doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Public commentary to MN DNR.

I guess the whole point I've been trying to make is that we should not be demanding the anti-lead people to produce evidence so much as we should be illuminating the false narrative that's already been tried.

If we demand evidence, they will produce it... and as we have seen, much of it will be agenda driven and not factual. Who will be vetting this evidence and verifying that the data is not fudged? Who will be there during an eagle's autopsy to refute that the actual cause of death was absolutely lead from shot or bullets? There is already a great deal of evidence that lead shot and other lead ammunition is not much, if any, of a real problem. It is manufactured hysteria aimed at making hunting and shooting less affordable and less appealing. Instead of waiting for lead bans to happen, and then starting threads on shotgun forums whining about the high cost or unavailability of bismuth or tungsten, it would be better to spend that time now, contacting your legislators and educating yourself on the issue.

If you think a lot of this inferior non-tox shot is expensive and hard to find now, just wait until lead bans cause greater demand for it. And what do you suppose will be the next step? They will go after bismuth because it can interfere with soil bacteria, and tungsten is linked to immune system suppression. Even copper is toxic and has been linked to the deaths of some California Condors. Anti-gunners will never stop with handguns, and anti-hunting forces will never stop with lead.

These anti-lead people are trying hard to discredit and demonize us. The best way to counter those kinds of dirty tricks is to catch them in their lies and take away their credibility. The global warming people kept a very low profile for a long time after the big scandal about falsified evidence came out. But they gradually became emboldened to make another run when the scandal was largely forgotten. It is no different with lead ammunition.

Well Keith . . . I did that in my articles on lead vs nontox. Pointed out where they were wrong about "steel is OK in any modern shotgun". Pointed out the results of the ND study on lead levels in humans. Pointed out that there is little or no evidence that lead ingestion is a problem for upland birds, with the possible exception of doves on heavily-hunted fields. (One reason lead isn't a problem for upland birds in general is because shot fall, which can be quite concentrated where waterfowl are concerned, is seldom concentrated in upland habitats.) And with the possible exception of scavengers, including eagles.

If they can produce evidence, then we can review it and poke holes in those areas where they're wrong. I've seldom seen any efforts from game biologists to intentionally "cook the books" where lead is concerned. They tend to refer to "potential" harm . . . at which point we can always say: "So show us the quail, grouse, pheasants, whatever that have died from lead poisoning." The Nontoxic Shot Advisory Committee to the MN DNR even admitted the difficulty involved in gathering evidence that lead is a problem where upland birds are concerned. A refreshing bit of honesty . . . as opposed to "We know they must be out there dying somewhere." Which is essentially what the WI Natural Resources Board said when they were pushing nontox shot only on all DNR managed lands.

I'm also eagerly awaiting the blind study on lead vs steel on upland birds, like pheasants for example. Given that steel is the only available alternative that's not outrageously expensive, and that we already know steel is ballistically inferior to lead, show us that steel won't result in more crippled and lost upland birds in comparison to lead.

The anti-lead people have a lot of work to do. We need to force them to do it rather than just spouting the "lead is poison so we should get rid of it" line.

I believe these are two assumption that may not necessarily be true. 'They' get a lot of mileage in significant influential circles, are opportunistic and relentless as need be, and will not be forced into very much at all. If 'they' lose, it's not through acceptance of overwhelming proof, it's just a road bump on the way to the next round.

I do believe your research is note worthy, but about a page back you mentioned about 'the hunting/gun lobby starting to make some noise', so that the politicians are 'more likely' to listen. I can't recall any study or analysis that'll stir 'em up. I keep wondering why there's no effort to even 'start' the noise, and rather just focus on 'studies' conducted by the folks who want ever more restrictions.

The comment period ended in mid-December. I expect the DNR will brush aside the adverse opinions and move ahead to implement the lead shot restrictions.

If that happens, I with many other hunters will be pushing our governor and state legislators to stop it. But I have some doubt we'll be able to fire up enough political heat. Most uninformed people don't care enough about the facts to learn them, and all too many hunters seem willing to accept the line that lead is poison so let's be good to the environment and stop using it.

Hope I'm wrong.

Jay

Chas,
In the event you hear about the DNR running at that, let us on the boards know, that we might be in contact with those in elected office. I'll do the same. I saw nothing in opposition run in the editorial section of the Red Star, and I know several who voiced that opinion to the paper, myself included.
Maybe they hope we will just go away.

Best,
Ted

I'm afraid most will just run down to Wally world and buy themselves a $200 dollar Remington Express with their 10% off all sporting goods after Christmas coupon and a couple boxes of steel shells and think no more about it.

"The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."-- Plato

When we FINALLY got a dove season in Iowa, the Natural Resources Commission voted that it should be nontox only. We got that one fixed via the politicians. However, having a Republican governor (who's a hunter) and one of the two legislative houses in Republican control did help.

Be on the alert. They will keep coming after lead.

All risks have to be identified and viewed from every angle because I feel that hunter indifference and complacency is probably the greatest threat.

In my opinion, only when the states start looking at banning lead rifle and pistol bullets will enough hunters finally sound off and say enough to this bogus science.

I too sent an email opposing the mandate.