Regs test

[Hunter John]

Or going to the shooting club next week with a 12 gauge and sabots? The control hunt is on in the area but I have no controlled hunt tag ???

[Quack_Kills]

One that i see is they had no hunter orange as it is required when there is an open season for big game.

"Under this regulation, all licenced hunters, including bow hunters and falconers hunting during a gun season for deer, elk, or moose are required to wear hunter orange. This requirement does not apply to persons who are hunting migratory game birds except woodcock."

"Where there is a gun season for moose, elk, or deer concurrent with an open bear season, then the only persons exempted from wearing hunter orange are migratory game bird hunters as indicated above"

[trimmer21]

After carefully re-reading the OP,the ONLY charge that could be laid is for not wearing blaze orange. The regs clearly state that during a gun hunt for Moose,Deer,Elk or Black Bear,ALL hunters must wear.....except for waterfowl etc. Because the shotgun is open and the front seat with ammo close by,R&PG exists to believe that hunting is taking place,therefore,blaze would be required. The OP states that the shot is #6 which falls within the legal requirement of shot size,therefore,no offense is committed. If,upon inspection of the truck box,they found that the duck meat had or would spoil,there may be an issue with that depending on how it was stored. It remains to be seen if the meat had actually spoiled. Having their rifles in cases and stored in the truck box is not an offense,therefore,licenses are NOT required and a charge for such can't be laid in that instance,either. Because the hunters aren't actively hunting waterfowl at the time and their gear is stored,no charge can be laid for possession of lead shot while hunting migratory birds because they weren't,quite clearly,hunting waterfowl.

[Bluebulldog]

No blaze is the only offence being committed.

Rifle in truck, not illegal.

Shotgun in cab, unloaded not illegal.

Possession of lead shot not illegal. The CO would likely check the duck to see what was used. Or ask if they in fact had steel shot as well.

[Hunter John]

[QUOTE=Bluebulldog;940857]No blaze is the only offence being committed.

Rifle in truck, not illegal.

Shotgun in cab, unloaded not illegal.


You are probably correct but unless they got out of the truck to hunt / shoot they are not hunting but perhaps transporting a shotgun not incased and that is perfectly legal . A bit of a stretch perhaps considering they told the CO they were looking for grouse but unless they got out of the truck with the shotgun ????

[finsfurfeathers]

[QUOTE=Hunter John;940859]

No blaze is the only offence being committed.

Rifle in truck, not illegal.

Shotgun in cab, unloaded not illegal.


You are probably correct but unless they got out of the truck to hunt / shoot they are not hunting but perhaps transporting a shotgun not incased and that is perfectly legal . A bit of a stretch perhaps considering they told the CO they were looking for grouse but unless they got out of the truck with the shotgun ????

Since searching for game falls under the definition of hunting driving the road looking for grouse falls under hunting hence the need for the orange. Definition of hunting is more than pulling the trigger.

[Hunter John]

And that's why I tend to agree with Blue BD. The 2 admitted what they were doing likely not realizing they were in violation of the orange requirement . While honesty is the best policy IMO if they said they were just going home could / would the charge still stick?

[finsfurfeathers]

And that's why I tend to agree with Blue BD. The 2 admitted what they were doing likely not realizing they were in violation of the orange requirement . While honesty is the best policy IMO if they said they were just going home could / would the charge still stick?

Probably would be okay. The next question would be were they wearing their seat belts? If it was on may support their claim "just on the way home" if it was off one might dig a little deeper into their actions or another charge maybe in order.

[rick_iles]

Slow down, does this mean one could get charged for having a rifle (locked, encased, out of sight, etc.) in the car while driving through an area with open season for which you don't have a licence/tag for?
I guess if one drives a dead-end logging trail, it's difficult to say they are on the way home, but there could be other legit reasons to go there that have nothing to do with hunting moose (e.g. pulling someone out of the ditch, target shooting, etc.).

This is the Section they would rely on with respect to the rifle.....note the word "possess"...and they were hunting small game, not just passing through or going home.



77. (1) A person hunting small game, when in an area during an open season in the area for a species of big game, shall not possess or use,
(a) a rifle of greater muzzle energy than 400 foot-pounds; or
(b) shells loaded with ball or shot larger than number two shot. O. Reg. 49/11, s. 18.
(2) Despite clause (1) (b), a holder of a small game licence, when in an area during an open season in the area for a species of big game, may possess and use,
(a) in the case of shot made of steel, shot that is not larger than triple BBB steel shot; or
(b) in the case of shot made of bismuth, shot that is not larger than double BB bismuth shot. O. Reg. 665/98, s. 77 (2).
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a holder of a small game licence hunting in that part of Ontario lying south of the French and Mattawa rivers during an open season for deer that is restricted to the use of bows. O. Reg. 665/98, s. 77 (3).

[trimmer21]

This is the Section they would rely on with respect to the rifle.....note the word "possess"...



77. (1) A person hunting small game, when in an area during an open season in the area for a species of big game, shall not possess or use,
(a) a rifle of greater muzzle energy than 400 foot-pounds; or
(b) shells loaded with ball or shot larger than number two shot. O. Reg. 49/11, s. 18.
(2) Despite clause (1) (b), a holder of a small game licence, when in an area during an open season in the area for a species of big game, may possess and use,
(a) in the case of shot made of steel, shot that is not larger than triple BBB steel shot; or
(b) in the case of shot made of bismuth, shot that is not larger than double BB bismuth shot. O. Reg. 665/98, s. 77 (2).
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a holder of a small game licence hunting in that part of Ontario lying south of the French and Mattawa rivers during an open season for deer that is restricted to the use of bows. O. Reg. 665/98, s. 77 (3).

It would depend on the definition of the word "possess" and the context in which it's used. Case law precedent has established it to mean "on one's person" at the time. Please don't ask me for specifics,I can only go from personal knowledge. If someone would like to research it,be my guest.