doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com EPIC Game Fair vs Vintage Cup Exhibitors

This repeats something I posted in the "Steel In Vintage Doubles" thread, but I think it helps explain what is at stake in the the Foxhall situation:

_____

In the lead vs steel debate, I think we get too narrowly focused on how a lead ban might affect certain guns and hunting targets. One of the issues that gets overlooked too often, is that beyond the question of how steel affects the gun, how would it affect the sport of clay shooting and our access to it?

As gunwriter Michael Yardley points out, "We might also consider the implications to clay shooting. If lead were banned, sporting clay shooting would become a very different game. The challenging, rangy, birds seen at today�s shoots would have to go � you just can�t hit them consistently with steel. Some forms of trap shooting would be severely affected too."

To Yardley's point that banning lead would change the sport of sporting clays, it would not only change the guns & targets, it would also change the courses.

One of Marty Fischer's comments to Stan on the Foxhall situation is: "Some have suggested that steel loads are unsafe because of pellets richocheting off of trees and coming back to the shooter. When I designed the course at Foxhall, that was taken into consideration, and no targets are presented where any trees will be shot in the normal course of fire"

Marty is one of the most respected course designers in the country, and I don't know if the "no trees" policy is a set in stone rule at all "steel only" courses, but if "lead free" means "tree free" - and I'm sure the lawyers for resort developers, anti-gunners and enviros will say it should be - I know most of the venues and targets I like most would be ruled out. I suspect flat surfaces such as rabbit targets and pond targets might be ruled out in many cases as well.

I think of most of the courses I shoot at: Hausmans, Deep River, Homestead, Orvis Sandanona, M&M, Lehigh Valley (which also shoots at old stone buildings), Old Forge, Dover Furnace (which has rocky hillsides) my two local county courses, and most resort courses; all except possibly Pintail Point (which does have water and flat surfaces) have lots of trees, as well as ponds and flat surfaces --- the very things that make them interesting places to shoot. I wonder what the impact on them would be if there were a national lead ban and if they could continue under a steel mandate?

For me, trees and terrain are what make these courses most interesting to shoot, asthetically pleasing, and frankly, cooler in the summer.

If that were all gone, it would be a much less interesting sport, and I suspect in much of the country, particularly along the east coast, a much less accessible one as well.

This is very interesting. The EPIC folks and Marty Fischer have pointed to the steel shot only policy at nearby Blalock Shooting Club as evidence that Foxhall is just like its neighboring development. Turns out Blalock tried to get out of its steel only policy because Orvis refused to run it as a steel only course. Unfortunately, they apparently couldn't get the change past the local zoning board and withdrew the proposal. Interesting to see Orvis arguing that steel is unacceptable to shooters.

Orvis may run Blalock shooting range
The Times-Herald, Published Monday, August 31, 2009

Western Coweta residents who feel their quality of life has been damaged by the sport shooting activities at the Blalock Lakes development hope to convince Coweta County not to allow a change they fear would make things even worse and harm the environment. The Blalock Lakes Homeowners Association wants to turn over management of its controversial hunting and shooting club to Orvis, a well-known outdoor company. Orvis will only agree to the deal if the condition prohibiting the use of lead shot is removed.

.....When plans for the Blalock Lakes community were submitted in 2005, the applicants, Cousins Properties, planned to exclusively use steel shot. Only steel shot can be used for duck and goose hunting -- federal law prohibits even possessing lead shot when hunting waterfowl. When the Blalock Lakes plan was first announced, and afterward, it was much praised by local officials, as a wonderful and unique thing for Coweta, a rural ideal. In early planning department review, though, planners expressed concern that the market would not support the Blalock concept, and worried what would come when the developers sought changes.

The private, gated community consists of almost 3,000 acres and would have a maximum of 399 lots. In addition to the hunting and shooting club, there would be fishing and equestrian facilities. Some lots at Blalock were priced at $1 million -- just for the lot. A lifetime hunt club membership is $10,000. Plans were approved in 2006, and nearby residents began to be impacted by the shooting club noise in 2007. Currently, there are four houses in Blalock Lakes.

The planning department report on the current request states that Blalock is pursuing the Orvis agreement "in an effort to add value to the development." ...

Orvis wants the ability to use lead shot for three reasons, according to the report. Steel shot performs differently than lead shot because of its lower density, and is "an unacceptable alternative with competitive shooters."

