These studies are nothing more than yet another tactic to greatly curtail and even ban hunting. Like others have posted the whole "Killing the Eagles" argument is nonsense.
I am 62 and have seen far more eagles in recent years than I ever did as a kid in the 1970's. The same can be said for hawks, buzzards, owls, and other predators. I can't say the same for ducks, however.
Bills were introduced last year in both Maine and New York to ban lead ammunition, and both were defeated. One of the arguments that the anti's were using in both bills was that non-toxic alternatives were both readily available and on-par cost wise with lead ammunition. This is partially true.
While steel shot has come a long way, is readily available, and reasonably priced the other non-toxic alternatives such as Bismuth and Tungsten-Matrix are not. As we all know, steel shot is not suitable for many or our vintage and or tightly-choked guns.
While also true that many manufacturers are producing non-toxic projectile rifle cartridges, they tend to be in the most popular or best-selling calibers. Not everyone hunts with a .270, .30-06, or 7mm. The guy who hunts with a .32 Special, .35 Remington, or say a .348 Winchester is out of luck with any ban on lead ammunition. It is doubtful that the major manufacturers will eventually load these older calibers with non-toxic projectiles.
What about the traditional muzzleloading hunter? And what I mean by traditional are those who use a flintlock or percussion muzzleloader using loose powder and a patched roundball. A lead ban puts them out of business as well. Yes, they produce a non-toxic projectile for the modern in-line type of rifles, but they are not suitable for the traditional rifles.
Factor in this crazy ammunition shortage and a lead ban puts a whole lot of hunters on the sidelines. Some outdoor writers have even jumped on the non-toxic bandwagon promoting it as "the right thing to do." It may be, but they are not thinking about some of the scenarios I mention.
Never give the anti's any sort of little victory. They will never stop. If it is not a ban on lead ammunition it will be something else. And if they get a ban on lead ammunition it will be something else.
We as hunters and conservationist have always done more for wildlife and habitat than the anti's ever have. We are also far more efficient at policing ourselves.
Eventually we will wean ourselves off of lead ammunition. It is inevitable. However, it should be gradual and voluntary, never mandated.
