Legal steel, legal lead

Since my waterfowl hunting is exclusively jump-shooting along the crik, I just use one shoulder bag for waterfowl hunting with steel shot only in it; a second bag is used for pheasant with lead shot shells exclusively.

Since limits in WI are two daily, the shoulder bag makes it simple to keep gear, water bottle, etc. in it, and just throw it over whatever jacket is appropriate for the day's weather. Two pheasants or three wood ducks just don't take up that much space.

Separating the two types of shot-shells makes it simple to avoid an expensive over-sight.

And yes, I've been checked in the field...by the only DNR warden I have met who was truly and profoundly obnoxious. Young, snotty, VERY impressed with his authority, and damned-near belligerent in his approach. It gave me great satisfaction to make him unzip his outer clothing to show me his credentials in the frigid temps with driving sleet before I let him have my shotgun. He had EXACTLY the wrong personality to be in any position of authority.

The good news is he truly has been the only arrogant enforcement officer in DNR I have ever encountered.
 
In S Dakota last year we had a FWS warden check our licenses while out pheasant hunting on a Waterfowl Production Area. He never checked our shells for lead. I asked him what the fine was for having lead shot. He said it was the smallest fine they write, $50.
 
Best article I have read in a while! Yes steel shot has ruined fine guns. We all might get the plastic stocked, camoflaged, steel shuckers. By the way, I did an informal study on my duck club, and determined how many waterfowl get crippled and make it to the bean field of about a 1 1/2 miles wide, the next property over. Suffice to say, it's alarming. I guess a 30-40% of each flight. Do we account for that? I don't think I have seen recordings of lost birds in the ledger! With waterfowlers, doesn't seem to be any real impetus to find cripples, as in getting out and walking a mile with a retreiver. I am an uplander, became a waterfowler because I got old and have a weak heart. The heart gets weaker when I see geese, or ducks, cruise down the dike, getting lower and lower, knowing they will drop and suffer around for a few days, a mile or two out, down in the bean stubble. The uplanders I know, men and dogs, will have hell freeze over before abandoning a bird, no matter how far, and the obstacles. At the duck club it's me driving down the road to get permisson to tresspass and see what I can find, not the guys who shot them. I know the published statistics, I still wonder if lead was better or not? I sure do not like seeing this. For me they better be trying to sit in the blind, and close enough that I might need a room! Or I hold my fire. I have had some perplexing misses, with nice shot, and steel, on pheasants and ducks, I chalk it up to old eyes and co-ordination, but thankfully no cripples me and my hairy brother couldn't find. Looks like to me, for waterfowl, avian cholera is the decimator now, along with plowing up the praire, and draining seasonal wet spots. Lead looks a long way down the list. But I agree, that ship has sailed. Without DU, supported by hunters, ( who shot lead!), we probably would not have huntable waterfowl now! So apologies to Sierra Club, PETA, your all late to the dance.
 
oldandnew said:
The uplanders I know, men and dogs, will have hell freeze over before abandoning a bird, no matter how far, and the obstacles.
Click to expand...

I never really thought about it, but you are right. Not really sure why, but I have friends that are avid waterfowlers that hunt upland as well, and they will put way more effort into retrieving a crippled upland bird than a crippled duck.
 
mnmthunting said:
Yeah, and the CMR is not managed at all, for waterfowl. There really is nothing for natural wetlands or potholes. Sage hills and Breaks on both sides. 1,100,000 acres. The big lake is not good waterfowl habitat. There are a lot of man made stockponds in the coulees. These are excellent waterfowl production areas. And early season waterfowl hunting, both honkers and puddle ducks:thumbsup:

In the hunting Regs, says, Pheasant hunting is allowed on th e CMR. I ain't gonna say there are no pheasants on the CMR. :confused:
But if You can find one I'd be REALLY surprised. :eek:
Click to expand...

