By Yamil Sued

The 10mm Auto is an undeniably powerful round, born in the mid-1980s from disappointment with the perceived inadequate performance of the 9mm. The cartridge was designed from the ground up to have immense stopping power, and it would prove itself to be a capable performer in both self-defense and hunting applications.

Testing the Perception

But how powerful is it, exactly? We all hear about how terrific the 10mm is, but what if we perform a 10mm gel test to see what kind of penetration and expansion we can expect?

I decided to do just that, taking a Springfield Armory Range Officer Elite Operator 10mm 1911 and running three different full power 10mm loads through it and into ballistic gelatin. Check out my video above to see how it all did on the range.

For this 10mm ammo comparison, I selected three loads, all with bullets weighing 200 grains. These loads covered both high-performance 10mm self defense ammo as well as basic range ammunition. I tested Federal Personal Defense HST, Speer Gold Dot Personal Protection Gold Dot Hollowpoint, and CCI Blazer FMJ range ammunition. Both of the full power personal protection loads used proven hollowpoint bullet designs while the range load used a 10mm FMJ projectile.

10mm Ballistics Performance

I set up a 32″-deep batch of ballistic gelatin and set about running all three loads through the RO Elite Operator 10mm. I was very impressed with the performance of all three loads and found that the 10mm does really push out some power.

Hollow Point vs. FMJ in Ballistics Gel

When testing 10mm penetration, both the Speer and Federal drove to roughly 18″ deep in the gelatin (within 1″ of each other), and expanded very nicely. These are both very powerful and effective rounds.

With the Blazer load, the FMJ punched clean through all 32″ of the gelatin, and impacted heavily on the safety berm behind it.

Excessive penetration is generally not preferred for defensive ammunition. While FMJ loads are great for paper targets, they simply do not expand in an attacker and will generally overpenetrate as this 10mm gel test shows.

I also chronographed all three 200-gr. loads to see how they performed. The Federal HST came in at an average of 1,130 fps, the Speer Gold Dot at 1,100 fps, and the Blazer ammo at 1,030 fps.

Conclusion

My test was intended to show 10mm ammunition performance and penetration, both full power self defense ammo and FMJ target ammunition.

I think that the results speak for themselves — the 10mm is an undeniably powerful round, and one that clearly will excel in both a hunting and self-defense role.

Editor’s Note: Please be sure to check out the new The Armory Life forum, where you can comment about our daily articles, as well as just talk guns and gear. Click the “Go To Forum Thread” link below to jump in!

Join the Discussion

Go to forum thread

Featured in this video

The Genesis of the Survivor Personality

by Al Siebert, PhD

Author of The Resiliency Advantage: Master Change, Thrive Under Pressure and Bounce Back From Setbacks (2006 Independent Publisher’s Best Self-Help book), and best seller The Survivor Personality: Why Some People Are Stronger, Smarter, and More Skillful at Handling Life’s Difficulties…and How You Can Be, Too.

(A condensed version titled “The Survivor Personality” was published in the AHP Newsletter, Aug.-Sept., 1983, and used as the source of material quoted in chapter eight in Love, Medicine, & Miracles, by Bernie Siegel, M.D.)

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Four Criteria
• Method
• Biphasic Traits
• Synergy Motivation
• Need for Good Synergy
• The Competence Imparitive
• The Role of Learning
• Learning What No One Can Teach
• Conclusion and Hypothesis
• Footnotes
• References
• Permission to Reprint Information
• Bottom of Page

Abstract:

A curiosity which started in 1953 about life’s best survivors led to the identification of a small subgroup within the population who will probably be the normal or typical human of the future. Such persons can be described as having “survivor” or “synergistic personalities.”

Abraham Maslow’s later writings reflected a strong interest in synergy. He assisted Margaret Mead in publishing Ruth Benedict’s descriptions of high synergy and low synergy cultures. Maslow wrote about high synergy and low synergy organizations and their effects on self-actualization. His listing of the motivations and gratifications of self-actualizing people includes nine items indicative of needing to have things work well.

To place the need for high synergy in context it is suggested that the traditional pyramid drawing of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs be inverted and that the need for synergy be added as the next need above self-actualization.

The synergistic personality is characterized as having been able to sustain into adulthood the playful curiosity of childhood. As a consequence, the life-long activity of learning carries such persons beyond their teachers. To make important aspects of their lives function well they engage in self- motivated, self-managed learning derived directly from experience. As adults they exhibit the neurogenic motive that Robert B. White described as “effectance motivation.” Thus as the years go by they become increasingly life competent or “life smart.”

Central to the development of a synergistic personality is the integration of paradoxical personality traits. Such persons are comfortable with and value their inner counter-balanced dimensions. They appreciate the benefits derived from being able to engage in pessimistic optimism, cooperative non-conformity, selfish altruism, extroverted introversion, playful seriousness, and more.

It is hypothesized that the synergistic personality reflects the emergence of a new level of human development and brain functioning that is fundamentally different and more advanced than that of Cro-Magnon humans.

Introduction

When I enlisted in the paratroopers in 1953 the training cadre were all seasoned combat veterans. They were the few survivors from the 11th Airborne Division, a unit that had fought in the Pacific during WWII and later in Korea. Being around them I saw that it wasn’t just fate or luck that these were the few still alive. Something about them as people had made a difference.

Four Criteria

After my discharge I returned to college and majored in psychology. In graduate school I chose clinical psychology as my major field but as time went by I became dissatisfied with the emphasis on mental illness and became increasingly curious about people who are best at handling life’s toughest challenges. My main focus over the years has been to try to understand life’s best survivors. To organize my efforts I developed a list of four criteria or qualifiers. The criteria are as follows:

People with survivor personalities are those who…

1. have survived a major crisis
2. surmounted the crisis through personal effort
3. emerged from the experience with previously unknown strengths and abilities
4. in retrospect find value in the experience (A)

A good indicator that a person meets the four criteria is a statement such as, “I would never willingly go through anything like that again, but it was the best thing that ever happened to me.”

Method

Ken Keyes, Jr. once wrote: “It is impossible for you to learn what you think you already know.” Instead of studying survivors by using existing concepts of human personality, motivation, physiology and learning, I let myself learn about people as they really are. Instead of trying to make the territory fit the maps that others had constructed, I wandered as an observer with a curious and silent mind through the territory allowing it to create its own map for me.

Using the four criteria as a frame of reference, I worked backward. Over the years I asked myself such questions as:

• “Is there a basic pattern of traits that survivors share? If so, what are the traits?”
• “What about their uniqueness? How can a person be similar to others and yet be a unique individual?”
• “What are survivors like when they aren’t surviving?”
• “Is the survivor personality inborn or can it be learned? If it can be learned, what are the learning parameters?”

To find answers to my questions, I interviewed many people, read extensively and developed a questionnaire (B) for collecting information from people who identify themselves as having survivor personalities. Once the picture started to become clarified, I sought feedback from experienced survivors about the accuracy of my descriptions.

Biphasic Traits

Survivors puzzled me at first. Survivors are both serious and playful, they are hard-working and lazy, self-confident and self-critical.

The historic mode of thinking in psychology has been to conceptualize personality traits as unidimensional and as either present or absent in a person. Individuals were thought of as being one way or another, as introverted or extroverted, for example. Yet, many survivors show characteristics of both introversion and extroversion.

What is the relationship between being a survivor and being paradoxical?

An article on biphasic patterns of behavior by T.C. Schneirla led to the answer. In this article, Schneirla described his experiments in attempting to understand how living creatures survive in the world. The basic purpose of his research was to find out how “animals generally manage to reach beneficial conditions and stay away from harmful, that is, how survivors do this.” (1)

After much research, he concluded that a creature’s ability to survive is derived from being able to approach or withdraw from anything near it. To survive on this planet a creature must be able to move toward life- sustaining conditions and away from poisonous or other life-destroying conditions. The ability to approach or withdraw was described by Schneirla as being a “biphasic pattern of adjustment.”

Biphasic patterns are possible because of opposing muscular systems in our bodies. Animals have physical control over themselves because the cerebral cortex coordinates flexor and extensor muscles working against each other in controlled opposition.

Similarly, the ability of humans to consciously influence their emotional states is largely a function of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems working in counterbalanced opposition to each other.

Opposing nervous systems give creative response choices. Consciously controlled, counterbalanced systems free humans from being stimulus bound. Moshe Feldenkrais, the originator of movement techniques that lead to better physical integration, has observed that “reversibility is the mark of voluntary movement.” (2) An action that cannot be reversed is involuntary. It is reflective and not under cortical control.

Biphasic personality traits increase survivability by allowing a person to respond in one way or its opposite in any situation. To have biphasic traits is to be both one way and another rather than either one way or another. Thus, complexity and stability are derived from being tough and sensitive, proud and humble, selfish and unselfish, cooperative and rebellious, analytic and metaphoric, shy and bold, etc.

The people involved in my survivor personality research project say that being flexible and adaptable, more than anything else, is central to being a survivor. Having a variety of responses available is what makes possible the handling of chaotic, unpredictable or unexpected conditions.

Respondents also indicate, by the way, that learning about the value of biphasic or paradoxical traits is emotionally reassuring. For example, a woman who worked as a head nurse in a county hospital and was recognized for her outstanding skills wrote to me saying: “appreciate the paradoxes — it’s good to know it’s not weird-I used to puzzle myself about being conservative-liberal, generous-stingy, serious-silly, quiet-gregarious, interested-bored, involved-aloof.”

What the specific pairs of counterbalanced traits are seems to be less important than having many such pairs. The longer the list of pairs of paradoxical or biphasic personality traits (C) that are descriptive of a person, the more complex the person is and, thus, the person is usually better at successfully dealing with a variety of situations.

