But I would accept a scientifically proven result.
Without knowing the source I always tend to be suspicious. ALL studies are agenda driven and 99% are looking for specific results. Almost anything can be proven to a certain degree of persuasive certainty on paper.
Is non-tox already required for clay shooting in Montana? If not, I wouldn't want any game agency giving me any BS about lead because nowhere else will concentrations be remotely as high. This is little more than another thinly veiled incremental step in making hunting and shooting more costly and therefore less attractive to more people. If this type of stuff goes unchecked rest assured that no matter what or where you shoot sooner or later your shooting will meet the same fate.
Recent increases in the cost of lead shot are making many non-toxic shot products comparably priced to premium lead game loads.
Anyone that would make that statement deserves to have to pay through the nose to shoot nice shot or tungsten matrix. Just because a small percentage of hunters don't have better ways to waste money than $18-$20 boxes of lead doesn't justify a reason for 99% of hunters to spend on 2-3 shells what they currently spend for a box of 25. If you load your own you can have loads as good as any premium (make that premium priced) load and the margin in cost between them and non-tox alternatives to steel is even wider.
Skip
