Lead Ban

[David BASC]

Hi, the LAG is not a ‘BASC’ group, it’s a Defra group,

 

It is not being funded by BASC so the accusation that we are spending members money on it is unfounded.

 

It is not just a one year project, as far as I am aware

 

Questions on the LAG should be addressed to the LAG, not to me, I only know what you know, from what’s on the LAG web site.

 

Contact the LAG here: info@leadammunitiongroup.co.uk

 

BASC’s position on lead is exactly the same as it’s always been, we will keep fighting to keep lead shot.

 

Graham has, I am afraid, got some of his facts wrong, in 1990 when the proposed lead ban came I do not remember the other organisations doing anything! The CA did do a couple of joint press releases with BASC though…

 

It was BASC that delayed the implementation of the ban for over 10 years! But in the end the government had no option but to act, but at least it gave the cartridge manufactures 10 years to develop new forms of shot.

 

Yes lead shot restrictions are an international issue – look up the details under AEWA on the internet, there is also here the original research on lead poisoning of water birds.

 

There are non toxic airgun pellets, there were on test in an airgun mag this month, and worked well from what I have read

 

Best wishes

 

David

Edited September 29, 2010 by David BASC

[anser2]

As I have said mammals do not suffer from lead poisoning in the same manner at birds . That’s why you have not found and dead foxes. A bird has no teeth. Instead it picks up grit and stores it in the crop. The crop grinds food up between the grit by squeezing. Birds can pick up lead pellets by mistake for grit and when grinding down food the soft lead also wears down and then dissolves into the bloodstream. A fox rips food off its victim and gulps it down only briefly chewing the tougher bits. The pellets enter the digestive whole and remain so and usually pass through untouched. I do not know it this can happen in foxes , but my father became ill many years ago and it was found that a number of lead pellets had lodged in his appendix from birds that I had shot. I do not think this is normal ( perhaps some DRs on here can comment ) but it can happen.

 

As for using no 6 lead pellets as the norm for goose shooting , I for one and every book , article or experienced shot will tell you they are not a suitable shot size for goose shooting. I have been caught on the hop when duck flighting and shot the odd goose at very close range with no 6 , but beyond 30 yards no 6 are more likely to wound than kill wild geese. There are many times in the past when I have plucked wild geese that I have shot with no 3 or no 1 only to find a number of small lead pellets lodged just under the skin. I can remember one poor pink foot that had 7 number 6s in its body from at least two old wounds. I should add here I have shot a hell lot of geese of all species over the years , probably far too many.

 

And steel shells are similar price and in some cases cheaper than lead shells now.

Edited September 29, 2010 by anser2

[anser2]

Blazer , If you took the trouble to read the many links i posted on here a few months ago you would know the evidence against lead pellets. I suggest you do a web search or look back for the old links. As for banning lead for shotgun shooting " finnishing shooting as we know it " thats rubbish sheer rubbish. If i remember rightly you do not shoot live birds anyway. A much bigger threat it if we all stick our heads in the sand and cry " we will not use steel " public opinion will make a much better job of banning shooting than a mear change of ammunition.

 

The loss of lead for wildfowling has had very little effect on wildfowling today. We now have guns and ammunition that are more than able to do the job.

Edited September 29, 2010 by anser2

[Elby]

As I have said mammals do not suffer from lead poisoning in the same manner at birds . That’s why you have not found and dead foxes. A bird has no teeth. Instead it picks up grit and stores it in the crop. The crop grinds food up between the grit by squeezing. Birds can pick up lead pellets by mistake for grit and when grinding down food the soft lead also wears down and then dissolves into the bloodstream. A fox rips food off its victim and gulps it down only briefly chewing the tougher bits. The pellets enter the digestive whole and remain so and usually pass through untouched. I do not know it this can happen in foxes , but my father became ill many years ago and it was found that a number of lead pellets had lodged in his appendix from birds that I had shot. I do not think this is normal ( perhaps some DRs on here can comment ) but it can happen.

 

As for using no 6 lead pellets as the norm for goose shooting , I for one and every book , article or experienced shot will tell you they are not a suitable shot size for goose shooting. I have been caught on the hop when duck flighting and shot the odd goose at very close range with no 6 , but beyond 30 yards no 6 are more likely to wound than kill wild geese. There are many times in the past when I have plucked wild geese that I have shot with no 3 or no 1 only to find a number of small lead pellets lodged just under the skin. I can remember one poor pink foot that had 7 number 6s in its body from at least two old wounds. I should add here I have shot a hell lot of geese of all species over the years , probably far too many.