Steel shot causes greater damage to guns than lead shot. Because guns can cost up to $100,000, avid shooters will not participate in facilities that do not allow lead.

And, thirdly, alternative sites in Georgia allow lead and "this would place Orvis in a competitive disadvantage if lead shot is not allowed."
...
Full Story:
http://www.times-herald.com/Local/Orvis-may-run-Blalock-shooting-range-843511

The internet newspaper websites are a real hoot. More than once on just this thread, we have had newspaper website links that give absolutely no hint of the location of the newspaper. They could be Nebraska newspapers as far as we would know. And how about the substitution of the word "steel" for "lead" in the seventeenth paragraph. The idiots running the newspaper and the website expect us to count down seventeen paragraphs in the article to find their error. All these big bucks sporting communities seem to have financial as well as resident problems. I guess 3000 acres isn't big enough to avoid noise complaints from outside. Wait until the resident complaints start to come in. Ted Turner and Sam Donaldson had the right idea. Buy some real property if you want to shoot. See you at the Vintagers. Bill Murphy

Feeling contrarian today. We agree lead is bad stuff. Danger is related to exposure. Steel presents different problems. Society says we must use it. Lawmakers regulate its use, changing the way we "do" shooting sports.

Everything's changing. Obesity's taking over as major health problem. We drive to gun clubs and shoot under controlled conditions as contrived as pinball machines. Rarely are hunters a kilometre off the roads.

Our countries are emptying to cities; most newcomers taking in each other's wash. But not enough public land to practise skills and stretch legs for successful hunts? Has it come down to shooting at bits of clay because of no land?

Media has a lot to answer for. But I think most of the moans about the shooting sports in a rapidly changing world is a part of a fanciful notion of those who have subordinated interest in getting out for the hunt to driving to the range.

Guess I'll be contrary, too, King. I don't agree that "lead is bad stuff", and danger from lead is primarily from ingestion of the substance or fumes. Lead exposure isn't nearly as dangerous as driving the highways.

Obesity is a self-controllable issue, not regulated, yet.

Gun clubs need rules and regulations for everyone's safety and enjoyment. Gentlemanly conduct makes most of these rules unnecessary down heah'.

Where I live the opposite is true, city folks are flocking to the country, not the other way around. Why would anybody WANT to live in a city anyway?

Plenty of public land around. Most hunters just don't avail themselves of it because, as you said, they don't want to get any distance from their truck, because of their obesity I guess.

There were clay pigeon clubs long before private land got posted. Their existence has nothing to do with a lack of available land to hunt on.

Most importantly, what has the steel/lead debate got to do with whether or not people would rather hunt or shoot at the range?

SRH

Could not have said it any better, Stan. Your observations are true and obvious.

King: one thing to remember-clay shooting is a GAME that allows us to use our shotguns in the offseason. It's fun and certainly nothing like an "either/or" choice between hunting. Not much wingshooting from March 1 to September 1.
JR

I've got a rather romantic notion that I might try and attend this...if I am well enough. It'll be 2 months after my surgery and it would be something to look forward to. If lots of people I've got to know on here are going it will be a further incentive.

Regards,
Tony

Thanks for the replies. I'm with you in spirit. Too much of any thing is lethal; the same applies to lead or water. That's why I used the qualifier of exposure.

I don't look down on off-season for improving skills. What was getting my goat is hand-wringing about steel's effects on the games. Everything is changing.

The biggest change I've seen in the shooting sports is how many now consider a modicum of effort beyond their comfort zone in hunting birds or game.

That's a bigger problem for our sport than steel's influence on anything.

By all means do so if your condition allows it, Tony. Just be prepared for a letdown in comparison to the UK Game Fair. You need to get a good dose of Georgia's September heat and humidity along with a heaping helping of NASCAR rednecks. Got Skoal?
JR

King, I think for this crowd, we're particularly sensitive to steel because of its potential effect on our guns and our ability to shoot them, without paying $3 per shell. Personally, I have no problem with nontox requirements where they are reasonable, based on biological/environmental factors. In most cases, depositing lead shot on dry land does not constitute a hazard to either wildlife or humans. But there are some who want to push us down the path to regulating lead like we regulate second hand tobacco smoke. The hazards posed by the two are totally different.