Back in the 60's and 70's it wasn't environment advocates or bunny huggers wading around the marshes picking up dead ducks and geese to find what was killing off waterfowl it was duck hunters. Lead poisoning was a real problem in some areas.

Yes the swans do get necropsied to determine what the cause of death. For many years that area also had a few pheasant release sights and one of the major roosting areas for swans was on the receiving end of a trap range. The pheasant release sights had corn planted on them that was left standing for waterfowl also. Other birds die in the area also but aren't near as visible as the swans and the swans have a number of people that monitor them.

Yes lead stays in the enviroment a long time but for the same reason you have to dig for gold and can pan it, lead is heavier than sand , gravel and mud and with wave action and current settles deeper every time it moves. It doesn't take long for lead shot in shallow waters to work it's way out of reach of birds.

I've been hunting ducks for 58 years now and most of it with a double gun of one kind or another. Back in MN we shot steel for nearly 10 years before it became a national mandate and the first couple of years I shot a Marlin 120 Skeet gun until the SKB 100 26" IC and MOD proved to handle and ounce of steel 4's just fine and was my goto duck gun until just a few years ago when the hammer guns of my youth called to me.

Shooting steel isn't a big deal, people just need to learn the limitation and abide by them and them it will kill just as good as lead. Instead of taking the shot when you think you can kill them let them make another pass and take them when you know you'll kill them. I'd much rather go home with four ducks than splash down 10 and only retrieve 7. I still count any un-retrievable duck in my bag.

You can call me a nut case but lead ingestion in waterfowl was a real problem in certain areas.

When hear someone say they quit duck hunting because of steel shot , they weren't really a duck hunter and were just looking for a reason to quit. If they made me hunt ducks with an arrow on a string so I wouldn't pollute with wads and shot and could retrieve every duck I hit I'd still be duck hunting. Heck back in the day I used to hitch across Wisconsin with my old hammer gun strapped to my duffle to hunt ducks in the river bottoms near Lacrosse and cut classes at college to get in on the evening flight of woodies on a local beaver pond. As a kid my dad would drop me on the river in one town and I'd float the river down to the next town stuff my gun in the bushes and hike to the tavern in my IKE jacket and hip boots to call dad and have him pick me up.

your right...your nuts..

.im concerned you have been eating lead

The problem is that because of the few areas that lead shot might have contributed to lead poisoning of wildfowl, we are constantly being strong armed with new restrictions on lead shot in areas where it makes absolutely no sense.

Despite your disdain for hunters that complain about the ban on lead shot, it is these "occasional" hunters that make up the vast majority of hunting license sales. Every time that hunting becomes more restrictive, and/or expensive it harms us all, and the future of our pastime.

I haven't hunted ducks quite as long as oskar, but share his addiction to them. He has had success with steel, as have I, but it has meant changing the way I hunt ducks. I was never a sky buster, but to say that steel today is just as effective as lead was in the old days, is wrong. We have adjusted, take closer shots now, and still kill limits. But, that does NOT mean steel is just as effective as lead as a killer of birds. It just means we have had to adjust. Those who were unwilling to make the necessary adjustments no longer hunt ducks, and blame bad, or misguided, research for their woes. I have a sneakin' suspicion that most of the people who say they can't kill ducks with steel today weren't great shakes with lead either. It's easy to blame poor shooting on sorry equipment. I will admit to refusing to give up lead for ducks here for many years after the ban, believing that, as Joe said, my ethics in not wounding ducks outweighed my lawbreaking. Steel loads are light years better today than they were initially.

I wrote protests to the agency that forced steel upon us, the USFWS I believe it was. I think it was a knee jerk reaction to a limited problem. But, it is what it is, and die hard duck hunters will do what it takes to kill ducks, in spite. My BSS is not a vintage duck gun, but it is a helluva duck killer over dekes, with good steel loads. When I really want to take my Foxes to the blind, I use bismuth, but in all honesty, it is only marginally better than the best steel loads, IMO. Oh, how I would love to pass shoot ducks leaving the roost with 3" magnum loads of lead #4s in my Super Fox, one more time.

