I'd say half of the squirrels I shoot are taken out by a .177 pellet gun.

I got an email back today

thanking me for contacting the DNR Natural Resource Board and stating this

Department staff are aware of the buckshot error and are in the process of working on an expedited rule.

kind of funny they are working on an expedited rule yet my warden was told to enforce it , strange.

They can probably make the change/correction via Emergency Order. I am sending mine to the NRB as well as the DNR secretary, Preston Cole.

A Warden I talked to said "I don't think anyone is going to worry about it since we've been able to use it for so long." Not trusting that.

Moosetrot

Its all in their interpretation now, at the Wardens discretion

I haven't contacted a warden yet, but these are some of the same questions I had when I started collecting the reg bulletins during hunting season, prepping for next year. Since all the offices are closed to the public, the customer service number is all but useless regarding regulation questions in my opinion. When I trapped and hunted (15 years ago) ... There were 4 1/2" min barrel length for small game handguns and the 17 Rem was legal for all small game. I'm not sure if that is true the way it's written today. I know I'll put up my 17 Rem against a 22lr for dispatch energy any day of the week for yotes at anything greater than 10 yards.

Anyway thanks for the heads up, guess getting some written clarification from a warden on Department letterhead would be timely at this point in time and a CYA document.

I believe that I saw in the regs the min barrel length for big game hunting was 5 1/2" muzzle to firing pin, so no snub nose revolves/compact pistols. For big game any .22 caliber centerfire or larger is legal, handgun/rifle. Gone is the 1000 ft-lb muzzle energy reg for handguns or does it still exist and just not written in the condensed bulletin?

This is what I sent about the 2021 Regulations:


To the Members of the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board and Secretary Preston Cole:

Several restrictions in the types of ammunition allowed for hunting in Wisconsin have appeared in the 2021 Game Regulations that have caused confusion, primarily for those of us who hunt predators and other small game in Wisconsin. I personally have received several telephone calls from hunters concerning these restrictions and their impact across the State.

There is currently a 2021 restriction on the use of buckshot, or any shot larger than T shot for hunting. I fully understand the need for this in waterfowling, however buckshot has been used for coyotes and other predators as long as I can remember. #4 buckshot and other buckshot is very efficient for Coyote and is used universally across the State, except in areas where non-toxic shot is required under regulation.

The regulations also prohibit the use of many small caliber rifles that have commonly been used for taking predators and other small game. Anything under .22 caliber is now prohibited, thus making many rifles, used for so many years by so many hunters, obsolete.

I have been involved with creation and setting regulations for many years. I can only assume that this was some type of oversight or error that placed these regulations in effect for 2021. These, hopefully erroneous regulations must be addressed as quickly as possible, as they are causing a lot of Wisconsin hunters frustration and confusion not only in the effects of these regulations on their treasured pursuits but also in the process of setting regulations with public comment.

I am requesting that the NRB, in their January 2021 meeting address and revert these regulations via Emergency Rule or whatever means possible, and correct the errors that affect so many of us across the State. This should not be something that we need to wait for the next regulation cycle.

Thank you for your consideration and fast action on this request.

Moosetrot

In addition, any comments for the NRB January 2021 meeting must be received by 11:00 a.m. on January 20.

Moosetrot

FYI-"Buckshot usage while hunting" has been added to the NRB Agenda for the Jan. 27 meeting.

Moosetrot

Thanks Moosetrot!

Chris

This is what I received as a reply from a DNR staff member in reply to my email to the NRB:

Thanks for your comments. I just wanted to point out that your statement that all calibers under .22 are now illegal is inaccurate. In fact, all minimum caliber restrictions have now been removed from administrative code. The new standard is that hunters must use a weapon or ammunition that is reasonably capable of reducing a target wild animal to their possession. We are currently working on rule-making to correct and restore allowing buckshot for furbearers.

