Hunting with FMJ's in Ontario and Quebec
- Thread starter Steyr101
- Start date
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Styer101
As others have said, adding more laws is not going to solve any problems in the field, most of which relate to marksmanship or attitude issues. "I saw him hump up a bit, but he's still on his feet, screw it, there'll be another one."
The provincial regulations are about 3X as thick as when I was a kid. When I was a kid they were 3X as thick as they needed to be. The laws we currently have are intimidating enough to cause many who might otherwise try or return to hunting, to take up golf. More laws are not conducive to participation.
So what's wrong with that - more game for the rest of us right? Well, consider this; when the number of hunters declines to the point that we no longer matter to the politician, how long will it be before there are gun bans? We don't have a right to arms, guaranteed to us under law, like our American friends. Should hunting cease, we can no longer justify the ownership of a hunting firearm. Given the mentality of our current generation, this is not such a stretch. In many areas hunting has ceased to be an effective management tool. The end of Ontario's spring bear season brought about little fuss from the general public, and it certainly was not based on good game management.
For generations now we've had to justify our need to own guns. Hunting and target shooting is OK, but guns for defense against people is not. We as gun owners had to learn that apparently there are good guns and there are bad guns. Guns with sporting purposes and guns without. Of course the writer of the law gets to determine the definition of the word sport. You can't tell the gun cops that you want to purchase a handgun for big game hunting, simply because, in Canada, it is not legal to hunt with a handgun. Even if you intend to go out of the country to hunt with your handgun, that would not be considered justification for ownership. You see, it becomes a self-fulling prophesy. Disinterest is born from draconian legislation. "Why would you need a deer rifle or goose gun if there is no hunting in Canada? Those things are only good for killing!" As if that were bad if it were true. How often have you heard that said about handguns? Yet when I was a kid you could hunt with a handgun in Ontario, while today many in Southern Ontario would support a ban. Are rifles and shotguns so far removed?
We have to encourage more folks to take up hunting and promote gun ownership. Complicated legislation is not conducive to that. The entire premise of C-68 had nothing to do with safety, we know that. It was designed to cause people to give up. Once people give up, bans, prohibitions, and seizures would be supported by the general public. Anyone who opposed any public safety measure would be labeled as part of the lunatic fringe.
You can be as outspoken as you like about the type of bullet, size of shot, or minimum caliber that is suitable for this game or that, but putting those thoughts into legislation helps no one.
As others have said, adding more laws is not going to solve any problems in the field, most of which relate to marksmanship or attitude issues. "I saw him hump up a bit, but he's still on his feet, screw it, there'll be another one."
The provincial regulations are about 3X as thick as when I was a kid. When I was a kid they were 3X as thick as they needed to be. The laws we currently have are intimidating enough to cause many who might otherwise try or return to hunting, to take up golf. More laws are not conducive to participation.
So what's wrong with that - more game for the rest of us right? Well, consider this; when the number of hunters declines to the point that we no longer matter to the politician, how long will it be before there are gun bans? We don't have a right to arms, guaranteed to us under law, like our American friends. Should hunting cease, we can no longer justify the ownership of a hunting firearm. Given the mentality of our current generation, this is not such a stretch. In many areas hunting has ceased to be an effective management tool. The end of Ontario's spring bear season brought about little fuss from the general public, and it certainly was not based on good game management.
For generations now we've had to justify our need to own guns. Hunting and target shooting is OK, but guns for defense against people is not. We as gun owners had to learn that apparently there are good guns and there are bad guns. Guns with sporting purposes and guns without. Of course the writer of the law gets to determine the definition of the word sport. You can't tell the gun cops that you want to purchase a handgun for big game hunting, simply because, in Canada, it is not legal to hunt with a handgun. Even if you intend to go out of the country to hunt with your handgun, that would not be considered justification for ownership. You see, it becomes a self-fulling prophesy. Disinterest is born from draconian legislation. "Why would you need a deer rifle or goose gun if there is no hunting in Canada? Those things are only good for killing!" As if that were bad if it were true. How often have you heard that said about handguns? Yet when I was a kid you could hunt with a handgun in Ontario, while today many in Southern Ontario would support a ban. Are rifles and shotguns so far removed?
