Lead Shot ban

[oxfordfowler]

Please read this - for those of you in this "gentlemans" constituency.

 

He does not appear to be sympathetic to the continued use lead shot.

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Collett,

 

Thank you for your letter to Keith Taylor regarding lead ammunition, which he has asked me to reply to on his behalf.

 

It is our understanding that the ECHA is currently working on proposals to restrict the use of lead in consumer products, but that lead shot will not be included in this proposal. The process of assessing the possibility of EU wide restrictions on the use of Lead ammunition is only just beginning; and we do not expect any formal proposals for legislation before 2014.

 

As an initial step in this process, the ECHA is beginning studies on the environmental and socio-economic impacts of introducing restrictions, the Countryside Alliance response you refer to is a part of this ongoing assessment procedure. Following these initial consultations and studies, it will then be decided if a proposal to introduce legislation will be brought forward. So far, an intention to produce a proposal has not yet been submitted.

 

You mention in your letter that the UK, along with 15 other Member States has already banned the use of lead ammunition in Wetlands. This is in line with commitments made under the AWEA33 (African-Eurasian Waterbird) agreement, to which the European Commission is also a signatory. It is possible that the legislative proposal eventually put forward by the ECHA will only address this issue. In this case, Keith and his Greens/EFA colleagues would be fully in support of the legislation, as it is essential that the EU takes steps to meet its obligations under this international agreement.

 

Although it is difficult for us to comment on a legislative proposal which is still a long way from being finalised; the Greens/EFA group believe that the potential environmental risk posed by spent lead ammunition is too high to warrant its continued use. As well as the risk of lead poisoning to both birds, and humans, the continued use of lead in ammunition also has significant economic costs. Additionally the impact of the loss of biodiversity and the limitations that lead can place on the population growth of rare birds has a damaging effect on the ecotourism sector.

 

It is for these reasons that Keith would be in favour of a more general ban on lead in consumer products, including ammunition. Any change in the specification for ammunition however should be phased in to allow time for adaptation of equipment, and for alternative, more environmentally benign materials to be used for ammunition. In this way the impact on the hunting and rifle industry could be softened.

 

It is also important to remember that lead breaks down very slowly, and so the impacts of the lead which is released into the environment may not be felt for generations. As lead builds up over time, the environmental impact becomes severe - this means that at some point in the future we will have a more serious and deep-rooted problem to deal with.

 

Despite Keith's general support of a more far reaching ban on the use of lead in ammunition, his final position on any proposed legislation will of course be based on its content. We will also consider the findings of the ongoing consultation procedure when deciding on our group position. For that reason it is not possible to say at this point if we will vote in favour of new legislation.

 

Thank you, once again for writing to Keith on this issue. For more information on his work as an MEP please visit his website at: http://www.keithtaylormep.org.uk/

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Grace Murray

 

Office of Keith Taylor MEP

Green Party MEP for South East England

The European Parliament

Rue Wiertz

1047 Brussels, Belgium

Brussels Tel: +32 2 284 5153 Fax: +32 2 284 9153

UK Tel: +44 20 7164 2153

www.keithtaylormep.org.uk

Twitter: @GreenKeithMEP

 

If you would like to receive Keith's bimonthly e-newsletter please e-mail keithtaylor@greenmeps.org.uk putting INFO as the subject header

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: stuart3883@hotmail.com [mailto:stuart3883@hotmail.com]

Sent: 07 July 2012 14:51

To: TAYLOR Keith

Subject: ECHA Investigation on Lead in Ammunition

 

From:

Mr Stuart Collett

 

 

 

 

07 July 2012

 

Dear Mr Taylor

 

 

I would like to bring your attention to the issue of lead in ammunition which is currently the subject of investigation by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), to which the Countryside Alliance have responded, which is likely to be discussed in Europe imminently.

 

The United Kingdom, like some other European countries, has already restricted the use of lead shot over wetlands as part of our obligations under the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA). Campaigners in the UK and Europe are now suggesting that there should be further restrictions on the use of lead shot on both environmental and human health grounds.

There is, however, absolutely no evidence that the use of lead shot outside wetlands has any environmental impact and there is likewise no evidence of any impact on human health. In the UK Defra has set up a 'Lead Ammunition Group' to review scientific research and advise government.

