More clarification needed?

Mark W

Mark W

Well-known member
Went to the recent Minneapolis Boat Show and had a discussion with the DNR rep manning their booth. He answered the question I had and his understanding of the rule matched up with mine Curious what others think.

I want to bring a pistol with me into the field when hunting ducks. Places I hunt allow for rifles and pistols. Areas I hunt are open to rifle shooting deer hunters and rifle shooting small game.

So I asked the DNR if it is legal to bring a pistol out with me in the blind. He said only non toxic lead shot of any type is allowed in possession when waterfowl hunting. I agree. CCI makes a non toxic copper/polymer blended .22LR round that is completely lead free so I should be allowed to bring this with me and when shooting the pistol. This shot would fall under the rules regarding possession of non toxic shot.

Here is where I wonder how having a pistol in the blind would be interpreted. I wouldn't be hunting ducks with a pistol but plinking cans or whatever. Or maybe I walk in the woods and shoot squirrels. Can the CO automatically assume that because I have a pistol on me that I am hunting ducks with it? Can he ticket me for having in my possession a pistol should he check me at the landing? I have no issue with him watching me while hunting and if I was dumb enough to shoot at a duck with a pistol citing me for the violation. Does he have to actually observe me shooting at waterfowl with a pistol or can he assume?

I can hardly hit a duck with my 12 gauge, Can't even begin to think I could hit a duck with a pistol.

"You may not hunt migratory waterfowl:
With a trap, snare, net, rifle, pistol, swivel gun, shotgun larger than 10 gauge, punt gun, battery gun, machine gun, fish hook, poison, drug, explosive or stupefying substance."

Mark
 
Last edited:
The times I?ve squirrel hunted while duck hunting, I?ve just carried nontoxic 4 shot for the ducks and squirrels. We are limited to shot size 4 and smaller for small game hunting.

A pistol is not a legal means to take waterfowl as you know. The safe bet for plinking would be to stash the pistol until after you?re done duck hunting then swap weapons. Put yourself in the COs boots- you hear rimfire shots, go to check it out, and find a dude with a 22 over a decoy spread. They?ll have a hard time reaching the conclusion that you weren?t attempting to take ducks with it. I?d consult the federal waterfowl regs to see what they say about possession vs means of take as most states aren?t any more restrictive than what the federal rules require.

What are your state laws about concealed carry? Is this public or private land? In TN, it?s illegal to take target practice outside of designated shooting ranges and illegal to hunt at the designated ranges.
 
Thanks for the note. The pistol could come with me in MN and WI. I?m covered carry permit wise. I?m also covered that it is ok to do shoot bullets verses shotgun shells. My question I guess is the Fed Rule stating it is illegal to HUNT ducks with a pistol. To me hunting means actually trying to shoot a duck with a pistol or rifle.

What makes it legal for a deer hunter, or small game hunter to be in the same area shooting a pistol or rifle where ducks are? Are they breaking the law as well? Do they get looked at differently due to the way they are dressed or not hunting near decoys?

How a great it if you are out in a duckboat with a camera and a pistol and come back with no ducks?

It trying to be difficult. I have asked the question of a couple of CO?s and received conflicting answers.

Mark
 
Frankly, I'd be surprised if you ever get a consensus from them, The law as written is very specific in what it says, not so specific in what it doesn't say, which leaves an agent free to use their "discretion", and they use their "discretion" a lot.

They get a ticket for their stats and you get to decide to fight it, don't bother them a bit.

If I sound bitter, I'm not, it's just the way they operate, so your job then is to not engage with them if possible, answer questions simply without going into detail, do not offer any other information, and don't think that good buddy attitude they use makes them your friend.
But as always, YMMV. [;)]
 
The problem with not offering information is a sticky one for CC permit holders. When stopped by LE, if you are carrying, you as a CC permit
holder are required to inform the officer (Police, Sheriff, Conservation) as to whether or not you are carrying. It's a good idea to do so.
I you don't and they decide to search you and find a pistol you didn't declare, well, you know what can happen next.
 
