View Single Post
Unread 04-12-2012, 10:08 PM   #3
Member
Steve Hodges
PGCA Member
 
Stephen Hodges's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,070
Thanks: 6,663
Thanked 3,652 Times in 992 Posts

Default

Yes, technology does take a bit to catch up, but by Code of Federal Regulations - Title 50: Wildlife and Fisheries section #6 "Field detection device. Before approval of any shot for use in migratory game bird hunting, a noninvasive field testing device must be available for enforcement officers to determine the shot material in a given shell in the field." This obviously precludes the need for a fish and wildlife officer from cutting a shell open to determine if the shot in it is indeed non-toxic and therefore legal for migratory bird hunting. Personally, I feel the advise to disregard these federal regulations is ill advised, and could result in a confiscation of your firearm, loss of hunting privileges and a substantial fine. But further, and perhaps more importantly, such advise flies in the face of “doing what is right”. As members of this fine organization we should both publicly and privately represent the best in shooting and hunting ethics. We owe this to future generations. I’ll now dismount my high horse.
__________________
Daniel Webster once said ""Men hang out their signs indicative of their respective trades; shoemakers hang out a gigantic shoe; jewelers a monster watch, and the dentist hangs out a gold tooth; but in the mountains of New Hampshire, God Almighty has hung out a sign to show that there He makes men."
Stephen Hodges is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Stephen Hodges For Your Post: