Think flying with a firearm is a hassle? It certainly can be, but if you follow these eight tips from American Hunter’s Cameron Hopkins, you can make getting your gun from Point A to Point B a lot less stressful.

After reading Cameron’s tips, tell us what you think. Have you come up with any tips of your own to make life easier when flying with a gun? Conversely, do you have any horror stories of traveling with firearms?

Flying With a Gun: 8 Tips for Airborne Hunters

Airborne hunters can fly with firearms without much hassle if they know what to expect and how to deal with the most commonly encountered hiccups.

1. How To Pack
Airline regulations as well as TSA rules require that firearms must be unloaded and packed in an “airline approved” gun case. Any hard-sided gun case with either a built-in lock or a provision for a padlock is “approved.” Prices for gun cases vary from low-end Doskocil to high-end StormCase to my personal favorite, a TuffPak (the cylindrical gun case that looks like a golf club case).

Render your firearm inoperable by removing the bolt from a bolt-action rifle, removing the barrel(s) from a shotgun, taking the slide off a pistol or removing the cylinder from a revolver. Make it easy for the TSA or ticket agent to see your firearms are unloaded.

2. Ammunition “Rules”
Airlines differ in their policies for the way ammunition must be packed in checked luggage. Some require that the ammunition be in the same case as the firearms, others specify the ammunition cannot be in the same case as the firearms. However, all airlines agree that ammunition must be “packed in original factory containers,” or a hard, plastic container and cannot exceed 5 kilograms (11 pounds) in total weight.

When you check in and declare your firearms, also declare that you’re carrying, “less than five kilos of ammunition in the original factory boxes.” By using this terminology, you’re speaking the same language as the ticket agent, and he or she will know that you know the rules, simply by your using the correct phrasing.

Some international airlines require that ammunition be packed in a totally separate locked case. Accordingly, I always pack my ammo in a small Pelican case with separate padlocks and then place this case inside my “suitcase” which is a large StormCase with its own padlocks. If I’m asked to check my ammo separately, it’s all ready to go in its own case.

3. First Impression
As your mother always told you, first impressions are everything. The most important person you will encounter on your trip is the ticket agent when you check in. Dress nicely. Wear a collared shirt or, my favorite, a well-kept polo with a law enforcement affiliation, such as an embroidered NYPD logo. You’re not being deceitful, you actually like the NYPD. If the ticket agent assumes you’re a cop, hey, that’s not your doing.

When I wear a polo with the logo of the U.S. Embassy, Kabul, Afghanistan that a buddy sent me from the sandbox—a favorite for when I have to clear U.S. Customs—I invariably get asked if I’m in the military. I reply truthfully, “No, a friend who is serving his country sent this to me.” I’ve still made a positive impression without being dishonest.

Continue reading the full article here.

Montana voters decided Nov. 2 to do away with the state’s outfitter sponsored licenses, which guaranteed approximately 5,500 big-game tags for outfitters guiding non-resident hunters. The outfitter sponsored licenses were good for the guiding business because outfitters could guarantee customers a license when they booked their hunt.

But by voting in favor of ballot initiative I-161, Montanans also approved increases in the fee structure for non-resident hunting licenses. Under I-161, the cost of a nonresident big game combination license will increase from $628 to $897, while a nonresident deer combination license will jump from $328 to $527 (which doesn’t include an additional $5 drawing fee and $10 hunting access enhancement fee.) In addition, a non-resident elk combination license will go from $593 to $812, and a non-resident youth big game combination license will go from $324 to $458.50—neither of which were announced in I-161’s official language.

Now, in the wake of I-161’s passage, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) has already moved to make those fee increases a reality. At its meeting Nov. 18, FWP gave tentative approval to a proposal to put the fee hike in place and move the quota of outfitter-sponsored licenses to the general license category. Both will likely become law on March 1, 2011.