Several things... I absolutely don't see that the .22 pistol is limited to notox bullets. The Federal reg clearly states "shot" or "shotshells" in the notox language, so any other ammunition type is irrelevant (see 50 CFR 20.21 (j) (1) pasted below). (For the smartasses, yes, carrying .22 lead rat shot shells would be a gamble.) As far as the pistol, I PERSONALLY do NOT read that you can't have one in possession, just that you can not use it (see 50 CFR 20.21 (a) pasted below). I know that the wardens often want to extend their reach to confuse possession with use to take. It clearly states you can't possess toxic shot, but just that you can't use a pistol, so they would have to see you attempt to take waterfowl with the pistol. I'm sure that there are a boatload of wardens that would ticket you for having a pistol, but I can't see possession of a pistol as illegal, MYSELF.

Obviously, state law could extend either of these further than the federal.


20.21 What hunting methods are illegal?
Migratory birds on which open seasons are prescribed in this part may be taken by any method except those prohibited in this section. No persons shall take migratory game birds:

(a) With a trap, snare, net, rifle, pistol, swivel gun, shotgun larger than 10 gauge, punt gun, battery gun, machinegun, fish hook, poison, drug, explosive, or stupefying substance;

...

(j)

(1) While possessing loose shot for muzzle loading or shotshells containing other than the following approved shot types.

Approved shot type* Percent composition by weight Field testing device**
Bismuth-tin 97 bismuth, and 3 tin Hot Shot?***
Iron (steel) iron and carbon Magnet or Hot Shot?.
Iron-tungsten any proportion of tungsten, and ≥1 iron Magnet or Hot Shot?.
Iron-tungsten-nickel ≥1 iron, any proportion of tungsten, and up to 40 nickel Magnet or Hot Shot?.
Copper-clad iron 84 to 56.59 iron core, with copper cladding up to 44.1 of the shot mass Magnet or Hot Shot?
Corrosion-inhibited copper ≥99.9 copper with benzotriazole and thermoplastic fluorescent powder coatings Ultraviolet Light.
Tungsten-bronze 51.1 tungsten, 44.4 copper, 3.9 tin, and 0.6 iron, or 60 tungsten, 35.1 copper, 3.9 tin, and 1 iron Rare Earth Magnet.
Tungsten-iron-copper-nickel 40-76 tungsten, 10-37 iron, 9-16 copper, and 5-7 nickel Hot Shot? or Rare Earth Magnet.
Tungsten-matrix 95.9 tungsten, 4.1 polymer Hot Shot?.
Tungsten-polymer 95.5 tungsten, 4.5 Nylon 6 or 11 Hot Shot?.
Tungsten-tin-iron any proportions of tungsten and tin, and ≥1 iron Magnet or Hot Shot?.
Tungsten-tin-bismuth any proportions of tungsten, tin, and bismuth Rare Earth Magnet.
Tungsten-tin-iron-nickel 65 tungsten, 21.8 tin, 10.4 iron, and 2.8 nickel Magnet.
Tungsten-iron-polymer 41.5-95.2 tungsten, 1.5-52.0 iron, and 3.5-8.0 fluoropolymer Rare Earth Magnet or Hot Shot?.
* Coatings of copper, nickel, tin, zinc, zinc chloride, zinc chrome, fluoropolymers, and fluorescent thermoplastic on approved nontoxic shot types also are approved.

** The information in the ?Field Testing Device? column is strictly informational, not regulatory.

*** The ?HOT*SHOT? field testing device is from Stream Systems of Concord, CA.

(2) Each approved shot type must contain less than 1 percent residual lead (see ? 20.134).

(3) This shot type restriction applies to the taking of ducks, geese (including brant), swans, coots (Fulica americana), and any other species that make up aggregate bag limits with these migratory game birds during concurrent seasons in areas described in ? 20.108 as nontoxic shot zones.
 
