doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Lead ammo ban

It's the old story, Stan. We're the oldest part of Canada in sense of first the Europeans settled, population under a million. Lots of open spaces, thousands of miles of waterlines, generally good hunting, exceptional in many respects, and as a result few issues between hunters and landowners. US different story and, as you say, you can darn sure keep it. One size doesn't fit all.

Way to go Ted. Congratulations on the great verbal b*tch-slap of that anti-lead zealot Grouse Guy Ben Deeble. Ben's response of tucking his tail between his legs and slinking away like the coward he is says it all. I guess Mr. Anti-Lead sportsman doesn't wish to talk about his illegal hunting activities either.

Safe to say that if you had taken a similar cheap shot at one of Ben's family members, he'd be throwing a tantrum and demanding that you should be banished. And several other Libtards here would be singing the same sad song in unison. Where are they now that one of their own kind has acted in such a low class manner???

King Brown's lunatic advice to the NRA was so bad, that they totally ignored it. He never would tell us exactly what he advised them to do, but we saw plenty of examples of his idiotic ideas of giving up hard won rights to the anti-gunners. He should have submitted his worthless concessionary ideas to the NRA on toilet paper so they could at least wipe their butt with them.

It's good to see King's little brother Larry Clown picking up right where he left off in last January's Lead and Condors thread. That thread got locked when Larry cried like a little baby to Dave about being taken to task for his opinions that deer hunters and lead bullets were responsible for lead poisoning in eagles.

There, Larry was frantically denying that he supported any additional lead bans. He repeatedly told us that the lead ammo bans for waterfowl were settled science and there was no use denying the facts, as he saw them. He absolutely refused to consider obvious contradictions in a famous University of Minnesota study and other junk science, and he repeatedly denied being a supporter of any additional lead ammo bans, although he threw deer hunters under the bus for supposedly leaving lead tainted deer carcasses and gut piles for poor lead starved eagles to feast upon.



Now we finally have him making he case for lead ammo bans in places where there is heavy shot fall in places where doves are hunted. Nobody is complaining about massive lead poisoning in doves. Nobody is wildly claiming that eagles are ingesting large quantities of lead tainted doves. If that were indeed a problem, eagles in places like Argentina would be on the verge of extinction. But here we have an opinionated blowhard in denial now throwing dove hunters under his anti-lead bus. Let's all welcome Larry Clown into the big tent of Kumbaya, so he can stab us in the back by making the case for additional lead ammo bans.

Anybody wanting to do a study of lead ingestion in eagles, due to feeding on doves killed with it, should go to C�rdoba, Argentina. Within 5 minutes of beginning shooting large numbers of eagles and hawks descend upon the fields, alight on the ground around the shooters and begin feeding on the dead doves. This has probably been going on ever since dove shooting began there in earnest, at least since I first went in 2003. If there is any death in them due to lead it would be hard to comprehend. The numbers of raptors there is just phenomenal. Not only raptors but wild cats of all descriptions, iguana lizards, canines, and on and on. All eating lead killed doves. There could be no better place on earth to study lead ingestion and it's effect on raptors, reptiles, or mammals.

SRH

According to a recent article in the New York Times, surprising given the paper's political slant, the US eagle population has increased to the extent that it is causing substantial damage to other wildlife and significant problems for some farmers and ranchers. Sheep farmers in parts of New England, for example, are experiencing serious losses of young lambs, while being prevented from taking action by federal laws protecting eagles.

Lead in game carcasses does not seem to be adversely affecting US eagle populations.

Nova Scotia had a role in reestablishing bald eagles in northeastern US. We've got lots of them; two nests on our small 70ha property bring out two new ones each year. I'm not aware of complaints from our sheep farmers about eagles although the usual sources have been chirping without traction about banning lead in bullets for the last 10 years. Curious New England has serious lamb losses although, as far as I know, none here.

I could be wrong but my guess would be that the catastrophic decline of Bald Eagles in the lower 48 was more due to indiscriminate shootings than DDT. See predator and shoot it.

And it's subsequent return has to do with being on the protected list and a change in mindset where only the most determined to break the law and thumb their nose at the rules that govern wildlife would shoot them today.

They are thick as rats at Lake of the Woods. Have been for decades. Had one in a tree in my backyard when I lived in Winnipeg....old part of the city, very close to downtown. Only thing that ever scared my cat. Now THAT was panic personified!

Interesting observations Stan. I wonder, if no one wants to do the studies, there may be the foregone conclusion that the results might not fit the direction some want to take the US. I wonder if 'notox' shot fills the fields and water around those high volume South American waterfowl shoots. Another missed opportunity for a study?

In spite of their rising numbers, the best place to search for stack 'em up body count pictures is at the base of wind generators. Another dot, previously considered, that's best not connected.

The federal government sets a quota, in the thousands, of the acceptable number of eagles that can be killed by wind turbines.
Eagle numbers continue to increase . . . in spite of which raptor rehabilitators deal with birds that are suffering from lead poisoning. Where wildlife are concerned, we usually focus on the overall health and population dynamics of the entire species. But eagles, for better or worse, are both extremely visible and our national symbol. So sick or dead eagles get a lot of press if lead is involved . . . but oddly enough, a whole lot of them being killed by wind turbines don't get much press.

The concern with doves and lead in this country--since we pick them up--is not with what might eat them, but rather that the doves themselves will ingest lead and die. Since they're basically pests in Argentina, I doubt anyone worries much about whether a few of them die from ingesting lead.

If you are not willing to support your argument, you are not creditable or very smart in your approach if you have real beliefs with a supporting set of facts.

Since you provide no real data other than you like non tox I can only assume you beliefs are emotionally based and without merit.

Am I right or do you have evidence that supports the banning of all lead as having true statistical significance with scientific (that means independently repeatable) results from real studies with open books (that means they don't just state their conclusions but open their data and methods for review)??