S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,494
Posts562,063
Members14,586
|
Most Online9,918 Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
The MN DNR has proposed numerous changes, including mandating steel shot on all state lands, beginning in 2018. The public commentary period ends December 13th, and if you haven't fired off an email, you won't be heard. Please take a minute to voice your opinion.
Thank You.
Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,418 Likes: 2
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,418 Likes: 2 |
Im in Wisconsin so I have no say in this but I hope they meant non-toxic shot and not just steel.....
gunut
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
Yes, you are correct it is non-toxic, but, for most hunters, that is steel. Just the added expense will likely chase some kids out of pursuing hunting. This is the email address to send your comments to. My computer is clunky, and I can't link the whole DNR site for some reason, but, this address is where your comment goes to, anyway:
jason.abraham@state.mn.us
Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,618 Likes: 1028
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,618 Likes: 1028 |
Ted:
Using the email address you posted, I've done my part. I sure hope it helps. The non-toxic argument has always relied on pretty dodgy science (pseudo-science?) and is clearly a thinly-veiled end-run on the 2nd Amendment.
If I remember correctly, this was attempted a few years ago as well, but your Governor at the time vetoed it. Sure hope you folks can put a stop to this again, and then run-out of office all of the simple twits that are pushing for it.
Last edited by Lloyd3; 12/07/15 03:12 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,786 Likes: 673
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,786 Likes: 673 |
The non-toxic argument has always relied on pretty dodgy science (pseudo-science?) and is clearly a thinly-veiled end-run on the 2nd Amendment. +1 Lloyd. I just e-mailed my comment Ted. I too hope you guys can stop this threat. I hope everyone also takes a minute to e-mail or call their Congressmen and Senators to tell them we don't want any of Obama's proposed restrictions on law abiding citizen's gun rights.
Voting for anti-gun Democrats is dumber than giving treats to a dog that shits on a Persian Rug
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 Likes: 1 |
I just sent an email to Mr. Abraham.
Thanks for the heads up Ted.
Best,
Mike
I am glad to be here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 279 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 279 Likes: 9 |
A few years ago, a survey was conducted about this issue. I sent an e-mail, also.
Last edited by Roundsworth; 12/07/15 07:51 PM.
GMC(SW) - USN, Retired (1978-2001)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,134 Likes: 125
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,134 Likes: 125 |
how you gonna kilt da grouses mit da steel?
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 495 Likes: 71
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 495 Likes: 71 |
Ted, I may be wrong on this, as I read this the comments have to be written and sent in to Mr. Abraham. He may be contacted via phone or E-mail to provide additional information.
The non toxic rules apply to the agricultural (farmland) areas of the state. This is vague, defined as the extreme western and southern parts of the state. So, Ed, the grouse will still face the rigors of lead shot, for the most part!
Letter crafted and sent.
Chief
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89 |
I can see where a fellow that uses his old underwear to clean his gun barrels would have a problem with environmentally safe shot....
|
|
|
|
|