The County of Brant is conducting a review and update of the current Firearms Bylaw to reflect residential and commercial development, increased population density, and changes in how land is used across the County - and we need your input.
This initiative is part of the County’s commitment to:
- Improve public safety
- Align regulations with community growth
- Provide clear, visual guidance on where firearm use is prohibited
Many of the areas proposed to be added are already covered by zoning rules that prohibit discharging firearms. The mapping update will make this clearer for residents and ensure transparency and ease ofContinue reading
The County of Brant is conducting a review and update of the current Firearms Bylaw to reflect residential and commercial development, increased population density, and changes in how land is used across the County - and we need your input.
This initiative is part of the County’s commitment to:
- Improve public safety
- Align regulations with community growth
- Provide clear, visual guidance on where firearm use is prohibited
Many of the areas proposed to be added are already covered by zoning rules that prohibit discharging firearms. The mapping update will make this clearer for residents and ensure transparency and ease of understanding.
What’s being proposed
We are proposing to expand the existing Schedule “A” maps, which identify areas where discharging firearms is prohibited.
Updates include:
- Adding new subdivisions and neighbourhoods to prohibited areas
- Updating areas such as parks, trails, and recreational spaces
- Updating other areas with growing public use
The goal is to ensure the maps are accurate, up to date, and easy to understand.
Check Your Area: Virtual Map
Want to know if the updated bylaw mapping affects your property? Curious to see the areas covered by the current bylaw versus the proposed area changes?
Summary of the current bylaw
The current Firearms Bylaw prohibits discharging a firearm or bow in several situations, including:
- On residentially zoned land or registered subdivisions
- Within 100 metres of a place of worship, public hall, school property, or recreational trail
- Over highways or County-owned land (unless authorized)
- Without the property owner’s permission
- In areas identified on the official “No Discharge” maps (Schedules A-1 to A-31 and B-1 to B-7)
Exemptions apply to peace officers, animal control officers, agricultural land, and archery instruction.
To read the full bylaw and view all current exemptions, please visit brant.ca/Firearms.
Top 3 Things to Know
- This is a map update, not a new ban.
The Firearms Bylaw already includes many restrictions. We’re simply updating the maps to match where people live, play, and gather today. - Your feedback matters.
We’re inviting public input to ensure the update reflects local knowledge, safety concerns, and community values. - You can still hunt, shoot, and enjoy rural life, safely and legally.
Exemptions remain in place for hunters, farmers, archery, and others under certain conditions.
Stay Informed
News feed: The Newsfeed is where you’ll find the latest updates about this project. It helps keep you informed about progress, upcoming opportunities to participate, important decisions, and more.
Subscribe for updates and be the first to get the most current project information. Simply add your email to the Stay Informed box on this page and click ‘Subscribe'.
FAQs
We have included a list of frequently asked questions to help answer some questions you may have.
Braeside Camp on East River Road features a house of worship, so I am surprised that it is not included.
Not a new ban? Adding new places to a existing ban is in practice the exact same as enacting a new ban. The majority of the new areas covered under this extension are properties with sufficient space to allow for responsible firearms enjoyment. This new ban represents nothing more than an urban centre minded county to place further restrictions on people choosing to live outside of town, in places where they can enjoy their hobbies without fear of, gasp, disrupting their neighbours!
Dear Council
Although I do agree with most of this initiative due to the community growth, I do however, have a concern with a particular area. The far west portion of Brant located south of Keg Lane has natural boundaries and is far from residential development. This area should remain outside of the prohibited area and remain a cherished hunting area for years to come.
I understand that the map would need to be updated for areas that are urbanizing, but I don't see the rationale to expand the map areas for rural areas that are not growing in population. I don't think anyone is asking for that kind of change.
I live by the fairgrounds (in that neighborhood) and the other day someone was firing something very close to our neighborhood. My puppy got so scared on her walk with my father that she wouldn’t move from a spot on the sidewalk. This resulted in me having to go pick them up 2 minutes from my house. Not only this, but my family enjoys walking in trailed areas and theres no need for hunting or firearm use to be happening in public environmental settings.
It is unfortunate that it has taken so long to update a bylaw that affects so many new residents! I have lived here for five years. Why isn’t this done when new residential building is approved and starts?
I believe strongly that all of these new rules are a compete waste of time. Firearms should 100% be able to be used on a property with a residential zoning given the property is large enough. Many people in the community use county land for hunting and shooting and this would be devastating for local residents that have resided in the community for generations.
If the county does decide to move forward with these ridiculous changes it MUST include the same enforcement for indigenous people as well.
The map of cainsville includes rural land used for hunting. Is this map set in stone? Can amendments be made? My family has been hunting this land for generations.
This is good - thanks for staying on top of this work and keeping the public informed.
1) Any changes that are being proposed currently or in the future MUST include the same enforcement for indigenous people as well. Otherwise for the County to claim one of their aims is "to enhance public safety", is unreasonable and ludicrous and is only focusing on non-indigenous people who are bound by law to abide by the Ontario Hunting Regulations. Currently there are indigenous people hunting in many areas within the county with guns that are prohibited in this part of Ontario, do not have permission of the landowners, do not abide by the Ontario Hunting Regulations and do not adhere to the current County Firearms Bylaw.
2) Any homeowners or property owners whose property is currently being considered or may be considered in the future as a no-gun/bow discharge zone should be notified personally and consulted with well in advance of the consideration so they have an opportunity to provide input and be involved with any decision-making.
3) Any homeowners or property owners whose property is near or adjacent to a property that is currently being considered or may be considered in the future as a no-gun/bow discharge zone should be notified personally and consulted with well in advance of the consideration so they have an opportunity to provide input.
1) Any changes that are being proposed currently or in the future MUST include the same enforcement for indigenous people as well. Otherwise for the County to claim one of their aims is "to enhance public safety", is unreasonable and ludicrous and is only focusing on non-indigenous people who are bound by law to abide by the Ontario Hunting Regulations. Currently there are indigenous people hunting in many areas within the county with guns that are prohibited in this part of Ontario, do not have permission of the landowners, do not abide by the Ontario Hunting Regulations and do not adhere to the current County Firearms Bylaw.
2) Any homeowner or landowner whose property is currently being proposed or may be proposed in the future to be a no-gun/bow discharge property should be contacted personally well in advance of the proposal so they had an opportunity to be a part of the decision making.
3) Any homeowner or landowner whose property is close to another property which is currently being proposed or may be proposed in the future to be a no-gun/bow discharge property should be contacted personally well in advance of the proposal so they had an opportunity to provide input and be a part of the decision making.
Not sure whether the idea of expanding the bylaw came from the County or from residents, but it was a good one. I only wish the County owned more land.
Leave it alone it’s fine