 

The United Kingdom has a very long tradition of shotgun shooting and has led the world in the development of the sporting shotgun. It is estimated that nearly 1 million people take part in shooting sports in the United Kingdom, from informal shoots to Olympic competition. Game shooting is worth £1.6 billion to the British economy and supports nearly 70,000 full time jobs, many in remote rural areas. Shooting also contributes nearly 2.7 million man days on conservation of the British countryside every year.

 

A ban on lead in ammunition could have a serious negative effect on the shooting industry because most of the guns made by the historic British gun makers, and many from abroad, are unsuitable for use with economically comparative alternatives to lead. Alternatives to lead with comparative ballistic capability can cost up to 10 times more.

 

The UK also has a unique game shooting tradition with a much greater focus on inland shooting than other European countries and a far larger number of birds being shot on driven shoots. As such, if the use of lead shot is to be further curtailed, it would have a disproportionate affect on shooting in the United Kingdom compared to other European countries.

 

We therefore urge you to support shooting in the United Kingdom by preventing any European Legislation which would affect this.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Mr Stuart Collett

Edited July 20, 2012 by oxfordfowler

[Trevorevans]

I know an adult will be along to correct me at some point but where does lead come from? Is it not mined ie dug out of the ground? So why would Putting it back where it came from, all be it in a different area, have such an alleged environmental impact.

[cant hit rabbits 123]

I know an adult will be along to correct me at some point but where does lead come from? Is it not mined ie dug out of the ground? So why would Putting it back where it came from, all be it in a different area, have such an alleged environmental impact.

 

Its the fact that it is being scattered across the surface, potentially into water, particles being released into the air and lead entering the food chain that is their major issue, based on health and safety grounds as usual. These are essentially the same people who produced the non common sense health and safety rules that serve no one, only cover the backs of employers and often make jobs more difficult.

[flyshooter]

I know an adult will be along to correct me at some point but where does lead come from? Is it not mined ie dug out of the ground? So why would Putting it back where it came from, all be it in a different area, have such an alleged environmental impact.

Blowed if I have the answer to your question T. I have been drinking out of lead water pipes most of my life, but was told,as it's hard water I won't die (I'm 67 and pretty fit). Now if the latter is true, what about lead flashing on roofs etc? water, (soft), from these goes into the earth and our water supply. I can understand ones worry over lead shot in ones system from eating, what ever, containing lead shot, but looking back over a good few years of, "the knowing people", I am quite sure it is a "lets make a name for ourself" jobby, once again. P.S. if your hideing in your shed from your post, let me know as I think I am going to need a place to hide :yp: to , Fly.

Edited July 20, 2012 by flyshooter

[super sharp shooter]

Had this sent to me

 

Dear Constituent,

 

Thank you for your email regarding lead in ammunition. I am a firm supporter of rural life and rural pursuits and I'm sure you can imagine that the concept of Brussels interfering in this was simply not acceptable to me.

 

In the process of replying to you I have been in contact with my UK Conservative colleague Julie Girling MEP who has contacted ECHA directly to get a current state of play on this matter as quickly as possible.

 

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has informed her of the following:

 

ECHA is not working on a restriction dossier on this issue, nor has the European Commission requested them to do so. However ECHA did carry out a number of studies on the cost effectiveness of reducing emissions from hazardous substances. Lead in ammunition was included as part of this package due to existing obligations under the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA.) ECHA also felt that this study would be a valuable fact-finding exercise.

 

At present there has been no formal notice made by Sweden, in the Registry of Intentions, regarding a restriction dossier and so nothing is likely to come forward in the near future. Any request for a European wide restriction at some later date would be subject to a widespread consultation process and there is no reason to believe that this will happen. We will certainly keep watching and act accordingly if anything comes forward.

 

As your MEP, I will continue to support and celebrate our rural heritage and way of life and I will continue to push for less interference from Brussels.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

EMMA MCCLARKIN MEP                                                                  

East Midlands Conservative Party

 

 

And this

I have looked into the question about lead ammunition about which you emailed me – and here is the very latest situation.

There is no proposal for legislation. The rumour has started because the ECHA, on its own initiative, is doing its own different studies “to assess the costs of reducing the use of emissions of hazardous substances”. One of the subjects they have chosen is lead ammunition – because the EU is a contracting party to the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement in which all signatories have all agreed to phase out the use of lead in shots in wetlands. They say that they understand that Sweden is carrying out its own preliminary investigation.They say that the UK has already banned the use of lead ammunition in wetlands in the UK.

The ECHA expects the first report of its abatement cost study will be placed on its website sometime during this month. But it is not preparing a proposal for EU legislation about lead shot.

