Just a thought...plastic wads

[Brad93]

I don’t think anyone is debating the lead over water laws. The issue is with the plastic wads here. 

 

[Vince Green]

30 minutes ago, Scully said:

Some of the wooden and some of the metal benches around here have been replaced by awful thick chunky brown plastic benches. Yes, they'll never rot or rust away, but that's the problem isnt it? 

Yes long term that's the problem sure enough

[panoma1]

On 03/05/2018 at 19:05, Brodie said:

Whilst the current interest is in reducing plastic waste we are still depositing lead shot over land everywhere.

What's worse - lead or plastic waste contamination? Both need addressing.

 

11 hours ago, Brad93 said:

I don’t think anyone is debating the lead over water laws. The issue is with the plastic wads here. 

 

Well it was you that threw Lead into the debate!  

[Guest cookoff013]

22 hours ago, Vince Green said:

The stupid thing is anybody can set up a clay trap on the waters edge and shoot clays with lead shot over the water as much as they like. Similarly they can shoot pigeon over water quite legally, that's not a ban its just poor legislation.

Don't think they can. The law states area below the high watermark too. So it would be illegal to set up a clay launcher to shoot in a lake. The law is about reducing the lead in the environment. 

[motty]

On ‎03‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 21:35, johnnytheboy said:

In the recent wildfowl magazine it was reported that Kent are to release bismuth cartridges at the same price as steel cartridges in America and Canada and the shot would be manufactured by the company they own in England called Gamebore! 

Just imagine if we could have a fibre wad bismuth cartridge at the same price as Steel ?

I don't believe that for a second. Production costs wouldn't make it viable.

[islandgun]

On 03/05/2018 at 22:15, islandgun said:

http://www.claygame.co.uk/12ga-fibre-shot-cups-34mm-38mm-and-55mm-pd82

Edited May 5, 2018 by islandgun

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, islandgun said:

These are the wadcups I was referring to in my earlier posting, which Gamebore load into their silver steel cartridges, the owner of Claygame is a former director of Gamebore cartridges......I imagine C&G obtain them direct from Gamebore? As I am lead to believe Gamebore hold the patent? 

Edited May 5, 2018 by panoma1

[ClemFandango]

1 hour ago, panoma1 said:

These are the wadcups I was referring to in my earlier posting, which Gamebore load into their silver steel cartridges, the owner of Claygame is a former director of Gamebore cartridges......I imagine C&G obtain them direct from Gamebore? As I am lead to believe Gamebore hold the patent? 

well ain't that a rummen? Good knowledge. 

[johnnytheboy]

5 hours ago, motty said:

I don't believe that for a second. Production costs wouldn't make it viable.

Just quoting from the text in the magazine! Pretty big claims to make in the biggest Wildfowling magazine in the world! 

[CharlieT]

6 hours ago, cookoff013 said:

Don't think they can. The law statesarea below the high watermark too. So it would be illegal to set up a clay launcher to shoot in a lake. The law is about reducing the lead in the environment. 

I can't see any reason why it should be illegal, unless of course the lake is situated in a SSSI.

The law states:

Prohibition on use of cartridges containing lead shot

3.  No person shall use lead shot for the purpose of shooting with a shot gun–

(a)on or over any area below high-water mark of ordinary spring tides;

(b)on or over any site of special scientific interest included in Schedule 1 to these Regulations; or

(c)any wild bird included in Schedule 2 to these Regulations.

 

T

[Brad93]

7 hours ago, panoma1 said:

 

Well it was you that threw Lead into the debate!  

Don’t think so mate unless I have two accounts??? 

[Guest cookoff013]

4 minutes ago, CharlieT said:

I can't see any reason why it should be illegal, unless of course the lake is situated in a SSSI.

The law states:

Prohibition on use of cartridges containing lead shot

3.  No person shall use lead shot for the purpose of shooting with a shot gun–

(a)on or over any area below high-water mark of ordinary spring tides;

(b)on or over any site of special scientific interest included in Schedule 1 to these Regulations; or

(c)any wild bird included in Schedule 2 to these Regulations.

