WWT Lead Shot Plans

[RossEM]

Mudpatten, nail hit right on the head. Thanks.

[BlaserF3]

Hi Poontang & Salopian, Maybe I should've written 'experienced' shot. These pheasants in my two videos were shot with 2 3/4" non-high performance steel cartridges (what the CIP call 'standard steel') Express 24g 20 bore. Of course I would not recommend using 3" cartridges with large shot sizes on smaller game as it would destroy the carcasses. To my knowledge, there is no 2 1/2" steel load commercially available, but there certainly would be if demand was high (e.g. if lead happens to be banned.) I've shot ground game with steel and haven't noticed any ricochet, but I know others who have.

 

Hi BlaserF3, to be fair that shot was a long one for me (I was egged on by the cameraman.) Poor judgement on my part, for which I apologise and it was picked up and dispatched within seconds.

However, that bird would not necessarily have been cleanly killed with lead. If you watch the wildfowl being shot with early steel loads in my last post, perhaps there are some better examples for you. I kind of resent your wounding/not sporting comments. It happens to us all, old chap.

 

Conveniently, you didn't post this one:

 

 

Was that one killed outright or wounded also?

[BlaserF3]

There is a lot of hand wringing going on about the apparently low,but still statistically valid, number of responses to a BASC survey.

 

That low number of responses is an accurate indication of how the average shooter views the abolition of lead shot.

 

For many shooters,this issue does not appear on their radar.It is the reason why many inland shooters still use lead on duck. It is the reason why so many gamekeepers sell those unlawfully shot duck to gamedealers on the open market.

 

A handful of contributors on this forum continue to propound the myth that the current situation with lead shot being in jeopardy is somehow the fault of BASC. I would respectfully put forward another scenario.

 

Our adversaries have correctly identified that there is a massive lack of compliance with the law relating to the use of non toxic shot.Despite the fact that steel shot, as the cheapest alternative, works well there is a constant background chatter against its effectiveness from misguided people who genuinely believe that the best way to save lead is to attack its alternatives.I`ve got news for you - the Government does`nt care about that, and if you persist in rubbishing steel they will attack shooting on humanitarian grounds as well as those of toxicity and then we really will be finished.

 

We constantly attack and denigrate our representative bodies. One idiot correspondent continually feels the need to accuse a BASC representative of misrepresenting the truth. But for appropriate warnings from the moderators I wonder how long it would be before that correspondent accused him of being a thief and a rapist. An exaggeration? Yes! But what does attacking something you don`t agree with in such a personal and vitriolic fashion actually achieve? Absolutely nothing. It just makes the attacker look bankrupt of strategy, tactics or even common sense.

 

Worse, it demonstrates to our adversaries, many of whom actually visit this forum, how factionalised and divided we are over the whole issue - how weak we are and ripe for attack.

 

None of those who attack BASC so vehemently actually put themselves forward as candidates for election to BASC Council where their ideas and drive would actually have done some good. Or been exposed as the nonesense that much of their rhetoric actually is. But at least they would have engaged with the debate where it matters. But they abrogated that responsibility completely and utterly.

 

And perhaps the most telling point of all about what the average shooter thinks about the whole issue, if indeed he thinks about it at all, and one well noted by our opponents as an indicator of our inability to fight is the fact that, at the recent BASC AGM, council members were voted into place, or not as the case may be,by LESS THAN 3000 VOTERS.

 

Less that 3000 chose to take part in the democratic process that could have seen the removal of John Swift, John Harradine stoned to death or Connor O`Gorman crucified upside down, depending on whether you view any of those particular individuals as the anti Christ or Satan himself.

 

The answer of the shooting community to a significant threat such as this is not to unite. Not to swell the number of members of BASC to increase its power base, not to change those things about BASC which we perceive to need changing, but to fight amongst ourselves like a rabid dog biting at its own hindquarters.

 

Gentlemen,we are going to get, despite the best efforts of BASC, the shot material that we deserve.

 

mudpatten, you sound like a preacher. Have you ever been to the AGM of the CPSA? Apathy rules you know and we will probably receive what we deserve.

[RossEM]

Hi BlaserF3, as you can see from 0:12 onwards, the bird is brain dead with wings flapping in reflex. Highly subjective as to whether that means "killed outright." As far as I'm concerned, that was a clean kill. Unless all yours have rigor mortis before they hit the ground?

[Salopian]

I think we can now bring this debate to an end.

Today I carried out a survey of shooters feelings at a large West Midland shooting ground.