I hope this is helpful to you.

All good wishes

Bill Newton Dunn, Lib Dem MEP

www.newton-dunn.com

[poontang]

Its the fact that it is being scattered across the surface, potentially into water, particles being released into the air and lead entering the food chain that is their major issue, based on health and safety grounds as usual.

 

Yeah, I've never quite understood this bit.

 

Now if my memory serves me right wasn't there billions of lead bullets and millions of tons of other assorted ordnance deposited in northern France during two world wars?

 

Yet some of the most productive arable and dairy farms in France today are in the exact same area. We don't see huge rafts of the French population dropping down dead with lead poisoning though do we?

 

It's my considered opinion that most of these so called 'scientists' are full of **** and make problems where they don't exist to justify there 'research' funding.

 

Common sense doesn't seem to enter into the equation anymore.

[David BASC]

But you do see one of the greatest sources of lead in food in Europe coming from bread and other grain products

 

However, as i said on the other thread the process involving the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the threat of a restriction on lead shot is currently a technical one, not a political one, and the adoption of any new restriction on the manufacturing, placing on the market, or use of substances involves 15 main steps..we are currently at step 1.

 

David

[poontang]

But you do see one of the greatest sources of lead in food in Europe coming from bread and other grain products

 

 

 

David

 

That's as may be David but nobody's dying from it, and the levels of lead in it must be way below the safe limit or it wouldn't be allowed on the market.

 

Therefore it 'aint a problem.

 

 

 

Poontang (CSE Chemistry)

[David BASC]

True, people are not dropping dead as far as I know, but lead was not banned from petrol or paint because it killed large numbers of people. Tobacco is still allowed and it kills thousands every year...

 

I agree that there is a lack of evidence to show lead shot in game for example causes you or me any problems, but at the same time I do know that the levels of lead that are acceptable in foods is tiny and will only fall and not go up.

 

But we are still at stage 1 of a 15 stage process…as I say, it’s a technical issue at the European level and not a political one.

 

The replies from the MeP’s confirms this as we see on the oiginal thread about this issue.

 

David

Edited July 20, 2012 by David BASC

[flyshooter]

But you do see one of the greatest sources of lead in food in Europe coming from bread and other grain products

 

However, as i said on the other thread the process involving the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the threat of a restriction on lead shot is currently a technical one, not a political one, and the adoption of any new restriction on the manufacturing, placing on the market, or use of substances involves 15 main steps..we are currently at step 1.

 

David

Blimey David, not only have I been drinking water from lead pipes most of my life but I have been a baker for 56 years, and smoke like a trooper to , no kid, I am begining to think I should be put in a glass case . P.S. thanks for your work with B.A.S.C. I'm pleased to be a coffin dogeing member.

Edited July 20, 2012 by flyshooter

[David BASC]

I too drank from lead pipes for years, but lead piper for new builds were banned decades ago and the water companies have been dosing the water with chemicals to stop the lead coming out into it for years and years.

 

Many plants will absorb lead from the ground as they grow and develop, and as it has no biological use what so ever will tend to stay in the plant. But the amount they absorb is very small of course.

 

David

[flyshooter]

I too drank from lead pipes for years, but lead piper for new builds were banned decades ago and the water companies have been dosing the water with chemicals to stop the lead coming out into it for years and years.

 

Many plants will absorb lead from the ground as they grow and develop, and as it has no biological use what so ever will tend to stay in the plant. But the amount they absorb is very small of course.

 

David

Thank you for info' David, in all fairness, my wife just pointed out that when it comes to house hold chores, I do have lead in my shoes

[David BASC]

Nice one!

 

In all seriousness, lead poisoning is a big deal for farmers, I think I am right is saying that lead poisoning is one of, if not the most common forms of poisoning in cattle for example. The big culprits being batteries and old paint tins.

 

David

[Scully]

But you do see one of the greatest sources of lead in food in Europe coming from bread and other grain products

 

David

This is naturally occurring and has nothing whatsoever to do with spent lead shot,nor from WW1/WW2 munitions.Findings of lead content in seed crops is so small as to be insignificant.

Higher in lead content is whey powder/milk substitutes such as SMA(baby milk)and this is advertised as a perfectly healthy alternative option to breast milk.

But as Poontang points out 'common sense' plays no part in politics.

[David BASC]

The point is that its lead in food is always going to be in the spotlite, there will be many sources I agree.