 

T

No lead shot is to be used below high watermark. Is clear. On or over below is pretty much anywhere. clay shooting is use of lead lead shot with lead shotgun cartridges. When I asked many ppl about this it was clear that they didn't understand this. Setting up a clay launcher on a lake is not illegal. What is, is using lead shells, even on no targets. So anyone, say let's call him "dave" shoots lead shotgun over water it's illegal, even though no waterfowl is shot

 What is difficult is the evidence of any crime. Shot bird + lead shot = guilty. No shot bird,100,000 lead shells used = no evidence

[panoma1]

30 minutes ago, Brad93 said:

Don’t think so mate unless I have two accounts??? 

Whooooops! Your right! My apologies..........it's likely an age thing!  

[CharlieT]

2 hours ago, cookoff013 said:

No lead shot is to be used below high watermark. Is clear. On or over below is pretty much anywhere. clay shooting is use of lead lead shot with lead shotgun cartridges. When I asked many ppl about this it was clear that they didn't understand this. Setting up a clay launcher on a lake is not illegal. What is, is using lead shells, even on no targets. So anyone, say let's call him "dave" shoots lead shotgun over water it's illegal, even though no waterfowl is shot

 What is difficult is the evidence of any crime. Shot bird + lead shot = guilty. No shot bird,100,000 lead shells used = no evidence

High water mark has nothing to do with inland lakes. It refers to land on the coast situated below high water mark.

[motty]

2 hours ago, cookoff013 said:

No lead shot is to be used below high watermark. Is clear. On or over below is pretty much anywhere. clay shooting is use of lead lead shot with lead shotgun cartridges. When I asked many ppl about this it was clear that they didn't understand this. Setting up a clay launcher on a lake is not illegal. What is, is using lead shells, even on no targets. So anyone, say let's call him "dave" shoots lead shotgun over water it's illegal, even though no waterfowl is shot

 What is difficult is the evidence of any crime. Shot bird + lead shot = guilty. No shot bird,100,000 lead shells used = no evidence

Sorry, but you are wrong.

[Guest cookoff013]

You can say that.

There is no legal way of shooting lead shot over body of water. At clays ducks or thin air.

[Fen tiger]

There was some wording i remember regarding lead shot fall over wetlands in scotland , but do not remember anything on england and wales.

[Ttfjlc]

51 minutes ago, cookoff013 said:

You can say that.

There is no legal way of shooting lead shot over body of water. At clays ducks or thin air.

Do you mind me asking how you come to that conclusion please? Even BASC state Foreshore, SSSIs or Wildfowl anywhere for Lead shot in England, nothing about ponds, lakes or rivers. 

[6.5x55SE]

30 minutes ago, Fen tiger said:

There was some wording i remember regarding lead shot fall over wetlands in scotland , but do not remember anything on england and wales.

Correct. Not illegal in England and Wales.

Go to Cambridge Gun Club ( long drove cottenham ) several of the clay's are shot over water  

[Vince Green]

4 hours ago, cookoff013 said:

No lead shot is to be used below high watermark. Is clear. On or over below is pretty much anywhere. clay shooting is use of lead lead shot with lead shotgun cartridges. When I asked many ppl about this it was clear that they didn't understand this. Setting up a clay launcher on a lake is not illegal. What is, is using lead shells, even on no targets. So anyone, say let's call him "dave" shoots lead shotgun over water it's illegal, even though no waterfowl is shot

 What is difficult is the evidence of any crime. Shot bird + lead shot = guilty. No shot bird,100,000 lead shells used = no evidence

If I have a lake on my permission (as I read it) I can shoot pigeons over it but not ducks, the regulations (again, as I read it) are species specific and apart from tidal water and sites where there are newts or some exotic wild plants. I can't see anywhere in regs where it says you can't shoot lead shot over standing water or non tidal rivers. I would really like to think that I am wrong but I can't find any reference that says so. Can you tell me where it says you can't shoot lead shot over water? certainly does in the States, there it is spelt out very clearly and it is enforced, they have Rangers 

Edited May 5, 2018 by Vince Green

[Guest cookoff013]

There are 2 issues here. Harvesting wildfowl with lead shot, and shooting over wetland. How is a lake not wetland? Please inform us all what "wetland" is and whether a lake / pond/ body of water is not wetland? 