Many birds take on shot and don't die.

We can all list things shot where we have found pellets under the skin, I've found many deer like that.

I think taking geese witn no6 shot encourages better shot placement.

Amazing how the Pinkfoot you found with all that lead in it never died of poisoning.

You say you have probably shot far too many geese over the years, can you tell me how many of the geese that kept going have taken on some of your shot?

[BlaserF3]

anser2,

 

That is your view and your view only about lead pellets, there is NO scientific evidence in the UK at all for a lead shot ban.

 

Hell fire man who needs enemies when you are on here.

 

No wonder any unity is pointless for shooters, all that happens is that we argue amongst our selves, I do not need to shoot at wildfowl to find that steel works for you, I only shoot clays but if all lead shot is banned that will affect me.

 

David BASC,

 

I know this is a World wide issue but do we have to roll over every time?

 

What were the air rifle pellets made from?

[Elby]

I should add here I have shot a hell lot of geese of all species over the years , probably far too many.

That's just bragging so I think I should add, my father was in the building trade for most of his life.

He was useless when he started and useless when he retired

[David BASC]

Hi Blaser,

 

I don't think anyone is rolling their eyes, indeed far from it. The CA, GTA and BASC are together on making sure there are no restrictions on lead shot unless there is clear scientific evidence to show there is a problem. If such evidence comes up than of course we would have to assess how to deal with it, but that does not necessarily mean a ban as far as I can see?

 

For example, some people die or get very ill if they eat nuts - do we ban nuts? No, we label food accordingly.

 

Some young people are very susceptible to a chemical called Phenylalanine– found in many fizzy drinks for example and some sweeteners- do we ban it? No we label foods accordingly.

 

At the CLA, Mark Avery from the RSPB said that he could not see any threats to human health from lead in game.

 

As far as I can see the EFSA 5 year study could not find any significant threats to humans from eating game shot with lead…

 

As to the airgun pellets, they are made of Zink, brand name Thunderbolt, in 177 they weigh in at about 8 grains! MV over 1000fps and ME average of 11.26 fps, through an SMK deluxe, which produced 11.33 fps with Crossman premiers.

 

Grouping was a tad better with the thunderbolts compared to the prems, and worked well on rabbits at 30 -35m, which frankly is about max range for a sub FAC airgun in my view.

 

The tester was a professional pest controller.

 

David

[al4x]

This argument is all a little flawed, of we accept Ducks get lead poisoning simply because they sift through silt to feed and once they ingest it the way a ducks guts work means it gets worked against grit which slowly disolves it and can kill. Thats the theory in practice I've never seen any evidence.

I think where Elby is coming from is the law is an *** issue, we can shoot pheasants over a pond with lead and that is legal yet when you shoot over land where it won't do any harm you can't shoot ducks with lead. The whole law is not properly thought out or written, the Scottish situation makes far more sense

[sitsinhedges]

Hi Blaser,

 

I don't think anyone is rolling their eyes, indeed far from it. The CA, GTA and BASC are together on making sure there are no restrictions on lead shot unless there is clear scientific evidence to show there is a problem. If such evidence comes up than of course we would have to assess how to deal with it, but that does not necessarily mean a ban as far as I can see?

 

For example, some people die or get very ill if they eat nuts - do we ban nuts? No, we label food accordingly.

 

Some young people are very susceptible to a chemical called Phenylalanine– found in many fizzy drinks for example and some sweeteners- do we ban it? No we label foods accordingly.

 

At the CLA, Mark Avery from the RSPB said that he could not see any threats to human health from lead in game.

 

As far as I can see the EFSA 5 year study could not find any significant threats to humans from eating game shot with lead…

 

As to the airgun pellets, they are made of Zink, brand name Thunderbolt, in 177 they weigh in at about 8 grains! MV over 1000fps and ME average of 11.26 fps, through an SMK deluxe, which produced 11.33 fps with Crossman premiers.

 

Grouping was a tad better with the thunderbolts compared to the prems, and worked well on rabbits at 30 -35m, which frankly is about max range for a sub FAC airgun in my view.

 

The tester was a professional pest controller.

 

David

 

Taking away our choice of airgun pellets aswell now and replacing them with something that won't retain its power at any range. Brilliant!

 

I was going to join the BASC but you wont be seeing a penny of my money until this thing is done and dusted and lead remains as it is.

[wymberley]

David BASC, hi,

Some years ago I was asked by the manufacturer to field test some zinc loads. They performed on a par (ish) with the then made steel and as the steel has apparently improved, no doubt the zinc would have as well. However, am I not right in believing that it was knocked on the head due to being toxic?