Evidence establishing the relationship between response choices and survival is available from many sources. Two biologists, in commenting upon successful patterns of survival in the animal and plant world, have stated: “the plants and animals that survive in their progeny are the lucky ones. They hold the winning combination: A successful pattern filling one place and time, and the ability to modify the pattern in the correct direction as fast as the environment changes. The luckiest of all have an adaptation ready, still unused, as though prepared for alteration that has not yet come. They gain a head start in the altered world. Less fortunate are those whose pattern limits them to a single situation. They vanish forever….” (3)

Synergy Motivation

Biphasic traits make flexibility possible; but being complex is not enough. Some complex people do not handle life’s problems well. If having biphasic traits provides options about ways to respond, what determines choices? What gives paradoxical people a sense of direction? How do they know what to do in unique situations? How is it that they handle emergencies so well? How do they know what not to do? How do they know what would not work? Why are they good people to have around?

These are motivation questions. They are questions about the occurrence, direction, and persistence of a behavior. Answers to these questions can be found by examining a major motive in life’s best survivors: It is the need to have things work well for themselves and others.

The need to have things work well explains much about survivors. This need is a central, organizing, motivational principle in their lives. It helps explain why, when necessary, they can successfully handle a situation that no other human being has faced before.

A diagram of the hierarchy of needs that Abraham Maslow described is usually drawn this way:

Visualizing the hierarchy as organized in the form of a pyramid is not conceptually accurate, however. (D) The more basic tissue needs are simple and satisfied quickly. Eating food or bandaging a cut takes only minutes. At each higher level the need is more complex than the one before it. Emotional and mental needs take longer to satisfy. Actualization takes many years.

In addition, the concept of self-actualization does not handle very well the need of people with survivor personalities to have things work well. Maslow recognized the existence of this motivational force in self- actualizing people, although he did not separate it out as another motive.

To make sense out of what I have observed and what Maslow actually described, therefore, I find that I have to turn his pyramid on its apex and add another motivational force beyond self-actualization. The drawing looks like this:

Maslow learned about synergy from Ruth Benedict, who introduced the concept in 1941 in some lectures she unfortunately never published. Maslow later obtained some of her lecture notes and had them published several years after her death.

Having studied many different cultures, Benedict felt the need to develop a concept which would help communicate some significant differences between cultures in regard to the quality of life for a person living in one culture or another. She stated:

I shall need a term for the gamut, a gamut that runs from one pole, where any act or skill that advantages the individual at the same time advantages the group, to the other pole, where every act that advantages the individual is at the expense of others. I shall call this gamut Synergy, the old term used in medicine and theology to mean combined action. In medicine it means the combined action of nerve centers, muscles, mental activities, remedies, which by combining produced a result greater than the sum of their separate actions.

I shall speak of cultures with low synergy, where the social structure provides for acts that are mutually opposed and counteracted and of cultures with high synergy, where it provides for acts that are mutually reinforcing. (4)

Ruth Benedict’s ideas are applicable to groups as well as cultures. High synergy exists in an organization or agency when minimum effort results in cooperative, effective action. Low synergy exists when excessive effort results in little useful action.

Trying to get something done in a low synergy organization is like driving a heavily loaded truck and trailer down the highway with all the tires flat. Working in a high synergy organization is like cruising along the highway in a well-tuned Porsche.

Maslow devoted a great deal of attention to the concept of synergy during the latter part of his career.

He recognized that some people do not merely self-actualize and then stop. Some people transcend being “merely healthy.” (5) They resolve, master and integrate conflicting forces and are motivated to create a good society for themselves and others. Maslow, in referring to the possible desirable state of affairs, coined the term “eupsychia” and defined it as “the culture that would be generated by 1,000 self-actualizing people on some sheltered island where they would not be interfered with.” (6)The central purpose of his book titled Eupsychian Management was to show organizational managers what they need to understand to create an environment conducive to optimum psychological health for workers.

The “need to have things work well” is clearly present in Maslow’s listing of the “Motivations and Gratifications of Self-Actualizing People.” (7) Nine of the 40 items in his list refer to this need:

• They seem to like happy endings, good completions.
• They try to set things right, to clean up bad situations.
• They generally pick out their own causes, which are apt to be few in number, rather than responding to advertising or to campaigns or to other people’s exhortations.
• They manage somehow simultaneously to love the world as it is and try to improve it.
• In all cases there was some hope that people and nature and society could be improved.
• A change to improve the situation where the operation is a big reward. They enjoy improving things.
• They enjoy bringing about law and order in the chaotic situation, or in the messy or confused situation, or in the dirty and unclean situation.
• They like doing things well, “doing a good job,” “to do well what needs doing.” Many such phrases add up to “bringing about good workmanship.”
• They enjoy greater efficiency, making an operation more neat, compact, simple, faster, less expensive, turning out a better product, doing with less parts, a smaller number of operations, less clumsiness, less effort, more foolproof, safer, more “elegant,” less laborious.

Thus, taking into account Maslow’s great interest in synergy, knowing of his clear awareness that people who are self-actualizing become very involved in making things work well, and taking into account that Maslow was a great teacher who encouraged people to think for themselves, I do not feel that Maslow would be greatly distressed to find that I find it practical to invert the pyramid and add synergy as a higher level need. (E)

The link between survivorship and being a competent, synergistic human is as follows: When things are working well, a person:

• can sit back and let things run themselves.
• expends much less energy than people who are struggling.
• has chunks of optional time for being curious about the early signs of new developments.
• can devote attention to the little things that count.
• can spot early indications of potential trouble and take action to prevent it.
• can work on future happenings so that when they occur things fall into place easily.
• is more relaxed, feels better and enjoys “working” as good exercise.
• can put high quality time and energy into emergency developments without having other basic matters interrupted.
• responds to an emergency or crisis with an attitudinal reflex of both expecting and needing for things to work out well.

The Need for Good Synergy

One of the most noticeable qualities of people in whom the synergy motive is strong is that they volunteer to help out when there is trouble. People with survivor personalities are foul-weather friends. When things are working well, they may drift around, apparently uninvolved; but, when there is trouble, they show up.

Their efforts to eliminate problems or reduce pain or distress in another person are partly selfish. Their sensitivity and sympathy for people who are in pain effects them. They feel it when other people are in pain.

The need for synergy is as selfish a motive as any other. The more well integrated a person’s thoughts, feelings and actions become the more the person needs a pleasantly functioning world to live in. Being exposed to discordant, unstabilizing, energy draining, disruptive people or conditions can be painful. Working to make things better is not an unselfish activity.

The selfishness in people with survivor personalities is paradoxical. When they do nice things for others, it is partly because it’s fun to have other people enjoy themselves and partly because it feels good. They have resolved what Maslow calls the selfish-unselfish dichotomy. They have achieved a state of selfish altruism. They can act unselfishly for selfish reasons. In commenting about fusing the selfish-unselfish dichotomy, Maslow states:

Here I would like to take a jump beyond Benedict….In highly developed, psychiatrically healthy people, self-actualizing people, whichever you choose to call them, you will find, if you try to rate them, that they are extraordinarily unselfish in some ways, and yet also they are extraordinarily selfish in other ways…

Somehow the polarity, the dichotomy, the assumption that more of one means less of the other, all this fades. They melt into each other and you now have a single concept for which we have no word yet. High synergy from this point of view can represent a transcending of the dichotomizing, a fusion of the opposites into a single concept. (8)

Since all psychological activities have physiological correlates, such a “fusion” of opposites must reflect the establishment of integrated neurological connections between the various brain centers and neurological systems. If this is indeed the case, then questions about the synergy motive, the need to have things work well, must include attention to neurological variables.

The Competence Imperative

The really competent, synergistic people in every sphere of human activity are those individuals who have gone beyond their teachers. They have learned what no one can teach them. Competence results from self- motivated, self-managed learning. People who follow instructions on how to function successfully are never as skillful as people who are self- motivated learners. Every teacher knows that the students who gain the most from a course are the ones who are self-motivated. Students who passively cooperate in doing as instructed may pass the tests, but they lack the self motivation that leads to mastery.

The motivational forces underlying the learning (F) that results in competence / mastery / effectiveness / skillfulness in making things work well in a variety of conditions cannot be accounted for by external forces such as reinforcers, punishers, social pressures or anticipated rewards. Neither can the self-motivated learning be accounted for by internal tensions or deficits. The self-motivated learning so strongly present in adults who function in synergistic ways is that same as that of small children. The motivational force is neurogenic and has been described by Robert W. White as “effectance motivation.” (9) White, in his classic paper “Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence,” summarized decades of motivation research by saying:

Later in his paper he stated:

In support of his position, White observed that a healthy, adequately fed child or animal “is by no means at the mercy of transient stimulus fields. He selects for continuous treatment those aspects of his environment which he finds it possible to affect in some way.” (12) What is called child’s play “involves discovering the effects he can have on the environment and the effect the environment will have on him. To the extent that these results are preserved by learning, they build up an increased competence in dealing with the environment.” (13) White defined competence as “an organism’s capacity to interact effectively with its environment.” (14) He says that, “In higher animals and especially in man, where so little is innately provided and so much has to be learned about dealing with the environment, effectance motivation independent of primary drives can be seen as having high adaptive value.” (15) White conceived of effectance motivation as characterized by satisfactions derived from explanatory, varying, experimental behaviors and conceptualized the activities which lead to competence as linked to feelings of efficacy. (16)

The synergy motive can be understood as having two motivational dimensions. First, a discordant, energy-draining situation may upset, irritate, or bother the person and may stimulate activities to improve things; and, second, there is the feeling of enjoyment and satisfaction from being able to take actions which results in things working well.

The Role of Learning

Linking the motivation for competence to internal, neurogenic processes helps explain how and why people who learn directly from life’s experiences are synergistic and handle life’s difficulties better than people who try to function as directed by others. It is not that people with survivor personalities have learned how to learn; instead, it is more accurate to say that they have managed to maintain the way of learning that enhances ongoing neurological development and leads to ever increasing personal abilities.

My own rough model of the circumstances in which people learn is this:

Ways in which humans learn:

• trained or conditioned to act, think, feel, speak as told.
• in structured experiences designed to teach predetermined thoughts, feelings and actions.
• working as an apprentice with a skilled person who helps “educe” useful learning.
• assisted in learning how to successfully deal with unique and unexpected challenges by a mentor.
• unsocialized, self-motivated, self-managed learning directly from experience.

