At the risk of anthropomorhizing a squirrell, I think I would prefer drowning. Being shot, whether with an air rifle, or a regular firearm is NOT an instant death, unless you can get right up on top of the critter and get perfect shot placement, with a large enough projectile to completely sever the spinal cord. Very often, an animal that is shot is likely to suffer more than an animal that is drowned.
I have never drowned an animal, but I'm not above it.
Numerous times I've called the game warden about a sick or injured animal, and the response is alway the same, "Just let nature take it's course." Should the game warden be hauled in to court and be made to pay a fine or court costs for allowing an animal to suffer for days before dying?
What do you think the dying animal would prefer, if we could ask it? Dying in a few minutes by drowning? Or a slow agonizing death of hours maybe days by nature's course?
He might have shot the squirrell, and it may have taken longer, and caused more suffering to die from being shot than being drowned. Even a trapped animal is hard to get a good clean painless shot on. And if you're in the city limits, as I am, even air rifles are illegal. What should he have done? Taken it to someone else's property and released it and let it become someone else's problem? Or taken it to the vet and had it euthanized for a fee of what? $30? Give me a break!
Drowning seems like a horrible way to die for us as humans, but for those who are actually in tune with the harsh realities of nature, it's better than MOST alternatives.
Just my opinion.
Regards,
Brian