I replied back with this:

The line that is causing the consternation and confusion is “A firearm with a caliber of at least .22” in the section titled “Reasonable equipment” It says “The following are presumed to be reasonable equipment:…”

If calibers are under .22 folks are under the impression, given the wording, they may be presumed to be unreasonable by LE, etc., or whomever made the determination that “A firearm with a caliber of at least .22” was to be the standard within the regulations. There are a ton of rifles currently being used for small game that are under the .22 caliber standard, and many folks are afraid and upset that they may be seen as “unreasonable” which brings them into the realm of being “illegal”.

I have been involved in this stuff for a long time, and even when I read it, I interpreted that anything under .22 caliber could be interpreted as being unreasonable, and thus illegal. Also, I did not see anything in there about the use of air guns (pellet guns) for use in hunting small game. Air guns are truly growing in popularity and should be addressed for hunting. Many of those are .177 caliber and under the current unclear wording in the regulation, they are also being construed by some as “illegal”.

Thanks for taking action on the buckshot issue but I truly think the small caliber(“..under .22 caliber…) rifles need to be addressed as well.

We'll see where this goes,,,

Moosetrot

It important to understand that the 'worst written Wisconsin hunting handbook for 2020' is not the law regarding hunting. It is only suppose to be a summary. Actual regs are a conglomeration of state laws and administrative codes. I question if all of these have been gone through and modified to reflect the language in the current handbook. But who knows what our democratic governor has instructed the DNR to do???

I know fully well that the regulation booklet is a summary of laws, etc. What happened is someone's interpretation and dissemination of the regulations messed up royally in describing the types of ammunition that can be used to take game, This is a rules issue, not a legislative issue, and the the DNR, under the direction of the NRB can and apparently are already in the process of review and hopefully correction of the erroneous language in the current brochure. The brochure is what the public goes by in determining the various aspects involved in hunting in Wisconsin, and how they are to comply.

They have already acknowledged the buckshot issue and I am trying to get them to use different language concerning the size of "reasonable" cartridges for taking game. The current language is very muddy and as I read it, cartridges under .22 caliber may be interpreted as being not reasonable, and thus illegal. Too much room for erroneous LE discretion in my mind.

Moosetrot

the ladies answering phones at the Madison DNR service center told me it stated nothing under 22cal.

if they can't straiten them out how is anyone else supposed to get a strait answer.

Pete-That is further evidence that the language is deeply flawed. When the ladies are answering phone they are most likely referring to the language contained in the booklet. The email I received was from a high level DNR staffer who apparently disagrees with them.

We will get this straightened out.

Moosetrot

Pete-I sent an email again to this guy explaining what happened concerning this on the DNR phone line. Pardon the pun but this is good ammo for us.

Moosetrot

If anyone wants to watch the discussion at the NRB meeting, you can do so at the link below. It's towards the end.

https://dnrmedia.wi.gov/main/Play/d...talog=9da0bb432fd448a69d86756192a62f1721

Using education instead of enforcement right now and trying to figure out the fastest way to fix. As someone that writes the rules, you would think they would already know the answer to that question. I am sorry but I have little faith in Keith Warnke. Sounds like it needs to be a emergency rule proposal.

Completely off topic, but if someone from Rusk or Sawyer county wanted to try to get bear trapping legalized, watch the meeting above. That is about as good of an avenue as you can ask for. Message me if you have an interest and I will gladly try to help.

There was no mention of the sub-.22 caliber language in the regulations either. That language has many people confused. I will be following up with the NRB, Scty. Preston Cole, and Keith Warnke on that issue.

Moosetrot

Email sent to all above reiterating my comments concerning the sub- .22 calibers. Was told it has been distributed to the NRB as well as appropriate DNR staff. We will have to stay on top of it and see where it goes.

Pete-I also included a description of your experience with the DNR call line.

Moosetrot

Moosetrot, are you saying I can't use my daisy pellet gun for rabbit hunting? It has taken lots of them in the past so I think it fits the reasonable part. Probably need to stick with stationary shots though. Maybe I will need to drive a little more attention to it.

All I can say is that your Daisy pellet gun does not fit the definition of "firearm" in the Regs. Have not delved deeply into the air/pellet guns but at first reading they appear to be not legal. It is not my word you should worry about. It is the decision of whatever Warden you encounter.

Moosetrot