Some people make it through the training, educational and other experiences forced on them by others with the motivation and ability to learn directly from experiences still strong. In some cases, the competency flourishes in spite of the efforts of parents, trainers and educators; in other cases, the competency flourishes because the parents, teachers and educators did not interfere with the self-motivated learning.

Many people do not make it through the training, educational and other experiences forced on them by others with much self-motivation left. Some are victims of severe, although usually well-intentioned, mental and emotional abuse, others seem addicted to “educements.”

Learning What No One Can Teach

The benefits derived from years of self-motivated, self-managed learning include becoming increasingly competent in dealing effectively with real life events and acquiring skills to learn what no one can teach. Everyone encounters difficulties they were not prepared for. Those happen at work, in marriages, with life changes and changes in the external world. Survival responses and synergistic actions both usually depend on the person being able to assess a situation quickly and invent a workable plan of action without asking for approval or waiting for help. The pattern of activities associated with the development of synergistic skills and a survivor personality include the following: As adults, such persons:

• play in the way that happy children do.
• may play aimlessly with no purpose other than for the enjoyment of the activity.
• can become deeply absorbed in an activity, losing all contact with time and external events. While so absorbed, they may talk with themselves, hum or whistle absent-mindedly.
• have the curiosity of a long-time child who asks: “How does this work?” “What if I did such and such?” “What would happen if I acted in another way?”
• allow their feelings to guide their curiosity.
• have an observing, nonjudgmental perceptual style.
• are willing to be foolish, make mistakes, get hurt and laugh at themselves.
• may test the limits, break rules or disobey laws to find out what happens.
• appreciate unpleasant information about themselves.
• carry on conversations with themselves, day dream and have active imaginations. They play in and with their minds.

Indicators that developmental processes are enhanced by these spontaneous, self-motivated activities include observations that such people:

• have empathy for individuals and groups, particularly for opponents / enemies / adversaries.
• have empathy for clusters or systems of relationships such as organizations or equipment.
• use subliminal perception as a valid, useful source of information.
• have good timing, especially when speaking or taking an original action.
• recognize early clues about possible developments and take meaningful action.
• rapidly assimilate new or unexpected experiences and facilitate being changed by them.
• get smarter and enjoy life more as they get older.
• are comfortable in and even amused by ambiguous situations that may frighten or bewilder others.
• exercise conscious choices over biphasic response alternatives.
• maintain a positive direction and show surprising self-confidence against sustained adverse circumstances.
• fall back to and successfully rely on inner resources in disruptive, chaotic circumstances.
• can be a cooperative nonconformist, i.e. not being controlled by social mores, laws or standards, and yet choose to abide by the laws and rules.
• have a talent for serendipity; able to convert accidents or what others would regard as misfortune into good luck.

Such indicators allow us to infer that self-motivated, self-managed learning can lead to advanced levels of neurological development. With some people, however, learning may only play a minor role in the development of the survivor personality.

A few people are born survivors. They are the natural athletes in the game of life. Just as some people are born musicians, writers, artists or singers, some people are gifted at coping well. This ability is so strongly inborn in a few children that even the most adverse home conditions and neighborhoods cannot break them. Julius Segal refers to such children as “invulnerables” and describes them as “an enigma.” They are “children who should be psychological casualties but aren’t.” (17)

E. James Anthony says about invulnerable children: “They deal with life with an excellence and adaptive capacity that doesn’t seem to come from anywhere, as if they had carved these qualities by themselves.” (18)

Nature provides a few people with such a strong inborn capacity for survival that even as children they apparently need minimum help or support from their world. The majority of others follow along lines that would be predicted by the normal distribution curve of human abilities. For most others, the potential for developing a survivor personality is present or absent to a greater or lesser extent. For them, it takes more time and more experience. Thus, for the majority of people, life’s circumstances (nurture) can enhance or diminish the probabilities that they will learn how to take control of their ongoing development.

The extent to which a person can function in ways aligned with deeper, neurological, organic processes is revealed in extreme circumstances. Terrance Des Pres, in summarizing his research into the survivors of the Nazi Death Camps, concluded when people are stripped of all their usual supports and even their health, “when the external props collapse, survivors fall back on life itself.” (19)

It may be that a significant, although subtle, force operating within human behavior and human functions is a species motive rather than an individual one. In the 1840s, Arthur Schopenhauer stated:

The inmost nature of every brute, and also of man, accordingly lies in the species; thus the will to live which is so powerfully active is rooted in this, not really in the individual. (20)

Ex-POWs have told me that, during some of the worst times in captivity, “dying is as easy as letting go a rope.” They would even joke about deciding to stay alive by saying: “We must be crazy to stay alive. Any horse treated like this would have died long ago.”

Conclusion and Hypothesis

Highly stressful situations, ambiguity, unwanted changes, and torturous conditions reveal that some individuals have more capacity to survive and make things turn out well than others. From studying people who successfully survive

and gain strength from extreme circumstances, I hypothesize that:

1. the survivor personality cannot be taught but it can be learned.
2. those motives, activities and experiences enhancing the emergency of survival abilities are the same as those which enhance the emergence of synergistic abilities.
3. neurological maturation can continue in humans throughout their lives.
4. for those persons who discover and facilitate the life and growth forces within them, life gets better and better decade after decade.

The methodological problems in testing the hypotheses are considerable. Since an ideal anything can only exist in the abstract, how can individuals with unique abilities be compared-especially when taking into account that one person’s way of solving and surviving real life problems may be quite different from another? To make such comparisons would be more like trying to judge an art competition than doing scientific research.

How can the ability to survive extreme conditions be tested? Humans cannot, for research purposes, be thrown into major, life disrupting conditions.

Even if methods such as those were used by research teams during natural disasters could be used to verify the observed correlations, what could be done to determine whether or not neurological development has occurred and is a significant variable? Can psychologists develop assessment devices that measure advanced levels of neurological functioning in the same way they assess neurological impairment?

Despite the methodological research problems, my observations of life’s best survivors leads me to conclude that the human species is in a transformation to its next level of development. A more developmentally advanced human being is emerging who will compare to the Cro-Magnon way of thinking and living at about the same level of comparison that Cro- Magnon compared to Neanderthal.

Comments and reactions are invited.

Footnotes:

(A) The “survivor personality” is, thus, an operational definition. It is a description of an abstracted system as distinguished from the hypothetical construct “mental health.” Such persons could just as well be described as having “synergistic” or “serendipity” personalities because these are also core attributes of exceptional mental health.

(B) What follows, then, is a preliminary report in which those variables and principles observed to be most central to the survivor personality are described. Research issues are discussed at the conclusion of the paper.

(C) The term “androgynous” is being specifically avoided here for the following reason. I have been using the terms “biphasic,” “paradoxical” and “counterbalanced” in reference to personality traits since the early 1960s and prefer them because they are gender neutral. “Androgynous” is a sexist concept implying that a complete person is a mixture of both male and female traits. I view people with survivor personalities as humans whose traits make them good survivors and that their sexual identities are relatively superficial when compared to more fundamental personality dimensions. Besides, the terms counterbalanced and paradoxical teach better. Try telling a room full of city maintenance department employees that they may be able to handle life’s challenges better by becoming androgynous.

(D) See the diagram in The Third Force by Frank Goble, on page 50, and notice how difficult it was to include the self-actualization growth needs in the space at the top of the pyramid.

(E) Another human need which Maslow hierarchy does not cover well is sexual activity, so even my revised version of his model may be considered to have limitations.

(F) Learning being defined as “a change in behavior that results from experience.”

References

(1) T.C. Schneirla, “An Evolutionary and Developmental Theory of Biphasic Process Underlying Approach and Withdrawal.” Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Vol. 7, Marshall R. Jones, ed. (1959). Reprinted in Selected Writings of T. C. Schneirla (W.H. Freeman, 1972).

(2) Moshe Feldenkrais, Awareness through Movement (Harper & Row, 1972), p. 85.

(3) Lorus J. Milne and Margery Milne, Patterns of Survival (Prentice-Hall, 1967), p. 4.

(4) Abraham Maslow and John J. Honigmann, eds., “Synergy: Some Notes of Ruth Benedict, American Anthropologist, Vol. 72, (1970), pp. 320-333.

(5) Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, pp. 282-292.

(6) Abraham Maslow, Eupsychian Management, (Dorsey Press, 1965), p. xi.

(7) Abraham H. Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, (Viking Press, 1971), pp. 308-309.

(8) Ibid, pp. 43 and 210.

(9) Robert W. White, “Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence, ” Psychological Review, Vol. 66, Sept. 1959, p. 329.

(10) Ibid, p. 305.

(11) Ibid, p. 32.

(12) Ibid, p. 320.

(13) Ibid, p. 321.

(14) Ibid, p. 297.

(15) Ibid, p. 329.

(16) Ibid, p. 329.

(17) Julius Segal, A Child’s Journey, Chapter 12 “Children Who Will Not Break” (McGraw-Hill, 1978), p. 282.

(18) E. James Anthony and Bertram J. Cohler, The Invulnerable Child (Guilford Press, 1987).

(19) Terrance Des Pres, The Survivor: Anatomy of Life in Death Camps (Oxford University Press, 1976).

(20) The Will to Live: Selected Writing of Arthur Schopenhauer, Richard Taylor, ed. (Doubleday & Company, 1962), p. 140.

The Resiliency Center was founded by the late Al Siebert, PhD who studied highly resilient survivors for over fifty years. He authored the award-winning book The Resiliency Advantage: Master Change, Thrive Under Pressure and Bounce Back From Setbacks (2006 Independent Publisher’s Best Self-Help book), and best seller The Survivor Personality: Why Some People Are Stronger, Smarter, and More Skillful at Handling Life’s Difficulties…and How You Can Be, Too.

One of the most frequent questions I am asked when visiting anglers are planning their fishing trip to Montana is “when is the best time to come out”. That question is impossible to answer so I generally try to feel out what is most important to someone: nice weather, lots of action, dry fly fishing, big trout, etc. If your top priority is catching big brown trout the answer is easier: October. There is no better time to fish Montana for large trout than October (and even November). Brown trout which tend to make up the majority of the trophy size trout that we see each year spawn in November and early December. Browns are notorious for becoming more aggressive prior to the spawn.

