I think it's a mistake to rely on the AG opinion too. The courts do call AG opinions persuasive, but when they are wrong, they are not binding.

I think the AG opinion is wrong. The law does not say hunt and discharge a firearm. It says hunt or discharge a firearm. The use of the word or means that either action is prohibited separately.

Bucky's defense should be based on the absence of evidence that either of the two actions were occurring when the officer observed him. He was walking to his truck with a firearm that had an empty chamber and scope covers were on the lenses of his scope.

Edit: Although the AG states that he was informing the judge who requested his opinion of the interpretation by the DCNR, it was his choice to give his own opinion as well. He should have known that the interpretation of the DCNR was wrong since it did not reflect the plain language of the statute in question.