SRH

I admit I was only a part time duck hunter even when lead was still legal for them....would rather chase ditch chickens...ducks/geese are only a diversion but an enjoyable one.... with my nice older guns I use one of the soft nontox shots available at 40 to 50 for a box of 10....usually jump shooting walking along a creek....or my BPS with steel for geese and pass shooting....don't decoy any more just to much junk to carry in and out....but I do miss that marsh smell early in the morning, putting out the dekes with the old rubber chest waders on....and the smell of a hot cup of coffee out of the thermos as you settled in listening for wings in the dark....

I don't think I'm a sky buster either, but boy do I like good long range pass shooting. By all accounts, there are a ton more recreational fishing folks than duck hunters, but apparently lead sinkers don't affect wildlife or our drinking water. Go figure.

Oskar I admire your passion ,but must admit I don't appreciate the effect of lead on waterfowl there's just not that many ducks where I live and hunt to accumulate the kind of hunter introduced lead you speak of ....but I can tell you this ,I hate steel and the price of the alternatives ,in Newfoundland where I live you can't hunt Ptarmigan and not find water ,basically every 20 feet there's a puddle or pond ,we have numerous Snipe that the dogs love to point ,but I have to switch out when it gets in the air and I realize what was pointed ,or pass ...no trouble to guess what to do,Pass.

The ducks here are mostly incidental ,we walk them up from a puddle while Ptarmigan hunting so maybe two or three opportunities a season ,the lead ban for waterfowl and migratory birds in this Province is basically a crock of shit ,at its first we were told we had to switch out whenever in the vicinity of a body of water ,ludicrous!!! it was just as well to stay home ...and thankfully that was never enforced ,I now pass on snipe or ducks ,or target them specifically and carry the "right " ammo accordingly ,it really took the edge off the experience for hunters up here and created quite a few lawbreakers who just said no ....this law when passed should never have been a blanket issue across the country ,I fully realize how it can be a problem in heavily hunted areas of the country that have been shot over for a hundred years , but for here it's just too stupid to talk about .

I love hunting snipe and I usually have a dozen or so dedicated trips to snipe fields each season. Snipe season also extends beyond the end of other seasons. I welcome the fact that our state's law permits the use of lead for hunting snipe in the same areas that duck hunting is done. Unlike federal and other states' lands, it's the quarry not the land that controls the lead ban on state lands.

I tossed in the towel on hunting waterfowl right after inferior shot became mandatory. It wasn't the only reason, as I discovered I enjoyed being out in the uplands with my Father's Irish setter more than sitting in a duck blind, but, it was a factor. My Dad kept duck hunting. The dog was perfectly happy to go with me.
Not long after I quit waterfowl, I did start noticing that I was finding wounded grouse in the Sherburn WMA (which, was inferior shot only, for any kind of hunting) which the dog retrieved as cripples, that had infections cooking in their bodies from being winged with inferior shot loads. This was still early in the game, so those loads would have been steel.
Cleaning the birds revealed steel pellets rusting inside the birds, and an infection around it. Lead shot in a non lethal wound typically will stay put, and, stay inert, with few if any side effects from it being there. I've taken a few pheasants that have had two sizes of lead pellets in them in the past, and if it was lead, said bird didn't appear wounded at the time I took it.
I maintain the inferior shot was a dictate, that was intended, along with mismanagement of the uplands at the state level (that was occuring at the same time) that was intended to diminish outdoor pursuits. I will leave the reasons why to others more involved with the process, but, what has happened to the upland experience in most states could have only happened deliberately. It continues to this day with a push for inferior bullets for big game hunting.
Eventually, with enough different dictates, the great majority will say "screw this" and buy a boat and go fishing. Or, take up bowling.
I won't let them win, in my lifetime. I will hunt where they spent my tax dollars to diminish habitat for wild birds, using whatever crap they make me use to attempt to take birds that don't exist there anymore.
Not sure my Son will feel the same, however.

Best,
Ted

I'll admit I was a fanatical waterfowl hunter from about the age of 12 into my mid 20's when I moved to AK. The area I lived in AK had tremendous numbers of waterfowl and migrating birds, the problem was, they'd usually be heading south by mid-Sept.

