smooth bore and steel shot

[paulvallandigham]

If that is all the evidence that an officer has- ie, that your shot dropped into a pond or barrow pit after hitting a pheasant, I don't see that ticket getting very far. I always demand a jury trial for my clients who are charged with conservation offenses. This forces the Prosecutor to prepare a written jury instruction setting out the elements of the offense. Most can't do that. And, the idea of asking 12 members of the public to convict you on that kind of evidence just doesn't inspire prosecutors to go after this kind of complaint. IF that Strick INterpretation of the law were to be applied, it would require that hunters of upland game stay at least 300 yds away from all bodies of water, and that would eliminate much of the hunting habitate in the state. If the Department wanted that to be the law, they would set it out in a regulation, have the public comment period, here the screams from local legislators who are inundated with complaints from their voters who hunt, and then quietly forget it. DO NOT Allow some wannabe Hitler with a badge to get away with this kind of thing. See your local attorney and pay him to send a letter of complaint to the head of the DNR about the officer's threats and strange interpretation. The lawyer can add his own professional concerns about the officer's interpretation of the law. If I were the attorney , I would send a copy of that letter to the Attorney General for your State, also, with a separate cover letter asking the AG to advise you if this is his interpretation of the Game laws, both State and Federal. A copy to the local U.S. District Attorney with the same request would also be in order. Between those three appointed and elected officials, some manure should hit this officer's air conditioner. :grin:

 

[Rusty Old Gunns]

Ah, but Paul, my friend. You are a gentleman and follow the rules. There are those out there who do not.

And of course the violation must be whitnessed before a summoms may issue, So if a conservation officer sees someone in wetlands, say... I think a warning, or even a threat for those who seem unrepentitave would be in order.

Just my opinion.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I think the laws requiring non-toxic shot are an abomination, and are not supported by science. Glen Sanderson, who worked here at the University of Illinois, was responsible for writing a priliminary paper that first suggested that lead toxicity in Waterfowl wan related to lead shot used by hunters. When he was called to testify before Congress, he told them his data was only preliminary, and it should not be relied on to change the law. But, the anit-hunting crowd, and the EPA types were looking for anyway to win battles against the NRA, so we got the non-toxic shot laws. When Glen finished his research, and published his final paper, he concluded that there is no lead based mortality that can be attributed to lead shot being picked up by waterfowl from mud flats, with any kind of certainty, and that the survey of dead waterfowl found that most of them had wound consistent with being wounded by hunters during normal hunting processes, and their mortality had already be factored into the annual quotas for waterfowl kills. The non-toxic shot rule lost its scientific support, which it never had. But who cares about the facts, right???

Having said that, I do follow the rules. I use non-toxic shot when hunting geese. Have never had an opportunity to hunt ducks. I am hoping that further use of Hevi-shot will yield loads that can work in my fowler, So I can take it on a guided duck shoot. Preferrably on the Illinois River.

 

[MSzychulda]

If you are already using Heavyshot, I am sure you know this but others may not. Heavyshot tungstin/matrix is heavier and harder than steel, further resisting deformation but is harder on barrels and especially chokes in modern shotguns, let alone fowlers. Make sure you use heavy plastic shot cups with it and watch for barrel gouging as it is not a uniform shot and has "edges". Remington announced they will be discontinuing it soon due the the cost and avaliablility of the product. They are using a Heavysteel now, and I have seen it on the market. I heard there are some experiments with a heavy polymer/iron blend that look promising. Who knows what might be around the corner!

I also completley agree with you on the non-toxic issue. The Anti's are always trying to find a problem where there is none, simply to make hunting harder and more expensive.

 

[jbrowngunmaker]

Yes, you can shoot steel shot in my barrels and I would use the fiber wad. It is safe to do so, and you don't have to worry about scratching the inside of the barrel. It won't happen.

Jackie

 

[Rebel]

Jackie, do you mean with or without a special heavy plastic steel shot cup? Just bare steel shot in the bore? I have one of your Carolina smoothbore and was wondering about using it.

 

[Russianblood]

Yes, you can shoot steel shot in my barrels and I would use the fiber wad. It is safe to do so, and you don't have to worry about scratching the inside of the barrel. It won't happen.

Jackie

Wow! That is great news! We've heard it directly from the horse's mouth (so to speak). :hatsoff:

 

[jbrowngunmaker]

Jackie, do you mean with or without a special heavy plastic steel shot cup? Just bare steel shot in the bore? I have one of your Carolina smoothbore and was wondering about using it.

Yes, you can without a cup. I would use a fiber wad with it though. Go ahead and try it you want be disappointed.
Jackie

 

[jbrowngunmaker]

Most barrels are made of 12 L 14 leaded steel. It is very soft and steel shot would probably damage it. My barrels have a higher carbon content and are much harder. My barrels are 1026 coldrolled. Steel shots should not be a problem. :hatsoff:
Jackie

 

[Rebel]

Thanks for the reply Jackie. I guess i was told wrong about the barrels you use. I was told, Not by you, that you used hydraulic tubing for them. I don't know, or care what they are made of, all i know is that mine shoots real good.