Assembly Bill 711

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 711, as amended, Rendon. Fish and wildlife: methods of taking. Hunting: nonlead ammunition.

Existing law requires the Fish and Game Commission, by July 1, 2008, to establish by regulation a public process to certify centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition as nonlead ammunition, and to define by regulation nonlead ammunition as including only centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition in which there is no lead content. Existing law requires the commission to establish and annually update a list of certified centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition.

Existing law requires that nonlead ammunition, as determined by the commission, be used when taking big game with a rifle or pistol, as defined by the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s hunting regulations, and when taking coyote, within specified deer hunting zones, but excluding specific counties and areas. Existing law requires the commission to establish a process, to the extent that funding is available, that will provide hunters in these specified deer hunting zones with nonlead ammunition at no or reduced charge. A violation of these provisions is a crime.

This bill would revise and recast these provisions to require the use of nonlead ammunition for the taking of all wildlife, including game mammals, game birds, nongame birds, and nongame mammals, with any firearm. The bill would require the commission, by July 1, 2014, to certify, by regulation, nonlead ammunition for these purposes. The bill would make conforming changes. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to government officials or their agents when carrying out a mandatory statutory duty required by law.

The bill would require the commission to promulgate regulations by July 1, 2014, that phase in the requirements of these provisions. The bill would require that these requirements be fully implemented statewide by no later than July 1, 2016. The bill would also require that the commission not reduce or eliminate any existing regulatory restrictions on the use of lead ammunition in California condor habitat unless or until the additional requirements for use of nonlead ammunition as required by these provisions are implemented.

By expanding and changing the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it unlawful to shoot at a game bird or mammal, including a marine mammal, as defined, from a powerboat, sailboat, motor vehicle, or airplane.

This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to this provision.


Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: State-mandated local program:

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) California’s wildlife species represent the state’s rich natural resources and environmental health and beauty.

(b) California’s wildlife species play an important role in the state’s environmental health.

(c) Fifty years of research have shown that the presence of lead in the environment poses an ongoing threat to the health of the general public and the viability of the state’s wildlife species, including federally listed threatened and endangered species.

(d) The United States Environmental Protection Agency defines lead as toxic to both humans and animals, and lead can affect almost every organ and system in the human body, including the heart, bones, intestines, kidneys, and reproductive and nervous systems. It interferes with the development of the nervous system and is therefore particularly toxic to children, causing potentially permanent learning and behavior disorders.

(e) Lead is a potent neurotoxin, for which no safe exposure level exists for humans. The use of lead has been outlawed in and removed from paint, gasoline, children’s toys, and many other items to protect human health and wildlife.

(f) Routes of human and wildlife exposure to lead include contaminated air, water, soil, and food. Lead ammunition in felled wildlife is often consumed by other animals and passed along the food chain. Dairy and beef cattle have developed lead poisoning after feeding in areas where spent lead ammunition has accumulated. Spent lead ammunition can also be mingled into crops, vegetation, and waterways.

(g) Efforts to limit wildlife exposure to lead ammunition have been successful. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service banned the use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting decades ago, and both hunting and waterfowl have thrived since. And California passed a successful law preventing the use of lead ammunition in condor habitat. However, because these restrictions only apply in certain areas or to the hunting of particular species, many species of wildlife remain threatened by the use of lead ammunition and more protections are needed. These successes have shown us how to extend protection from lead poisoning to other wildlife.

(h) A variety of nontoxic ammunition is readily available. Studies have shown that nontoxic ammunition performs as well as, or better than, lead-based ammunition.

Section 3004.5 of the Fish and Game Codee is amended to read:
3004.5.

(a) Nonlead delete centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition, as determined by the commission, shall be required when taking big game with rifle or pistol, as defined by Section 350 of the department’s mammal hunting regulations, and when taking coyote, within the department’s deer hunting zone A South, but excluding Santa Cruz, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and San Joaquin Counties, areas west of Highway 101 within Santa Clara County, and areas between Highway 5 and Highway 99 within Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern Counties, and within deer hunting zones D7, D8, D9, D10, D11, and D13 all wildlife, including game mammals, game birds, nongame birds, and nongame mammals, with any firearmend insert.