We have to encourage more folks to take up hunting and promote gun ownership. Complicated legislation is not conducive to that. The entire premise of C-68 had nothing to do with safety, we know that. It was designed to cause people to give up. Once people give up, bans, prohibitions, and seizures would be supported by the general public. Anyone who opposed any public safety measure would be labeled as part of the lunatic fringe.
You can be as outspoken as you like about the type of bullet, size of shot, or minimum caliber that is suitable for this game or that, but putting those thoughts into legislation helps no one.
Last edited:
Quebec rules are very clear about that matter;
That's from the 2008-2010 regulation brochure, p. 15; http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/publicat...ntation-chasse/pdf/brochure-chasse-regles.pdf
and in english;
http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/english/...ife/hunting-regulations/pdf/hunting-rules.pdf
It is prohibited :
to hunt caribou using 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 or .410-gauge shotguns;
to hunt any animal using traps or snares. Hares and Eastern cottontail may however be snared in certain zones;
to call an animal using an electronic device in order to hunt it. However an electronically reproduced sound may be used to hunt
American crow;
To hunt using a means or a device (electronic or other) making it possible to reveal, detect or indicate the immediate presence of an
animal in order to hunt it;
to hunt using a live animal as a decoy;
to use any mechanism that would trigger or discharge an arm without discharging the arm oneself;
to use poison, explosives, toxic substances or an electrical discharge to hunt;
to use tracer bullets, military-type hard-point bullets or bullets with non-flattening tips to hunt
Hunting gears and special provisions
15
to hunt with an air gun;
to hunt under the influence of alcohol.
to hunt migratory birds:
with more than one gun. Each additional gun must be unloaded and disassembled, or unloaded and stored in a case;
with a gun that can contain more than three cartridges;
with the help of live decoys;
using recorded bird calls (except for the snow goose);
with a single-bullet cartridge.
within 400 metres of any place where bait* has been placed, unless the place has been free of bait for at least seven days;
* Bait means: corn, wheat, oats, leguminous plant, or imitation thereof, or any other food likely to attract migratory birds.
in french;
Il est interdit :
de chasser le caribou avec des fusils de calibre 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 et 410;
de chasser tout animal à l'aide de pièges ou de collets. Les lièvres et le lapin à queue blanche peuvent toutefois être colletés dans
certaines zones;
d'appeler, à l'aide d'un son reproduit électroniquement, un animal pour le chasser. Toutefois, un son reproduit électroniquement peut
être utilisé pour chasser la corneille d'Amérique;
de chasser en utilisant un moyen ou un dispositif (électronique ou autre) permettant de déceler, de détecter ou d'indiquer la présence
immédiate d'un animal pour le chasser;
de chasser en utilisant un animal vivant comme appelant;
de faire usage d'un dispositif permettant de provoquer la détente ou la décharge d'une arme sans que la personne ne l'actionne ellemême;
d'utiliser un poison, un explosif, une substance toxique ou une décharge électrique pour chasser;
d'utiliser des balles traçantes et des balles à pointe dure du type militaire et à bout non écrasant pour chasser;
de chasser avec une arme à air comprimé;
de chasser sous l'influence d'une boisson alcoolique;
de chasser les oiseaux migrateurs :
avec plus d'un fusil. Chaque fusil en excédent doit être déchargé et démonté ou déchargé et rangé dans un étui;
avec un fusil qui peut contenir plus de trois cartouches en tout;
à l'aide d'appelants vivants;
à l'aide d'un enregistrement d'appel d'oiseaux (sauf pour l'oie des neiges);
avec une cartouche à balle unique;
à moins de 400 mètres de tout endroit où un appât* a été déposé, à moins que l'endroit n'ait été exempt d'appât depuis au
moins sept jours;
* Le terme « appât » désigne du maïs, du blé, de l'avoine, une légumineuse ou une imitation de ceux-ci, ou tout autre aliment susceptible
d'attirer les oiseaux migrateurs.
