WA State reg question

[tompetersonhaircut]

Hi all,

With the summer in full swing, I’m getting ready for fall hunting here in Washington state. I have been doing my e-scouting and following up with visits to different potential hunting locations. A thought occurred to me while looking into a location- a lot of wildlife areas, waterfowl spots, and pheasant release sites have non-toxic shot requirements. The wording of this regulation includes loose shot for muzzle loading.

I was curious if the WDFW would consider airgun ammo “loose shot”or if this is specifically applied to shotguns?

Airgun hunting has only been legal here for a few years and the regulations are still pretty vague. I don’t know a lot of hunters using airguns, so I don’t know how the WDFW is interpreting and enforcing regulations.

I wrote to the enforcement department and followed it up with a phone message back in June to no response. I understand that they’re strapped for time, so I thought I’d ask if anyone here has any information or experience with this in WA state?

Given the lack of specifics and the short time that airguns have been legal means of take, I am very conscientious about making sure that I am representing the airgun community in a legal and ethical manner. All it takes is one bad decision or bad actor to ruin the opportunities that we now have. I also want to get out there and enjoy hunting with my tools of choice. If anyone has any suggestions or information please do share.

Thanks for your time.

 

[Gerry52]

In my limited knowledge, loose shot refers to shotgun type of projectiles because that's what they are (loose, within the cartridge casing). It might help if you include the wording as stated in the regs.

 

[Coinwa]

I’m in WA, and understand your frustration with the vague wording that the state often uses regarding fish and game.

I went a couple rounds with a fish cop in Douglas County when hunting coyotes in a State Wildlife Area. The sign clearly said “non-toxic SHOT”. So, I figured my copper jacketed BULLETS were not an issue.

She disagreed.

I then pulled up the definitions the State used in their own hunting pamphlet, showing that “shot” was something fired by a shotgun. My 6 Creed was clearly not a “SHOTgun”.

She got all annoyed, and let me off with a “verbal warning”.

I’ll have no issues shooting lead pellets/slugs at all legal species here in WA, regardless of where it is. If I need to slug it out (pun intended) with them again, I’ll do it.

Please let us know if you get a definite answer.

 

[tompetersonhaircut]

I’m in WA, and understand your frustration with the vague wording that the state often uses regarding fish and game.

I went a couple rounds with a fish cop in Douglas County when hunting coyotes in a State Wildlife Area. The sign clearly said “non-toxic SHOT”. So, I figured my copper jacketed BULLETS were not an issue.

She disagreed.

I then pulled up the definitions the State used in their own hunting pamphlet, showing that “shot” was something fired by a shotgun. My 6 Creed was clearly not a “SHOTgun”.

She got all annoyed, and let me off with a “verbal warning”.

I’ll have no issues shooting lead pellets/slugs at all legal species here in WA, regardless of where it is. If I need to slug it out (pun intended) with them again, I’ll do it.

Please let us know if you get a definite answer.

Man, what a PITA! That is exactly why I am so frustrated! Thanks for sharing your experience.

The use of airguns and wording of regulations is so new/vague that I think it’s going to be up to the individual interpretation of the WDFW officer.

I posted this same question in the HAM forum and a user suggested writing and mailing a letter to get a response. I think that might be a good idea. Hopefully it leads to a clear answer and possibly a document that can be produced in the field.

I will follow up with my results. Anyone else with first hand experience with this issue please share.

 

[tompetersonhaircut]

Thanks all for the replies-

I was able to get someone on the phone and, as I suspected the interpretation exceeds the regulations as written.

The WDFW rep said that lead pellets would likely be considered “toxic shot”, even though they are not ammunition for a “shotgun”. He seemed to be referring to the “spirit of the law” not the “letter of the law”. I did present a counter argument about the wording, but that didn’t seem to compel him. As mentioned above, I want to avoid conflict and present our community in a positive light, so I didn’t press it.

I did however immediately order a few different makes/weights of lead free pellets, haha! Now I guess I need to figure out how to make either the GTOs or Barracuda Greens work for me. Silver lining- more testing and shooting!

Thanks again for the input y’all. Shoot safe!

 

[Coinwa]

I’m still shooting lead.

The rules are for shotguns and muzzleloaders. They don’t reference non-toxic projectiles for rifles…. and it’s a pellet RIFLE.

They can’t prosecute on “spirit of the law”…. They are bound by the law, and the definitions THEY created. I know this state regularly moves the goalposts on us as Sportsmen…. which is stupid, because we’re the ones paying for it all.

I’ll fight it out in court if necessary…. but I’ve found most of the fish cops are reasonable if you are.

You on the East side, or the Dumb side of WA? I’m on the Dumb side in SE King County.

 

[tompetersonhaircut]

I’m also on the wet side.

I agree that hunters and anglers shoulder a disproportionate amount of the financial burden for conservation and management of outdoor recreation lands.

I think that camping/hiking/mountain biking/etc equipment and access should be subject to an equal percentage of fees and taxes as hunting and fishing. After all, hunters and anglers have potentially even more vested interest in protecting habitat and wildlife than a casual day hiker.

I respect your position and also agree that there should be enforcement of only the specific language that spells out requirements. I think it’s unfortunate that the folks that enforce the rules have been put in the situation where they have to both enforce and interpret the rules. I think it’s putting them in potential conflict unnecessarily.

I also understand that the regulations are there to maintain good habitat conditions for species that are vulnerable to lead.

Im disappointed and mad, but I’m going to use this as an opportunity to learn about lead free options in my airguns. I have other places to hunt where there’s no restrictions. I don’t have the time or patience (or resources) to go to court.

Shoot safe and thank you for sharing.

 

[Coinwa]

Unfortunately… there are no good non-toxic options.

The lead shot issue is an absolute non-issue for upland game birds… but I see its value with waterfowl.