(b) By July 1, 2014, the commission shall establish, by regulation, a public process to certify centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition as nonlead ammunition, and shall define, by regulation, nonlead ammunition as including only centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition in which there is no lead content. The commission shall establish and annually update a list of certified centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition.

(c) (1) To the extent that funding is available, the commission shall establish a process that will provide hunters within the department’s deer hunting zone A South, but excluding Santa Cruz, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and San Joaquin Counties, areas west of Highway 101 within Santa Clara County, and areas between Highway 5 and Highway 99 within Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern Counties, and within deer hunting zones D7, D8, D9, D10, D11, and D13end delete with nonlead ammunition at no or reduced charge. The process shall provide that the offer for nonlead ammunition at no or reduced charge may be redeemed through a coupon sent to a permitholder with the appropriate permit tag. If available funding is not sufficient to provide nonlead ammunition at no charge, the commission shall set the value of the reduced charge coupon at the maximum value possible through available funding, up to the average cost within this state for nonlead ammunition, as determined by the commission.

(2) The nonlead ammunition coupon program described in paragraph (1) shall be implemented only to the extent that sufficient funding, as determined by the Department of Finance, is obtained from local, federal, public, or other nonstate sources in order to implement the program.

(3) If the nonlead ammunition coupon program is implemented, the commission shall issue a report on the usage and redemption rates of ammunition coupons. The report shall cover calendar years 2008, 2009, and 2012. Each report shall be issued by June of the following year.

(d) The commission shall issue a report on the levels of lead found in California condors. This report shall cover calendar years 2008, 2009, and 2012. Each report shall be issued by June of the following year.

(e) The department shall notify those hunters who may be affected by this section.

(f) A person who violates any provision of this section is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of five hundred dollars ($500). A second or subsequent offense shall be punishable by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more than five thousand dollars ($5,000).

(g) This section does not apply to government officials or their agents when carrying out a mandatory statutory duty required by law.

(h) The commission shall promulgate regulations by July 1, 2014, that phase in the requirements of this section. The requirements of this section shall be fully implemented statewide by no later than July 1, 2016. The commission shall not reduce or eliminate any existing regulatory restrictions on the use of lead ammunition in California condor habitat unless or until the additional requirements for use of nonlead ammunition as required by this section are implemented.

No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
31Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
32the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
33district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
34infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
35for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of
36the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within
37the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
38Constitution.

SECTION 1.

Section 3002 of the Fish and Game Code is
40amended to read:
P6 1
3002.

It is unlawful to shoot at a game bird or mammal,
2including a marine mammal as defined in Section 4500, from a
3powerboat, sailboat, motor vehicle, or airplane.

Did you notice?

-Only government certified ammunition.

-Handloads by definition cannot be certified.

-This is offset by dangling the "possibility" of free or reduced cost ammunition.

If you live in that state and hunting is really an important part of your life, you need to get on out of there, sooner rather than later. Unless, family ties or age or business reasons prevent it.

It's clear that ALL hunting in CA will be banned in the near future and at more or less the same time ALL private possession of firearms will be restricted to where no one can jump through all the hoops in the way.

The Heller ruling can't stop this. Too many of us have gotten dependent on thinking that decision will be honored or is there to stay at all.

Sport fishing's in danger too in CA in the longer term.

quote:

Did you notice?

-Only government certified ammunition.

-Handloads by definition cannot be certified.

No, they'll certify the projectiles, which includes component bullets for handloading, as was done under the Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act.

quote:

It's clear that ALL hunting in CA will be banned in the near future

Not all hunting, they'll keep trying to pick off the "fringe" issues as they did with hounds for bear/bobcats last year and they're trying to do with trapping bobcats this year with AB 1213.

quote:

If you live in that state and hunting is really an important part of your life, you need to get on out of there

Hunting is a very important part of my life, but I'm not moving. I'd rather stay and fight. Quite frankly I'd give up more hunting and fishing opportunity by moving to another state.

Please pardon if this is not the right thread to say this, maybe the "boycott" thread is the better place, but I'll throw it out here anyway.

What's needed, no, what's essential to fight all this including what's going on in CA with lead and what's going on in CO, is a truly national resistance effort.

And it has to be aimed not at our friends in those states but at those states in general in order to get the attention of all.

