Free: Contests & Raffles.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170120/obama-says-goodbye-to-america-s-gun-owners-with-a-likely-short-lived-lead-ammo-ban
https://www.fws.gov/policy/do219.htmlAs I read the order it is less of a "ban" than an initiative to work with various state and federal agencies.
It doesn't seem to affect that much territory at all and should be easy to overturn.I suggest breathing into a paper bag.
Quote from: jay.sharkbait on January 22, 2017, 07:43:44 AMIt doesn't seem to affect that much territory at all and should be easy to overturn.I suggest breathing into a paper bag.Then you should probably reread it. All uses. To the maximum extent practicable. Working with state, tribal, and other federal agencies. Read it again. If it is no big deal, why bother with it?
The lead ammo been will be coming to Washington soon enough. CA just passed it statewide and everyone knows WA will follow suit. I bet within the next 5 - 10 years there will be laws in place.CA has had big plans and timed their change quite well. Now the lead ammo ban takes place around the same time the background checks for buying ammo kicks in.... So you can't use your old ammo, and now they can regulate and watch what you're buying.
Quote from: Fl0und3rz on January 22, 2017, 07:58:09 AMQuote from: jay.sharkbait on January 22, 2017, 07:43:44 AMIt doesn't seem to affect that much territory at all and should be easy to overturn.I suggest breathing into a paper bag.Then you should probably reread it. All uses. To the maximum extent practicable. Working with state, tribal, and other federal agencies. Read it again. If it is no big deal, why bother with it?And show me where it actually changes regulations. Oh wait, it doesn't! Your "To the maximum extent practicable" only applies on USFWS lands, which are 95% lead free already, and it just says the agency should work towards lead free on those lands. No regs are changed by this policy!
DIRECTOR'S ORDER NO. 219 Subject: USE OF NONTOXIC AMMUNITION AND FISHING TACKLE Sec. 1 What is the purpose of this Order? The purpose of this Order is to establish procedures and a timeline for expanding the use of nontoxic ammunition and fishing tackle on Service lands, waters, and facilities and for certain types of hunting and fishing regulated by the Service outside of Service lands, waters, and facilities. Sec. 2 What is the legal authority for this Order? a. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d). b. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). c. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee). d. National Wildlife Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4). e. Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). f. Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j). g. Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 715-715r). h. Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. § 3901b, 100 Stat. 3583).
Quote from: bigtex on January 22, 2017, 08:00:30 AMQuote from: Fl0und3rz on January 22, 2017, 07:58:09 AMQuote from: jay.sharkbait on January 22, 2017, 07:43:44 AMIt doesn't seem to affect that much territory at all and should be easy to overturn.I suggest breathing into a paper bag.Then you should probably reread it. All uses. To the maximum extent practicable. Working with state, tribal, and other federal agencies. Read it again. If it is no big deal, why bother with it?And show me where it actually changes regulations. Oh wait, it doesn't! Your "To the maximum extent practicable" only applies on USFWS lands, which are 95% lead free already, and it just says the agency should work towards lead free on those lands. No regs are changed by this policy!You seem to believe that unelected bureaucrats need new regulations to implement new policy. That would be an error on your part.QuoteDIRECTOR'S ORDER NO. 219 Subject: USE OF NONTOXIC AMMUNITION AND FISHING TACKLE Sec. 1 What is the purpose of this Order? The purpose of this Order is to establish procedures and a timeline for expanding the use of nontoxic ammunition and fishing tackle on Service lands, waters, and facilities and for certain types of hunting and fishing regulated by the Service outside of Service lands, waters, and facilities. Sec. 2 What is the legal authority for this Order? a. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d). b. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). c. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee). d. National Wildlife Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4). e. Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). f. Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j). g. Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 715-715r). h. Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. § 3901b, 100 Stat. 3583).
Quote from: Miles on January 22, 2017, 08:50:41 AMThe lead ammo been will be coming to Washington soon enough. CA just passed it statewide and everyone knows WA will follow suit. I bet within the next 5 - 10 years there will be laws in place.CA has had big plans and timed their change quite well. Now the lead ammo ban takes place around the same time the background checks for buying ammo kicks in.... So you can't use your old ammo, and now they can regulate and watch what you're buying.I don't disagree. I think eventually lead will be outlawed in most states. CA phased in their lead regs thru a 3 or 4 year phase in with full implentation by 2018 or 19, can't remember. But realistically right now CA is lead free with the exception of hunting a couple species.