In view of your bit about the airgun pellets, I'm either wrong or just plain confused.

Cheers

[al4x]

interestingly it probably wouldn't kill you but if you fed shot game to your dog it might well kill them. Cracking suggestion

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc_toxicity

[Bazooka Joe]

The RSPB are the instigators of this and I believe it was done with the intentions of mischief making to try and stop as much shooting as possible. The RSPB has the backing of 2,300,0000 members and has enormous financial backing as well as the ears of many antis in government. They didn’t just put this idea forward as a bit of a lark or to pass the time of day. It was proposed as a genuine way to stop the use of lead and to make it as expensive as possible (and therefore cutting down the numbers of shooters) to shoot.

 

 

I've said this from day one, they cannot ban shooting head on, so they've got there heads together & come in the backdoor so to speak.

 

BJ

[David BASC]

Good morning sitsinhedges

 

No one is taking away your choice of airgun pellets. I am a keen airgunner and I will keep using lead, I have no intention of changing!

 

If you read the article in Airgun Shooter mag, the tester found the pellets grouped absolutely fine and dispatched rabbits at normal hunting ranges.

 

Muzzle energy is a function of speed and weight, its lighter, so it goes faster and flatter, or so the tester found. Please don’t shoot the messenger!

 

Yes Al4x I agree that this is the point being made, and personally I agree the system in Scotland makes much more sense, and is easier and more practical to comply with.

 

Best wishes

 

David

[Bazooka Joe]

Yes Al4x I agree that this is the point being made, and personally I agree the system in Scotland makes much more sense, and is easier and more practical to comply with.

 

 

So it begs the question David, WHY has England not got the same Law then ?

 

BJ

[Elby]

So it begs the question David, WHY has England not got the same Law then ?

 

BJ

Because we won't do anything that the Jocks thought of first.

I would like to know if a lead ban comes in what would we do for expanding ammo?

[Graham M]

Muzzle energy is a function of speed and weight, its lighter, so it goes faster and flatter

 

And slows down a hell of a lot faster as well David.

 

We all know that a 40grn bullet comes out of a CF rifle a lot faster than a 55 grn bullet. but it doesn't retain its energy as well.

 

Copper is now being offered as an alternative deer bullet, but I have seen many shooters who swear that they are not as effective as lead due to not expanding over longer distances. Some have even complained that they go straight through at shorter distances, so what does this do to inspire confidence. And if you want to use a .308 for deer then at @ £77 per 100, they ain’t exactly cheap (and please don’t point out Nosler partitions as being the same sort of price, because I refuse to buy those as well because of their stupid price).

 

G.M.

[anser2]

Lead pellets under the skin does not cause lead poisoning Elby. It has to enter the digestive system. I have found pellets of other sizes under the skin in wild geese from no 7s to BBs , but 90% of them have been number 6. Probably shot at by people shooting pigeons who could not be bothered to change to a more suitable cartridge. At 40 - 50 yards no 6 , unless it hits the goose in the neck or head is unlikely to have enough energy to go through the breast meat to the vital organs and produce a killing blow.

 

Blazer if you read the links I posted up you would have found its not just my view. Have you used modern steel cartridges to shoot a live bird ? If as I suspect the answer is no then how can you offered an informed opinion. Its like saying you do not like the taste of bananas when you have never tasted them.

 

God help the future of shooting if we all thought like that.

 

Its a big myth that banning lead will stop shooting. It did not stop wildfowling and it will not stop other shotgun shooting.

 

Scotland does not have the same laws as England because its a devolved country and can make many of its own laws.

Edited September 29, 2010 by anser2

[David BASC]

Good afternoon Graham

Yes the Zink pellets will slow faster, but as the tester found they were still grouping well and delivering a killing blow at 35m on rabbit, I guess that is the most important thing

 

I am aware that some do not get on with copper for deer and others do- I have no experience of copper so I can't comment, but I know its been discussed at some length on the SD.

 

BJ

Yes Scotland is devolved and has different laws on lead shot, their restrictions are based on RAMSAR definitions of wetlands.. their laws came into effect a few years after England, and indeed after the 2002 compliance checks in England – see here: http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/game...onlead-shot.cfm for the info, time scales etc. Laws are not set in stone and can be amended of course…

 

David

[Elby]

Lead pellets under the skin does not cause lead poisoning Elby. It has to enter the digestive system. I have found pellets of other sizes under the skin in wild geese from no 7s to BBs , but 90% of them have been number 6. Probably shot at by people shooting pigeons who could not be bothered to change to a more suitable cartridge. At 40 - 50 yards no 6 , unless it hits the goose in the neck or head is unlikely to have enough energy to go through the breast meat to the vital organs and produce a killing blow.