I continued to hunt waterfowl occasionally, and had some fantastic shoots but my main focus was big game, which overlapped with the waterfowl season. I hunted geese at Izembek Lagoon, the same year steel was mandated in AK, with a good friend, who hunted everything with a 20 ga. We both realized fairly quickly that the steel shot was much less effective than lead, particularly my friend with his 20 ga. However, IMO, the steel loads produced nowadays are head and shoulders above what was produced in the late 80's/early 90's. Still trails lead in effectiveness, but much better than 25-30 years ago.

Well said, Ted. (And I definitely prefer your use of the term "inferior shot" over that other commonly used misleading term.)

I hunted ducks & geese thru the late 70's and 80's with lead in a couple of different guns, that I mostly sold off in the late 80's.
I kept a Valmet 220 for grouse and pheasant, still have it. I'd got more interested in big game hunting, thru the late 80's and up til around 2003, with rifle and bow. I got interested in ducks again for something to do in the middle of the day, jumping beaver ponds and the like. I picked up an IC barreled 870 for that. In 2006 I lucked into a retriever, over the next couple of yrs, got back into ducks and geese. I used to shoot the Valmet for the most part, but didn't want to mess with the chokes for steel, it is full/mod. Still use it for upland.
Sort of glad I mostly missed that period, as the steel ammo is a lot better than it was. The guns I bought over the last few years are all rated for steel, and the last couple are rated for the new CIP spec for the higher pressure, high speed steel rounds. Granted, I have to use 3" and 3-1/2" to get the same loads as I used in lead, and they are only 120 to 220 fps faster than the lead rounds were. And in the 20ga, 1oz steel loads are about all I can get,and they are only 75fps faster, but, it still kills ducks just fine. I guess a person will just have to see how well the guns hold up to these loads over time. You can use smaller loads in the older guns, open the chokes, use smaller shot, or ITX and Nice shot, but, I see that as limiting myself when I don't really need to. It looks like the mfgrs are coming around to the idea of doubles needing to use steel now, and there are some decent guns out there, if you want to use them.

Gee, I don't remember it the same as oskar. When the initial calls for the bans on lead shot came, they weren't from hunters who were aghast at finding the swamps and lakes littered with lead poisoned waterfowl. The calls for lead bans came from wacky environmentalists and anti-hunters. There were and still are many other sources for an animal or bird to get lead into their bloodstreams, many much more efficient than swallowing lead shot. Go check the price to get tested for lead poisoning, and then ask yourself who was paying for all of these autopsies of dead ducks. Hunters were almost universally against lead shot bans, and virtually all still are against lead ammunition bans. After reading reams of junk science on the subject, including much of what the anti-lead zealot Ben Deeble used to post here, I am more convinced than ever that it is a scam designed to reduce participation in the shooting sports.

oskar makes the claim that storms and wave action will soon cause lead shot to sink deep into the silt, but isn't it strange that it didn't happen until after the anti-lead people got what they wanted... a way to make hunting more expensive and less effective. Yes, there are those hunters and shooters who will continue to hunt even if they have to use silver bullets. But when there are many fewer shooters and hunters left, it becomes much easier and sociably acceptable to restrict our gun and hunting rights.

Sorry oskar, but steel is ballistically inferior to lead. It is not just as good. It is also more expensive, but not nearly as expensive as some of the other non-lead ammo. We often hear about this alternative ammunition being in short supply. Imagine how much more it would cost if demand increases due to more lead ammo bans. We could look back at $2.00 a pop as the good old days.

I shot a groundhog yesterday. The autopsy showed that he died from acute lead poisoning which caused massive cerebral hemorrhage. Works for me.

My Dad's deer hunting partner had a reloading press inside a shed on his property, which, in addition to reloading ammunition, he raised chickens on. One day, when I was watching him reload shotgun ammunition, he told me "watch this". He allowed a lead pellet to roll off the edge of the bench, where a hen promptly ran over and picked it up, and then spat it out on the ground.
Ever since that demonstration, I've had serious doubts about any birds injesting lead shot.

Best,
Ted

Thank John Olin. The Nilo Farms "tests" force fed mallards nothing but lead pellets and corn. And it did adversely affect the ducks. A**holes. Just like most environmentally driven legislation, based on phoney science.
Climate change. Mars has warmed up more than earth over the same period. I cannot believe that one Mars rover is responsible. But, that liberal idiot in the White House is going to do his utmost to wreck the U.S. economy over it.

First I never said steel was as good as lead or was as effective as lead. I said that if used within its limitations it kills ducks as good as lead.

