[vmthtr in green bay]

Looked in the WI hunting guide and did not see anywhere that says it is against the law. Where can I check?

Mike

 

[glenn asher]

Check a copy of the Wildlife Code in WI, it should say something about it, somewhere. I'd suspect that something left over from the '30s would mention them. If that fails, call the Fish and Wildlife Dept. in the state capital, but don't rely on your local game warden, who probably isn't too familiar with the laws, anyway. I'd bet it's illegal, but maybe WI is ahead of the times......

 

[DAW WIS]

TRUST ME WITH OUR GOVENOR DOYLE WE ARE LUCKY WE CAN STILL HUNT WITH GUNS HERE IN WISCONSIN. DOYLE ALL MOST MAKES HILLERY LOOK GOOD. WE ALL BETTER GET TO WORK OR WE ARE GOING TO HAVE HER IN "08". FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS

 

[Ole]

Isn't that a federal thing?

 

[vmthtr in green bay]

Ole,
buying and owning them goes through the BATF. Using them for hunting is up to the state.

Mike

 

[vmthtr in green bay]

Found it and it is legal

From the WI DNR web site FAQ's for hunter safety

Suppressed (silencers) Firearms: Is it legal to hunt with a suppressed
firearm?

That depends. The short answer is Yes...if the hunter possesses a class III
federal firearms license to own such devices. The use of a suppressed
firearm (silencers) for hunting is illegal for anyone that does not possess
such a federal license.

Wisconsin law does not prohibit the use of a class three suppressed weapon
for hunting. Federal Law controls the legal possession and use of a class
three suppressed weapon. The individual and weapon must have proper
verification and certification of compliance from the Department of the
Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. If the individual
complies with all requirements of Wisconsin law, Wisconsin hunting
regulations and Federal Law he may hunt with a class three suppressed
weapon.

 

[T.D.C.]

So, Does that make you "silent but deadly"??

 

[TinMan]

Be careful here.

In Indiana, the phrase

"The individual and weapon must have proper
verification and certification of compliance from the Department of the
Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms."

Meant you had to have copies of the paperwork on your person while using it, at least for full auto class three, even to use it at a range. (No, we were not using full auto for hunting.) In other words, you have to be able to prove on the spot you are legal, not just have the paperwork at home.

 

[Don M.]

Why ?

Why hunt with a silencer ? Probably 1 in 500,000 hunters has a
class III license.

 

[Alan in GA]

I sure could use one,,,,nuisance animal control...

and although Georgia's game regs say "no hunting" with a silencer,,,I might be able to.
I am a 31 year experienced and licensed exterminator {I'm 56}. I occasionally do NUISANCE ANIMAL CONTROL which takes a seperate but easily [test] attainable license.
I will check to see if I can 'get by' for nuisance animal control use,,it IS a different function - not really "hunting".
I'm sure I could not, would not,,'better not',,,take a deer.
I have REAL need of one for COYOTE control, tho. Coyotes are NOT protected in Georgia under any law,,and they are huntable with "ANY WEAPON" all year long.
I've had several great debates on what round would be best for close range [100 yards and closer] coyote killing near subdivisions. Although a large bore slow moving bullet [44 mag is popular] would be a good killer,,I forsee the bullet being bad to ricochete,,,NOT good or acceptable!
I have read articles on the 22 Long Rifle being used ONLY for head shots,,,that is still an option.
Also thought about the larger caliber PCP air rifles. 22, 25, 9mm, .45 and .50 caliber rifles are out there and I've had 5 of them in smaller calibers [177 and 22] and very familiar with them. A silencer on them is probably still best owned with the tax license [$200].
What think?
The coyotes are getting braver and more numerous!!!
{Although it would be "work",,,I can still have FUN doing it!}

 

[Theo]

Nuisance wildlife control

I use suppressed firearms for a variety of contract wildlife damage management applications. A couple things to remember is that if the projectile is supersonic, you will still get considerable noise, even with the best of suppressors. Also, they are pretty expensive - roughly $700 for the type in the photograph. Might be hard to justify the expense unless your business is doing very well, or you need a tax deduction from listing the cost of the suppressor. I've found that suppressors do help in controlled lethal deer removal operations, but not much on other mammals, especially not on coyotes. I use the suppressed 77/17 in the photo for woodchuck control. The benefit mainly being that it attracts less unwanted attention from nosey passersby. The form you need from the feds is the ATF Form 5.