Just one for instance. It's well known that a typical tactic of our (in my opinion Communist) opposition is to boycott and punish gun makers by forcing state pension funds to divest of shares of stock in gun makers.

Well, two can play at that game.

How's about a NATIONWIDE movement to stop buying the municipal bonds of offending states and local governments.

There are many hundreds, maybe thousands of other ways to fight back once you enlist the MANY folks on our side across this nation.

..just one more idea...start a local option movement in these states leaving it up to individual counties rather than the whole state to enforce liberal cultural policies on guns and hunting.

quote:

What's needed, no, what's essential to fight all this including what's going in CA with lead and what's going on in CO, is a truly national resistance effort.

Well that's better than suggesting the run away and hide strategy.



Problem is, and has been for years, that individuals and groups outside of affected states just take the gloom and doom commentary approach. Rather than the 'How can we help kick their ass' option.

All of these fights are really national fights, it spreads from state to state from the same groups operating off of the same pool of funding.

We've lost winnable fights due to a lack of national help, which is what the antis are all about. They use national funds from national groups to target a state issue.

And there is political power in the various state legislatures and Congress that can be brought to bear on state legislators in a particular state. From both parties.

Yes, you're right.

Assuming nationwide resistance is put in play.

If it's not, then "cut and run" is one of two options if you're in a libdem state. Option two is try to "rise above it" and go on until they shut it down, or time gets called on you personally and you become too old for it - not too old to care, but just to old to be a part of it (you never get too old to care).

If you're in a nice comfortable pro gun owner and pro hunting state, you've also got two choices. Join the nationwide fight, or, lay low and try not to think about it (I don't know how you do that last one).

Fights are happening. People from other states just hear “California” and they think everything here is banned already. But maybe with the new laws happening in CO, we might get something started nationally.

The “lead free” area in Southern CA has already proven not to work in helping the condors. Even with the stomach contents of a DOA condors showing every piece of junk they eat (including batteries), they still blame hunters.

As far as running hounds on bears/bobcats, there’s a new bill being introduced to over turn it.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/..._amended_asm_v98.htm

Keep up the fight. Email, call and write your reps and ask to pass AB 1230!!!

quote:

The “lead free” area in Southern CA has already proven not to work in helping the condors.

I don't even need to be from there to take an educated guess that saving anything is not their point. It's to do whatever makes it harder to have a gun and to hunt.

That's a lot more important than condors.

Excepting to keep their money rolling in from impressionable kids.

It’s hard to say, because the big deal was to save the condors. That’s the whole reason it started. These people have no idea. They really don’t think it’s a big deal. They don’t think it’s a problem. They see no difference in shooting an animal with a lead bullet or a copper one, so they can’t understand why it’s even a big deal. Some even think they are making our meat safer (they really do).

But what they don’t know is every animal I have shot with a Barnes bullet out of my 300 has ran away with little to no blood trail to follow. And animals shot with a Partiton usually just drop.

But if this bill passes, other states will follow. People hear the word "lead" and freak out.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
If you live in that state and hunting is really an important part of your life, you need to get on out of there, sooner rather than later. Unless, family ties or age or business reasons prevent it.

I'm half ashamed/half proud to admit it, but I am typing this as I take a break from packing. I hate to leave as California has a lot to offer and ALL of my friends and family are here, but the time has come.

I am a single father to a 3 year old daughter and I just can't see raising her in this state. I have been trapped here by my ex-wife and our custody agreement but now that I have my daughter free and clear I am getting out while the getting is good.

Hunting will remain open in California for a long, long time but I can guarentee that things will continue to get harder and harder for the California hunter/shooter.

Hey Jason, congrats on getting custody sorted out. Where ya headed?

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
If you live in that state and hunting is really an important part of your life, you need to get on out of there, sooner rather than later. Unless, family ties or age or business reasons prevent it.

All of the above. I'm not leaving any time soon, I'll just continue to be be a canker on their butts.

Long term there's more at stake than guns and hunting with what we're up against. Guns and hunting are also bell weathers for other, bigger and farther off losses of freedom that will be enabled by the ever enlarging demographics within the democrat party.

Things like the eventual loss of America's land title system. And offers of "guaranteed" jobs for all, free education, free health care and free homes, which require the confiscation of all property and possessions to make redistribution possible. Along with media run by the state, a personality cult built around the "leader" and youth taught to turn in dissenters. And finally the abolition of opposition parties and imposition of soviet style yes/no elections, so that no one can object.

