HSB 609 Hunting turkey with a .410
- Thread starter Fishbonker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
seven twenty
PMA Member
Probably some dumb questions here, but;
Why do they need a bill? Couldn’t the DNR just add it as an acceptable method of take?
Why do they need a bill? Couldn’t the DNR just add it as an acceptable method of take?
Fishbonker
Life Member
The legislature has to tell the NRC they want something done or changed, the NRC then makes a rule following the legislative guidelines, publishes the rules and the DNR enforces/follows them. Straight wall as an example.
This is a simplified explanation, as there are some other checks and balances but that's it in a nutshell.
NRC being the Natural Resource Commission.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Good point. The bill uses the term "shotgun" and I think this precludes the use of a "handgun" ie: pistol or revolver. As I recall in other hunting laws the use of a pistol or revolver is spelled out in the law, but I can see someone wanting to use a Judge.
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
The says specifically use of a .410 shotgun, not a pistol or revolver, like the Judge. Looks like shotgun only to me; which by definition is long barreled and shoulder mounted.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Fishbonker
Life Member
The House and Senate bill are identical, the Senate passed their bill today.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Several amendments were proposed to this bill today (HF 2370). Two of them are the same ones about disabled veteran NRs getting a deer tag and resident disabled vets getting lifetime trout licenses that were proposed to HF 2410 the NRLO bill. The third strikes the requirement for tungsten shot.
smallmunster
Member
Hunting turkey with a .410 and 28 gauge passed and was signed by Gov Reynolds in the past few days.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Well...... I went back in the legislative "Session Daily" section to 3/10 when the bill was passed, and I do not see where the bill has been sent to the gov nor where the gov has signed it. If a bill has been signed by the gov the way the bill displays on the legislative web site changes as well and the way SF 2334 displays has not changed. BUT this could bill could be sent/signed at any time.
Also, there is not an "enactment clause" in this bill. Usually if the bill is to be enacted before June 30th there will be verbiage something like "this bill will take force upon signature of the Governor", so if it is sent and signed tomorrow the .410/28ga will not be legal for this year.
My personal note on this bill, I personally wanted the tungsten requirement, I thought it was a good compromise. I thought the Senate and House versions were the same, and at one point they were. Then one day I was checking the lobbyist declarations and I saw the IFC was in favor of the Senate version and opposed to the House version. I didn't look at the bill to see if they were different, I just assumed the IFC had made a mistake and both bills required tungsten shot. Several days or maybe even weeks went by, and the House called up their version of the bill, an amendment was proposed to drop tungsten shot. I went back and reread the Senate version and that's when I found out I had been wrong. The House accepted the no tungsten requirement, passed their bill, then withdrew it and accepted the Senate no tungsten version. I don't particularly understand why they did it that way but that's what happened.
I can understand the slippery slope of requiring a type of shot other than lead, and it is my fervent hope that the mentors that are taking youth out on hunts to use a .410 understand the limitations of the .410 using lead shot, or even tungsten for that matter.
There are several states surrounding Iowa that allow the .410 for turkey hunting. One thought process was that a lot of other states allow the .410 so why not Iowa. A lot of other states allow unrestricted deer tags and guns in the rut so should we be like all the other states on deer issues as well?
Also, there is not an "enactment clause" in this bill. Usually if the bill is to be enacted before June 30th there will be verbiage something like "this bill will take force upon signature of the Governor", so if it is sent and signed tomorrow the .410/28ga will not be legal for this year.
My personal note on this bill, I personally wanted the tungsten requirement, I thought it was a good compromise. I thought the Senate and House versions were the same, and at one point they were. Then one day I was checking the lobbyist declarations and I saw the IFC was in favor of the Senate version and opposed to the House version. I didn't look at the bill to see if they were different, I just assumed the IFC had made a mistake and both bills required tungsten shot. Several days or maybe even weeks went by, and the House called up their version of the bill, an amendment was proposed to drop tungsten shot. I went back and reread the Senate version and that's when I found out I had been wrong. The House accepted the no tungsten requirement, passed their bill, then withdrew it and accepted the Senate no tungsten version. I don't particularly understand why they did it that way but that's what happened.
I can understand the slippery slope of requiring a type of shot other than lead, and it is my fervent hope that the mentors that are taking youth out on hunts to use a .410 understand the limitations of the .410 using lead shot, or even tungsten for that matter.
