MGA proposing lead ammo ban for hunting

[Slackdaddy]

Slightly simplified, Monolithic copper bullets are used length for length , not weight for weight .

For this example , .30-30 would use a 150 TSX FN FB . Barnes published data has bunch data for the usual powders giving 2000 - 2300 fps .

Over the past 3 or 4 decades , plenty of hunters who weren't mandated to , have used the Barnes copper bullets on purpose for the expansion and penetration qualities .

But yeah , a lot of hunters who weren't handloaders before , will become so now . And a business opportunity for start up boutique ammo mfg .

We're also see a step back to the old days . When most hunters used .30-30 , .30-06 , maybe .308 or .243 , because that's what every gas station or country store had on the shelf . ( Or else were handloaders ) . So there will be a trend of having rifles to fit the handful of commonly available hunting ammo , instead if other way around . ( There are already a plethora of .223/ 5.56 ammo on the market with X Bullets , so AR platform hunters are already good to go. )

Yes , CCI makes non toxic .22lr , but it kinda sucks .
{ No , I am NOT in favor of this ! Just giving some ammo and ballistic background .)

I always appreciate your insight.
I live/hunt in shotgun/SWC counties, So all those centerfired bottleneck cartridges are a foreign language.
I just purchased a Henry 44m a few months back, along with about $250 worth of 44m mag (lead based) ammo to try.
Barnes does not make a copper bullet for the 44m or 357m

Prior I hunted with a H&R 20ga ultraslugger. and rotweill sabot slugs, it was ~1600 fps and roughly 1800 ft/lb. with great results.
I was able to find lead 44m ammo that would give me ~1800-2000 fps in a 200-220 grain,, giving me my 1600-1700 ft/pd.
I am not even finding anything close in copper?

 

[Doco Overboard]

Absolutely! The numbers of geese and ducks on the family farm were all ways huge. You didn't need to bother with decoys, you could easily pass shoot your limit. When you shot they would drop, if they didn't and were wounded they still kept up with the flock and seemed fine. With steel I would get some and wound some but when I went out into the field to get the ones I got I would see blood trails from the wounded that went as far as I wanted to follow. I never saw blood trails from geese with lead. The wounded ones with steel would fly away and likely die of blood loss. The lead shot ones I cleaned in the old days always had feathers in the wound channels and I suspect the feathers acted as bandages and the wounds that were not fatal would heal.

I don't know if there are any numbers of the waterfowl dying from lead poisoning around but I would bet there were a lot more dying from steel shot wounds and still are.

Further, we need to remember and take into account waterfowl will still get lead poison from gravelling and eating lead that has been left on the edges of all the water around here and all up and down the east coast from 3 to 4 hundred years of hunting with lead shot.

Sorry for the rant...

Absolutely, you have it to a T
I was going to mention cripples reducing numbers in my post but if no one ever experienced how good waterfowling was before so called conservationist and some manufacturers became involved they wouldn’t get it anyway. What we’re experiencing in real time is the end of another era of American excellence and traditional rural life with screw in choke tubes and internet bought and mail truck delivered decoys.

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

Buy stock in slingshots.

Then they’ll ban stones.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Barnes does not make a copper bullet for the 44m or 357m

But indeed they do ! Both component buklets and loaded ammo .( And for that matter , my Late Shooting & Hanoading Partner #1 worked up an excellent X Bullet load for his Marlin .41 mag .)

I'll have to switch over to my other device , but I'll see if I can insert some pages from the Barnes website .


And No , I don't support this totally unnecessary Bill , just discussing loads and ballistics .

 

[Biggfoot44]

I'd have to dig for load data for .357 rifle with these to make 1200 ft lb ( or 700 ft lb from long revolver) , but .44 will either easily .

 

[Biggfoot44]

And Barnes load data shows .45 Colt " Ruger & T/C Only " @ 30K psi giving 1,100 plus ft lb from 7.3 inch test bbl , so that would also easily meet MD standards both from Revolver and Carbine .

* Note- Marlin and Winchester M94 are generally accepted to handle any load suitable for Ruger ( original) Blackhawk. Modern Win M92 clones are stronger than Marlins or '94 . Other rifles consult authoritative sources .


And again , I don't support this pointless and harassment Bill , just sharing ballistic info .

 

[Raineman]

Hey, silver lining...just think of all the lead based ammo we'll have left for the war.