That's from the 2008-2010 regulation brochure, p. 15; http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/publicat...ntation-chasse/pdf/brochure-chasse-regles.pdf
and in english;
http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/english/...ife/hunting-regulations/pdf/hunting-rules.pdf
It is prohibited :
to hunt caribou using 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 or .410-gauge shotguns;
to hunt any animal using traps or snares. Hares and Eastern cottontail may however be snared in certain zones;
to call an animal using an electronic device in order to hunt it. However an electronically reproduced sound may be used to hunt
American crow;
To hunt using a means or a device (electronic or other) making it possible to reveal, detect or indicate the immediate presence of an
animal in order to hunt it;
to hunt using a live animal as a decoy;
to use any mechanism that would trigger or discharge an arm without discharging the arm oneself;
to use poison, explosives, toxic substances or an electrical discharge to hunt;
to use tracer bullets, military-type hard-point bullets or bullets with non-flattening tips to hunt
Hunting gears and special provisions
15
to hunt with an air gun;
to hunt under the influence of alcohol.
to hunt migratory birds:
with more than one gun. Each additional gun must be unloaded and disassembled, or unloaded and stored in a case;
with a gun that can contain more than three cartridges;
with the help of live decoys;
using recorded bird calls (except for the snow goose);
with a single-bullet cartridge.
within 400 metres of any place where bait* has been placed, unless the place has been free of bait for at least seven days;
* Bait means: corn, wheat, oats, leguminous plant, or imitation thereof, or any other food likely to attract migratory birds.
in french;
Il est interdit :
de chasser le caribou avec des fusils de calibre 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 et 410;
de chasser tout animal à l'aide de pièges ou de collets. Les lièvres et le lapin à queue blanche peuvent toutefois être colletés dans
certaines zones;
d'appeler, à l'aide d'un son reproduit électroniquement, un animal pour le chasser. Toutefois, un son reproduit électroniquement peut
être utilisé pour chasser la corneille d'Amérique;
de chasser en utilisant un moyen ou un dispositif (électronique ou autre) permettant de déceler, de détecter ou d'indiquer la présence
immédiate d'un animal pour le chasser;
de chasser en utilisant un animal vivant comme appelant;
de faire usage d'un dispositif permettant de provoquer la détente ou la décharge d'une arme sans que la personne ne l'actionne ellemême;
d'utiliser un poison, un explosif, une substance toxique ou une décharge électrique pour chasser;
d'utiliser des balles traçantes et des balles à pointe dure du type militaire et à bout non écrasant pour chasser;
de chasser avec une arme à air comprimé;
de chasser sous l'influence d'une boisson alcoolique;
de chasser les oiseaux migrateurs :
avec plus d'un fusil. Chaque fusil en excédent doit être déchargé et démonté ou déchargé et rangé dans un étui;
avec un fusil qui peut contenir plus de trois cartouches en tout;
à l'aide d'appelants vivants;
à l'aide d'un enregistrement d'appel d'oiseaux (sauf pour l'oie des neiges);
avec une cartouche à balle unique;
à moins de 400 mètres de tout endroit où un appât* a été déposé, à moins que l'endroit n'ait été exempt d'appât depuis au
moins sept jours;
* Le terme « appât » désigne du maïs, du blé, de l'avoine, une légumineuse ou une imitation de ceux-ci, ou tout autre aliment susceptible
d'attirer les oiseaux migrateurs.
JohnC
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Here's another Quebec prohibition on the list:
"To hunt using a means or a device (electronic or other) making it possible to reveal, detect or indicate the immediate presence of an animal in order to hunt it;"
Does that mean I can't wear prescription glasses to see game when it jumps up (shades of Elmer Fudd, or is that Elmer Fudd's shades?
)or a hearing aid to hear it?
But to jump in - we have too many laws already - we don't need any more.
"To hunt using a means or a device (electronic or other) making it possible to reveal, detect or indicate the immediate presence of an animal in order to hunt it;"
Does that mean I can't wear prescription glasses to see game when it jumps up (shades of Elmer Fudd, or is that Elmer Fudd's shades?
)or a hearing aid to hear it? But to jump in - we have too many laws already - we don't need any more.
