Well, the title of the thread says it all really. (also posted a fishing version in that group)
The only thing i would ask is that we steer clear of the First Nations thing. We don't need another one of those debates.
So, If you could change or create any regulation or law regarding hunting in ontario what would it be?
it could be gun regs, slot sizes, seasons, or whatever.
i have many on my mind, but i'll save them for later, more interested in everyone else's takes.
I would allow handguns to be legal to hunt with. Never going to happen but if I could pick one it would be that.
I think the MNR should create a new process for changing/enacting/managing wildlife. This should include 1/2 MNR and 1/2 sportsmen. There could be different panels for hunting, fishing, etc. Like city or regional council. Ideas and changes would be argued and discussed on the topic and then a vote or show of hands would carry the change.
Currently we're in a dictatorship. Who really runs the MNR? Stalin, Hilter? certainly not the user groups!
politicians run the MNR. That's the problem. The conservatives were just as bad as the idiots we have now.Quote:
Originally Posted by SK33T3R
I would like to see the use of lead shot allowed in our new Ontario Mourning Dove seasons.
Such a tasty sporting bird that many people would love to hunt with nice older small guage shotguns that can not shoot steel without damage to barrels.
Common sense dictates the doves are more of an upland bird found further away from wetlands than American Woodcock where we are still allowed to use lead shot.
Some good thoughts so far. I think Sunday hunting bans are stupid and rooted in 19th century Christianity. But would also like someone to change or explain why a .44cal rifle is not allowed in SW Ont but a .270 is....
For group hunting the placing of a tag on a harvested animal I would like the word "immediately" removed and replaced with "as soon as reasonably possible".The notion that your a five kilometer hike away in the bush and must immediately tag an animal is pretty stupid.IMHO.
I'd like to see Bowhunters have to pass a proficiency exam before they could buy their Tags....many states do it. Cuts down on wounded animals because hunters couldn't hit the vitals on a deer at 20 yds out of their treestands.
I would like to see them bring back handgun hunting and some kind of test for bow hunters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Same logic could be applied to many gun hunters
I'd like to see mandatory moose/deer harvest reporting, an archery proficiency test, the banning of buckshot for any big game animal, party hunting group size limited to say 4 or 6, increased fines for trespassing, written permission requirement for private lands similar to manitoulin, more careful control on crown land camping time and littering, more control on the use of off road vehicles in relation to the destruction of our crown lands, and lastly a better law on the leaving/erecting of permanent stands on crown land.
I've hunted in other jurisdictions and the tight control over activities permitted on crown land makes the outdoor experience far better than here in Ontario. It's nice to be able to walk into an area where you don't see quad trails through every inch of the unspoiled wilderness. No garbage, no cutting of massive "shooting lanes" on crown lands etc etc. We as Ontario hunters have a great resource here in the province but things are going downhill year after year. The days of finding an area that is truly undisturbed and getting that feeling of "I may be the only person to ever set foot here before" are coming to end...crown land should be left as found! It's there for all of us to enjoy and tread lightly so others can share a similar experience. we all out the blame on the omnr and their sometimes weird way of managing....i agree they could be doing a better job in some areas but we need to also self regulate ourselves if we want to keep enjoying what we currently enjoy.
I believe many laws are outdated in both fishing and hunting and i would like them reviewed more often.I dislike gun or bow encased will going or coming out of hunt.Carrying a case is a pain and if gun or bow are unloaded i see no sense in that one.Once back by car for example then must be put in case. It would seem pretty hard to shoot a bow in the dark or even see or get close to some animal while walking in or out of bush.
I believe that is for the CO's protection, confronting a hunter in the dark...PIA, but acceptable...Quote:
Originally Posted by fishing1
Before any landowner receives compensation (money-crop damage etc...) from government. The landowner must show proof of allowing some type of wildlife management to take place. (hunting/trapping).
So high powered rifle only? no Slugs maybe? I carry buckshot and a bear tag, I may only be after grouse on a quiet walk..or I maybe be simply walking on some backwoods trails with my wife and my DISABLED sister-in-law/83 year old Mother-in-law. So I CARRY BUCKSHOT AND A BEAR TAG. Would you ask me to now carry two firearms?Quote:
Originally Posted by biggamer
I agree with this ... I would also accept lead usage if more than 200 metres from a main body of water.Quote:
Originally Posted by slider
Get rid of this No sunday gun hunting bull in the south. And allow trapping
Id like to see a study examining how much harvest would increase if the rifle deer hunt was extended to a month in central ON. I dont think harvest would increase very much at all.