The clayshooters surveyed had no idea that lead was an issue and the majority all agreed "it will never happen, the Lord's won't allow it". Thank God for that, I can rest easy tonight, David BASC can get on with his day job, and John Swift can retire knowing that he has averted a crisis.

[BlaserF3]

Yup, I've had enough of it.

[RossEM]

Mudpatten is absolutely right about those on PW who denigrate BASC - it is a democratic organisation - if you disagree with a policy, it should be possible to change it.

 

I'm not knocking the right to criticise BASC, that is a prerogative of the membership. If you have nothing constructive to say, what is the point? If you're not a member, why play divide and conquer within a sport which already faces threats from outside? We should be working together. The more attacks shooting comes under, the more definite the need for an amalgamation of all fieldsports associations - I think we need this process to begin sooner rather than later. DavidBASC, how do I as a BASC member bring this up?

[scolopax]

Here is a video of RossEM shooting a pheasant, sorry wounding a pheasant with steel shot

 

Not really sporting is it Old Chap

 

not wounded, head shot

[RossEM]

Maybe I underestimated myself...

[scolopax]

well, if I was to be a tad critical, I would say you was maybe a wee bit too far infront

[RossEM]

At least I wasn't behind! How many yards away would you say that was?

[andrewluke]

RossEM,

 

when lead was allowed on the foreshore i used 1 1/8oz of 5s for ducks out to 40yds,what would you recommend size/weight i should use in steel for the same purpose?

[scolopax]

really difficult to say off a single dimension clip! Bit of a stab in the dark but 35 yards, give or take 10 yards !!

[poontang]

Mudpatten is absolutely right about those on PW who denigrate BASC - it is a democratic organisation - if you disagree with a policy, it should be possible to change it.

 

I'm not knocking the right to criticise BASC, that is a prerogative of the membership. If you have nothing constructive to say, what is the point? If you're not a member, why play divide and conquer within a sport which already faces threats from outside? We should be working together. The more attacks shooting comes under, the more definite the need for an amalgamation of all fieldsports associations - I think we need this process to begin sooner rather than later. DavidBASC, how do I as a BASC member bring this up?

 

Well mudpatten's entitled to his opinion the same as everyone else.

 

While there may be one or two on here who might want to denigrate BASC for the sake of it, I think there has been some fairly good discussion on the subject.

 

I would ask you Ross, do you believe everything you're told, or do you believe that sometimes it's right to question what's put in front of you?

We often hear that the shooting organisations should be working together, and in this instance they are.

 

What remains to be seen is exactly what they're working for.

[wymberley]

Hallelujah! Ignorance is bliss!

 

Edit: Re Salopian, Post #480.

Edited June 16, 2012 by wymberley

[poontang]

Hallelujah! Ignorance is bliss!

 

Edit: Re Salopian, Post #480.

 

 

Yes, more likely a case of ignorance than apathy.

 

I mean how would clay shooters know what's going on when their organisation isn't involved in any of the ongoing discussions?

 

Considering clay shooters use more lead cartridges than all other shooters put together it would surely make sense for them to have their say..........wouldn't it?

[gunsmoke]

Yes, more likely a case of ignorance than apathy.

 

I mean how would clay shooters know what's going on when their organisation isn't involved in any of the ongoing discussions?

 

Considering clay shooters use more lead cartridges than all other shooters put together it would surely make sense for them to have their say..........wouldn't it?

 

Just to let you know the CPSA where on the Face UK shooting group. or should have been, however, they did not get on the phone chat about the EU reply. they cut the phones off before they managed to get on. The CPSA man thought it did not have anything to do with clay pigeon shooting. I put him right on that one. It included clay pigeon shooting. They where included in the emails list.

 

along with the NGO and CA.

 

The only person to question anything was ME.

 

I cannot say any more I had BASC on the phone this week and I have to be careful what I say.

[RossEM]

Poontang, yes I agree, nothing wrong with debate - but the vitriol of some of the comments on this thread has gone way beyond that at times, and I don't think it's unreasonable to be opposed to PW members who have nothing constructive to add. No, I don't believe everything I'm told, which is why I've waded into this debate!

 

Scolopax, it was estimated by neighbouring guns to be 45 yards. Not very clear in the video though.

 

Hi Andrewluke, these: http://www.lyalvaleexpress.com/steel-game-32-grams

The website isn't clear on shot sizes, but I know they're available in size 4. I've shot duck for three seasons with their 20 bore 24g 4's, no complaints.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not an expert on or an aficionado of steel shot, I'm just going on personal experience.