I've said it once, and i'll say it again. I did not ask for public opinion, I simply asked if there was legislation in Ontario which prohibits the use of non-expanding bullets for hunting. It exists in every other province (execpt perhaps NB and PEI). I don't mind debates, I thrive on them actually. But the hostility displayed in this thread is childish to say the least. I guess I should have known better than to come here and ask a legtimate question about Canadian laws. I'd like to thank those CGN's who actually took the time to look up the information I needed but could not find at the time.
Rick, you are entirely right. I have been using Barnes X Bullets almost exclusively but they are not military type ball ammunition. In fact, it can be argued that the Barnes X Bullets are the ultimate hunting bullet due to their incredible performance and expansion over sucha wide range of calibers and velocities.
And I will also agree with you that in Africa, where you are dealing with the largest and most dangerous animals on the planet, solids provide incredible performace as far as penetration. The sheer power of the big bores also aids in their success. But we are not in Africa, and we are not (usually) using big bores with 500gr+ bullets. I would also point out that solid or not, anything that hit some serious vitals or the CNS will drop any animal quickly. You simply have more room for error with a bullet that causes massive tissue and shock damage... such as a Barnes X.
I've never claimed to be an expert on the matter. Very few of us actually are. Some of the military guys have chimed in, and so far, I think the consensus from them seems to be that military FMJ ammo does relatively little damage... as it's supposed to do.
If you guys in Ontario think that being able to use military ball ammo is such a major benefit, then by all means use it. Anyone else in Canada want to use it? By all means, go right ahead. I certainly wont lose any sleep over it.
Rick, you are entirely right. I have been using Barnes X Bullets almost exclusively but they are not military type ball ammunition. In fact, it can be argued that the Barnes X Bullets are the ultimate hunting bullet due to their incredible performance and expansion over sucha wide range of calibers and velocities.
And I will also agree with you that in Africa, where you are dealing with the largest and most dangerous animals on the planet, solids provide incredible performace as far as penetration. The sheer power of the big bores also aids in their success. But we are not in Africa, and we are not (usually) using big bores with 500gr+ bullets. I would also point out that solid or not, anything that hit some serious vitals or the CNS will drop any animal quickly. You simply have more room for error with a bullet that causes massive tissue and shock damage... such as a Barnes X.
I've never claimed to be an expert on the matter. Very few of us actually are. Some of the military guys have chimed in, and so far, I think the consensus from them seems to be that military FMJ ammo does relatively little damage... as it's supposed to do.
If you guys in Ontario think that being able to use military ball ammo is such a major benefit, then by all means use it. Anyone else in Canada want to use it? By all means, go right ahead. I certainly wont lose any sleep over it.
This has been a good thread and very informative. I had always assumed the ban on hunting with FMJ was Canada wide, so this was a good read. Many states prohibit FMJ for hunting as well.
This topic comes up a lot on American hunting forums. Some guy will show up and brag about killing deer with FMJ 5.56, and lecture everyone about shot placement. Most hunters consider it cruel and prone to simply wounding the animal. A lynch mob then forms and they chase him out, tell him to man up and use a larger round, or at least something with a soft tip that will do some tissue damage.
From there it goes into a debate over "5.56 magic fragmenting rounds". Then someone points out that modern NATO 5.56 no longer fragments very well (unlike the ammo used in the early 70s), and is even less likely to do so when fired from a barrel less then 19".
Much drama follows and then the thread gets locked...
This topic comes up a lot on American hunting forums. Some guy will show up and brag about killing deer with FMJ 5.56, and lecture everyone about shot placement. Most hunters consider it cruel and prone to simply wounding the animal. A lynch mob then forms and they chase him out, tell him to man up and use a larger round, or at least something with a soft tip that will do some tissue damage.
From there it goes into a debate over "5.56 magic fragmenting rounds". Then someone points out that modern NATO 5.56 no longer fragments very well (unlike the ammo used in the early 70s), and is even less likely to do so when fired from a barrel less then 19".
Much drama follows and then the thread gets locked...