Still, the public can submit comments on these changes before they become official. Comments are due Dec. 3 and can be sent via e-mail to hworsech@mt.gov or by conventional mail to Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Licensing Division, PO Box 200701, Helena, MT 59620-0701.

The language of I-161 told voters that the fee increases for non-resident hunters would raise state revenues over the next four years by an estimated $700,000 annually.

What it didn’t mention is that doing away with outfitter tags will likely kill the state’s guiding industry because guides can’t guarantee prospective clients licenses.

It also failed to tell voters about Idaho’s 2009 decision to increase non-resident license fees, which backfired with a $1 million shortfall, as fewer out-of-staters bought hunting licenses last year. Like Montana, Idaho expected to see a corresponding jump in revenue from the fee hike.

Time will tell if the same fate awaits Montana.

“It’ll be bad for hunters, it’ll be bad for land owners, it’ll be bad for tourism in Montana and it’s going to cost us jobs,” warned Mac Minard of the Montana Outfitters & Guides Association, when asked how I-161 will impact hunting in Montana.

NRA actively opposed I-161, as did many other hunting groups, including the Montana Outfitters & Guides Association. Now that FWP is complying with its terms, we’ll see how I-161 plays out in real life, instead of on paper or a computer screen in a voting booth.

For more on this story, check out the Billings Gazette.

With Thanksgiving just nine days away, I give you the story of tom turkey vs. Ocean Breeze, N.Y. It seems this community on Staten Island is besieged by a flock of turkeys that won’t leave the residents alone. Considering that most city slickers are scared of anything wild, the residents of Ocean Breeze are naturally terrified of the turkeys. They want the birds gone, now.   

I have a simple solution: hunt them.

Nov. 10 in the New York Daily News:

One slice of Staten Island isn’t giving thanks for its turkey this holiday season because the wild fowl are rampaging across the neighborhood.

The menacing flock is ruffling feathers in Ocean Breeze by tying up traffic, covering yards with excrement - even trapping one terrified woman in her car.

“It was straight out of ‘Cujo,’” said dental assistant Gina Guaragno, 23. “I’m sitting in my car Facebooking on my phone when turkeys jumped on my windshield.

“I screamed like I was being murdered. They just kept looking at me like it was their car. I felt trapped. I was so scared.” …

Ocean Breeze’s turkey terror began at least a decade ago, when a local resident liberated her nine pet birds at nearby South Beach Psychiatric Center.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation said there are roughly 100 turkeys in the neighborhood, though locals think it might be in the thousands.

Packs of turkeys strut slowly along the tree-lined residential streets near Cromwell Ave. and Mason St. in a daily display that’s hardly mouth-watering.

“It’s disgusting. It’s horrible,” said Sarah Pellei, 82, who first noticed the invasion a decade ago.

“People think turkeys are a big joke. But when you have thousands of these filthy animals surrounding my house and pooping all over everything, it becomes a living nightmare.”

Standing 2 to 4 feet high, the brown-feathered fiends meander between houses and linger for hours outside some homes.

“The turkeys are terrible, terrible,” said Sarina Sanfelice, 82, who keeps a garden hose by her front door to drive them away.

“They come in droves by the hundreds and eat the figs off my fig tree and poop all over everything. I complain and complain, but no one will help us.”

If they opened the area to turkey hunting, I’d say hunters would be lining up to help the good people of Ocean Breeze. That would be a win-win for everyone involved. A hunt would reduce the population, restore the birds’ natural fear of humans, create a great new opportunity for hunters, and put some meat on the table either for the hunters’ families or needy people in the community.

I am wrong in thinking this is a no-brainer? To its credit, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has said harvesting the birds is an option.

If that’s the case, I sincerely hope they allow members of the public to do the hunting. But then again the residents are probably afraid of hunters, too, and would want the DEC to bring in “experts” to do the job.

At the taxpayers’ expense.

Given the chance, experienced hunters can solve the community’s turkey troubles free of charge—and possibly teach residents that hunting and wildlife are nothing to fear.