Non Toxic ammunition, Does your state require it for upland

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:24 am

Game Hunting.
What states require it on either public or private lands for Pheasant, grouse wood cock dove rabbit?

MNTonester · Post by **MNTonester** » Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:45 am

not yet and I hope it doesn't happen. I hunt with a number of old handed down shotguns and don't believe the cost of alternatives to lead for such guns is affordable for many people. Non-tox is required on Fed Waterfowl areas in MN

fishvik · Post by **fishvik** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:13 pm

Non toxic is only required for waterfowl in Idaho.

msuhunter · Post by **msuhunter** » Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:32 pm

Non tox required when hunting Waterfowl Production Areas in Wisconsin for any birds or small game. Dove hunting on state managed land requires non tox shot. Federal Wildlife refuges require non tox for any hunting other than deer.

Rik · Post by **Rik** » Sun Sep 28, 2014 7:00 pm

Washington, Oregon

Both states require non toxic shot for upland birds on all state land. Expect that all shotgun hunting in these states will require non toxic shot on private, state and Federal lands within the next two years. I hunt with an ancient Parker SXS and have converted to Bismuth shot at $2 t0 $2.50 a round and use lead for the range at $1.00 a round. I shoot maybe 100-150 rounds rounds a year while hunting, so bismuth costs me at most $275 more. I've become a better shot as a result of thinking about the 2.50 I'm about to spend when I pull the trigger. I may even start using a single shot. Will probably start to see fewer autoloaders in the field once we all have to use nontoxic...........

Wyobio · Post by **Wyobio** » Mon Sep 29, 2014 2:08 pm

Rik wrote:Washington, Oregon

Both states require non toxic shot for upland birds on all state land. Expect that all shotgun hunting in these states will require non toxic shot on private, state and Federal lands within the next two years. I hunt with an ancient Parker SXS and have converted to Bismuth shot at $2 t0 $2.50 a round and use lead for the range at $1.00 a round. I shoot maybe 100-150 rounds rounds a year while hunting, so bismuth costs me at most $275 more. I've become a better shot as a result of thinking about the 2.50 I'm about to spend when I pull the trigger. I may even start using a single shot. Will probably start to see fewer autoloaders in the field once we all have to use nontoxic...........

I shoot mostly an autoloader, and have killed many pheasants with #6 steel loads. These are not any more expensive than the typical pheasant loads, and I have not noticed any difference in the effectiveness or crippling rate. I use the steel loads when hunting waterfowl production areas in ND, and I usually hunt late season pheasants. The only thing I notice is that the steel shot shells have a really weird, unpleasant odor to the burned powder

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Mon Sep 29, 2014 3:55 pm

Wyobio wrote:
Rik wrote:Washington, Oregon

Both states require non toxic shot for upland birds on all state land. Expect that all shotgun hunting in these states will require non toxic shot on private, state and Federal lands within the next two years. I hunt with an ancient Parker SXS and have converted to Bismuth shot at $2 t0 $2.50 a round and use lead for the range at $1.00 a round. I shoot maybe 100-150 rounds rounds a year while hunting, so bismuth costs me at most $275 more. I've become a better shot as a result of thinking about the 2.50 I'm about to spend when I pull the trigger. I may even start using a single shot. Will probably start to see fewer autoloaders in the field once we all have to use nontoxic...........
I shoot mostly an autoloader, and have killed many pheasants with #6 steel loads. These are not any more expensive than the typical pheasant loads, and I have not noticed any difference in the effectiveness or crippling rate. I use the steel loads when hunting waterfowl production areas in ND, and I usually hunt late season pheasants. The only thing I notice is that the steel shot shells have a really weird, unpleasant odor to the burned powder

Your observations defy physics.

Wyobio · Post by **Wyobio** » Mon Sep 29, 2014 4:20 pm

Neil wrote:
Your observations defy physics.

Obviously, steel shot is completely useless for hunting and cannot kill birds.

People get really silly about steel shot. All I know, is that at reasonable distances, if you can kill birds with lead shot, they will die when you shoot them with steel shot. Not saying lead or other non-toxics are not ballistically superior, but I have eaten many wild pheasant killed with steel shot.

UglyD · Post by **UglyD** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:50 am

Utah- only Waterfowl

Rik · Post by **Rik** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:19 pm

Didn't mean to imply that expensive Bismuth rounds are the only answer to non toxic shot requirements. Steel shot works fine for upland birds, I use it in my modern weapons. I only use the Bismuth in my 50 -75 year old shotguns which are not rated for steel, or even for heavy modern powder loads.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 7:17 pm

Wyobio wrote:
Neil wrote:
Your observations defy physics.
Obviously, steel shot is completely useless for hunting and cannot kill birds.

