California Ammo Ban Set To Cost Hunters Big Time, Some May Quit Entirely

[Rattler]

The side effects of banning lead ammo.....

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/california-ammo-ban-set-cost-hunters-big-time-may-quit-entirely/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2019-09-10&utm_campaign=manualpost&fbclid=IwAR3NbPoLp0AWJN6vXK9iWfy-hZU3kR5mAKdQlziX76wM-ZHuBuke9PnP81Y

[ATbuckhunter]

Did you see california banned fur trapping as well? This is getting ridiculous

 

[virgil]

I switched to copper for deer hunting a few years ago.  Between the cost of sighting in my gun each year and the few rounds I might fire in the woods during the season, the total impact of the switch costs me about $15 per year.

[ATbuckhunter]

31 minutes ago, virgil said:

I switched to copper for deer hunting a few years ago.  Between the cost of sighting in my gun each year and the few rounds I might fire in the woods during the season, the total impact of the switch costs me about $15 per year.

I also use copper for deer hunting as well. I don't shoot many times at animals, so the extra cost doesnt really add up to much like you said 

[Rattler]

35 minutes ago, virgil said:

I switched to copper for deer hunting a few years ago.  Between the cost of sighting in my gun each year and the few rounds I might fire in the woods during the season, the total impact of the switch costs me about $15 per year.

If all of your ammo, for all of your hunting and sighting in had to be lead free, and you did all sorts of hunting and a lot of it, your cost would be much higher overall.  Read the article.  We're losing hunters in California.  That was the plan from the start.

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by Rattler

[virgil]

3 minutes ago, Rattler said:

If all of your ammo, for all of your hunting and sighting in had to be lead free, and you did all sorts of hunting and a lot of it, your cost would be much higher overall.  Read the article.  We're losing hunters in California.  That was the plan from the start.

 

Is it illegal to target shoot with lead in California?

[ATbuckhunter]

Just now, virgil said:

Is it illegal to target shoot with lead in California?

Not at the range as far as I know. So its really just hunting the lead free is needed

[virgil]

Nobody will quit hunting over this.  Even if you did a ton of hunting for all kinds of game, the number of rounds fired in the field would still amount to a relatively small financial impact.  The banning of lead for waterfowl hunting has a much greater impact because bird hunters usually fire a lot more shots in a day of hunting.  This article is the exact same as the dozens that were written when California first passed the bill a few years ago.  It's reactionary nonsense.

[airedale]

1 hour ago, virgil said:

Nobody will quit hunting over this

You are speaking for yourself!

I have a brother and several friends all who live and hunt in California and the future of hunting is bleak and been on decline for years.

Go to the California hunting sites like this one and get it from the Horse's mouth, the hunting license sales have been on a steady decline many hunters have quit or moved out and the banning of traditional ammo has had a lot to do with it.

Al

The numbers do not lie and this is with a population that has more than doubled!

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by airedale

[virgil]

Airedale, the ban just went into effect.  The trends that you're sighting have been going on for years- decades.  And there's been no uptick in the decline in the years since the ban was announced.  The 2019 number is probably an outlier as the big game season is still a few months away and perhaps many hunters buy their licenses at the last minute.  it's the whole, 'correlation does not establish causation' thing.  Hunting has been in decline in CA for far longer than this proposed ban has been in effect.

Edited September 11, 2019 by virgil

[virgil]

It's also interesting that 2018 had the highest number of lifetime licenses sold for period covered by your statistics.  That number tells me that there are more young people getting into hunting today than there were a few years ago.  As you said, the numbers don't lie.

 

[airedale]

7 minutes ago, virgil said:

Airedale, the ban just went into effect.

The total state wide ban just has went into effect, there has been a ban on Traditional ammo in many of the prime hunting areas which has been incrementally increasing for years. Watch and see what the numbers are in another five years!

Al

[Hunter007]

Well its certainly not going to help get new hunters into the sport that's for sure making ammo cost more .  That is  one of the reasons  pcp airguns are gaining in popularity.  Less BS to deal with  .

[virgil]

12 minutes ago, airedale said:

The total state wide ban just has went into effect, there has been a ban on Traditional ammo in many of the prime hunting areas which has been incrementally increasing for years. Watch and see what the numbers are in another five years!

Al

OK, it will be interesting to watch.  But, if the ammo bans have been incrementally increasing in recent years, you should expect an uptick in the decline in hunters if your argument is accurate.  But, in fact, there has been a slower decline in license sales- an 8% decline in the years between 2010-2018 vs. a 28% decline in the years 1970-1979.

[Rattler]

On 9/11/2019 at 11:14 AM, ATbuckhunter said:

Not at the range as far as I know. So its really just hunting the lead free is needed

You have to sight in your hunting ammo at the range prior to using it to hunt with, correct?

Unless you expect your lead free ammo to hit the same zero as your lead ammo.  That's an assumption I would not make.

 

[Rattler]

Hunters have been getting fed up with overall government interference in hunting for decades now.  This ammo ban is just a huge cog in the wheel that may turn out to be the straw that breaks a lot of hunter's desire to continue hunting.

Even if you doubt it will cause a decline in the numbers, you are taking a big gamble with that thinking.  If you're wrong, the decline will be very hard to reverse, if it can be reversed at all.  The current decline in hunter numbers hasn't stopped and shows no sign it will either.