Alternatively, I'd love a late season muzzleloader hunt in central ON.
[QUOTE=biggamer;955303]I'd like to see mandatory moose/deer harvest reporting, an archery proficiency test, the banning of buckshot for any big game animal, party hunting group size limited to say 4 or 6, increased fines for trespassing, written permission requirement for private lands similar to manitoulin, more careful control on crown land camping time and littering, more control on the use of off road vehicles in relation to the destruction of our crown lands, and lastly a better law on the leaving/erecting of permanent stands on crown land.
Just for your information since you are in Kitchener, Woolwich, Wellesley and Centre Wellington Twp requires hunters to have written permission. Fines for trespassing from Twp are higher than from CO's. Woolwhich requires you to carry the permission with you even if you are hunting with landowner on his land. We have to be careful for what we wish for because most of these laws or bylaws are usually made by anti hunters.
Yeah, I'm with you on the buckshot thing. I used to be totally opposed to it until I hunted with a gang that used it a lot. I started using it and turned into a believer. It's very effective on running deer at close range (during a deer drive). You just need to be disciplined in its use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
I'd eliminate party hunting for whitetails. Shoot your tag, then get out of the bush. Like Alberta.
This for me as well. I'd go a step further and implement a three point rule, exempting anyone under the age of 18...Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
As a couple of others have said I'd get rid of Sunday gun hunting bans first and foremost. I know hunters in the affected townships are "compensated" with longer waterfowl seasons but that's not the point. The old "lord's day" mentality doesn't apply to commerce anymore and it shouldn't apply to hunters either.
Other than that I'd get rid of 2 firearms-related rules: the ban on hunting with a high-powered rifle during antlered game season if you don't have an antlered game license, and the ban on carrying non-big game firearms while hunting big game in addition to your high-powered rifle or bow. Both rules interfere with legitimate hunting opportunities and I don't see how either makes poaching more difficult.
The first one basically means that if you're not hunting deer or moose, you have to give up long-range varmint/predator hunting for the deer/moose season. How does it help stop poachers? If someone's going to shoot a deer or moose without a license, why do we assume they're less likely to do it out of season? If anything there would be more COs out during deer/moose season checking downed animals for tags.
And the second one means that if you're in a stand or still hunting the bush with your rifle or bow for big game, you can't have a .22 or birdshot-loaded shotgun with you in case a rabbit or grouse is what shows up. If you were allowed to have one, why would you be tempted to use it on a deer when you have a far better-suited deer weapon with you? Also, if you're not using calls and scents and stuff, there's no indication that deer is specifically what you're hunting until you shoot one. So if you shoot a deer with the appropriate firearm, what's the point of prosecuting you for also having a small-game firearm with you?
If you use it right, and hunt with it like it was designed, 10 to 15 .33 Cal pellets means it should have more then a couple hole in the vitals. I think many of the people opposed to buckshot see it as just very big bird shot. Well buckshot does spread out and pattern like bird shot on a paper target, the pellet string is much Shorter.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilly
As well in my case with the Wife's mom and sister, there is only two options for an aggressive bear..
1) let the old bugger have them. Not likely to go well with the general "Happy Wife, Happy Life" plan.:(
2) plant my feet and know only one of us is coming out the fight ( Yup better if the bear eats me then the wife getting mad at me.:rolleye:)
I'd rather use a slug on just about anything.
I would like too see a return to the deer and bear seasons running coincidental, and having a single licence that allows a hunter to take either a deer or a bear, and provide for additional seals in WMU where game densities will support their use. This could mean an extended archery season for deer and bear, with a shortening of the gun season on bear. Or it could could go the other way and provide the lengthening of the gun season on deer, which would mean those choosing to do archery, would have to get use to wearing hunter orange.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
I would also like to eliminate party hunting for whitetails.
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Yep that's the one i'd like to see as well!
I agree carrying a huge case for a cross bow, or putting a rifle or shotgun in a nylon sock meets the regulations. I had a scary encounter with momma black bear going to my stand before daylight. Not that I had to shoot, however the option of quickly loading or discharging a warning shot was not an option. I had to clean my pants after!!! My personal safety should trump that silly regulation.