If you listen for it, there are rumbles out there now of the distant storm clouds.

NY and CA and their type of "politician" will be leading the charge.

The countries that are ahead of us on that stuff, China, Cuba, Venezuela and so forth, by co-incidence have already banned guns.

There's a lot at stake here.

quote:

Originally posted by Shack:
Long term there's more at stake than guns and hunting with what we're up against. Guns and hunting are also bell weathers for other, bigger and farther off losses of freedom that will be enabled by the ever enlarging demographics within the democrat party.

Things like the eventual loss of America's land title system. And offers of "guaranteed" jobs for all, free education, free health care and free homes, which require the confiscation of all property and possessions to make redistribution possible. Along with media run by the state, a personality cult built around the "leader" and youth taught to turn in dissenters. And finally the abolition of opposition parties and imposition of soviet style yes/no elections, so that no one can object.

If you listen for it, there are rumbles out there now of the distant storm clouds.

NY and CA and their type of "politician" will be leading the charge.

The countries that are ahead of us on that stuff, China, Cuba, Venezuela and so forth, by co-incidence have already banned guns.

There's a lot at stake here.

In my heart I fear you are right. For the sake of my children and grandchildren I hope you are wrong. When it happens it is to late to do anything about it.

How long before they find that old cartridge in your old coat or truck?

This stuff is just crazy.

Well IF/WHEN all the Condors are dead, then the Condor Protection zones will no longer be needed...

Just saying...

It seems to me that we have non-toxic shotgun shells and rifle bullets that are just as effective and in some cases more effective than lead based ammo. What do you see as the problem with a lead ban?

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
It seems to me that we have non-toxic shotgun shells and rifle bullets that are just as effective and in some cases more effective than lead based ammo. What do you see as the problem with a lead ban?

465H&H

I've not shot anything but Barnes X, TSX, TTSX, or Banded Solids, CEB Brass monometal bullets, or North Fork, Copper monometal bullets for the last 17 years or so. Contrary to the earlier post in this thread, every animal, and there have been a lot of them ranging from the smallest (duiker) to the largest (elephant) and most dangerous (cape buffalo / lion), have dropped right there in their tracks with the exception of several buffalo; usually with a large smattering of blood and tissue on the ground or brush behind the animal as the bullet plows through, exits, and does massive damage along the way. So I agree with you Walt that many of the lead free projectiles are more effective in the first place.

However, that is beside the point on this fight. The point being that the liberals are using this as a way to limit our access to ammunition. The entire "no lead" initiative is yet another example of the liberals using "junk science" to influence the uninformed masses and sway them to insist we accept "reasonable" measures that are actually incremental steps marching toward removing our rights to hunt and own weapons. That's why we have to fight these initiatives.

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
It seems to me that we have non-toxic shotgun shells and rifle bullets that are just as effective and in some cases more effective than lead based ammo. What do you see as the problem with a lead ban?

465H&H

Government intrusion and cost. I just picked up 500 45 cal LSWC for $57. What would copper cost?

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
It seems to me that we have non-toxic shotgun shells and rifle bullets that are just as effective and in some cases more effective than lead based ammo. What do you see as the problem with a lead ban?

465H&H

That is the reason it will pass. And it will pass in other states too.

Not to turn this into a copper vs non-cooper thread, but I hate copper. It doesn’t work for me. I shoot Partitions. I think I should be able to have a choice. It’s not like I’m throwing 20 lbs of lead into the drinking water. I’m shooting a 30 cal, 180 grn, half lead bullet, into a large animal on the side of mountain.

First it will be lead. Then it will be your powder causes cancer, then it will be your gun is too loud. Then it will be your bow is inhumane.

Might be time for some civil disobedience. I've given the state over $100 a year in license and tag fees for many many years. Maybe I'll just quit buying those and process my own meat. I'm beginning to understand why my Grandfather bridled at game laws in this state. He felt that the laws weren't there when he started hunting and there was plenty of game so the hell with 'em.

quote:

That is the reason it will pass. And it will pass in other states too.

That's part of the reason will pass, with modifications, another big reason is that the argumentation against it has been pretty weak and lacking in any real data to counter the data used by the bills proponents.

