Ricefarm, I may be wrong (and someone please correct me if I am) but as i have always understood it the only non-game birds you are allowed to shoot without a permit are European starlings and English sparrows. And pigeons, I suppose.

Everything else, even common and boat-tailed grackles, blackbirds, cowbirds, etc, are protected under federal law, although as noted in the story you can apply ofr and receive depredation permits for some species.

it looks like the nose of the camel coming in under the tent, I just hope it gets a swift kick (from the NRA) and withdraws before it knocks the entire tent over and we have to use non-toxic ammo for everything and even plinking with a .22 becomes cost-prohibitive

To clarify, jcarlin, you don't need a federal permit for sport hunting of crows. The new rule applies only to the nuisance control hunting of crows and other pest species under a federal depredation permit, which obviously will have different rules, regs and bag limits.

As for sport hunting of crows, you just have to have a state hunting license and follow your state's rules and regs.

The question I posed was, will this eventually have any effect on the sport hunting of crows, in terms of non-toxic shot requirements.

Chad, for a partial answer to your question, check out the Dec 2, 2010 Federal Register (http://tinyurl.com/466lxlu) where the USFWS proposes the regulatory change. The USDA Wildlife Services (the group that will be most impacted... not sportsmen) raised several concerns, including the fact that the regulation will be unequal, since sportsmen will still be able to use lead for crows, starlings, and other migratory (non-waterfowl) birds. The response from USFWS is that they'll be reviewing those regulations at a later date... which means there will probably be consideration of expanding this ban across the board on migratory birds.

Maybe it's never going beyond nuisance bird control, but given all the heat on lead ammo these days, I'd say the future doesn't look bright for lead ammo. Hunters need to keep an eye on this.

For what it's worth, Shane, there's not a ton of hope but the NRA and SCI are presenting a TON of challenges to the scientific "evidence" used by the CBD and other organizations. I've spent some time chatting with one of the folks involved, and they've got some pretty good stuff... good enough to stop CA from expanding the lead ban here.

If we can force the EPA and USFWS to prove that lead ammo has a detrimental effect on populations before they can enact a ban, that'll slow things down. Hunters need to be actively involved in this, though, and not leave it to the NRA to do all the work for us.

I hope you're right, Sayfu!