Boy oh boy Larry, you are the Energizer Bunny of supporting the junk science of the anti-lead people and countering actual instances of the Audobon Society supporting lead ammunition bans.
"Fair and Balanced"??? Where is the Fair and Balanced treatment from the anti-lead and anti-hunting people? You seem to be going out of your way to help them. Why? What are they doing to help us? Do you consider it a fair trade-off if a few Audobon people contribute a small fraction of what hunters contribute to habitat improvement if the other side of your balanced equation includes ammunition bans and the inability to use our vintage doubles?
I have agreed that the presence of a lead bullet fragment or lead shot pellet in a bird or animal may slightly elevate the blood lead level of that animal. But you seem to also be going out of your way to deny that many other sources of lead are much more bio-available than chunks of elemental lead from ammunition. It is well known that pieces of shot or bullet fragments are more likely to simply pass through the digestive system before they can leach out enough toxicity to be anything but a very minor contributing factor. Once again Larry, lead dust from mining waste and decades of burning leaded gas, and soluble forms of lead from paints and pesticides are much more easily absorbed by ingestion, breathing, drinking, and physical contact.
Your example of lead shot being forced downward into the soil by riding lawn-mowers is really reaching to make excuses that give aid and comfort to the anti-lead side. I haven't seen many riding mowers around lake shores, swamps, or even in the fields and woods where I do my upland bird hunting.
I have already spoken to your question about waterfowl ceasing to die from lead poisoning after the Federal lead shot ban. I do not believe it was ever the serious problem it was portrayed to be by agenda driven propagandists. I talked about those heart wrenching pictures of dead and dying ducks and (supposedly) lead poisoned staggering geese. All of that drama stopped after the anti-lead people got what they wanted. But the lead shot that had been fired into the water and shorelines for hundreds of years was still there. It is still there now Larry. Nobody has gone out there and cleaned it all up... probably millions of tons of the stuff. It is still churned up by storms and wave action, and frost heaving. If lead was the problem back then, it would stand to reason that there would still be a high incidence of lead poisoned ducks now. The lead is still there in their environment where they eat, drink, and swim. Once again Larry, the drama stopped after the anti-lead people got what they wanted. Then they moved on to use the same propaganda and junk science to attempt to ban lead in upland and other hunting areas. Are you going to continue to help them? So far, suggesting that you stop shooting us in the foot hasn't done any good.
So what about all of those propaganda pictures of dead and dying waterfowl in pre-ban times? You ask what was killing them then that is not killing them now? Uh, how about old age, disease, parasites, and a hundred other things that have been killing ducks and keeping ducks from being immortal for thousands of years before guns were ever invented? These are mostly migratory birds that travel to countries that have not banned lead shot. Between the lead shot that is still being used elsewhere, and the lead shot that was deposited by over two centuries of waterfowl hunting here, they should be too sick to fly. Have you read about the massive numbers of doves in Argentina and the massive amounts of lead ammunition that is fired at them. With that massive volume of lead, they should all be dead or dying from lead poisoning too.
I am not trying to be "Fair and Balanced" with the anti-lead and anti-hunting forces. I am doing what I can to counter propaganda and junk science. So is craigd. What you are doing is supporting the anti-lead position, and almost assures that there will be more lead ammunition bans.