People get really silly about steel shot. All I know, is that at reasonable distances, if you can kill birds with lead shot, they will die when you shoot them with steel shot. Not saying lead or other non-toxics are not ballistically superior, but I have eaten many wild pheasant killed with steel shot.

It was your comment that you had not noticed and difference between lead and steel that is just not supportable by fact.

How do you define "reasonable distances"?

Steel will kill, but it is not the equal of lead or the better alternatives, saying otherwise is just wrong. I don't care what you shoot, just don't give misinformation to others. You are the one being silly, I have science on my side of the argument.

MSU Aggie · Post by **MSU Aggie** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 7:55 pm

South Dakota requires non-toxic shot on public lands or walk in areas.

nikegundog · Post by **nikegundog** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 8:48 pm

MSU Aggie wrote:South Dakota requires non-toxic shot on public lands or walk in areas.

Not required on most SD GFP's walk in areas.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:23 pm

nikegundog wrote:
MSU Aggie wrote:South Dakota requires non-toxic shot on public lands or walk in areas.
Not required on most SD GFP's walk in areas.

And the few state lands that require non-toxic shot for upland game are wetlands or lake adjacent and clearly marked.

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 4:57 am

Neil wrote:
nikegundog wrote:
MSU Aggie wrote:South Dakota requires non-toxic shot on public lands or walk in areas.
Not required on most SD GFP's walk in areas.
And the few state lands that require non-toxic shot for upland game are wetlands or lake adjacent and clearly marked.

South Dakota requires non-toxic on all public land, With the exception of U.S. Grasslands,State School Land and Walk ins. It has nothing to do with adjacent water. The SDNR Highly recommends Non-toxic for all shot gun hunting.
I use cheap Non-Toxic 2 or 4 all the time because it seems to work about as well as lead. I do not like changing ammo every time we change hunting grounds and if you forget to change you might be paying a fine. Also it is the responsible thing to do............................Cj

nikegundog · Post by **nikegundog** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:42 am

South Dakota requires non-toxic on all public land, With the exception of U.S. Grasslands,State School Land and Walk ins.

Just for clarification, over two million acres of public lands fall into "exception class".

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:11 am

nikegundog wrote:
South Dakota requires non-toxic on all public land, With the exception of U.S. Grasslands,State School Land and Walk ins.
Just for clarification, over two million acres of public lands fall into "exception class".

More clarification. Most of the school land is private property and while it is legal to hunt it is difficult or impossible to tell where the boundaries are and in some cases access is very difficult. Generally speaking the National grasslands are not good pheasant hunting, some are good sharptail hunting.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:40 pm

Now I want to learn, I am either confused or I have been in violation for 20 years. In the part of SD I hunt, I can only think of 3 areas that require non-toxic, all are state parks, contain a lake, and are clearly designated.

So besides school land (which in our areas have roads running through them), grasslands (on which I have taken many phez), state parks, and walk-in, what other state land is there?

Put another way, how much land does require non-toxic? Certainly private land does not.

I sure hope I am not breaking the game laws. I am confused.

Neil

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 1:02 pm

I'm just curious as to Why it's the RIGHT THING to do? :roll:

MSU Aggie · Post by **MSU Aggie** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 1:07 pm

The way the GFP described it to me was road hunting and private land (including School Lands) are the only places not required to use non-toxic shot. Walk-in areas are a gray area, if they are state or federaly owned then non-toxic is required. However if it is private land that the state leases it may or maynot be required, check signage before entering. This has been in effect since 1998. The law is clear as mud, but most places I've hunted are clearly marked when non-toxic shot are required.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:09 pm

Here is what I found, I need someone smarter than I am to explain what it really means:

Non-toxic shot for shotguns is mandatory for small game hunting in South Dakota on all State Game Production Areas, State Parks and Recreation Areas and Lakeside Use Areas, U.S. ARMY Corps of Engineers land, Bureau of Reclamation land managed by Game (Fish and Parks), Federal Waterfowl Production Areas and National Wildlife Refuges, State Water Access Areas, National Waterfowl Refuges. Hunters should also use nontoxic shot when hunting in public rights-of-way (ditches) adjacent to public lands which require nontoxic shot. Instead of lead, try using steel, bismuth-tin, tungsten- iron, tungsten polymer, tungsten matrix, tungsten-bronze, tungsten-nickel-iron, tungsten-tin-bismuth, tungsten-tin-iron-nickel (Hevi-shot).

I still think water must be involved.

Help?

