Legality Question - Game Birds in Alberta

Xero

Xero

Regular
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Location
Calgary, AB
The General Regulations state:

It is unlawful to
  1. hunt any game bird using
    • a shotgun in which the magazine and chamber combined will hold more than three rounds of ammunition,
Click to expand...

Where do ghost loading capable shotguns come into this? Is the feed plate considered part of the magazine or chamber? I don't believe it is but I'd like to be sure before I do it with my Benelli SBE.

If you're unfamiliar with ghost loading, it is essentially the process of placing an extra shell onto the feed plate. It doesn't cause the shotgun to jam and essentially allows the shotgun to carry an additional shell. Here's a video demonstrating it:
 
While not technically the magazine, I think you would find that a judge would likely interpret putting a shell anywhere into the shotgun in such a manner that it can be fed into the chamber and fired simply by working the action, to be functionally the same as the magazine and therefore within the spirit and intent of the regulation.

I would not personally consider that extra shell valuable enough to test the theory, and being at risk of being charged, losing the firearm etc, and being convicted of a wild life offence.
 
I agree, and that's why I'm asking here. I'm trying to find solid evidence before actually doing it while hunting. I asked an RCMP officer about it in regards to shooting at the range with the magazine already unplugged to allow 5 rounds in the tube + 1 on the plate + 1 in the chamber. He said that since -in that case- it would be following the rules about a centerfire firearm not having a capacity of more than 5 rounds in a magazine, it was fine as the shell was not "in the magazine". We didn't go into "spirit of the law" discussions, but apparently it was fine to the best of his knowledge.

I don't see much of a difference between that, and my question, except for semantics.

And I'm aware that it's not really a LEOs job to interpret the law, but to enforce it. Who would I contact to get legally binding confirmation on this question? CFO?
 
Xero said:
And I'm aware that it's not really a LEOs job to interpret the law, but to enforce it. Who would I contact to get legally binding confirmation on this question? CFO?
Click to expand...

A judge.

After you've been charged and gone to court for it. I would think its entirely legal, because the law says "chamber and magazine" and this is clearly not either of those.

Your problem is that if a CO doesn't like it, he'll take your gun and charge you, and then you have to deal with everything that comes with it... For the bonus of one extra shell, I wouldn't risk it.
 
I would operate on the theory that if you were checked by a Wildlife officer in your duck blind or grouse hunting in the field and 4 shells come out of your shotgun you are going to get dinged.
The money spent on a lawyer could be better utilized buying more firearms :)
 
So there's no way to get confirmation of a legality question prior to "testing" the law and going to court? This seems incorrect, and if it is, our legal system is much worse off than I had assumed it already was.

Although I'm talking about firearms laws in Canada, I probably shouldn't be surprised by now.
 
Awesome!

That's what I was looking for, I'll call and see if I can get some clarification on the subject. Even if it results in a more strict re-wording of that particular Alberta regulation, then at least it's clear.
 
"It is unlawful to hunt any game bird using a shotgun in which the magazine and chamber combined will hold more than three rounds of ammunition"

That seems abundantly clear to me. The maximum lawful number of rounds that the chamber and magazine combined can hold is 3. It doesn't say how many rounds pop out of the gun when you unload it. It doesn't say chamber, magazine, and lifter combined...it says magazine and chamber combined, that is the test.
 
Xero said:
Awesome! That's what I was looking for, I'll call and see if I can get some clarification on the subject. Even if it results in a more strict re-wording of that particular Alberta regulation, then at least it's clear.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that's probably not going to help much. You are going to get the opinion of a bureaucrat that won't matter in any court of law. Maybe you get a positive response from the same conservation officer that ultimately meets you in the field, and he sticks to his prior word. Otherwise, you have to hope that every conservation officer sees it the same way, or that a directive is issued from above to enforce the regulation in like manner.

Norton said:
I would operate on the theory that if you were checked by a Wildlife officer in your duck blind or grouse hunting in the field and 4 shells come out of your shotgun you are going to get dinged.
Click to expand...

I agree, and this is likely what will get the theory tested ... the hard way.