That was obvious in 2008 with the Ridley Tree Condor Preservation Act when the argumentation against it fell flat.

I have not heard anything out of the NRA on this issue. Are they doing anything to stop it?

quote:

Originally posted by Skinner.:

quote:

Did you notice?

-Only government certified ammunition.

-Handloads by definition cannot be certified.

No, they'll certify the projectiles, which includes component bullets for handloading, as was done under the Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act.

quote:

It's clear that ALL hunting in CA will be banned in the near future

Not all hunting, they'll keep trying to pick off the "fringe" issues as they did with hounds for bear/bobcats last year and they're trying to do with trapping bobcats this year with AB 1213.

quote:

If you live in that state and hunting is really an important part of your life, you need to get on out of there

Hunting is a very important part of my life, but I'm not moving. I'd rather stay and fight. Quite frankly I'd give up more hunting and fishing opportunity by moving to another state.

Maybe so, but that's not the way it reads:

"The commission shall establish and annually update a list of certified centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition."

quote:

Originally posted by DesertRam:
Hey Jason, congrats on getting custody sorted out. Where ya headed?

Thanks, getting some freedom for my daughter and I has been a HUGE relief(regarding custody/visitation).

We are in Jackson Wyoming at the moment. We have spent the past week doing a lightning tour of the western half of the state. I have to say I am looking forward to making Wyoming our home.

Wyoming takes education seriously. As an elementary school teacher and parent that is very, very important to me.

Oh, and the hunting/gun rights...... Lets just say Wyoming has California beat.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
Might be time for some civil disobedience. I've given the state over $100 a year in license and tag fees for many many years. Maybe I'll just quit buying those and process my own meat. I'm beginning to understand why my Grandfather bridled at game laws in this state. He felt that the laws weren't there when he started hunting and there was plenty of game so the hell with 'em.

I'm not sure what that will accomplish. It might make you feel a bit better, but that is about all.

The bottom line is this: the greenies are trying to squeeze the sportsmen out. And the truth is they will win.

Soon they will price shooting out of range of the average person. In a generation or two there will be so few hunters in Ca that hunting will be effectively gone.

Why subject ourselves to "death by a thousand cuts"? It is time to get up and leave.

Jason

Good for you! I fled the blue state of Minnesota many years ago and resettled in Idaho. It's stressful at first so many people will not do it and will rationalize staying "and fighting the good fight". It's just that simple. If it wasn't for people willing to take the risk, the US would have been limited to the east coast. I am pleased to see the pioneer spirit is alive and well in you. Enjoy your freedom, you earned it.

quote:

Maybe so, but that's not the way it reads:

"The commission shall establish and annually update a list of certified centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition."

It's actually the same language as the Ridley Tree Condor Preservation Act, which gave authority to the CA F&G Commission to develop and implement the regs. And they'll just apply the same regs. developed for the condor zone to be statewide. With the addition provisions that all small game and upland bird hunting be lead free as well.

The commission certified projectiles, whether loaded ammo or components for handloading. As per shot they use the regs. from USF&WS that certifies non toxic shots.

The regs. and list of certified ammo for the condor zone can be read here,

CA DFW- Condor Zone Lead Free Regs.

quote:

Oh, and the hunting/gun rights...... Lets just say Wyoming has California beat.

For some big game, but overall there are more hunting opportunities in CA, if you're an all around hunter and do upland birds, waterfowl, varmints, feral pigs, and so on.

Another huge factor for me is that WY, ID and other inland states lack an ocean............

Which is really quite important to me since I derive a lot of income from fishing, as well as a lot of recreation and food.

quote:

Soon they will price shooting out of range of the average person.

Isn't that true about everywhere now ? And not just recreational shooting but in hunting with the loss of free or cheap access to private lands, urban sprawl, habitat changes/loss and the disappearance of upland game birds. Overall the loss of opportunity has been huge nationwide.

We can make a very long list of what has been lost or what guys have been regulated or priced out of in state after state.

No state offers me the diversity of hunting and fishing that CA does, with lots of public lands and waters, a huge diversity of species to take, long seasons, and weather that allows for me to do it year round.

quote:

Originally posted by Skinner.:

quote:

Oh, and the hunting/gun rights...... Lets just say Wyoming has California beat.

