Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
I'm in KY Jon's camp-we are not much different than Charles Gordon was, chasing out-of-period designs that are worth less than they cost.
Mandatory non-toxic laws will make them even more of an anachronism. Like us.

Best,
Ted


Ted, you're sounding like a prophet of doom and gloom. To start with, CIP has come up with guidance on steel shot loads for both 12's and 20's at "ordinary" CIP proof levels (850 bars). Those guns will be limited in both shot size and velocity, but then they're somewhat limited already, even with lead loads--but certainly adequate for American upland shooting, on birds up to and including pheasants. The 2 1/2" 12ga would become problematic for pheasant hunting with CIP standard steel loads, and the 2 1/2" 20ga wouldn't be useful for birds any larger or tougher than ruffed grouse. But I don't think we're going to be faced with a choice of either hanging them on the walls or shooting them only with very expensive nontox alternatives suitable for guns that won't handle American steel.

Secondly, "mandatory nontoxic laws" have not done well this year. The EPA has determined that it cannot regulate lead in ammunition as a result of legislation passed by Congress, and it's highly unlikely the current Congress will give them that authority. Therefore, all regulation of lead shot for other than migratory birds would have to come from the states. Just in the last few months, SD rejected a proposal to require nontox for hunting along roadways. The governor shot down an attempt to expand nontox requirements on public hunting areas in Iowa. The MT legislature passed a bill revoking the state game agency's authority to regulate ammunition. And here in WI, sportsmen at the spring DNR meetings voted by a strong majority against a DNR proposal to require nontoxic shot on all DNR-controlled land. That was an advisory vote only, but with the current administration in Madison and new leadership at the DNR, that proposal is quite likely to die as well.

The upshot is that additional nontox requirements established by the states are only inevitable where hunters and shooters don't stand up and ask for good scientific evidence as to why the changes are necessary. Pressure on politicians appears to be working quite well here.