Last edited:
Ron Schuna said:
The problem with not offering information is a sticky one for CC permit holders. When stopped by LE, if you are carrying, you as a CC permit
holder are required to inform the officer (Police, Sheriff, Conservation) as to whether or not you are carrying. It's a good idea to do so.
I you don't and they decide to search you and find a pistol you didn't declare, well, you know what can happen next.
Click to expand...

In my quick look, one of the states he is talking about requires him to disclose if carrying if asked.
 
Tod -

Interesting comments. So what you are saying is that ?shot? and ?bullets? are treated differently or that they are defined differently according to the regulations. Do I have this right?

So when the regs say ?shot? it only refers to shotgun shells and not bullets. So I would be able to have lead bullets with me but no lead shot.

I have read the Fed, WI, and MN regs on this and they interchange words which makes a big difference in meaning. For instance, one reg will say it is illegal ?to take? waterfowl with toxic shot and another Reg is written that it is illegal ?to hunt? waterfowl with toxic shot. The reg makers may think they are saying the same thing but I don?t think they are.

So is it any different if I was plinking cans from my duck boat verses stepping out of the boat and plinking 10 yards away? 100 yards away? Wearing orange verses camo? I think intent is written into many of these regs and intent is so subjective.

I know I am guilty of posting these legal splitting hairs questions but I find then confusing. Hope the board doesn?t mind. And I am not trying to get around the regs I just want to be prepared and well informed should an issue arise in the field.

Mark
 
Last edited:
For the shot vs bullets, read section (j)(1) that I pasted in my response, I think it is pretty clear - it talks about shot and shotshells, not projectiles or bullets, etc.... The state reg could be different so that needs to be looked at too.

What is written in the rule books is just a summary for guidance and not a legal interpretation of the regs. You need to read the actual (state and federal) statutes and come up with your own interpretation. If the state and federal statutes have conflicting regs, you would have to use the most conservative.

Mark W said:
Tod -

Interesting comments. So what you are saying is that ?shot? and ?bullets? are treated differently or that they are defined differently according to the regulations. Do I have this right?

So when the regs say ?shot? it only refers to shotgun shells and not bullets. So I would be able to have lead bullets with me but no lead shot.

I have read the Fed, WI, and MN regs on this and they interchange words which makes a big difference in meaning. For instance, one reg will say it is illegal ?to take? waterfowl with toxic shot and another Reg is written that it is illegal ?to hunt? waterfowl with toxic shot. The reg makers may think they are saying the same thing but I don?t think they are.

So is it any different if I was plinking cans from my duck boat verses stepping out of the boat and plinking 10 yards away? 100 yards away? Wearing orange verses camo? I think intent is written into many of these regs and intent is so subjective.

I know I am guilty of posting these legal splitting hairs questions but I find then confusing. Hope the board doesn?t mind. And I am not trying to get around the regs I just want to be prepared and well informed should an issue arise in the field.

Mark
Click to expand...
 
So if another guy went into that spot with a 22 and were only there to hunt squirrels or go plinking, he'd be allowed to use normal, lead rounds, but since you are there to duck hunt, you need to shoot non toxic ammo with your 22? Please tell me that's not true.
 
Paul Mc said:
So if another guy went into that spot with a 22 and were only there to hunt squirrels or go plinking, he'd be allowed to use normal, lead rounds, but since you are there to duck hunt, you need to shoot non toxic ammo with your 22? Please tell me that's not true.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely true in most cases.
 
I can handle rules, but I can't stand when things don't make sense. We shoot low brass lead for skeet prior to duck season and then switch to duck loads during season on the same marsh. I've been checked and never had a problem. There's a group of guys who skeet shoot every Sunday all winter during duck season with low brass lead and they've never had a problem. Once they got approached and the CO went into his rap about lead during duck season and they guys were pretty much like "but there's the skeet and there's the thrower and we aren't duck hunting." And the CO just said "clean up when you're done" and left. That being said, I do know that the CO's outside of this area are not as open to discussion.
 