 

[lazarus]

Yes
But for non handloaders , the limited selection , limited availability , and $$ of $35- $80 per 20 rounds will be a major pain . Limited practicing . and foreshortened sighting in .

And for handloaders the selection of bullets and calibers will be better , but still $ , as that in consumer qusnities , the component bullets cost about as much as good loaded conventional ammo .

Yes and I am not big on this law.

That said, probably 90% of deer hunters shoot up less than 1 box of ammunition a year. Often times 1 or 2 rounds. One shot from a bench or whatever, looks zeroed, one shot on the deer. Plenty of hunters have been using the same box of ammo for several years before they use it up.

A small minority of hunters likely burn up one or more boxes of ammo a season in practice or zeroing their rifle.

Heck, I can't think of any hunters I know of that practice using the ammunition they hunt with. Zero'ing their rifle sure.

 

[lazarus]

Absolutely! The numbers of geese and ducks on the family farm were all ways huge. You didn't need to bother with decoys, you could easily pass shoot your limit. When you shot they would drop, if they didn't and were wounded they still kept up with the flock and seemed fine. With steel I would get some and wound some but when I went out into the field to get the ones I got I would see blood trails from the wounded that went as far as I wanted to follow. I never saw blood trails from geese with lead. The wounded ones with steel would fly away and likely die of blood loss. The lead shot ones I cleaned in the old days always had feathers in the wound channels and I suspect the feathers acted as bandages and the wounds that were not fatal would heal.

I don't know if there are any numbers of the waterfowl dying from lead poisoning around but I would bet there were a lot more dying from steel shot wounds and still are.

Further, we need to remember and take into account waterfowl will still get lead poison from gravelling and eating lead that has been left on the edges of all the water around here and all up and down the east coast from 3 to 4 hundred years of hunting with lead shot.

Sorry for the rant...

It is also about fish ingesting it. And then birds of prey eating both. Lead ban on water fowling was one of the things that helped things like eagles rebound. Along with a ban on DEET in general applications to control insects.

Yeah there is a lot of lead in water ways. Most of it gets buried under silt in just a few years though.

And it isn't just about birds dying of it. You eat the bird too, and it generally causes elevated lead levels in a lot of them, pre-ban.

I am not aware of any REAL evidence of lead used in non-waterfowl hunting causing any real issues in anything OTHER than California Condors. And there, the biggest issue is simply there are so few of them and so many keep dying over various pandemic bid flus it makes it hard for their numbers to recover. And poison traps for yotes also contributes to condor kills.

Around most of the country, the number of vultures is so high, any small impact from lead ingestion is low. And it doesn't appear to have any real impact on other scavengers.

 

[Brickman301]

Heck, I can't think of any hunters I know of that practice using the ammunition they hunt with. Zero'ing their rifle sure.

I do! So does my son, brother and nephew. Sure we shoot other firearms, but we practice with our deer rifles and hunting ammo often.

 

[Slackdaddy]

Yes and I am not big on this law.

That said, probably 90% of deer hunters shoot up less than 1 box of ammunition a year. Often times 1 or 2 rounds. One shot from a bench or whatever, looks zeroed, one shot on the deer. Plenty of hunters have been using the same box of ammo for several years before they use it up.

A small minority of hunters likely burn up one or more boxes of ammo a season in practice or zeroing their rifle.

Heck, I can't think of any hunters I know of that practice using the ammunition they hunt with. Zero'ing their rifle sure.

I burn through 30-40 rounds late summer, just practicing at different ranges.

 

[Clovis]

It is also about fish ingesting it. And then birds of prey eating both. Lead ban on water fowling was one of the things that helped things like eagles rebound. Along with a ban on DEET in general applications to control insects.

Yeah there is a lot of lead in water ways. Most of it gets buried under silt in just a few years though.

And it isn't just about birds dying of it. You eat the bird too, and it generally causes elevated lead levels in a lot of them, pre-ban.

I am not aware of any REAL evidence of lead used in non-waterfowl hunting causing any real issues in anything OTHER than California Condors. And there, the biggest issue is simply there are so few of them and so many keep dying over various pandemic bid flus it makes it hard for their numbers to recover. And poison traps for yotes also contributes to condor kills.

Around most of the country, the number of vultures is so high, any small impact from lead ingestion is low. And it doesn't appear to have any real impact on other scavengers.

