|
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
Topics39,499
Posts562,111
Members14,586
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1 |
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 Not sure if we saw the same thing Chief, but I understood the DNR's website advice for submitting feedback to mean it had to be in writing, with sending via email acceptable. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 495 Likes: 71
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 495 Likes: 71 |
Hi Jay,
You're likely correct. I erred on the side of caution.
"Public Comment. Interested persons or groups may submit comments or information on these possible rules in writing"
"Agency Contact Person. written comments, questions or requests to receive a draft of the rules, and requests for more information on these possible rules should be directed to: Jason Abraham at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155 or by telephone at (651) 259-5197" Then Abraham's E-mail address.
Chief
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165 |
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 Ted and others interested in this issue: I have (hard copy only) the "Report of the Nontoxic Shot Advisory Committee" which was submitted to the Fish and Wildlife Division of the Minnesota DNR back in Dec 06. Interesting document. Some comments from the report: "The issues are extremely complex and conclusive data on wildlife population impacts is lacking. Furthermore, it is unlikely that conclusive data can ever be obtained due to the cost of this type of research." A bit later: "It is inevitable that lead shot will have to be restricted for all shotgun hunting at some future time." Translation of the two statements above: "We don't have 'good science' on our side this time, but we're going to restrict lead anyhow." A bit later: "Experts currently believe that modern steel loads are safe in any modern gun regardless of choke . . . " Guess they either didn't read the recommendation from Browning about no steel in any of their Belgian-made guns . . . unless maybe they consider those guns, made well into the 70's, as not modern. Well worth reading and quoting in any responses to the MN DNR.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
I can see where a fellow that uses his old underwear to clean his gun barrels would have a problem with environmentally safe shot.... I don't think of it as "environmentally safe" shot. I think of it as "inferior shot". Any way you want to look at it, effectiveness, cost, function, lethality, whatever, it comes up inferior to lead. It also is what the anti's like to refer to as "A good first step". You are far too stupid to understand where it would or could go from there, on the last point, so I won't bother with explaining. You are simply one of their "useful idiots". You can google the term. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89 |
You are simply one of their "useful idiots". You can google the term.
Best,
Ted
Better than being a useless idiOt like you...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,021
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,021 |
What he is referring to in 'You are simply one of their "useful idiots", the word 'their' in that sentence is Obama's and Hillary's gun grabbing Democrat Party. You get it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,720 Likes: 1357 |
What he is referring to in 'You are simply one of their "useful idiots", the word 'their' in that sentence is Obama's and Hillary's gun grabbing Democrat Party. You get it? Not likely. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89 |
What he is referring to in 'You are simply one of their "useful idiots", the word 'their' in that sentence is Obama's and Hillary's gun grabbing Democrat Party. You get it? I get it....you're a moron if you think I voted for Obama or that I'd vote for Hillary Cliton.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,572 Likes: 165 |
Well . . . lots of morons can at least spell Clinton correctly. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,462 Likes: 89 |
Well . . . lots of morons can at least spell Clinton correctly. Only a "moron" wouldn't realize that I had misspelled the sorry bee'itches name intentionally...
|
|
|
|
|