Tooling · Post by **Tooling** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:48 pm

Neil is correct

Tooling · Post by **Tooling** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:48 pm

http://gfp.sd.gov/hunting/areas/rules-information.aspx

Brooks Carmichael · Post by **Brooks Carmichael** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:11 pm

Washington State Fish and Wildlife rules of use of non-toxic shot. This is copied from their rules. As I interpret the rules this refers only to release sites not all Fish and Wildlife owned or controlled property or other state owned property or private property or all government property such as BLM or USFS lands.

To protect wildlife species nontoxic shot is required for ALL upland bird hunting on ALL pheasant release sites STATEWIDE.

Many US Fish and Wildlife Service refuges also require the use of nontoxic shot. See specific refuge rules.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:18 pm

Tooling wrote:http://gfp.sd.gov/hunting/areas/rules-information.aspx

I can't be right, as I am still very confused.

You think they want us to use non-toxic even when not officially required?

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:19 pm

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:I'm just curious as to Why it's the RIGHT THING to do? :roll:

If you want to discuss that start your own thread................Cj

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:01 pm

You brought it up in this thread didn't you? Right thing to do because you say so? I DON"T THINK SO!

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:06 am

It does look like in the western part of The SD there is more public land and accessible school land where lead is allowed...............Cj

Tooling · Post by **Tooling** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 7:23 am

This one caught my attention because we're heading out to SD in Nov and planning to hunt centered in Aberdeen and heading to the surrounding areas..primarily Britton, Langford, etc...mostly public areas but also working on securing some private land.

Appears to be a lot of WIA in the region - I read it the same way that Neil did and was surprised b/c that's all I've heard is - Non-Tox, Non-Tox period.

Was kind of relieved to learn that in most cases lead is fine and only planned on stocking up mildly w/ a couple boxes of non-tox "just in case"

Do I need to prepare heavier on the non-tox side? Is it common to arrive at CREP & WIA's only to have non-tox posted on signs trumping the primary guidelines?

cjhills · Post by **cjhills** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 8:03 am

Tooling wrote:This one caught my attention because we're heading out to SD in Nov and planning to hunt centered in Aberdeen and heading to the surrounding areas..primarily Britton, Langford, etc...mostly public areas but also working on securing some private land.

Appears to be a lot of WIA in the region - I read it the same way that Neil did and was surprised b/c that's all I've heard is - Non-Tox, Non-Tox period.

Was kind of relieved to learn that in most cases lead is fine and only planned on stocking up mildly w/ a couple boxes of non-tox "just in case"

Do I need to prepare heavier on the non-tox side? Is it common to arrive at CREP & WIA's only to have non-tox posted on signs trumping the primary guidelines?

Most of that area is lead. Not a lot of water fowl areas unless you go north. Sand Lake refuge is closed until the after the last rifle deer season. The WIAs and CREPS will be lead. Good Luck............................Cj

Tooling · Post by **Tooling** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 8:21 am

cjhills wrote:
Tooling wrote:This one caught my attention because we're heading out to SD in Nov and planning to hunt centered in Aberdeen and heading to the surrounding areas..primarily Britton, Langford, etc...mostly public areas but also working on securing some private land.

Appears to be a lot of WIA in the region - I read it the same way that Neil did and was surprised b/c that's all I've heard is - Non-Tox, Non-Tox period.

Was kind of relieved to learn that in most cases lead is fine and only planned on stocking up mildly w/ a couple boxes of non-tox "just in case"

Do I need to prepare heavier on the non-tox side? Is it common to arrive at CREP & WIA's only to have non-tox posted on signs trumping the primary guidelines?
Most of that area is lead. Not a lot of water fowl areas unless you go north. Sand Lake refuge is closed until the after the last rifle deer season. The WIAs and CREPS will be lead. Good Luck............................Cj

Thanks - the guidelines certainly seem rather straight forward and downloading the atlas certainly helps for locating areas.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 1:46 pm

I thought it was straightforward until it was posted otherwise. I am never more confused than when people present half truths. Lies I can detect, it is the misdirection that calls for deep thought. SD states we prefer that you use non-toxic everywhere, then it is very unclear where it is required. I am sorry it offends, but the leftists seem to be every were.

But to answer the question about SD, if it is not clearly posted otherwise, I am shooting lead. Been doing it for 20 years.

Edited - I first went to South Dakota in 1972, there were many interruption.

MSU Aggie · Post by **MSU Aggie** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 6:25 pm

When in doubt call the GFP and/or game warden. That is the fastest, easiest way to put your mind at ease.

Neil · Post by **Neil** » Sat Oct 04, 2014 9:14 pm

MSU Aggie wrote:When in doubt call the GFP and/or game warden. That is the fastest, easiest way to put your mind at ease.

Have you ever followed your advice?