The aggressive nature of browns in the fall combined with the fact that they are on the move running up river and sometimes into tributaries can produce some heart stopping action for lucky and persistent anglers. Late fall fishing isn’t just about targeting huge trout, there can also be some great dry fly fishing over the baetis hatch. For most of our guides, however, we get caught up in chasing really big fish in the autumn months. Hunting huge browns in the fall isn’t for everyone and if you are going to play the game there are a few important guidelines worth considering.

Dress for Success October and November in the Northern Rockies can be notoriously unpredictable. Days can be warm and sunny or the snow can be blowing sideways. Make sure you prepare for any kind of weather from hot and sunny to cold and wet. If you are travelling all the way to Montana to chase big October browns you don’t want to be shut out just because some bad weather blows in. Although October and November are dry months, there will always be some early winter storms that move through and these often produce great conditions for browns that love low light conditions. I still wear gore tex waders but I also have long underwear and fleece pants to layer underneath as well as plenty of layers on top. Don’t forget the gloves and winter hat either.

Arrive at Peak Times Although big browns begin moving in late September, the best fall run fishing isn’t until after the middle of October and sometimes as late as mid November. The peak fishing on the Madison run above Hebgen in Yellowstone is usually the third week of October while monster browns on the Missouri usually don’t start showing up until November.

Throw Giant Streamers Most anglers know that big browns are predators and that fishing streamers is a great way to target them. If you are going to throw streamers in the fall don’t underestimate how big of a fly a huge brown will eat. I have seen big browns regularly eat relatively big trout in the 15” range – they often can’t swallow them all at once and spend a day with a big tail sticking out of their mouth. If you want to move fish over 24” make sure you are stripping the biggest streamers that you can find. I usually have to tie my own tandem hook streamers that are around 10” long. These massive flies are best fished on a seven or eight weight. They won’t put you into many small trout but if you throw them long enough you are sure to see some huge fish at some point.

Try Egg Patterns Whitefish, brown trout and brook trout are all fall spawners which means there are a lot of eggs bouncing around the rivers in October and November. Although huge browns tend to prefer a big meal, eggs are so packed with nutrients that even the largest browns will still eat them. There are days when fishing egg patterns under an indicator will outfish every other method for big browns.

Target Spawning Runs Although any large river that holds big browns can produce a monster in the fall, targeting fisheries that receive a spawning run of browns from a lake or larger river downstream is a good option in late October and November. Most of these fall run fisheries are no secret. Expect to see some other anglers if you are chasing browns on these fisheries that include the Madison in Yellowstone Park, The Lewis Channel in Yellowstone and the Missouri between the lakes. There are other locations that aren’t as well known that also produce a great run of fall browns if you do some legwork and experimenting. Even on the famous fall run fisheries like the Madison in the park there is always plenty of room and on a weekday with a bit of fall weather you will often see very few other anglers. November fishing is also extremely productive and the fishing pressure dramatically drops off with very few visiting anglers in the state and most of the locals out hunting.

A few years ago, I was listening to the Range podcast made by two of my friends—Julia Ritchey and Amy Westervelt. It’s a great show about life in the West, and this particular episode was about the controversies surrounding coyote hunting, but about halfway through the podcast, I noticed that people were pronouncing “coyote” two different ways: the three syllable “coyote” and the two-syllable “coyote.” Here are two clips:

Julia Ritchie (podcast host): After their first petition to get a coyote hunting ban failed, they tried again in November of last year, and about 40 people spoke. I tallied it up. (3:51-3:57)

Fred Knowlton (a retired professor who studied coyotes for 40 years): Personally, I don’t believe any of the coyote hunting expeditions by the general public are effective in reducing coyote numbers. (6:42-6:52)

I did some research and didn’t find anything definitive, and then I put the question out to the Grammar Girl Facebook page, and got more than 1,800 responses, which is why it’s nearly three years later that I’ve gone through all the comments, made a map, and am now telling you about it. Wow. Thanks for all that! I didn’t word the question in a way that makes this a scientific study, but 1,800 responses certainly rivals things I’ve seen published in journals.

Since then I’ve also done more research, so here’s what I found.

Many Ways to Pronounce ‘Coyote’

There are actually more than two different ways to pronounce it. You have “kai-oat-ee” and “kai-oat,” which you heard in the clips, but then some people pronounce it with a little bit of a different ending—“kai-oat-eh”—and people honoring the Spanish origin or who live near the Mexican border in the United States might pronounce it the Spanish way: “coy-yoh-tay.” And the Cambridge Dictionary says the British pronunciation is “coy-oh-tee.” So we can safely say there are at least five—five—different pronunciations that people are regularly using to describe this animal, and I bet there are some I haven’t even found. And that’s just in current times.

A publication from the late 1800sopens TEXT file by the American Dialect Society notes that at that time the word was often mispronounced as “cayote.” Although I’m guessing at the pronunciation. The “cay” part at the beginning is clear, but your guess is as good as mine as to how they meant people pronounced the last part. It could be “cay-oat.” It’s just spelled C-A-Y-O-T-E.

Most of what I’ll talk about next is just about the first two pronunciations because that’s what I asked people about, and I made a map of the responses. What will jump out at you first is that the “kai-oat” pronunciation is much more prominent in the middle of the United States than anywhere else—it spans a somewhat expanded Great Plains region.

All along the coasts and in the South and through the whole Minnesota-Wisconsin-Ohio region, people primarily seem to say “kai-oat-ee,” but in Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa, “kai-oat” seems dominant. Colorado, Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas seem like a mixed bag.

People from the University of South Dakota told me their mascot is the “kai-oat,” but that his name is Charlie, and sometimes they also call him Charlie “Kai-oat-ee.”

But when I started reading the comments themselves, two patterns emerged beyond big-picture geography.

Coyote: The Urban-Rural Divide

First, there seemed to be a clear rural-urban divide. People in cities are more likely to say “kai-oat-ee” and people who live in rural areas are more likely to say “kai-oat.” There were quite a few comments from people who said something like this:

I am from Los Angeles, and we say “kai-oat-ee,” but we would say “kai-oat” when we’re trying to sound like cowboys.

The Wile E. Coyote Influence

Second, there seems to be an age-related divide, with older people saying “kai-oat” and younger people saying “kai-oat-ee,” which, of course, leads us to Wile E. Coyote, the Loony Toons character who’s always getting an anvil dropped on his head by the Road Runner. That cartoon first appeared in 1949.

Many people speculate that younger, urban people say “kai-oat-ee” because the only experience they’ve had with coyotes is from the cartoons, and that may play a role, but I believe the three-syllable version is actually the older version since the word comes to English from the Mexican Spanish word “coy-yoh-tay,” which ultimately goes back to the Nahuatl word “coyotl.” (“koy-OH-tehl”)

I found one radio interview that said “kai-oat” was the original pronunciation in English, but it didn’t provide references, and I’m not convinced. The earliest citations in the Oxford English Dictionary seem to be a mix of the two-syllable and three-syllable version. It’s a mess. The first eight citations spell it seven different ways.

Noah Webster’s original dictionary, published in 1828, doesn’t appear to include the word. The Imperial Dictionary by John Ogilvie published in 1885 (an extension of Webster’s original dictionary), shows two pronunciations with the “kai-oat” pronunciation first, but Webster’s 1913 Unabridged Dictionaryopens TEXT file flips that around and shows the three-syllable pronunciation first, likely pronounced “coy-oh-te,” and then also appears to include an alternative two-syllable pronunciation. It seems that at least in the United States, people have pronounced it both ways for a long time.

For what it’s worth, the “kai-oat” pronunciation seems to be mostly limited to the United States and Canada. Nobody outside those two countries reported saying “kai-oat,” and the Oxford English Dictionary doesn’t include a two-syllable pronunciation. (But the Collins Dictionary does. Argg.)

‘Coyote’: Singular and Plural

And then there were a few comments that don’t fit any of the patterns, but seemed interesting enough to pass along. Two people, for example, said that they use “kai-oat-ee” as the singular, but “kai-oats” as the plural. And another person reported doing the exact opposite. I’m not sure what to make of that except that people are adapting the pronunciations to have different meanings.

‘Coyote’: Smugglers

Along the same lines, at least one person from southern California said he uses “kai-oat” for the animal and “kai-oat-ee” for a person who smuggles immigrants across the border.

‘Coyote’: A Mix of Pronunciations

Finally, there were multiple people who realized they say it both ways, and said they always feel like they aren’t even sure how it should be pronounced, and after going through all the comments and possibilities, I can say that I’m not surprised people are confused!

Quite a few people seem to use two different pronunciations depending on the context, whether they are talking about one or more animals, or even just randomly. Merriam-Webster calls the “kai-oat” pronunciation “chiefly Western,” but that’s not exactly what I found. Among my responses, almost nobody in California or Arizona reported saying “kai-oat,” for example. It could just be that the people in those states who say “kai-oat” aren’t active on my Facebook page, but that seems unlikely.

How to Pronounce ‘Coyote’

So after all this research, what do I think you should do?

If you’re in the U.S., both the two syllable and three syllable versions are fine. Use whatever you prefer or what’s dominant in your region.

But if you’re outside the U.S., it’s probably better to stick with a three-syllable version like “coy-oh-tee” or “kai-oat-ee.” But my research outside the U.S. isn’t as extensive, so if it’s important, you might want to look into it more.

Mignon Fogarty is Grammar Girl and the founder of Quick and Dirty Tips. Check out her New York Times best-seller, “ opens in a new windowGrammar Girl’s Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing.”

By Duncan Dobie

Taking a world-record buck is hard under any circumstances. Doing so with a 45-pound recurve and wooden arrows is even more remarkable.

Such was the situation in 1962, when then-34-year-old Lloyd Goad shot his 14-pointer in southern Iowa. At the time, the deer was the top bow typical of the modern era, at 197 6/8 net Pope & Young points, and he’d wear the crown for three years.