[Scully]

Just to let you know the CPSA where on the Face UK shooting group. or should have been, however, they did not get on the phone chat about the EU reply. they cut the phones off before they managed to get on. The CPSA man thought it did not have anything to do with clay pigeon shooting. I put him right on that one. It included clay pigeon shooting. They where included in the emails list.

 

along with the NGO and CA.

 

The only person to question anything was ME.

 

I cannot say any more I had BASC on the phone this week and I have to be careful what I say.

Why do you have to be careful....unless you're actually employed by BASC they can't sack you.Are you employed by BASC?If not,and you have verifiable information relevant to this thread,then tell us.....please.Don't be shy!

Edited June 17, 2012 by Scully

[David BASC]

A few points to answer what’s been asked but as always if I have missed anything let me know

 

The survey went to 3000 people, not 6000. The original 3000 randomly selected members were mailed twice. This is common practice in surveys.

 

As Salopian found out when he surveyed shooters recently, the knowledge of lead shot restrictions or indeed issues are still low in some areas of the shooting community. So I hope he and everyone else does their bit to educate our fellow shooter.

 

The answer the point about merger, that’s a matter for members to decide at AGM, so a proposal must be made and seconded for a debate on merger.

 

However, the shooting organisations do work together through BSSC for example.

 

To the best of my knowledge CiC are not on FACE and will have little influence on them.

 

As I said before I do not have a copy of the FACE response and I cant see it on the FACE web site

 

As I said earlier, if the attack is based on pollution and health then we must defend on the basis of pollution and health by working to uncover the facts. That’s exactly what BASC and CA are doing though LAG.

 

I have no doubt the CPSA will be involved when the primary evidence group looks more into the environmental impact of lead.

 

In the interim we will keep stressing at the highest possible levels within the Parliaments and Assembly etc. that there should be no further restrictions on lead shot.

 

David

[gunsmoke]

 

The survey went to 3000 people, not 6000. The original 3000 randomly selected members were mailed twice. This is common practice in surveys.

David

 

Thank you for clearing that up. So the same 3000 people had the same questionnaire twice. Therefor the 45% from the 939 returns should now be halved. SO only 22.5% said they used lead illegally.

 

Now we are getting somewhere.

Edited June 17, 2012 by gunsmoke

[David BASC]

Yes the same people got the same questions, but the analysis was done on the total number of returns so the 45% is the correct and final answer

 

David

[David BASC]

To clarify the above the second mailing went to those who did not reply to the first mailing

David

[Scully]

There is a lot of hand wringing going on about the apparently low,but still statistically valid, number of responses to a BASC survey.

 

That low number of responses is an accurate indication of how the average shooter views the abolition of lead shot.

IS IT?ON WHAT BASIS DO YOU MAKE THIS CLAIM?

 

 

For many shooters,this issue does not appear on their radar.It is the reason why many inland shooters still use lead on duck. It is the reason why so many gamekeepers sell those unlawfully shot duck to gamedealers on the open market.

FOR MANY SHOOTERS THIS ISSUE DOES APPEAR ON THEIR RADAR,BUT THEY SIMPLY DON'T CARE.I KNOW OF MORE THAN ONE SYNDICATE WHICH OPERATES IN THIS MANNER.

 

A handful of contributors on this forum continue to propound the myth that the current situation with lead shot being in jeopardy is somehow the fault of BASC. I would respectfully put forward another scenario.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANYONE ON THIS FORUM WHO HAS CLAIMED THIS IS THE FAULT OF BASC.HOW COULD ANYONE POSSIBLY CLAIM THAT?THE FAULT LIES WITH THE APATHY OF SHOOTERS AND THE APPARENT LACK OF CAPABILITY OR UNWILLINGNESS OF OUR ORGANISATIONS TO STAND UP TO EU ORGANISATIONS OF FACE ETC.

 

Our adversaries have correctly identified that there is a massive lack of compliance with the law relating to the use of non toxic shot.Despite the fact that steel shot, as the cheapest alternative, works well there is a constant background chatter against its effectiveness from misguided people who genuinely believe that the best way to save lead is to attack its alternatives.I`ve got news for you - the Government does`nt care about that, and if you persist in rubbishing steel they will attack shooting on humanitarian grounds as well as those of toxicity and then we really will be finished.

OUR ADVERSARIES HAVE NOT CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED ANY SUCH THING AS A MASSIVE LACK OF COMPLIANCE AS THERE IS MORE THAN A LITTLE EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE COMPLIANCE ISSUE IS FLAWED.