You obviously don't belong to a Hunt Camp that pushes dogs etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Flight
Geez you beat me to it! I think it would lead to less deer harvested which is likely a good thing for a while. Removing some of the hunters from the bush would lead to a better hunting experience for those that haven't tagged out. I don't think they used to allow party hunting for deer back in the 1960's.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
#1
I'd like the legal option, regardless of licence type, to carry at least (3) slugs (or buckshot, I suppose), -for a last-ditch protection from bears, *despite* the obvious problem of "I was only defending myself/ bear hunting".
The best solution for that I can come up with would be- that the shooter must report and simply won't benefit from usage of the carcass, but will participate in its recovery/processing(?)
———
#2
Unless there's a rational conservation reason, I'd love to extend grouse season to mid-February. ...but I'll admit there may well be established good reason for the seasons exactly as they are.
My thoughts exactly. Eliminating party huntng would be the death of northern hunt camps.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Spoken like guys who hunt that grain fed overpopulation of deer in the south.Quote:
Originally Posted by TPM
They dont have a clue how it is in the north.
Add to that , " and over huge bait piles . "Quote:
Spoken like guys who hunt that grain fed overpopulation of deer in the south
That is one thing that I would like to see eliminated in southern Ontario , "baiting for deer ".
You can carry slugs and buckshot for Yotes in Eastern Ontario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayardia
I would like to be able take a handgun hunting. I would like to hunt deer with a 357 revolver.
Yep,but,not during the open Black Bear season(s) unless you have a BB license and wear blaze orange except while in a tree stand. During the spring Wild Turkey season,this could be an issue when hunters are licensed for Black Bear,also. This needs to be made crystal clear in the regulations. If I was to change anything,this would be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
i would like to see night hunting for coyotes in the south
So maybe it needs to modified for certain wmu's? What about allowing those that have tagged out to hunt along with the tag hunter but they can't carry deer ammo or rifles? I know it doesn't make sense sitting on the watch. We don't allow the tagged out turkey hunter to shoot another turkey on the other hunters tag but they can call and accompany the hunter.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
BTW I do know how it works in the North so maybe the rule needs to be applied to a line below highway 26 or something. Other provinces and states seem to make it work somehow.
It's just a little tough to talk to a guy who shot 5 deer last year and some guys don't have the opportunity to get one for all kinds of reasons. Share the wealth and improve the hunting experience by removing the successful hunters for that fall.
Why would not being able to shoot your friends, brothers, uncles, mom's, grandma's, cousin of the guy from works tag, be the death of northern hunt camps? You can still hunt as a group without party hunting, but the only tag you use, is the one in your pocket. Less shooting deer like waterfowl as they run by to fill everyone's tags, and instead, a more selective, patient, ethical harvest. One might think twice about unloading several rounds of buckshot at a group of running fawns, if they could only use the one tag they have in their pocket. Might be less likely to pop the one across the property line too.Quote:
Originally Posted by TPM
I think we should ban archery because its unethical and I dont do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
Thats essentially what you're saying. If you dont hunt in the big bush of central ON then please dont make judgements like this. You literally have no idea what the hunt, and deer population, are like.
I also find it very interesting who in this thread wants to IMPOSE FURTHER RESTRICTIONS vs loosening restrictions which in many ways are archaic and no longer relevant.
Wow, you haven't got a clue about organized hunt camps. Unbelievable.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
What?!?Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
Change the non controlled deer hunt so that if you apply and are successful in getting an antlerless deer tag, that is what you have to shoot.
its mildly irritating to hear guys call it a insurance policy or they saved a doe or fawn they never plan on shooting.
Which part did you need explained?Quote:
Originally Posted by arclight
The first part? Where I reference the current party hunting system making it far too easy for groups to use tags from friends/family/etc who don't actually participate in the hunt. There's a whole new thread started for that topic. See "Gaming the tag system" thread.
Or where I make reference to the mentality of 'shoot as many as possible within the time allotted' created by a system that puts 'x' number of tags at your disposal?
Either way, that's the 1 rule I would change per the topic of this thread. Sorry if it ruffles some feathers around here.