Lloyd died on Dec. 20, 1993, and remarkably little has been written about his great whitetail. The following was taken from his handwritten account of the historic hunt.

“I started hunting squirrels with a neighbor when I was about 14 years old,” Lloyd wrote. “Kenny was several years older than me. All of his close hunting buddies had been called off to service during World War II, but he was unable to go because of a heart condition. He was one of the finest hunters I ever knew.”

After getting married, Lloyd found a new hunting partner in his wife’s brother, Donald. They enjoyed many trips to hunt small game near the Des Moines River, in an area that later became part of Red Rock Lake.

Around 1953, the Conservation Commission opened a special deer season with a limited number of permits for a two-day shotgun hunt. It was a new experience for both men.

“Gradually our enthusiasm for deer hunting in Iowa spread,” Lloyd wrote. “We didn’t fill our tags each year, but for about six or seven years we had some very rewarding hunts.

“During the late ’50s, more and more shotgun hunters began to invade our territory,” he noted. “About that time, several of the original bowhunters in our area brought in the biggest bucks I’d ever seen! I decided the challenge of bowhunting for deer was something I wanted to try.

“Midway through the 50-day 1961 bowhunting season, I purchased some hunting equipment from the closest archery dealer around, a man named Elwood Stafford, who lived in Albia, Iowa,” Lloyd noted. “I bought myself a 45-pound York Crescent recurve bow and some cedar shafts tipped with Hill’s Hornet broadheads.

“Being a veteran bowhunter himself, Elwood was very helpful in showing me some of the fundamentals of bowhunting,” Lloyd noted. “I knew I should do a lot of practicing, so I acquired several bales of straw from a farmer. I placed them against the lube room wall of the service station (which Lloyd ran), along with several layers of cardboard.

“The longest distance I could get from the target without running the risk of having someone walk in front of an arrow was about 40 feet. Studying this distance from a gun hunter’s perspective, I said to myself, ‘This’ll be a cinch!’ But the many scars on the cement block wall were grim reminders of the misses and broken arrows that resulted from my first few practice sessions. After several days, though, I began to get the feel of a decent release, and I started shooting some reasonable groupings.”

With less than two weeks left in the 1961 season, Lloyd headed for the Monroe County woods. Hunting on the ground, he got a shot at a button buck — but the arrow sailed about four inches over the deer’s shoulder. Days later, Lloyd missed a forkhorn walking broadside at about 20 yards. That arrow deflected off a tree limb.

Although disappointed, Lloyd was now hooked on bowhunting. “Those two misses gave me more of a thrill than practically all of my shotgun kills,” he wrote.

Lloyd then had two more misses during the early weeks of the 1962 season. Little could he know that his next shot — only his fifth at a wild deer — would bring down one of the greatest typicals of all time.

“When the last day of the ’62 archery season appeared on the calendar wall at the service station — Dec. 2, 1962 — I was still without a deer,” Lloyd wrote. “I resolved to take the entire day off and hunt all day long, if necessary.

“The day began pretty much like any other — up early, a good-luck wish from my wife, Loretta, and I started on the 18-mile ride to my stand with the windows and vents open on my pickup to help rid my clothes of all household odors. Before heading into the woods, I applied a liberal dose of buck lure on the sleeves and legs of my camouflage suit and a little extra on my cap for good measure.

“To a large degree, the good fortune I was about to experience was due largely to several outings I had shared with a good friend named Paul Pearson,” Lloyd wrote. “Paul had been one of the best wolf hunters in southern Iowa during his younger years, and he taught me a lot about reading the woods and looking for deer sign — especially about trails and crossings. Since most bowhunters hunted on the ground in those days, my preferred method was to set up near a major trail not far from a little-used road crossing. You could get there quickly and quietly without spreading a lot of scent in the woods, and I found that deer liked to use these trails.

“When I reached the area I intended to hunt, I met a hunting buddy, Bob DeMoss, who planned to do some squirrel hunting in the same general area. I also ran into two other bowhunters. One had shot a doe the evening before, and he was back to look for it. He planned to continue his search in an area just north of where I wanted to hunt. His friend said he would cover a trail to the west, in case something was chased out.

“Bob decided to hunt squirrels in the timber on some state forest land just south of me across a dirt road. So I decided to hunt a well-used trail not far from the road — pretty much in the middle of all this activity — in hopes that something might happen.”

Lloyd quietly slipped into a small, triangular patch of woods near the right-angle intersection of two dirt roads. He took a stand next to a large elm not far from a fencerow that ran from one road to the other.

Hunting conditions were perfect. The area was cloaked in a heavy mist, the kind big bucks love to sneak around in. Lloyd barely had time to pick his spot before he heard a noise coming from toward the road.

“I took a peak around the elm, and there he came — slipping through the wild plum sprouts and sumac bushes with his h

ead down. He had so many points on his head that I couldn’t distinguish his antlers from the limbs of the bushes. My heart started pounding so hard I thought he must be deaf not to hear it,” Lloyd recalled.

“He walked up to the fence and stopped behind some brush not 20 feet away. I was behind the tree, and he couldn’t see me trembling. I could have taken a shot through a small opening in the brush at that time, but the experience of four previous misses had taught me that it was simply too risky. I waited.

“He just sort of melted over the fence with no effort. My bow was already in position, and all I had to do was pull it back. When I did, he stopped and looked straight at me at a distance of 18 steps. He was already beginning to whirl around and go back into the brush as I released.”

Lloyd waited a half-hour and then eased back to the truck. He met Bob a few minutes later and showed him the buck’s enormous tracks in the road crossing. Lloyd returned four hours later with friends, and they soon found the buck. Hit in a leg artery, he’d gone less than 150 yards.

“He carried 14 points and weighed 224 pounds field dressed,” Lloyd beamed. “I couldn’t have planned a more perfect ending to any season!”

This trophy had an almost perfectly symmetrical 7×7 rack, and at 197 6/8 typical, he was an easy archery world record. His mark fell three years later, when Mel Johnson arrowed his 204 4/8-inch typical in Illinois. That buck remains No. 1 in P&Y.

In 1986, Curt Van Lith arrowed a huge 11-pointer in Minnesota, tying Lloyd’s buck for No. 2 in P&Y. Their deer still share that spot, though they figure to drop with confirmation of the 203 3/8-inch Hubert “Tiggy” Collins buck, taken in Saskatchewan last fall. (See the February and August issues.)

Lloyd kept bowhunting for many seasons after downing his Iowa record. He was often asked how it felt to have to settle for shooting bucks smaller than one he’d already taken.

“Every deer is a new experience,” Lloyd would reply. “And every shot is a challenge. Not every deer will make the top of the record book, but they all make my book — bowhunting pleasure!”

Once one of Larry Huffman’s Legendary Whitetails, this giant now is in the “King of Bucks” collection at the American National Fish & Wildlife Museum in Springfield, Missouri. For more on the Goad buck, visit legendarywhitetails.com.

A native of New Jersey, this taxonomic relict dates back to 250 million years.

I must admit, as a kid I enjoyed playing in the mud with my older brother way too much. Little did I know, that as an adult I would find myself still reveling in that joyous childhood pleasure.

Ironically, some of my favorite fishing adventures occur in the muddiest and swampiest places that I could explore here in South Jersey. Previously, I had become quite addicted to catching monster northern snakeheads. At the time I never thought that I would find another species that would match that kind of adrenaline rush or that would thrive in such a murky, mysterious environment.

It’s a fish with as many monikers as Satan himself, and a hell-raising disposition to match. Mudfish, mud pike, dogfish, grinnel, and cypress trout, are just some of the names they are known as in different parts of the country. I had heard of them as bowfin, but never once encountered these singular beasts even though they were surely in some of the waterways where I had cast my line many times over when scouting for other, more familiar species.

It just goes to show that they have a knack for hiding in plain sight.

Where one might be inclined to cast far out in open water, bowfin could be lingering on the shallow bank underbrush submerged in the muck right at your feet. This king of the swamp really knows how to get down and dirty. Perhaps that is how they have survived for millions of years, because of their amazing ability to lay low.

A Prehistoric Native

Amia calva, yet another more formal name, date way back to the Jurassic period and their fossils have indicated that they were once widespread across North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. These fish are the only surviving member of a prehistoric family of fish known as the order Amliformes. They are thought of as a highly-evolved primitive fish given that they’ve not changed much from their earliest ancestors. I’d say they must have gotten something right to have outlasted the dinosaurs. Today their population is not as widespread as it once was and is limited to the eastern part of the United States, Southern Canada, and several rivers flowing from the Eastern Seaboard or Gulf of Mexico.

Bowfin are related to gar and share their fantastic trait of being air breathers. A swim bladder serves as both a float for buoyancy and as a crude lung. The primitive lung makes it possible for bowfin to survive in poorly oxygenated water and also helps them endure extended periods of time out of the water. Another species that shares this same quality is the snakehead, a fish often confused with the bowfin in appearance. But bowfin are native to our area and have been for millions of years, where the northern snakehead is believed to have been introduced in the past decade or so.

Northern snakeheads are considered invasive and it is recommended that they be destroyed when caught. Sadly many bowfin are erroneously killed when an angler does not spot the differences between the two fish. Key differences that set the bowfin apart from the snakehead are a black eye spot (in males) located on the narrow part of their body where their tail fin is attached, a shorter anal fin, a solid tan or olive coloration, a rounded head, and an upper jaw that protrudes past their lower jaw.

Bowfin have gotten a bad reputation for allegedly having a negative impact on the environment. It is feared by some that the aggressive fish take over waterways and devour popular gamefish or simply out-compete them for food stunting their populations. It seems strange to be thinking this of a fish that has been here for millions of years. The developing attitude towards these fish is similar to the truly invasive snakehead. Perhaps their all too similar traits are responsible for this shift in opinion.

We ourselves are not without blame for having a negative impact on the environment. The use of herbicides to clear vegetation for boats could pose just as much of a threat to the habitats of juvenile fish. Still, there are some studies that have been positive for this species, pointing out that bowfin are actually indicative of a thriving habitat.

