I believe this bill is needed. It is unwise to let the executive branch use constitutional power assigned to the legislature without statute.
It however appears that the changes proposed by SB 120 seem to be broader or at least less defined than those the Governor in consultation with the legislative leadership agreed to last summer.
Perhaps adding some clarifications, something like:
The closure may include the restriction or prohibition of the use of firearms for target shooting in unincorporated areas of the state where the banning of non-traditional rounds, or exploding targets or devices, are not sufficient to protect against the extreme fire danger.
The banning of target practice areas are only in very specific areas described or shown on a state website and by a signed notification by the state forester after consultation with county commissioners or officials and other local officials and sheriffs.
The banning of fire arm target practice shall not ban the legal carrying of fire arms as protected under Art. I, 6.
Article I, Section 6. [Right to bear arms.]The individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, others, property, or the state, as well as for other lawful purposes shall not be infringed; but nothing herein shall prevent the Legislature from defining the lawful use of arms.
Target shooting with traditional copper/lead bullets do not cause sparks. It is rare for a bullet to hit a rock, causing it to hit another rock and that rock to rock impact sparks and creates a fire, or the bullet stopping so fast by hitting a rock to heat up to a high enough temperature to cause a fire.
The great majority of the target shooting fires caused in 2012 were not caused by traditional bullets alone.
Shooting exploding targets or non-traditional rounds, such as steel jacketed or steel core or tracer rounds are main the problem.
Shooting old TV's around dry grass during a fire danger is just plain dumb.