doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com More about the lead controversy

I see you are having a bad day. Oh well, keep at it and eventually you will have completely altered your own little reality and everything will be peachy again...

Brent, The NH wildife agency was staffed by visionaries 25 years ago. Long before there were any lead shot bans they floated the idea of a Dove season. It was shot down and agreed to be never brought up again after bird feeding animal lovers threatened to post their land to hunting. So we don't have to worry about heavy concentrations of lead in the dove fields here. Never mind it's a bird with a documented winter mortality of nearly 90% is never to be hunted. There is politics and there is science, I for one have seen my rights diminished by too much of the former and little of the latter, and often the latter is agenda driven ie. liars figure. Sincerely, a skeptic.

Although I don't profess to be an expert, here are my credentials - take them for what you wish:
B.S. Degree in Zoology 1978
Two years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Upper Mississippi Wildlife Refuge and yes I worked with waterfowl, non-waterfowl species, Bald Eagles and upland birds.
-30 years of working in the water and wastewater treatment field as a technical specialist - and yes I have spent many, many hours working with lead contaminated water and sludge. I have worked on many lead removal projects from such waste streams as lead battery production facilities.

Here is what I know as fact.

Lead CAN be very toxic to birds and mammals. It is not always toxic, but it is sometimes toxic under certain circumstances. Lead is amphoteric, meaning it dissolves in both low pH and high environments. It is when it dissolves and ionizes that it becomes a toxicity problem. Lead pellets consumed by birds and mammals that quickly pass the pellets in their stool will most likely not have a problem unless they consume them on a regular basis. In a mammal, the acidic fluids in the digestive track will dissolve a small amount of lead each time one is ingested. Prolonged expossure to even small amounts of lead in the digestive system result in lead poisoning. That is why lead paint was such a problem with small children that chewed on lead painted toys and woodwork. In waterfowl and some upland game birds, the pellets end up in the gizzard where they stay for long periods of time where they are slowly dissolved causing lead poisoning and death. Lead shot with a protective oxide coating still dissolves in a low pH or high condition. And yes I have handled many live and dead waterfowl that had lead poisoning.

Now here my opinion - not fact on this issue.

Perhaps some people here feel it is there God given right to shoot whatever type of shot they want to. Perhaps they haven't seen, studied or understand the long term implications of something like this. There are some people that will contradict whatever scientific study is presented and some that are just paranoid and feel the government is always out to get them. I on the otherhand am willing to make sure that my children and my children's children do not have to clean up my messes. Because the vast majority of the studies indicate there CAN be a significant problem, I am willing to miss a few more birds and clay targets using non-tox shot. If it becomes too expensive to shoot - I will stop shooting because I value the resource more than I value shooting. And yes - I have hunted all types of game birds and big game for over 40 years. Remember the argument is not lead shot or nothing - it's lead shot or non-tox shot.

Brent, I'm not quite sure what you're saying. I think we may even agree. "Scientific evidence" on whether secondary lead shot ingested from eating carrion kills eagles may indeed have been accurate. May indeed still be accurate. But there is also very CLEAR evidence that whatever it was that used to kill eagles, there are a lot more of them around now than there were 20-25 years ago. They have recovered remarkably, as an endangered species.

So would you not agree that that is evidence that CURRENT restrictions on lead shot have worked, as far as eagles are concerned? And that in fact, the evidence offered by the eagle recovery would seem to indicate that again, as far as eagles are concerned, there really isn't any reason to expand lead shot restrictions? Further lead shot restrictions may indeed make sense to protect the condor, and in areas of concentrated dove hunting. But surely no one in his right mind can continue to use the eagle, given its recovery, as TODAY's poster bird for further lead shot restrictions.

Tom C.,

As a recently retired wildlife biologist of 32 years, and with over half of that working in wetland ecology, I applaud you for your synopsis of factual information re: lead poisoning. You've got it right, and 'No' argument there. At least there shouldn't be.

As for your opinion section though, I must genuinely ask what the harm is of using lead shot, on say, a managed (i.e. mined & recycled) clay shooting grounds when it can be demonstrated that the soil is not part of a jurisdictional wetland, nor is it strongly acidic or alkaline?

I ask this because some of us who shoot nothing but vintage guns at the rate of a hundred rounds a week (as I do), would be very hard put to support a shell bill of roughly $480.00 a month in order to maintain our hobby, wouldn't we? And 'why', I ask you, should we be compelled to do this via a future nation-wide ban when it is a 'no harm, no foul' situation for many, many such shooting grounds across the country?

I think I know the reason, and that is because it is much simpler for the 'bureaucratic mind' to punish everyone equally than to come up with a management plan that addresses the 10%? of the problems when and where they occur. Which is precisely how the non-tox mandate was handled two decades ago when it was openly conceded that not all wetlands were 'problem areas' in regard to lead pellet ingestion by waterfowl.

I'll leave the upland hunting scenario for someone else, and close by saying that not nearly all of us are as willing as you to forfeit our right to shoot these vintage guns......and probably won't be until it can be objectively proven that lead is a menace on every square meter of U.S. soil.

Rob Harris

Indeed, I do agree. I am afraid I misread your post. My apologies.

Brent

Would a resolution template like this be useful for people to route around to their organizations, local governments, and landowners groups?

"Whereas lead shot pellets are a traditional, common, and legal projectile for use in upland bird hunting in ___________ (your state); and

Whereas lead shot was banned in 1991 for all hunting of waterfowl nationwide, due to secondary poisoning of scavenging birds such as eagles and due to incidental poisoning of waterfowl ingesting spent pellets in wetlands;

Whereas lead pellets are often a preferred particle size for consumption by some birds as “grit,” and studies show that incidental poisoning of birds continues to occur in both wetland and upland environments due to both historical and current lead shot use;

Whereas lead shot is already prohibited from use on many waterfowl production areas, most federal wildlife refuges, and some state, private, and tribal lands;

Whereas upland birds, particularly pheasants are often hunted in wetlands and in shrinking locales offering liberal public access;

Whereas all modern shotguns are now engineered for the use of shotshells using steel shot, and other non-toxic ammunition alternatives are also available for vintage shotguns;

Whereas the efficacy and cost of most non-toxic shotshells for hunting is now comparable to the quality and cost of lead shotshells;

Whereas responsible hunters should always strive to minimize deleterious impacts to non-target species and habitats;

Whereas the use of non-toxic shotshells may be appreciated by some private landowners, and may protect the health of families eating large quantities of wild game;

Whereas the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Canada have already banned lead shot completely, and several U.S. states have enacted partial bans or are contemplating bans;

Now therefore, be it resolved that the ____________ (agency/organization/local govt.) request the __________ (appropriate
entity) to study the economic, social, environmental, and harvest impact of prohibiting the use of lead shot for all bird hunting in ________ (your state)."

Tom C.
Don't worry about you great grandkids kids they will have outlawed all guns and hunting by then so the discussion over whether or not to shoot lead shot is mute.

Tom being with a BS Degree is Zoology I was surprised you didn't mention DDT...Lead shot had nothing to do with the decline in Raptors and I imagine DDT hit the waterfowl hard too.

Little lame to bring lead paint and Battery manufacturing into this scenario...don't you think ?

I think the purpose of the above references was to illustrate previous experiences with lead toxicity. I am sitting on enough lead shot to last me 20 years and am loathe to change my habits, but accusing Mr. C of lameness is insulting to him and yourself.