I have hunted pheasants on CMR, the upper end has birds, you can hear them crow even in the fall in the bottoms. However, getting a shot in those 20' tall doghair willows, that is another story. I understand in the 50 and 60s when there was still farming in the bottoms (Slippery Ann area) there were lots of pheasants. I have heard the Musselshell bottoms have some birds but I never seem to make time to go check it out. A few years ago, when the Ft Peck was really low and we had a series of mild winters, there were birds along the edges near Hell Creek, a friend was hunting them using a boat and two hunters, drop one off and walk in the direction of where the other hunter parked the boat and just keep leap frogging until the limit was in the bag, true story! Pheasants survive in some amazing places! :cheers:
 
mnmthunting said:
I thought all Federal NWR's require non toxic for all bird hunting.
All other federal lands open to public hunting such as National Forests and BLM lead is allowed for up land, same thing for state owned land, except for State owned Waterfowl Production areas, non toxic only.. If Your hunting waterfowl on any land You can NOT have lead on you. Your truck Yes.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I was hunting a federal WMA this past year to see what I could kick up and was also planning to walk a state section later. No luck with pheasants, but did drop a passing goose. As I'm walking back to the truck, FWP showed up. He checked licenses, plug and ammo. I had only non toxic in my shell bag. He asked if I had any lead in the truck, I told him yes. He told me that technically the lead was in my posession, even though it wasn't on my person. He gave me a verbal warning and was very nice, probably because everything else I did was legal. Needless to say I was confused. I went to the FWP office and spoke with the captain. He told me it is kind of a gray area that needs to be addressed because it is a little confusing. Even though it was in the truck, I could have gotten a ticket.
 
MTtailchaser said:
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I was hunting a federal WMA this past year to see what I could kick up and was also planning to walk a state section later. No luck with pheasants, but did drop a passing goose. As I'm walking back to the truck, FWP showed up. He checked licenses, plug and ammo. I had only non toxic in my shell bag. He asked if I had any lead in the truck, I told him yes. He told me that technically the lead was in my posession, even though it wasn't on my person. He gave me a verbal warning and was very nice, probably because everything else I did was legal. Needless to say I was confused. I went to the FWP office and spoke with the captain. He told me it is kind of a gray area that needs to be addressed because it is a little confusing. Even though it was in the truck, I could have gotten a ticket.
Click to expand...

That one I would put my foot down, take a stand and say enough!. They have no law for you having lead in your vehicle. Whats next, ticket you when we walk out of Walmart with shells. LOL I would report it to the superior above them.
 
FCSpringer said:
That one I would put my foot down, take a stand and say enough!. They have no law for you having lead in your vehicle. Whats next, ticket you when we walk out of Walmart with shells. LOL I would report it to the superior above them.
Click to expand...

The funny thing about it was that I saw him driving down the road towards my truck. He sat and watched me walking out of the field back to the truck. He used the phrase "in your possession", which I told him could go for the ammo I have back @ home too. To me there's a big difference between "in your possession" and "on your person". It's confusing to say the least. If he had written me a ticket, I would have fought it in court.
 
Last edited:
FCSpringer said:
That one I would put my foot down, take a stand and say enough!. They have no law for you having lead in your vehicle. Whats next, ticket you when we walk out of Walmart with shells. LOL I would report it to the superior above them.
Click to expand...

I was just reading the non-tox regulations for South Dakota. I would guess the SD Regs are worded much like they are in most states. It says, "Lead shot may not be possessed while waterfowl hunting or while hunting small game on the areas listed above." I believe the key word here is "possessed". Webster's definition of "possess" is "to have and hold as property, own. to seize and take control of, take into one's possession. to enter into, control firmly."

There is no doubt much grey area here. How someone interprets the definition. I don't believe the intent of the law was to include the shells you have in your vehicle. I think if someone was ticketed for having lead shot in their vehicle while hunting an area requiring non-tox that it would be difficult to make that charge stick in court.

Perhaps the states need to be a little more clear on this. It would be easy to simply define "possession" as "being on your person." Either the state game commission or the state legislature should address this issue.

But as we have seen in other laws and regs in various states, a lot is left up to the CO's to interpret in the field. and we have also seen cases where the CO's don't even know the law. (i.e. a CO recently told FCSpringer you couldn't use lead on state lands in Minnesota?
 
Dakotazeb said:
I was just reading the non-tox regulations for South Dakota. I would guess the SD Regs are worded much like they are in most states. It says, "Lead shot may not be possessed while waterfowl hunting or while hunting small game on the areas listed above." I believe the key word here is "possessed". Webster's definition of "possess" is "to have and hold as property, own. to seize and take control of, take into one's possession. to enter into, control firmly."

There is no doubt much grey area here. How someone interprets the definition. I don't believe the intent of the law was to include the shells you have in your vehicle. I think if someone was ticketed for having lead shot in their vehicle while hunting an area requiring non-tox that it would be difficult to make that charge stick in court.

Perhaps the states need to be a little more clear on this. It would be easy to simply define "possession" as "being on your person." Either the state game commission or the state legislature should address this issue.