 

Although lead shot is being looked at by ECHA before anything is banned in Europe, there is this exhaustive 15 step process, and if you look at it the MEPs have little input to ECHA.

 

David

Edited July 20, 2012 by David BASC

[huffhuff]

I'm sure i've read it before, but here is my reply from UKIP. There seems to be a few different threads, maybe the mods could merge in some way - maybe into the original thread from al4x?

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Thank you for your recent email, addressed to Stuart Agnew MEP. I am replying on his behalf.

 

I can confirm that Mr Agnew will oppose any EU legislation to restrict the use of lead shot. This is yet another example of the European Commission barging in at the behest of the Green Lobby (which in the European Parliament contains a significant number of Communists). Mr Agnew has used a shotgun since the age he was legally allowed to carry one and is well aware of this issue and the implications that stem from it.

 

He does, however, have one reservation, which he would like you to pass on to the lobbying organisations for your sport. There are growing numbers of farmed poultry ranging outdoors in the UK. Lead shot should not be allowed to fall onto these areas, in any significant quantity. He is confident that the sport can regulate itself in this regard, without interference from the EU.

 

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), to which you refer, is what can be described as an EU controlled agency which has specifically been created to enforce the REACH Directive. This Agency has the power to change rules without any reference to MEPs and serves as a very good example of the undemocratic way in which we are governed by the EU. Indeed, it is far from clear to whom the ECHA is actually accountable.

 

MEPs can produce an 'own initiative' report in response to constituents’ concerns. This would take the form of 'calling on the Commission’ to take such and such an action. However, the Commission, even in the face of a massive majority, is not obliged to take action. As it is the only EU Institution with the power to propose legislation, they can ignore us if they choose.

 

We can sign 'written declarations’ and if they attract enough signatures, this can have a deterrent effect but the Commission is still likely to ignore them. However, that is a worst case scenario. The Commission is not stupid and will bend if it feels it expedient. We should be able to find many sympathetic MEPs from rural constituencies in the UK and in countries where there is a strong country sports lobby or sporting gun manufacturing base, such as France, Italy and Spain.

 

Mr Agnew feels it is time that the UK's shooting lobby got together en mass (a la the US NRA) to resist all government/green inspired attacks. Unfortunately it was due to short-sighted attitudes that we lost first carbines, then pistols. This was largely due to the shotgun lobby’s ‘ostrich’ mentality which meant that they adopted a policy of: "I don't shoot carbines or pistols so they can't hurt me!”. As a result we are weaker now and the anti-gun lobby will continue to peck away at our rights and freedoms. Much can be achieved by a more co-ordinated approach.

 

Best wishes,

 

Stuart Gulleford

Political Advisor to Stuart Agnew MEP

[BlaserF3]

I have had three replies from MEP's and the answer is nearly identical to each other.

[David BASC]

Its true enough that many of the replies are very similar indeed, and its not too surprising, as I have been saying the ECHA review is a technical one and not a political one, so all Mep’s can comment on is the technical process.

 

As to BASC or indeed any other shooting organisations position on lead shot, as you know BASC and all the main organisations contributed to the FACE UK response on this issue and we all have exactly the same position- i.e. to keep lead shot use as it is and to comply with the AEWA requirements. its very important to maintian this united front.

 

It really is as simple as that and for anyone to keep on trying ‘prove’ otherwise or to break ranks with FACE UK position are , in my view, simply playing into the hands of those that oppose shooting.

 

I am pleased that all my MeP’s replied, although one or two needed chasing, but I do question what the MeP’s can do about this technical process?

 

David

[Penfolio]

I have received only two replies so far, one of which was an auto-responder.

 

Unsurprisingly, the BNP MEP doesn't seem to have an opinion either way. I assume the issue isn't black and white enough for him?

 

Many thanks for taking the time to write to us regarding this very important subject. We will certainly take your comments on board with regard to the votes on this issue.

 

best wishes,

 

Chris Beverley

Assistant to Andrew Brons MEP

 

...and an out of office response from the LibDem MEP

 

Out of office message:

 

Please note that the Brussels office of Edward McMillan-Scott MEP is closed and will re-open on Monday 27 August 2012. We will however be checking emails.

 

For any urgent inquiries please refer to Edward McMillan-Scott's website, www.emcmillanscott.com

 

Thank you.

Edited July 25, 2012 by Penfolio

[Penfolio]

Now, finally, at least one response that's got a 'not on my watch' vibe to it.