I think there are a percentage of us that feel that there are already such liberal hunting laws here and so many advantages for the modern hunter (bait, xbow/compound technology, scope/ranging technology, scent killing gizmos, atv's, party hunting, etc.), that a restriction here or there to benefit the animals chances isn't necessarily a bad thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
No feathers ruffled here. I get what you're saying and in that scenario they're breaking the law but I've seen a lot more abuse of the system with archery hunters in the south than I have with the rifle hunters of the north.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
You can also noticed when from comments who hunts in the south and those north of there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
It is just as easy for you to sit in a tree stand watching your big oil' bait pile and use your wife's cousins sisters ex boyfriends tag to shoot a second deer during the archery seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
Does it happen? Yes
Is it only done by party hunting groups? Nope, far from it. Individuals do it often
ilegally attaching a game seal is an entirely separate issue from legal white tail party hunting
party Hunting for waterfowl...
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
I haven't hunted outside of Ontario so I would like to hear from well-traveled hunters who can compare Ontario's restrictions to those in other areas of North America. I get the feeling watch game warden shows from other areas that Ontario is the wild west. There are areas that don't allow party hunting for deer, or baiting or additional game seals for deer. I don't think we're regulated wisely in Ontario.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
If people are using tags that don't belong to them, then they take the risk o getting charged. It is an offence now. But if you are party hunting an you can a opportunity to take a few deer then by all means, go for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
I think you're misunderstanding the aspect of 'party hunting' that some of us find to be a problem. It's nothing to do with hunting as a group. It's the general acceptance it creates in having someone else's tag on game they haven't taken. And YES, archery hunters are just as bad, maybe worse. (Not sure why archery keeps getting brought up. Maybe i need to change my screen name.) Yes, many bowhunters fill others tags who aren't actually participating in the hunt. Yes, it's illegal. It's poaching. But many still do it because it's easy to get away with with the current system where no one thinks twice seeing your brother-in-laws tag on your deer.Quote:
Originally Posted by B Wilson
Now let's not derail this thread any longer. Jump over to the "Gaming the system" thread to discuss this topic further if you like.
This is a tough one but I see your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
In my case a group of us (7) rent a cabin for a week in 92B for the M/L hunt. So if I shot the first deer in the first 10min of the hunt my week of cabin rental would be a complete waste. That doesn't sit well with me & no I wouldn't want to become the camp cook... LOL
Like I said I do see the advantages of this for the herd. It would eliminate the skilled hunters in the first few days & let the others have a chance to become skilled if they want to fill there tag.
I for one am glad we have party hunting.
You may find your fellow camp members agree....:sad::sad::joker:Quote:
Originally Posted by bellerivercrossbowhunter
encasing of a bow. if an arrow isn't nocked it can't be fired pretty simple.
a 1 for one tag system on deer/coyotes up to a max of 2/person. So you want a deer tag go shot or trap a coyote show proof of the kill then you are eligible for a deer tag
Dan
I've hunted in a few different jurisdictions south of the border...they know how to manage hunters as well as game far better than Ontario in my opinion. There are a lot of less restrictive rules in place for the day to day stuff but one thing that is strongly enforced is the actual hunting act and the use of off road vehicles.
All places I've been you must shoot your own animal, tag it with your tag, and you're done hunting....ATV use is strictly regulated and you don't dare get caught on public land off a maintained trail or road. It's a great experience to wonder miles of woods and mountains without stepping in quad tire ruts and flattened landscape. You also don't cut living trees down for firewood and leave no trace when camping.
We in Ontario are so blind to the impact of off road vehicles both in the population equation of our animals as well as the impact on our wetlands and forest areas. A fella can cover 100 miles before noon on a quad hunting in the big clear cuts of northern ontario, a huge day in Colorado or Idaho on foot might be 4 or 5 miles! The OFAH and other organizations push for more use and access to crown land, I agree totally! But make it non motorized areas and let's use our two feet/canoes/bicycle to get there. Opening up huge tracts of land so a bunch of "hunters" can roar back and forth on the roads all day aboard their snorkel equipped/27" mudszilla tire quads, hoping to intercept a crossing moose or deer, is a recipe for species depletion and defeats any gains we have made as far as our hunting tradition and ethics. I hunted parry sound area this fall for deer. I sat for 7 days and there wasn't one hour go by where I didn't hear or see guys ripping around. I spent 14 days on a self guided elk hunt in Colorado and saw one hunter on foot up close and two on horseback through binos over a mile away. I also saw one piece of garbage on that trip that likely fell from a backpack. I'm disgusted as to what people leave in our woods here, makes me cringe.
