Fox Collectors

.......how does the difficulty of shots at flushing grouse in typical cover compare to woodcock in the thick stuff? Having never even seen a grouse in person I have no idea, but am curious. I do hunt woodcock, and our cover is usually really thick with but usually with a split second "window" for a clear shot before the 'doodle is behind something that completely hides it.

Does a grouse "get gone" as quickly as a woodcock can?

SRH

Much faster, at least the Michigan grouse I have seen. On a good woodcock day with say, 10 observed flushes over a spaniel, I will see the tail end of one grouse, not even the body, in an opening in the canopy.

From my vivid memories of tangling with CT grouse back in the late 70's:

WOODCOCK
GROUSE

I agree with Tool's examples but some of the toughest shooting I have done is on wild quail in the swamp thickets here on MD's eastern shore. The cat briars would eat up a pair of brush pants in a season and the various oak species never dropped their leaves. Those little brown rockets were gone in a flash and never flew above the underbrush for a clear shot.

woodcock are polite enough to hold for the dog and twitter up in front of you-they may go for the tops or cork screw the saplings - i almost always see a woodcock fold

Grouse explode when they feel ready (and when you are not)- in front - to the side - behind, in a thunderous flush - just swing through the jungle and shoot- my dogs have often brought in a grouse I did not see go down

add that to Steve's pictorial

Thanks, guys. I had no idea.

SRH

Ditto the Toolman.

Stan, for an example I hunted the 18th of September for Rosey’s first hunt of the year. The aspen leaves were still thick and just changing color. Rosey pointed five grouse of which I managed to see one w/a clean miss and one that I saw for a flash of a second. She pointed five woodcock of which I would have had clear shots on four of them. Woodcock was not in yet I’m so no shots were taken. To me even as cover thins that is typical/anecdotally what my experience has been. I keep detailed records of my hunts inclusive of points, wild flushes, shots, kills and I would say the records would bear out the same info.

Thanks for the examples given and the opinions. I had no idea.

Sounds like hunting the "King" is a little like targeting really big stripers in the freshwater rivers here. It's more like trophy hunting than it is fishing.

Hoping for a great grouse season for you all.

Best, SRH

Just my experience on ruffed grouse in the northeast; on a difficulty scale of 1-10 I'd put typical woodcock shots at a 2, and grouse with a good dog at 7 and at 9 while walkup hunting. That's where 1 = chip shot, and 10 = extremely difficult. This is for modern day grouse as they've evolved and at current population levels. Way tougher than we read in sporting articles circa 100 years ago, and more difficult as compared with our grouse hunting not that many decades ago. frank

Very much in agreement with the previous observations. All of my grouse hunting was walk up until I got a truly great English setter "legacied" to me by a guy who went to GSPs for field trials. The biggest advantage IMHO was having a "warning light" go on when he started acting birdy, so I could at least prep myself for a flush. In reality, the 'prep factor' was a minor advantage, but it really got your attention. After he exited the planet, I went back to walk-up hunting. So far as woodcock, the advantage of having a good dog was very decisive - they normally held so tight when pointed .that I could actually see them on the ground most times before they flushed. In shooting, Tool's comparison is right on - a grouse' flushes and hauls a** like a feathered rocket; some woodcock flushes resembled someone tossing playing cards into a hat up in a tree. Kevin