But as we have seen in other laws and regs in various states, a lot is left up to the CO's to interpret in the field. and we have also seen cases where the CO's don't even know the law. (i.e. a CO recently told FCSpringer you couldn't use lead on state lands in Minnesota?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you this, having lead shot, in your car is possession , with no need for a search warrant if it's visible. This works for drug possession, a firearm, even unloaded for a felon, and anything else the framers of the "Patriot Act" can summon up. Possession?, you have the keys to your car in your pocket, probably it's titled to you, possibly you have waterfowl in your car or are putting it inside your car or are about to. I have seen waterfowl hunters on property we OWN, be cited with a cooler with an address and name on it, because the ducks are not indivually tagged seperately, some of which had no wing, being chilled for dinner, inside the house, on our duck club property. I guess I was glad that we didn't have lead shot on the property! Who knows. Maybe you can fight it, in Federal Court, ask your attorney what it will cost, probably around $5000.00 or more, and you might loose, and be subject to abuse, like audits from the IRS, unexpected visits to you, your friends, in order to get you to see the light and pay the $50.00 fine. You see, in Federal Court, the government always wins, from the sublime to the outrageous. I'll leave the lead in the closet if I am anywhere near a WPA, hunting waterfowl, see waterfowl, have a feather in my car, waders in my trunk, or a lanyard with a call on my rear-view mirror. Might rub mud on my DU bumper sticker too! We live in outrageous society, keep your dog on a leash in town, if you reach for your cell phone and weave, a do gooder will rat you out on the cell phone, as a drunk driver. If you kids rough-house around and bruise each other, you'll get a call from the school, or worse, a report to family services. Don't get me wrong, I do not support drunk driving, don't even drink, or being cautious about Kids and their well being, but your neighbors and the homes association peering through your back fence, encouraged by Uncle Sam, and the Patriot act, disturbs me. I remember believing that as free citizens in a free society, we extend each other the benefit of the doubt. If they clearly need help, maybe we do what we can to help, before we or the government make the situation worse, for everybody. Seems like a guy has steel shot in his vest, and waterfowl, might be inclined to be believed! Regardless of any lead anywhere else.
 
Whoa! Holy Crap, I didn't mean to open up that big a can of worms. Let's not take things to the extreme.

I have always carried lead and non-tox in my vehicle together. I'll continue to do it. But on my person in the field if non-tox is required all the lead will remain in the vehicle. Never been a problem in the past and I don't anticipate it being a problem in the future.
 
If I'm headed someplace where I know I might jump some ducks while pheasant hunting, I'll fill the shell bag with non toxic. If I'm in an area with no waterfowl, I'll just take lead. I carry both types of ammo in the truck all the time, but they're in an ammo bag, not visible or in plain sight.(on the floor behind the seat) I guess if I'm only doing waterfowl that day, I'll leave the lead at home to avoid any problems. It would make more sense to me if the laws were written in a more direct and concise manner. The way it's written here in MT, it's really open to interpretation and who/how they interpret it. My dad spoke with a warden in a different district about what happened to me and that warden disagreed with how the warden I dealt with interpreted the law.:confused: Not really sure who's right or wrong.
 
If a CO is one of those types that is an extremist as far as the use of lead shot.

LOOK OUT!! He will write You up. Waterfowl and lead shot in Your vehicle.:(
How are You going to prove You didn't have lead in Your pocket?
The Judge is not going to pay much attention to Your case.:confused:
 
Here you can have what ever you want in your car for shells, wether it be 50 cal or 6 shot lead while duck hunting. Now, grab your gun put some in your pocket and set foot in the field, thats where it starts. If you in any state are putting up with anything less, you need to get the voice out, vote out stupid laws, those who write them, and do something about it. Take a stand now, and never! give up more rights with out a fight, period. Just my 2 cents.;)
:cheers:
 
david0311

mnmthunting said:
If a CO is one of those types that is an extremist as far as the use of lead shot.

LOOK OUT!! He will write You up. Waterfowl and lead shot in Your vehicle.:(
How are You going to prove You didn't have lead in Your pocket?
The Judge is not going to pay much attention to Your case.:confused:
Click to expand...

You don't have to prove you did not have lead in your pocket--he would have to prove you did--

have been to court many times over the years believe very few judges would not side with you in a case like this

also any officer that would write that would be in line for (avian excrement) ticket of the year award---

despite some of the previous posters have said most officers have common sense enough to look at the intent of the law---(and I know there are some who don't--go to court if you feel you receive an unjust ticket --I would)

regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top