Weird Hunting Regs?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bobson

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
4,294
Location
Kendall County, TX
I was looking over the Washington state hunting reg book, where it lists Equipment and Hunting Methods (p 85).

Rifles:
Big game, except cougar, must be hunted with a minimum of .24 caliber (6mm) centerfire rifle.
. . .
Handguns:
Big game, except cougar, may be hunted with handguns with a minimum barrel length of 4 inches per manufacturers specification, and fire a minimum .24 caliber centerfire cartridge.

So... one may legally hunt deer in WA using a Glock 19 (it has a 4.01" barrel), but not a .223 rifle? Is that correct? Seems weird to me.
 
Laws are written by politicians, not hunters. You'll find weird stuff like that in a lot of states. We used to have a lot more stupid regulations on the books here in GA, but things have gotten better within the last 10 years or so. Many of the laws were completely unenforceable so even game wardens simply ignored them. We still have a few, but most of the really stupid stuff has been simplified.
 
Used to be in Kansas it was legal to deer hunt with a 32-20 or .30 Carbine revolver.

But not with a .38 Super, .40 S&W, 10mm, 45ACP, or .44 Special.

It was all based on case length.
Not energy, suitable hunting loads, or how big a hole it made.

They finally fixed it a few years ago.

rc
 
[QUOTESo... one may legally hunt deer in WA using a Glock 19 (it has a 4.01" barrel), but not a .223 rifle? Is that correct? Seems weird to me.][/QUOTE] Incorrect on page 90 it states that semiauto handguns must be 40cal (10mm) or larger to take big game.
 
Incorrect on page 90 it states that semiauto handguns must be 40cal (10mm) or larger to take big game.
The section you're looking at on page 90 is only addressing specific Firearm Restriction Areas, which are detailed, by county, following the firearm restrictions themselves. For instance, I attached a pic of the particular areas these restrictions are applied in my particular county.

So, in those particular areas of Snohomish county, you're correct in that one would legally need a Glock 23. Elsewhere in the county, a G19 would be sufficient. :p lol

It was weird before. Now it's just funny. They're really splitting hairs aren't they?
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    70.7 KB · Views: 48
In California you have to use a magazine plug for all shotgun hunting to limit capacity to 2+1. This includes deer/pig hunting with slugs when it would be perfectly legal to hunt using a rifle with a 5 round capacity.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, these aren't laws written by politicians but regulations dictated by your state wildlife agency.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, these aren't laws written by politicians but regulations dictated by your state wildlife agency.

In GA it is the elected officials. They sometimes seek and get guidance from Fish & Game, but it is the politicians who decide.

Baiting has been a hot topic here. Almost everyone who owned private property did it although illegal. Politicians in the southern half of the state wanted to legalize it. Northern politicians were against it as was state Fish and Game. The compromise: it is now legal in the southern half of the state.

We used to have a 500 ft lb @ 100 yard rule for handguns. Totally unenforceable. The only way to make a citation legal was to confiscate the gun and ammo and send it to the state crime lab for analysis. The current backlog on important stuff is about 6 months. I'd take at least 2 years to get the results back and make a case. At the urging of Fish & Game now any centerfire handgun is legal. They figure if someone is dedicated enough to handicap themselves with a handgun they will take the time to be good with it.

In California you have to use a magazine plug for all shotgun hunting to limit capacity to 2+1. This includes deer/pig hunting with slugs when it would be perfectly legal to hunt using a rifle with a 5 round capacity.

Similar here in GA. There is no restriction at all on rifles, but shotguns were limited to 2+1 for anything. In an effort to correct that the law was changed to read 5+1 for shotguns only for deer or bear. It is still 2+1 for everything else. Close, but no cigar, whoever wrote the law forgot about Mossbergs which are 6+1 when the plug is removed. Technically Mossbergs are illegal unless plugged to be 5+1, but no warden is going to write that ticket.
 
In Florida the wildlife commission is made up of political appointees. Very few of them hunt. They are usually donors to the governor's campaign and most are from the larger cities.
I'm amazed that they passed a bear-hunting season this year. It was probably due to the women that were attacked by bears.
 