Here's a rather long read about 20 pages on the history of lead poisoning in waterfowl and introduction of non-toxic shoot. Along about page 18 it includes reference to sportsman involvement.

Remember non-toxic shot was in mandatory use as early as 1972 but the emviromentalists didn't really get on the band wagon until just a few of years before the total ban in 1991.

Interesting note that crippling from steel shot in the last few years is at a lower rate than with lead shot before the ban.

Ted my dogs have caught and retrieved many sick and dying pheasants with green breasts and legs from lead shot wounds.

I think geen indicates a little more going on than non-lethal wounding. You can say what you want, but, a steel pellet in a body is going to rust and always cause an infection. Many animals, humans included, go about their day to day with lead fragments in their bodies.

Best,
Ted

Lead fragments? Heck, my grandfather carried a .45 lead slug in his body 75 years without any problems other than a bit of arthritis.

The problem supposedly occurs when lead pellets in a birds gizzard get ground up. That makes sense, but the problem was way overblown. Wild ducks do not eat only corn, and with a "normal" diet the lead would pass right through. But, it's apparent oskar has drunk the Kool-Aid, and nothing will sway his mind, so at least he and I cancel each other out.

This one single "statistic" from your vaunted 20 page report should tell you something. The author is telling you that in the last few years, steel has actually gotten better than lead. And you believe that nonsense?

And your contention that it was hunters who wanted a lead shot ban for waterfowl, and the environmentalist wackos only got on board recently... really?

Some of us were born at night. But it wasn't last night.

I don't think it means that steel shot is better than lead but that it is better than it was when it first came out and that hunters have learned to use it with its limitations..so less crippling because you don't take those fringe shots like you would be tempted to take with lead ...I don't mind using steel in my modern made guns,I long ago got used to its limitations and the improvements in shell design have improved it a lot.... what really gets me is the rip off prices being charged for vintage gun compatible nontox.....they price that stuff like its made with gold shot....

Sportsmen in the day helped collect the carcasses and helped collect data on waterfowl deaths. I don't think anyone had any idea where it would lead. Duck populations in the 1960' were at some of the lowest levels and ducks were diing in the marshes from other than hunting.

Lead shot, sinker and bullet bans are coming, we don't have the science or the numbers to stave it off for very long. I'm working on lead free ammunition for my coyote guns and big game rifles for that day. When everyone else is sitting home wining about the loss of lead shot and bullets I'm going to be out hunting and doing as well as I did with lead.

I hope regular folks can pass traditions on for generations to come. Sounds like it'll die out sooner rather than later. The occasional duck hunter may be a bit more important than you give them credit for being.

If more bans on lead ammunition or even lead fishing sinkers do in fact come, it will be because of sportsmen who bought into the claims made by junk science and phony doctored statistics.

There is still no peer-reviewed scientific evidence that lead was causing population-level impacts to America’s migrating waterfowl. In fact, most of the population declines in the 1960's and 1970's has been attributed to breeding habitat loss and drought. We still see much of the same improper use of so-called science being used to promote other agendas. Global warming is another popular one that is widely promoted and fully accepted by people unwilling to look at simple facts and make up their own minds. We have had a .85 C degree increase in global temperatures since the 1880's which is within the standard deviation for error. But we are also monitoring temperatures in places that were not monitored in the 1880's. Arctic sea ice is in fact decreasing, but Antarctic sea ice has been increasing for several years and was at all time record levels last year. The Earth has always had natural cycles of warming and cooling. California's current drought appears to be due to a normal 1100-1200 year cycle, but that is not stopping rabid Chicken Little claims that the sky is falling due to man made global warming.

My Biology degree is from Pennsylvania State University. I have personally seen researchers doctor or fudge data in order to get continued government grant money. I ate trout that were killed by a researcher for a meal, and he reported that the fish died due to low pH levels from acid mine drainage which caused cancers in the fish. He told me that the surest way to get government grant money at the time was in cancer research, so you tell them what they want to hear. It embarrasses me that my Alma Mater was collaborating with East Anglia University in Great Britain to submit falsified climate data supporting Global Warming claims. The Liberal Media was pretty quiet about that, and claims of Global Warming were pretty subdued for a couple years until things cooled down and the scandal was largely forgotten.

