PUBLICATION:
The
StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
DATE:
2004.08.09
EDITION: Final
SECTION:
Sports
PAGE:
B7
COLUMN:
Outdoors
BYLINE:
Lloyd Litwin
SOURCE:
The StarPhoenix
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another
scattershot plan by feds: Looking at revising laws for home reloading of
ammunition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
have been reloading rifle shells lately to get my daughter Nancy practising and
ready for her elk hunt. While I have loaded several thousand shot shells the
last few years, between the muzzleloader and one-shot deer seasons I haven't had
to do any rifle loading for awhile. I am surprised at the cost of powder these
days. I have to calculate the input costs and see if it is still worthwhile.
This
could all be moot in a couple years anyway. It seems the Federal Ministry of
Mines, Energy, and Resources, which has jurisdiction of explosives, is rewriting
the laws which govern home reloading of ammunition.
The
department put out a feeler to the reloading public for a response and was
dismayed that these people started to spread the proposals around. I, for one,
am glad they did.
Typical
of office bureaucrats, they have no idea of the subject they are in charge of
regulating. The new proposals would effectively eliminate the whole hobby.
I
called the Ottawa office. After talking with several people, I finally got some
answers. The person I was talking with told me these are good proposals as he
didn't want to live next door to someone who had powder in his basement. It's a
fire hazard, he said.
I
asked how many incidents in Canada in the last 10 years, involving reloading in
a dwelling, would prompt the department to rewrite the laws.
"Two,"
he answered.
A
while later his boss returned my call. He tried to assure me that everything was
in the preliminary stages and they were assessing the feedback from the shooting
community. We again discussed the reasons why the department feels changes are
needed.
The
department feels reloading in condos or apartments puts the neighbours at risk.
Of the two incidents in the last 10 years, one was in an apartment and the fire
took out a kitchen in an apartment above the loading bench. The other incident
was at a commercial storage facility and was nowhere near another dwelling. So
actually there has been just one incident in the last 10 years.
But
in trying to do what they feel is safe for the public, they use a sledgehammer
approach. They propose reloading been done in a separate building, apart from
your own home, and located a minimum of 15 metres from any other occupied
dwelling. Nobody in the city has that kind of space.
They
also want to limit the amount of powder we can have to two kilograms. They say
this will load 1,500 shotgun shells, several thousand pistol bullets or 1,200
rifle shells. What they don't understand is that every calibre uses a different
powder, or that 1,500 shot shells is enough for just one weekend shoot and a few
practice rounds. Serious shooters have to buy bulk to gain any savings. The
hobbyist who tries different loads with many powders to get the ultimate
performance from his rifle would be severely limited.
A
few years ago the feds revamped the rules for rifle ranges, squeezed out a few
clubs and made it more difficult to shoot.
Last
year they tried to include lead bullets and brass cases as dangerous commodities
subject to stringent transportation and importation laws.
Now
they are going after our gunpowder. And like every other time there are no
statistics to warrant change to already sufficient laws. One enhanced fire due
to reloading in the whole country in 10 years? We have more important issues.
But
one piece at a time they are determined to disarm the law-abiding citizens of
this country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Original Message -----
From: Brockett, Clayton E-MAIL: brockett@NRCan.gc.ca
Sent:
Friday, August 06, 2004 8:33 AM
Subject:
RE: explosives act
Thank
you for your interest and taking the time to express your views on this
important matter. We will be taking your views, and others, under advisement at
this time as we develop this initiative further. At an appropriate time we will
respond collectively to all, as part of the consultation process, likely through
our website as an initial step, with public safety being our prime interest and
mandate.
Clayton
E. Brockett
E-MAIL: brockett@NRCan.gc.ca
Processing
Officer/Agent de traitment
Explosives
Regulatory Division/Division de la réglementation des explosifs
Natural
Resources Canada, 1431 Merivale Road, Ottawa, (Ontario) K1A 0G1
Ressources
naturelles Canada, 1431 rue Merivale, Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0G1
Government
of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada
Phone:
(613) 948-5203
Fax
(613) 948-5195
ERD
General Number: (613) 948-5200
Juri
T. Kasemets, P.Eng.
E-MAIL: jkasemet@nrcan.gc.ca
National
Manager, Regional Inspection and Enforcement
Government
of Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Explosives Regulatory Division,
1505
Barrington St., Suite 1505 North, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K5
Tel:
902-426-9486, Fax: 902-426-7332
C.G.
(Chris) Watson, Ph.D. E-MAIL:
Christopher.Watson@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca
Chief
Inspector of Explosives
Director,
Explosives Regulatory Division
Minerals and Metals Sector