Spring & Summer Target

These fish spawn in early spring or early summer, typically when the water temperatures reach a steady 60 to 65 degrees. This is the very best time to catch them in numbers. The males make the spawning beds over sand bars, under stumps, logs or bushes in depths of up to 3 feet of water. The males also sport a vibrant lime green coloration on their fins, underbelly, and on the inside of their mouths at this time. The females can produce up to 5,000 eggs, which the males will guard until the fry reach about 2 to 3 inches in length.

These cylindrical fish are ambush predators and can be caught on many of the same lures and baits used for bass. The gear that I use does not differ from anything that I would use for bass fishing. You can use either a spinning or a casting rod. I use a sturdy 6-1/2-foot medium/heavy spinning rod loaded with 30-pound braid. Braid is a must because these fish have very sharp teeth. In fact, you could find using a wire leader to be a wise choice. I just check my line for frays after I catch a couple, and if the line looks sketchy I re-tie lures or hooks as needed.

I prefer to use a reel that is sealed such as the Penn Fierce 3000 spinning reel because it doesn’t mind getting dirty or being beat on by these beastly fish. A strong super line 4/0 hook is definitely necessary when you are using bait. These bruisers can easily bend a standard hook wide open. Using cut bait has no doubt been my most successful choice for catching bowfin. It is said that their sense of smell is much greater than their sight, makes sense for a fish that thrives in stained water. I have also used shrimp and imitation crab meat with great success. When fishing cut or live bait I prefer to attach a bobber, but you certainly could fish bottom on the same rig you would use for catfish.

I find the bobber method to be more productive because you really know the moment they take the bait. Give them a few seconds swimming with it and hit them hard on the hookset. Their heads are extremely bony, and you have to really sink that hook to keep them on.

One major thing I have noticed when fishing for bowfin is that they do not spook as easily as your typical gamefish. I don’t know if it is because of their temperament, the spawn, or simply that they are not as targeted as other more sought after fish. It is pretty awesome though. So if you miss a fish on a cast, don’t worry. Let the bait sit for a minute or recast it back out to the same spot. Most of the bowfin that I have encountered have hit again, multiple times.

As far as lures, top water frogs and spinners have worked for me. The level of vegetation usually dictates which one is the better choice. Work the banks, around stumps, or under bushes. Often you will see a v-shaped wake come charging your lure.

Battle Tested Bruisers

Their ability to breathe air is very useful in the heat of summer when oxygen levels are low in the water. When they need to replenish their oxygen, they surface, release depleted oxygen through their gills and gulp a fresh supply of air through their mouths. It is a telltale sign as to where they are, so when you see a swirl cast a little past it and reel in. Jigging is also a good method to entice a bite.

Some people consider this species to be a “trash fish” but they can give a better fight than many of the popular gamefish. Pound-for-pound these fish are one of the most extreme fighters I have hooked in freshwater. I can definitely understand how someone might get annoyed if they aren’t expecting this kind of bite. Bowfin can really mangle your favorite lure or snap it off altogether.

The intense tug of war that ensues after hooking into one of these prehistoric beasts reminds me of the fierce battle that you would get with a northern snakehead. The sheer power of this predator is amazing and they never seem to tire. Both fish are agile as they torpedo through the water on the other end of your line. Snakeheads seem to be more acrobatic and can leap out of the water trying to throw the hook, whereas bowfin tend to have a more bulldog approach and dig straight for the sanctity of the bottom or underbrush to escape. You will have to play these fish diligently to land them, but as you pull them in you will see that they just don’t stop trying to free themselves. They often go into a death roll much like a crocodile.

Removing the hook from these toothy critters can be intimidating. A lip gripper and pliers are must have gear to get the job done. They tend to continue to thrash violently on the gripper; safely lay them down to avoid hurting them or yourself. Catch, photo, and release them as quickly as possible so you can get back out there and catch another. Most likely there will be more fish in the vicinity.

If you don’t have any idea where to begin to locate populations of these fish, take a little time and scout some swampy tidal waterways that you may have bypassed for the beaten path. They prefer well vegetated areas with little or no current. You may find yourself catching northern snakeheads in these same areas as well. Make your own adventure and find those hidden living fossils.

These prehistoric fish are a must catch for any avid fisherman; add them to your list. You might get a little dirty, but you’ll have so much fun doing it.

Best for the Beach and Soft Sediment

Orange Screw Ultimate Ground Anchor

Weight Per Stake: 1.82 oz | Material: 100% recycled polycarbonate plastic

If you often set up camp with a canopy tent on the beach or other areas with soft sediment, the Orange Screw Ultimate Ground Anchor is the stake for you. Its screw design, flexible plastic material, and length are the perfect recipe for a lightweight, durable, robust holding power machine in loose sediment where other stake designs struggle. Another bonus is that these screws do not require a hammer or an awkward balancing act to install by foot. Rather they use a plastic tube that threads through the top of the anchor for extra leverage to screw in by hand. Even if the anchor can only be installed 50% into the ground, the natural flexibility of the plastic and effective traction of the screw in the ground still provides an awesome hold.

Where the Orange Screw doesn’t shine is in hard, rocky ground. The main challenge in tough rocky earth is gaining initial traction with the anchor. As rocks shift and get dislodged as the anchor tries to dig in, it loosens up the ground reducing any traction the anchor might have had initially. This limitation to soft sediment already largely disqualifies these stakes from backcountry use, while the bulky size of these screws makes them an unrealistic option for backpacking as well. Overall, the Orange Screw is a durable option for staking applications requiring a strong hold in both horizontal and vertical directions of pull in soft to firm conditions. While you likely won’t see these miles away from the trailhead, there are plenty of uses like backyard canopies, camping, and festivals where these stakes can shine, plus the fact that it is made of recycled materials is an added bonus.

Compare Products

Compare select up to 5 products to compare

Why You Should Trust Us

We extensively researched the various types of tent stakes available on the market today, ranging from tri-beam, shepherd’s hook, nail peg, screws, and v-shape designs, and compiled a list of dozens of the most popular models today. Keeping overall performance and cost in mind, we narrowed our focus further to the top contenders for meeting a wide array of end-user needs. We hammered, pushed, and pulled each stake in and out of an array of different ground densities repeatedly to gauge durability, holding power, overall versatility, and ease of use to suss out the best of the best. With 80 uses applied per stake, we installed and pulled on stakes over 800 times. We carefully weighed and measured each stake to gauge overall packability while considering the inclusion of a stuff sack or not. We kept detailed notes along the way capturing surprise or unexpected performances and logged ideal uses in order to provide you with all of the information you need in choosing your next set of tent stakes.

As an avid outdoor recreationalist and industry professional, Hayley Walker has been adventuring and working in the outdoors since graduating from college in 2011. Whether it is backpacking, canyoneering, climbing, mountain biking, trail running, pack rafting, or all of the above wrapped up into a multi-sport adventure, she has spent countless nights out under the stars pitching tents and shelters. Her several years of experience as a rental gear manager for an outdoor guide and outfitting service has given her a depth of knowledge and experience when it comes to assessing camping equipment. She is no stranger to the ins and outs of tent stakes and their unending ability to bend or break at the most inopportune times. With a keen eye for the details and vast experience testing equipment for quality, Hayley put her knowledge to the test with this tent stakes review sussing out the top performers to help others rest easy on their camping adventures.

Analysis and Test Results

The criteria for comparison considers the important role tent stakes play in securing a protective and reliable shelter while out in the elements. Keep in mind your own staking needs and preferences as you consider the metrics and comparisons made between tent stakes below.

Value

Not all low-priced options are created equally. Some products present a better value than others, and though we don’t score the products we test on their price, we like to make note of products that provide a great price-to-performance ratio. We love the All One Tech Stakes, which come in a set of 12 and are lightweight, packable, and easy to use. This set is great for backpackers looking to shave weight and save money on gear. For campers who are less focused on weight but just need a solid, affordable stake to hold their tent down, check out the Coleman 10-Inch Steel stakes, a 4-pack of heavy-duty steel stakes. If you need a few more than 4, we recommend the Eurmax Galvanized, which are very similar but come in a 10-pack for a few bucks more.

Durability

Durability is one of the most important metrics we used to rank each model. While material and design play an important role in predicting potential overall durability, we wanted to know how well each tent stake could weather being repeatedly used in a variety of ground types including sand, soft soil, firm ground, and hard, rocky conditions in order to arrive at a real durability score. We installed 1 of each stake into all 4 ground types 20 times per ground type for an overall total of 80 installations per stake. Of those 20 installations per ground type, we used a hammer for 10 of them and our hands and feet for the other 10. Stakes were then scored across 3 metrics associated with durability; bend factor, guyline attachment points, and stake tip.

The recycled polycarbonate plastic Orange Screw Ultimate Ground Anchor surprised us with the highest durability score, showing very little wear and tear even after repeated uses. As expected, the steel Coleman 10-inch and Eurmax Galvanized stakes scored the next highest, especially under their ideal circumstances for use, with a hammer in soft to hard ground.

The Vargo Ti Shepherd’s Hook received a high score considering its minuscule weight, displaying promising integrity with its titanium material and natural flexing capabilities. The aluminum models struggled to keep up with the sturdiest models in regards to durability, but with careful use, they can enjoy a long life, too.

Packability

Packability is another key area of performance, especially when considering a backpacking or backcountry setting. Campers can largely ignore this metric, while backpackers are advised to tune in more carefully. We carefully measured and weighed each tent stake using a kitchen scale and measuring tape. Each stake within its set was measured and the average weight was scored relative to the other contenders. We measured one stake from each set to log and score the length and width. The smaller and lighter the stake, the higher the score. We also considered whether or not a set of stakes came with a stuff sack or not.

The most packable stakes were the Vargo Ti Shepherd’s Hook, the MSR Mini Groundhog, and the TOAKS Titanium V-Shaped, all of which were indeed lightweight and quite small in size. The Vargo Ti and the MSR Mini scored well for being the lightest of the bunch, while the TOAKS Titanium scored well for its ability to pack down into a neat, compact size by nesting into itself and for coming with a high-visibility, ultralight stuff sack.

