I have been away from home for a bit and have read the posts I have not seen. Thanks to all who wrote. I would like to respond a bit.

Firstly, Ben Deeble seems to think if he publishes countless internet search lists on various subjects that the reader or listener might succomb to his "baffle them with bullshit" technique. Ben has not "connected the dots" as he says , to show any "good science" connecting his list with the proposal to ban lead shot in Montana's WMAs. He only lists countless unrelated studies hoping the reader or listener will tire and nod off, accepting his conclusions, which were arrived at without any "good science".

If Ben Deeble is intested in "good science" will he explain why , after maybe 80 years or so of South Dakota using lead shot for pheasants, South Dakota had the best pheasant season on record a few years ago. That is a good case study on lead shot and pheasants.

I think we all suspect that Ben, who willingly admits to depositing lead shot in Montana, but at his chosen sites, is not really in this fight , except to rattle enough sabres to get some "grant Money" for a study on the subject. I admonish all of you to watch closely the activities of Ben Deeble's employer, the National Wildlife Federation, and , I think, the Montana chapter of the same. These people solicit your funding -----how would you like your donations spent ?

http://www.bakercollectors.com/