I'm sure it does, but with tidal actions, floods, storms and erosion actions I'm sure it will be re-exposed. It ain't going away.

 

[lazarus]

I do! So does my son, brother and nephew. Sure we shoot other firearms, but we practice with our deer rifles and hunting ammo often.

I practice with my deer rifles a lot too. Just not with my hunting ammo. Even reloads, it is a lot more expensive than just practicing with FMJ

 

[lazarus]

I'm sure it does, but with tidal actions, floods, storms and erosion actions I'm sure it will be re-exposed. It ain't going away.

It isn't going away, but in wetland areas, it mostly stays down. Only in high erosion areas is it going to be getting re-exposed on anything other than rare times. Just because there might be a lot there, isn't a good reason to keep adding to it.

 

[rbird7282]

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Sure they do


The MGA Does Not Care.......


Again, the MGA Does Not Care.....


Let me say it again, the MGA Does Not Care.....


So, do you think the MGA really cares?????

LMAO

THIS!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

I burn through 30-40 rounds late summer, just practicing at different ranges.

Conversely, I know half a dozen guys who shoot their deer rifle less than 5 times a year. Not range trips, total shots.

I burn through 3-5 rounds a year in my deer rifle of my hunting ammo. 3 to ensure zero, 0-2 on deer. I run maybe 100-200 rounds through it a year with other, cheaper, ammo.

 

[rbird7282]

Eagles and birds of prey.
The persons proposing this nonsense more than likely have none whatsoever in their district to speak of. that can be readily pointed to.
There’s more eagles and buzzards abounding to where you can’t go nearly anywhere on the shore without seeing droves of them unless your blind.
Eagles, pairs of them literally perch behind the house here like seagulls at a dump.
This is only about imposing onerous stipulations on sportsman and gun owners by onerous city sh*tbirds who couldn't change a car tire or plan a birthday party for a five year old without consulting a liberal think tank or having to introduce themselves with pronouns at a gender queer party.
No study, no data, record keeping proof or anything of the sort just typical BS from politicians.
Just a another distraction to add to the morass of stupidity these people profess and another penchant for failure to manage environmental resources in an effective manner.
I hope it passes right away first time through so the more sooner I can ignore this garbage.

This has nothing to do with Eagles and birds of prey, it’s just an excuse. If they really cared about them do you think they’d be for wind turbines?
They don’t give a fvck, it’s all just an excuse to get their foot in the door of banning ammo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Coehorn]

It is also about fish ingesting it. And then birds of prey eating both. Lead ban on water fowling was one of the things that helped things like eagles rebound. Along with a ban on DEET in general applications to control insects.

Yeah there is a lot of lead in water ways. Most of it gets buried under silt in just a few years though.

And it isn't just about birds dying of it. You eat the bird too, and it generally causes elevated lead levels in a lot of them, pre-ban.

I am not aware of any REAL evidence of lead used in non-waterfowl hunting causing any real issues in anything OTHER than California Condors. And there, the biggest issue is simply there are so few of them and so many keep dying over various pandemic bid flus it makes it hard for their numbers to recover. And poison traps for yotes also contributes to condor kills.

Around most of the country, the number of vultures is so high, any small impact from lead ingestion is low. And it doesn't appear to have any real impact on other scavengers.

Reminds me of the ever-present and difficult to eradicate Nikkious Haleyous Unipartious bird. A vile multi-tongued creature that sits high in a tree. Waiting to feast on the carcass of her opponents. Opponent.

 

[Muleskinner]

Is it a law currently, or a regulation? DNR can change regulations. MGA makes laws.

I assume it's law. Those same requirements have been on the books for as long as I have been hunting and decades ago they might have been relevant.

But if the state is going to allow 700 for handguns, 600 for air guns and archery is around 30 then there is no way a sub 1200 long gun shouldn't be legal for deer as long as it's proper hunting ammo and not rim fire. I spoke to a rep from MDDNR and was told the MGA would have to pass a law to change it. I have no idea if it's true but wither way I wouldn't hold my breath. They won't change it because it negatively affects people with guns.

 

[Muleskinner]

I have several years worth of lead deer hunting ammo that I will be using regardless of whether this crap passes. It's way past time to become ungovernable. I spent good money for that ammo and I WILL be using it. Come catch me..