We can quibble about steel shot ammunition being better than it was when first introduced, and fewer hunters engaging in sky-busting resulting in lower crippling losses, but to claim that crippling with steel shot in the last few years is lower than crippling with lead before the ban... at a time when waterfowl populations were lower... strains credulity. Anyone who thinks the anti-hunting and anti-gun forces will stop or be satisfied if and when they get lead ammunition banned is ignoring history and being foolish. I don't expect to change oskar's mind on this. Now he is trying to tell us again that sportsmen led the charge to ban lead shot by collecting carcasses for autopsies and studies without knowing where it would eventually lead. It was abundantly clear where it was headed as the calls for banning lead shot increased. oskar himself knows where it is headed if we sit on our hands and do nothing, because he has told us he is already shifting to non-lead ammo for other hunting. He has drank the Kool-Aid, but the rest of us should stay on top of this scam and remind our legislators that we do not support junk science aimed at reducing sport hunting and fishing.

When they outlaw lead for rifles it will get interesting.

yea; since they wont be able to hunt critters with them lead core rounds; some
folks will be sending it back to politicians one round at a time.....never thought the revolution would be started by a bunch of candy ass sportsman....

BTW I heard the all copper rounds are just as accurate and effective on game....

When I saw that the title of this thread was about a nut case who lived to duck hunt, I thought somebody had finally published my life story....:)

Like Oskar, I too have been in this game a long time. 40 years for me. I grew up on the Eastern Shore of Md. Started hunting in the early 70's when lead and the A5 were King. One of my friend's father ran a goose guiding business and I went along occasionally. When the mandate to use steel hit, it was only for 12 ga. ALL the serious hunters that I knew went out and bought 16 ga guns so that they could continue to use lead. My parents house was on a peninsula of land with a huge corn field behind it and a large body of water in front. The geese would fly back and forth over out house and the first couple of seasons where steel was mandated, the geese would bleed all over the cars, the sidewalk, everything.

In the spring we would be in the marsh trapping muskrats. Never once did we find a dead duck in the marsh. Trapping season was followed closely by eel potting for crab bait. We were out there, in the boats, pulling eel pots by the score, close to shore, close enough to see back into the marsh and again, we found no dead ducks.

The body of opinion on the Shore was that this was yet another way for the State of Md, and their notoriously anti hunting DNR to back door restrict hunting.

Yes Oskar, today's steel shells are head and shoulders above the first generation of steel, but they are no where near what lead shells are capable of. As far as I'm concerned, if a steel shell load isn't traveling at 1500 FPS or better, I'm not buying it. (and no I don't like Hyper Sonics, they kick too much) Velocity is what has made today's steel tolerable.

2 years ago when I was told I had cancer, I made the surgeon hold off on scheduling the operation till after the season was over. If the bag limits were reduced to one bird a day, I would still go out before first light and set decoys and wait to see what dawn brings.

Mergus, nutcase....

To the extent that there is increased mortality from lead poisoning in heavily-shot marshes, the increased wounding of game from the use of steel shot probably offsets the intended gains from using steel. The problem could have been solved easily if we had designated "Waterfowl Loads" which were lead, but had an excise tax equal to the increased cost of steel vs. lead put on those shells which would be used for the purchase and maintenance of breeding marshes. We all know that the ultimate reduction in huntable populations of all game is caused by the loss of habitat

There is no reason for ordinary people(whatever that is) to lose the traditions of the past. Steel shotshells are not anymore expensive than lead waterfowl loads in the past. In the early 70's a box of Win 1 1/4 oz. Duck loads was about $3./box and I was making $3.50/hr operating a crane. When I retired a few years ago steel loads were $8-9/bx and I was making $25/hr, today they run $9-10/bx. I can't see where having to shoot steel would stop anyone from hunting. My old hunting partner shoots nothing but steel even for upland as it is too much of a hassle to swap loads all the time even for wild pheasants with his 20 ga. He puts more time into upland than anyone I've ever met and doesn't find it disadvantages him any.

My advice for anyone that thinks steel doesn't kill any better than lead "don't shoot if they are to far to kill with steel".

I found that I suffered no disadvantages with lead. Other than having to suffer fools who tried to sell me junk science about how I spend my free time.

Best,
Ted