Larry still seems to think that ducks and geese that ingest lead are much more susceptible to lead poisoning than pheasants or grouse.
If any researcher or whistle-blower ever does admit that lead shot was not a major source of lead poisoning in waterfowl, Larry will never accept it.
Translation of the above: First quote demonstrates clearly that Keith does not understand the difference between waterfowl and upland birds, and how they're hunted. Highly concentrated shot fall around places where waterfowl are hunted in addition to the way waterfowl feed makes it much more likely that waterfowl will ingest lead vs upland birds. Shot fall very scattered in upland habitats compared to waterfowl . . . and even where it's quite concentrated, very few birds end up ingesting lead. Evidence presented by me, from Tall Timbers quail research.
Second quote is a lame excuse for not being able to come up with even ONE contrarian scientist where the lead ban for waterfowl is concerned. There are scientists who believe climate change caused by human activity is junk science, and who say so. Anyone who prides himself on "research", like Keith does, should be able to come up with just ONE wildlife biologist who worked in the field back then and who's going to tell us that the lead ban was all a scam. Otherwise . . . we're looking at a vast conspiracy involving thousands. Many of whom are now retired and have nothing to lose. And vast conspiracies involving thousands are seldom vast conspiracies. It's like any other secret. The more people who know, the greater the chance someone will tell. The truth is out there . . . but since we haven't heard otherwise, maybe we already KNOW the truth.