There are several states surrounding Iowa that allow the .410 for turkey hunting. One thought process was that a lot of other states allow the .410 so why not Iowa. A lot of other states allow unrestricted deer tags and guns in the rut so should we be like all the other states on deer issues as well?
smallmunster
Member
IFC article
Sportsmen's Alliance article
Both said it was signed and one article claims it starts July 1, 2022.
I supported the TSS and adding the sub-gauges because those loads and gauges are effective and humane with modern TSS shot, it was just a bonus that many states are already allowing it. Striking the TSS was not the greatest move IMO, but hopefully those who decide to use lead shot realize it will not perform like the TSS videos on Youtube. The .410 with TSS in a properly choked shotgun is effective out to 40 yards or more on turkey. Lead shot in 8, 9, or 10 shot; not so much and if you use bigger shot your pattern density will be pretty low considering most loads are under 1 oz.
Overall I think this is good, especially for getting kids into turkey hunting with the low recoil .410.
Sportsmen's Alliance article
Both said it was signed and one article claims it starts July 1, 2022.
I supported the TSS and adding the sub-gauges because those loads and gauges are effective and humane with modern TSS shot, it was just a bonus that many states are already allowing it. Striking the TSS was not the greatest move IMO, but hopefully those who decide to use lead shot realize it will not perform like the TSS videos on Youtube. The .410 with TSS in a properly choked shotgun is effective out to 40 yards or more on turkey. Lead shot in 8, 9, or 10 shot; not so much and if you use bigger shot your pattern density will be pretty low considering most loads are under 1 oz.
Overall I think this is good, especially for getting kids into turkey hunting with the low recoil .410.
sep0667
Land of the Whitetail
This was my concern the instant I saw this passed.
Daver
PMA Member
I am concerned that there seems to be a push to make everything easier these days, etc. Can a well placed .410 shot kill a turkey? Sure. Will plenty of them NOT produce a clean kill? It seems so to me.
If the idea is to get kids hunting, which I love to see, but if the kid is so small that they can't handle, say, at least a .20...then they should wait a year to shoot. They can still go hunt with dad, but it is a fallacy to me that a small kid has to kill an animal so as to have gone hunting. FWIW, my boys went with me often prior to being able to handle a weapon and it was not a problem.
If the idea is to get kids hunting, which I love to see, but if the kid is so small that they can't handle, say, at least a .20...then they should wait a year to shoot. They can still go hunt with dad, but it is a fallacy to me that a small kid has to kill an animal so as to have gone hunting. FWIW, my boys went with me often prior to being able to handle a weapon and it was not a problem.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Thanks for the links. Has it been signed yet? I don't think so, but I'm asking some folks who should know. Will it be signed if it gets to her desk? I'd be very surprised if it wasn't. It's just not, in my current opinion, 100% done at this point and I just like to be as accurate as I can be in my "reporting".
There was a premature news article a few years ago about the straight wall cartridges as well. To be accurate, the article did state that the straight wall bill had passed the House. It took almost 18 months for the gov to sign the final bill.
smallmunster
Member
I also looked and couldn't see where it was signed. Maybe the articles jumped the gun, but someone also told me they saw it on the news or facebook this morning which is why I googled it in the first place.
I am personally against allowing rifles during deer season, although I could see it for non-ambulatory people (my brother is one of those for full disclosure). I can see how it looks similar at first blush, but the big difference for me is that allowing rifles doubles (or more) the effective range of the average shotgun which I feel could negatively impact Iowa's deer herd, especially trophy bucks.
Allowing sub-gauges for turkey doesn't do that as far as I can see. Even those TSS loads in 12 ga don't double or triple the effective range of the standard lead turkey loads. My old 835 with lead #5 can kill them all day at 50 yards, I almost never took a shot that far, but it was within the effective range. Most of what I see with the 12 ga TSS is about 70 yards effective range and I have yet to see an article stating they thought that was a shot that should be taken.
My 9 year old niece uses a .410 with TSS #9 in Missouri. It could be years before she can handle the recoil from a 20 ga. I am happy my 8 young nieces and nephews that live in Iowa will have the same option now. I plan on using a .410 myself once it is legal. If you are worried that these 410 TSS loads are underpowered or less effective than 12 and 20 ga loads, below is just one of many articles that you can find disputing that.