Quote from: Fl0und3rz on January 22, 2017, 09:05:19 AMYou seem to believe that unelected bureaucrats need new regulations to implement new policy. That would be an error on your part.QuoteDIRECTOR'S ORDER NO. 219 Subject: USE OF NONTOXIC AMMUNITION AND FISHING TACKLE Sec. 1 What is the purpose of this Order? The purpose of this Order is to establish procedures and a timeline for expanding the use of nontoxic ammunition and fishing tackle on Service lands, waters, and facilities and for certain types of hunting and fishing regulated by the Service outside of Service lands, waters, and facilities. Sec. 2 What is the legal authority for this Order? a. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d). b. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). c. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee). d. National Wildlife Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4). e. Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). f. Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j). g. Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 715-715r). h. Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. § 3901b, 100 Stat. 3583).And your legal background is??? I enforce those regulations, pretty sure I know what I am talking about. A lead ban that you think is enacted could only be enacted thru new regulations. The DO did not enact any new regulations.
You seem to believe that unelected bureaucrats need new regulations to implement new policy. That would be an error on your part.QuoteDIRECTOR'S ORDER NO. 219 Subject: USE OF NONTOXIC AMMUNITION AND FISHING TACKLE Sec. 1 What is the purpose of this Order? The purpose of this Order is to establish procedures and a timeline for expanding the use of nontoxic ammunition and fishing tackle on Service lands, waters, and facilities and for certain types of hunting and fishing regulated by the Service outside of Service lands, waters, and facilities. Sec. 2 What is the legal authority for this Order? a. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d). b. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). c. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee). d. National Wildlife Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4). e. Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). f. Fish and Wildlife Act 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j). g. Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 715-715r). h. Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. § 3901b, 100 Stat. 3583).
Quote from: bigtex on January 22, 2017, 08:59:02 AMQuote from: Miles on January 22, 2017, 08:50:41 AMThe lead ammo been will be coming to Washington soon enough. CA just passed it statewide and everyone knows WA will follow suit. I bet within the next 5 - 10 years there will be laws in place.CA has had big plans and timed their change quite well. Now the lead ammo ban takes place around the same time the background checks for buying ammo kicks in.... So you can't use your old ammo, and now they can regulate and watch what you're buying.I don't disagree. I think eventually lead will be outlawed in most states. CA phased in their lead regs thru a 3 or 4 year phase in with full implentation by 2018 or 19, can't remember. But realistically right now CA is lead free with the exception of hunting a couple species.All of the new laws down here are crazy. I'm getting out of this state at just the right time. I've seen a lot of similarities between CA and WA since living down here. It's like WA looks to CA for the newest ideas. I'm worried that WA will be just like CA in the future. I know quite a few hunters down here that thought a lot of the garbage CA just passed would never happen... Now they're upset and having to deal with all the changes. You guys need to stay active and don't give an inch or they'll take a mile.2019 is the year for the ca statewide lead ammo ban.
That said what's all this talk that this isn't bad etc? For the most part shotgun ammo with lead had been banned on BLM, and or other lands, but just because it's been the norm doesn't mean it's good and sure doesn't mean it's not one step towards all lands, other than private that is. Lead ammo doesn't do the amount of damage that people have said it does. The condors in California, and eagles, etc... aren't dying off because of lead ammo, they're digesting it from natural sources. Making hunters who use firearms to hunt with are going to be herded out at some point or other if this doesn't get dumped by Trump or someone. Because the idea is to switch to faster but hotter copper, or another kind of metal, or derivative from, which if it shoots hotter that means in the summer when it's hot and dry already technically they could stop you from target practicing or hunting all together.
Quote from: csaaphill on January 23, 2017, 09:50:17 PMThat said what's all this talk that this isn't bad etc? For the most part shotgun ammo with lead had been banned on BLM, and or other lands, but just because it's been the norm doesn't mean it's good and sure doesn't mean it's not one step towards all lands, other than private that is. Lead ammo doesn't do the amount of damage that people have said it does. The condors in California, and eagles, etc... aren't dying off because of lead ammo, they're digesting it from natural sources. Making hunters who use firearms to hunt with are going to be herded out at some point or other if this doesn't get dumped by Trump or someone. Because the idea is to switch to faster but hotter copper, or another kind of metal, or derivative from, which if it shoots hotter that means in the summer when it's hot and dry already technically they could stop you from target practicing or hunting all together.What are the sources of lead? Peer reviewed literature?
