Although I have never broken this law, I have always questioned its legitimacy.
Why should I only be allowed 3 shells in my gun?

There is no ammo capacity requirement for deer or small game hunting.
There is a daily bag limit that prevents me from “over harvesting” game.

So why limit me to 3 shells?
Is it to make it harder to harvest birds? Who cares how hard or easy it is?
I can’t shoot more than my daily bag limit regardless of how easy or hard it is.

Is it safety driven?
Thoughts?

I would think it has to do with taking longer, less ethical (lower kill percentage, higher wound percentage) shots with those 4th or 5th shells in the gun. But that's purely a guess on my part. My opinion, if you haven't hit that bird with the 1st or 2nd shot, that third one is just a waste anyway. I was always told that third shot is just to be able to "release some anger" at the wind.

I dont think the law does anything in regards to making anything 'more difficult'. If that was the case, baiting deer and plugging them during their breakfast/supper with a fancy rifle and a scope nice enough to count the hairs in its ears would be illegal.

It might, however, have something to do with removing too many birds from any given flock at the same time or something? I dont know, I dont know about dove's living arrangements, I just shoot em.

I would guess the laws are centered around control and conservation rather than ease or difficulty of sport.

I don't think you need to worry about plugs when hunting quail or turkey, only migratory birds.

And I totally agree with your thinking. It really shouldn't matter since there is a bag limit.

I like Dynstars answer... that makes sense. Though there have been numerous times that I could have had a legit fourth or fifth shot.

I guess I could imagine a duck blind with four shooters each with 5-8 shells in their tube which would result in a spray and prey party that just wounds birds.
Maybe I just answered my own question, but whose to say that 3 shells each wont have the same conclusion.

Although, I know there have been many times when I have knocked a duck in water and tried to finish it off before is swam out of range. Steel shot is highly ineffective and even more so when a duck is like an ice burg in the water and I've had to reload just to hit it enough times to put it down.

Someone like me that uses a semiauto and is a slow shot is only taking one shot per pass, anyways.

I've always wondered about this rule as well.

Because it's limited to migratory birds, I'm betting that it has something to do with the old points system or a derivative thereof.

I hunt with a double barrel, and about 75% of the time, I'm only using one barrel anyway.

EDIT:

RE: deer and big game hunting

I can't remember in Texas, but I can tell you that there is a magazine limit for rifles to hunt any permitted game in AZ. A rifle cannot hold any more than 5 rounds in the mag. So that means you must either modify your mag or clip to accomodate this to legally hunt.

Most of the time, this reg is a non issue, but if one wanted to hunt praire dog or some other varmint, you have to adhere to these rules. It's not a major issue, but it is somewhat of a pain.

[This message has been edited by schmellba99 (edited 9/8/2009 4:29p).]

quote:

---

Most of the time, this reg is a non issue, but if one wanted to hunt praire dog or some other varmint, you have to adhere to these rules. It's not a major issue, but it is somewhat of a pain.

---

does this mean they would make you plug a tube magazined rifle?

I do most of my dove hunting with a SxS so on the off chance that I go with the 870, I usually forget that there is a 3rd shot.

I use the 3rd shot as my next 1st round. Shoot, cycle, shoot, cycle, reload 2, repeat... there's always one ready.

This rule goes back to 1935. At the time, it actually became change in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. At the time 5 and 6 shot automatics were gaining popularity. At the same time the migratory bird populations were crashing for a variety of reason (some attributed it to "multiple shot guns". So much so, that may "bird shooting clubs" actually prohibited pumps and automatics. At the time, hunters (yes, we encouraged the rule) wanted waterfowling to be held with "high skill" and not mass killing.

----I freely admit I royally failed basics of grammar on this one. Baby started crying, oh well.

[This message has been edited by ursusguy (edited 9/9/2009 12:34a).]

quote:

---

At the time, hunters (yes, we encouraged the rule) wanted waterfowling to be held with "high skill" and not mass killing.

---

I'm still for this. Unless you're hungry... but then you'd get good in a hurry.

For dove hunting I dont think that rule is a big deal. I very rarely get in a 3rd shot. Usually only shoot once or twice.

The only time I would care about having 5 or 6 shots is like times in the past when I have gotten close range with a group of hogs and started shooting with buck shot.

oh yeah, and 3 quick shots with buck shot can sometimes be a little rough on your shoulder, so maybe 3 shots is just right.

I think the three shot rule only applies to migratory birds, as stated earlier. For hogs, etc. the rule does not apply.

I am not sure I would use a shotgun for hogs anyway. They can be tough bast*rds.

well I usually only use a rifle when hunting hogs. But there were times that I've been close enough and did some real damage. One time my buddy and I got within 20 yards of a group that was up wind of us. We said to hell with the rifle's and started blasting with buckshot. Out of 6 shots between the 2 of us, there were 5 dead hogs. If you are close enough, buck shot can do a lot of damage. The only reason we got that many hogs though was because my buddy dropped one of the hogs right in the hole in the fence all of them were trying to get through. They were all running up and down the fenceline looking for another way back to the way they came from. I much prefer the rifle though with hogs. Dont have to do so much stalking.

I saw my nephew kill a triple last week with his 12 gauge pump. He would have been bored in short order if allowed to shoot more than 3 shells at a time...

quote:

---

does this mean they would make you plug a tube magazined rifle?

---

The rule only applies to centerfire rifles, so a tubed .22 that can hold 18 rounds is exempt.

But you can't hunt much permitted game legally with a .22, so it's kind of a moot point.

Now if you were hunting with a Winchester 94 in .45 Colt, I believe mine holds 8 rounds in the tube. I'm honestly not sure if you would have to plug it or not - I might have to look this up out of curiosity.

yeah, I was wondering about a .45/70 govt. Marlin 1895 with 9 in the tube...

Yall do realize the rule only applies to migratory birds? The definition for "legal shotgun" only applies to migratory birds.

Pretty much any legal firearm is good to go on hogs.

If you don't hit them with your first three you have NO BUSINESS shooting a fourth!!

quote:

---

...I can tell you that there is a magazine limit for rifles to hunt any permitted game in AZ. A rifle cannot hold any more than 5 rounds in the mag. So that means you must either modify your mag or clip to accomodate this to legally hunt.

---

what part of this applies to migratory birds?

I believe in that there aren't magazine restrictions except for when dealing with migratory waterfowl in Texas

ie: you could have a 30rd magazine for an AR and hunt with it.

Edit: Just checked and on pg 56 of this years TEXAS outdoor annual its says there are no magazine capacity restrictions except for migratory birds.

[This message has been edited by AgBrad08 (edited 9/10/2009 7:59p).]

[This message has been edited by AgBrad08 (edited 9/10/2009 8:09p).]

state?

I believe limiting hunters to three shots also promotes finding more birds. When hunting dove, there have been many times I've seen them flying in huge groups (pretty common with migratory fowl). If hunters harvest three or four, rather than kill one and immediately retrieve, then much more birds are not ever found (usually resulting in the hunter killing more than the bag).

I don't know if this was the original intent of the law, but it has always made sense to me. I still get ticked at seeing hunters kill a couple and only finding the last one they shot, leaving the others for the varmints.

[This message has been edited by Ark03 (edited 9/11/2009 8:03a).]