 

[gndhogbob]

Suppressor for hunting...

Indiana DNR regs say no, to use of a suppressor while hunting....Bob in Indiana

 

[kaferhaus]

You can buy the $200 tax stamp and build your own.....

The local class 3 dealer here sells suppressors for $250-$300 depending on the application.

$700 for a can with some wadding inside it and a nut welded on the other end is a bit excessive.

The last one I built cost me under $35.00..... it's on a 10/22 and the noise the action makes cycling is about double what the muzzle report is.

 

[Knockemfloppin]

I use suppressed firearms for a variety of contract wildlife damage management applications. A couple things to remember is that if the projectile is supersonic, you will still get considerable noise, even with the best of suppressors.

I use the suppressed 77/17 in the photo for woodchuck control. The benefit mainly being that it attracts less unwanted attention from nosey passersby.

Out of curiosity, I'll ask if you use subsonic 17 HMR ammo in the 77/17.

 

[Theo]

Suppressed rifles

Out of curiosity, I'll ask if you use subsonic 17 HMR ammo in the 77/17.

I use the Federal V-Shok stuff, which works pretty well. It kills woodchucks way better than a 22 rimfire. I'm not sure if subsonic 17HMR ammo is even made. I've never seen any at least. That tiny bullet would have so little killing power if slowed down to around 1000 fps, I doubt it would have much practical use in wildlife control work, except maybe for something like pigeons.

The main reason for using a suppressor in this line of work is to reduce the amount of attention that the rifle's report attracts from both people and the target animals, especially if there are many of them. There is still a decent crack sound from the bullet, but the suppressor reduces the muzzle blast and makes it harder to determine where the sound came from. In several cases I've been able to remove multiple animals instead of just a single one as a result of the suppressor. Also, bystanders who hear something they think might be a gun going off tend to just look around and then go back to what they were doing if they can't confirm the sound with something visual or can't determine where it came from.

This is a 77/22 with an integral suppressor, which is very quiet with subsonic ammo, but not very powerful. It vents the gas into an inner chamber even before the bullet leaves the muzzle. That further reduces velocity, making this rig only useful for close range and headshots where noise must be kept to a minimum.

By the way, I don't recommend starting out with a Ruger for one of these rifles. About a third of them have to be sent back to the factory because they shoot so poorly.

 

[Knockemfloppin]

I use the Federal V-Shok stuff, which works pretty well. It kills woodchucks way better than a 22 rimfire. I'm not sure if subsonic 17HMR ammo is even made. I've never seen any at least. That tiny bullet would have so little killing power if slowed down to around 1000 fps, I doubt it would have much practical use in wildlife control work, except maybe for something like pigeons.

The main reason for using a suppressor in this line of work is to reduce the amount of attention that the rifle's report attracts from both people and the target animals, especially if there are many of them. There is still a decent crack sound from the bullet, but the suppressor reduces the muzzle blast and makes it harder to determine where the sound came from. In several cases I've been able to remove multiple animals instead of just a single one as a result of the suppressor. Also, bystanders who hear something they think might be a gun going off tend to just look around and then go back to what they were doing if they can't confirm the sound with something visual or can't determine where it came from.

.

That's pretty much exactly what I had guessed (including the non-availability of subsonic 17 HMR ammo). Thanks very much for the detailed reply.

 

[Vibe]

That depends. The short answer is Yes...if the hunter possesses a class III
federal firearms license to own such devices.

Why hunt with a silencer ? Probably 1 in 500,000 hunters has a
class III license.

Mike, Don ,and others. While it is a common misconception, one only needs the specialized FFL to SELL NFA firearms, not to merely possess them. Possession only requires proof of transfer tax payment IE the tax stamp from the BATFE.

But as was stated before you MUST have it either with the firearm or on your person at ALL times while the firearm is in your possession.