And there you have it, like I said, encourages people to produce better shot placement.

So lead under the skin cannot get into the blood stream?

[anser2]

And there you have it, like I said, encourages people to produce better shot placement.

So lead under the skin cannot get into the blood stream?

 

 

There are or rather were a lot of people walking about after the last two world wars with bits of lead in their bodies. A bit painful perhaps but lead in the body tissues does not neccessarly kill you. But when even small amounts get into the digestive system it will kill birds .

 

Sounds as though you are the only goose shooter in the world who can always place their shot pattern on a gooses head with almost every shot they take. I cant and i have never met anyone else who can.

[Elby]

There are or rather were a lot of people walking about after the last two world wars with bits of lead in their bodies. A bit painful perhaps but lead in the body tissues does not neccessarly kill you. But when even small amounts get into the digestive system it will kill birds . Which you have no real evidence of cos predators eat them all

 

Sounds as though you are the only goose shooter in the world who can always place their shot pattern on a gooses head with almost every shot they take. I cant and i have never met anyone else who can.

Did I say that?

Sounds as you are the only goose shooter in the world who never misses a body shot.

Really Anser putting words into peoples mouths is not a reasoned argument.

Ok so answer me this: if I have a field that wildfowl never land on to feed but must fly over to get to their feeding ground, why would it be better for me to use non toxic?

Edited September 29, 2010 by Elby

[Terry P]

I can only speak from my own expieriences where steel is concerned and how it has effected my sport. I mainly shoot duck and the occ goose and mainly on the foreshore,I can hand on heart say the lead ban on wildfowl in no way riuned my sport. I use a 3" shell on the foreshore and a 2 3/4 on the odd flight pond,I use the same 2 3/4 for any rough shooting I do and believe its made no difference,I still miss some,hit some some,clean kill most and injure some.

I'm a member of BASC and belive they will do what they can for lead,if they fail it will not be just them but ALL the organisations that are involved that have tried but lost the fight to keep lead.

I don't want to see lead banned and believe we should fight to keep the right to use it,but if not then its not the end of anyones shooting.

[anser2]

First of all there is a huge amount of evidence with many papers published that show that lead pellets do kill birds through ingestion. Just search the web and you will find them or look back through past posts on this subject in this forum.

 

I clearly stated my kill ratio using non toxic shot for geese.

 

Elby to quote your comment "Which you have no real evidence of cos predators eat them all " . To prove that comment as I already pointed out scatter 25 pigeons about a marsh and see how many you can find a week later. This experiment has been done and the results were very very few.

 

 

Secondly you and I might be honest enough to use the right shot type per species , but many people are not. Anyone caught with a duck or goose shot with lead over wetland can simply claim they shot them over a dry field. Thus the law becomes unenforceable. The only workable way for the law is a blanket ban. As far as I know nobody has been prosecuted for using lead for shooting wildfowl in Scotland for this very reason. When the lead ban came into force I was one of its hardest critics after all wildfowling takes place over places where there is a need for a cartridge with the greatest ballistic potential. Now we have the cartridges that as good or in the case of Hevi-shot far better than lead ever was and there is no ballistic excuse not to use non toxic shells.

 

No matter what BASC does I think a ban on lead pellets is coming within the next decade , world wide , developed countries are moving towards it or have adopted it. There seems little point to try and turn the tide of overwhelming evidence and though I will carry on using lead until that time I for one will not be too dismayed when lead is banned. Its been removed from almost every part of our environment because of its dangers so how can the shooting community stand against common sense.

 

The result of shooting the goose with lead over farmland in England is breaking the law , the environmental effect might be no more than shooting a pigeon with lead , but it would encourage anyone shooting wildfowl where ever it may be to use lead. This would bring back the dangers of lead poisoning to our wildfowl.

 

I want my children and granchildren to have the option to shoot if they want to but , if we are going to continue to shoot into the future public perception of our sport is very important and any widespread belief by the public that we are poisoning birds as well as shooting them will have but one result. The banning of live shooting.

Edited September 29, 2010 by anser2

[al4x]

silly question here anser but you mention no prosecutions in Scotland, have there been many south of the border? as to me its still likely to be unenforceable.

[MC]

And there you have it, like I said, encourages people to produce better shot placement.

So lead under the skin cannot get into the blood stream?

 

 

I have a lead pellet lodged in my finger, it has been there about 20 years and I am not dead yet.