Paul Mc said:
So if another guy went into that spot with a 22 and were only there to hunt squirrels or go plinking, he'd be allowed to use normal, lead rounds, but since you are there to duck hunt, you need to shoot non toxic ammo with your 22? Please tell me that's not true.
Click to expand...

In TN this is handled at the local level. Wildlife management areas that also have waterfowl units require nontoxic when hunting in the bottoms. Lead is ok in the upland areas of the same property.

I wouldn?t have a 22 out while hunting ducks regardless. It will be an invitation for a conflict with your local wildlife office. You also need to look into the definition of hunting for your state.

TN defines it as chasing, driving, flushing, attracting, pursuing, worrying, following after or on the trail of, searching for, trapping, shooting at, stalking, or lying in wait for, any wildlife, whether or not such wildlife is then or subsequently captured, killed, taken, or wounded and every act of assistance to any other person, but "hunting" does not include stalking, attracting, searching for, or lying in wait for, wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching wildlife or taking pictures of wildlife
 
tod osier said:
Paul Mc said:
So if another guy went into that spot with a 22 and were only there to hunt squirrels or go plinking, he'd be allowed to use normal, lead rounds, but since you are there to duck hunt, you need to shoot non toxic ammo with your 22? Please tell me that's not true.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely true in most cases.
Click to expand...

Tod,
I'm confused you seem to contradict your earlier statement " I absolutely don't see that the .22 pistol is limited to notox bullets."
 
Huntindave McCann said:
Tod,
I'm confused you seem to contradict your earlier statement " I absolutely don't see that the .22 pistol is limited to notox bullets."
Click to expand...

Agreed. My statement to Paul is not correct reading his whole statement (I was responding to the first part of his statement, but ignored the main question he asked).

In my read of the federal statutes there is no requirement for notox other than shot, so 22 lead is fine for anyone. The real question is if the officer if going to consider carrying a pistol as the same thing as attempting to take game with it.
 
Last edited:
It's very unfortunate because if you want to carry your .22 into the field for some plinking after you pick up your decoys etc, there's no way that you could prove that to a CO who interprets your having the .22 as a hunting gun and now you're in a situation. Or better yet, let's say that you have a legit concealed permit and you happen to have your pistol with you; why not? You can have your gun with you at the supermarket but not in a field in the middle of nowhere? I don't like it......
 
Paul Mc said:
It's very unfortunate because if you want to carry your .22 into the field for some plinking after you pick up your decoys etc, there's no way that you could prove that to a CO who interprets your having the .22 as a hunting gun and now you're in a situation. Or better yet, let's say that you have a legit concealed permit and you happen to have your pistol with you; why not? You can have your gun with you at the supermarket but not in a field in the middle of nowhere? I don't like it......
Click to expand...

I would hope that the CO would have to prove I was using a .22 to hunt ducks not that I would have to prove I wasn't using it.

The more I dig into this, the more confusion reigns. At least I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer (saved you the trouble Dave M).

I did go and purchase some non toxic .22 ammo made by CCI. I now wonder if this would even be considered non toxic. It is a combination of copper and some polymer that they mix together and put into a mold and either bake it or compress the heck out of it. While it is non toxic, I don't know if it fits exactly under the Fed rules on what constitutes non toxic shot.

Good thing I'm retired and have time for this stuff. It has been interesting for sure.

Mark
 
personally - i think the risk of a misinterpretation is too high

it all depends on the CO -win or lose

in NY basically if you have something with you when afield - the assumption is you are hunting with it

for example - i cannot carry large shot or slugs with me when upland bird hunting ( I'd like to because of the increase is coyotes ) - as it was explained to me, if you have a slug you are deer hunting - even if you are not

and depending where you hunt - you may have conflicting Fed Vs state opinions
 
Last edited:
Rick L said:
personally - i think the risk of a misinterpretation is too high
it all depends on the CO -win or lose
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying Rick. But that being said, being the way I am, I'd also bring a spatula or something completely ridiculous just to make a point that I wasn't cooking either just because I have it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top