If you read the actual legislation, how is anyone supposed to discharge any lead shot via a shotgun in the air and get detected?.

If a pigeon flies in circles over a pond. It is illegal to shoot it / near it with lead. Because it is illegal to use a shotgun with lead shells at or below a body of water. Regardless if it is wildfowl or not. Just read the legislation. Not just the shooting of wildfowl, but the discharge of lead pellets on or over a body of water. The law is 2 parts. The wildfowl that needs nontoxic shot and the place where nontoxic shot should be used.

With the interpretation it would be quite legal to pour billions of tons of lead in a pond as long as there is a clay launcher near it!

 

[Vince Green]

1 minute ago, cookoff013 said:

There are 2 issues here. Harvesting wildfowl with lead shot, and shooting over wetland. How is a lake not wetland? Please inform us all what "wetland" is and whether a lake / pond/ body of water is not wetland? 

If you read the actual legislation, how is anyone supposed to discharge any lead shot via a shotgun in the air and get detected?.

If a pigeon flies in circles over a pond. It is illegal to shoot it / near it with lead. Because it is illegal to use a shotgun with lead shells at or below a body of water. Regardless if it is wildfowl or not. Just read the legislation. Not just the shooting of wildfowl, but the discharge of lead pellets on or over a body of water. The law is 2 parts. The wildfowl that needs nontoxic shot and the place where nontoxic shot should be used.

With the interpretation it would be quite legal to pour billions of tons of lead in a pond as long as there is a clay launcher near it!

 

that's what I keep asking you, what legislation? Where does is ever say wetland?  relevant to the UK? I'm not disagreeing with you on the principal but the only legislation that I am aware of that refers to wetland is in the US. Wetlands is, after all,  an American word

And yes, I do actually believe you can pour ton's of lead into a pond as long as they are shooting clays, pigeons or whatever. Stupid definitely, totally stupid, I am not trying to argue in favour of the point I am making I would so like to be proved wrong.

The point I am trying to make is that the law is a total b.a.l.l.s up because the people who drafted it didn't have a clue what they were talking about.

Please put me straight on this, as I said before I would like to be wrong

 

[Scully]

24 minutes ago, cookoff013 said:

There are 2 issues here. Harvesting wildfowl with lead shot, and shooting over wetland. How is a lake not wetland? Please inform us all what "wetland" is and whether a lake / pond/ body of water is not wetland? 

If you read the actual legislation, how is anyone supposed to discharge any lead shot via a shotgun in the air and get detected?.

If a pigeon flies in circles over a pond. It is illegal to shoot it / near it with lead. Because it is illegal to use a shotgun with lead shells at or below a body of water. Regardless if it is wildfowl or not. Just read the legislation. Not just the shooting of wildfowl, but the discharge of lead pellets on or over a body of water. The law is 2 parts. The wildfowl that needs nontoxic shot and the place where nontoxic shot should be used.

With the interpretation it would be quite legal to pour billions of tons of lead in a pond as long as there is a clay launcher near it!

 

I don't think that's correct; your interpretation would ban the use of lead shot in total. I've read the legislation which states specifically over which land and bodies of water lead can't be used, and which species it can't be used on, but there is nothing in legislation to stop anyone shooting lead at a pigeon or pheasant flying over water unless the area is below the high water mark or the land is an SSSI or the body of water is within that SSSI. 

[islandgun]

“For the purposes of this Convention wetlands are areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres.”

Scottish rules as above, no lead shot to be used over any water less than 6m deep, but you may use lead for waterfowl over arable land for example, not sure about England and Wales

[anser2]

On 04/05/2018 at 19:02, panoma1 said:

Perhaps you could direct us to the peer reviewed scientific papers, from which you are drawing your conclusions?

Are you claiming the government ignored evidence and consequently was wrong, when it declined to bring in legislation to ban lead shot despite the biased report provided by their own Lead Ammunition Group (LAG) chaired by the former CEO of BASC? And despite the continuous lobbying pressure to ban lead shot from from the protectionist WWT and RSPB!

 

Do a check on this site. I spent hours digging them out a few years ago and provided links.