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
x2
Ontario is bad enough without giving politicians and knee-jerk asshat antis more 'ideas' for laws.
next thing you know FMJ will just be outright banned.
even FMJ artillery wont travel that far, so youre safe and snug in your province from the evil Ontario FMJs. please leave our province the #%@$ alone
I also live in Ontario and asked the same question just a few weeks ago and I came away with no clear answer to the question, Can I use FMJ legally here in Ontario... I did receive a bunch of information but nothing concrete....I enjoy this website very much and have become more knowledgeable about guns, loads and hunting in general, I just don't understand the sh#ty talk that takes place here at times....I read all the previous post and I would like to say I feel sorry for you and anyone else that asks a question that sounds dumb/silly to someone else.... Everyone had to learn something somehow, we should not beat anyone for asking a question we should encourage questions comments so we all become better informed....Our learning should never stop and we should never, be made to fear, to ask a question......Threads like this make asking questions for some of us very uncomfortable....When I was little, I used to get the beats from my dad, now that I am big I expect when I ask a question,( or anyone else for that matter) to get an appropriate response, if you can't respond appropriately, walk away.... we don't need your sh#t, life is to short...
2 cents...
I spoke with Ontario's MNR legal representative and YES, you theorically CAN use a FMJ bullet in Ontario, but, as said above, common sens have to be used... Would one shoot a moose or even a bear with a FMJ bullet?
Even if the bullet thumbles, except for a head shot, there is no insurance the animal will fall on it's track. Usually, the type of wound these bullets are producing brings a long, painful end.
Energy transfer and bullet placement are the key for a quick, good killing.
I can suggest the following "study", or testing, if one prefers, for more on terminal ballistics;
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html
It is somewhat technical, but the explanations are clear and easy for most to understand.
Even if the bullet thumbles, except for a head shot, there is no insurance the animal will fall on it's track. Usually, the type of wound these bullets are producing brings a long, painful end.
Energy transfer and bullet placement are the key for a quick, good killing.
I can suggest the following "study", or testing, if one prefers, for more on terminal ballistics;
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html
It is somewhat technical, but the explanations are clear and easy for most to understand.
Last edited:
Gatehouse, I am indeed regretting that I perhaps volunteered too much information... trust me. I have always read your posts with much interest, you are among the very knowledgeable when it comes to hunting arms and bullets. Due to your enthusiasm for Barnes bullets, I tried em out and love em for multiple reasons. You, however, would be the last person I would have thought would be advocating non-expanding bullets for big game use.
We are however, all entitled to our opinion. I for one, am completely against using non-expanding bullets for north american big game. We have absolutely no need for ultra penetration on our game considering the regular and premium "hunting" bullets perform so well. For those of you that disagree, that's fine by me. Your opinion is just as valid as mine.
CGN is much turning out to be much like dealing with customs and LEO interrogations... no more information than is necessary less it turn into a lynch mob by those who don't agree.
We are however, all entitled to our opinion. I for one, am completely against using non-expanding bullets for north american big game. We have absolutely no need for ultra penetration on our game considering the regular and premium "hunting" bullets perform so well. For those of you that disagree, that's fine by me. Your opinion is just as valid as mine.
CGN is much turning out to be much like dealing with customs and LEO interrogations... no more information than is necessary less it turn into a lynch mob by those who don't agree.
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
youre actually trying to take a high horse position after you admittedly want to impose more restrictive firearms/hunting laws to a province in which you dont even reside?
Re-read my initial post bud... I am in no way involved with this other than providing information about a Quebec hunting regulation. A friend and resident of Ontario asked me for some information... which I provided to him. That's where it ends for me.
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
i understand your initial posts as well as the later ones perfectly.
there are legitimate uses for FMJ, and despite you and your buddy's personal views on the matter animal/human injuries from FMJ hunting ammunition are not such a problem in Ontario that it warrants yet another restrictive firearms/hunting law and loss of rights for firearms owners. Some hunters of fur-bearing animals specifically choose FMJ to minimize pelt damage.
either way, the fact that you and your buddy have taken it upon yourselves to police what goes on in another province is appalling.
I am advocating no such thing. I don't use FMJ bullets for hunting, although I know some use them for fur bearers without issue.
I am advocating no more laws that we dont' need. And unless there are hordes of hunters crippling game in Ontario and the rest of Canada, we probably don't need the FMJ laws.