In missouri we can deer hunt with any centerfire, air rifles over 40 cal and use atlattls. "Weird" yes, but also very logical.

HB
 
So... one may legally hunt deer in WA using a Glock 19 (it has a 4.01" barrel), but not a .223 rifle? Is that correct? Seems weird to me.
You think that's weird? In TX, you can't legally hunt any game birds with an airgun but you can legally hunt hogs or mountain lions with one.

Sometimes laws make sense, sometimes they don't.
 
Here in Ohio you can legally deer hunt with a .50 beowulf AR pistol with a 10 round magazine or a .45-70 rifle but you can't use a .30-30. Doesn't make sense but that's what it is.
 
Having a min cal is nothing new . States have min`s on cross bows, muzzle loaders, etc.

Most DNR`s have open meeting to discuss issues. Open to the public. A good place to bring up," how come." J s/n.
 
Well, I'd ask 'em "How come I can shoot doves with lead shot and over the same field, I have to shoot steel shot on geese", but I figure they'd just demand steel for doves. :rolleyes: That's federal law, though. The citizen has no input into the laws of the federal government. They're wiser than us, ya know, know what's best for us and all that. :rolleyes:
 
Missouri used to not specify caliber for deer, but did require a bullet weight of 100 grains or more. I guess they expected the game wardens to carry scales and bullet pullers? Now they just specify caliber.
 
Having a min cal is nothing new . States have min`s on cross bows, muzzle loaders, etc.

Most DNR`s have open meeting to discuss issues. Open to the public. A good place to bring up," how come." J s/n.

Been to a couple of those. I found that the DNR is very similar to the rest of government. It's unusual for logic to be used much in the decision making process.
 
I also know in CA, that the flashlights you can have on your person while hunting are determined by voltage and not lumens. Given advances in LEDs, voltage is,less important than it used to be. Also, CA being the nanny state, you would expect burdensome hunter orange requirements but there is no hunter orange requirement m
 
Some municipalities in Southern Ontario say you cannot use any cartridge greater than .275, by the cartridge name(so a .270 Win is ok, but a .276 Pedersen is not.), for small game. Some municipalities say .270 or less for anything.
It is rumoured to have started just after W.W. I to stop hunters using surplus Lee-Enfields. The .270 or less is just stupid civil servants making laws about things they know nothing about.
Having to use steel shot on migratory birds is by International treaty. So is the 3 rounds in the gun rule. Ontario's MNR civil servants decided it'd be 3 for everything too. Used to be you could use ANY size rifle mag.
 
In Alabama we can hunt over corn as long as it is at least 100 yards away and "out of sight" behind a natural obstruction such as terrain or vegetation. It makes some sense because you can't have a feeder behind a roll of hay in the middle of a big field...until you read the part where the game warden can determine if the bait is in a spot that will attract the deer past your hunting area? Basically any spot I have corn COULD be drawing deer past my stand so I am guilty every time I hunt.
This grey area has been beaten in court by everyone I know of.
 
In Alabama we can hunt over corn as long as it is at least 100 yards away and "out of sight" behind a natural obstruction such as terrain or vegetation. It makes some sense because you can't have a feeder behind a roll of hay in the middle of a big field...until you read the part where the game warden can determine if the bait is in a spot that will attract the deer past your hunting area? Basically any spot I have corn COULD be drawing deer past my stand so I am guilty every time I hunt.
This grey area has been beaten in court by everyone I know of.

I was told they worded it that way to keep people from hunting directly over a corn pile and from putting feeders in green fields.

I don't use corn at all, and don't remember who told me but it does seem reasonable.

The hunting laws on water ways are what make me mad. NO ONE knows where you can hunt in back waters. I used to duck hunt a good bit up creeks going to the rivers and I never knew if I was legal or not, many times I met the game warden in places without incident, and few weeks later they'd be giving tickets for hunting in the same places, and many times the judge would throw them out, other times he wouldn't. It's crazy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top