First you have no record, try defending a citation based on a phone call. Second I don't always have an hour to be placed on hold. The guys in the Field are great, those in the office, not always.

I ran in to a large flight of Woodcock in far Western SD, called to see if they were huntable as they were not listed in the regs to be told there were no Woodcock in the state. Anyone want to guess how many timberdoddles I have seen in flight after 40 years of hunting them, including 20 trips to Louisiana?

Usually I can decipher the written regs.

MSU Aggie · Post by **MSU Aggie** » Sun Oct 05, 2014 6:26 am

Yes, I do follow my own advice. I generally call the GFP if I have a regulation question. But I typically do it before the season even starts. Like I said earlier my input comes from a conversation with the GFP. If you think I'm wrong there is 2 weeks before the season starts here, plenty of time to contact them with any questions.

Tooling · Post by **Tooling** » Sun Oct 05, 2014 8:16 am

Calling ahead of time and studying resources online etc does not always prepare you and you have to be prepared for that - I've spent hours on the telephone in a parking lot or in front of a field gate trying to get info on the fly - have even been given misinformation. I can assure you - if you are out of state, the state you are visiting welcomes you with a smile and they also smile pretty wide when you are billed the maximum fee for an infraction. Try defending the fact that you were given misinformation from the agency who is imposing the fine, after the fact and given via telephone. It pretty much sucks and seems to be the cost of enjoying the hunting opportunities sometimes..I try very hard to avoid it.

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:31 am

Just for your info on the asking game wardens,from my experience some times they are as confused about the game laws as they try to keep the public.A couple examples from my & others experience.Several yrs back we use to have an early ML deer season & the then game warden from that county said if you had a 2 barrel muzzle loader only one barrel could be loaded even though the laws stated 1 ball per barrel.That same game warden plus others from different counties were giving citations for not firing their guns off at quitting time even though the laws stated if the cap,or priming powder were removed they were unloaded.We were actually at a groupd meeting when the last of these 2 examples came up & the head DNR man at this meeting said if all the people that had paid fines for these citations & had proof their money would be returned.This letter from the email stated if a ML has 10 barrels they all can be loaded with 1 ball per barrel & if the cap or priming powder was removed from the ML it was considered unloaded,this game warden use to come into camp quite often before that letter but ceased to & retired a few yrs after.

We had a guy at the deer hunting camp that called Columbus DNR office & had an email sent to the forest manager at the office of the designated Forest we camped & hunted in for that primitive weapons season to show the game warden & get him set straight.So Game wardens would not be my choice to ask because some times more then you know they don't know the law either,most people just go ahead & pay the ticket,it's cheaper & more convenient in most cases.
The letter came from the man that wrote those laws!!& not any one elses interpretation!!

Just a little after thought when we brought out our game laws that we received when you buy your tags & license he wouldn't even look at it,said those are just guidelines not the laws.Then he goes to his vehicle & brings out a big thick note book & says this is the Green book & it contains the laws,that little pamphlet you have means nothing.

cutty72 · Post by **cutty72** » Sun Oct 05, 2014 8:42 pm

North Dakota.

Non-tox required for:
-All waterfowl hunting.
-Wetland production areas

Otherwise, lead is fine.

TonyS · Post by **TonyS** » Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:19 am

Here in California you can still shoot upland game with lead. Of course not ducks.

After 2019 lead shot will not be allowed. Seeing how there is next to nothing of non-toxic ammo other than steel I will have to buy a new shot gun. I just can't afford $20 for 10 shots (non-toxic) From what I have heard from others they will ignore the non-toxic rule and take the ticket.

This is the same state that protects mountain lions and the public can't understand why those cats eat their pets and try to take their children.

mtlhdr · Post by **mtlhdr** » Thu Oct 09, 2014 12:48 pm

Here in California you can still shoot upland game with lead. Of course not ducks.

After 2019 lead shot will not be allowed

Hunting with lead throughout the entire state will banned by 2019, but they are phasing in the ban starting in 2015 with state lands (wildlife areas, etc) (as currently proposed).

orbirdhunter · Post by **orbirdhunter** » Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:18 pm

Unless I am missing something in Oregon for upland game non toxic shot is only required in certain wildlife management refuges and state parks. Most public and all private land is ok for upland lead shot....Same with Washington, Designated wildlife management area's and refuges are non toxic, rest of state lead is ok....

For Now......

TonyS · Post by **TonyS** » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:47 am

If you live in a state that is going to require non-lead then please write to Sinterfire Ammo. They make non toxic bullets and with some encouragement can probably make shot that will cost 1/4 of what tungsten, bismuth and other alternatives are costing now. They just need to know there is a market.