys that go out to North Dakota and South Dakota and shoot lead on those trips because they would rather pay the fine than pay for the expensive stuff or use steel. I don't know about that philosophy. Then again, these guys are always trying to find a way around the system.