Holding Power

This test metric measures how strong of a hold each stake provides across soft soil, firm ground, and hard rocky conditions. Upon installing each tent stake into the ground during our durability testing, we then attached a guyline to each stake and pulled at a near-horizontal angle to the ground. Across 20 pulls, we judged how easy or difficult it was to pull out of the ground. Scores were tallied either as an easy single-hand pull, a difficult single-hand pull, or a hard two-hand pull. Difficult two-hand pulls were then tallied for each stake across the soft soil, firm ground, and hard rocky ground types to give an average holding power score. We intentionally left out sandy conditions to give a more accurate representation of holding power under the most common circumstances. If a stake held strongly in one ground type but performed poorly in another, its overall holding power score was lower despite excelling under some circumstances.

Our strongest performers included the longer steel nail peg designs like the Coleman 10-inch Steel and the Eurmax Galvanized, which were able to dig down deep, maximizing their surface area and traction. The other top contender, especially in softer to firm ground types, was the Orange Screw Ultimate Ground Anchor with its wide screw design and length reaching and gripping effectively into the ground.

The other above-average performers included the TOAKS Titanium V-Shaped utilizing maximum surface area with its v-shape design and the aluminum tri-beam models like the MSR Mini Groundhog and the All One Tech stakes. Some of the shepherd hooks impressed us with more holding power than expected but still landed lower than the models mentioned above in this metric.

Versatility

Versatility determines overall stake performance and is based on scoring answers to a few basic questions. First, we consider how many guyline attachment points the stake presented. The more available options for attaching guylines increased the overall usability of a single stake. Second, we consider whether or not a stake requires a directional placement in the ground or if it can be placed in multiple directions. A directional placement requirement can be limiting, reducing its overall usability. Third, we consider the stakes’ utility across varying sediment densities, from loose sand to packed and dry dirt. Lastly, we consider whether or not it is still feasible to use a stake after it was bent or damaged through prior testing.

Our top performers for versatility included the All One Tech and MSR Mini Groundhog stakes for their overall solid performance in holding power, non-directional placement capabilities as tri-beam designs, and their ability to be used over and over again with minimal bending or damage. They are also lightweight enough for backpacking trips yet also work fine for camping.

The Coleman 10-Inch Steel and Eurmax Galvanized received higher scores for their ability to hold in sand where most others failed. Only the Orange Screw also performed well on the beach, although this screw is mostly limited to the beach or quite soft or moist sediment. The FANBX F Tent Pegs, while not the most versatile overall, did have a noteworthy performance in their continued usability despite getting bent out of shape early on in testing.

Ease of Use

Ease of Use is how user-friendly or not the tent stakes are. We used four criteria: ease of installation by hand and foot, ease of installation by hammer, the inclusion of a pull cord or equivalent, and the ease of removal from the ground. It should be noted that we did not use a hammer or foot to install the Orange Screw Ultimate Ground Anchor but rather, due to its design that utilizes its own mechanism for installation, based its ease of installation scores off of its intended installation method.

The top performers had pull cords and a tri-beam design in common, two factors contributing to easy removal and easier installation by foot. The winner here was the MSR Mini Groundhog, which was easier to install by foot than most others, hammered in quickly, and was a breeze to remove with the help of its pull cord. The notches are also very useful for keeping guylines in place.

The All One Tech came in as a close second. This model was equally easy to remove. However, its length made it a touch harder to install by foot. The Vargo Ti Shepherd’s Hook was another close contender. The slim profile made it easier to install in and around rocks. It was also easy to remove by hand with its hook design.

Conclusion

We used our professional experience working with rental equipment, our depth of personal experience pitching tents, and our extensive research and hands-on testing to bring you our comprehensive review and recommendations. After relentless usage in all types of environments, from sandy and soft conditions to our backyard lawn to rocky and unforgiving terrain, we documented stake performance through it all to identify the top models and their best uses, all with the hope of shedding light on what tent stakes make the most sense for your tent staking objectives and needs.

My flashlight lit up the narrow trail I hacked days earlier down to a wetland edge. The whitetails I targeted followed it with the regularity of New York City subway commuters. I stopped just short of the main trail and yanked a bottle of estrus-based doe urine from my pocket. With its misting nozzle I aimed for some nose-level vegetation on both sides of the trail and hazed the area lightly with scent.

As I climbed into my treestand in the predawn, I felt good that any buck passing would pause for a second, giving me precious seconds to draw and settle my Mathews bow for a successful hunt.

Some of you, firearm or archery hunters, probably question my decision to use scents. I know a handful of outfitters who flatly decline to allow the use of scent around their stands for fear of spooking deer. I don’t blame them. Cheap scents, poorly-executed deployment or lackadaisical scent control on your behalf all could lead to a whitetail spooking or worse, associating the smell with a trap.

One outfitter even told me of a hunter using a whole bottle to soak up a half dozen or more scent wicks that he hung like Christmas ornaments around his stand. He found them the next time he put a different hunter in that stand. It might have worked, but likely would raise white tails in alarm rather than stirring curiosity.

The use of deer scents can be a boon to your hunt, but only if you use them right.

PREPARE

To ensure you can get your scent positioned appropriately in shooting lanes, you need a plan. Begin by clearing paths to and from shooting lanes that you can use, thus avoiding direct travel on deer travel routes. Despite your best efforts to be scent free with clothes laundering, rubber boot usage and spraying down with scent-eliminating products, you still likely leave a bit of you on every branch you brush by. Your boots may even be spreading a bit of you on the ground.

How do I know? Coyotes give me the best gauge of my scent-elimination success. Whenever a coyote slips through the brush and crosses one of my access routes, I watch them for a reaction. Most of the time they hit a wall and slink out like a scolded dog, or worse yet, turn and flee. I rate a coyote’s sniffer one notch above a deer, but a buck could react the same way if you’re careless.

By avoiding the main trails and pruning access routes to shooting lanes from your stand, you avoid leaving any scent where you hope to shoot a deer. Clear and trim vegetation so you can move back and forth to your shooting lane without anything touching your clothes. Only your boots should hit the ground and those should be scent free as well. And as noted earlier, you simply use a mist or spray dispenser to lay a fog of spray where you hope to stop a buck for the shot.

You never have to step into a shooting lane and you can glass for spot-on accuracy. I follow this routine when hunting with my bow, even when I’m carrying my muzzleloader into dense cover.

This corridor-clearing chore should be done in the preseason, and at the same time you may want to create a mock scrape  for the perfect shot placement. Your goal is to create a primary scrape, one that gets attention, so scrape out plenty of dirt area. Deer love to scrape in areas with little vegetation, so make it easy on them and clear a wide area to reveal black earth. You can even mix in some deer urine for deep-earth penetration.

And to continue interest in the scrape, use a dripper to disperse scent. Models that heat up and open during the day to release scent, then shut down at night when it’s cool, fake the impression of daytime deer visits. If your trickery works, bucks will take over the scrape and eventually you won’t need to add any scent at all. Deer will provide their own scent distraction while you focus on shooting from a nearby hide.

PURCHASE

Picking out a deer scent from dozens of choices is about as confusing as trying to purchase the right perfume for the leading lady in your life. Do your research. You want to purchase high-quality, fresh scent, not leftovers from last year as they could break down and spook deer.

Some manufacturers claim their urine is from a single doe or buck. Others mix and match while some even have concocted synthetic versions. If your budget allows, go with those that fill bottles from a single deer, but truth be known, most of my experience with scents is with bottles filled in community whitetail restrooms.

As long as the urine smells fresh and doesn’t have an ammonia tinge to it you should be OK. As you shop look for bottles that dispense with a misting nozzle to deposit a diversion in shooting lanes. If you’re re-filling mock scrape dispensers no mister is needed. Keep any purchase cool and out of direct sunlight.

As for what scent to use, I’ve never really seen a huge difference. Straight buck or doe urine can sidetrack a buck, or doe during any season. I’ve used estrus-based scents from September through December with similar, curious results. If you believe an estrus scent could spook a buck in the early season, save it for the rut.

My entire theory on scents is to use them as a minor distraction to pause a buck where I want him to stop. After more than 30 years of hunting whitetails from Canada to Texas and points East and West, I’ve only had a handful of experiences where whitetails actually followed a drag or picked up a scent wafting on a breeze. Most stumbled upon it right where I placed it and paused out of curiosity. If it was the right buck it was the end of the story.

PLACEMENT

Despite nearly 30 years of having most bucks ignore my wafting wicks and drags, I still go through the drag-rag motion from time to time. Nevertheless, my true passion and success is with the simple placement of scent via a spritz or freshening of a mock scrape. When a buck is distracted with one of these scent traps, it’s less likely to see me drawing my bow or raising my rifle.

During the hunt, I prefer to stay away from shooting lanes. As described earlier, I try to stand a few feet away from a shooting zone and mist scent into the area. Lean out to where you want a buck to pause at your ambush site and apply the aroma of whitetail with a spray.

Sounds easy, but you need to place it correctly. Whether you spray or use a wick my experience has been it needs to be a nose level. I’ve sprayed and dribbled scent on trails only to have deer disregard it and walk over it like trash on a city boulevard. Wicks and spray dispensed at deer-nose level receive attention. It’s the sector they’re surveying as they travel, and that’s even more important during the rut as bucks pick up the pace — even trotting between ridges. They’re not as perceptive as you’ve read when on the hunt for a hot doe.

If you do need to freshen a scrape or refill a dispenser during the hunt, wear scent-free footwear. Splashing in mud or water on the way to your stand can help in adding natural cover scent to the tread. Also don latex gloves as you handle dispensers to avoid leaving any traces of you at the scrape. If a buck reaches up to rub its preorbital gland and suddenly smells the McMuffin you had an hour earlier it could lead to a string-jumping ending.

An hour after sunrise, a brawny whitetail buck I knew from trail cameras circled the wetland before me. I had a hunch his circle would end right under my stand and a few minutes later the scattering of does signaled his approach. Like a scripted movie he came down the trail and paused to investigate the scent I had sprayed two hours prior. Totally immersed in the olfactory delight, I was able to draw my Mathews and send an arrow off for an ending to my season that had the smell of success.