 

Thank you for your email regarding lead in ammunition. As you may know, I am a strong supporter of rural life and rural pursuits and I'm sure you can imagine that the concept of too much European interference is simply not acceptable to me. Due to the number of constituent queries I have received on this issue, I contacted European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) directly to get a current state of play on this matter as quickly as possible.

 

The ECHA informed me of the following:

 

"ECHA is not working on a restriction dossier on this issue, nor has the European Commission requested them to do so. However ECHA did carry out a number of studies on the cost effectiveness of reducing emissions from hazardous substances. Lead in ammunition was included as part of this package due to existing obligations under the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA.) ECHA also felt that this study would be a valuable fact-finding exercise."

 

At present there has been no formal notice made by Sweden, in the Registry of Intentions, regarding a restriction dossier and so nothing is likely to come forward in the near future. Any request for a Europe-wide restriction at some later date would be subject to a widespread and thorough consultation process and, frankly, there is no reason to believe that this will happen at all. However, we will certainly keep an eye on this and act accordingly if anything comes forward.

 

As your MEP, I continue to support our rural heritage and ways of life and I know how important this is to so many constituents across Yorkshire and the Humber.

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

Timothy Kirkhope MEP

[Christopher Graffius]

I'm posting in David's absence on well earned leave. My background is as a lobbyist for shooting for the last eleven years with experience of lobbying in Europe that dates back to the early '90's.

 

Thanks to all those who have contacted their MEP's. The fact that MEP's have contacted ECHA will demonstrate that their is a wider interest in the process.

 

As David has hinted the job of an MEP is very different from the job of a British MP. The EU parliament is not sovereign, as is the British parliament. It is more of a talking shop than the British equivalent and does not have the same decision making powers. The European Commission, the Council of Ministers and - on defined technical issues - expert committees are where the decisions are taken. It's important to appreciate this difference. If we were talking about an unwarranted threat to lead shot in the UK, the politicians have the decision making powers and lobbying MPs and Ministers can secure a result. If we are considering the same scenario in Europe the power lies with expert committees made up of scientists from member states and it is against European law for member states to lobby their representatives on a committee. The MEP's have little or no say on such an issue. They may get a vote at the end of the process on whether or not the Commission, to which the committee reports, has exceeded its competence. We shouldn't rely on that because hazardous chemicals are acknowledged to be within the competence of the Commission.

 

The purpose of this system is to ensure that political considerations don't get in the way of scientific facts, but political factors can never be excluded. In Europe it's important to ensure that the alliance we can bring together to support our cause will be listened to. In this regard we may not want to have anti-EU MEPs (whatever our own views) backing our cause, that would be counter-productive. Imagine relying on a group of right wing Tories to influence a Labour UK government.

 

The good news is that there is a massive amount of solid technical and scientific work being done on the lead issue. It can't be trumpeted in the press and it takes time. As the MEP's responses indicate we do have some time to get this right. FACE, the European Federation of Hunters (For hunting read shooting on the continent) to which most UK shooting organisations belong are doing excellent work supported by British experts. I'm cautiously optimistic about the outcome and happy to answer any questions.

 

Christopher

[oxfordfowler]

Just recieved this from my MEP - Looks like the same e mail as sent out by other MEP's. Standard reply.

 

Thank you for your email regarding lead in ammunition. As you know, I am passionate about rural life and rural pursuits and I'm sure you can imagine that the concept of Brussels interfering in this was simply not acceptable to me. Due to the number of constituent queries I have received on this issue, I contacted ECHA directly to get a current state of play on this matter as quickly as possible.

 

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has informed me of the following:

 

ECHA is not working on a restriction dossier on this issue, nor has the European Commission requested them to do so. However ECHA did carry out a number of studies on the cost effectiveness of reducing emissions from hazardous substances. Lead in ammunition was included as part of this package due to existing obligations under the African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA.) ECHA also felt that this study would be a valuable fact-finding exercise.

 

At present there has been no formal notice made by Sweden, in the Registry of Intentions, regarding a restriction dossier and so nothing is likely to come forward in the near future. Any request for a European wide restriction at some later date would be subject to a widespread consultation process and there is no reason to believe that this will happen. We will certainly keep watching and act accordingly if anything comes forward.

 

As your MEP, I will continue to support and celebrate our rural heritage and way of life and I will continue to push for less interference from Brussels.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Richard Ashworth MEP