But we can't see the forest for the trees here and blame everyone but ourselves for our issues. I own a quad myself so I'm not against them, just an advocate for their proper use as far as crown land goes. If you own a couple hundred acres and wanna rip the hell out of it go nuts, just don't do it on public land that was granted to us for all to enjoy and marvel at. It's. Pretty simple concept really, leave it the way you found it, or better.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggamer
Exactly what many of us have been asking for but I'm shocked at how many on this Board think we're over regulated already! Thanks for posting. One tag = one hunter = one kill then hunt something else .... sounds fair to me.
Not sure when you were appointed the moderator of this thread...and not sure how responding to a specific comment or thought on this thread, derails it. It's still on topic and the "party hunting" I participate does not involve the illegal activity described in the other thread. If you want to continue to post about illegally attaching a non present persons tag on white tails, take your own advice and talk about it in the other thread. I am merely defending the position of legal party hunting as per the current regulations.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
You are still missing the point of how I and a lot of others who are in hunt camps, legally party hunt. You are persistent with the thought that we are using tags of people who are not even hunting with us. This is simply not the case. Example if a guy only comes into camp for a couple of days, and doesn't shoot a deer, he doesn't leave his tag for the rest of us because we couldn't legally attach his tag if he was not participating in the hunt. He takes it home with him. Camp members don't show up with extra tags that they have obtained from people who don't hunt with us, that would be a quick way of getting kicked out of the camp.
It's not the end of the world if party hunting for whitetails was eliminated, but it sure would shake up the dynamics of Central / Northern Ontario hunt camps.
If legal party hunting was eliminated, what problem will it fix / correct? There is no shortage of white tail deer in Ontario.
I would like to see a separation of tags for bow hunting g and GU hunting. It would be nice to know that if you are successful during gun season that your hunting season is not over.
Well, some WMUs each year do have additional tags available that are archery only, so that would fit what you're saying. Other WMUs have additional tags available that aren't archery only, but you can use it for archery if the idea is to not be done when you fill your tag in gun season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Useless
That is how it's interpreted. As long as the shooter has a way of communicating with the tag holder and don't move a downed animal before it's tagged, no CO is going to hassle you about the tag holder taking a reasonable amount of time to travel up to 5 km to the kill site. That's been addressed in the old "Ask a CO" Q&A that used to (?) be on the MNR website.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Useless
your hunting season is not over if you use your tag just your deer hunting season
there are other critters to hunt
what your asking is they basically double the tags not sure we have that many to spare
I like this one as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by sullyy
If I understand it; the 3 or 4 point rules are adopted in areas down south where the tags are Buck or Doe....the restriction keeps a balanced lower end but statistically it results in more does being killed. Which works in some WMUs, but for a lot , where deer numbers aren't very high, it's not a desired consequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by sullyy
My buddy uses an outfitter in Que, he takes his fishing tackle, he successfully hunts the first 1/2 day for a spring bear and then is off fishing the rest of the week...relaxing vacation every spring.Quote:
Originally Posted by hunteronwheels
How about a "demerit point" system listed on your outdoor car? just like driving, any infraction will be posted. mostly useful for COs, but still a good idea, perhaps even a three strike your out system for hunting violations.
There are many instances where this would be helpful. New guy wants to join the camp? i'd have a 1 demerit or less policy maybe? and so on and so forth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flytyermiller
We are talking about hunting here not rocket appliances. No need to re inject the wheel .
I started the thread. i'll "inject" whatever i want in the "rocket appliances", Johnny Boy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Outdoors cards, hunting violations and regulations have as much to do with hunting as anything else. it doesn't take a "rocket appliance" to understand that....
Quote:
Originally Posted by flytyermiller
Jeez I wish somebody would tell that to the folks at the MNR. When I did background checks for PAL applicants I could not get access to wildlife convictions for the MNR. I probably renewed licenses for some poachers.LOL
Other than MBCA wildlife convictions aren't Federal. Just curious why a hunting or fishing conviction could have an impact on whether some guy gets a PAL renewed?