States like California are not concerned though.  They will be quite happy to control animal populations by supporting larger wolf, cougar, grizzly bear, black bear and coyote populations to pick up the slack.  All of which will become another expense for taxpayers to be burdened with.

There has been no retreat from animal rights groups to eliminate hunting, and it isn't odd they have invested millions in this ammo ban bill if they don't think it will affect hunters.  Yeah, they want to help animals affected by lead, but that is a minimal gain compared to how many they save if hunting numbers decline.

And the animal rights crowd is closely aligned with the gun ban crowd.  It won't be long before they decide to attack your gun rights based on the fact you have no desire to go hunting anymore.  No hunting license?  No need for a gun, especially that "high powered, scoped sniper rifle" you call a deer rifle.

None of these heavy handed government regulations happens in a vacuum, and none are stand alone regulations that aren't expected to be expanded in the future at the first opportunity.  Voluntary changes, become advisories, which become mandated with punishment by a fine, then morph into misdemeanors, which finally become felonies where violations remove all of the rights you used to have.  There are hundreds of examples I could give to prove it to anyone wanting to see them, but I fear it would be as futile as administering medicine to the dead.

Trusting the government is foolhardy when you consider all of the damage it's done to individual liberty over the years.

[Rattler]

More of the same.  Wake up people.

https://www.sportsmensalliance.org/news/california-bobcat-hunting-ban-headed-to-governor/?fbclid=IwAR0Zb5CA2zseZ1ogBESKR1TShDzU3d8K9MkYvKC-E4jqw2k9T2MqbNJ5JM0

[Core]

This is great news to most californians. They hate hunting and anything approximating classical America.

As for ammo prices, though, what the heck? Steel shot is all over the place and priced similarly to lead. Where do they get the 387% price increase stuff from?

The real impact is on rifle rounds. They are absolutely much tougher to find in copper.

Edited September 12, 2019 by Core

[Core]

27 minutes ago, Rattler said:

More of the same.  Wake up people.

https://www.sportsmensalliance.org/news/california-bobcat-hunting-ban-headed-to-governor/?fbclid=IwAR0Zb5CA2zseZ1ogBESKR1TShDzU3d8K9MkYvKC-E4jqw2k9T2MqbNJ5JM0

Oh most of us get it. I personally wouldn't mind using copper as an option for deer, but laws like this have plenty to do with progressives' distaste for hunting. Many liberals, of which California is full, hold the view that it's a demented bloodthirsty activity and should be outright banned. Controlling the surplus of prey is not of concern to them, no matter how many car accidents or crops get hurt.

I'm sure we'll see the same law here in NY in time.

Edited September 12, 2019 by Core

[Rattler]

California's hunters will see big spikes in non lead ammo pricing as soon as supplies dwindle, since ammo makers can't possibly crank out the volume of ammo needed when everyone has to use it for hunting.  You can't even get non lead ammo in many popular hunting cartridges.  I guess you just have to buy a new gun to keep hunting.

[Core]

1 hour ago, Rattler said:

I guess you just have to buy a new gun to keep hunting.

That's fine, works out as intended. Anything Californians can do to ultimately make hunting, guns, etc. more difficult/onerous is a win for them.

[ATbuckhunter]

3 hours ago, Rattler said:

You have to sight in your hunting ammo at the range prior to using it to hunt with, correct?

Unless you expect your lead free ammo to hit the same zero as your lead ammo.  That's an assumption I would not make.

 

Right, but how many rounds does it take to sight in? Roughly around 10 or so if there was some sort of problem. Its not nearly as much of a problem as everyone is making it out to be. In the grand scheme of how much we pay to hunt, and extra 10-20 buck a box will not kill us or force people to stop completely. You can still practice at the range all year and just make the switch for hunting season

[airedale]

What goes over people's heads it is the Varmint and small game hunters who get reamed big time with no Vaseline when it come to Traditional ammo bans. I have had years when I shot hundreds of rounds of centerfire and rimfire rifle rounds along with plenty of shotgun shells hunting those game animals and birds. 

There are hunters that hunt stuff other than Deer. By far the most ammo I ever used for hunting was when I was after Squirrels, Rabbits-Hare, Fox, Coyote, Coons, Woodchucks, Crows, Pheasant, Woodcock, Grouse, Turkey, Pigeons, Rats, Possums added to the already mandated Waterfowl.

Edited September 12, 2019 by airedale

[BizCT]

Mountain Lion taxidermy is illegal in Cali so I can’t move to Orange County.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Curmudgeon]

Acknowledging that costs to deer hunters are very different than those to varmint hunters, can we agree that costs to deer hunters are nearly insignificant?

I killed 3 deer with the non-lead bullets last season. I fired 5 rounds, which includes the 2 rounds I put through the .270 beforehand. I bought a box of .270 Federal Copper ammo for $30 at Mayhood's in Norwich. How is that a financial burden?

BTW - Opening day last year there were 2 bald eagles in a tree above one of my gut piles by afternoon. There was an eagle circling over my head as I gutted that deer.  This is not a theoretical problem.  Every eagle we have trapped in the winter had measurable lead levels.  

My friend who comes here each year for opening week hunts a lot in CA. He says the ban is a non-issue among the people he hunts with.