Outdoor Life article from 2018
"The .410 put substantially more TSS pellets on the 12-inch target—and in the 6-inch center—at 25 and 40 yards than did the 20-gauge with lead pellets. Yet at 10 yards—where most turkeys get missed—the .410 also threw a broader, more even pattern than the lead 5s, with nearly the same number of pellets striking the sweet center spot.
I didn’t have access to ballistic gelatin for this test, and so I used the next best thing for testing penetration: cans of Showboat Pork and Beans. The cans were no match for lead or TSS at 25 yards. At 40 yards, the lead 5s punched through the front, dented the back of the can, and settled in the beans. The 9s mostly did the same—except for one that passed all the way through the back of the can. I’d have liked a more thorough penetration test, but I’m confident the TSS No. 9s from a .410 don’t give up anything to the lead No. 5s from a 20.
There you have it. The Heavyweight .410 TSS paired with the right shotgun can outperform a 20-gauge with lead turkey loads with a fraction of the recoil. It’ll cost you about $6 a shot. Of course, Heavyweight TSS is available in 20- and 12-gauge too. Might be overkill, but it’s what I’m using this spring.
I am personally against allowing rifles during deer season, although I could see it for non-ambulatory people (my brother is one of those for full disclosure). I can see how it looks similar at first blush, but the big difference for me is that allowing rifles doubles (or more) the effective range of the average shotgun which I feel could negatively impact Iowa's deer herd, especially trophy bucks.
Allowing sub-gauges for turkey doesn't do that as far as I can see. Even those TSS loads in 12 ga don't double or triple the effective range of the standard lead turkey loads. My old 835 with lead #5 can kill them all day at 50 yards, I almost never took a shot that far, but it was within the effective range. Most of what I see with the 12 ga TSS is about 70 yards effective range and I have yet to see an article stating they thought that was a shot that should be taken.
My 9 year old niece uses a .410 with TSS #9 in Missouri. It could be years before she can handle the recoil from a 20 ga. I am happy my 8 young nieces and nephews that live in Iowa will have the same option now. I plan on using a .410 myself once it is legal. If you are worried that these 410 TSS loads are underpowered or less effective than 12 and 20 ga loads, below is just one of many articles that you can find disputing that.
Outdoor Life article from 2018
"The .410 put substantially more TSS pellets on the 12-inch target—and in the 6-inch center—at 25 and 40 yards than did the 20-gauge with lead pellets. Yet at 10 yards—where most turkeys get missed—the .410 also threw a broader, more even pattern than the lead 5s, with nearly the same number of pellets striking the sweet center spot.
I didn’t have access to ballistic gelatin for this test, and so I used the next best thing for testing penetration: cans of Showboat Pork and Beans. The cans were no match for lead or TSS at 25 yards. At 40 yards, the lead 5s punched through the front, dented the back of the can, and settled in the beans. The 9s mostly did the same—except for one that passed all the way through the back of the can. I’d have liked a more thorough penetration test, but I’m confident the TSS No. 9s from a .410 don’t give up anything to the lead No. 5s from a 20.
There you have it. The Heavyweight .410 TSS paired with the right shotgun can outperform a 20-gauge with lead turkey loads with a fraction of the recoil. It’ll cost you about $6 a shot. Of course, Heavyweight TSS is available in 20- and 12-gauge too. Might be overkill, but it’s what I’m using this spring.
Fishbonker
Life Member
No doubt it will be signed, good, bad, or indifferent, but publishing a news article with fake news is just wrong. Sure, it's a done deal but I expect accurate reporting and it appears to be is short supply these days, even for something as seemingly innocuous as a turkey bill.
Fishbonker
Life Member
This bill is taking wayyyy too much of our (yours and mine) time, but just as a follow up, I called the Office of the Governor yesterday afternoon and left a message asking for clarification on signed/not signed. I just received a call back from whom I assume was an intern, he said the bill has not been signed and it is being reviewed by "legal". He could not tell me exactly what that was but went on to say it had been passed by both chambers.
Also, this AM I got an email wondering if the articles weren't an attempt to put pressure on the gov to get the bill moving.
Politics. Making people crazy for eons.
Also, this AM I got an email wondering if the articles weren't an attempt to put pressure on the gov to get the bill moving.
Politics. Making people crazy for eons.