It doesn't. i think the implication was that maybe it should? but i may have read that wrong. but that's what i got from it. which makes sense i suppose, if you have a pile of hunting related convictions, should you really legally possess in canada? debatable.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
I believe there should be a mandatory course for duck hunting. Almost like turkey education course. Provides new hunters the proper methods on waterfowl ID- ing and waterfowl ethics. I remember the hunters Ed course showed an outline of one duck and that was all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No Sawbill has it right under the firearms act section 5 Provincial Wildlife convictions would not preclude a poacher from having his PAL renewed.But if I had access to the convictions I would list them in the results of my applicants background check and forward it to the Chief Provincial Firearms Officer.I could not get them so they did not get listed.Quote:
Originally Posted by flytyermiller
I had to take the course in 1993 when I moved to Ontario and back then they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonecollector23
Would allow handguns for carry in wilderness(both hunters and fishermans),still no hunting during night time but would allow firearms not being encased in wilderness areas.
zero tolerance on alcohol and influenced behaviour.
Dito ,BUT. For all types of hunting. Not just bow. Europe, nordik countries maintains animal pops this way. It works. Most bow hunters actually practice more due to muscle conditioning req'd than the fudds with guns I've seenQuote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
#2 the stupid rule that draws the firearm/non-firearm line at 500 fps with no other logic
In Sweden it's called the Jägarexamen;
Definitely challenges the shooters capabilities...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il1MBHb2Am8
The problem with Archery, not many practice 3D from an elevated stand....seen it many times...10 arrows in the bull at ground level but miss the Bag from 16' up...
An example of a proficiency test from Iowa;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOsue51ZpMQ
In NB if your name gets drawn for the moose hunt you need to pass a shot test at the MNR range I think the target is 100 yards. 3 tries no pass no Moose.
It's called proficiency with arm. No matter the arm or the country. It's needed for all firearms and bows. Ya elevation tricks some archers. Having said that by the time the season comes I'm usually more accurate with bow at any height than Elmer who's thrown a few down range. I've seen flubs by archers. Personally I've seen way more firearm flubbed shotsQuote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
I'd like to see the "blaze orange" law changed to allow blaze orange camo. That one never did made any sense.
While I 100% disagree with Lowbanksarcher's stance on party hunting, I believe he is basing his comments on his own experiences/encounters with party hunting in his neck of the woods. As a former resident of that area, there's a reason why I choose to do my party hunting elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher
I'd like to see organized parties taking part in the deer or moose rifle hunts be granted have the ability to legally share a single bear license that would allow the party to kill one bear, shot by anyone in the party. It could be a special party license that would cost more than the regular bear license. The idea was formally presented by the OFAH to MNR several years ago, and that's where it still rests.
I like that idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninepointer
^^^
I also agree with that. I know our group would buy that tag.
A Gun i wish i could hunt with here. a beauty! That's a change i'd make. 410, practical.
[IMG]http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/...28635255_n.jpg[/IMG]
ya when that slug leaves that 3" non rifled bore whatever's within 5 yds you got himQuote:
Originally Posted by flytyermiller
I believe FlyTier was thinking more in terms of ground swatting ruffed grouse; the ones he hunts with his bird dog.Quote:
Originally Posted by standup
They Judge has a 2 1/2" chamber and a rifled barrel, it also shoots 45 Colt, the issue is something to do with a shotgun with a short barrel in the US, this is a rifled barreled pistol that you can use 410 shells in.Quote:
Originally Posted by standup
I would love to be able to carry a handgun, 22LR for grouse or rabbits and a 45 for back woods camping and fishing trips.
I think my little Bearcat would be perfect for grouse.Sadly I will never have the chance to find out.
http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j1...psa38df903.jpg
What if a grouse landed at the range? Would that not be a place where you could legally shoot your restricted and also hunt because there is no restriction on hunting for small game with a handgun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
You can dream
Lol Fox , I tried once Shhhh,, A few years ago a small group of starlings landed on the lower part of the berm at 50 yards. Well I only managed to scare the crap out of them but it was fun.
Ha ha ha, I know of a groundhog at 100 yards hit with a 300 win mag during the fall sight in, it was a mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Clever, but see page 23 of the hunting regs summary... "You may use semi-automatic or repeating firearms for hunting in Ontario, but not handguns that are restricted or prohibited firearms or fully automatic firearms."Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
Dang, that is true, I forgot that part. I remember when they used to say you could not use a pistol or a revolver but they had to change it because pellet guns are considered guns and are not restricted or prohibited.Quote:
Originally Posted by tweedwolfscream
But I think the summary of the regs is only stating that, so hunters will also comply with the handgun restrictions relating to the other acts that control the use and possession of them. Trappers were able to carry handguns for dispatching animals for years (and may still be able to)