doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com pesticide

Peace, order status quo must be maintained, therefore, pesticides, herbicides,
genetically enhanced food......food farms stay. Not everyone can afford organically grown vegetable or free range raised meat. I believe if food cost went up sharply along with price of energy items like gasoline went up my countrymen and countrywomen would actually go out in the streets. Obviously while the poor still own guns the elite leadership can not allow for that to happen. It looks like we will have to dig in a little deeper to enjoy good hunting experience.

I support continued use of lead shot for hunting and sporting use because there is no personal downside for me and being nice caring fella I don't want those owning many classic old guns take financial beating if non-lead shot is mandated for all use.

Stan - sorry, I tend to run on sometimes; my life has revolved around lions and Furadan for too long. And I worked on organochlorines in African raptors at the beginning of my career, so know a bit about that history, too. A historical note closer to home: George W.'s last act in office was to pardon a guy convicted of poisoning bald eagles with Furadan.

Of course people who use things responsibly (like guns) should not be penalized for the criminals who don't. Sorry to bring this back to Africa, but where there is no law enforcement, in practice there is no way to control people's behavior. The only way to stop wildlife poisoning in Africa would be to get rid of carbofuran entirely. Organophosphate arachnicides (tick dip) and strychnine used to be the predator poisons of choice, but those are no longer available. Then in the late 1990's people discovered how cheap and effective Furadan was and predator numbers plummeted -its a helluva lot easier to kill off all the predators as we did than to keep your cattle corralled at night, as was done for ten thousand years.

Craig, if you look at the papers in that symposium sponsored by the Peregrine Fund, you will see that the authors were based at respectable government agencies and academic institutions, not PETA. The Peregrine Fund is concerned about eagles and condors, many of which die every year from lead in scavenged carcasses. Lead shot does not fall into the simple categories of proper/improper use - when birds eat it, they die. California has (so far) exempted quail and doves from the lead shot ban, presumably because they are not very likely to be eaten by condors, but there certainly doesn't seem a good rationale to ban lead for turkeys. What can I say? Its California.

I'm always amazed at the sheer magnitude of knowledge that some folks amass without any training or experience, or even a little keyboard research at the very least. In this day and age, anyone can go to scholar.google.com and become at least superficially familiar with the actual primary literature on any topic, including Furadan and bird mortality, even when properly applied in the fields. And topics like lead shot and waterfowl have a plethora of science supporting very clear conclusions. Yet, a few folks, always the same few folks claim to know everything about any subject and are always somehow in direct opposition to those conclusions. How is this?

Brent, it ain't easy being one of the few folks, but no, I shouldn't include anyone other than myself. It only seems that way when folks like you are always right. Personally, I can understand that they're toxins that can affect wildlife. What, in your expert, unassailable opinion are they, and what should be done about them?

Brent -

from Wikipedia: 'Confirmation bias, also called confirmatory bias or myside bias, is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs.'

We all reflexively dismiss information that doesn't conform to our biases. Objectivity and critical thinking don't come easy.

It's a type of cognitive bias and a systemic error of inductive reasoning? LGF, no kidding, I appreciate your point of view. I don't understand, why can't I just make the claim that I'm extensively familiar with primary source research? Obviously, it must be some sort of bias that says poke fun at craigd, otherwise, I'd be credible, right? Are you alluding to political bias on the state and national level, but ignoring it to fit your notions?

Unless one is an expert in or has substantial knowledge in given field and has sound analytical skills Google is not a friend.

That is simply not true. Just avoid secondary literature. If you read blog posts and editorial diatribes and cannot separate them from original studies, then you do, indeed, have a problem. Anyone that looks at the primary literature, on the other hand, finds it quite clear that lead shot and granulated pesticides are pretty well understood and the basic conclusions (they are toxic to wildlife, of course) is well known and accepted.

Hahaha, this is coming from a guy who couldn't explain how his precious and infallible junk science references contained wildly differing numbers for what constituted a lethal dose of lead in eagles. In one of his references in last year's "Lead and Condor Deaths" thread, an eagle was brought in with a massive lethal off-the-charts overdose of lead, but somehow, it was able to still fly and perch in a tree.

It shouldn't take a lot of smarts to read such crap and realize that something is not adding up. Too bad that inflated egos are no substitute for critical analysis and rational thought.

Brent and Larry Clown, the ex-CIA intelligence analyst, aren't able to use their own brains to question the veracity of such obvious garbage that passes for science without peer review. Poor Larry still demands to see a competing view that proves lead ammo wasn't the huge problem that agenda driven anti-lead activists claimed. He and Brent cling to their anti-lead ammo bias while continuing to ignore the many alternate sources of lead that are much more bio-available than shot or bullet fragments. I still love their junk science crap that suggested the majority of deer gut piles were laced with hundreds of lead bullet fragments. The first step in using your brain is the requirement that you actually have one.

And so it goes.