 

 

We constantly attack and denigrate our representative bodies. One idiot correspondent continually feels the need to accuse a BASC representative of misrepresenting the truth. But for appropriate warnings from the moderators I wonder how long it would be before that correspondent accused him of being a thief and a rapist. An exaggeration? Yes! But what does attacking something you don`t agree with in such a personal and vitriolic fashion actually achieve? Absolutely nothing. It just makes the attacker look bankrupt of strategy, tactics or even common sense.

TO SUGGEST ANYONE IS GOING TO ACCUSE ANYONE OF THEFT OR RAPE IS AN ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC ATTEMPT TO INCITE PERSONAL REMARKS IN RETALIATION AND GET THE THREAD LOCKED!EXAGERATION OR NOT,YOUR INTENT IS PLAIN FOR ALL TO SEE.

 

Worse, it demonstrates to our adversaries, many of whom actually visit this forum, how factionalised and divided we are over the whole issue - how weak we are and ripe for attack.

WE ARE ALREADY FRACTURED AND DIVIDED,AND HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS,WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT ORGANISATIONS,AND WHY WE FIND IT SO HARD TO FIGHT.

 

None of those who attack BASC so vehemently actually put themselves forward as candidates for election to BASC Council where their ideas and drive would actually have done some good. Or been exposed as the nonesense that much of their rhetoric actually is. But at least they would have engaged with the debate where it matters. But they abrogated that responsibility completely and utterly.

IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER MUCH OF THE RHETORIC IS NONSENSE.

I LIVE IN CUMBRIA,AND HAVE NO RESOURCES(TIME-WISE NOR FINANCIAL)TO CATER FOR THE MASSIVE UNDERTAKING TO SIT ON THE BASC COUNCIL,WHICH IS WHY I PAY BASC TO REPRESENT ME,AND IF I FEEL BASC IS NOT REPRESENTING ME THEN I WILL SAY SO.

 

And perhaps the most telling point of all about what the average shooter thinks about the whole issue, if indeed he thinks about it at all, and one well noted by our opponents as an indicator of our inability to fight is the fact that, at the recent BASC AGM, council members were voted into place, or not as the case may be,by LESS THAN 3000 VOTERS.

I DO VOTE,BUT THE AVERAGE SHOOTER JUST WANTS TO SHOOT.HE DOESN'T WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THE POLITICS OF THE SHOOTING WORLD,ANYMORE THAN HE WANTS TO GET INVOLVED WITH THE POLITICS INVOLVED IN RUNNING THE COUNTRY.HE PAYS BASC TO REPRESENT HIM.I'VE TRIED TO GET MOST OF MY MATES INVOLVED,BUT MANY OF THEM SIMPLY AREN'T INTERESTED...'THAT'S WHAT I PAY BASC FOR',IS ONE RESPONSE,'YOU DON'T KEEP A DOG AND DO THE BARKING YOURSELF DO YOU?' IS ANOTHER.THEY SIMPLY AREN'T INTERESTED.THEY WILL BE WHEN ITS TOO LATE MIND YOU,BUT THAT'S THEIR PROBLEM.

 

Less that 3000 chose to take part in the democratic process that could have seen the removal of John Swift, John Harradine stoned to death or Connor O`Gorman crucified upside down, depending on whether you view any of those particular individuals as the anti Christ or Satan himself.

YEAH,LIKE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN!

 

The answer of the shooting community to a significant threat such as this is not to unite. Not to swell the number of members of BASC to increase its power base, not to change those things about BASC which we perceive to need changing, but to fight amongst ourselves like a rabid dog biting at its own hindquarters.

WE ARE FIGHTING AMONGST OURSELVES BECAUSE THE ORGANISATION WHICH CLAIMS TO BE THE 'VOICE OF SHOOTING' CLEARLY ISN'T;AND THERE IS MORE THAN A LITTLE DOUBT AS TO ITS COMMITMENT TO EVEN WHISPER.

 

Gentlemen,we are going to get, despite the best efforts of BASC, the shot material that we deserve.

IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER THE EFFORTS OF BASC ARE INDEED ITS BEST,BUT WE CAN AT LEAST AGREE THAT WE WILL GET WHAT WE DESERVE.

[chrispti]

''For many shooters,this issue does not appear on their radar.It is the reason why many inland shooters still use lead on duck. It is the reason why so many gamekeepers sell those unlawfully shot duck to gamedealers on the open market.''

 

FOR MANY SHOOTERS THIS ISSUE DOES APPEAR ON THEIR RADAR,BUT THEY SIMPLY DON'T CARE.I KNOW OF MORE THAN ONE SYNDICATE WHICH OPERATES IN THIS MANNER.

 

 

Scully, what did you do about it