The terms “buckshot” and “birdshot” are often used a lot when discussing the different types of shotgun ammo. Many new shooters are confused about the difference between them, and that’s OK because we were all a little confused the first time we stepped up to the ammo counter.

In this article, we will explain the differences between birdshot vs buckshot so that you know exactly which shotgun loads to get for your shooting needs.

The Difference Between Buckshot and Birdshot Explained

The difference between birdshot and buckshot is the size of projectiles (shot/pellets) loaded into the shotgun shell and their penetration ability. Buckshot shells have larger pellets in lower numbers while birdshot shells have smaller pellets in much higher quantities. Buckshot loads have high penetration while birdshot typically has lower penetration ability.

Understanding Birdshot

Of these two shotgun shells, birdshot is the smaller of the two. Birdshot loads fire smaller pellets, but this allows ammo manufacturers to jam a lot more of them into the shell. When you pull the trigger on your Remington 870 or any other shotgun, the shot from the shell leaves the barrel and begins to separate and move outward from each other.

As its name implies, birdshot is primarily designed for hunting birds like quail, grouse, pheasant, duck, goose, and even turkey. However, birdshot is capable of small game hunting and is quite capable against rabbits, squirrels, and even snakes.

Although primarily developed for bird and small game hunting, birdshot is also used for shotgun shooting competitions such as skeet, trap, and sporting clays.

As small game animals and birds like quail and pheasants do not require a lot of stopping power to fell, birdshot loads are designed to give the hunter the highest probability of a successful harvest. This is why smaller pellets are used, as they create a wider pattern, and increase the chance of a successful hit.

Pellet shot size works on an inverse scale, just like shotgun gauge, meaning that the larger the shot number, the smaller the pellet size. For example, #5 shot is larger than #8 shot. The most common birdshot sizes you’ll see at the ammo counter are 7, 7 ½, 8, and 9 which can be used for bird hunting and sporting clays.

Although some birdshot loads can carry well over 500 pellets, these lightweight projectiles don’t carry a lot of kinetic energy. Although perfect for felling birds or bursting clay pigeons, they are less effective on large game or in self-defense.

For that you’ll need something with a bit more oomph behind it…like buckshot.

Understanding Buckshot

Buckshot, like its name suggests, was designed for hunting medium to larger game. As a “buck” is a term for a male deer, buckshot was primarily designed for whitetail hunting.

Buckshot fires larger pellets but fewer of them. Furthermore, they are often loaded with more powder than birdshot, giving them higher recoil but increased penetration and range. Just like birdshot, when you pull the trigger on that Winchester SXP 12-gauge shotgun, the pellets exit the barrel and begin to separate. However, unlike birdshot, buckshot typically has a tighter pattern as you want all that stopping power put into a smaller area to harvest big game.

Just like with birdshot, buckshot gauge is measured in reverse. This means that No. 4 Buck will be smaller than No. 1 Buck.

The most common buckshot load is 00 Buck. Pronounced “double-aught buck”, 2.75” shotgun shells carry around 8 pellets while 3” magnum shells can hold around 12 pellets. 00 Buck pellets measure 0.33” in diameter, almost the same size as a 9mm Luger handgun bullet.

Buckshot is typically not used on birds or small game due to the amount of kinetic energy it carries. Using buckshot on a bird is considered, by many, unethical and typically renders the majority of the meat inedible.

Although buckshot might not be the best choice for bird hunting, it’s widespread use by law enforcement has led many homeowners rely on a home defense shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot shells for protection.

Pattern/Spread

The way a shotgun shell disperses its shot on a target is referred to as its pattern or spread. The type of pattern a shell has is typically tailored to its intended purpose.

However, there are other factors that will affect pattern as well. Certain shotgun barrels are designed to constrict near the muzzle, thereby tightening the pattern of the shot as it exits the barrel. This is known as a choke.

Some shotgun barrels have the ability to have chokes screwed into them from the muzzle while others have a choke integral to the barrel itself. It is not advisable to fire shotgun slugs from a barrel with a choke.

However, when it comes to buckshot vs birdshot, buckshot will generally have a tighter pattern while birdshot will have a wider pattern.

This trend directly reflects what each shotgun shell is designed to do.

As birdshot is meant to be fired a fast-moving targets like pheasants or clay pigeons, shooters want a wider spread of shot to increase their chances of a hit. On the other hand, buckshot loads are designed to deliver all its power into a smaller, more localized area to ethically harvest larger game or for self-defense.

Effective Range

Shotguns are typically considered close range firearms, and neither buckshot nor birdshot is intended for long range shooting.

As spheres are not very aerodynamic, buckshot and birdshot will quickly lose velocity and kinetic energy as they exit the barrel and begin to spread. Birdshot is especially susceptible to this, as the small pellets don’t have much kinetic energy to begin with and are more affected by air resistance than heavier buckshot loads. However, as buckshot is heavier, it will be affected more severely by gravitational forces.

Effective range is highly dependent upon the pattern a shotgun load has in your firearm. Although there are some brands of shotgun shells specifically designed for longer range shooting, the general effective range for both buckshot and birdshot is around 40 yards.

Stopping Power/Penetration

A 12-gauge shotgun is highly regarded by military, law enforcement, and civilian shooters for being an incredibly powerful firearm for close range defensive situations or hunting.

Although buckshot and birdshot both generally have the same effective range, buckshot will have deeper penetration as it is firing a larger shot size with heavier pellets.

As the amount of kinetic energy needed to effectively harvest a bird is considerably less than what is needed for deer or home defense, birdshot is generally loaded lighter. On the other hand, buckshot is loaded hotter as it requires more penetration and kinetic energy to take down a deer or a bad guy.

Without question, buckshot will have deeper penetration and stopping power in most situations.

Price/Availability

Birdshot is more often less expensive than buckshot.

Shotgun ammunition is very affordable to the point that only extremely high-volume competitive shooters even consider reloading shotgun hulls.

For 12 gauge shells, target loads suitable for sporting clays or small game hunting, like Winchester Super Target, can be had for around $0.60/round. While a 00 Buck defense rounds, like Hornady Critical Defense, will generally cost upwards of $1/round or more.

The difference in price is often attributed to the difference in materials cost between the two types of shotgun ammo. Buckshot pellets are typically made from solid lead, while birdshot is typically made from a steel-core with only a coating of lead. Furthermore, buckshot is loaded with more powder and requires high-brass shotgun hulls to accommodate the higher pressure the shell creates. On the other hand, birdshot uses low-brass shotgun shells as less powder is needed to achieve the desired muzzle velocities for the smaller shot size.

Hunting

The best shotgun ammo for hunting primarily depends on what game animals a hunter plans on harvesting.

Birdshot is the ideal choice for upland game, quail, pheasant, ducks, geese, and turkey, while buckshot is better for hogs, coyotes, and deer or other larger game animals.

The simple truth is that buckshot is not needed for small game animals, as these thin-skinned critters don’t require a lot of kinetic energy to humanely harvest. Furthermore, birdshot increases the probability of a clean kill as it fires considerably more pellets in a wider pattern than buckshot.

On the flip side, birdshot is not powerful enough to harvest large game animals and lacks the penetration needed to reach the vital organs. The wide pattern of birdshot means that large game hit with it will likely only be wounded and endure inhumane suffering. This is where buckshot is the better option, as its deeper penetration and tighter pattern have the power needed to humanely harvest large game.

Make sure to follow all of your local laws regarding hunting deer with buckshot, as some states and territories prohibit their use and only allow the use of shotgun slugs for deer.

Home Defense

The 12-gauge shotgun is highly respected as an incredibly effective home defense tool. Many homeowners rely on the stopping power that 12 gauge shells offer, however there is quite the debate raging over the effectiveness of birdshot for home defense.

The major point of contention centers around over-penetration. As buckshot is more powerful, there is the potential that a round could pass through drywall and injure one of your family members. There is some merit to this point, as birdshot loses a lot of its kinetic energy at range, it is less likely to punch through drywall. However, do not fool yourself into thinking that drywall is impenetrable to birdshot, as a close range shot will punch through sheet rock with little issue.

It is this author’s opinion that a homeowner should NOT use birdshot for home defense, and instead use buckshot for its overwhelming stopping power.

When in a home defense situation, a responsible citizen should bring enough power to bear to stop a bad guy in a single shot. The truth is, unless you are at close range (around 10 feet or less), birdshot lacks the penetration needed for self-defense.

To illustrate this one need only recall a hunting accident in 2006 when then Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot Texas attorney Harry Whittington in the neck and chest with birdshot. Whittington’s injuries were non-fatal and he made a full recovery. However, this would have been a different story had Cheney been using buckshot.

Buckshot provides the penetration needed to stop a threat quickly, which is the goal of any home defense situation. Although there is the potential for over-penetration when using buckshot, the advantages buckshot provides far outweigh this. Following the cardinal rules of gun safety and knowing what lies behind your target is the key to protecting you and your family members in any home defense scenario.

Many shotgun ammo manufacturers like Remington, Hornady, and Winchester currently offer buckshot defense loads specifically tailored for home defense. These loads maximize the penetration capability of buckshot while minimizing the potential for over-penetration making them ideal for protecting your loved ones from harm.

Conclusion: Birdshot vs Buckshot

Buckshot and birdshot are two different types of shotgun ammo that have drastically different intended uses.

Birdshot fires a lot of smaller projectiles in a wide pattern that is ideal for hunting upland game, waterfowl, and for use in sporting clays competitions. Capable of firing hundreds of small pellets at a time, birdshot gives shooters a higher probability of scoring a hit on their target but lacks the penetration needed for self-defense.

Buckshot fires larger pellets in smaller quantities and tighter patterns to maximize penetration and stopping power. It is ideal for hunting medium to large game as well as for protecting the lives of yourself and your family members in a home defense situation. Although more powerful, buckshot does have the potential to over-penetrate, so care needs to be exercised when firing buckshot loads in self-defense.

Selecting the best shotgun ammo for you depends primarily on your needs as a shooter, just make sure that you get all of your shotgun ammo here at Ammo.com and be ready for any situation!