Duck shooting theory plausible

A Fish and Game wildlife manager says the only explanation for a hunter losing an eye is that shot ricocheted off a duck, and critics need to think about the evidence.

John Dyer is defending the decision he came to in a report, which became a key piece of evidence in a case where a man lost an eye in a shooting incident.

A charge of reckless use of a firearm causing injury was withdrawn against a man recently in the Palmerston North District Court.

The man, who has name suppression, did not deny firing the shot in May 2016 that hit Jim Morton in the eye.

But he denied he was reckless and Dyer’s report was a key piece of the puzzle that led to the charge being withdrawn.

Morton was critical of the report, saying it had not been peer reviewed and relied on information from at least 30 years ago.

He also said the physics had not been tested.

Dyer told the Standard he had been contacted by multiple people since the report went public, including a person who said he had been hit by shot that ricocheted off a duck.

That shot had ricocheted at a 45-degree angle, Dyer said. ‘‘People say it can’t happen. Well, it has happened at least twice.’’

While faulty shot was known to swerve in the air, there was no way it could come back as far as 45 degrees. ‘‘If you don’t go with the deflection theory, how the heck else do you explain it?’’

In Morton’s case, there were no pellet marks in the mai mai he was under to support the theory he had been directly shot at, Dyer said.

Furthermore, Morton was hard up against the mai mai wall looking at the ducks. ‘‘His own statement corroborates the fact that he was well protected by the corrugated iron walls,’’ Dyer said.

Steel shot was lighter than previously used lead shot, now illegal, and that likely contributed to issues.

He did not expect a swathe of people to start getting hit in the eyes by shot ricocheting off ducks, but thought people should be prepared.

‘‘It’s like walking along the footpath and a stone gets thrown up from the road and it hits you. It happens from time to time, but it is a rare thing.’’

Dyer said lots of range shooters wore glasses when firing lead shot, just in case there were ricochets.

Safety glasses were not compulsory for duck shooters, but may prevent some injuries in similar situations, Dyer said. ‘‘If I was the wife [of a duck hunter] I don’t know if I would be waiting until Christmas to be buying the shooter of the family good quality shooting glasses.

‘‘If you wear them, after a while you forget you are wearing them.’’