For some big game, but overall there are more hunting opportunities in CA, if you're an all around hunter and do upland birds, waterfowl, varmints, feral pigs, and so on.
------------------------------------

No state offers me the diversity of hunting and fishing that CA does, with lots of public lands and waters, a huge diversity of species to take, long seasons, and weather that allows for me to do it year round.

I was a bit unclear in my post. What I meant was that Wyoming has California beat in "hunting rights" and "gun rights". Gun rights speak for themselves, and as far as "hunting rights" I would point to availability of decent hunting on public land and the legality of different methods of hunting methods(dogs, baiting, etc.) and of course lead ammo.

I wasn't referring to California Vs. Wyoming in regards to "hunting in general" for 2 reasons: first, my interests is primarily big game, and second, Wyoming has Ca beat so soundly that I did not feel that it was worth mentioning(not to mention that as a single father short big game seasons are a benefit as they allow me to concentrate my most precious resource, time, on actually getting into the woods). IMO there is no question that Wyoming has better hunting.

You are not the first person to point out what a great destination Ca is for the all around hunter. Each time I read this I have to admit that an argument for California can be made on paper, but it practice it rings hollow. (I will be interested to hear your thoughts BTW).

Wyoming residents can hunt moose, Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep and mountain goat by drawing. California does not have these animals.(Ca does have desert bighorn but the draw odd are astronomical).

Wyoming residents can hunt antelope, elk and mule deer every year. In Ca these species are by drawing with long odds.(Ca does have blacktail deer, but these are low odds hunts unless you have access to good private land.).

Wyoming offers wolf and mountain lion hunting. Ca does not, so I don't know that you can say Ca has better varmint hunting. Both states have prairie dogs and coyotes, BTW.

Pig hunting is open year round in Ca and is almost exclusively private land, so getting in a pig hunt when visiting family here in CA would not be much different than it is now as a resident.

Wyoming has upland game, waterfowl and turkey hunting, but the opportunities in Ca are better overall.

Wyoming has great rabbit hunting.

Bear can be hunted with hounds in Wyoming. No hound hunting for bears in Ca.

quote:

Originally posted by Skinner.:
Another huge factor for me is that WY, ID and other inland states lack an ocean............

Which is really quite important to me since I derive a lot of income from fishing, as well as a lot of recreation and food.

I expect that I will get as much abalone diving and ocean fishing in when I return to visit family as I now do as a resident.

quote:

Originally posted by Skinner.:

quote:

Soon they will price shooting out of range of the average person.

Isn't that true about everywhere now ? And not just recreational shooting but in hunting with the loss of free or cheap access to private lands, urban sprawl, habitat changes/loss and the disappearance of upland game birds. Overall the loss of opportunity has been huge nationwide.

We can make a very long list of what has been lost or what guys have been regulated or priced out of in state after state.

You are correct, but Ca has a huge head start in each category. Wyoming is about 40 years behind CA the way I figure.

And when the lead ammo ban is expanded to cover all shooting, including target shooting(and it will be, just give them a few years. If you read the current proposed law it is clear that is where they are going to take this) you can bet that shooting ranges will close and Californian hunting and shooting will begin to slide into oblivion.

For myself the bottom line is this: with hunting opportunities and bag/possession limits being what they are it is impractical, if not impossible, for a hunter in Ca to feed his family on game alone. In states with better hunting(Ak, Id, Mt, Wy, Ut, Tx, etc.) this is not a problem.

For anyone who's taking notes on legal arguments, there's the 14th Amendment, equal protection of the laws. It does apply to state actions you know.

And they aren't at the same time outlawing lead for all uses statewide or even for a lot of uses, but in this case only for gun owners.

It's being applied purposefully with a discriminatory intent against a selected group that is officially disfavored.

Actually, I'm surprised the 14th Amendment hasn't been relied on more in gun owner cases. It's a whole different argument than the 2nd Amendment and as a practical matter a lot harder for libdems to read out of the Constitution.

Unfortunately given the realities with what's going to happen to the 2nd Amendment with new appointments to the Supreme Court, we're gonna need more than what we've all been just assuming will always be there for us.

That's just my modest attempt at a helpful suggestion for our shooting sports brotherhood in CA. If nothing else, it may muddy the waters a little for opponents of gun ownership.