# Shotgun line



## weatherby (Mar 26, 2001)

What's everyone's opinion on movin the shotgun north to M-20? Personally i am for it, but i am only 1 of 750,000 gun hunters


----------



## mparks (Sep 4, 2001)

Why? Has there been a population explosion between M-57 and M-20?


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

Put me down for a nay. 

Why would you move it? From a safety standpoint?

I don't hunt that much south of 20 but I like my rifles. 

Those slug guns they make these days aren't our grandpas slug guns either. Seems like every year they make something a little better and extend the range.

Just my $.02


----------



## kingfishcam (Jul 16, 2002)

I think the line should be moved down in a few areas! And make Houghton Lake area shotgun only. Can't believe the hunter concentration in some of the northern areas.


----------



## wildcoy73 (Mar 2, 2004)

move the shotgun line north? what about getting rid of this pesty rule. by now most of us can shot over a hundred yards with our shotguns 200 plus with our muzzleloader and 300 plus with the new handguns we have so why move the shotgun area north? i see no need in it. but than again i see no need in a shot gun area. i hunt the line between the two zones now and i have more houses in the rifle side of 46 than in the shotgunzone south of it. so to me this rule is as stupid as unlimited doe tags.
just my thouaght


----------



## flinch (Aug 10, 2003)

Are people getting hurt or killed because someone should be using a shotgun instead of a rifle? Anyway, modern shotguns shoot saboted bullets almost as far and as fast as grampa's old 30-30. Hunter orange requirements have probably saved more lives than anything else we can do.


----------



## codybear (Jun 27, 2002)

> *flinch * Are people getting hurt or killed because someone should be using a shotgun instead of a rifle?


Is that what we should be waiting for before making that decision? As more rural areas become devloped, this issue should continually be reviewed.


----------



## kingfishcam (Jul 16, 2002)

The shotgun line has noting to do with population, new housing subdivisions or Walmart moving in. Has to do with how many people are in the woods at a given 15 day period. If it were based on population booms, then why is yote hunting below the line legal with a rifle?

The law should go away, or at least be made more sensible to the population of hunters in a given area.


----------



## fulldraw (Nov 20, 2002)

I believe the shotgun zone will probley be moved south do to the increase of people moving out of the city. Is now the time I do not know. But it is correct that the saboted shells now are shooting just as far some rifles these days and some muzzle loaders are are even shooting as far as rifle so when it comes to moving the shotgun zone south I don't believe it will ever happen. 

fulldraw


----------



## flinch (Aug 10, 2003)

codybear said:


> Is that what we should be waiting for before making that decision? As more rural areas become devloped, this issue should continually be reviewed.


As kingfishcam pointed out, the shotgun line is for safety during the rifle season only, and the five day quiet period prior. Other times of the year you can hunt with a rifle in the shotgun zone for other species.

As for other issue, sorry, that sounds bad when I reread it. My point is that when someone is hurt or worse today, is the type of firearm used really the issue?

I guess my answer is that no, we don't need to move the line as it won't make things safer. That's up to the hunter behind the firearm, IMO.


----------



## DEERHNTR (Mar 12, 2004)

If it's not broke don't fix it.


----------



## weatherby (Mar 26, 2001)

mparks said:


> Why? Has there been a population explosion between M-57 and M-20?



Yes, but i do think there is other reasons this needs to be done. Hunter concentration, open fields, and safety are good reasons. I can't comment above M-20 because i hunt betweeen M-57 and M-20


----------



## NicksKnack (Oct 21, 2004)

Weatherby, I am with you. I hunt the same area and there are a lot of hunters...sitting close to each other. I would like to see the line move up to M20.


----------



## lodge lounger (Sep 16, 2005)

My dad, who detested hunting deer with shotguns, always claimed the shotgun legislation was pushed by lobbyists from up north who wanted to ensure that plenty of guys would continue making the trek north and keep the tourist bucks rolling in. While I always got a kick out of hearing his grousing on this and similar topics, I doubt that was the case. However, I see no reason for the restriction in the south. The point's already been made about the effective range of modern shotguns and muzzle loaders. And back in the old days, the concentration of hunters on public lands in the northern lower was staggering, so I don't see that as a reason. In fact, in the absence of any good rationale I can think of for the restriction, maybe the Ole Man was right...


----------



## hunting man (Mar 2, 2005)

Wouldnt make a difference even if they did away with the shotgun zone. Most hunt from tree stands and shoot into the ground. With the way the inlines are shooting, what difference would it really make if I could use my rifle? Might increase the kill numbers and the DNR is all for that about now.


----------



## Ken (Dec 6, 2000)

Makes more sense to base it on property size........someone can own 5 acres up north and use a rifle, but if they own 400 acres down state they still have to use a shotgun......

or apply the shotgun zone to public land only


----------



## Jacob Huffman (Sep 13, 2004)

kingfishcam said:


> If it were based on population booms, then why is yote hunting below the line legal with a rifle?


You can can actually hunt anything with a rifle in zone 3 except deer....


----------



## answerguy8 (Oct 15, 2001)

kingfishcam said:


> The shotgun line has noting to do with population, new housing subdivisions or Walmart moving in. Has to do with how many people are in the woods at a given 15 day period. If it were based on population booms, then why is yote hunting below the line legal with a rifle?
> 
> The law should go away, or at least be made more sensible to the population of hunters in a given area.


REALLY!?! So Gladwin County must be a shot gun zone? I can't imagine an area with denser hunters. ( I mean greater hunter density) :lol:


----------



## Sprytle (Jan 8, 2005)

wildcoy73 said:


> ... 200 plus with our muzzleloader and 300 plus with the new handguns


Yes... 200 can be attained by a muzzleloader nowadays.
300 plus with the new handguns?? Yes it CAN be done but... Its the shooter behind these guns that make it possible and 200 w/ a M/L and 300 plus with a HANDGUN... even the newest single shot centerfire pistols, it takes a VERY competent shooter behind these guns to even come close to these ranges. 
Im NOT saying it cant be done,,,What i am saying is it cant be done with 90% of the michigan deer hunters that just hunt deer and do not live thier lives shooting year round perfecting the perfect handloads. 
And i would also say that the shotguns nowadays with a quality rifled barrels and great optics can eaisly achive over 100 yrds with a little practice from a avereage shooter. Put in the time and yould be amazed at what some of these weapons can do.

-Bob


----------



## MIBIGHNTR (Aug 27, 2002)

I vote for the ENTIRE LOWER to be a shotgun zone (as I steady myself for the onslaught of attacks)... :lol: 

Perhaps that would be a SMALL piece of the puzzle in moving towards having better hunting.

OH, IL, IN, and I belive IA....all SHOTGUN states.

OK, attack at will... :evilsmile 

Mark


----------