Another avenue: You could always check to see if there is already any legal precedent (prior court decision) on the issue in Alberta.
 
CV32 said:
While not technically the magazine, I think you would find that a judge would likely interpret putting a shell anywhere into the shotgun in such a manner that it can be fed into the chamber and fired simply by working the action, to be functionally the same as the magazine and therefore within the spirit and intent of the regulation.

I would not personally consider that extra shell valuable enough to test the theory, and being at risk of being charged, losing the firearm etc, and being convicted of a wild life offence.
Click to expand...

I think this would be the correct answer
 
Runningfool said:
"It is unlawful to hunt any game bird using a shotgun in which the magazine and chamber combined will hold more than three rounds of ammunition" That seems abundantly clear to me. The maximum lawful number of rounds that the chamber and magazine combined can hold is 3. It doesn't say how many rounds pop out of the gun when you unload it. It doesn't say chamber, magazine, and lifter combined...it says magazine and chamber combined, that is the test.
Click to expand...

The problem is that "magazine" isn't defined in the regulation, and if a judge is forced to consider whether the feed plate is a factor, he or she is also going to consider the spirit and intent of the law. Since the limit is there for conservation and sporting reasons, adding an extra round of ammunition runs directly counter to that spirit and intent. Just speaking objectively.
 
Superbrad said:
I would be very impressed if someone could actually show me an extra animal harvested thanks to ghost loading... please tell me your stories.....
Click to expand...
I've taken 3 of 5 birds before, because I couldn't reload fast enough to get the next shot off. The other two flew into trees nearby for a moment, before finally flying down into a valley and hiding on the forest floor. I could of taken at least one more bird from either of the trees.

I haven't ghost loaded while hunting in the past, because I was never sure if there were any regulations specifically prohibiting it or not. It sounds like there isn't, but it also sounds risky because the COs can do whatever they please if they deem you to be out of line.

I'm curious as to what would happen if I had a copy of the documentation with me, and showed it to any CO that happened to stop me. At that point, I don't see how they would be able to do anything... As I stated before, it's their job to enforce the law and not interpret it. I'll ask a few as to what their opinions are next season.
 
CV32 said:
The problem is that "magazine" isn't defined in the regulation, and if a judge is forced to consider whether the feed plate is a factor, he or she is also going to consider the spirit and intent of the law. Since the limit is there for conservation and sporting reasons, adding an extra round of ammunition runs directly counter to that spirit and intent. Just speaking objectively.
Click to expand...

Though "magazine" may not be defined in the hunting regulation, I think it is pretty clear what is and isn't a magazine in the firearms regulations. Remember, the hunting regulation says it is unlawful if the chamber and magazine hold more than 3, it says nothing as to how many rounds you have loaded at the time. So by your reckoning, my Beretta semi that only holds 2 in the tube would be unlawful to hunt with since it could potentially be ghost-loaded.
 
Judges rely pretty heavily on the "intent" of the law in grey areas like this. I think the intent is pretty clear.
 
Norton said:
Well, you could call or email SRD and ask.
http://esrd.alberta.ca/about-esrd/contact-esrd/fish-and-wildlife-area-office-contacts.aspx
Click to expand...

And Good Luck with that! I've spoken with several SRD offices posing one singular question about game regulations.
Each office gave a different answer. Just as sheephunter posed here, only the judge has the final answer within grey/foggy areas of law.

I am pretty sure there are many Benelli owners out there, perfectly fine with the 3 shot limit. To the OP, why should you be so different huh?
 
Last edited:
Xero said:
I've taken 3 of 5 birds before, because I couldn't reload fast enough to get the next shot off. The other two flew into trees nearby for a moment, before finally flying down into a valley and hiding on the forest floor. I could of taken at least one more bird from either of the trees.
Click to expand...

And that's why there's a 3 round maximum law. It's to prevent over harvesting and crippled birds. If you have more than 3 rounds in your gun and you're bird hunting,expect to get charged. If you want to fight it out in court, expect your wallet to become considerably lighter. It'll cost you far less to take the fine for hunting with the plug out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom