Lead Shot Ban

I really like shooting lead. I don't mind steel but I just don't think it kills as well. Maybe I read the article wrong but if they are trying to protect wetland why would they exclude northern grouse woods. Just ban it all together on any public land.
 
I agree with Tbear.... go big or go home. Just pull the band-aid off and be done with it.

I use only steel because I bounce around to a lot of WPA's and emptying my pockets every time I switch spots is a pain. I would

I guess I've never really had an issue with the performance of steel. I generally don't take real long shots.
 
I agree with Ryan Bronson of Federal Cartridge. There simply is no data that supports lead is negatively affecting upland game on WMA's. It's more or less a feel good proposal that is mostly image related.
 
I personally don't really care what they do, I always have steel with me anyways because you never know when you'll decide to hunt a WPA. However, (this comes from no actual testing, just what I feel like has happened to me over the years) I feel like I shoot lead MUCH better and have far fewer birds that get wounded and take off running when they hit the ground, as opposed to shooting steel. That comes from no patterning or anything, maybe I just always "happen" to have a bad shot with steel, who knows.
 
Thanks for your interest guys! Again, please contact the DNR with your thoughts. They have contact info on the bottom of the page.

I emailed them with essentially the same comment Birdshooter made. I would fully support a lead shot ban if the science suggested that the lead actually affect the upland animals. The decision should be an informed decision, and not based on pressure from outside groups or politics.
 
mnaj_springer said:
Thanks for your interest guys! Again, please contact the DNR with your thoughts. They have contact info on the bottom of the page.

I emailed them with essentially the same comment Birdshooter made. I would fully support a lead shot ban if the science suggested that the lead actually affect the upland animals. The decision should be an informed decision, and not based on pressure from outside groups or politics.
Click to expand...

I agree with you both. Steel thing has been a farse since day 1. Bunch a hooy. Lead kills. Steel cripples way way more birds. Both waterfowl and upland. Thanks for the info I will send my thoughts.
 
Probably too many tickets and warnings handed out because of the shell switching going on...

MN pheasant hunting licenses are on a downward trend ... it is probably more a PR thing and not a science thing ...

Ever notice all the dead birds around all the trap & skeet and sporting clay ranges ... Not.
 
I cripple and loose a lot more birds with steel then lead. I know what your thinking probably my shooting. I just get sick of being so regulated!
 
BRITTMAN said:
Probably too many tickets and warnings handed out because of the shell switching going on...

MN pheasant hunting licenses are on a downward trend ... it is probably more a PR thing and not a science thing ...

Ever notice all the dead birds around all the trap & skeet and sporting clay ranges ... Not.
Click to expand...

You're right and that's kind of my point. The decisions made by the DNR should be based in science though. Otherwise the management of our natural resources, and therefore the resources themselves, are up for sale! I can't stand for that.

As for too many tickets, shouldn't that benefit the DNR and their funds? And why change the law to help the law breakers. I mean, the speed limit does not increase in areas they give more tickets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top